|
|
|
GeoHot, separating legal fact from fiction
|
|
Senior Member
|
23. February 2011 @ 17:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
bigo93
Senior Member
|
23. February 2011 @ 19:31 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
can GeoHot do whatever he wants with his PS3, that he bought and paid for? The simple answer is no, in the same way that you can?t do whatever you want with your car,
Yes there are laws that come with buying a car such as speed limits. But there no laws stopping one from changing it's colour, getting a private plate, changing the radio, adding an air freshener, adding alloy wheels, adding nitro, heck you can even mod it to fly if you have the money, time and know-how as long as you also have a flying license and permission to use the airspace.
What is illegal is if the car manufacturer calls you us after the warranty period and demands the radio back, the wheels, the brakes etc.
And a lot of people would find it unfair and demand action if the manufacturer says you cannot mod your car, add nitro, convert it into a flying car, add a private plate, change the radio, only use fuel sold by their specially approved pumps, and the only air freshener fragrance you can use is "sony's sweaty ballsack".
So I disagree with that article especially since the guy didnt even mention the fact that sony themselves donated $1 to geohots paypal account and used that as evidence that he was taking donations, or that they gave him less than 12 hours notice to appear in court 2500 miles away! The fact geohot did not allow piracy on his cfw, yet sony claim he has. As for sony not wanting to bankrupt him, geohot says his legal fees have already reached $10,000! How many of us have that much to launder on a silly court case unless we believe that sony are trying to trample on our rights!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. February 2011 @ 19:37
|
Senior Member
|
23. February 2011 @ 20:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
bigo93
Senior Member
|
23. February 2011 @ 21:05 |
Link to this message
|
Sony's TOS are based on US laws, a few of the clauses probably could be considered illegal in the EU. There is a case being put forward in Norway right now what the removal of otheros was illegal.
Also do not forget that you cannot read these agreement before you buy, and the fact that these agreements can change over time is silly. As we saw with 3.21 fw, it was a lose-lose situation for users, either lose otheros or lose psn, future gaming and bluray playback. Otheros was an advertised feature and one of the main selling points of the ps3, to remove it resulted in false advertising. It doesnt matter is 95% of the people would never use it, it was an advertised selling point.
I think I made my point about these agreement, but think ppl ignored it, when I posted in a previous thread stating that if anyone posts in this thread they agree to give me everything they own, if Sony's TOS is binding that so is that thread and I should legally own all your stuff if you posted in that thread. Why? Cos it's written clearly on that thread, meaning you read it and agreed with it and hence were "willing" to give me everything for the right to post on that thread.
Yet you will agree with me that that was nonsense and is not legally binding (or is it, phones lawyer :P) So why should sony's be? Just because they are are large corporation they can make electronic contracts but an individual cannot?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. February 2011 @ 21:06
|
Senior Member
|
24. February 2011 @ 03:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
That has to be the biggest pile of crap i have been stupid enough to read in a long time, very biased and not complete fact.
|
Senior Member
|
24. February 2011 @ 09:40 |
Link to this message
|
Understanding ownership
David Braben on ownership, theft, freedom of speech and the outsiders
When we buy a house on a plot of land, we don?t own the mineral rights even if we ?own? the land.
A local coal mine does not have to seek out the permission of the numerous owners of all the different columns of rock they are tunnelling through, nor can the ?owner? of the surface tunnel sell the coal or oil that might be there, unless they have a separate right to do so.
Even with the surface ownership, we cannot do what we like.
Almost all countries have some sort of building/planning control, and that is a good thing. Maybe it is annoying to us, but it also stops our neighbors doing things we might hate. In effect we have a license to use the land a certain way from the country in which it sits, but we call it ?ownership?.
Buying a PlayStation 3 (for example), also does not give me unrestricted ownership of it. If I ?dig? into it, I can?t just sell or even give away all the information I find. It really annoys me when hackers claim they can do what they like with what they find, especially when it is destructive to the security of all the other PS3 machines.
These people are damaging to everyone with a PS3, not just to the games dev community, because of future security measures that will be needed, but there seems to be a blind spot amongst some players, perhaps because they imagine it will mean ?free stuff? in the future.
SECURITY MEASURES
If someone buys the same model of car as me, and then after studying it at length announces to the world a good way of breaking into that car, it hurts me.
I will have to take extra security measures thereafter, and it damages the manufacturer of that car. In this case though, there is not an equivalent blind spot, perhaps as finding a quick way of breaking into all cars of that type does not mean free fuel in the future.
Almost everyone would agree it is a bad thing, and would get angry with such a person.
There have been suggestions that releasing hacking information is an issue of freedom of speech. That is such rubbish. Some freedoms of speech are also curtailed for sensible reasons. Broadcasting easy ways of breaking into cars is bad for everyone affected, as is the freedom of speech cliché that is always wheeled out ? shouting ?Fire? in a cinema, which creates a real risk of harm to others. It is common sense not to do it.
There is a more subtle side to this not ?getting? ownership. That is the failure to acknowledge intellectual property rights, and rights to a service.
When we buy a new car, we buy an item and a service. In this case, it is mostly the item we are buying, but the service is significant. This is a service, and if you sell the car, the warranty and maintenance cover does not restart.
INTO SERVICE
A game is an item and a service too, except there are people out there trying to prevent publishers and developers detecting whether a game is new or has been sold again.
The equivalent is adjusting the paperwork and registration number on your second hand car to get a new warranty and free maintenance out of your garage.
We see shops using polishing machines on used game discs, and even replacing the outer sleeve to make a scratched game look new. With a game, the service is a combination of the single player game and online support.
Online bandwidth per user is something that gradually dies down after a game is some months old ? but if it is then passed to another user, those costs are incurred all over again for the new user ? but the publishers providing the service see none of the ?pre-owned? revenue to cover it.
It is all about what is reasonable. Hacking into a machine as an academic exercise is one thing.
Broadcasting the information is another. We should all be prepared to roundly condemn such people. Right now it is Sony that is hurting.
Tomorrow it will affect all of us in the development community, so we should stand against it together, now.
|
|
bigo93
Senior Member
|
24. February 2011 @ 10:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
And why is this? Because we have a government which "made it so". Yes we elect our governments, but it does not give them the right to rule over us, tell us what we can do and what we cannot. This is what has happened, we have allowed a select few to become our dictators.
Democracy is not perfect, it's just the best there is that people will accept. It's full of loopholes and, as we have seen, can be corrupted in many areas very easily.
The world we live in is a corrupt world, there is no real freedom or liberty, it s just a hoax. People dream of a utopia, it we wanted it we can make it happen oh so very easily. But the fact is people do not, they think only of themselves, people have a "me me me" attitude, why else are people ignoring things like climate change - "I wont be alive in 50 years so I dont care", but their children will be alive, what about them and their children?
No-one wants to think about consequences be it that they appear tomorrow or 100 years from now, they just want want want. To live in an ideal world sacrifices must be made, and people refuse to make them. So we continue living in our corrupted world.
Now if you cannot link this rant with the current situation, you are one of those people.
|
Senior Member
|
25. February 2011 @ 04:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
In all the years that software has been sold, not one single customer is sold the software itself. The software on the disc is provided for free. That's right, free. The developing company owns the claim and rights to the software, and have a vested interest in such, and therefore it is protect by a series of copyrights, patents, etc. A company simply sells you a license granting you rights to use THEIR software as long as you AGREE to their terms or EULA in most cases.
There may be shipping and handling charges, etc., packaging costs, development costs, etc. passed on to the consumer in the final cost as well. The very copy of Windows that you are using right now operates in the same fashion. For instance, if you shred your Windows CD/DVD, you still have the right to operate your OS void of the disc, because in fact the license is what bought you the access to the code in the OS software. Even FREE software does not pass on the right for users to OWN it, the license is just simply free or @ no charge. The developing company still OWNS the software. And if you haven't noticed even free software comes with a EULA.
That is why it is illegal for you to strip down or reverse engineer any software, mod it a bit, and repackage it as your own to sell, etc. It is breaking the law. If we OWNED the software we bought, reverse engineering, repackaging and reselling would be legal. Bottom line, companies must protect their investment.
Because even though we think we "BUY" the software, when we actually don't, doesn't make us any less liable legally when we infringe on copyright laws, patents, and intellectual property.
And for those who like car analogies, If you drive your car in a reckless fashion, run red lights, stop signs, drive down a One Way street in the wrong direction when no one is looking without injury to anyone, are you still breaking the law? The answer is yes.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
25. February 2011 @ 05:12 |
Link to this message
|
It is true that you don't own the land above or below the property you purchase. Is this fair? No...it isn't fair...and a lot of people have been screwed over by this...such as farmers that have had their land ruined by natural gas companies that drilled against the orders of the land owners...not only do we have no rights to the air above our properties, or the ground under it...you don't even have control over the 1/2MM thick layer of land that the deed says you own (otherwise they would not be allowed to drill through it without permission).
Copyright laws are actually a big grainy when it comes to software...they say that the software is free and that you are just buying the license to use it...and then they fine people for distributing copies of the software without licenses. It is always heads-they-win-tails-you-loose.
As for reverse engineering, this is only illegal if you use their code in your final product...or if you sell something with their name on it. It isn't illegal to make game mods...unless you try to sell them of course. If you reverse engineer something to find out how it works, there is nothing stopping you from implementing the same features in your software so long as you write the code your own way. It isn't even illegal to copy someone's idea...if it was, then there would only be one media player, one operating system, one video game, etc.
While there are still a few people using the leaked sony SDKs, most homebrew is written using no sony code at all...and the master key is not sony code; because you can't just say a random string of numbers belongs to you...if they did, then everyone on earth would be guilty for transmitting that combination of characters at some point by some means, even if it was just something like a few bits in the middle of the digital signal that comes from your cell phone when you talk to your friends.
Quote:
And for those who like car analogies, If you drive your car in a reckless fashion, run red lights, stop signs, drive down a One Way street in the wrong direction when no one is looking without injury to anyone, are you still breaking the law? The answer is yes.
My car is theoretically capable of doing all of these things...should I be arrested simply because I could do these things? Should I be forced to install some kind of computer controls to prevent me from doing these things? If my car came with a chip to prevent it from driving the wrong direction down one-way roads, and it did so by preventing the car from moving in either direction down one-way roads, would Toyota be able to sue me for removing that chip? Would the police be able to give me tickets for driving the wrong way down these streets when I did not?
|
|
SDF_GR
Member
1 product review
|
25. February 2011 @ 07:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
you can't just say a random string of numbers belongs to you...
well..You can.
When he posted "This is the Master Key of the PS3" ....you can.
and when he admits that he digged into to ps3 and he found "this" (the key) i still think you can......and when it is proven that he transmitted something that enabled piracy... again you can.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
25. February 2011 @ 08:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
He didn't find the key; he reverse engineered it...totally legal as it was not on the system.
Windows enables piracy...I guess microsft needs to get sued for transmitting it and even selling it?
|
Senior Member
|
25. February 2011 @ 09:19 |
Link to this message
|
These arguments are always going to one sided, you have the Sony fans on one hand that don't understand the hackers, then you have the hackers, who will never understand why fanboys continuously let companies control them.
I can see both sides of the story, i see the bad side, piracy, hacked PSN etc, i see the good side, homebrew, improved Linux better than OtherOS, vast Emulator support, game editing/mods(non online), console editing, like custom boot logo's sounds.
For me the good far out weighs the bad.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
bigo93
Senior Member
|
25. February 2011 @ 13:08 |
Link to this message
|
Well as Bawango said when you buy a disc you are just buying a disc, well I don think I want to be paying upto £50 for a lousy disc when similar discs can be bought for under £1!
If I am buying a license then I want the companies to replace the disc free of charge whenever it becomes scratched and unplayable! I want them to provide me with the software on new media whenever it is released, i.e. if I bought a film on vhs, they should provide me with a dvd, and today provide me with a bluray copy of the film; after all I bought the license to watch the movie, they should provide the support to be able to view it in future devices.
They cannot have it both ways in their favour.
|
|
