PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued • Hacker News Board

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#71

Post by eftpotrm » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 2:01 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #48

cookiecaper wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a cut-and-dry matter of whether intellectual property "should be protected". I think most hackers expect some protection in the form of copyright. However, most hackers are also tinkerers and are disturbed that current IP law so heavily favors corporate interests, even to the extent where you cannot use something you rightfully own according to your own desires. Would you buy an oven if there was a big label…

> Would you buy an oven if there was a big label that said "IT IS ILLEGAL TO USE THIS OVEN FOR BROWNIES; ALL BROWNIE BAKERS WILL BE PROSECUTED"? Do you think laws that allow that kind of thing are good? Remember, this isn't a rented oven, you bought the whole thing outright. It depends. Did they sell me the oven at below cost, and their plan for not losing money overall depends on people not using the ovens for brown…

The argument of below-cost hardware sales comes up frequently, yet I'm not at all sure it's true. Nintendo have certainly gone on record as saying the Wii was _never_ sold for below hardware cost (don't have a reference to hand, sorry); I don't follow the scene enough any more to know the general current position but it's far from a given that hardware sales are subsidised by software.

Frankly I'd much rather see the whole thing opened up and made more reasonable and competitive, into a proper market. Microsoft don't have any say over who releases what for Windows, Apple don't have a say over who releases what for OS X (though are heading down a slippery slope with the App Store following iOS...) - I see no legitimate reason for the games market to be different. If the hardware cost goes up, fine - we're still below the real-terms cost of the earlyish 16 bit era.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#72

Post by allwein » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 2:26 PM UTC

sorghum wrote: post #24

maeon3 wrote: post #8

This notion of owning a piece of hardware without the legal right to take it apart worries me. Close that car hood citizen, there are secrets in there, don't make me taze you. erk: C0 CE FE 84 C2 27 F7 5B D0 7A 7E B8 46 50 9F 93 B2 38 E7 70 DA CB 9F F4 A3 88 F8 12 48 2B E2 1B riv: 47 EE 74 54 E4 77 4C C9 B8 96 0C 7B 59 F4 C1 4D pub: C2 D4 AA F3 19 35 50 19 AF 99 D4 4E 2B 58 CA 29 25 2C 89 12 3D 11 D6 21 8F 40 B1 38 C…

This bit in particular disturbs me: >> First, the PS3 System consists of a “protected computer” because it is used in interstate commerce (e.g., the Internet.) Second, without SCEA’s authorization, Defendants intentionally accessed certain levels of the PS3 Systems by circumventing SCEA’s TPMs in the PS3 Systems. Defendants’ access to such levels in the PS3 Systems is not authorized; to the contrary, the PlayStation…

They're also failing to grasp that "protected computer" is an instance attribute, and not a class attribute.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#73

Post by jokermatt999 » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 3:35 PM UTC

iwwr wrote: post #55

zzygan wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although I dont agree with SECA, their point of view is that once the console can run "uncertified" software then its only a matter of time before the pirates have their day. I think that if Sony had just left the OtherOS option in the new consoles, and not removed the support from older ones and maybe improved it by allowing access to the GPU, then this would have taken a lot lot longer since there was no motivation…

They may have even lasted into the release PS4 and so benefit from nearly zero piracy through the product cycle.

OT, but I haven't seen any rumors of a new generation of consoles. This generation has lasted a lot longer than the previous, and I wouldn't be surprised to see at least another year or two out of them. The addition of the new motion controls (Kinect and PS Move, although I haven't heard really anything about the latter) make it seem even less likely that they'll push for a new console yet.

Edit: I also wouldn't be surprised if these motion control addons are research for the next console generation. I've heard of people thinking of Kinect as the next generation of XBox somewhat, and it does kind of make some sense. I don't think we'll reach a stage where motion controls are integral to most games, because even in this generation with the SixAxis on the PS3, most all of the uses of it were one of gimmicks (Mirror's Edge: Use the SixAxis to balance, or just use a control stick. Uncharted: Use the SixAxis to adjust grenade arc...or again, just use a control stick. Ratchet and Clank: Use the SixAxis for two minigames).

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#74

Post by atomical » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 3:42 PM UTC

pyre wrote: post #28

dools wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in practice you only get prosecuted if you publish your results on the internet. This guy could have figured out how his stuff works all he wants, and even shown his friends, with impugnity.

That may be, but selectively enforced laws are evil by their very nature.

You conceded your argument but received more upvotes than the other person. Uh?

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#75

Post by atomical » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 3:58 PM UTC

alexqgb wrote: post #30

atomical wrote: post #14

Judging from a lot of the comments on this topic and others many geeks don't believe intellectual property should be protected. When someone creates a platform (Heroku, Facebook, Apple's App Store) they have a right to lock it down. If you don't believe in that don't buy the product!

This is a joke, right? I can't believe you're seriously comparing online platforms owned and operated by their creators to a hardware platform that's neither.

Just because it is a physical product doesn't make it any less protected. So, yes, I am seriously comparing them. If that's all you have to add I can't believe you wasted your time writing that.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#76

Post by atomical » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 4:20 PM UTC

trotsky wrote: post #22

atomical wrote: post #14

Judging from a lot of the comments on this topic and others many geeks don't believe intellectual property should be protected. When someone creates a platform (Heroku, Facebook, Apple's App Store) they have a right to lock it down. If you don't believe in that don't buy the product!

With opinions like yours it's a miracle we have libraries.

Not a very clever one liner but I'll bite. My opinion appears to be in the minority on here and possibly elsewhere as well. What gave you the impression that my opinion is so important to the debate as to make it a miracle. I could see if I was a congressman or in government you might think that, but I am not.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#77

Post by cookiecaper » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 4:20 PM UTC

roel_v wrote: post #32

cookiecaper wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a cut-and-dry matter of whether intellectual property "should be protected". I think most hackers expect some protection in the form of copyright. However, most hackers are also tinkerers and are disturbed that current IP law so heavily favors corporate interests, even to the extent where you cannot use something you rightfully own according to your own desires. Would you buy an oven if there was a big label…

EULA's have nothing to do with copyright, it's plain contract law. If you and I are neighbors and we agree that you I will pay you 250$ a month to not park you car in front of my house (while you legally have a right to do so), should that not be allowed? If I am a shoe manufacturer with local retail outlets you and I agree that I will sell you my shoes for reselling overseas, but part of the agreement is that you wo…

The DMCA explicitly disallows the publication of methods or programs that allow users to circumvent copy protection, from what I recall (not a lawyer). It's not a matter of a private contract, Sony's abuses have been enshrined by IP law, and that's the problem -- the person I was replying to was complaining that we don't believe in copyright generally. I don't think that's true, we just don't believe in copyright so extensive that you are not legally allowed to publish something imprinted on a device you own (even if that is imprinted electronically, like the PS3's encryption and signing keys).

Even so, clickwrap and EULA contracts are pretty lame. If your product must be distributed where end-users are restricted from doing things, then you should create a real contract that each party takes seriously.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#78

Post by nivertech » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 5:52 PM UTC

roel_v wrote: post #44

Osmose wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically yes, except with a PS3 your purchase amounts to agreement with the EULA; it's tucked away in a manual that no one reads, or at best is shown to the user on a screen during setup which is simply clicked through. Most people don't realize that they aren't buying the physical machine, they're buying the right to use the physical machine in approved ways only (this may be technically untrue, but it's certainl…

Sorry but that doesn't make sense. When you buy from a supplier, you are already bound by a number of contractual stipulations, (almost) nobody reads those, either. They're still enforceable, there are mountains of jurisprudence on that. Should contracts be void because one of the parties can't be bothered to check the content of the agreement? Or should suppliers force users to read the contract to be enforceable? S…

EULA is shown to user, only after purchase is made. SONY or their authorized retailers should first ask user if he/she agrees to EULA and only then take his/her money. Once you taking money upfront - you agree to any use of your device.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#79

Post by pyre » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 6:11 PM UTC

atomical wrote: post #74

pyre wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be, but selectively enforced laws are evil by their very nature.

You conceded your argument but received more upvotes than the other person. Uh?

I didn't concede my point. Selectively enforced laws are intrinsically evil. Just because they aren't being applied to evil purposes right now is irrelevant.

A gun is designed to kill people, and I can't argue against that fact by claiming that at present guns are only used to crack nuts open with their handles. Just because a gun isn't being used to kill people right now does nothing to make it any less deadly.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#80

Post by redrobot5050 » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 6:35 PM UTC

storm wrote: post #62

roel_v wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but that doesn't make sense. When you buy from a supplier, you are already bound by a number of contractual stipulations, (almost) nobody reads those, either. They're still enforceable, there are mountains of jurisprudence on that. Should contracts be void because one of the parties can't be bothered to check the content of the agreement? Or should suppliers force users to read the contract to be enforceable? S…

Is there actual case law supporting the notion that I can be party to a contract on the basis of a bunch of legalese buried in a manual I'll never read, for a product I purchased through a third party? I paid for a product, I own it. If Sony wants ridiculously extended protections that turn the arrangement into some kind of conditional rental, they'd damned well better force the Walmarts of the world to have us sign…

So when you bought a physical copy of DOS 3.0 or Windows 3.1, you effective own DOS or Windows? My god man, you should assert your rights and claim your billions!