112w ago -
Update:
CourtHouseNews.com now
reports that a federal judge has dismissed (
PDF) the remaining claim by class who said Sony reneged on its promise to let PlayStation 3 video game consoles function as computers.
Similar to their
previous request, Sony has now filed a motion to dismiss the PS3 Other OS Class Action Lawsuit.
To quote from Groklaw (linked above): There's news from the class action litigation, In re Sony PS3 'Other OS' Litigation, where the plaintiffs are suing Sony Computer Entertainment America for removing OtherOS from PlayStation 3s.
SCEA has filed another motion to dismiss the class action case, once again saying that the plaintiffs' newly filed First Amended Complaint is insufficient to state a claim. The original complaint's claims, except for one, were dismissed, with the judge giving the plaintiffs a chance to refile. Now that they have, SCEA says this refiled complaint should be tossed out also. There will be a hearing on all this on May 12th.
And the class action plaintiffs are asking the judge to help them get discovery that SCEA is, they claim, reluctant to provide. Role reversal. In the SCEA v. Hotz litigation, SCEA is all about discovery, all they can get. Here, it's the opposite.
There is a transcript from a February 9th hearing in the Sony class action attached as an exhibit to the plaintiffs' letter to the judge in the case, and I think you'll be amazed. Would you like to know what SCEA's lawyers think of customers who use Linux? We get to find out, because the hearing begins with SCEA asking the judge for access to the plaintiffs' hard drives.
Why would you want that, the judge asks? These are not defendants accused of anything, remember. Sony is the one in the hot seat, but here is the incredible answer: because, says their attorney, these plaintiffs say they used Linux, so SCEA suspects they were part of a hacking conspiracy, and they'd like to check. There's more, and I'll tell you all about it.
And SCEA claims in the transcript that it wasn't the entity that decided to drop OtherOS. It says in this courtroom that Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. is responsible for that decision. In Hotz, SCEA says it is responsible for pretty much everything to do with PS3s in the US, or at least I got that impression.
SCEA also tells the judge at the hearing that there's been a change in the corporate setup. SCEI isn't the parent of SCEA any more. So I did a little research on that. Who are they then? And how how were they related? I have found some press releases that clarify very nicely.
Hello Everyone, first time posting!
been here for a while never posted till today
Been here a while, first time posting. Everyone is very helpful....
I think this was less of a security issue than Sony looking for an excuse to discontinue it under pressure from IBM. I believe that it is probable that IBM refused to work with Sony on the PS4 unless Sony stopped cannibalizing their cell blade server business.
Sony should give out a voucher for one physical game or a few PSN downloads for those where they took the functionality away.
The idea of putting OtherOS back is laughable. It doesn't matter if they do or not, eventually we'll have it back and a better version of it anyways.
Mainly because:
1. They've PAID for it so they want to do whatever they want with it.
2. It's most affordable IBM cell machine videlly available - you clearly have NO IDEA what are you blabling about. You can't compare power of PS3 / CELL with 99.99% of PCs around.