QOTD: Should Sony be Sued for Removing Linux?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

quaz_99

Distinguished
May 28, 2010
1
0
18,510
0
I take issue with Sony removing Other OS out of principle. They should not be allowed to take out features that were part of the system when purchased, major or minor. It's just wrong; a bait and switch. But something else to consider is that in the EULA, the words "functionality" and "functioning" are both used in the software updates section only. No where are "features" referred to as "functions." In fact, the word "feature" is used to describe the things that the system may do (such as "Internet Features"), while the word "function" is used to describe how well the features work, as it says that software updates will ensure that the services are "functioning properly." Therefore, I take the use of "some loss of functionality" as meaning a software update may cause certain features to function at a loss, or slower/less efficiently. This may sound like splitting hairs, but so is using an EULA to justify the removal of features which were bought and paid for by thousands of people.

Something else I take issue with is how Sony claims that this software update is "optional." If that were true, then I would not have had to return Red Dead Redemption to amazon.com in exchange for the 360 version. An optional update would contain new features or fixes which you could opt out of without removing compatibility with future games which were written for the system. If Sony wants to play the "optional" game, every game they release should be mandated to disclaim which firmware revision it requires, and not be able to say that the games are simply PS3 compatible. I own two PS3s and neither of them are now compatible with Red Dead Redemption.
 

kinggraves

Distinguished
May 14, 2010
951
0
19,010
12
Lets sue Nintendo too for removing the Homebrew Channel.

Of course too many lawsuits and the gaming industry's going to bankrupt. Mario doesn't come cheap.
 

SuckRaven

Distinguished
Aug 6, 2008
99
0
18,630
0
@ twbg4cq

The issue is not the same as with backwards compatibility (especially hardware based using the Emotion chip). You could (before they killed off the 20GB and 60GB versions) opt to buy either a model that did or did not have this feature, but if you did buy a version that did have it, then a simple firmware update would not have removed this ability like it did with Install Other OS. I was lucky enough not to have updated the firmware on my PS3, but the upsetting part is that I can't connect to the internet with the console, because it tries to force a firmware update.

As to the original question, yes, I believe some legal action against SONY is in order for having done this to their customers.
 

kelemvor4

Distinguished
Oct 3, 2006
469
0
18,780
0
I can't imagine a less relevant article. It doesn't matter if linux support was something I bought the ps3 for or not. It was a feature they advertised, then subsequently removed. I paid for that feature along with everyone else who bought a ps3 prior to the removal.

Fine with me if sony wants to sell systems with no linux support from here on out, but they have no right to take back what they already sold me.

I'd be pissed at Honda if they decided to show up and remove the headrests from my car. I didn't buy my car because it had headrests, but that doesn't mean it's ok for them to take the headrests back after the sale.


On a side note, I thought there was already a class action suit going? no?
 

alershka

Distinguished
Apr 6, 2005
7
0
18,510
0
This [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]

Not the same. They pulled it from the app store. They didn't update the code so you couldn't run the app if you bought it.

It's would be the same (and you would be able to sue imo) if your iphone was updated so it couldn't run any third party apps because they might cause security risks.

At the 2005 E3 Sony Press Conference, Sony said the PS3 would be more than a simple game machine and that it would launch with Linux support. I think the suits are valid. Since I have a launch 60gb, and am part of the class of the class action law suit, I will take my $5 check after the greedy lawyers get paid.
 

Pyroflea

Distinguished
Mar 18, 2007
2,156
0
19,960
89
I don't think that changing the features a product has should warrant a law suit. It's not like Linux compatibility was the Playstation's main selling feature (and you can still install it using a patch made specifically to do so). They decided that they wanted to remove a feature, and that's that.
 

nocteratus

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2007
369
5
18,815
5
Yes we should sue Sony for that.

I purchased my PS3 for blu-ray and linux support only. I decided to go with the PS3 because of firmware update for new features not to get features remove. I don't really game on the PS3.
Now I'm thinking of building a HTPC for dual boot with Windows 7 and linux to replace my PS3. My PS3 is not even connected to my LAN.
 

matchboxmatt

Distinguished
Mar 19, 2009
129
0
18,680
0
I don't think it's any different than the Kindle fiasco.

If that lawsuit established anything, it's that you can't sell a feature and then take it away after someone already purchased the product.
 

suoeno

Distinguished
Mar 8, 2010
25
0
18,530
0
Nah they should be sued for the following:-
1. PS4?
By now we deserve a kickass GHTPC (that's gaming home theater PC) level of a console,complete with a better OtherOS that can run proper Ubuntu or its derivative with no hiccups.Cell are powerful yes but we're in the turn where integrated CPU+GPU solutions are getting better,Sony should seriously laser focus on that.When all else fail they can dbl team it with AMD/ATI.No I'm not kidding.I've been wanting a console that's also productive in the middle of the living/entertainment area.

and

2. PSPhone
..because I can't get anymore creative with what's been floating around already previously.

Enough with the PS3.Get us PS4.
 

Gin Fushicho

Distinguished
Mar 11, 2009
1,777
0
19,790
1
Personally I think so, a lot of people including the military bought it for that reason.

and I may not have used it, but I was planning on it. I wanted a multimedia center that would play all my movies on it so I could watch them on the big screen in HD, with surround sound.
 

Darkerson

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2009
706
0
18,990
2
Yes! They need to learn that you don't advertise certain features as a selling point only to take them away down the line. First they removed the PS2 Hardware compatibility so they could lower the price. But we all know it was a bullshit move so they could keep milking the old PS2 for more money. Now its Other OS support, because they're afraid people could start doing things they don't want. Like they couldn't just patch it, instead of completely removing it? I'm glad I never got around to getting one, because I know I would be pretty damned pissed off about paying for something and then having it become less and less useful over time.
TL;DR: I hope they get nailed for this.
 

xenol

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2008
216
0
18,680
0
I know I'm going to get voted down for this, but one thing that irks me is how come there wasn't this much of an uproar when backwards compatibility was taken out? Or maybe there was and I don't remember it. Anyway, as far as I know, Sony wasn't sued for the loss of backwards compatibility, a feature that seemed to matter to a lot more than the Other OS user base.

Or was the user base fine with the loss of one major feature and all it took was another for them to start saying "Sue Sony!"
 

uncfan_2563

Distinguished
Apr 8, 2009
904
0
19,010
8
Yes of course. People, like the United State Airforce, by this as a cheaper super computer node and removing that feature is a real kick in the teeth.
 

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
2,360
0
19,790
4
I think they should be sued. Alot of their business for the PS3 has been research and supercomputing companies who use them as a cheap alternative to a PowerPC.
 

spectrewind

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2009
446
0
18,790
2
[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]

Exactly... I keep reading comments from people who say "it's in the EULA". What these people don't seem to understand is that EULAs are void of value if they violate the prevailing law of the land.
 

spectrewind

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2009
446
0
18,790
2
[citation][nom]xenol[/nom]I know I'm going to get voted down for this, but one thing that irks me is how come there wasn't this much of an uproar when backwards compatibility was taken out? Or maybe there was and I don't remember it. Anyway, as far as I know, Sony wasn't sued for the loss of backwards compatibility, a feature that seemed to matter to a lot more than the Other OS user base.Or was the user base fine with the loss of one major feature and all it took was another for them to start saying "Sue Sony!"[/citation]

I am not a lawyer...

There is a large difference here:
The PS3 devices that were sold without BC were sold that way, with a bill of sale and receipt in the hands of the client (a sales contract) that was clear on the lack of the BC feature prior to the sale.

For the Other OS feature, Sony modified the device to perform differently that negetively affects the purchaser. A feature sold AFTER the SALES CONTRACT was COMMITTED to has been violated.
This is a bona-fide breach of that sales contract and a EULA should not give Sony the power to breach that sales contract.
 

pingu_Z

Distinguished
Jun 21, 2008
21
0
18,520
1
The military and many other institutions may use the PS3 for a variety of functions but do you honestly believe they use the default firmware?
It’s not like the Air force went down to Wal-Mart and bought 200 PS3’s installed Ubuntu and called it a server. They have custom OS’s running on custom firmware, and they don’t hook them up to the PSN so this is a non issue for them. Furthermore, on the original PS3 boxes nowhere does it advertise the ability that you can install Linux on it. Sony has never given that ability any support, it was simply an option that was present. Removing a non advertised feature that they have publicly stated they do not support is not a crime.
 

anamaniac

Distinguished
Jan 7, 2009
2,447
0
19,790
1
Sony needs a kick in the ass for what they have done.
Same same with the PSP (while custom firmware is frowned upon, many use it for more than just ripping games, because it actually makes the damned thing useful).
Just because Macintosh wants a draconian future doesn't mean you have to too Sony...

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY