|
Sony: Geohot fled to South America
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 23 March, 2011
According to VGHQ, George 'Geohot' Hotz has fled to South America in an effort to avoid handing over his possessions to Sony.
Furthermore, Sony has caught Geohot lying on record, outing his PSN account which he claimed did not exist.
Sony's official document in the case, Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC v. Hotz reads:
Though the evidence establishing personal jurisdiction ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
AfterDawn Addict
3 product reviews
|
24. March 2011 @ 12:21 |
Link to this message
|
Good luck to you Mr Hotz, I hope you show sony they cannot F people over and not expect a comeback!
To get instant assistance with Flashing / JTAG / Homebrew from experts for free! click me (Im not one of the said experts BTW)
Make poverty history, cheaper drugs NOW! |
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
24. March 2011 @ 12:32 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by jrp696:
Can someone update the article? He's in vacation. It was stated by his lawyer and by himself. I believe he's in Argentina (he's wearing a boca juniors jersey). But someone should update this with more accurate information, check psx-scene.
Also, the "missing components" that sony was talking about were the drive controllers; standard parts that sony had many of. I don't know if george had an account or not...and if he lied under oath, then that was dumb...but remember that a big part of this case has to do with the fact that these agreements are not exactly legal to start with...when you can't return the system, and the contract requires you to accept it just to continue using the device you paid for, and it is not negotiable, there are some serious legal issues there.
|
|
dEwMe
Senior Member
|
24. March 2011 @ 13:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Here here KB! Let's hope they actually explore those legalities and don't just try to railroad him.
Just my $0.02,
dEwMe
|
|
trainmstr
Newbie
2 product reviews
|
24. March 2011 @ 14:20 |
Link to this message
|
Damnit Nike ... I just paid 200 dollars for these re-re-re-re-released retro jordans with white laces...so I re-laced them with red ones.
The fact...regardless of copy protection measures ... I OWN the equipment. No different than me taking a motor off a lawn tractor and putting it on a go-cart.
If I sat and thought about all the different things created in the past say ...20 centuries...and then googled them ...and really really researched deeply ...
Everyone would find that most things created or invented came from an idea and/or creation of someone or something else.
X-rays come to mind actually. No one ever envisioned them being able to actually be such a big part of life today.
Phonograph is another. AC electricity yet another.
What most people on the side of Sony don't realize ... you can't control what you can't envision and you cannot possibly envision every possibility one product has or might end up having. Sony does not own innovation. If i create a use for PS3 that no one envisioned ..on MY machine ... they should be thankful...they don't own my creation.
If i wan't to play my legally ripped matroska blu-rays on my ps3 ..whos to say I can't create something that will allow that to happen? Why should I be forced to go buy another product just to play those movies when I have something perfectly suited to do so already?
To stop this nonsense ...sony ..charge end users 10 bucks or something and let them download some sort of homebrew app that lets end users do everything they want. I really don't believe one should even have to pay anything for this ability... but its a compromise. Then ... for those new wares or abilities that actually improve the machine and add value ... pay those who added that value. as far as piracy ...Wait for them to log onto psn with a pirated game and ban the machine from your network. The end.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. March 2011 @ 14:24
|
|
wmccusker
Junior Member
|
24. March 2011 @ 17:20 |
Link to this message
|
I agree with trainmstr, if they did not remove other os, and added some form of homebrew feature - which i might as is unneccessary with other OS - then this s**t storm would have never gained momentum. If they had given the end user what they paid for, then most of this would not have happened (for a while yet atleast)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. March 2011 @ 17:21
|
|
airman
Newbie
|
24. March 2011 @ 19:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by o0cynix0o:
I'm all for personal freedom. I jailbrake phones and hacked my wii, but I also understand that both open me to being sued. It's just the risk you take when you do such a thing. But to go public with it is completly different matter. It reminds me of the LA riots in the 90's ie all the people doing interviews with the evidence in their hands.
To hack your own console is one thing, to show others how is something else entirely. Wether or not you do it for financial gain is irrelevent. And to think that someone coming after you for sercumventing the security they put in place to keep you from pirating games is a bad thing to do is just completly ludricris.
If I broke into your house and stole your TV, and then told the world how to get in to your house so they could steal some stuff. Then you'd be pretty mad.
Get real people Sony is a buisness and has share holders to protect and yes make richer. It sucks but its the truth.
Let the flaming begin...
Yes, Sony is a business producing a product, but when you purchase a product the producer normally has no further control over what you do with that product. For instance, some years ago, I had a tube type TV set. I converted that TV set from a receiver to a 90 watt radio transmitter.
Sony can ban modified sets from accessing their on-line games, or products for that mater and pirating games or software is illegal. No one, or hardly any one argues their right to do prevent that. However, it has never AFAIK "in the past" been illegal to modify a radio, TV set, or computer to make it do what you want or to show others how to do the same as long as the results do not do something prohibited by law, not the what the manufacturer says.
Now if Sony *leased" the hardware to the user and licensed its use, THEN they have complete rights to said hardware. To do otherwise (which the court did) is counter to established rights.
Even restricting the ability to pay a game on a specific piece of hardware is pushing the limits of legality, but it is done.
Courts reinterpret laws differently with the times and judges, or at least some appear to lean either to the Liberal or Conservative sides.
Airman
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
25. March 2011 @ 00:59 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by airman:
Now if Sony *leased" the hardware to the user and licensed its use, THEN they have complete rights to said hardware. To do otherwise (which the court did) is counter to established rights.
You make a good point there, although you didn't actually make it...
If you lease a car, the manufacturer cannot limit the places that you go with it. You can even take it to a race track (although your insurance might not cover you there). The manufacturer can't even limit modifications to the car; they can end the lease and demand that you purchase the car, but they cannot sue you for it (unless you cannot afford to purchase the car).
Sony is saying that our purchases give us fewer rights than we get with a lease...and that is why I can't buy an NGP no matter how much I want one, even if they make a NGPhone version...a purchase from sony isn't even a lease; it is a rental.
|
|
airman
Newbie
|
25. March 2011 @ 02:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
"KillerBug", All I can do is agree with you on that. I don't understand how they can get the courts to go along with their stance.
Airman
|
Senior Member
|
25. March 2011 @ 03:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by trainmstr:
Damnit Nike ... I just paid 200 dollars for these re-re-re-re-released retro jordans with white laces...so I re-laced them with red ones.
The fact...regardless of copy protection measures ... I OWN the equipment. No different than me taking a motor off a lawn tractor and putting it on a go-cart.
If I sat and thought about all the different things created in the past say ...20 centuries...and then googled them ...and really really researched deeply ...
Everyone would find that most things created or invented came from an idea and/or creation of someone or something else.
X-rays come to mind actually. No one ever envisioned them being able to actually be such a big part of life today.
Phonograph is another. AC electricity yet another.
What most people on the side of Sony don't realize ... you can't control what you can't envision and you cannot possibly envision every possibility one product has or might end up having. Sony does not own innovation. If i create a use for PS3 that no one envisioned ..on MY machine ... they should be thankful...they don't own my creation.
1716 PS3's turned into an Air Force supercomputer:
http://goo.gl/fb/G1Tyg
In Other News:
GeoHot Has Not Escaped! He Will Be Back To Jailbreak Sony Xperia PLAY.
http://t.co/tWp0QZd
Live Free or Die.
The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2011 @ 23:56
|
|
kfir1
Member
|
25. March 2011 @ 13:40 |
Link to this message
|
WOW ...sony is PATHETIC to the CORE. Doesnt sony have anything else to do? Geohot must have "FU#K" one of the sony execs daughter and not because of a hacked PS3.
|
|
lissenup3
Suspended permanently
|
25. March 2011 @ 14:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ddp:
lissenup3, are you going to be a good boy or do i have to keep banning you?
I've been a good boy everyday and said nothing bad before. That was made clear when no one honored my request for the article and statement I "supposedly made" that was offensive.
When your readers make stupid, biased, prejudiced comments, I just call 'em out. Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger. Propagating stupidity and ignorance is shameful and needs to be stopped at the source.
Next time you ban, provide the example of the reason.......otherwise, you're just flexing your own opinion by stifling mine. Common of the FInnish though.
|
|
brockie
Member
|
25. March 2011 @ 15:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
hope they crush this guy.
|
|
lissenup3
Suspended permanently
|
25. March 2011 @ 15:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by o0cynix0o:
Originally posted by lissenup3:
.........and Sony can't stop wasting their F'ing time on someone that showed others how to manipulate a product they rightfully purchased.
They may own the systen ie the hardware, but the software is still own by Sony. And wether or not you acctually did read the EULA is not Sony's problem it's YOURs especially if you decide to monkey with the software. And then to tell the whole world "Look what I did, I'm so smart." This dude (GEOHOT) has got to be one of the dumbest smart people I have ever heard of.
EULAs are a scam. They should be disallowed because they are a form of entrapment. Basically, "agree with what we say or don't use our software". It's a legal loop hole and you better not be supporting the practicality of EULAs or else you're an............
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2011 @ 15:17
|
|
hastypete
Junior Member
|
25. March 2011 @ 15:31 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by cdxanti:
Get over it Sony. You can't stop hackers their just smarter than you.
their = ownership
they're = they are
I'll bet even Sony knows this.
In all seriousness, it's just nicer when people are clear in their communication. When they're not, it's harder to understand what they're saying.
side note: its = ownership; it's = it is.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2011 @ 15:33
|
|
hastypete
Junior Member
|
25. March 2011 @ 15:43 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
If you lease a car, the manufacturer cannot limit the places that you go with it. You can even take it to a race track (although your insurance might not cover you there). The manufacturer can't even limit modifications to the car;
Good point. but you didn't complete it.
Actually, the government can make your modifications illegal and fine you real money. They can also force you to remove the modification or face confiscation. Not only that, but if your modifications cause damage to person or property, you will face possible jail time. Now Sony is not the government, no doubt. But Sony didn't make what Geohot did illegal. That was actually the government. Geohot caused monetary damage to PS3. And caused every PS3 to lose value, thereby damaging all legit PS3 owners. (just the ones who don't give a fart's ass about other OS).
Oh yes, I must be a Sony employee (sarcasm intended for the poster who keeps using that as some kind of a slam. LOL)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2011 @ 15:46
|
|
hastypete
Junior Member
|
25. March 2011 @ 15:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's nice that Geohot was able to still go on his planned vacation.
He probably would not have been able to do this if he'd had to spend his own money on his legal defense.
Honestly, the ethics of this are amazing. But it's already apparent that he doesn't score high on the ethics scale.
|
|
adre02
Member
1 product review
|
25. March 2011 @ 18:31 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by brockie:
hope they crush this guy.
I am willing to wager 3,000.00 that this guy never does a day in jail as far as sentencing.
This is superman
|
Newbie
|
25. March 2011 @ 18:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
Citizens were never asked whether they wanted the change to laws that allowed an object they bought to be still owned by the corporation they bought it from. The massive changes to intellectual property legislation that have been made, were most frequently achieved using back door methods such as free trade agrements. Amerikans should read up on all their property and political rights signed away in the nafta agreement. That model was repeated around the world during the 90's by slick willie and his crew of crooks strong arming other governments into invoking their own DMCA's.
If we didn't agree to it (hell in most cases we weren't even told it was happening) we are not bound by those laws, no matter how many puerile eulas they try to get us to click. Because those eulas are meant to be a contract. A contract is only reasonable when made by two equal parties who can choose whetheer to agree. A purchaser (who has usually already paid up in most cases) has no choice but to agree to the eula if he/she wants to enjoy the property right he/she obtained by paying for the goods.
I realise lawyers could run rings around this simple logic, but that doesn't show the correctness ofthe law it shows how divorced that modern law has become from ordinary citizens rights and responsibilities.
|
|
airman
Newbie
|
25. March 2011 @ 19:09 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by hastypete:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
If you lease a car, the manufacturer cannot limit the places that you go with it. You can even take it to a race track (although your insurance might not cover you there). The manufacturer can't even limit modifications to the car;
Good point. but you didn't complete it.
Actually, the government can make your modifications illegal and fine you real money. They can also force you to remove the modification or face confiscation. Not only that, but if your modifications cause damage to person or property, you will face possible jail time. Now Sony is not the government, no doubt. But Sony didn't make what Geohot did illegal. That was actually the government. Geohot caused monetary damage to PS3. And caused every PS3 to lose value, thereby damaging all legit PS3 owners. (just the ones who don't give a fart's ass about other OS).
Oh yes, I must be a Sony employee (sarcasm intended for the poster who keeps using that as some kind of a slam. LOL)
Did he devalue the PS3 or add flexibility and value for the end users?
As for the car, if I purchase, or lease I can do any thing I want to the car including changing out the engine to a blown hemihead Chrysler if it'd fit. I may or may not be able to legally drive it on the street depending on mods, but as I don't live in CA about the only thing I have to worry about is how loud it is and of course how I drive it. Here the the tires do have to have a certain % covered to prevent them from throwing *stuff* onto other cars if you are going to drive it on the road. I can even pull ever bit of anti pollution stuff. Yes with a lease I'd have to buy the car after all that.
Responsibility belongs to the driver and owner whether the car is modified or not.
Airman
|
Member
|
25. March 2011 @ 20:12 |
Link to this message
|
The point I was trying to make is Take the PS3 and shoot it full of holes if you want...it's yours. You just can't alter the software...that's not yours, Sony still owns the software.
?Breathe in. Breathe out. Breathe in. Breathe out. Forget this... and attaining enlightenment is the least of your problems.?
?Zen Judaism by Someone Clever
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
25. March 2011 @ 21:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
lissenup3, i'm not finnish as i'm canadian.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. March 2011 @ 02:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ya know if this sets any precedent(like the judge allowing reverse class action case) the public needs their right to brains revoked....
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
MrZoolook
Junior Member
|
26. March 2011 @ 13:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by airman:
Originally posted by hastypete:
Originally posted by KillerBug:
If you lease a car, the manufacturer cannot limit the places that you go with it. You can even take it to a race track (although your insurance might not cover you there). The manufacturer can't even limit modifications to the car;
Good point. but you didn't complete it.
Actually, the government can make your modifications illegal and fine you real money. They can also force you to remove the modification or face confiscation. Not only that, but if your modifications cause damage to person or property, you will face possible jail time. Now Sony is not the government, no doubt. But Sony didn't make what Geohot did illegal. That was actually the government. Geohot caused monetary damage to PS3. And caused every PS3 to lose value, thereby damaging all legit PS3 owners. (just the ones who don't give a fart's ass about other OS).
Oh yes, I must be a Sony employee (sarcasm intended for the poster who keeps using that as some kind of a slam. LOL)
Did he devalue the PS3 or add flexibility and value for the end users?
As for the car, if I purchase, or lease I can do any thing I want to the car including changing out the engine to a blown hemihead Chrysler if it'd fit. I may or may not be able to legally drive it on the street depending on mods, but as I don't live in CA about the only thing I have to worry about is how loud it is and of course how I drive it. Here the the tires do have to have a certain % covered to prevent them from throwing *stuff* onto other cars if you are going to drive it on the road. I can even pull ever bit of anti pollution stuff. Yes with a lease I'd have to buy the car after all that.
Responsibility belongs to the driver and owner whether the car is modified or not.
The owner being NOT you, since its a leased car?
And unless I am mistaken, the PS3 issue is about the software rather then the hardware... and most software comes with a specific clause to prevent modification/reverse engineering. You may own the hardware, but the software is provided on a medium to you on the understanding you accept the licensing agreement that goes with it. What you actually OWN is the right to use the software (via the agreement should you accept it) but the software itself is still OWNED by the copyright holder.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. March 2011 @ 13:12
|
