Ongoing PSN outages

[daltonlm]

Completely understand the difference between markets in disposable income available to people. Unfortunately, if the price of hardware or software is reduced in somewhere where people have less disposable income, then the other markets can have disgruntled customers. In any case, still no excuse for stealing. I can't afford the very nice Scirocco's in the local VW dealer, doesn't mean I'm going to go and grab the keys for one in the middle of the night.

Of course is not excuse for stealing! A PS3 produced on Mexico and sold legaly in Brazil cost $1.250 USD and a game barely early released like GT5 cost around $110 USD. Who´s getting stollen? Do you know where from i buy my PS3 games? I import them from UK or PY, just because they are the half of the price, and the final price stills higher than US, ie...

Then the main leaders in this sector (North America, Japan and some portion from the Asia) thinks about the beauty of the jailbreak, like if it wouldn´t end in pure piracy. Do you think that screwed people like Brazilians give a **** to piracy?

And so then i could buy legal copies of my PC games from services like Valve? Cool, but for that i must still bypassing the law because i only can buy content from there if i hide my IP. Oh BTW the Playstation Store is blocked on Brazil, if i pretend to buy something from there, i must use an ALT login user, from where? US!

This history is so much large to explain everything here, larger even than your patience to care about it. Resuming, i never gave a **** to piracy because even with one of the largest base of players in the world, officialy the Brazilians doesn´t exist for the world gamming market. We are like roaches, we will be here in the baseament even if any nuclear holocaust happens.

You guys from the mainstream markets have all in hands to do the right thing, but it doesn´t happen... The Anonymous are from where? Canada? Since when Canadians needs to whine about jailbreaks and such? Isn´t you guys that have 3 PS3, 2 for piracy and 1 for lawful gamming?

I said no such thing. I said that the industry isn't as weak as you implicated from piracy.

Nonono...! As weak and just fine are far from the same thing!

Global gaming industry is doing just fine, despite the efforts of people like yourself. 👍

The industry, specialy de developement gamming brands are being injuried and spoiled, and you must agree about that.

/EDIT
Only after read all this i realized that your English instead North American.

 

[McLaren]

Funny, you complain about people using biased sites in support of Sony, yet do the same against them. See they use the word presumably, that means that they came to their own conclusion based on what they believed is correct, it's not based on anything factual.

All I just read is someone unwilling to accept facts. Slashgear is for neither side. They are also not the only ones coming to the conclusion & it doesn't take a moron to wonder why else Sony wants the information of anyone visiting or commenting about hacking the PS3.

Once again, so? Sony requested it to show he is making a profit by infringing on their intellectual property.

Geo has not sold anything. The law does not even require such evidence to be shown.

1) How do you know Sony doesn't know about them?

I don't, but you're the one claiming there's hundreds of sites allowing such info. I doubt Sony is aware of all of them.

2) The link you provided is talking about a case where the person hacked the console solely to allow it to run pirated software. Now sure, you'll say that wasn't the intention of hacking the system, I'll buy that excuse when I find someone who buys those funny looking "tobacco pipes" at the smoke shop and actually uses them for tobacco.

Wrong. The person hacked the console to run his own programs. He released the info for anyone willing to do the same. The pirates are the ones who decided to use it for their own gain.

We have members on this site who have admitted to using the PS3 to run things such as Linux, and since this whole case started, Sony is removing the ability to do even that & wants to prosecute those who want to return the feature back to the system.

That appears to be the biggest misconception with this site's members; that the hack was released solely for pirating. It wasn't. Before, there were several programs you could run on the PS3 to make it run better. To do these, you had to hack it. The downside was piracy, unfortunately. Sony attempted to block out these people, but as with all hackers, they eventually find a way through. Part of Anon's reasoning for the DDoS is that as the owner, you had every right to modify the system you paid for just like you could modify a phone or a computer. Sony doesn't believe so & basically wants to tell people how to use it. For the people using it to pirate games or online, they have a point, but to go after people who just want to run things like Linux, but need the hack to do so, are going about it wrong. If I wanted to tell anyone here how to run Linux on their PS3, Sony feels I should be censored, even though you have a right to know. Whether or not you choose to do so is up to you.

 

[Northstar]

All I just read is someone unwilling to accept facts. Slashgear is for neither side. They are also not the only ones coming to the conclusion & it doesn't take a moron to wonder why else Sony wants the information of anyone visiting or commenting about hacking the PS3.

Since when does assuming = facts?

There is a saying about assuming, it makes an ass out of you and me.

Geo has not sold anything. The law does not even require such evidence to be shown.

But he has made money from is has he not?

Wrong. The person hacked the console to run his own programs. He released the info for anyone willing to do the same. The pirates are the ones who decided to use it for their own gain.

Once again, I'll buy that when I find someone who uses one of those funny looking pipes to actually smoke tobacco.

We have members on this site who have admitted to using the PS3 to run things such as Linux, and since this whole case started, Sony is removing the ability to do even that & wants to prosecute those who want to return the feature back to the system.

I do agree that they shouldn't have taken Linux away, doesn't change the case at hand though.

 

[McLaren]

But he has made money from is has he not?

No, he hasn't. People are not giving him money for the hack. They are donating money to help pay for his court fees.

Nothing in the law says that is illegal.

Once again, I'll buy that when I find someone who uses one of those funny looking pipes to actually smoke tobacco.

You can believe what you want, then. The man is a respected individual for what he's managed to do.

I do agree that they shouldn't have taken Linux away, doesn't change the case at hand though.

It does. Sony believes you have no right to do what you want with your system. You do, as long as you don't start getting into the illegal issues, i.e. pirating.

 

[tinram]

It's like creating a hole into a warehouse and telling everybody "hey you can get stuff for free" "hey you can put your stuff here, don't get any stuff from inside cause that would not be nice" and yet expecting no repercussions because you did not steal anything.

This would work if you where in a land of unicorns.

Someone will respond .... but but but i got bought it so i own it, then i say don't connect it to the network and do with it as you please, cause you did not buy the whole infrastructure.


FIXED

 

[McLaren]

It's like creating a hole into a warehouse and telling everybody "hey you can get stuff for free" and yet expecting no repercussions because you did not steal anything.

Saying things like that obviously promotes the use of piracy since you advertise that everything is free.

That's not what Geo did at all, however.

 

[Scaff]

No, he hasn't. People are not giving him money for the hack. They are donating money to help pay for his court fees.

You don't know that, none of us do.

The only way to know that is to cross reference dates payments were made and what material was returned to those making payments, which would require the court to be able to view information held on the Paypal, e-mail communication, etc.

You have also failed to mention that some (how much we do not know, but it certainly applies to the Paypal and IP details of site visitors Edit - see the second link a pdf of the court order - its pretty much everything) of this information is has been classed as ‘Attorney’s Eyes Only’, which means Sony themselves do not get to see it or access it. Effectively the attorneys for both sides review the material, under court supervision to see if its supports either side in the case.

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2011/03/06/access-to-geohots-visitor-details-granted/

http://stadium.weblogsinc.com/engadget/files/Sony v Hotz - 90.pdf

http://www.frostbrowntodd.com/news/publications/detail.aspx?pub=1312

Not quite the free access to every bit of information you have been claiming, and not even close to providing Sony with details to start launching multiple legal actions with.

Even if the attorneys Sony are using were stupid enough to provide Sony with the data it would quickly become obvious what the source was (the second a case was drawn up) and they would be disbarred in a heart beat and Sony fined into the stone age.

I strongly suggest that you exercise the same care with the information you provide as you are demanding from others.

And this....

That was the stupidest reply I have ever seen.

BTW, the terms are white hat & black hat. Don't talk of things you clearly have no knowledge of.

...comes very close to breaking this...

You will not behave in an abusive and/or hateful manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack any individual or any group.

If this topic can't be discussed in a civil manner it will be locked and those responsible will find the staff review the posts they have made and take the action needed.



Scaff

 

[Tweetman_277]

How many of you like the fact now that Sony can use any information you provided the PSN with for their own use?

What? Anger that SONY has access to information about you that you Gave to SONY when you bought SONY console, then signed up to a SONY service...
Im more shocked that they couldnt get it before this.
But no. I have no problem with them having access to my PSN details. I read a certain part of the last disclaimer that said something like acceptance meant that if you did hack the ps3, sony is allowed to access all the details you gave them.
So SONY can find out where i live? Big deal. Its not like ive done anything wrong. It just means i can get random junk mail if they wanted to send me it.

 

[Tornado]

Once again, I'll buy that when I find someone who uses one of those funny looking pipes to actually smoke tobacco.

The link you provided is talking about a case where the person hacked the console solely to allow it to run pirated software. Now sure, you'll say that wasn't the intention of hacking the system, I'll buy that excuse when I find someone who buys those funny looking "tobacco pipes" at the smoke shop and actually uses them for tobacco.

It doesn't matter one iota what you believe. The original CFW that GeoHot released was explicitly designed with roadblocks so you couldn't use it to play backups. It took a couple of weeks of reverse engineering for others to come up with a way to use his software to play backups, legal or otherwise, and even then they mostly abandoned it for alternatives that didn't have such roadblocks.

Even though you agreed otherwise, by law, when buying the system!

Um... no?

What? Anger that SONY has access to information about you that you Gave to SONY when you bought SONY console, then signed up to a SONY service...

Sony gets that information regardless of whether you sign up to a Sony service. Any game you play, any movie you watch, even what kind of television you connect your PS3 to. Sony gets all of it every time you turn your system on when it is connected to the internet.

 

[Northstar]

It doesn't matter one iota what you believe. The original CFW that GeoHot released was explicitly designed with roadblocks so you couldn't use it to play backups. It took a couple of weeks of reverse engineering for others to come up with a way to use his software to play backups, legal or otherwise, and even then they mostly abandoned it for alternatives that didn't have such roadblocks.

What about the ones after the original one?

Um... no?

Terms of Service. Even if you never connect the console to the internet it still pops up the first time you turn it on.

Sony gets that information regardless of whether you sign up to a Sony service. Any game you play, any movie you watch, even what kind of television you connect your PS3 to. Sony gets all of it every time you turn your system on when it is connected to the internet.

In order to get online with the PS3 you need a PSN account, which is a Sony service.

 

[SuperShouden]

Alright...soo.....because Sony took legal actions against a hacker, they got hacked, and because someone was stupid enough to get banned THIRTY-FIVE times from XBL hacked the guy wielding the banhammer? So, what stupidity breeds stupidity?

 

[Tornado]

What about the ones after the original one?

He wasn't responsible for them.

Terms of Service. Even if you never connect the console to the internet it still pops up the first time you turn it on.

This is assuming that the terms of service overrule personal property rights in the first place, and considering Apple lost that huge case last year over that exact issue, that is arguable at best.
And that the terms of service transfer with the console when it is bought used.
And that the terms of service apply in the first place considering simply using your PS3 is not a service provided by Sony.

In order to get online with the PS3 you need a PSN account, which is a Sony service.

You don't need a PSN account to connect your PS3 to the internet.

 

[McLaren]

You don't know that, none of us do.

Geo never charged a penny for his hack. At the very most, people were donating money for his time & effort. I can imagine that only an idiot would pay for something that is for free in the first place.

You have also failed to mention that some (how much we do not know, but it certainly applies to the Paypal and IP details of site visitors Edit - see the second link a pdf of the court order - its pretty much everything) of this information is has been classed as ‘Attorney’s Eyes Only’, which means Sony themselves do not get to see it or access it. Effectively the attorneys for both sides review the material, under court supervision to see if its supports either side in the case.

Irrelevant. That kind of information shouldn't be released in the first place.

Web site visitors, Twitter followers, & YouTube viewers have done nothing wrong. Sony has zero right to be demanding webhosts turn over their information, regardless of whether they see it or not.

And this....

...comes very close to breaking this...

You mean like the fact his post came very close to racism because he failed to know the proper terms?

Not discussing it any further with you, Scaff.

 

[Scaff]

Geo never charged a penny for his hack. At the very most, people were donating money for his time & effort. I can imagine that only an idiot would pay for something that is for free in the first place.

That he never charged for it is a moot point, you stated as a fact that he was never paid for the hack. Neither you or I can prove that, however the records in question can.

Irrelevant. That kind of information shouldn't be released in the first place.

Web site visitors, Twitter followers, & YouTube viewers have done nothing wrong. Sony has zero right to be demanding webhosts turn over their information, regardless of whether they see it or not.

In your opinion, the judge in the case quite clearly disagrees with that opinion.

You are also still insisting that this is blanket disclosure from these sites (and in doing so it would seem have not read the actual court order), which is most certainly not the case.

Twitter TOS states that they will disclose information:

Law and Harm: We may disclose your information if we believe that it is reasonably necessary to comply with a law, regulation or legal request; to protect the safety of any person; to address fraud, security or technical issues; or to protect Twitter's rights or property.

youtube comes under the google privacy TOS, which states:

We have a good faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to (a) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request, (b) enforce applicable Terms of Service, including investigation of potential violations thereof, (c) detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues, or (d) protect against harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public as required or permitted by law.

http://www.google.com/intl/en/privacy/privacy-policy.html[

You may also want to think about the following part of the GT Planet AUP (which you agree to by the fact that you are a member here):

GTPlanet also reserves the right to disclose personal information when required by law or in the good-faith belief that such action is necessary to conform to the edicts of the law or comply with a legal process served on GTPlanet, protect and defend the rights or property of GTPlanet, or visitors to GTPlanet, identify persons who may be violating the law, the legal notice, or the rights of third parties, and cooperate with the investigations of purported unlawful activities.

https://www.gtplanet.net/aup

Now with all these sites and more the user/owner of the account has to agree to these terms to join and use the service, and as such it doesn't strike me as beyond comprehension in a case like this that a judge would issue an attorneys eyes only disclosure notice.

To be blunt if you don't want it to happen then don't use the services in question.

You mean like the fact his post came very close to racism because he failed to know the proper terms?

Not discussing it any further with you, Scaff.

Excellent - because it wasn't a point of discussion. I do however note with interest that you have focused on the section of my post that quoted your self (which I did as the more clear and representative example of the conduct in this thread) and didn't quote the final part of it which states:

If this topic can't be discussed in a civil manner it will be locked and those responsible will find the staff review the posts they have made and take the action needed.

Notice the use of the term 'those responsible', now unless I'm very much mistaken that address' the entire membership posting in this thread and rather changes the context of things. Quite clearly highlighting that action will be taken against those that break the AUP. But as we agree, not a discussion point.


Scaff

 

[McLaren]

That he never charged for it is a moot point, you stated as a fact that he was never paid for the hack. Neither you or I can prove that, however the records in question can.

Anybody giving him money for the hack did it on their own accord & would be seen as a donation. He never charged a penny for it; it was out there for anyone & everyone who wanted to download it.

In your opinion, the judge in the case quite clearly disagrees with that opinion.

Because a judge always makes the right decision, correct?

Several people in the article as well as a webhost have already objected to the judge's decision as "over-bearing". There's no need for so much information to be over turned just b/c Sony may have the mindset that anyone who may have viewed, commented, or discussed a hack is actually a hacker to begin with.

 

[Scaff]

Anybody giving him money for the hack did it on their own accord & would be seen as a donation. He never charged a penny for it; it was out there for anyone & everyone who wanted to download it.


Because a judge always makes the right decision, correct?

Several people in the article as well as a webhost have already objected to the judge's decision as "over-bearing". There's no need for so much information to be over turned just b/c Sony may have the mindset that anyone who may have viewed, commented, or discussed a hack is actually a hacker to begin with.

So you still have not read the court action then?

If you do you will see the reason behind it (and you may also note that my interest in this in not for either side - more the actual facts in play being represented) the reason for the request is to prove a link between geohot and SCEA.

If that link can be proven then he can be tried in California (who are far more likely to side with Sony - that may not be fair but that's how the US legal system works).

The easiest manner in which to do this is to establish a link between geohot and anyone who follows him discussing the set-up of a PSN account (which is why this is a major part of the legal action) or the mention of SCEA by geohot (an organisation that he denies having any knowledge of).

If that can be achieved then he can be tried in California (and geohot most certainly doesn't what that - a point his legal team have made clear.

Youtube are actually one of the main targets for the Sony legal team in this regard as part of the TOS for youtube states:

You agree that: (i) the Service shall be deemed solely based in California; and (ii) the Service shall be deemed a passive website that does not give rise to personal jurisdiction over YouTube, either specific or general, in jurisdictions other than California. These Terms of Service shall be governed by the internal substantive laws of the State of California, without respect to its conflict of laws principles. Any claim or dispute between you and YouTube that arises in whole or in part from the Service shall be decided exclusively by a court of competent jurisdiction located in Santa Clara County, California.

http://www.youtube.com/static?gl=US&template=terms

If geohot has discussed owning a PSN account or SCEA on a youtube discussion then it would clearly tie him to California and that is the crux of this matter.


A large number of people (including yourself) seem to have worked this into a frenzy of Sony getting reams of data about people who have nothing to do with the case and then using it to do all manner of terrible deeds.

The truth of the matter is (and the court paper is quire clear in this regard) a lot more mundane.

The Sony and Geo-hot legal teams will look at blog posts, etc to see if PSN accounts are discussed and/or SCEA is mentioned and argue a lot about what vague bits of it means. The sole upshot of it will be if Geo-hot is tried in California or not.


Sorry, but its not a global attack on the freedom of individuals, its about a person creating a PSN account or knowing if SCEA exists or not.

The following is a direct quote from the court order:

The third party subpoenas merely seek
information regarding Mr. Hotz’s transactions with entities based in California, as well as
information regarding whether California residents accessed Mr. Hotz’s web content and/or had
interactions with Mr. Hotz. SCEA is entitled to this jurisdictional discovery.

Scaff

 

[tinram]

So basically hacking is ok as long as your not getting paid for it?

The only way hacking is ok is if it is sanctioned by the company your are hacking and probably getting paid for it, it's called intrusion/security testing.

Remember that your freedom ends when it starts to impinge on someone else's.

 

[Tornado]

So basically hacking is ok as long as your not getting paid for it?

Yes, actually. And you can even be paid to do it, in fact, depending on the situation.

The only way hacking is ok is if it is sanctioned by the company your are hacking and probably getting paid for it, it's called intrusion/security testing.

This is a pretty silly thing to say, and shows a fundamental misunderstanding about what "hacking" actually means. To play an old game on a modern computer/OS, you usually have to hack the EXE.

Remember that your freedom ends when it starts to impinge on someone else's.

And the ability to enforce laws under the premise that you are impinging on someone's freedom ends when other's freedoms aren't being impinged.

 

[uMadson?]

🤬

Can't find the words to say though, but Anonymous are just making idiots out of themselves. Hacking Sony is just the first step to madness. If their plea of banning Sony into nothing but a mere memory gets approved then I, with the whole PS3 gaming community, have wasted precious, hard-earned money, time, etc.

Think of it, if Sony gets banned and GT5 gets its updates through the PSN servers then the most-wanted DLC's may not come, either Kaz may have to make a new Gran Turismo and we'll play it without any online functionality or get broke and waste more money on buying an Xbox just to play games such as Forza. Same with other games. Then the sales will also drop. 1/4 to 1/2, or even the WHOLE profit will be taken away from gaming companies. PS3's (or possibly PS4's when they get released) will become obsolete.

Geohot got what he deserved. He violated the terms of service. He even violated the laws of the country. But Anon is now getting revenge for Geohot? This is utter bullcrap. Ban Sony then a part of the community here in GTPlanet, or even in the whole world, would have nothing to do. It's quite unfair for us people.

In short, Geohot got what he deserved, but with Anon trying to turn the tables, more tragic events may come, even with our own lives at stake.

/rant

 

[Terronium-12]

WTF are you talking about?

 

[uMadson?]

WTF are you talking about?

If Anon succeeds to have Sony get banned then more stuff goes to waste aside from Sony itself.

*sigh* If only they think before doing.

 

[Terronium-12]

I'm not familiar with the topic at hand but I'm pretty sure they couldn't care one iota. Also, where does the whole "our own lives at stake" come from?

 

[uMadson?]

I'm not familiar with the topic at hand but I'm pretty sure they couldn't care one iota. Also, where does the whole "our own lives at stake" come from?

Well, you know, either we get broke just for another console or play PS3 games offline. ALWAYS offline. And if we rant about Anon, they might get up our asses.

 

[X-Power]

Well, you know, either we get broke just for another console or play PS3 games offline. ALWAYS offline. And if we rant about Anon, they might get up our asses.

That won't happen. Sony won't get banned from anything, especially since Sony haven't done anything wrong. It's more likely that the hackers will be punished, not Sony.

 

[uMadson?]

That won't happen. Sony won't get banned from anything, especially since Sony haven't done anything wrong. It's more likely that the hackers will be punished, not Sony.

I've thought of the whole situation again. Well, yes, Sony being banned is unlikely. But what is to worry about though is Anon. They may be involved in even worse attacks soon.

 

[stupidstormy36]

hi all, i have been having this problem all day and would like to know if its just me or anyone else that not been able to sign into the PSN, many thanks phil

I was having problems signing in that day too. I don't know if you were able to sign in after that. I changed my DNS settings in the Network Configuration and it worked after that.

 

[TryingToDrift]

hello,
i tried to log-in to my PSN-account but i got a error. (place: Belgium)
Does anyone else have this problem to?

 

[poorAmerican]

I logged in earlier then logged out, now it won't log back in.

 

[Driver321GO]

in Austria to :/

 

[Counter_Z23]

This explains it:



The PSN has been hacked.