That's Sony's problem actually. Which is easily solved by banning your console from their network.

I'm libertarian so I believe in small government and less interference.   No one should trample on my rights.  People who work for corporations are also people who have rights as well.  No one shouldn't trample on their right to a livelihood by stealing their work.  Stop being blinded by self-righteousness.  I do not appreciate your disrespectful assumption.

Only if I agreed to it.  But didn't someone already disprove your car analogy in another thread?  Besides, you don't like it, you don't buy it.  That's freedom.

It is their problem, and they can do legally do what they can so solve it.  And they did.

The fact Norway ruled that Sony broke laws internationally by removing OtherOS actually strengthens their case here greatly. It shows that people actually do/did use it. And that might be enough to push for it to be readded to the firmware, which would be funny as hell seeing that the PS3 Slim models would finally get OtherOS.

And before anyone says "but Sony said OtherOS is impossible on the Slim models" let me stop it now. OtherOS is entirely just a bootloader. It is software. The PS3 Slim is the exact same hardware as the PS3 fat but with smaller parts. There is zero reason as to why it cannot run the the Slim. The Cell processor is still the cell processor, ram is ram, RSX is the RSX, and a hard drive no matter how many gigabytes is still a hard drive. The ability to run the bootloader to run OtherOS can work, will work, and it's just because Sony got their finger up their rears over the RSX's drivers were found out and got scared Nvidia would bitch at them (which based on track record, they would not have).

No.  They didn't?

Also, uh, nobody agreed to it when they bought the product.

This is why EULA's are problematic.  They're basically illegal when it's ruled you wouldn't have agreed to it before you bought the product.

This is why companys never actually let things play out to trial.

If he had signed an agreement BEFORE placing down his money for his PS3, there would be a point... but since that's all done AFTER you buy your PS3, open it up, and it's unusuable....

It's basically up to a judge.

I am a libertarian too. And I am not being at all self-righteous. You are actually being the least libertarian between the two of us. You are defintiely more right leaning than me by a long shot.

Being able to do what you want with what you own is your right. No corporation has any right in stating what you can do with it once you pay for it. Sony's only stance against you doing something against them is banning you from their network, which truly doesn't matter since anyone installing their own software onto the system really does not care about the PSN at all.

Why would medical scientists add themselves to the case?  I'll answer that.  They wouldn't.  If anyone was using the PS3 in a cluster, why would they upgrade?  Again, I'll answer, they wouldn't.  That's why Sony isn't getting sued by the US gov't for removing OtherOS, even when the Navy is using the PS3 in a cluster. 

The OtherOS case probably won't go anywhere.  You know why?  Sony didn't force you to remove the OtherOS in the first place.  They even put out announcements about what the new FW would do and even had you confirm it twice before it would even install.  In the end, YOU chose playing newer games and the PSN over PS3 Linux.  It was YOUR choice.

Edit:  Above you stated: "Sony's only stance against you doing something against them is banning you from their network, which truly doesn't matter since anyone installing their own software onto the system really does not care about the PSN at all."  If that's the case, why did you choose PSN over PS3 Linux?  I mean you seem so upset over losing it, yet you chose to update your FW.

Truthfully, they didn't solve anything. Hotz took a deal, there was no legal action in the court room because I really don't think Sony would have won if it made it in front of a judge. Hotz wussed out. Plain and simple.

Like I said, cell phones are legally able to be jailbreaked, so the same could be said about a game console. Jailbreak software for phones are regularly available, so why shouldn't PS3 jailbreak software? That's right, there is not reason it shouldnt be regularly available.

Er.  There is a thing called PS3's breaking down.

This is why the US Airforce said Sony removing Other OS was "Very disapointing" and they were aware of the lawsuit.

As for the "your choice"... ever hear of "Hobson's Choice."

Such a choice is actually illegal under consumer laws.

To quote the Other OS Lawsuit....

MR. PIZZIRUSSO: I am, Your Honor. It was a Hobson's choice. Either way, you lose functionality. You are going to lose features either way. And we said that's not a real choice.

You can't sell someone an apple and an orange.  Then tell them they have to give one back.  Then claim it's ok because "It was their choice."

Hence why Sony isn't even trying to argue that.  They are trying to argue that the defendents shouldn't of had the expectation to play games that came out after their warranties were up, because after your warranty is up you can't even expect your console will work.