George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

April 11, 2011 -

Sony Computer Entertainment America, a subsidiary of Sony Corp., and PS3 jailbreaker George "Geohotz" Hotz have quietly settled their legal dispute out of court. Both parties issues a joint statement today saying that they had amicably settled their differences over alleged hacking activities. Details of the settlement were not disclosed.

The statement claimed that both parties came to the agreement "in principle" on March 31 this year. Sony had filed for a temporary restraining order against Hotz and other PS3 hacking group Fail0verFlow in January. SCEA did not say whether it would continue its legal action against the hacking group in its settlement announcement. The company said in its original complaint that the group had laid the groundwork for Hotz' PS3 jailbreaking.

Most recently, SCEA and Hotz were butting heads over whether or not the San Francisco, California federal court where Sony filed the case held jurisdiction over New Jersey-based Hotz.

Prior to the settlement, the court had approved Sony's request for preliminary injunction, which meant Hotz had to remove postings related to the PS3 jailbreak from his website.

"It was never my intention to cause any users trouble or to make piracy easier," Hotz said in the settlement announcement. "I’m happy to have the litigation behind me." Hotz continues to deny that he did anything wrong. He has always maintained that his jailbreaking of the PS3 was to re-enable the use of Linux and in turn enable the use of homebrew software. He never intended for any of his work to be used to enable software piracy or hacking.

"We want our consumers to be able to enjoy our devices and products in a safe and fun environment and we want to protect the hard work of the talented engineers, artists, musicians and game designers who make PlayStation games and support the PlayStation Network," SCEA general counsel Riley Russell said.

"We appreciate Mr. Hotz’s willingness to address the legal issues involved in this case and work with us to quickly bring this matter to an early resolution," Russell added.

Source: Gamasutra by way of E. Zachary Knight.


Comments

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Good for Hotz, but I still really want to see hardware modding tackled in court.  The anti-circumvention clause is far too broad; my mere possession of software for playing DVD's under Linux is a violation of it.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Meh moding hardware should get you banned from online but nothing more than that. You should need much more than just that to be sued even if you made a hack. One can not be proactive with IP, its about as sane as being proactive with morals, IE not looking past the surface of something just dissing it for its appearance alone.

Oh well maybe the next big case will poke holes in the DMCA and ludicrous IP/CP/EULA crap.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Weren't you one of the people on here complaining when Microsoft banned a bunch of people from XBL because they had modded hardware?

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

He has every right to complain. I mean, come on. You should be able to cheat and ruin the gameplay experience for everyone else because it's YOUR system that YOU paid for, right? Nobody should be able to stop you from doing what you want with YOUR system. And the DMCA is a piece of crap, you should be able to copy all the games you want, because the big, evil, nasty, rich developers and publishers make too much money as it is, and they charge too much for their product. And it's not like making copies of the games are hurting anyone, right? Right? RIGHT?

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

GamePolitics - the home of mature, reasonable debate. 

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Don't tell me you took that seriously. If so, for someone named Prof_Sarcastic, you sure are horrible at detecting sarcasm.

I like to keep my arguments mature and civil, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with infantile ribbing every once in a while, right?

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

And who exactly were you ribbing?  Seems to me that your post had nothing to do with what anyone was actually saying.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

I was ribbing Zippy, of course! He's our favorite little anti-copyright mascot. ^_^

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Well, not really; you were ribbing something jedidethfreak CLAIMS Zippy said, in an entirely different thread.

And hell, maybe he did; I can't parse half of what Zippy says and I do my best not to pay any attention to the half I understand.  But jedi didn't provide any evidence to support his accusation, and given his track record if he told me it was dark outside I'd check to make sure.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

While I do agree with the notion that it's ridiculous for Sony to sell a product with certain features only to strip them out later (even if virtually no one used them, Linux runs better on a 10 year old PC than on a PS3), I have a real hard time feeling any sympathy for GeoHot. This guy's continued attempts to go "this is for homebrew and Linux, I didn't want it to be used for piracy" is BS. You don't get into this stuff without knowing the two principal reasons people hack consoles: To play stolen games and to cheat online. All I have to do is check my local online classified site and see people willing to mod a console and give you a pile of burned games for next to nothing. A select few care about homebrew, the majority are entitled asshats who feel they deserve everything for free, as long as they don't have to look the person they're stealing from in the face of course.

Whether he thinks himself helping the "greater good" or not, he's contributing to things that are ruining the PS3 platform for legitimate customers (i.e. making is possible for rampant cheating online). These people paid for certain features too and thigns he's done are tainting them. This is partially Sony's fault too for not thinking ahead before adding Linux to the PS3 in the first place. But people like GeoHot who enable things like piracy and griefing and then put their hands over their eyes and go "Well it's not my fault because I don't WANT them doing that!" aren't saints. I think Sony went too far in pursuing him as they did but he kind of asked for it too.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

That's what I've been saying since the whole thing started.

But you may want to watch that "Linux on PS3 is for pirates and cheaters" bit, though. I tried to make that point, but some people take offense to that around here. I agree wholeheartedly, though.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

It's always offensive to make ad hominem attacks. You claim cheating and copyright infringement was the primary motivation all you like, but it doesn't make it true. Nobody needed this hack to play games for free, it was already possible. This was, and remains, an attempt to restore an advertised feature to a product that had perfectly legitimate purposes. Calling Linux on a PS3 a tool for infringement and cheating, is no different than calling a hammer a weapon.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

*Facepalm*

Was NOBODY paying attention to this case at all?! Sony sued Hotz because the jailbreak facilitated piracy. Plain and simple. Like I said in the middle of this: I'll buy Hotz didn't mean for the jailbreak to make it easy for pirates and cheaters. I'll even buy he doesn't like piracy.

However, nobody's still answered my initial question. Can anyone tell me why Sony took the Other OS feature out? Why would Sony take out a feature that apparently doesn't do any harm at all? Answer me that, and you can have an argument.

Put simply, Sony had  every right to sue because whether Hotz intended it or not, the jailbreak made it easy for pirates and cheaters. Legally speaking, you don't have to intend to facilitate piracy to be guilty of copyright infringement, it just has to make it possible.

That said, smart as Hotz is, I'm sure he's perfectly capable of putting 2 and 2 together and figuring out that putting Linux back in the PS3 will swing open the doors of piracy and cheating.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

It's cute how you continue to misunderstand the case and pretend to understand copyright and the DMCA. Sony sued Hotz because he distributed a software tool that facilitated the circumvention of the DRM system that Sony had included in every PS3. Circumventing DRM and facilitating infringement are not one and the same.

"However, nobody's still answered my initial question."

A shill's favorite line. Fine, I'll answer you. They took it out because they felt threatened by what Linux enthusiasts are capable of and wanted to avoid the possibility that someone would use it as an avenue to circumvent the DRM.

Sony had a right to sue because he violated the clause that prohibits the circumvention of copy protection measures applied to software which Sony holds the copyrights to. "Piracy" and cheating were just excuses to validate their position of the poor martyr being abused by the big, bad hackers.

"That said, smart as Hotz is, I'm sure he's perfectly capable of putting 2 and 2 together and figuring out that putting Linux back in the PS3 will swing open the doors of piracy and cheating."

Oh, don't pretend that wasn't an attempt to say he was acting with malicous intent when trying to restore OtherOS. Creating a method that enables the possible proliferation of something illegal does not, in itself, make it illegal. If we followed your thought to its logical end, we would be destroying highways because they might be used to transport drugs, weapons, or human trafficking. Or perhaps we should ban all power tools because someone might use them to massacre people? You can't outlaw something just because it might be used for illegal purposes, especially when it does have a perfectly legal and useful purpose (Like restoring features that people paid for). What Hotz did initially was restore a feature that Sony wrongfully took away and subsequently, nuked the restoration of that feature. It pushed Hotz to take even more drastic measures which resulted in Sony filing a lawsuit for something that they started.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

It's cute how you like to misrepresent the facts to make the case seem like a threat to the rights of humanity, when in reality, it's just a company defending its intellectual property from an arrogant jackass who thinks he's smarter than everyone else. Are you one of PETA's lawyers?

I've read the DMCA extensively, and I understand copyright.

So if I'm a shill, I guess that makes you a pirate, an apologist of, or even a member of Anonymous. I've said multiple times that Sony has done some dumb stuff. But they haven't done anything wrong.

"They took it out because they felt threatened by what Linux enthusiasts are capable of and wanted to avoid the possibility that someone would use it as an avenue to circumvent the DRM."

Really? Is that weak answer the best you could come up with? You're wrong. Dead wrong. They took it out because people were abusing it to cheat and pirate Blu-Rays and games. As much as I know people who love Linux want to believe that their OS is incapable of wrongdoing, the proof is right there. People were even bold enough to put ads in papers and craigslist to mod the system to play pirated games or run mod software to cheat on Call of Duty, all using the Other OS to install Linux, and running Linux to use the programs.

And even in the off chance that you're right, my original point still stands. Even IF Sony WAS afraid of what Linux enthusiasts could do, they are within their legal right to remove the Other OS feature. It's retarded, yes. But they can legally do that. You do NOT have the legal right to put it back in, especially since there's a significant enough probability that you're going to use it for piracy.

"Oh, don't pretend that wasn't an attempt to say he was acting with malicous intent when trying to restore OtherOS."

Were you not paying attention to what I just said? I said I would believe that he didn't mean for people to use it for piracy. I also said I'd even buy that he hates piracy. I SAID that as smart as he claims to be, he would know that it would be used for piracy. I'm not saying he intended people to use it for piracy, I'm saying he doesn't care. And he's still an arrogant jackass.

And we agree that Sony really sued because Hotz violated the DMCA. However, what I was trying to say is, like earlier, Sony had the right to remove the Other OS feature because they had proof that it was being used for piracy. When they found out that someone was trying to put it back in, what choice did they have but to believe that they were going to bring it back for piracy?

What were they supposed to do? Go "Oh, well" and just let people use THEIR copyright to steal from them, and other copyright holders? 

And we know that one of the terms of the settlement is a permanent injunction on his work. If Hotz was really innocent of wrongdoing, why did he not fight to keep his work intact?

How about this: If Sony brought back the Other OS feature, but made it so you couldn't install anything but Amiga OS, would you be happy? I don't remember Sony advertising that you could install Linux specifically.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

"It's cute how you like to misrepresent the facts to make the case seem like a threat to the rights of humanity, when in reality, it's just a company defending its intellectual property from an arrogant jackass who thinks he's smarter than everyone else. Are you one of PETA's lawyers?"

I'm not smarter than everone else, but I'm obviously smarter than you. I haven't misreprsented the facts, you just call your opinions facts and when the real facts don't align with your opinions, you point the finger at others and accuse them of misrepresenting the facts.

"I've read the DMCA extensively, and I understand copyright."

You may have read it, but it's obvious that you don't understand it.

"Really? Is that weak answer the best you could come up with? You're wrong. Dead wrong. They took it out because people were abusing it to cheat and pirate Blu-Rays and games. As much as I know people who love Linux want to believe that their OS is incapable of wrongdoing, the proof is right there."

Proof? Of what? Proof that people can use anything to do something wrong, immoral, or illegal? There's nothing in this world that can't be turned to devious ends. Cheating and infringement were doing just fine on the PS3 before the hack came out thank-you-very-much. They took it out because what people might do, and then it happened because they took it out. So Linux caused this all by itself? It wasn't people that did it? I guess guns shoot people all on their own too right? Linux is software, a tool. It can do no more harm than its user will it to.

"they are within their legal right to remove the Other OS feature."

No! No! No! Emphatically no! They are not within their rights to do that, no matter how much you say they are. They get away with it because they can afford better lawyers. You have a really bad habit of calling your opinions facts and completely misunderstanding what copyright is all about. Hell, you proved that you don't even know what the law defines as copyright infringement. The Sale of Goods Act of 1979 makes it unlawful to sell a product that is not as advertised and/or unfit for purpose. It's a game console that plays media, yes, but it was also advertised as a computer than can run alternative operating systems. That means they do not have the right to remove that post-sale. Copyright does not overrule consumer rights of their paid-for items.

"However, what I was trying to say is, like earlier, Sony had the right to remove the Other OS feature because they had proof that it was being used for piracy."

And you are completely wrong. Copyright does not grant the power to ignore rights that aren't granted or revoked within the text of the copyright act. You have a pretty low bar for what you call proof. It seems to be good enough when it fits your own point of view, but it's much higher when it comes to pointing out that which doesn't support your warped logic. Using something for illegal purposes does not give anyone the right to piss all over the rights of others. This was an obvious case of unfair business practices, but they get away with it because they have many government officials in their pocket.

"When they found out that someone was trying to put it back in, what choice did they have but to believe that they were going to bring it back for piracy?"

They probably did assume that, but only because they only care for their bottom line and not one shit for their customers or do I need to remind you of the root kit fiasco and the other misdeeds they've thrust upon the public?

"And we know that one of the terms of the settlement is a permanent injunction on his work. If Hotz was really innocent of wrongdoing, why did he not fight to keep his work intact?"

Gee, I don't know! Maybe it's because he can't afford a long and protracted legal conflict nor does he wish to spend valuable time arguing with a big company that will beat him down with their money and expensive lawyers? Maybe he made a dirty deal with them that we don't know about? Maybe making assumptions about people without any evidence to back it up is purely speculation and has no grounding in truth? Pure speculation is all your argument is, speculation to cast doubt without any facts to back it up. If Hotz is guilty of wrong doing, why did Sony settle? See that? I can play the bullshit speculation game too!

"How about this: If Sony brought back the Other OS feature, but made it so you couldn't install anything but Amiga OS, would you be happy? I don't remember Sony advertising that you could install Linux specifically."

How about this: You stop posting logical fallacies and opinions as facts. And while you're at it, read the copyright act and the DMCA again, because you missed a wide swath of facts.

Let me give you a few of the facts for free:

1. Copyright is a right to control the copying and distribution of works. It does not grant title of property to those works, because they are not the exclusive property of the rights holder. It grants no ownership except for the copyright itself, not the creative work in question. Creative works are the property of the public domain the moment a work is published, but this does not mean that it is free to take while the copyright still applies.

2. Infringement is the violation of an author's right to copy and distribute exact duplicates of works to which they hold the copyright. A violation of the DMCA occurs when someone distributes copy protection circumvention tools. Anyone can use ideas embedded in works to create new works or remix works into something entirely new that doesn't resemble the source material at all. We call that fair use.
 

3. Copyright was not intended to grant, secure, nor gaurantee a rights-holder payment for works. It was created to promote the creation of more art by incentive of a temporary monopoly on such works. It is outlined in Article one, Section 8 of the United State Constitution that congress shall have the power to grant this right, but is not required to nor is it an automatic right.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Are you sure you're reading the American version? Because that's the only thing that applies here. The Sale of Goods act of 1979 is U.K. Legislation. The DMCA you're reading could possibly be the EUCD, or European Union Copyright Directive. It addresses some of the same things as the DMCA, but it is nowhere near the same.

Allow me to summarize the DMCA for you.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States copyright law that implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). It criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures (commonly known as digital rights management or DRM) that control access to copyrighted works. It also criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, whether or not there is actual infringement of copyright itself. In addition, the DMCA heightens the penalties for copyright infringement on the Internet.

Hotz's work is in direct violation of the terms of the DMCA. He was trying to bring back a feature he had no right to add, but Sony has every right to remove. Speaking of...

And you say the Other OS feature was advertised. Where? I never saw one single advertisement specifically advertising the Other OS feature. So unless you can show me where it's advertised, you have no ground to stand on. In fact, almost 90% of PS3 owners didn't even know that you could install another OS until they took it out! There was no statement by SCEA, no marketing campaign, it wasn't even on the box.

So yes, yes, yes, emphatically YES! They can take it out if they so choose, as well as anything else they feel like. It's just like buying a game. You own the medium, but the game itself is being licensed to you. Sony reserves the right to add, remove, or alter features as they see fit.

Honestly, nobody complained when they added Netflix, and that wasn't advertised until after they implemented it, so what base is there to complain about them taking a feature out?

Your three facts may be true enough, but none of them apply to this particular case, so the point is moot.

"If Hotz is guilty of wrong doing, why did Sony settle? See that? I can play the bullshit speculation game too!"

Now I'm entirely convinced you don't read anything, you just pick out random words. I had JUST said in that phrase YOU quoted was that one of the terms of the settlement was a permanent injunction to his work, which was what Sony was after the whole time. So as long as what they wanted was part of the agreement, of course they'd settle. They got Hotz's work stopped permanently, so it's pretty much the same as Sony winning.

Read. Pay attention. Learn. And for the love of pie, try to use material relevant to your arguments, it's annoying when you use random facts that have no bearing on the topic at hand.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

"And for the love of pie, try to use material relevant to your arguments,"

And if you can't find any, make some up!

90% of PS3 owners didn't know about the OtherOS option.  (SOURCE: John Kyl.)

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

yes, because trying to push the envelope is a right belonging only to the people in white lab coats being paid by mega-corporations and the only thing that ever comes from homebrews and garage studios are stolen goods and ripoffs.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Not the only thing, just a vast majority.

Every time you pirate apologists make a comment like that, all you're doing is excusing piracy.  These things were taken out BECAUSE of piracy.  Does it occur to you that if piracy and cheating weren't an issue, Sony most likely wouldn't have removed OtherOS?  Of course it doesn't, because it's easier to sleep at night thinking that only some faceless corporation and some unnamed rich people are the bad guys.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Torrents are mostly used for piracy. Clearly ISPs should be able to block Torrents, even if it kills WoW updates.

Oh and the Army wants their PS3s with OtherOS. Let's sue them for piracy.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

I don't think Sony should have removed OtherOS. They made the dumb decision to put an option in the PS3 that makes piracy trivial but that's how they sold the system and they should have to live with that.

That said, they should have every right to ban modded consoles from PSN. You may own the system, you do NOT own the network. The problem is that GeoHot and his group were proudly touting how they could adapt their jailbreaks to make it look to PSN that your system was legit, even if it wasn't and you were running code that allowed you to cheat in online games. Stuff like that is where I lost sympathy for him.

This is as much Sony's fault as his. But it's also his.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

In what way does installing Linux make piracy "trivial"?

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

See, the "appearing legit" part of the story is probably the only place where my support wavers also. While I do firmly stand on the side of consumers' rights (even though I co-own a studio), I still think that the PSN is Sony's property and any attempt to fake a legit connection is (or should be) on the wrong side of the law. But that's really it though...

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Not to mention they can't track people who buy so everyone needs a bar code so they can limit art to paying consumers only.*rolls eyes*


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

ZIEG HEIL! MR Thought police man!

You can not be proactive with IP stuff its the same as getting on the slippery slope of good intentions that always lead to worse things in the end. They can toss moders off their networks but trying to claim onwership of a device that is no longer owned by them, sorry it just dose not add up. Go after the sites that distribute frimeware and software as not only is it easier it dose not treat the consumer or the public at large like criminals fined and convicted before the trail.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

"Go after the sites that distribute frimeware and software as not only is it easier"

BZZT! Wrong! What happens on the internet, stays on the internet, just as what has been seen, cannot be unseen.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

So lets allow them legal status over you due to copy rght concerns?? I don't think so, sorry but allowing intrusive laws via EULAs and hardware gives us less security and freedom.

The fine line is over the copy righted software/firmware anything past that is bad for us all.

 

They have 3 levels of control, retial distribution, legal status via copy right(which needs to be limited/defined more) and online service, they do not need more than that as anything more than that leads to legal oppression. Allowing them more power is the same as tossing out due process the police do not need a warrant and since your guilty they can execute you right away! Just think of all the innocent people it would save!!1111


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

He is not a pirate apologist anymore than a man against banning violent video games is a murder apologist.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Thank goodness this is all done and over with. Maybe Anonymous will stop there attacks now.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Silly Hotz. Trying to bring back Linux without a single thought as to why they took it out in the first place.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Whatever the reason or doing so what is the harm in letting people put it back on if they want it so badly.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Hmmm... Good question. What could possibly be the harm in bringing back a feature that the big, bad, mean company took out in the first place? What could possibly go wrong? Not like people used it for piracy or cheating or anything, right?
 

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

So you're saying that if a piece of software can POTENTIALLY be used for piracy, it should be banned.

Out of curiosity, how are you reading GP in the first place without a Web browser?

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Oh right, that'll be why VCRs are banned too.

Re: George Hotz, SCEA Settle Legal Dispute

Silly, people don't use VCRs anymore... They use PS3s, duh.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
quiknkoldEZacharyKnight : Lemme ask you a question. We have people who cling to walls, people who fire lasers from their eyes, people who can shapeshift....and yet fabric needs to be upheld to RL physics?09/17/2014 - 6:54pm
james_fudgebody paint?09/17/2014 - 5:33pm
E. Zachary Knightquiknkold, I stand corrected on the buttcrack thing. Still, I know of no fabric that actually does that.09/17/2014 - 5:05pm
Andrew EisenSo... it's unethical to discuss the ethics surrounding public interest vs. personal privacy?09/17/2014 - 4:45pm
prh99The source for the game was just released not long ago, it's at https://github.com/keendreams/keen09/17/2014 - 4:43pm
prh99An Indiegogo champagin bought the rights to the early 90's game Keen Dreams to make it open source and release it on GOG etc. https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-get-keen-dreams-re-released-legally09/17/2014 - 4:42pm
james_fudgeAlso http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/17/Exposed-the-secret-mailing-list-of-the-gaming-journalism-elite09/17/2014 - 4:29pm
Andrew EisenI read the Kotaku story. Nowhere does it say anything close to "Gamers are white bigoted sexist losers." It's commenting specifically on the crap being slung at people discussing gender issues in games. So, what's the problem?09/17/2014 - 4:06pm
Andrew EisenYeah, I can imagine Spiderwoman posed like in your second link.09/17/2014 - 4:00pm
Andrew EisenThat's not the same pose. Spiderman (who is wearing an actual outfit rather than body paint) is crouched low to the ground. Kinda like a spider! Spiderwoman has her butt up in the air like she's waiting to be mounted.09/17/2014 - 3:59pm
quiknkoldAndrew Eisen : Kotaku did a whiole article on it, as did others http://kotaku.com/we-might-be-witnessing-the-death-of-an-identity-162820307909/17/2014 - 3:59pm
CMinerQuiknkold: Do you think that there are no cases where a piece of art (painting, movie, videogame, comic cover, etc) is unambiguously sexist?09/17/2014 - 3:58pm
quiknkoldand can you imagine if Spiderwoman was posed like this? http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/spider-man1.jpg09/17/2014 - 3:58pm
Andrew EisenWhat games outlet is writing articles saying "Gamers are white bigoted sexist losers"? What examples have you seen of journalists being paid off for favorable reviews? Who's shaming what now? What's the problem with critiquing the Spiderwoman cover?09/17/2014 - 3:57pm
james_fudgeWell there's def "politics" involved in this issue. The movement was hamstrung by bad behavior and illegal activites here. We would have covered it more if not for those unforutnate happenings.09/17/2014 - 3:56pm
quiknkoldhttp://i.imgur.com/v3p8Bwf.jpg Here you go EZacharyKnight. Spidermans Buttcrack.09/17/2014 - 3:56pm
quiknkoldwhile another person doesnt see it09/17/2014 - 3:56pm
quiknkoldJames_fudge : I feel like the people challenging Games are the same people who Challenge Art because Michaelangelo's David shows Wang. The problem is, alot of things with Games are left to the eye of the beholder. One Person see's Sexist Antiwomen views.09/17/2014 - 3:55pm
E. Zachary Knightquiknkold, I don't recall Spider-man's costume conforming to the contour of his buttcrack.09/17/2014 - 3:54pm
quiknkoldIts the same Agenda Fueled Journalism youd find on Fox News or MSNBC. I appreciate Gamepolitics for just stating the facts.09/17/2014 - 3:54pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician