Except the guy handed you the book so that you could read it, after he had fun with it himself.

People should really quit this fallacious argument already... People have been hacking electronic devices since... well, since they started existing.

Wow people are freaking at my statement. I never suggested the guy is a criminal. Just that his hack encouraged criminals and made it possible for them to commit such crimes. He made it possible to run software on your PS3 that Sony didn't want run. At worst I'd say he was an accomplace?

Its the same argument as "I shot someone with a gun, the gun company created the gun and sold it to me". Now some would blame the gun company. But I would blame the moron who pulled the trigger.

In my opinion if Geo hadn't done it another hacker would. What he did was not a crime it just enabled criminals. I don't think I purposely tried to suggest otherwise.

No, people just setting the record straight and stop you from sorta* blaming the guy.

And by your responses, you still sorta* blame the guy.

If a item I lent to someone was then used in a crime even if my intentional was for them to use it lawfully still means I'd be in trouble with the police because I would have provided that item.

Geohut was never taken to criminal court as his actions in themselves were not a crime, he was sued however because of his actions related to releasing information.

That said, congrats for him getting a job and entering the world of work like the rest of us. Give it a week and he'll hate it like the rest of us too.

No.

Getting sued can happen to anyone regardless of whether they did something wrong or not.

No one cares, except Sony.

Your PS3 is yours, not Sony's.

No?... that's it? great debate. Why no? If I give my mate a baseball bat to play with and then he goes and beats someone up with it, police are likely to ask me questions about why I gave the baseball bat to him, I'd then have to prove I didn't give my friend the baseball bat when I knew he'd use it in such a way.

Tell me why this isn't true. I'd like to know.

If that's what you mean by being in trouble iwith the police, OK... but I don't see how this has anything to do with Geohot. He didn't give anything to anyone directly, he just published some information on the Internet.

As I said before people have been hacking electronics for a very long time, and to my knowledge no one was ever found guilty of it... In fact, US courts specifically said jailbreaking should be legal. Why do you think the Geohot/Sony/PS3 case is special?

Again I never meant Geo was a criminal.

People argueing all he did was lawful and intended for lawful use is funny. Do you really think Geo was that Niave? to really believe his hack would only be used lawfully? He knew that his hack would be used unlawfully, much like the creators of Kazaa, LimeWire and Napster all were legal file sharing, but the creators knew that users would use those programs unlawfully.

A good metaphore for this

A store advertises 2 for 1 deal on 1TB hard drives for example (Offering other OS) a customer comes into the store and goes to the cashier with his two 1TB hard drives. The store (Sony) says you know what we aren't going to honour our deal, we won't give you the free 1TB hard drive. The customer is upset and legally has the right to that 1TB hard drive. So the store closes and the customer decides he's going to get his free hard drive, so he breaks into the store and takes it.Later that night a group of theives see the store with the glass broken, they pour in and clear out the shelves.

Now the customer had every right to that free hard drive. Lawfully the store was required to give it to him. However rather then say sue the store , press charges or such, he breaks in. Here's the problem, Geo (The customer) knew that by breaking into the store he was leaving it defenceless. He knew that chances are someone else is going to use his break (Hack) to steal from the store (Sony).

Now say a Police officer gets called out to this scene. Do you think the officer would see the customer (Geo) as innocent or guilty? He was innocent in taking what he was owed. But he broke the window that allowed the theives to steal from the store. He would likely be seen by the police officer as an accessory. He knew the crime was going to be commited and broke the glass anyways.

He was complacent in the crime. Thus no he's not guilty of a crime. He however did make one possible.

All those who say Geo was completely innocent. Do you all believe he really did not think anyone would use his hack to commit a crime?

He knew from day one that his hack would open Sony's security up to be robbed.

Now I know many people are fans of home brew and support GeoHot because he only took back what Sony had promised consumers. But his actions resulted in piracy and theft. He may not be the pirate or the theif but he made their break in possible.

One of the few cases where it really is a matter of opinion who is to blame. I personally feel he knew exactly what he was doing. Do i think he did it to pirate games? Nope. But i believe he knew releasing the homebrew would allow others so i feel him being talented enough to homebrew, he should have exercised responsibility knowing what his release would allow people to do. Or been far more clear and concise on his stance on being against pirated games, urging and even pulling the homebrew instructions once it got out that it was happening. He straddled a fine line and because of that i think he knew exactly what his actions were and by that time the battle lines were drawn so he chose the pirates vs sony in his stance (as evident by his rap)

Hes still a young kid, he made some mistakes handling his talents, hopefully now that he works for one of the biggest corporations on earth and hes doing something with a boss and such his talent can be utilized in a much more productive way.