Gamasutra

A U.S. District judge has dismissed much of a lawsuit filed by a group of PlayStation Network users against Sony, in relation to last year's infamous PSN hack, as he notes that Sony's privacy policy stated that its security was not perfect.

The users behind the original complaint said that Sony "failed to follow basic industry-standard protocols to safeguard its customers personal and financial information," which led to the hack which exposed more than 69 million people's personal and bank details.

However, judge Anthony J. Battaglia noted in the 36-page order, as provided by [PDF] Courthouse News, that the privacy policy signed by all of the plaintiffs before using their PlayStation 3's included "clear admonitory language that Sony's security was not 'perfect,'" therefore "no reasonable consumer could have been deceived."

He added that personal information was stolen from Sony as a result of a criminal intrusion, and since the original complaint had not alleged that Sony was involved in the intrusion itself, there would be no bailment charge with prejudice.

Elsewhere in the order, Battaglia states that Sony did not violate consumer-protection laws "because none of the named plaintiffs subscribed to premium PSN services, and thus received the PSN services free of cost."

In total, the judge threw out seven of the eight motions, although he noted that the PSN users involved have a short period in which they can file an amended complaint. 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/179956/Judge_dismisses_PSN_breach_suit__Sony_never_said_it_was_perfect.php#.UInsaW_A_ng

im pretty sure every service since has been hacked of some form. even bnet and steam

Yup. Why not sue the movie theater in the Aurora shooting while we are at it: facepalm.

Americans love to sue and I'm glad this case is legally found to be hogwash.

If anything, your comparison is much more of a facepalm.

actually i think people are trying to sue the theater, and it actually makes sense why.

The theater, didnt allow firearms on their premises, even posting signs stating such, so they effectively disarmed their customers, and making it a "gun free zone" and kept them from being able to protect themselves, so by doing this the theater assumes responsibilty for the safety of their customers. They are expected to provide adaquate security to ensure people's saftey.

I chose an extreme example for obvious reasons. My point being suing a another victim of the same crime is ridiculous. Should a passenger in a bus sue their driver when a drunk driver sideswipes them? I hope for the sake of humanity you agree with me the answer is no.

Agree with your sentiments in general. Glad to see that the douchebags got nothing. I hope they had to pay sony's legal bills for wasting their time. 

A lot of us live in societies where a heavily litigious culture is propagated and condoned, which just means more money for me and the corporate fat cats. Thanks society!

Also I would have been more surprised had the applicants been successful.

facepalm....

Free PSN users suing Sony. If there had been PS Plus users, maybe this would have went somewhere. No wonder this was dropped, a judge saw a bunch of online freeloaders suing because they couldn't stay up till 4:00am playing COD online.