Sections

PS3 hacker: "It's about whether you really own that device you purchased"

Geohot being sued for "making Sony mad"

George 'Geohot' Hotz, one of the people responsible for the recent PlayStation 3 security breach, has claimed his actions will ultimately be deemed legal in the case brought against him by Sony.

"Right now, still legally, you can go to my website and download my Jailbreak for your PS3," he told G4TV's Attack of the Show.

"What it lets you do is install homebrew applications, which have been developed by anyone. You can develop your own application or go download some and put them on your Jailbroken PS3."

He believes his earlier iPhone jailbreak being allowed by the courts under the DMCA sets a precedent for the PlayStation case.

"Currently the difference is the DMCA says specifically mobile phones, but the same precedent should apply. If they decide a phone is a closed system, where the manufacturer controls all the software that runs on it.. If you can Jailbreak one closed system, why can't you Jailbreak another?

Hotz felt that, were he to win the case, it could open the door to more legally-permissible console hacking. "This case is about a lot more than what I did and me. It's about whether you really own that device that you purchased."

Hotz also claimed that his hack will not allow the running of bootlegged games. "The way piracy was previously done doesn't work in my Jailbreak. I made a specific effort while I was working on this to try to enable homebrew without enabling things I do not support, like piracy."

The reason he was being sued, he claimed, was simply for "making Sony mad."

Confirming that he had hired two layers to help him fight back, he commented that "the adrenaline is definitely flowing. It's exciting, it's scary at the same time."

Related stories

PS3 was "a stark moment of hubris" - Layden

Sony Interactive Entertainment Worldwide Studios chairman reflects on last generation's missteps and how the company changed course for PS4

By Brendan Sinclair

UK charts: Spider-Man is fastest-selling game of the year

Most successful week one for a Marvel game

By Christopher Dring

Latest comments (46)

Wesley Williams Quality Assurance 8 years ago
"The way piracy was previously done doesn't work in my Jailbreak. I made a specific effort while I was working on this to try to enable homebrew without enabling things I do not support, like piracy."

Not sure how that can be the case, but I completely agree that we should be allowed to do whatever we like with the devices we own.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Craig Burkey Software Engineer 8 years ago
Personally I think this is like a gun manufacturer being held responsible for the crimes committed with that tool... if they aren't he shouldn't be.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Adam Shepherd Functionality Tester 8 years ago
I think lawyers would help him more than "layers". to be honest.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Show all comments (46)
Joe Bassi Managing Director & Business Development, Mertech Data Systems8 years ago
As I posted in another related topic, I think the console makers needs to rethink a lot of their strategies. Maybe switching from products and services to just services like the cable TV companies: instead of selling the PS3 - the video game console - they should rent it and the customer pays a subscription. In this rental model, no one will be the owner of the hardware, therefore you neither can open or modding it because it’s Sony property, simple like that.

As is today, the dilemma still clear: the customer buys the console but he is not able to do what he wants to do with it because there are tremendous limitations and serious consequences if he does not accept the license terms the console makers presents unilaterally from time to time.

The OtherOS support – Linux – removal was a clear example of breach of contract by Sony against customers who bought the PS3 with the ability to run Linux and play online.

If we limit to say that the hackers groups are doing just plain piracy at the end, so it’s equally valid to say the console makers cheat the customer when they change the TOS, agreements and licenses, at they will and disposal, leaving the user to agree and proceed or don’t agree and be prepared to throw away his console, like saying “accept it or die” or “I fight for the programs”.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Joe Bassi on 14th January 2011 11:18am

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Wesley Williams Quality Assurance 8 years ago
Joe, I'd be very interested to see how the market reacted to a rental model. If Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo all comitted to doing it at the same time, it would likely work, but if not, I imagine it would be rather more difficult.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
There's a lot of muddy water here for the courts to resolve.

There's "wrong" on both sides. But how many of us have heard that two "wrongs" don't make a right.

Sony upset a lot of users by removing otherOS. They may have legally had the right to do so, but it was handled badly.

Doing whatever you want with a console is absolutely your right once you've purchased it. Hacking or reverse-engineering. In the privacy of your own home, harms no-one. But publishing security flaws? Publishing the information required to open the doors to piracy on the PS3? How many of us in the industry can really support the facilitator of more piracy on the consoles we make a living from?

In the end, the courts may decide no crime was committed.

But any increase in piracy diminishes all our earnings and puts some of us out of work.

(Maybe) no crime, but lots of harm.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
I'm gonna quote a well informed post I read on the IGN forums:

By Vega_Obscura on IGN forums:

I'm 99% sure he's going down or settling out of court, especially after briefly familiarizing myself with the DMCA:

"Wikipedia:
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. (Where Hotz is screwed) 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."


The exemptions in the legislation appear to only cover computer/PC games:

"Wikipedia:
Video games accessible on personal computers and protected by technological protection measures that control access to lawfully obtained works, when circumvention is accomplished solely for the purpose of good faith testing for, investigating, or correcting security flaws or vulnerabilities, if:

* The information derived from the security testing is used primarily to promote the security of the owner or operator of a computer, computer system, or computer network; and
* The information derived from the security testing is used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright infringement or a violation of applicable law. (A new exemption in 2010.)"


For those of you who insist on using the iPhone Jailbreak as a reason why the PS3 is okay to hack, here are the exemptions in the DMCA that rendered that ONCE ILLEGAL act harmless:

"Wikipedia:
# Computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute software applications, where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications, when they have been lawfully obtained, with computer programs on the telephone handset. (A new exemption in 2010.)
# Computer programs, in the form of firmware or software, that enable used wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless telecommunications network, when circumvention is initiated by the owner of the copy of the computer program solely in order to connect to a wireless telecommunications network and access to the network is authorized by the operator of the network. (Revised from a similar exemption approved in 2006.)"


He's playing a much different game with Sony and he's choosing the losing side.

Even if he "did his best" to prevent the pirating aspects of the software, he released that software, which a pirate will dissect and repurpose for the use of stealing games.

Jailbreaking the iPhone didn't hurt their revenue, in fact, it may have spurred more iPhone sales.

Had AT&T filed the case, THEY might have won if the iPhone jailbreak allowed people to choose a different carrier for cellular service. Damages, especially since AT&T had an exclusivity contract with Apple at the time.

Hotz stands less of a chance in this case because Jailbreaking the PS3 will cause direct damage to Sony's revenue the moment someone uses it to pirate a game.

Sony Computer Entertainment derives a hefty chunk of it's revenue from software sales, software that Hotz' Jailbreak code allows malicious individuals to obtain illegally.

Honestly, he shouldn't be in trouble for this unless he himself pirated any games, which is what will be determined when his hardware is turned over.

He shouldn't be faulted for making the software, especially if Sony left those doors open in the first place. If your security is weak, it should be circumvented and you should be aware to how it was circumvented.

Hotz main screw up was releasing the code.

Sony doesn't have to win this case.

They can seize Hotz hardware and tie him up in court so long that he'll be buried in legal fees for the rest of his life.

It's dirty, but this is what you set yourself up for when tempt you the wrath of a billion dollar corporation.

He's just being made into an example. A well publicized, well known example.

Why fight an army when you can simply assassinate one of it's most prominent figures and demoralize the group...?
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Tom Keresztes Programmer 8 years ago
@Joffrie Diependaele,

Apple is already being critizised for monopolistic practices - namely only allowing apps developed and sold through the AppStore. Sony could easily find itself in a unconfortable situation, this is not as clear-cut as a modchip. I suspect there will be an out of court settlement, though.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Joe Bassi Managing Director & Business Development, Mertech Data Systems8 years ago
Wesley, I appreciate your reply. The switching from product and services to just services is what many companies want to do because our civilization has becoming digital and services are the goledn source of recurrent business. In the case of Sony, they have a long history of products so for them is really hard to let go the hardware sales because it's their core.

The TV is really migrating to data streaming, like GoogleTV, where the feature is embedded in Sony’s TV sets, while Voodoo, for instance, is abandoning their dedicated hardware and going to the PS3. So I think in a way or other, videogaming will eventually merge in some wider entertainment system, not mentioning the "cloud videogaming".

But the dilemma still there: who owns the hardware that needs the software to work? It seems impossible to distinct the hardware part from its software part. If there are lines of codes written in the flash memory of MY computer system, how this piece of code is not mine?

If I don’t want to transfer property, I do not sell it. I may lease it under certain rights and obligations. But leasing is not licensing. And licensing has been used for decades in the software industry as the exclusive legal approach and here comes the mess because almost all legal framework we have today, 2nd decade of the 21 century, was forged more than a century ago.

I just can say now – as a customer – I am tired of buying stuff that has obscures obligations beyond a simple look or gets impossible to be updated or connected. More and more I think we should never buy again any complex electronic system that is tied to a kind of service. Just sell me the service and the means to get is not my business.

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Joe Bassi on 14th January 2011 12:50pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Kam Star Managing Director, PlayGen8 years ago
I agree with Adam - hiring 'layers' is really not very useful, it would be better to hire some lawyers instead.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Stephen Arnold Business Development, Localsoft Games8 years ago
Geohot is a fool for taking credit for it and making himself a target. But kudos to him for figuring it out. That must have been one rubix cube of a code.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
J. Goldmaker Community Management 8 years ago
If you break into a bank, you will still be arrested, even if you don't steal the money in the vault. If you really want to do such things, you contact the Bank manager and inform him ahead of time, he might even pay you for testing things out on his behalf. It is quite irresponsible to cause major losses to a corporation and artists because you did not inform them ahead of time.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Neil Hall Senior Lecturer in Games Animation, Teesside University8 years ago
@J. Goldmaker But what if you solely owned the bank? It's your property. If you're a home-owner and lose your house keys, you either pop a window or get a locksmith. It's yours and if you want to break a window to get in, so be it! You wouldn't get original builders knocking on your door and explaining that you've wrecked up their vision. :-).

If it's rented... Oh my! Don't go putting a new carpet down or changing the colour of the walls! LOL!
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Terence Gage Freelance writer 8 years ago
I know almost nothing about programming so forgive me if the following comments seem naive.

I don't really understand the analogies people keep making that Sony had weak security and effectively 'left the doors open'. If the PS3 security was so easy to circumnavigate then how come no-one before now managed it in the 4+ years it had been on the market?

And although it might be legal to modify hardware as this is personally owned, surely in hacking his PS3 and outwitting the security measures Hotz had to tamper with the system software, which is not owned by the consumer and only operated in a licensee sense - thus quite possibly making it illegal, or at the very least not exactly defensible.


Also, a couple of sloppy grammatical errors in this article - 'layers' instead of lawyers, as previously mentioned, and:

<em>"Currently the difference is the DMCA says specifically mobile phones, but the same precedent should apply. If they decide a phone is a closed system, where the manufacturer controls all the software that runs on it.. If you can Jailbreak one closed system, why can't you Jailbreak another?

Hotz felt that, were he to win the case, it could open the door to more legally-permissible console hacking.</em>

Needs a closing quotation mark after 'another?'. There's also instances of 'jailbreak' having either a capital or a lower-case J.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Henry Durrant Programmer, SUMO Digital8 years ago
If you own that box of silicon and plastic, its your to do with as you please.

Banning individuals from online services for violating Contract/EULA and cutting them off from future updates to firmware / OS is up to the Service provider.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Damian Lofthouse Studying MComp in Computer Graphics, University of East Anglia8 years ago
A little sided here, but why do we need more than one person picking up on the 'layer' 'lawyer' typo? Maybe the first person to comment on it made us smirk, but everyone else is just recycling old news.

Back on topic I very much support the stance of if I go to the shops and spend over £200 on a piece of hardware, I own it and can do whatever I like with it, If I want to open it up, it may void my warranty, but if I want to pull it to pieces I should be able to. If I break it then so be it. The software within it is different since that's intellectual property.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Brian Lewis Operations Manager, PlayNext8 years ago
The sad facts are this.

Hotz is going to suffer for his actions. Sony is going to make his life very uncomfortable, and the best case scenario for him at this point is that he will have a long, ongoing court battle, that will cost him money, time, and peace of mind. No matter what his intentions were, he is now in a position that will not be enjoyable.

However, there is some bright side here. There is a (longshot) chance that some civil liberties group will choose to help him in order to challenge the DCMA. It is possible to get some court rules that are favorable (for the masses, if not Hotz) out of this, and to make this an eyesore for Sony and any other company that wants to do this in the future.

Bottom line, Hotz is going to be executed. He can be hung like a criminal, or nailed to a cross (as a martyr).
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
James Verity8 years ago
In this rental model, no one will be the owner of the hardware, therefore you neither can open or modding it because it’s Sony property, simple like that.

that would cost Sony lots of money in YLOD repairs... :D

The OtherOS support – Linux – removal was a clear example of breach of contract by Sony against customers who bought the PS3 with the ability to run Linux and play online.

just like Sony having nothing to do with Banning PSN users that hack third party titles... another clear example of breach of contract by Sony...

Edited 2 times. Last edit by James Verity on 14th January 2011 5:16pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Lee Ward Education 8 years ago
I don't condone piracy. I've spent hundreds on games over the past 12 months and I plan to do the same again this year. Just thought I should mention that before I continue.

I hope Sony loses all the charges. The reason I do is that they relied on what IT Practitioners in my industry refer to as "security through obscurity". Security through obscurity is a failed model which relies on the fact that the devices inner workings are incredibly difficult to get in to, and that the code is obscured to be as hard to follow and read as possible. The argument for and against this method of protecting your rights is right here on Wikipedia: [link url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity
]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_th...[/link]

This can delay a break in by years, but once a light is found at the end of the tunnel the whole thing can be blown wide open. It's basic web application developer practice. Before Sony removed the OtherOS feature nobody was really willing to invest so much time and effort in to actually breaking it. When they removed that feature though it became necessary to break in order to regain that functionality (Linux on PS3).

I used OtherOS. Not often but I did. I justified the cost of PS3 based on the fact I could do this. When they removed it, they not only forbid access back to the Linux information, but they also locked the end user out of any data stored on it.

Removing the feature was incredibly poor play and I hope Sony themselves are punished dearly for handling it in such an anti-consumer way.

My box, my rules. Manufacturer doesn't like those rules? Build a GPL'd version of the firmware (A simple Linux bootloader) which doesn't have the logic to run commercial titles, only homebrew but allows FULL unrestricted access to the hardware you purchased in good faith that features would not be removed at a later date.

I'm fairly sure the "Reverse engineering access control measures" thing relates to DRM on actual computers, where the customer doesn't require a heightened level of expertise in order to circumvent that protection (DRM on computers is so easy many games don't touch PC as a result, and Ubisoft apply unreasonable DRM to their PC titles, and not to console titles). Sony can play the "The PS3 is a computer" all they want, if I can't load a custom piece of software on to a device it most definitely isn't a computer, but a set top box, and the iPod Touch/iPhone is just a mobile version of that. Apple lost it, Sony will lose it. If Sony really wants to call it a computer, then they need to provide the ability for the average joe to load a custom bootloader and linux, and the ability to completely and utterly remove any and all copyrighted Sony firmware and therefore the ability to run commercial PS3 titles.

What ever happened to those huge farms of PS3 consoles universities bought just for the OtherOS feature so they could be used for processing?

Sony had to be seen to be doing something otherwise shareholders would lose confidence, but commit to a lawsuit they are bound to lose? When they do, how do they plan to explain that?

All I'm going to say is long live Net Yaroze!

Blah, always have a lot to say.

Edited 3 times. Last edit by Lee Ward on 14th January 2011 6:37pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Adam Yaure Studying MSc Games Programming, University of Hull8 years ago
I agree somewhat they should switch to a service model where the console is not sold but rent out to customers.

I don't really buy the "you bought something and can do whatever you want" altitude without caring what effect it will bring to others, this is just irresponsible...publishing security flaws is even worse.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Temi Web design 8 years ago
Console rentals could result in a massive drop in console sales and market size. Also where does the console inventory get stored? What about countries not members of the major markets? do stores somehow profit from console rentals? If microsoft, nintendo and Sony decided to do it, I would put my money on sega or whichever other company decided to make a new console with the old business model.

This also would not stop hacking of a console. maybe the hackers won't be public figures. You would just be making it harder to make money for no reason

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Temi on 14th January 2011 6:37pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Ben Hewett Studying MA Philosophy, University of Birmingham8 years ago
Three things occur to me, each inspired by what Terrence posted.

Firstly, even if we accept that Sony's security was lax (I don't see how it could be THAT bad, given it took 4 years to crack), that doesn't mean that it's ok that it was hacked wide open. Maybe not in this thread, but in other GI thread's, I've noticed some users suggesting that Sony got what was coming to them. I find this disturbing.

Secondly, following on from Terrence, surely the hackers would have had to hack the system software? That must be illegal?

Thirdly, what is so wrong with the concept of a manufacturer issuing legally binding TOS/TOU for their hardware products? Sure, they could lead to the manufacturer utilising them for harm, but without them harms are occuring.

Personally, I come at this with the intuition that this guy has done something wrong and should be punished for it. As to exactly what he's done wrong, I'm not so sure.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Goodchild Studying development, Train2Game8 years ago
@Temi, I agree with your comments, but on the bright side, a lot of Sega fanboys/girls would rejoice if Sega had an opportunity to rejoin the race;)

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Adam Yaure Studying MSc Games Programming, University of Hull8 years ago
@Temi They can just apply rental on using the console as a service, so you can still keep the console in the house, throw it away or anything but the property remains to sony so you're not allow to hack/modify it. So basically just changing the terms and conditions etc...
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Christopher Bowen Owner, Gaming Bus 8 years ago
As I posted in another related topic, I think the console makers needs to rethink a lot of their strategies. Maybe switching from products and services to just services like the cable TV companies: instead of selling the PS3 - the video game console - they should rent it and the customer pays a subscription. In this rental model, no one will be the owner of the hardware, therefore you neither can open or modding it because it’s Sony property, simple like that.

Congratulations; you've just lost quite a few customers who are not going to be willing to pay in perpetuality for the right to use a console, no matter how good Call of Duty looks on it.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Goodchild Studying development, Train2Game8 years ago
Backing up Christopher, you've always had an option to rent TVs. You know you can always have a current model, and if broken through anything except irresponsible treatment, you can get a replacement. Most people prefer to own one instead, even if that means buying on credit, and replacing it when the credit is paid. People like ownership.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Jean Toledo8 years ago
I vote for J. Goldmaker's comment.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Jakobs Lead Programmer 8 years ago
Ofcourse I agree in the part that you should be able to run whatever you want on YOUR hardware, and not have important features removed after you bought the console (yep for me OtherOS was one of the reason why I bought the PS3, gaming came 3rd).

But his claim his 'jailbreak' doesn't allow for illegal games is BS ofcourse, if it can run homebrew it can also be made to run an illegal game (through homebrew).. As far as I know what his 'jailbreak' does, is enable the 'install packages' option..

@Christopher Bowen: my god you really don't have a vision at all, especially for someone who claims to be a journalist/editor. It will go that way, but not through having a setopbox at home, but through streaming services like OnLive (but then through a universally agreed on standard for TV's). Piracy/cheating will be virtually impossible..
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Goodchild Studying development, Train2Game8 years ago
@Andrew Jakobs. Not everyone likes the idea of on live. Again we have problems with a lot of the UK having rubbish broadband (I have 2 Mb max, whew), then there is the idea it is that you can never own a game, and if on live goes bust, you lose everything for backing the wrong horse. I believe on OnLive you have a time limited licence (admittedly Gaikai promises you own I licence if you buy it and are looking at ways of intergrating it with ways of downloading too). And anyone not willing to pay for Xbox live won't pay to subscribe for one player games (ok Gaikai has no subs but Onlive does).

Don't get me wrong, cloud gaming probably has a future, but not everyone wants it. They may come round, but more likely a lot of them will turn to the company who decides to go the old way.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Jan Almqvist Senior Level Artist, Ubisoft Quebec City8 years ago
I for one hope that Sony nails the sobs to the goddamn wall. We don't need assholes like these to screw with our livelihood and force manufacturers to even more drastic security measures that always end up making products less user friendly and increasingly cumbersome to use.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Klaus Preisinger Freelance Writing 8 years ago
Sony would have no problems finding retailers for their rental distribution model. PayTV does it, cell phone operators do it, retailers offering 24 month financial plans on anything they sell are basically doing it.

The major problem with rented hardware being the life cycle of the damn thing. You can't expect people to sign five year rental contracts. You might fool them into three, but after that, you would have to iterate on your hardware to retain the premium user and rent the older model for less to customer who would not have picked it up for $15 a month. Else the competition will eat you alive. You also have to make people buy games for a platform they only have temporarily, which is another major hurdle to overcome.

I do not see Sony in a position to really pull that off, they might be good at iterating TV sets, but not consoles and console software. Microsoft, yes, they do have the Direct X groundwork and Windows experience to construct a platform which is iterated upon every three years while retaining compatibility of sorts.

Sony is also not an ISP, meaning controlling the platform by controlling its internet connection from start to finish and ensuring a connection is there from start to finish is not an option.

That leaves one thing for them to do: arrange yourselves with homebrew. Why fight it? TV manufacturers are dying for people to write shitty apps for a Samsung or a Sony, there are competitions with $50.000 price money for rudimentary stuff. Yet here Sony is too proud to let people in, when they could have a vibrant homebrew community. Sure, it would cost them money to mange the approval process and handling the copy protection themselves. But there would be no more excuses to hack the damn thing.

Sony might lose the control over a few aspects they maybe could have marketed themselves, but Apple clearly shows the way how money is made. Sony once claimed the PS3 did everything, but when I look at my Samsung TV, I have to say that the PS3 might do games better, but anything else is done better by the TV. This trend will continue, then what PS4? It only does games?
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Goodchild Studying development, Train2Game8 years ago
I still can't understand why after a few years of Xbox indie games (XNA), which most people with any interest in indie development see as a positive thing (regardless of what they think of implimentation) Sony have not introduced an equivelent. Not only can you essentially on some level legally do home development for Xbox (for a small fee) you have a chance to sell it if it meets basic requirements. Why do sony think this isn't worth taking up? Sure it may be seen as copying, but then the implemented trophys after seeing the growing popularity of achievements, and move reminds me of something I've seen before, so I don't see the problem. It may have been seen as a good will gesture, whilst remaining a managed system.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Private Industry 8 years ago
I have seen the video he appears to enjoy being in front of the camera and it`s good that he admit that he never started to hack into the system via linux because OtherOS was not on the slim he started to hack to gain access to the video chip at the beginning so there was no intention of "I just do that for the poor people who don`t have OtherOS on the slim". And now he claims that it`s about OtherOS that was removed via FW update that was his fault in the first place to twist it around and pretend to be the hero of the community, because the fat PS3 would still have OtherOS without his hacking into the system.

But sure he took all necessary steps to prevent any kind of wrong doing, say hello to the app that let`s you already unlock trophies. So how long until his custom firmware is modified to have the security removed or until an app comes out that allows for pirated games?

In regards to XNA. Yes it`s a great thing. Did it stop hackers from making it possible to run pirated games within a very short time? Not at all. Hackers can pretend whatever they want do they really give a toss about the homebrew? For me they are just a bunch of people who run around and scream "look at me and how cool I am" who don`t care about what people do with their hacks they just want to get their 15 minutes of fame.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Isaac Kirby Studying Computer Games Development, University of Central Lancashire8 years ago
"I went to the shop one day to buy a computer. I wanted to play games on it, but by a stroke of good fortune it happened to do other things. It could play my films, my music, i could even watch TV on it. Then one day, being an educated man and knowing some programming i decided to find a way to make my own software for it. I had to fiddle around a bit, but i managed to get a way to run my own software on it. I was very happy.
But all of a sudden a man turned up at my door, he said i was not allowed to use my computer this way. He said it was not meant to be used this way. So he tried to sue me. . . . "

Sorry for the Am-Drams but it just seems so wrong. So very wrong.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
abra Cadabra Remove me please 8 years ago
I never understand why these hackers out there try to be the vigilante and play the half robin hood role. If I took the time out to learn the methods and skills required to do such a thing as this, I would have rung SONY, sent them a copy of what I had done and said 'how much to help you fix it - or its released on the net' .... I cant help but think its been done for attention, to feel like some important crusader, so I struggle to have sympathy.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Private Industry 8 years ago
That would be blackmailing :)

But if you do it right you could get a good job with those skills or open a business that is focused on security , and it`s not like they don`t have skills. Obviously releasing information about security problems on the internet or make jailbreaks available on the net is not the best way to introduce yourself to a company. Who wants to hire someone for their security division who did stuff like that previously and you can`t really trust no mater how good they are.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew McNeish Studying Games designer, Train2Game8 years ago
I think the whole ownership thing is a good fight. If you buy a 1.6 ford focus and modify it with 3.0 litre supra engine, lower it and add a body kit, thats fine because its bought and paid for. However opening a door that may cause a lot of people to lose their jobs is a risky and irresponsible move! Its a case of just because you can doesnt mean you should. No doubt they will settle out of court and geohot will end up with a job with Sony........ or microsoft.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Private Industry 8 years ago
Always with the car examples :)

But yeah actually that`s not fine, you are only allowed to modify cars to a certain extend and you always need to get approval after you made modifications. If you modify them too much you are not allowed to drive on the road. So also with cars you are not allowed to do whatever you want you still have to stick to what has been ruled to be allowed, unless you just want to look at your car and don`t drive with it.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
@Wesley: To answer your earlier question (as I don't think anyone did) The previous Jailbreak method (the one that required the dongle) the loaders required to rip and pirate games required access to lvl2 syscalls to operate. Under GeoHot's Jailbreak method, there is no access granted to lvl2, preventing those loaders from functioning.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
@Ben Hewett: It wasn't cracked for 4 years because no one was really bothering to try. It took fail0verflow a year to figure out that Sony's private keys were based on a static number rather than a randomly generated one (which they did with some rather crude hacking tricks) and then all it took was a fairly simple math problem to figure them out.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Goodchild Studying development, Train2Game8 years ago
@Clerk. It wasn't that no one was trying for 3 years, the right (wrong?) people weren't trying. There ain't a chance in heck no one was trying. Even if Failoverflow arn't into piracy, there most certainly are plenty hackers that are.
Also, even taking a year is better than the two months it takes on most consoles, but it's a shame there was no back up measure.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Ben Hewett Studying MA Philosophy, University of Birmingham8 years ago
@Clark

Ok cool. So for them to do what they've done, did they need to hack the system software?

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Krasimir Koichev Producer, Riftforge8 years ago
What Neil Hall says makes so much sense. It's your console, your PROPERTY. You can break with a brick, or you can break it with a piece of software.

It shouldn't make no difference, unless you're trying profit from it ... like creating an underground club full of PS3s, all hacked and being used to play pirated games. Why do I bother, no one's going to create an underground club like that.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Haroon Imran8 years ago
I think he should hire layers. Lawyers suck.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Peter Dwyer software engineer, openbet8 years ago
I'm gonna go hire me a layer!
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
But this means you cant share the open key to the system online (its illegal) Geohotz is just a guy that haves allot of free time on his hands.

I made a specific effort while I was working on this to try to enable homebrew without enabling things I do not support, like piracy.

Here he says that he dont support like piracy? but refers to it :)

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Sotiri Dimpinoudis on 26th January 2011 3:49pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply

Sign in to contribute

Need an account? Register now.