Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

Aussie gamer loses PS3 Other OS case

  • By Laura Parker, GameSpot AU
  • Posted Sep 1, 2010 6:52 pm PT

Adelaide man sues Sony for Linux-lockout in the PS3; court clears entertainment giant, dismisses charges.

Sony's decision to tighten security on its PlayStation 3 console by removing one of the system's most versatile features--Other OS--as part of firmware v3.21 in April this year did not sit very well with some gamers.

The removal of the feature--which meant users could no longer install the Linux operating system on the PS3 and effectively use the console as a desktop computer--sparked a series of lawsuits in the US over resulting hardware issues.

Aussie gamer not happy with Sony's decision to remove the Other OS feature.

Aussie gamer not happy with Sony's decision to remove the Other OS feature.

Now, the ABC is reporting that Adelaide man Michael Trebilcock has lost a court claim filed in July this year against Sony. Trebilcock tried to sue the publisher for A$800 (US$726.80) after discovering firmware upgrade v3.21 meant he could no longer use his console as a computer. According to the ABC, Trebilcock said he thought the removal of the Other OS feature as a result of the firmware upgrade was an April Fool's joke.

Earlier this week, Holden Hill Magistrates Court dismissed Trebilcock's claims and cleared Sony of any wrongdoing regarding the upgrade.

28 Comments

  • kus3pt

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 5:09 pm GMT

    @MonkeySeeker

    hehe....i love this....this debate we got going on here...a lot more mature than the other ppl on this website going immaturely n calling each others names....n i thumbs u up on ur comment cause u got a pt

  • HollowNinja

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 3:34 pm GMT

    This seems more like a rumor than anything. I'll believe it when I hear the reasoning behind the judge's decision.

  • user_93475765

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 11:37 am GMT

    What's this? Sony's multi-million dollar legal team managed to win a court case against one average joe, despite said joe being clearly in the right? Why, I'm shocked. It's almost as if legal rulings can be BOUGHT... Hmmm, but that can't possibly be true!

  • MonkeySeeker

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 10:36 am GMT

    @kus3pt That would be fair enough if he bought his PS3 after people became aware of the update but not if he bought his PS3 before anyone knew about it.

    They sold the system with certain features and in my opinion (that is all it is after all) no company should be able to just remove features at will when people have paid their money for those features.

    I don't buy the "you can choose not to update" argument either, people shouldn't have to make a choice of which feature they can use when they bought the system with ALL features.

    I understand Sony wanting to protect against hacking and piracy, I just think people have a right to be peed off about the removal of a feature that may even have swayed them when considering buying the console in the first place.

  • CarlosY2Jericho

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 8:51 am GMT

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JAWDmXXGwQ

    You can't beat it

  • kus3pt

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 7:30 am GMT

    @CraigNinten

    sry i feel like a wall whore.....but i feel like talking today SRY GAMESPOT users

    back to topic. there were heaps of hacked up psps back in the days, and the ppl did it with the pandora battery and downgrading the psps by themselves. by downgrading the psps they can hack their psps thru software-wise if u catch my drift.

    which is y i think sony is not allowing a downgrade on their systems, to prevent another potential option to hack :S

  • CraigNinten

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 6:40 am GMT

    if sony allow users to go back to previous firmware version, then if would not be so much trouble.

  • kus3pt

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 6:04 am GMT

    @MoneySeeker

    naaa...ive seen a number websites where they actually mentioned the features of ps3 version upgrades. i dont use or have installed linux on my ps3 but ive read on the net knowing that linux would not be supported anymore because of some version upgrade. this upgrade and not supporting linux business was quite a while back tbh :S

  • Zerabp

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 5:36 am GMT

    Here's the thing Sony didn't say you Can't use it anymore they just said you can't use it and any PS network features anymore. So they gave everyone a choice if you use the system for gaming online, or if you purchase things from their store, or if you want fully insured Bluray compatability, upgrade and sacrifice other OS to insure those things. If you're content playing games offline and watching Blurays without any networking features and possible compatibility issues, but want to keep others OS don't upgrade. Everyone had this choice and most chose to sacrifice other OS. Sony did not force anyone to download the firmware update.

  • shaunn191

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 5:02 am GMT

    haha what a idiot. yeh lets go sue sony for $800 and see who wins. the court costs would have been more than $800 anyway

  • MonkeySeeker

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 4:55 am GMT

    @kus3pt No amount of research would have told him that Sony would remove a feature from the system at some point in the future.

  • Jebril posted Sep 2, 2010 1:36 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    Jebril

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 1:36 am GMT (hide)

    If Sony removed the music player or your web browser or HD support I think you people would understand then, just cuz you guise haven't used the 'Other OS' feature doesn't mean other people haven't been using it. It is a very useful feature, in fact probably the most useful feature on the PS3 believe it or not, since Linux is the most powerful OS currently in existence.

  • Jebril

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 1:36 am GMT

    What Sony did is illegal if most people don't understand this yet, I can't sell you something with set features and then remove it cuz someone figured out how to break the law with one of those features.

    That's like if I sell you a car with AC and someone turns the AC into a flamethrower, does that mean everyone will use it as a flamethrower and kill people with it? No, some people want some cold air while they drive.

    As for the argument get a computer, dumb argument, you can't access the same hardware from a computer that you can with the PS3, if people forgot this is one of the features advertised ON THE BOX AND SITE at launch.

    They removed the feature cuz Geohot ran his mouth saying he hacked the PS3 using this feature...even though he actually didn't and was just running his mouth. However hacking a system is not illegal, nor is using Linux, pirating games is. Sony doesn't understand that though, the correlation they made from Linux to pirating is ridiculous. Again what Sony has done is illegal, you did not LEASE the PS3 you have now, you PURCHASED it along with the set features promised. When a feature is removed then this is not the product you have originally purchased thus you should be allowed a refund IMO. That is what this person was suing for, a refund to the product he no longer has.

  • Trainz2006_fan

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 12:43 am GMT

    Seriously $800!? Why didnt he just sell it and buy a netbook or something?

  • kus3pt posted Sep 2, 2010 12:23 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    kus3pt

    Posted Sep 2, 2010 12:23 am GMT (hide)

    i dont see the point in sueing sony....CLEARLY its this michael guys fault for not researching thoroughly before making a purchase..... :S

    who agrees? as consumers...we should ask shop assistance and do a little research before purchasing a product especially one that is quite $$ like a ps3 :S

  • Wuflungdung

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 11:56 pm GMT

    @Barighm

    but if sony would have given some compensation, like credit to peoples accounts that owned an old ps3, even something like $30 everyone would have been happy, its just they went about it that pissed most people off.

  • Barighm

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 11:32 pm GMT

    Basically, you may use your PS3 as a computer by using Linux, but seeing as how this means you can now find ways to cheat and ultimately ruin the gaming experiences of others, or create software for others to do so, we'd prefer you can't play online anymore; otherwise, you probably aren't using your PS3 as a computer anyway and this doesn't affect you. Sounds like a fair deal to me. It's unfortunate some people feel they wasted money, but let's face it, they should understand that Sony is trying to stop a major source of cheating before it started. Yeah, you lost some money. Join the club. Everyone gets ripped at some point in life. Deal witl it.

  • shani_boy101

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 11:12 pm GMT

    This guy fails from the get go. Why would you ask for only $800? the court fees and lawyer fees are going to cost multiple time that amount.

  • Wuflungdung

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 11:07 pm GMT

    @paperwarior17

    no when the ps3 first came out in australia it was over $1,000, they still sell for about $600 so $800 is pretty normal price for a ps3.

  • ColdfireTrilogy

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 10:25 pm GMT

    @Reiken37 its more like buying a pickup truck because it has both 2 wheel drive and 4 wheel drive. Then suddenly later the company comes and offers to either lock the pickup truck off the road (ps3 no PSN if not updating) or allow them to remove the 4 wheel drive feature, one of the reasons your bought the truck in the first place. Some not all (but does it matter, even if its only 2k people) people bought the PS3 to use not only the PS3 for gaming but also for OtherOS ... to suddenly be told either you cant play online or your cant have OtherOS is like a retro removal of an integral feature you originally purchased the console FOR.

  • paperwarior17

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 10:01 pm GMT

    @Nintendo_Man
    And an Other-OS-capable PS3 would have been less than that.

  • paperwarior17

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 10:00 pm GMT

    Now that this feature is gone, I kind of wish I could have tried it. I'm sure a PS3 has better specs than my laptop.

  • Reiken37 posted Sep 1, 2010 9:55 pm GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    Reiken37

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 9:55 pm GMT (hide)

    So... did he actaully expect to win this, what laws does it violate to make it impossible to install Linux on a game console that the company owns. It's like saying "Well, Windows is now making a firewall that blocks my virus, I think I'm going to sue them today."

  • Wuflungdung

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 9:23 pm GMT

    @ Nintendo_Man

    he would have just taken them to small claims court

  • zzamaro

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 9:13 pm GMT

    "he thought the removal of the Other OS feature as a result of the firmware upgrade was an April Fool's joke"

    EPIC

  • supdotcom

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 9:01 pm GMT

    Didn't really care for the other os feature. there's something called a computer if you want to use an os.

  • tbag05

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 8:47 pm GMT

    and yet again our fantastic legal system has no idea about technical problems or how to deal with them.

  • Nintendo_Man

    Posted Sep 1, 2010 8:35 pm GMT

    He wanted $800 but the court/solicitor fees alone would be more than that.

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!