PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued • Hacker News Board

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#101

Post by redrobot5050 » Thu, Jan 13, 2011, 5:21 AM UTC

chc wrote: post #95

redrobot5050 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see I'm being downvoted because HN is becoming more like reddit in terms of discussion and debate. To make my point clearer: You can own a physical device, but the software (IP) on that device is not your property. Is anyone familiar with court cases that might set a precedent if the root key is considered a software feature or a hardware feature? My bet is Sony is claiming it to be a software feature, and thus, no…

You're being downvoted because your comment was snarky and seemed disingenuous. Nobody's saying that buying a copy of a piece of software grants you the copyright to that software (rather than ownership of that copy of the software), and a copyright is very obviously not analogous to a PC.

Is it? I buy a PC loaded with Windows. I own the hardware. I have a license to windows.

I buy a PS3. It is a computer loaded up with a OS to which I have a license. I can do what I want with the hardware, but the software isn't mine. An encryption key (in my mind) is a software component.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#102

Post by EliRivers » Thu, Jan 13, 2011, 1:11 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…

"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?"

I don't know how it works elsewhere, but in the UK there are a number of legal rights that cannot be signed away. For example, tenancy agreements with illegal clauses are simply enforceable for those clauses, whether it's signed or not. Another example; one cannot consent to Grievous Bodily Harm, even if you really want to (this one was taken all the way through the legal system when someone consented to having a nail hammered through a rather sensitive part of his body).

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#103

Post by chopsueyar » Thu, Jan 13, 2011, 2:18 PM UTC

chc wrote: post #85

chopsueyar wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slavery was once legal in the US, too.

Does this observation have some relevance, or is it just for shock value?

Are we not questioning the morality of said laws? Simply because it is the law, does not make it right or just.

Re: PS3 Root Key Hacker Sued

#104

Post by atomical » Fri, Jan 14, 2011, 2:53 PM UTC

chc wrote: post #86

atomical wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It doesn't make it any less protected, but it does change whose rights come into play here. Apple owns the App Store servers, and thus you're violating its property rights if you hack them. I own my computer, so the one with property rights to protect is me .

You do not own the software, thus you violate their property right if you "hack" it.