OtherOS removed in Firmware update 3.21

[cward24]

Paul,

Thank you for taking the time to read it. It would appear that timing was a major factor on why the OtherOS was removed. So I am going to wait this thing out and my 60gb PS3 on firmware 3.15 will remain in its box. The slim however will be continued to be abused with all of the firmware updates. Thanks again on letting me know about the "SpursEngine". It seems like good concept and would be cool to see in a 3D Television.

Chris

[lernatix]

Kmeaw has released AsbestOS v1.2 which enables a proper install without needing a network.

[lernatix]

Figured I'd move this, it's a bit OT.

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=7844

[aguilarojo]

I thought it would interest others in this thread that Sony itself tweeted the Master Signing key for the PS3! I thought it was worth not only the laugh but help relieve the anxiety, if not the anger, regarding what Sony has been attempting to do.

Vengeance is mine saith the Lord! Indeed, indeed!

[billb]

Nice one!

[ppietro]

I thought it would interest others in this thread that Sony itself tweeted the Master Signing key for the PS3!

I try not to be petty, but I've particularly been enjoying the schadenfreude of this.

Cheers,
Paul

[aguilarojo]

I thought it would interest others in this thread that Sony itself tweeted the Master Signing key for the PS3!

I try not to be petty, but I've particularly been enjoying the schadenfreude of this.

Cheers,
Paul

Indeed! I thought this development would be of interest here.

I don't think you or anyone else in this thread, doesn't have some basis to enjoy the "poetic justice" of what Sony has done to itself. It's almost as luscious as what happened to SCO when it was brought to their attention, in the middle of their suit against IBM, et. al., the fact that SCO did not own Unix at all! That's going back awhile!

It would be great if Sony just changed their stance and allowed the OtherOS option again. But I hope that if that doesn't happen we move forward to whatever may be possible in a creative and productive manner.

[JickJant]

Anyone familiar with this?
[LINK DELETED]

[aguilarojo]

Anyone familiar with this?
[LINK DELETED]

Briefly, once one cuts through the self-referring congratulations regarding the release expressed at the site, the blog describes the software claims to be open source machine firmware for the PS3 which can be modified by anyone for their specific uses. The assumptions and claims stated in the blog regarding the ownership of those who purchased the PS3 and the rights of these consumers to modify their PS3 to do as they wish are, in fact, misleading claims -- at least in terms of U.S. Law, as I understand it. Individuals should confer with a lawyer within their State as different States have different interpretations regarding how "ownership" is defined and what rights, if any exist, such "ownership" entails. This reality is the downside of the concept of State's rights, as these laws are not the only ones which are not consistent across State lines.

The blog also seems to confuse concepts in Federal Law which rely upon cooperating State Law to enforce them; again across the years what is enforced, or not, varies according to changing determinations in various Courts which offer occasionally contradictory decisions. Enforcement, unfortunately is not uniform across State borders. It doesn't require a legal scholar, or even a law student, to notice these distinctions. Most U.S. citizens understand what is legal in one State is illegal in another.

Although this environment makes for a legal and financial minefield, overall the States and the Federal System have been successful up until the last decade or so. Obviously one rule of law would be convenient but the U.S. system relies on the Supreme Court for that and regarding the points affecting the issues of hardware and software defined concepts and definitions of ownership and responsibility when things go wrong -- are not yet defined legally as clearly as one would wish.

There is a little known saying as ancient as caveat emptor ("buyer beware"), it is caveat lector ("lecturer beware") or in more modern phrasing "beware the speaker or lecturer". In this case, in reference to the particular blog the link connects to if anyone pursues the views there make sure that one is well within one's legal rights within one's own State. Understanding that strategy well is what may save Geohot; it is not however, a guarantee. Neither is there a guarantee that proceeding with the views of that blog, even if you can utilize the unique laws in your State to your advantage, will fully protect you from financial ruin in defending yourself.

Research the details carefully. My personal view is that the use of open source software is not enough a defense when such use violates the rights of a corporation. Remember that in U.S. Law, and the Law extant in many States, corporations are considered as individuals with the full rights available to control, maintain responsibility for, sell and distribute their products.

Remember also that open source, as defined by the GPL, doesn't promise to be effective, useful for any particular intended purpose or be free of damaging your hardware. Remember the risk, legally, is yours alone.

I'd like to highlight one more point which approaches this problem regarding Sony's firmware and the open source firmware presented as a replacement at the blog, from a different argument.

The closest analog I can think of in exploring a problem close to this which approaches proprietary v open source, is Microsoft's Office suite v OpenOffice.org. OpenOffice.org is within the YDL package list throughout various releases. However, it doesn't offer all the functionality of MS Office nor does it attempt to replace MS Office. OpenOffice.org is a reasonable replacement or substitute however for many, but not all technical office related tasks. Also every release of OpenOffice.org although it has improved doesn't ever "cross the line" into Microsoft's territory in function. Although The Register has a article discussing Microsoft's fears regarding OpenOffice.org (newly renamed/restructured as LibreOffice, there remains significant differences in how the different suites function.

Comparing MS Office v OpenOffice.org with the open source version of PS3 machine firmware v Sony's PS3 firmware is very different. The open source firmware offered at the blog aims to be a complete replacement of Sony's firmware which individuals may customize to their advantage. Just because the software offered at the blog is identified as open source doesn't mean that it may be considered the same as customizing Linux kernels which themselves are also open source. Recall that all of the Linux variants replace only themselves or can be used in lieu of commercial operating systems; they do not replace the functions of commercial systems -- instead Linux offers a more expanded options and tools of use to those with the skills to implement those advantages.

The open source software provided at the blog provided by JinkJant has only one purpose, it is intended to replace completely Sony's firmware for the PS3 which, regardless whether one likes it or not, belongs to Sony. Again although the legal issues involved are not well defined for consumers, it should be clear that Sony does have legal rights -- even if they have been silly and annoying in their decisions. The rights of consumers vary across States unfortunately. In the current scale of economic stresses, one must evaluate one's choices.

Whatever one decides, or believes, may each one choose carefully and well.

All the best...

[JickJant]

Dear aguilarojo,

thanks for the detailed explanations of the legal situation. Seems to be quite complicated in the U.S.

Cheers

[ppietro]

Sorry guys - I had to delete the link in the previous posts. So - ahem -

PLEASE DON'T POST LINKS TO ANYTHING RELATING TO CUSTOM FIRMWARE ON THIS BOARD UNLESS IT'S PURELY INFORMATIONAL ONLY!!!!! AND EVEN THEN - BE CAREFUL!!!

This Yellow Dog forum is located in the United States. As such, it is subject to the copyright protection provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (aka DMCA). Publishing any information about how to use custom firmware to bypass the PS3's built-in firmware violates the DMCA, since it violates Sony's copyrights.

We have to be very careful here - since that link had links to source code that creates modified firmware, it had to be removed - open source or not. We can not - in any way - been seen as distributing information that facilitates in the breaking of (Sony's) copyrighted software.

A news bulletin about custom firmware I think is okay - we need to know what's going on with Sony and the lawsuits as normal Linux users - but if there's enough detail in the news bulletin to facilitate PS3 firmware copyright violation, that can't be posted.

Normally, I would also lock this thread, but since there's useful, non-copyright breaking discussions in here, it can continue. Just be careful folks - please.

Cheers,
Paul

[aguilarojo]

Dear aguilarojo,

thanks for the detailed explanations of the legal situation. Seems to be quite complicated in the U.S.

Cheers

No problem!

The nuances of the Law in effect in every country I'm sure is worthy of examination as a student of human history and development no matter who one is. Some laws are silly, others archaic, and others annoying -- however as piece-meal as they may appear the intent is to protect the rights and property of individuals and business ventures individuals engage upon. The U.S. Courts have the role of working through the mountains of minutiae in determining a law's application or utility in the context of a particular situation.

As for the U.S., the independence of States and their cooperative interdependence in forming what exists as the Federal Government is unique and an interesting study all by itself. However, there are enough nuances and distinctions that it is best advised to have and acquire skilled legal counsel when making decisions which could be financially and personally exhausting due to the controversy involved, especially this particular one.

All the best...

[JickJant]

Dear Paul,

began for pardon to post a link that could create trouble. I understand your point of view.
I will stick to your remark and don't post anything related to custom firmware anymore which is more than pure information.

Cheers

[billb]

This doesn't look good re: the case for OtherOS:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/22 ... it_gutted/

“Plaintiffs must therefore either allege that Sony made some express representations as to the continued availability of that feature, or they will have to show both that there were implied representations as to continued availability and that an express warranty claim may legally proceed even where it is based in part on such implied representations."

I'm pretty sure a Sony representative made a statement regarding the continued availability of that feature...

http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/cbe-o ... 06965.html

The feature of "Install Other OS" was removed from the new
"Slim" PS3 model to focus on delivering games and other
entertainment content.

Please be assured that SCE is committed to continue
the support for previously sold models that have the
"Install Other OS" feature and that this feature will
not be disabled in future firmware releases.

[aguilarojo]

A story comparing how Microsoft and Sony treat hackers, as well as which company seems to be benefiting from the strategy appeared at Mashable. I thought it would interest everyone in this thread. By the way, I'd recommend to read through the various links available within the article to learn what Microsoft means by their making their Kinect product available to be "hacked"!

All the best...