Law Firms defend Sony's Accusations against George Hotz

[wraggster]

News via http://psx-scene.com/forums/f6/law-f...ge-hotz-75976/

Geohot's law firm has issued a press release vowing to fight Sony tooth-and-nail in defense of their client.

Quote:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
January 14, 2011

Law Firms defend Sony's Accusations against George Hotz

San Francisco, California – Today, attorneys Stewart Kellar and Yasha Heidari announced they intend to vigorously defend the baseless accusations asserted by Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC (“Sony”) against Mr. George Hotz.

“Make no mistake,” Stewart Kellar, intellectual property attorney and e-ttorney at law™ stated, “this case is not about Sony attempting to protect its intellectual property or otherwise seek bona fide relief from the court. Rather, it's an attempt from Sony to send a message that any individual using Sony hardware in a way Sony does not deem appropriate will result in harsh legal consequences from a multi-billion dollar company, irrespective of any legal basis or authority for such action.”

Sony recently filed suit against a number of individuals, including Mr. Hotz, a 21-year-old computer prodigy who is well-known for his accomplishments and innovations in the field of phone and computer development, such as for creating the ability to provide for iPhone interoperability between various cellular network carriers. Citing unfounded concerns and a dubious legal basis for jurisdiction, Sony seeks relief from the Court due to Mr. Hotz re-enabling core functionality of the Playstation 3.

“I think it is quite telling that Sony, who is legally required to provide notice to Mr. Hotz before seeking any special relief with the Court, decided to e-mail Mr. Hotz a copy of their motion at 7 p.m. when a hearing was scheduled for the next morning at 9 a.m. in California, while Mr. Hotz does not even live in California. Sony is seeking various unreasonable relief, such as seizing Mr. Hotz's personal property and computers. Luckily, the Court postponed the hearing,” said Yasha Heidari, Esq., managing partner at Heidari Power Law Group, LLC.

Mr. Kellar added, “This case not only has profound implications for the parties involved, but it also implicates core property rights for every consumer out there.” Recently in April of 2010, citing the fact that the Playstation 3's terms and conditions reserve the right to modify the PS3's settings and features, Sony inexplicably issued an “upgrade” that removes the end user's ability to utilize the PS3's OtherOS functionality. Consumer familiar with the PS3 know that OtherOS is a powerful tool that is critical in allowing its users to utilize the PS3 as a personal computer. Sony had previously touted the PS3's OtherOS as a major selling point and feature that would receive Sony's continued support. Yet, despite this, Sony took the position that consumers must either choose to upgrade the PS3 to play newer game titles and lose OtherOS support, or ignore the update to keep OtherOS but be prohibited from playing newer titles.

Mr. Heidari stated, “While most companies issue firmware upgrades to increase a product's abilities over its life cycle, Sony has taken the unacceptable and draconian approach of decreasing the PS3's capabilities by actually destroying a core feature of the PS3. Imagine taking in your car for an oil change and having the manufacturer remove your car's air conditioner, radio, and half its horsepower because of fears that other hypothetical individuals might abuse their vehicles. It just doesn't make any sense, and it's a slap in the face to the consumers that put their support behind the product.” Mr. Kellar proclaimed, “This case rests on Sony's misguided belief that it has the unfettered ability to control how consumers use the products they legitimately purchase.”

Both attorneys agree that Sony's interpretation of the law is quite troubling. The attorneys state they hope the judge will deny Sony's motion, but regardless of how the judge rules, they fully intend to defend Mr. Hotz in this action, which has wide-spread implications for consumers globally.

[pkmaximum]

There isn't much to add here, I completey agree; SONY should withdraw from this case and restore functionality that was unjustly taken from consumers who invested their money into the PS3.

I should also add, hoping someone reads this post, I would recommend using Aristotle & Thomas Aquinas's views to defend Hotz actions; in which the interior and exterior acts of this situation were both good. The intentions in which Geo Hot committed his action were towards a noble cause, restoring core functionality of the PS3. The end in which he achieved was the release to the public of extending the limitations of their hardware for the happiness of others. Are we not allowed to buy after Market parts for our vehicles do get features that the stock manufacture don't provide? Can our parents prevent us from being who we want to be (assuming you're not a child)? Can the constitution not be made against Britain's wishes? The logistics of SONY's views are troubling, and sadly they're not alone in their mode of thinking. I believe it was not too long ago where Apple filed a court motion order against the legality of jailbreaking/unlocking "their" iDevices. Too what extent do the things we purchase we actually own?

I want to help in this trial and support Geo Hot in any way I can. If for some reason Geo Hotz' layers or Geo Hot himself reads this, contact me @ [email protected] I will help in anyway I'm capable.

[Fonixx]

Sony's knowingly fighting this losing battle to hopefully scare the bejesus out of other hackers, but like a lot of what they do this is probably just gonna backfire on them, because when Sony lose big style on this people will realise their bark is far worse than their bite, and also wonder how such a big pussy can bark anyway.