-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Case against Sony for OtherOS removal dismissed
- Thread starter USD
- Start date
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
I could've told you this would happen like half a year ago.
In fact, I did.
And they deserved to lose.
In fact, I did.
And they deserved to lose.
Cosmo Clock 21
Banned
This sets a troubling precedent for companies reneging on promised features in their closed systems. I'd be okay with the ruling if consumers had the legal right to install their own third-party firmwares, but this just leaves a bad taste in my mouth (as right as the judge may be).
Mama Robotnik
Member
Unfortunate.
Cements that a company can lobotomise a feature from your privately-owned property if it is in their corporate interests.
Very unfortunate. I was very-much hoping to see Sony punished heavily for what they had done, if only to deter such an anticonsumer move from happening again.
Well done Sony, you pulled off something despicable and got away with it.
Cements that a company can lobotomise a feature from your privately-owned property if it is in their corporate interests.
Very unfortunate. I was very-much hoping to see Sony punished heavily for what they had done, if only to deter such an anticonsumer move from happening again.
Well done Sony, you pulled off something despicable and got away with it.
StalkerUKCG
Banned
While the feature was relatively useless for most people cutting it for "security reasons" was crap considering the state of the PS3 hacking scene with its removal.
I disagree with the choice, how much could sony cut considering these new laws, blu-ray movie playback? dlc support ect
I disagree with the choice, how much could sony cut considering these new laws, blu-ray movie playback? dlc support ect
Why?
Yeah, I'd love to know. EU usually saves the day. Not that it's without faults or above making bad decisions from time to time, of course.
Zomba13
Member
I'm wondering that too.
You might own the system but Sony still owns PSN which does let u play online for free. You did have the choice to not update. It's well within Sonys right to remove a feature that they deem is a security risk.
Or play the latest games. It wasn't an option at all and people should stop calling it such. The choice was "either lose the advertised OtherOS or make your PS3 useless for playing games released from now".
I'd like to know this too. Judge says no good claim has been made as to why Sony wasn't within their legal rights to remove a product you already bought from them. I'm quite surprised, even by the US's typically pro-consumer courts. It seems like such a black and white case to me.
Mama Robotnik
Member
Or play any new games that require the update. If you keep OtherOS, you are excluded from a substantial number of blockbusters now I believe.
Consider: A customer buys a product with features A + B + C.
Why is it right that some time into the lifespan of the product, for the manufacturer to dictate "you can have features A + B or feature C but not all three any more"? Especially when such a choice is being forced not because of your best interests, but because of the financial concerns of a megacorporation?
How is this in any way defensible?
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
Whether or not the plaintiffs could show they had any right to the OtherOS feature or PSN by owning a PS3.
This would only stand up if you could play PS3 games without updating the PS3, too. It isn't just about PSN access.
Thats how.
Opus Angelorum
Member
Well they launched the PS3 at $599 and still recovered, anything's possible.
Ploid 3.0
Member
Blue pill or Red pill. The people chose, some chose to keep OtherOS. If otheros really was a big deal to the person they could get a second gaming system (there are a lot of options out there).
Tylahedras
Banned
Can you really not play newer games if you don't update? I have trouble believing they would do that... what about people with no internet access?
Really???? That's not something I can support...
The updates are on the discs.
Mama Robotnik
Member
$599 wasn't despicable, just daft.
Zomba13
Member
If it's anything like the Wii then the updates are on the disc and the game wont start unless you update.
The discs have the update on them. If you haven't update via the internet, you'd be asked to update by inserting the disc. Sony's done that with the PSP since 2004, and the PS3 since 2006.
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
That's a very... convenient restatement of the case.
Or let's put it in even simpler terms!
Two advertised features of the PS3 that became contractual obligations on the part of SONY the moment you paid for the product (goods must always function as advertised at the time of sale):
- The ability to play PS3 games
- The ability to install OtherOS
Then they say, years later, they are going to remove one and you get to pick.
It's a really clear-cut case of failure to provide purchased goods as advertised. I honestly don't know how it's possible for a judge to fuck up and see it as anything else.
Two advertised features of the PS3 that became contractual obligations on the part of SONY the moment you paid for the product (goods must always function as advertised at the time of sale):
- The ability to play PS3 games
- The ability to install OtherOS
Then they say, years later, they are going to remove one and you get to pick.
It's a really clear-cut case of failure to provide purchased goods as advertised. I honestly don't know how it's possible for a judge to fuck up and see it as anything else.
I have absolutely no idea what you mean by the word 'convenient' in the context you used it. Unless you mean in the literal sense in which case thank you and you're welcome to use that restatement for your own purposes.
This.
They advertised OtherOS? I had no idea.
Zomba13
Member
Maybe change that to 'play the latest PS3 games' as you can still play PS3 games if you have OtherOS still, just not recent ones.
If you cannot play all officially released PS3 games, your ability to play PS3 games has been impaired, thus SONY cannot claim to be fulfilling their obligation to provide a product that plays PS3 games.
This isn't a complicated concept.
Erm, yes? How else would people have known about it? It wasn't like some super-secret easter egg that people discovered upon buying it where previously the world had no idea.
Also, even if it was a super-secret easter egg, the fact it was there at the time of purchase means (unless SONY could show it was an unintentional inclusion and they have good reason to remove it) it falls under 'as advertised' and 'as sold'.
H_Prestige
Banned
ITT, being a despicable company is somehow against the law.
They had every right to alter the ps3 software. You agree to it each time you update. And you have every right to refuse.
They had every right to alter the ps3 software. You agree to it each time you update. And you have every right to refuse.
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
Where was OtherOS advertised, anyway?
And I meant convenient as in, it was a restatement that skewed the facts to benefit your non-argument.
So what if Windows gave you the choice of being able to run games or have internet access or something like that? You'd be fine with it? You paid for a product, and then parts of the product are forcibly taken from you?
This is true. Other OS feature was not on the boxes or in any ad material for the OG PS3.
The back of an OG PS3 box: http://media.ps3scene.com/images/ps3-eu-launch-unit/02.jpg
Theonik
Member
Just wondering, how many times did you use the otherOS feature?
See above.
True or false: in America there are laws against false advertising?
If true, I have not skewed the facts at all.
Not once, but how is that relevant at all?
Is that relevant?
test_account
XP-39C²
It was adverticed in the sense that they mentioned that the PS3 had this feature. But i never saw it mentioned in commercials or anything like that. The feature isnt even mentioned on the 60GB PS3 box.
EDIT: Already mentioned
Like I posted above. OtherOS was not an advertised feature.
Nope, I'm just curious.
It was adverticed in the sense that they mentioned that the PS3 had this feature. But i never saw it mentioned in commercials or anything like that. The feature isnt even mentioned on the 60GB PS3 box.
EDIT: Already mentioned
So basically, it wasn't advertised. Gotcha.
If I say an apple has a diamond for its core, but don't make a TV commercial about it or put it on a box containing the apple, I'm still obligated to provide that diamond core if you then purchase that apple on the understanding it has one else I am obligated instead to give you a full refund.
Advertised =/= put in trailers or written on a box. If you, as a company, make a statement about the product (and SONY stated OtherOS was a feature), that counts.
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
See above as in... the post that confirms that it was not advertised anywhere on the box?
And you have skewed the facts to make it look like there's false advertising present here when there is not.
test_account
XP-39C²
If "something like that" was a feature that i never used and i had agreed to the terms of service that features could be changed or removed, then i probably wouldnt have cared much about it. But this just what i would have done though, someone else might have reacted differently.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah... this leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Don't like the precedent this sets at all.
Similar threads
- Poll