Zarbon

@sonicspike41

Sony's rules are not the law. According to title 17 chapter 12 of copyright law there's an exception to the law against circumventing security measures if it is necessary to achieve interoperability with other programs - like linux.

Sony decided - nobody forced them - to sell the hardware at a loss, hoping to grab market share and make more profits on the games, because they would have dominance in some markets and be able to overcharge for the software. In effect they tried to get into an oligopoly position and derive profits from that. Some people took advantage of the discounted hardware with no intention of buying the overpriced games and want to use the consoles differently. Sony using the DMCA to try and compensate for a bad business decision is pretty pathetic.

The law contains an exclusion for reverse engineering where it is done to make a system interoperable with other systems. Look at Title 17, chapter 12, § 1201, paragraph f of US code.

Don't hate the hacker, hate the code.

@Angel Mass

Quite true, all they did was tell people how to fix their own property that had been broken by the manufacturer after purchase.

The PS3 attach rate was only 4 when there was no piracy.

@Jacksons

That's a rather serious accusation.

@Danjcb
I think it should be pointed out that what you're arguing for is at least incipiently if not explicitly fascistic. You're saying that a company in conjunction with government should be able to impose their view of legitimate use of a product on consumers after purchase for the express purpose of increasing profit at the expense of existing consumer rights.

@Danjcb

If that were general consensus it'd be wrong. Chemicals such as THC, DMT, Psilocybin, and Mescaline, have different modes of interraction with the brain than alcohol. The apparent effects of alcohol are resulting from its damaging effects on the brain. So you have it backwards.

@Danjcb

Drug prohibition does all of those things now so what the heck are you talking about?