By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Anon attacking Sony employees and their children?

Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
 

 

It's a way to hack any PS3.  He gave anyone the instructions on hacking any PS3.  Obviously,  I'm not concerned with him cracking 'my personal PS3'  but he gave everyone the ability to hack any bank account (PS3).   Not saying I could personally hack YOUR PS3 from a distance, but if I had the opportunity to have access to your PS3, I certainly could using his method.

Obviously, this is going to cause problems with the bank.    Especially because these bank account hacks cause other people to lose their money, reliability and safety of their bank account.

I don't see your point where this is an issue?  Since the only people who can hack their PS3's are still, the people who own their PS3s.  Or people who break into someone elses house.

In which case, they could just steal your PS3 rather then hack it.

I think this website would be enlightening to you.

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/neutronics/todd/nuc.bomb.html

It  is... quite literally, a blueprint to build a nueclear weapon.

Anyone could build their own atomic bomb, or modify anyone elses I suppose.

How many Nukes have you built with that guide, since it is the tell all blueprint to crafting them?

The point is,  to build your own nuclear weapon you need a lot of resources at your disposal.  There is a reason not every country in the world has Nukes at their disposal.   Despite how easy you would think it is.  Instructions alone is probably the easiest part of the process.

 

The point where it's an issue is you have someone who has claimed not to do anything illegal while cracking the PS3 (Piracy, etc) , while simultaneously and obviously released codes to the rest of the internet (For his obvious intent) (to financially harm Sony via Piracy).   You're absolutely bat shit crazy if you don't think Sony  (Or the Bank we've been referring to)  is going to come after him legally and attempt anything they can find to bust him for something illegal.

Everyone seems to assume he is innocent because all he did is release the codes (If that's all he did, I have no doubt that he will win this case against Sony). However, I also believe that he took it further (I'm a realist).  I completely believe that there were definitely piracy motives (Especially after releasing the codes)  to his decision making and it wasn't just all earnest and honest 'jailbreaking'.   

This is why and what Sony is going to attack him for.   People are missing the point if releasing the codes are illegal or not.  Sony is coming after him knowing the liklihood that there was a legitimate crime committed that he could be proven guilty on. 

 

As for his "ulterior motives".  This is the same guy who jailbroke the Iphone.  There were no ulterior piracy motives there. 

That's odd.  That must be why Apple went to court trying to stop Jailbreaking from getting a DMCA Exception, right?  They just felt it was to their benefit and that there was no piracy to be found right?

Again,  you want me to believe this fairy tale unrealistic viewpoint. Sure Geohot didn't release an official custom firmware that 'allows' piracy.  He would then catagorically be proven guilty in this situation.   That's essentially walking to the police station and admitting a crime.   That's retarded.      He knows full well that piracy is entailed with what he is doing  (And in my opinion he atleast explored this to find out how it could be done). 

Ofcourse piracy of games is one of the reasons to Jailbreak a system of this nature,  or cheating in games, etc.   It's one of the negative side effects but it is definitely one of the known, desired outcomes. 



Around the Network
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
 

 

It's a way to hack any PS3.  He gave anyone the instructions on hacking any PS3.  Obviously,  I'm not concerned with him cracking 'my personal PS3'  but he gave everyone the ability to hack any bank account (PS3).   Not saying I could personally hack YOUR PS3 from a distance, but if I had the opportunity to have access to your PS3, I certainly could using his method.

Obviously, this is going to cause problems with the bank.    Especially because these bank account hacks cause other people to lose their money, reliability and safety of their bank account.

I don't see your point where this is an issue?  Since the only people who can hack their PS3's are still, the people who own their PS3s.  Or people who break into someone elses house.

In which case, they could just steal your PS3 rather then hack it.

I think this website would be enlightening to you.

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/neutronics/todd/nuc.bomb.html

It  is... quite literally, a blueprint to build a nueclear weapon.

Anyone could build their own atomic bomb, or modify anyone elses I suppose.

How many Nukes have you built with that guide, since it is the tell all blueprint to crafting them?

The point is,  to build your own nuclear weapon you need a lot of resources at your disposal.  There is a reason not every country in the world has Nukes at their disposal.   Despite how easy you would think it is.  Instructions alone is probably the easiest part of the process.

 

The point where it's an issue is you have someone who has claimed not to do anything illegal while cracking the PS3 (Piracy, etc) , while simultaneously and obviously released codes to the rest of the internet (For his obvious intent) (to financially harm Sony via Piracy).   You're absolutely bat shit crazy if you don't think Sony  (Or the Bank we've been referring to)  is going to come after him legally and attempt anything they can find to bust him for something illegal.

Everyone seems to assume he is innocent because all he did is release the codes (If that's all he did, I have no doubt that he will win this case against Sony). However, I also believe that he took it further (I'm a realist).  I completely believe that there were definitely piracy motives (Especially after releasing the codes)  to his decision making and it wasn't just all earnest and honest 'jailbreaking'.   

This is why and what Sony is going to attack him for.   People are missing the point if releasing the codes are illegal or not.  Sony is coming after him knowing the liklihood that there was a legitimate crime committed that he could be proven guilty on. 

 

As for his "ulterior motives".  This is the same guy who jailbroke the Iphone.  There were no ulterior piracy motives there. 

That's odd.  That must be why Apple went to court trying to stop Jailbreaking from getting a DMCA Exception, right?  They just felt it was to their benefit and that there was no piracy to be found right?

Again,  you want me to believe this fairy tale unrealistic viewpoint. Sure Geohot didn't release an official custom firmware that 'allows' piracy.  He would then catagorically be proven guilty in this situation.   That's essentially walking to the police station and admitting a crime.   That's retarded.      He knows full well that piracy is entailed with what he is doing  (And in my opinion he atleast explored this to find out how it could be done). 

Ofcourse piracy of games is one of the reasons to Jailbreak a system of this nature,  or cheating in games, etc.   It's one of the negative side effects but it is definitely one of the known, desired outcomes. 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

It's actually not illegal to make something play Isos.  Or whatever PS3 games are played in.

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

 

For further refrence, See Sony vs Bleem.  A case Sony actually lost.  When Bleem was providing... you guessed it, software that allowed you to play your PS1 games on PC or also if you wanted.  ISOs.

 

Sony and Apple both sued Geohotz for the same reason.  Intimidation.  An attempt to intimidate people from doing something completely legal by threatening them with expesnive lawusits.  (Just like Sony did with Bleem!  Which is partially why you don't see other commercial emulators, despite them being ruled legal.)

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.



Kasz216 said:

Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
 

 

It's a way to hack any PS3.  He gave anyone the instructions on hacking any PS3.  Obviously,  I'm not concerned with him cracking 'my personal PS3'  but he gave everyone the ability to hack any bank account (PS3).   Not saying I could personally hack YOUR PS3 from a distance, but if I had the opportunity to have access to your PS3, I certainly could using his method.

Obviously, this is going to cause problems with the bank.    Especially because these bank account hacks cause other people to lose their money, reliability and safety of their bank account.

I don't see your point where this is an issue?  Since the only people who can hack their PS3's are still, the people who own their PS3s.  Or people who break into someone elses house.

In which case, they could just steal your PS3 rather then hack it.

I think this website would be enlightening to you.

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/neutronics/todd/nuc.bomb.html

It  is... quite literally, a blueprint to build a nueclear weapon.

Anyone could build their own atomic bomb, or modify anyone elses I suppose.

How many Nukes have you built with that guide, since it is the tell all blueprint to crafting them?

The point is,  to build your own nuclear weapon you need a lot of resources at your disposal.  There is a reason not every country in the world has Nukes at their disposal.   Despite how easy you would think it is.  Instructions alone is probably the easiest part of the process.

 

The point where it's an issue is you have someone who has claimed not to do anything illegal while cracking the PS3 (Piracy, etc) , while simultaneously and obviously released codes to the rest of the internet (For his obvious intent) (to financially harm Sony via Piracy).   You're absolutely bat shit crazy if you don't think Sony  (Or the Bank we've been referring to)  is going to come after him legally and attempt anything they can find to bust him for something illegal.

Everyone seems to assume he is innocent because all he did is release the codes (If that's all he did, I have no doubt that he will win this case against Sony). However, I also believe that he took it further (I'm a realist).  I completely believe that there were definitely piracy motives (Especially after releasing the codes)  to his decision making and it wasn't just all earnest and honest 'jailbreaking'.   

This is why and what Sony is going to attack him for.   People are missing the point if releasing the codes are illegal or not.  Sony is coming after him knowing the liklihood that there was a legitimate crime committed that he could be proven guilty on. 

 

As for his "ulterior motives".  This is the same guy who jailbroke the Iphone.  There were no ulterior piracy motives there. 

That's odd.  That must be why Apple went to court trying to stop Jailbreaking from getting a DMCA Exception, right?  They just felt it was to their benefit and that there was no piracy to be found right?

Again,  you want me to believe this fairy tale unrealistic viewpoint. Sure Geohot didn't release an official custom firmware that 'allows' piracy.  He would then catagorically be proven guilty in this situation.   That's essentially walking to the police station and admitting a crime.   That's retarded.      He knows full well that piracy is entailed with what he is doing  (And in my opinion he atleast explored this to find out how it could be done). 

Ofcourse piracy of games is one of the reasons to Jailbreak a system of this nature,  or cheating in games, etc.   It's one of the negative side effects but it is definitely one of the known, desired outcomes. 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).





Rpruett said:

Kasz216 said:

 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).




Restruants DON'T get into legal trouble for that though.

Also, I'm completely failing to see your point then.

Though, intention is completely pointless. 

Also near impossible to prove.  I mean, it's not like playing an image of a CD is illegal.  It's only illegal if you don't own the game it was produced off of.



Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:

Kasz216 said:

 

 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).




Restruants DON'T get into legal trouble for that though.

Also, I'm completely failing to see your point then.

Though, intention is completely pointless. 

Also near impossible to prove.  I mean, it's not like playing an image of a CD is illegal.  It's only illegal if you don't own the game it was produced off of.


Thanks for keeping up the good fight. I gave up already. Its sad though that some poeple so easily dismiss their rights.

 

As Benjamin Franklin said

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:

Kasz216 said:

 

 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).




Restruants DON'T get into legal trouble for that though.

Also, I'm completely failing to see your point then.

Though, intention is completely pointless. 

Also near impossible to prove.  I mean, it's not like playing an image of a CD is illegal.  It's only illegal if you don't own the game it was produced off of.

Yes,  they do.   That's a big reason why you get 'shut-off' at bars. 

My point is,  Geohot probably committed an offense during the Jailbreak process.  He probably atleast attempted something pertaining to piracy,  why wouldn't he?   If he infact did,  he is guilty of what they are saying he is guilty of.  It's just funny to me how people around here run around and try to make this some moral crusade about how Geohot would never do anything like that, and I think it's completely false and funny.   Ofcourse, Geohot probably pirates music, movies, games, etc.   

I don't personally care that he did it, it doesn't affect me one way or another and I'm not against piracy in all fashions but I do believe he is guilty, if only a small bit.



Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:

Kasz216 said:

 

 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).




Restruants DON'T get into legal trouble for that though.

Also, I'm completely failing to see your point then.

Though, intention is completely pointless. 

Also near impossible to prove.  I mean, it's not like playing an image of a CD is illegal.  It's only illegal if you don't own the game it was produced off of.

Yes,  they do.   That's a big reason why you get 'shut-off' at bars. 

My point is,  Geohot probably committed an offense during the Jailbreak process.  He probably atleast attempted something pertaining to piracy,  why wouldn't he?   If he infact did,  he is guilty of what they are saying he is guilty of.  It's just funny to me how people around here run around and try to make this some moral crusade about how Geohot would never do anything like that, and I think it's completely false and funny.   Ofcourse, Geohot probably pirates music, movies, games, etc.   

I don't personally care that he did it, it doesn't affect me one way or another and I'm not against piracy in all fashions but I do believe he is guilty, if only a small bit.


No, you get shut offs at bars because if someone kills someone while drunk driving from your bar it's bad buisness.

Also, no he wouldn't be guilty of what they're saying... you don't seem to comprhend what he's being sued for.

He isn't being sued for piracy.  It's nowhere in the charges.  Aside from which actual intent on whether he meant to create something that could allow piracy is completely irrelevent.



Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:

Kasz216 said:

 

 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).




Restruants DON'T get into legal trouble for that though.

Also, I'm completely failing to see your point then.

Though, intention is completely pointless. 

Also near impossible to prove.  I mean, it's not like playing an image of a CD is illegal.  It's only illegal if you don't own the game it was produced off of.

Yes,  they do.   That's a big reason why you get 'shut-off' at bars. 

My point is,  Geohot probably committed an offense during the Jailbreak process.  He probably atleast attempted something pertaining to piracy,  why wouldn't he?   If he infact did,  he is guilty of what they are saying he is guilty of.  It's just funny to me how people around here run around and try to make this some moral crusade about how Geohot would never do anything like that, and I think it's completely false and funny.   Ofcourse, Geohot probably pirates music, movies, games, etc.   

I don't personally care that he did it, it doesn't affect me one way or another and I'm not against piracy in all fashions but I do believe he is guilty, if only a small bit.

Please do us all a favor and read the court documents. Piracy is not mentioned any where in the law suit. IT IS NOT ABOUT PIRACY IN ANYWAY. Sony is not sueing for piracy. They are not suing for stolen games. They are not sueing for hacking into the PSN. They are sueing because he circumvented their controls of his ps3 and opened it up to custom software. They are also trying to sue for the release of a series of number they claim they have copyright protection too (I believe thats how its worded).



thranx said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:

Kasz216 said:

 

 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).




Restruants DON'T get into legal trouble for that though.

Also, I'm completely failing to see your point then.

Though, intention is completely pointless. 

Also near impossible to prove.  I mean, it's not like playing an image of a CD is illegal.  It's only illegal if you don't own the game it was produced off of.

Yes,  they do.   That's a big reason why you get 'shut-off' at bars. 

My point is,  Geohot probably committed an offense during the Jailbreak process.  He probably atleast attempted something pertaining to piracy,  why wouldn't he?   If he infact did,  he is guilty of what they are saying he is guilty of.  It's just funny to me how people around here run around and try to make this some moral crusade about how Geohot would never do anything like that, and I think it's completely false and funny.   Ofcourse, Geohot probably pirates music, movies, games, etc.   

I don't personally care that he did it, it doesn't affect me one way or another and I'm not against piracy in all fashions but I do believe he is guilty, if only a small bit.

Please do us all a favor and read the court documents. Piracy is not mentioned any where in the law suit. IT IS NOT ABOUT PIRACY IN ANYWAY. Sony is not sueing for piracy. They are not suing for stolen games. They are not sueing for hacking into the PSN. They are sueing because he circumvented their controls of his ps3 and opened it up to custom software. They are also trying to sue for the release of a series of number they claim they have copyright protection too (I believe thats how its worded).

Again proving that piracy exists from this is an excellent way to prove damages from his development of the custom firmware. 

The copyright protection number is similar to how you couldn't just give away the combination to a safe of a bank you worked at and if you did and someone ended up robbing the bank safe ...You could be held accountable as well.



Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:
Kasz216 said:
Rpruett said:

Kasz216 said:

 

 


And yet.. he wasn't convicted eh?  Whether piracy or not is around is completely pointless.

Also.  Not he wouldn't be catagorically found guilty.

Yes he would. If he released a firmware designed with piracy in mind and admitted as much, he most certainly would. 

 

Piracy being one of the outcomes is... completely irrelevent.

The only time something providing or making something that has illegal uses is relevent is when there are zero legal applications.

Afterall, kitchen knives have the illegal use of stabbing no?

Stabbing someone with a kitchen knife is one of the known negative effects that some people desire... right?

Again,  you can name an example like that. 

I can name an example of a restaurant who gets in legal trouble because a patron who legally bought alcohol, drank too much and ended up driving (on his own accord)  and killing someone while intoxicated.   It's not the restaurants fault that he drank too much,  drank too much without a ride,  drove drunk,  nor is it their responsibility to make sure that he has a way of safely getting home.

 

 

Sony literally does this all the time.  LOTS of companies do.

Ofcourse they do.   A.)  For intimadation like you said ,   B.)   Searching for anything they can manage to include as illegal and win a case on,  C.)  Because they have a whole arsenal of attorneys on payroll that it's no skin off their back really.

I don't think we're really disagreeing on much,  I don't have a moral dislike for Geohot.  I just do believe that he did it (Atleast partially)  with piracy motives (And I think you're being intentionally obtuse for saying otherwise).    I don't even mind him Jailbreaking things, but if he did it with piracy in mind (And Sony can show or prove this,  he will be in legal trouble).




Restruants DON'T get into legal trouble for that though.

Also, I'm completely failing to see your point then.

Though, intention is completely pointless. 

Also near impossible to prove.  I mean, it's not like playing an image of a CD is illegal.  It's only illegal if you don't own the game it was produced off of.

Yes,  they do.   That's a big reason why you get 'shut-off' at bars. 

My point is,  Geohot probably committed an offense during the Jailbreak process.  He probably atleast attempted something pertaining to piracy,  why wouldn't he?   If he infact did,  he is guilty of what they are saying he is guilty of.  It's just funny to me how people around here run around and try to make this some moral crusade about how Geohot would never do anything like that, and I think it's completely false and funny.   Ofcourse, Geohot probably pirates music, movies, games, etc.   

I don't personally care that he did it, it doesn't affect me one way or another and I'm not against piracy in all fashions but I do believe he is guilty, if only a small bit.


No, you get shut offs at bars because if someone kills someone while drunk driving from your bar it's bad buisness.

No.  Do you own a business?   Have you even ran a business?  You most certainly can and will get charged with liability relating to that as a Bar owner.  It doesn't sound fair (it truly isn't)  but it does happen more often than you would think.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/03/court_restaurants_bars_liable.html

"In a precedent-setting decision, a state appeals court ruled today that a bar or restaurant can be held liable for allowing a patron to drive drunk although the person did not drink there."

http://alcoholism.about.com/library/weekly/aa990929.htm

 "A ruling last week by the Montana Supreme Court has once again held a bar owner responsible for damages caused by a patron because he continued to serve him alcohol knowing he was already intoxicated."

 

http://business-law.lawyers.com/business-litigation/Bar-Liability-for-Alcohol-Injuries.html

"Are you or a family member the victim of a drunk driver who went bar-hopping before driving intoxicated? Were you assaulted as a bystander by a drunk patron in a bar fight or a brawl outside a tavern? You may have a right to sue the bar under what are called "dram shop" laws."

 

Do you really need to keep arguing this point?