Underage PlayStation site hacker sentenced

And always remember your heard this first from The Plug.
Keep it locked.

My God, they can make their own podcast but we STILL don't have a PS3 podcast on Joystiq...

I like mbmbam...

It doesn't say if he was banned from computers including his gaming consoles. So he got pissed about being banned from one game and he potentially will be banned from all games and dear precious facebook. Oh well live and learn.

Interesting thing, I read that the kid who hacked Sarah Palin was up for a REAL stiff penalty. Potentially 50 years. WAY worse than an assault charge. I heard on NPR, even a Catholic priest got 10 years for molesting 3 boys. I don't think "cyber crimes" are anywhere in the same realm of other crimes especially violent and they are treated sometimes worse than violent crime. There is no real justice with a system like this.

He could have murdered the SOCOM developers and gotten less time.

Agreed

The law is not designed for the purpose of teaching people lessons... it's about having those in the wrong pay those who were wronged. $5,000 might seem like a lot to a kid, but it's pocket change to Sony who most likely lost a lot more than that. Soon, everyone who hates sony will be taking turns knocking down their service 11 days at time for $5k a piece.

He didn't make a mistake. It was intentional.

IMO he got off too easy.

I'm pretty sure juvenile law is indeed designed with 'teaching a lesson' in mind.

And I'm also sure that the basic concept of any tort, breach, is hard to apply to a minor.

I think the community service is a better punishment. 250 hours seems awfully light, too. Make it 5000 hours, and make it feeding homeless and picking up garbage. Smart kids who are misguided can be made into leaders if they are exposed to both the best (tech, etc) and the worst (hopeless filth).

Also, if you have a smart kid, or really any kid, get an umbrella insurance policy. I knew a gal who caused half a million dollars in damages in a single car accident about 6 months after her parents got a half million dollar umbrella policy. That's why they got to keep their house, though the young lady had to buy her own car (And insure it, lol).

The point of the damages is to allow the plaintiff to recoup his losses - and I am betting Sony lost a bit here, especially considering legal fees. While it is common for judges to cut awards, I would like to see exactly what damages were laid out before saying it was right or wrong.

"Sony asked for more than $33,200 in restitution, but the judge ruled that amount would be too excessive for the teen." This makes me think that Sony knew exactly how much they lost on this and wasn't excessive in the first place.

This might sound stupid and like I'm missing the point, but I think I'd quite enjoy a (paid) job just floating around the library, ISBNing the hell out of some books.
I can't think of a less stressful place than a Library, unless the computers fail, and you have to sign in/out every book.

Breach is not a tort issue here - this isn't about a contract being breached.

"four felony counts for planting a computer virus that caused the Sony Entertainment Corp.'s gaming Web site to repeatedly crash"

This was a "criminal" conviction where they awarded restitution and not a civil matter where breach is brought in. This would, if pursued civilly, be an intentional tort and not likely entail contract issues.

OBJECTION!

I'm sorry but all the time for the engineers to get everything back up the lost revenue for being down 11 days plus legal fees. I think Sony wasn't asking enough.

"And I'm also sure that the basic concept of any tort, breach, is hard to apply to a minor."

To clarify, I was thinking you referred to contract breach for the PSN agreements or something. I reread your comment and see what you mean. "Breach of duty" is part of a tort that is a basic concept and if you can show a duty to others, which is clear here, and show he breached it - which he did by hacking a site, then you have breach.

Minor age doesn't mean someone no longer breached a duty - Generally they will use the standard of the "ordinarily prudent and reasonable child of the same age". In this situation I think the breach and risks were obvious and he would have no chance of getting out of it. If he was under 14 maybe, but at 17 - not likely.

He's not a good kid. I go to his school and this isn't the only bs he pulls. Back when he was allowed within 50 feet of a computer or console, he would get Xbox Live Gold by stealing people's accounts, hacking them to give him 50 years of service and then cheat in games until he got banned, then he would repeat.

Kids make mistakes, it's part of life. If your not punishing people we the idea of rehabilitation in mind your just a sick sadist.

IANAL but I'd assume that they can still bring a civil lawsuit against him for damages. They could probably bankrupt this kid (or his parents) in civil court if they wanted.

IIRC, the music downloading case was a criminal case, just like this one.

The music cases are almost always civil, unless it's a bittorrent tracker or a pre-release uploader that they are going after. There is a lot of misinformation out there, which makes it hard to say for certain, but the average "settlement" seems to be around 3,000 dollars if you settle out of court when they offer. If you take it to trial, damages can be in the hundreds of thousands if not millions. That is for a civil case though.

I make the statement that they could still sue for damages based on my extremely limited knowledge of the law. I know that the families of the people OJ supposedly killed were able to sue him in civil court and were awarded huge damages. Maybe they were able to do that only because he won the criminal case, I really don't know. If this kid is spared from a civil lawsuit due to the guilty verdict in his case, then I'd say he's lucky. I'm sure Sony would claim (rightfully I'm sure) that they lost a lot more than 5,000 dollars while the PSN was down due to this kid. If he can be sued, then I'd say they'd definitely do it, and they'd win a lot more than 5,000 dollars.

That is what is considered cruel and unusual punishment.

Or a reality show prize, apparently.

That's already Cyrus's job.

I don't know where you get your views on internet advertising but let a web developer explain it.

Adds come in two forms, Par-Per-view and Par-Per-Click. Both these methods are based on the actual number of views or clickers respectively. If you want a 100,000 impression ad campaign they don't sell you the space based on how long it should take them, if they get 10,000 views a day they don't give you 10 days, they (the advertiser your going though, not the website the ad is being displayed on as that would be very open to fraud) give you 100,000. If that takes a mere 8 days then thats all it's up there for, if thats 12 days it's up there for 12 days.

Some individual places offer ads for set lengths of time that is true, but it's very uncommon and usually run by the site owner and not some other advertising company. The site has to be very large for anybody to view that as a good ideal, maybe a large gaming site like GameFAQs can do it but not something smaller like joystiq (and yes, it is smaller, still big but defiantly smaller).

This of course is a moot point because the sony website has no ads on it, well at least no adds that arn't for other sony products, the they lost nothing in the way of advertising. There also is no store running from the playstation website so they dident lost anything there. Infact I doubt sony makes anything directly from their website, so they can't really claim having the site down cost them anything, working to get the site back up on the other hand they can claim.

This = You
http://frasesporeuropa.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/capitalist-pig.jpg

I'm getting sick of comments like these.

"TAKE ALL THE MONEY FROM THE KID!! YESS.. YESS!!!"

i thought that was legal?

So on that logic i should go try to hack the defense network at the pentagon in hopes they'll ask me if i want a position after. I'll be right back.

Think 'deeper'.

http://www.ncsl.org/IssuesResearch/TelecommunicationsInformationTechnology/ComputerHackingandUnauthorizedAccessLaws/tabid/13494/Default.aspx

"Hacking is breaking into computer systems, frequently with intentions to alter or modify existing settings. Sometimes malicious in nature, these break-ins may cause damage or disruption to computer systems or networks. People with malevolent intent are often referred to as "crackers"--as in "cracking" into computers.
"Unauthorized access" entails approaching, trespassing within, communicating with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise intercepting and changing computer resources without consent. These laws relate to either or both, or any other actions that interfere with computers, systems, programs or networks."

Sadly that's probably EXACTLY what's going to happen.

No if you're convicted of a cyber crime you're actually very un-likely to get a tech job, or even into a tech program at college.

Also my college is very strict with cyber crimes. If you commit one, even after being accepted, you get kicked out and black listed. Then if you commit one after graduating they revoke your diploma.

He'll need that salary after the civil lawsuit Sony will hit his parents with.

Spoiled little punk should've gotten a stiffer fine.

@Aquacharger: ... you have no idea >.> I guess you think all corporate individuals think in the same manner.

I'm sure there are needs for people with his capabilities... especially if he has acquired them at that age? I'm sure they'll be thinking "well what will he be capable of with further training and the right tools?" :P