QOTD: Should Sony be Sued for Removing Linux?

Status
Not open for further replies.

znegval

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2009
99
0
18,630
0
They marketed it with a feature and after the product was sold they took it out. Doesn't really matter what the feature was, they shouldn't have done that. Not Sony, not any company should be allowed to do that.
 
My answer is yes, it was well known prior to the update that the PS3 supports Linux and was used on several occasions as a selling point. With the feature removed with numerous users, universities, and the military being impacted with this loss Sony should either reimburse in partial for the loss of the feature or restore it on existing models. Under EU law Sony could face some legal trouble in that region.
 

twbg4cq

Distinguished
May 27, 2010
43
0
18,530
0
Yes, and if we're going to sue Sony for removing Linux support, then let's get them to bring back backwards compatibility for PS1 and PS2 games while we're at it.
That's one of the things holding me back from buying one.
 

Franklin Hennersdorfer

Distinguished
Aug 1, 2008
13
0
18,510
0
Yes, they should, if only to set a precedent to stop others from doing this same kind of thing. Removing features from an already purchased product is tantamount to theft if you ask me, (and any EULA that tries to make this practice kosher should be illegal, too). If Toyota recalled those accelerator challenged vehicles, and in the process disabled 'left turns', shouldn't they be sued? There's little difference here in my eyes. Sure, Toyota could argue that one could live without left turns, after all 3 right turns equals one left. But would you buy that excuse? Doubtful.
 
G

Guest

Guest
no one cares about linux, I can slap a pentium 3 with 1 gig ram and a geforce ancient and make a far more usefull linux box than a ps3, face it microsoft has the operating system monopolized
 

jhansonxi

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
1,262
0
19,280
0
The result of any lawsuit is likely to be just some coupons for future Sony products. They are not going to bring the other OS option back. While it was a nifty feature for the technically inclined it's market importance is small compared to game and movie sales and the required DRM. I'm sure third-parties will fix the problem regardless.
 

techguy911

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2007
1,075
0
19,460
58
The air force also is looking into taking sony to court as well as researchers if the system fails and they send it in to be repaired they will flash the ps3 with newest firmware as policy thus loosing otherOS.
 

sstym

Distinguished
Feb 16, 2009
118
0
18,680
0
I don't think they should be sued, because they actually have the rights to add or remove software features at anytime:

http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-eula/ps3_eula_en.html

in particular, read section 3 (Services and Updates)

"Some services may change your current settings, cause a loss of data or content, or cause some loss of functionality."

However, this is so deceptive that they should be heckled and/or boycotted for actually doing it.
 

ArgleBargle

Distinguished
Jul 17, 2008
150
0
18,680
0
If Sony can remove features at their whim, then who really owns the PS3? Does Sony own the operating system? Can you install your own OS on the hardware without coming up against DRM? If Sony can get away with this, the next thing you know, all consoles will be "rentals." You won't be able to resell them, you won't be able to play them in the future when Sony changes to the PS4.
 
I'd say that they should be sued. Yes, the penalty won't be that bad, but the company did market their products with certain features that they then revoked. That's a classic example of not only breach of contract, but if it's shown it was planned in advance, it can be deemed fraud.
 

Rahbot

Distinguished
Dec 12, 2008
231
0
18,710
15
I believe that they should be sued for the removal of added features. I would be one that would sue also. I bought my PS3 just for the fact that I could install Linux and use it as a Muti-Media Center for files that the PS3 can't natively play. Like RealMedia, some AVI and MPEG, Quicktime files, geez I wish Sony would put those formats useable in an update. I know some of Picture and video files dont play on my PS3.
 

tsnorquist

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2009
399
0
18,780
0
I think this is akin to what Amazon did recently with removing books from user's Kindles.

Not right. If you don't want the feature on the machine Sony, then stop allowing the feature on all *NEW* PS3's.

I'll gladly raise my hand for a share of my money lost b/c of this.
 

weepee

Distinguished
May 20, 2008
13
0
18,510
0
so can i sue Apple because i bought an iphone for the "baby shaker" game, and then apple removed it without my consent?
 

njalterio

Distinguished
Jan 14, 2008
780
0
18,990
1
[citation][nom]sstym[/nom]I don't think they should be sued, because they actually have the rights to add or remove software features at anytime:http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-eula/ps3_eula_en.htmlin particular, read section 3 (Services and Updates) "Some services may change your current settings, cause a loss of data or content, or cause some loss of functionality."However, this is so deceptive that they should be heckled and/or boycotted for actually doing it.[/citation]

Just because it is in the EULA it doesn't make it legal. The EULA still needs to satisfy the requirements of U.S. law.
 

BloodyIron

Distinguished
Nov 17, 2007
20
0
18,510
0
700 people is a shitty sample size. this shouldn't be taken as a serious survey as statistics and interests can vary widely from region to region. was this even international?
 

the_krasno

Distinguished
Sep 29, 2009
550
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]weepee[/nom]so can i sue Apple because i bought an iphone for the "baby shaker" game, and then apple removed it without my consent?[/citation]

Yes. As distasteful that it is, you paid for it and it became yours. Not theirs.
 

DaddyW123

Distinguished
Apr 22, 2010
148
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]njalterio[/nom]Just because it is in the EULA it doesn't make it legal. The EULA still needs to satisfy the requirements of U.S. law.[/citation]

Absolutely. I can put in a EULA that upon you purchasing a PS3, I am allowed to come over to your house and shoot you in the face. Just because you signed an agreement unwittingly saying "hey, go ahead and shoot me in the face", doesn't mean I shouldn't go to jail for killing you.

Some people are just stupid. "the EULA this and the EULA that"... f**k the EULA. Ever heard of such a thing as Right and Wrong? Apparently Sony hasn't.
 

gm0n3y

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2006
3,441
0
20,780
0
Yes.

But what a stupid, useless article. Why bother even talking about a survey that has nothing to do with the topic? Bad journalism. No offense Jane, normally I like your reporting.
 

Assmar

Distinguished
Sep 14, 2009
249
0
18,690
1
This is very different from the backward compatibility issue in that you knew whether or not your PS3 was backward compatible at the point of sale, it either was or wasn't and you had the choice to buy it or not. That's fair to me, although not the smartest move on Sony's part in my opinion.

It is completely unethical, and some courts will rule illegal, to advertise a feature on a product which would later be removed. It was marketed to some as a component to a supercomputer with the Linux feature, and like the first post says, many universities and institutions purchased it solely for this purpose. And so, in some cases in which this holds true, those people alone should have no trouble winning settlements and legal battles (if they can afford the lawyers).
 

gorehound

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2009
396
0
18,780
0
Yes.What a dumb story.If you bought a product and it was advertised to do something so you got it and then they just take that away.
What do you think anyways ?

YES !!! And for every bit you can as it is rootkit sony.
 

gm0n3y

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2006
3,441
0
20,780
0
Imagine if you bought a car and the manufacturer decided a couple of years later to remove the sound system from all of their cars. Would anybody think this was OK? There is no difference here. It isn't (or at least shouldn't) be legal to sell a product and then partially remove part of that product after the fact with no justification or recompense.
 

Camikazi

Distinguished
Jul 20, 2008
1,405
1
19,315
5
[citation][nom]twbg4cq[/nom]Yes, and if we're going to sue Sony for removing Linux support, then let's get them to bring back backwards compatibility for PS1 and PS2 games while we're at it.That's one of the things holding me back from buying one.[/citation]
Not exactly the same thing since the old systems with the chip still play older games, it's just new ones that can't. If they were to write code into the OS to block those older systems from playing those old games then it would be the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY