George Hotz Must Let Sony Inspect Hard Drive

February 10, 2011 -

PlayStation 3 hacker George Hotz has been ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston to let Sony inspect his hard drive. In her first pass, Illston said that Hotz needed to retrieve information "that relates to the hacking of the PlayStation." She later apologized to the attorneys and said that asking Hotz to do that was unreasonable.

"It’s information. It can’t be retrieved. It’s just not practical," Illston said. "What would they do, Xerox it and mail it back?"

Illston changed her mind because, she said, she "was not clearly aware of the details in her earlier order."

"This kind of got away from me and I apologize for that," she added.

Hotz' attorney Stewart Kellar complained about the hard drive, noting that Sony would be able to observe the entire contents of the computer.

At first, the judge said “That’s the breaks," but later clarified that Sony's search would be limited:

"Here, I find probable cause that your client has got these things on his computer," she said. "It’s a problem when more than one thing is kept on the computer. I’ll make sure the order is and will be that Sony is only entitled to isolate … the information on the computer that relates to the hacking of the PlayStation."

The judge ordered Sony's attorney and Kellar to work out the time and place where Hotz would allow Sony to sift through his computer and ordered him not to delete or modify any files connected to the jailbreak.

One thing that was not addressed in the Wired report was the whole jurisdiction issue. One would have to assume that the court believes it has jurisdiction over the case because it is ordering Hotz to turn over his hard drive.

We'll have more on this story as it develops.

Source: Wired


Comments

Re: George Hotz Must Let Sony Inspect Hard Drive

it seems like she's taking it a little too laxidaisical for as popular as this case is. either that or her lack of computer competence is getting in the way of better judgement?  my bet is on her ruling in sony's favor with an appeal filed shortly after.  after that could be anyone's guess...

Re: George Hotz Must Let Sony Inspect Hard Drive

So I'm curious - how much longer before it's illegal to modify or customize your clothes, house, car, applicances, yard, and other items?

If you take your pants to have them altered - why is it not a crime as well?

I like this informed comment too:

"It’s a problem when more than one thing is kept on the computer."

Yep, sure is a problem - you should only have ONE file on your computer there at work too lady - delete everything except for 'ntldr.com' and see how it runs. More than one thing always presents a problem, doesn't it? lol

Re: George Hotz Must Let Sony Inspect Hard Drive

Because you OWN your clothes, house, car, appliances, yard, and other items.

When you buy a PS3, you own the casing, so you can put stickers, decals, skins, LEDs or whatever on the body. But you don't own the internal parts. They're being licensed to you. It's just like buying a game. You own the disc, but not what's on it. It's being licensed to you. If you modify the contents, you're in violation of the terms of the license.

But let's say I'm wrong.

If you're right, by your logic, you can hide child porn or a murder weapon in your underwear drawer and nobody's allowed to search for it because it has more than just the porn or the weapon in there. It's the same deal with Sony. They don't care if he has child porn or a murder weapon hidden in his PS3, they just want the information that proves he hacked it.

And I've said this before, and defend it all you want, it's something everyone knows.

Homebrew = piracy. Sure, you don't HAVE to use it to play pirated games, but that's what everyone does use it for. They went through this same song and dance when it came to the R4 cards.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

Re: George Hotz Must Let Sony Inspect Hard Drive

When you buy the PS3, you own the device and everything in it. What you don't own is a license to distribute the software or the product. So you can't copy it and then redistribute it. But you still HAVE the right to ALTER it, and then provide the information towards OTHERS to alter THEIR ps3. 

It may break the terms of service, meaning that if there is a problem, Sony is not going to help you or provide other services like online gaming. But it STILL remains LEGAL to alter the product YOU own.

Now Sony wants to know how he hacked it ? Fine. But he still has the right to hack it.

But not according to the highly unconstitutional pos legislation (Created by the "Keep the goverment out of peoples live"  Republican ) that is the DMCA, which assumes you are guilty before proven innocent, which says that one computer can be hacked (Smartphones), but others can't (Home Consoles).

 

 

Re: George Hotz Must Let Sony Inspect Hard Drive

The article contains a minor error. The jurisdiction question was not whether the court has jurisdiction over the case, but whether the court has jurisdiction over the defendant himself (called personal jurisdiction).

Re: George Hotz Must Let Sony Inspect Hard Drive

This will probably go down in Cali, since jurisdiction would logically come first. At least the judge realised that Hotz didn't have to collect information as that would(?) fall under 5th amendment protection.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Infophilegoing too far, making it all pointless. With GamerGate, if the goal is ethics in journalism, then harassment of women (and SJWs in general) is a completely different axis. No reason it would have to come up again after a disassociation and rebranding.06/30/2015 - 5:24pm
InfophileThough it is a comparison worth considering. The question is: Is it worthwhile to disassociate? The bad elements of feminism are typically bad because they're overzealous or go to far. Even if some did disassociate and rebrand, new people would start...06/30/2015 - 5:23pm
Goth_SkunkAnd just to be clear, that remark is firmly tongue-in-cheek, while also echoing statements made by those critical of GamerGate.06/30/2015 - 4:43pm
Goth_SkunkA fair point Andrew, and you are a very reasonable feminist. Though I would suggest that if you don't wish to be associated with the toxic elements present in feminism, I recommend disassociating yourself from them. Maybe call yourself something else? :^)06/30/2015 - 4:42pm
Andrew EisenGoth - By the by, you know how GamerGate doesn't like being painted with a broad brush? Well, I hate to speak for anyone but myself but I'm pretty confident in saying we feminists don't care for it much either.06/30/2015 - 4:10pm
Andrew EisenWell of course. Being a feminist doesn't mean rape can never be depicted in fiction.06/30/2015 - 4:03pm
InfophileIn fiction, it depends on the context. It's very easy to get "wrong," but there are cases where feminists have approved of how it's been shown (eg. the scene with Honor Harrington in the new compilation comic)06/30/2015 - 4:02pm
Andrew EisenThat would be an interesting alternate film though. Ray became a Ghostbuster to get rid of the spooks that had been sexually assaulting him.06/30/2015 - 4:00pm
Andrew EisenHe's not powerless against ghosts. That's very firmly established by that point in the movie.06/30/2015 - 3:57pm
Andrew EisenSo, if in the new movie, McCarthy or one of the other Ghostbusters has a dream where a pretty ghost goes down on her, I don't predict outrage (other than from those silly random no-name numbnuts on Twitter).06/30/2015 - 3:56pm
Goth_SkunkDream or not, it's still a scene that depicts a victim powerless to stop his attacker from engaging in an act of sex upon him. Even if he enjoys himself, it's technically rape. Hypothetically, he could feel traumatized afterwards.06/30/2015 - 3:55pm
Andrew EisenWell, he could always, you know, grab a proton pack and bust that rapey ghost! But again, it's still pretty clearly a dream.06/30/2015 - 3:53pm
ZippyDSMleeSo what dose GG stand for if its not been taken over my bigots??06/30/2015 - 3:52pm
Goth_SkunkI am assuming he's powerless to stop it, yes. I have no reason to believe a ghost would find itself in any way obligated to obey laws of corporeal beings. And it's not just about consent, but also about the means to stop the person engaging the sex.06/30/2015 - 3:51pm
Andrew EisenRape in real life? Absolutely (though "tizzy" isn't the right word). In fiction? Depends on how it's used.06/30/2015 - 3:50pm
Infophile"...it's rape. And that tends to send feminists into a tizzy." You say that as if rape isn't something to get into a tizzy about.06/30/2015 - 3:48pm
Andrew EisenBesides, it's pretty clearly a dream. Ray and the ghost are in some unknown bedroom. Then it cuts to Ray and the other guys in the firehouse beds with Ray rolling over in his sleep and falling off the bed. Looks like Egon is having a weird dream too.06/30/2015 - 3:46pm
Andrew EisenYou're assuming he's powerless to stop it. Maybe saying "no" or something would have stopped the ghost. Anyway, so, in your opinion, sex (oral or otherwise) is rape unless there's explicit consent?06/30/2015 - 3:44pm
Goth_SkunkBut, to be completely fair, that fact never dawned on me until 15 minutes ago.06/30/2015 - 3:43pm
Goth_SkunkAbsolutely. He doesn't consent, and is powerless to stop it because his attacker isn't corporeal. The fact that he's enjoying himself does not change the fact that it's technically rape.06/30/2015 - 3:42pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician