PS3 user refunded for 'Other OS' removal

Amazon responds to complaint that console is not fit for purpose

A PlayStation 3 user has reportedly received a partial refund after complaining that Sony's removal of the Install Other OS feature meant the console was no longer fit for purpose.

The user - NeoGAF forum member lapetus - was granted a refund of £71.49 for his 60GB PS3 console by online retailer Amazon. That was without having to return the console, which was considerably out of its warranty period and Amazon's 30 day guarantee.

PlayStation University reports that lapetus used European laws to obtain the refund - specifically stating that the feature's removal meant the console no longer complied with the description given and was not fit for the purpose required which was made known to the seller at the time of purchase.

The recently-released Firmware 3.21 disabled the ability to run Linux on the PS3 - a move that Sony said was necessary due to security concerns.

The feature had already been dropped from newer PlayStation 3 models last year, and Sony has said that those few using the Other OS can continue to do so by opting not to upgrade their consoles. However, not doing so would result in not being able to sign into the PlayStation Network, or play games that require the latest update.

Sony's user agreement also states clearly that it has the right to revise the PS3's settings and features in order to prevent access to unauthorised or pirated content. has contacted Sony for comment on the situation.

More stories

New PlayStation update adds USB storage and cross-generation Share Play

PS5 owners will be able to save game data onto an external drive, but the games won't be playable from there

By Danielle Partis

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

Latest comments (9)

Ross Mills designer, eeGeo11 years ago
Others should not be mistaken in thinking that they all deserve a refund. This user was SPECIFICALLY going to use this console for this purpose (or so they claim)
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Patrick Williams Medicine and Research 11 years ago
Doesn't this create a problem with the law? Anyone could write a EULA to invalidate anything a product was ever advertised.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Mark Raymond Functionality Tester, SEGA Europe11 years ago
I thought there was still some debate over the legality of a EULA anyway? (Specifically, whether they're legally binding or not.)

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Mark Raymond on 9th April 2010 1:01pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Show all comments (9)
gi biz ;, 11 years ago
Anyways, how many people are buying a PS3 (or anything else) and returning it right after reading the EULA because they don't agree?
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Anuj Malhotra Studying Business Management, Imperial College London11 years ago
I wonder how Amazon will respond to the legions of copycats looking to make a quick buck...
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Whitehead Journalist 11 years ago
Wasn't it on there so Sony could claim it as a computer and save on some tax break? I'm pretty sure that's why that's why the PS2 shipped with that demo disc with BASIC on it in PAL regions.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
James Goldie Studying Master of Business (Science & Technology), Monash University11 years ago
Patrick, I'm not sure how things work under European law, but in Australia you can't always just disclaim a customer's statutory rights (Trade Practices Act, etc.) away. I'm trying to remember how this is impacted when a contract's involved, but there are usually safety measures against completely stripping away consumer rights.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andrew Whitehead Journalist 11 years ago
They've been stripping features out of this thing for so long. It's ridiculous. And Patrick, it may seem petty, but this user was sold product with a long list of features and taking any away one that was important to him means he's entitled to a refund. I think we should be on the consumers side in this instance, not the big corporation taking yet another promised feature away from us. For once the EULA did something useful for us.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Snipar Scorp11 years ago
I totally agree with Andrew, the PlayStation 3 sucks as it is, why make it any worse? I personally beleave that, taking away such a feature' such as running Linux on the PlayStation 3 is a waist, the PlayStation 3 has good internal structure, the console itself doesn't feel like a gaming console, control system on it sucks but graphics are fantastic. Taking away delicate feature's for those who are looking to use full potential of the product is stupid, and consumer should have every right to stand by that. Glad he got a refund.
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply

Sign in to contribute

Need an account? Register now.