*canireturnthis.jpg*Mudkips said:Really? I can return my opened PS3 to Amazon, or Sony, for a full refund? :lol
Can I do this after they change the EULA on me? :lol
Can I return an opened game for a refund? :lol :lol :lol :lol ...
*canireturnthis.jpg*Mudkips said:Really? I can return my opened PS3 to Amazon, or Sony, for a full refund? :lol
Can I do this after they change the EULA on me? :lol
Can I return an opened game for a refund? :lol :lol :lol :lol ...
If you should think that milk tastes better if you drink it out of a SEGA cup, then that would be your opinion Then it is up to me (or anyone else for that matter) to agree or disagree with your opinion, but wouldnt your opinion still be the same even if i agree or disagree with it?Segata Sanshiro said:I think milk tastes better when I drink it out of a SEGA cup. Take it as you will. Anyway, this is a derail, so if you want to chat any further about group identification theory, we should probably take it to PM.
charlequin said:I think it's extremely likely that it is legal for Sony to remove this feature in the US simply because it's basically legal to sell people broken junk that doesn't do what you advertised or otherwise actively and knowingly rip consumers off in the US -- but the EULA is not going to be a determining factor in that.
test_account said:If Microsoft would remove for example the Avatar support and/or if Nintendo had removed for example the Weather Channel in an attempt to prevent piracy, then i would most likely have had understanding for this as well.
charlequin said:We've been over this before.
- EULAs have an indeterminate legality in the US, with certain district courts ruling that they are enforceable given certain preconditions (like that the user must have a legitimate way of reading the agreement and consenting to it), and others ruling they are completely unenforceable. Since there's no Supreme Court case on the matter and no written law on the matter, it's really still an ambiguous issue in general.
- None of the cases that rule in favor of EULAs in the US support the enforceability of such contracts if a user does not have the opportunity to peruse them before locking in their purchase. Console-game EULAs would not be enforceable anywhere in the US because you can't see them before rendering the product unreturnable.
- EULAs, even in the most favorable interpretation, are still bound by the restrictions of contract law and therefore do not generally allow a consumer to waive any consumer-protection rights they may possess, to automatically disclaim copyright over works created using the licensed software, etc. As a result, an EULA, even if judged enforceable, cannot actually be used to get around any laws that may exist to protect the consumer.
I think it's extremely likely that it is legal for Sony to remove this feature in the US simply because it's basically legal to sell people broken junk that doesn't do what you advertised or otherwise actively and knowingly rip consumers off in the US -- but the EULA is not going to be a determining factor in that.
Leondexter said:Nintendo already removed MP3 support from the Wii. But they didn't advertise the Wii as an MP3 player. There's a distinction. If Sony had included OtherOS but never advertised the feature in an attempt to sell systems to people for use as (basically) a PC, then it wouldn't be this big a deal...it would pass virtually unnoticed like Nintendo's dumb update did.
GSG Flash said:It's not even that, Nintendo's mp3-removing update of the photo channel was completely optional and independent of the console's other features, unlike Sony's dumbass firmware update. Meaning that no matter if you updated the channel or not you would still be able to play online or play any games released in the future, even if they required a firmware update.
Sony, on the other hand, just gives you the illusion of an optional update when it really isn't unless you want a gimped console.
Cruzader said:So whats the deal with the DNS thing to bypass the FW? Pros/Cons plz. If I continue to use that, will something happen? If I can make a DNS setting on my router so that my PS3 can use it and be safer or can I remain using the one posted here?
PSGames said:Doesn't refusing the new update mean we can't play future games as well?
No way. I dont think they'll go that far [ actually I haven't heard anyone banned from PSN so far ]. They removed a feature and they'll ban you if you still want to use it? Why would they do that, I'm not Geohotz I'm not trying to hack PS3 via Linux, I'm harmless .Kittonwy said:Why are you trying to bypass the firmware? Do you actually need linux on your PS3 (not just in general)? It's not like the Sony people don't go around checking out boards or won't know about this FW bypass, they'll probably find a way to stop this by the time the next update comes around or maybe they'll start banning accounts if they see machines connected online that don't have the proper firmware.
AndyD said:Huh?
No, I meant that the core features of the PS3 are gaming and multimedia. So unless they start removing portions of those, I will not start worry. It was in response to his slippery slope statement.
I am not sure what the Wii has to do with it. It does both gaming and multimedia and not Linux.
Sure you can argue Linux can be used to play games or for multimedia and I have used it that way for roms, but in the grand scheme its not a crucial element of the core gaming and multimedia features.
Ah yes, that is true, i forgot about that Nintendo removed the MP3 support for the Wii. What was the reason for that Nintendo removed the MP3 support again, because they didnt want to pay a license fee or something? If so, i can understand that. I can also understand that Nintendo didnt want to include the support for playing DVD movies, because to save money on fees. EDIT: I see now that Massa showed how to get MP3 support back on the Wii. Why did Nintendo remove the MP3 support when they officially tells you how to get the MP3 support back?Leondexter said:Nintendo already removed MP3 support from the Wii. But they didn't advertise the Wii as an MP3 player. There's a distinction.
Was the OtherOS feature really adverticed in a way to attempt to sell more systems? I cant remember to have seen OtherOS being adverticed in any ads etc., but i probably havnt seen every PS3 ad, so maybe the OtherOS feature was adverticed? I just checked my european 60GB PS3 box and i dont see anything mentioned about OtherOS on the box. I also read through the PS3 manual that was included and i didnt see one word mentioned about the OtherOS feature, but i didnt really read the manual very carefully, so i might have missed it.Leondexter said:If Sony had included OtherOS but never advertised the feature in an attempt to sell systems to people for use as (basically) a PC, then it wouldn't be this big a deal...it would pass virtually unnoticed like Nintendo's dumb update did.
You want to change dns on the ps3, not router.Cruzader said:So whats the deal with the DNS thing to bypass the FW? Pros/Cons plz. If I continue to use that, will something happen? If I can make a DNS setting on my router so that my PS3 can use it and be safer or can I remain using the one posted here?
It says in the PS3 EULA something about that you arent allowed to modify the firmware, so if Sony somehow can detect that you run custom firmware on the PS3, i guess that this could be a reason enough to ban because it is a violation of the EULA. But i have no idea if this type of banning would be legal or if Sony would ban even if they could detect custom PS3 firmware though.JardeL said:No way. I dont think they'll go that far [ actually I haven't heard anyone banned from PSN so far ]. They removed a feature and they'll ban you if you still want to use it? Why would they do that, I'm not Geohotz I'm not trying to hack PS3 via Linux, I'm harmless .
Ah, cool that they got Linux up and running on the Wii The last time i read about it (1-2 years ago or so), Linux on the Wii was still under development i think, so i didnt know that they managed to run Linux on the Wii now, that is coolAnony said:
Maybe. But if Sony left the thing driverless like they did on PS2, I doubt it would change things dramatically.missile said:It wouldn't make a big difference, granted, but the PS3Linux scene would be different today if the RSX were enabled from day 1, don't you think?
It always seemed academic driven to me, so I don't believe anyone thought of things beyond "it's opensource, free, community will come". Which may be noble, but it also missed the point.Don't you think Sony had something similar in mind, but decided otherwise further down the road? I don't know.
iapetus said:Absolutely. But when people who do complain start getting results, it won't be long before the wider PS3-owning community starts to discover that there's a free money party.
test_account said:Was the OtherOS feature really adverticed in a way to attempt to sell more systems? I cant remember to have seen OtherOS being adverticed in any ads etc., but i probably havnt seen every PS3 ad, so maybe the OtherOS feature was adverticed? I just checked my european 60GB PS3 box and i dont see anything mentioned about OtherOS on the box. I also read through the PS3 manual that was included and i didnt see one word mentioned about the OtherOS feature, but i didnt really read the manual very carefully, so i might have missed it.
...
I wonder if the removal of the OtherOS would have been a bit more unnoticed if it hadnt been used for exploit to hack the PS3. The OtherOS was removed from the PS3 Slim several of months ago and i cant remember it being that much talk about it then as it is now. But when the PS3 Slim came out, then the older PS3 models still had the OtherOS feature, but now all PS3 models dont have the OtherOS feature (unless you dont update the firmware), so maybe this is why people didnt talk that much about the removal of the OtherOS feature when it was removed from the PS3 Slim? But i dont know.
AndyD said:The link to the EULA is usually printed on the box.
And since there aren't any, there is nothing to supersede the EULA.
missile said:// PS3 Owner Refunded (Without Return) for Missing Other OS
http://www.playstationuniversity.com/ps3-owner-refunded-without-return-for-missing-other-os-3555/
Sometimes I think it would be better that way, leaving everything to theFafalada said:Maybe. But if Sony left the thing driverless like they did on PS2,
I think everything depends on momentum. But you are right. It would beFafalada said:I doubt it would change things dramatically.
PSGames said:Amazing work iapetus. This needs to get more attention. If you have a PS3 and are from Europe you can get a refund without returning your PS3. Everyone should be taking advantage of this!
missile said:From your perspective, what do you believe was / is 'the' reason Sony has
disable the RSX for the OtherOS?
They'd be cleverer to give you £84 credit to spend on their goods, rather than cash.iapetus said:Your mileage may vary. Some people have taken very similar approaches to Amazon and not got a refund (and I'd like to clarify that I don't yet have the £84 in my bank account, though it shows up as a credit on the purchase info).
deepbrown said:They'd be cleverer to give you £84 credit to spend on their goods, rather than cash.
iapetus said:Your mileage may vary. Some people have taken very similar approaches to Amazon and not got a refund (and I'd like to clarify that I don't yet have the £84 in my bank account, though it shows up as a credit on the purchase info).
Currently, he is waiting for his Infectus chip (a NAND flasher) to arrive.geohot said:... The method is simple, it's hybrid firmware. The system is running an
older kernel + hypervisor (Core OS), and the VSH (Visual Shell) aka XMB is
3.21. The trick is to also replace the module which displays the Other OS
menu option, with one that displays it.
I was exactly thinking the same!Clear said:Its probably because clever use of shader programming could be used to engineer exploits.
The CELL is a secure chip design, RSX is not.
Here here. Completely agree. Now the problem is rounding up more than 20 gamers with principles. I really hope Sony don't get away with this but with the attitude seemingly "Well, you didn't use Linux anyway" I don't have much hope. Why are gamers such shit consumers?dr_octagon said:I'm sure it's been done to death but it's worth remembering that it is a matter of principle. It doesn't matter that it affects a small number of people, Sony are at fault. A retroactive effect of removing such a feature, which was a selling point for some, is a big deal. It's not just people complaining for the sake of it, iapetus is spot on about the rights of the consumer and I don't see why this should be an exception.
Problem is the majority of consumers are shitty consumers. Companies abuse them and they never take action.SmokyDave said:Here here. Completely agree. Now the problem is rounding up more than 20 gamers with principles. I really hope Sony don't get away with this but with the attitude seemingly "Well, you didn't use Linux anyway" I don't have much hope. Why are gamers such shit consumers?
iapetus said:I can't see this working on the Slim - the reason for dropping support on that platform was the effort that would need to go into building support for the new hardware revision, and this was before the whole 'security' furore.
Gold =)XMonkey said:
XMonkey said:
XMonkey said:
iapetus said:Who is this 'lapetus' of which they speak?
Edit: Curses, beaten to recognising how to spell my own name!
http://digg.com/playstation/PS3_Owner_Refunded_Without_Return_for_Missing_Other_OSiapetus said:Who is this 'lapetus' of which they speak?
Edit: Curses, beaten to recognising how to spell my own name!
iapetus said:Because this sets a precedent for a hardware manufacturer to remotely disable an advertised feature of the hardware that they had previously committed to maintaining, in violation of European law. I don't care what that feature is, or whether I want to use it personally, they should not be allowed to get away with it.
Because they sold the PS3 as being capable of running Linux, and claimed it was one of the most powerful features of the device. They don't have to actively support the community, but likewise they can't just remove that capability.
Magnus said:Just wanted to pop my head in and pat iapteus on the back for winning something here. Wasn't following the thread and only learned about the victory from a gaming blog. :lol
Power to the people.
Not only is the DMCA completely irrelevant in most of the world, you're mixing things up. The DMCA prohibits reverse engineering if it's done to enable piracy. Which isn't the case here. I know Wikipedia isn't exactly a great source, but in this case, it sums it up nicely:Mudkips said:W r o n g .
You can't reverse engineer shit because of the DMCA, not because of the EULA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineeringReverse engineering software or hardware systems which is done for the purposes of interoperability (for example, to support undocumented file formats or undocumented hardware peripherals) is mostly believed to be legal, though patent owners often contest this and attempt to stifle any reverse engineering of their products for any reason.