License agreement is only readable after purchasing the device. Now, I may be mistaken here but legally doesn't that mean it's not worth a bean? I'm pretty sure the EULAs of games at least have been challenge by this.

Personally I think Sony lost all right to preach about how people use their product when they removed Linux from the PS3. That's not why I personally bought a PS3 but for some it was a big factor and they didn't even offer refunds on withdrawing such a large piece of functionality. Imagine Bill Gates came to your house and demanded you only use Windows on your pc. I'd be so appalled I might not even offer him a cup of tea.

So......I'm confused..... 

This guy wants his "ownership" of the hardware he buys from apple/sony/whomever to be absolute, but by the same token then shouldn't SONY have the right to complete "ownership" of Sony-Online and be able to dictate TERMS under which and within which connection to same is allowed?

an old saying "........good for the goose........good for the gander....."  comes to mind............  

the Monk

Can't help but think of this. The guy who owns the game machine has the right to do whatever he wants with it, right?  So, quoting Monk, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander", should it not be true for the guy who owns the service the other guy uses? Just saying. Not taking sides but credit where credit is due.

I can agree with that more or less. Granted, I don't know all the details of the Mr. Hotz's case or what happened with him jailbreaking his system, I am reasonably sure he knew before hand that his actions would end up stopping him from using Sony's online service. As long as someone who owns any kind of gaming system wants to stay "off-line" with it, I don't honestly think there should be an issue with what that person wants to do with that system, particularly where writing your own software is concerned.

I have a friend of mine named Mikey who owns two Wii's. One he has for playing online games in multi-player. The other one he has running "Homebrew" so that he can run software on it that's not technically allowed to be used according to Nintendo's EULA. I don't know the details of what all software it exactly allows him to run, but he's told me he can now run some of his phone apps and Apple software on his Homebrew system. He's pretty smart and is more than capable of coding his own apps as well. He has a full time in the tech industry and on the side he runs a part-time business designing web-sites for people.

I can agree with your whole reply except for one line.

"And to be honest everyone who jailbreaked his box is a pirate."

That I don't agree with. Just because he jailbroke his system that does Not make him a "pirate". If you check out the article I linked to in reply #28 Donations pour in for PS3 hacker; Sony court battle continues , he clearly states (with full backing of his legal counsel no less) that "This Isn't About Piracy". His exact words which I quoted above are:

"I am an advocate against mass piracy, do not distribute anyone's copyrighted work but my own, do not take crap lying down, and am even pro-DRM in a sense," Hotz said. But, while companies like Apple have the right to lock down their iPhones at the factory, Hotz believes that consumers should be able to do what they like. "Once it's paid for and mine, I have the right to unlock it, smash it, jailbreak it, look at it, and hack on it," he wrote. "Fortunately, the courts agree with me on this point."

Now, to expand on jailbreaking not being piracy in and of its-self, many people jailbreak systems (phones mostly) so they can run perfectly legal and paid for software (or even free-ware) that simply isn't allowed by the phone's OS to be ran on it. Just "jailbreaking" something doesn't make a person a pirate. Downloading software, games or movies that should be paid for, for free, is what makes a person a "pirate". There are plenty of apps out there, like Weather Apps, GPS Apps, MP3 playing Apps, and all kinds of things out there that can't be used on some phones simply because the phone makers don't make any money off the sales of some of these apps because the apps themselves are free-ware, and that is why the phone company blocks these apps from running on their phones. The most notable one that comes to mind that I've heard of people "jailbreaking" is the iPhone.

I agree the PS3 is a Gaming Platform, but, by jailbreaking it and using your own OS there's no reason why Non-Game related Apps couldn't be ran on it, which would make it much more than purely a gaming platform.

The main reason I believe that Sony is going after Mr. Hotz is because his work does enable those people who Are Pirates to be able to create software that will allow the PS3 to be emulated on PCs or so that a modified PS3 can run pirated games. It also allows people who want to use third-party game cheating software like "Aim Bots" to cheat at online multi-player games. Those people who do that Are Pirates and Cheaters. Just jailbreaking a system how-ever does Not make a person a "Pirate" unless they actively use it to run something that they should have otherwise paid for.

When Sony no longer feels like living by the terms of their license agreement they simply change it and inform you that if you wish to continue using your hardware you must comply. I can't believe people still hide behind licensing agreements as if it gives Sony carte blanche authority to do whatever they want.