wraggster
September 20th, 2010, 00:29
The attorneys representing Sony Computer Entertainment America have responded to a class action complaint filed against the company for removing the other 'Other OS' feature from the PlayStation 3.
Sony removed the feature in April due to potential security issues as part of PS3 firmware update v3.21. Seven total class action lawsuits were filed against the company soon after, and in July, a judge ruled to consolidate all the lawsuits into one complaint.
Last week, however, Sony's attorneys filed a motion for the court to strike the class allegations and to dismiss the case.
Sony contends the plaintiffs' claims that the company advertised the Other OS feature the later removed it - depriving PS3 users of software features - is contradicted by the explicit terms stated in SCEA's written express warranty, the System Software License Agreement and the PSN Terms of Service.
"These contracts specifically provide PS3 purchasers with a license, not an ownership interest, in the software and in the use of the PSN, and provide that SCEA has the right to disable or alter software features or terminate or limit access to the PSN, including by issuing firmware updates," the motion reads. "Plaintiffs therefore cannot succeed in any of their claims because SCEA's alleged alteration/disablement of PS3 features including the Other OS, was entirely proper and authorized."
Sony's motion also said the complaint fails to provide any mass media advertising campaign, statements by SCEA, or PS3 packaging that referenced the 'Other OS' feature.
"Instead, it includes a mix of quotes drawn from obscure articles and unrelated third party publications, and a smattering of out of context and incomplete references to a few pages of SCEA's website and user manual," Sony said.
Sony went on to list several reasons why the court should strike the class allegations from the complaint and pointed to the fact all plaintiffs did not use the Other OS feature in the same manner, if at all.
"One plaintiff never installed Linux during the more than two years he owned his PS3; two plaintiffs used the Other OS feature only to do things equally available through the PS3 native operating system; one plaintiff supposedly also played Linux-specific games; and the last plaintiff used Linux extensively, including for electronic mail, word processing, spreadsheet software, and other 'productivity applications.'"
Sony later referenced various message board postings from PS3 owners admitting they had "no idea that the PS3 even had an Other OS function or Linux functionality."
The company also cited numerous postings from owners who stated they "did not purchase the PS3 because of the Other OS feature and did not use it" and others saying they downloaded the update because "they did not care about the Other OS feature."
Both parties will be heard before a judge on November 4, 2010. The plaintiffs, meanwhile, have requested that Sony turn over internal documents regarding the decision to remove the 'Other OS' feature.
"We are in the process of reviewing Sony's Motions to Dismiss and to Strike," a representative from the interim co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs told IGN. "These types of motions are fairly common at this stage of the litigation and we believe we have strong arguments for why they should be denied."
"We plan on vigorously opposing these motions and we hope to have them decided in November. In the meantime, we have requested that Sony turn over its internal documents about why the 'Other OS' feature was removed and we look forward to reviewing those materials."
http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/112/1121709p1.html
Sony removed the feature in April due to potential security issues as part of PS3 firmware update v3.21. Seven total class action lawsuits were filed against the company soon after, and in July, a judge ruled to consolidate all the lawsuits into one complaint.
Last week, however, Sony's attorneys filed a motion for the court to strike the class allegations and to dismiss the case.
Sony contends the plaintiffs' claims that the company advertised the Other OS feature the later removed it - depriving PS3 users of software features - is contradicted by the explicit terms stated in SCEA's written express warranty, the System Software License Agreement and the PSN Terms of Service.
"These contracts specifically provide PS3 purchasers with a license, not an ownership interest, in the software and in the use of the PSN, and provide that SCEA has the right to disable or alter software features or terminate or limit access to the PSN, including by issuing firmware updates," the motion reads. "Plaintiffs therefore cannot succeed in any of their claims because SCEA's alleged alteration/disablement of PS3 features including the Other OS, was entirely proper and authorized."
Sony's motion also said the complaint fails to provide any mass media advertising campaign, statements by SCEA, or PS3 packaging that referenced the 'Other OS' feature.
"Instead, it includes a mix of quotes drawn from obscure articles and unrelated third party publications, and a smattering of out of context and incomplete references to a few pages of SCEA's website and user manual," Sony said.
Sony went on to list several reasons why the court should strike the class allegations from the complaint and pointed to the fact all plaintiffs did not use the Other OS feature in the same manner, if at all.
"One plaintiff never installed Linux during the more than two years he owned his PS3; two plaintiffs used the Other OS feature only to do things equally available through the PS3 native operating system; one plaintiff supposedly also played Linux-specific games; and the last plaintiff used Linux extensively, including for electronic mail, word processing, spreadsheet software, and other 'productivity applications.'"
Sony later referenced various message board postings from PS3 owners admitting they had "no idea that the PS3 even had an Other OS function or Linux functionality."
The company also cited numerous postings from owners who stated they "did not purchase the PS3 because of the Other OS feature and did not use it" and others saying they downloaded the update because "they did not care about the Other OS feature."
Both parties will be heard before a judge on November 4, 2010. The plaintiffs, meanwhile, have requested that Sony turn over internal documents regarding the decision to remove the 'Other OS' feature.
"We are in the process of reviewing Sony's Motions to Dismiss and to Strike," a representative from the interim co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs told IGN. "These types of motions are fairly common at this stage of the litigation and we believe we have strong arguments for why they should be denied."
"We plan on vigorously opposing these motions and we hope to have them decided in November. In the meantime, we have requested that Sony turn over its internal documents about why the 'Other OS' feature was removed and we look forward to reviewing those materials."
http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/112/1121709p1.html