Case Dismissed! Geohot and Sony Reach Unexpected Settlement

Leiva

More info here .

And Here.


Seems GeoHot has agreed to stay away from all Sony products .

tonydude

Wonder what ''Anonymous'' think about that ( idiots )

Retr0gamer

So the result of this case is that Sony doesn't win anything and Geohotz hasn't done anything illegal. Geohotz gets a slapon the wrist from Sony and probably walks away with this with some money in his pockets as well after Sony paid his legal fees.

Basically Sony didn't have a case and knew they would eventually lose it or had a very strong chance of losing it so instead of going ahead with a case that was unfavourable and had the chance of getting them in legal hot water over the illegal actions against civil liberties, they decide to give Geohotz an offer he couldn't really refuse.

So in the end it's still legal to hack your PS3, a hacker gets let off the hook and rightfully in this case and some lawyers have gotten a little richer. I'm surprised Sony didn't do what they did with Lik-Sang and blast them into the stone age with legal fees they couldn't possibly afford despite the case Sony made being totally illegal. I guess in this case the case was so flimsy that they knew Geohotz would have gotten a lawyer pro bono since winning it was assured.

amacachi

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Basically Sony didn't have a case and knew they would eventually lose it or had a very strong chance of losing it so instead of going ahead with a case that was unfavourable and had the chance of getting them in legal hot water over the illegal actions against civil liberties, they decide to give Geohotz an offer he couldn't really refuse.

Well if he were as confident as you are I don't know why he didn't go to court rather than take the slap on the wrist and really show them up.

Retr0gamer

amacachi wrote: »

Well if he were as confident as you are I don't know why he didn't go to court rather than take the slap on the wrist and really show them up.

Because he'd be in court for years and might have to pay legal fees. Not the best position to be in as a student.

As a student if Sony said, right we'll drop the case if you promise not to mess with Sony products again and as a bonus we'll pay your legal fees and a few grand extra then I think you'd have a very stupid legal team and be a very stupid person not to say '**** yeah!' to that. I know I would.

amacachi

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Because he'd be in court for years and might have to pay legal fees. Not the best position to be in as a student.

As a student if Sony said, right we'll drop the case if you promise not to mess with Sony products again and as a bonus we'll pay your legal fees and a few grand extra then I think you'd have a very stupid legal team and be a very stupid person not to say '**** yeah!' to that. I know I would.

If I could get a free lawyer like you think is possible I'd go on ahead. Appearance and interview fees would pay off any college loans as well. :pac:

Retr0gamer

The thing is you wouldn't have any time for college, the case will probably take over your life for a few months, if you are lucky. More than likely with Sony trying and failing to get a ruling that what Geohotz did was illegal (it wasn't) then it could be a few years. I'd rather my life back. Geohotz got a very good deal I'd say and Sony have won nothing with this case.

Grumpypants

The second this case came up i said Sony should have just said "crap our PS3 has been hacked, do you want a job in our security team George" Paid him a consultant fee to show them how he cracked the security and then fixed the exploit without any lawyers, court cases, terrible PR and site hacks.

Varik

@Retr0gamer

Where are you getting that they paid his legal fees, those were paid by those donation he got.

Did you even read the agreement they both have now, he can't do anything to any Sony product or help anyone else.

You can't bring a case against someone that's illegal, if the action has no ground it doesn't go to court and if the judge is unsure then it may be dismissed at a latter point. You can try to take anyone to court it just may not get there.

What he did was illegal, whether he was responsible for the actions of other due to piracy is another thing but any release of anything that circumvent copyright protection is illegal. It's illegal to hack you console in the US unless your creating the method yourself and it's fully illegal in most of the EU.

gizmo

Yea, I'm confused with your summation of events too Retr0gamer. Sony, imo, got exactly what they wanted - they shut Hotz down ensuring he now can't contribute to the NGP/XperiaPlay hacking which will undoubtedly occur, showed people that they're happy to take people to court to protect their IP and did so without the negative PR that a massive fine against Hotz would have led to. Pretty much a win win for them as far as I can see.

Varik

gizmo wrote: »

Sony, imo, got exactly what they wanted - they shut Hotz down ensuring he now can't contribute to the NGP/XperiaPlay hacking which will undoubtedly occur, showed people that they're happy to take people to court to protect their IP and did so without the negative PR that a massive fine against Hotz would have led to. Pretty much a win win for them as far as I can see.

He would have been able to hack the Xperia Play as it's a phone and exempt from that law before this, and it's not like they could have undone the release or gotten any large amount of money from him.

Retr0gamer

Varik wrote: »

@Retr0gamer

Where are you getting that they paid his legal fees, those were paid by those donation he got.

Did you even read the agreement they both have now, he can't do anything to any Sony product or help anyone else.

I haven't read the agreement and the only people that have read the agreement are Sony and Geohotz legal teams. Sony have released a statement about what was in the agreeement and of course showed it in a positive light for them but they don't have to mention what else was promised in that agreement and I can tell you with how quick this decision came out it was a lot more favourable to Geohotz.

Varik wrote: »

@You can't bring a case against someone that's illegal, if the action has no ground it doesn't go to court and if the judge is unsure then it may be dismissed at a latter point. You can try to take anyone to court it just may not get there..

Yes true and this case would have been dismissed at a much latter date unless sony convinced the judge that the law needed to be changed which is what Sony was trying to do. I'm guessing that they knew their argument wasn't strong at all and this was them backpedalling.

Varik wrote: »

What he did was illegal, whether he was responsible for the actions of other due to piracy is another thing but any release of anything that circumvent copyright protection is illegal. It's illegal to hack you console in the US unless your creating the method yourself and it's fully illegal in most of the EU.

No it wasn't illegal at all. Geohotz only released tools and hacks that lead to other people making hacks that circumvented copyright protection. I'm also pretty sure it's not illegal to circumvent copyright protection unless you actually use it to for that purpose then it becomes illegal. Geohotz didn't use or modify any copyrighted code and only used a security key that was out in the open. He didn't even have to hack the key.

gizmo wrote: »

Yea, I'm confused with your summation of events too Retr0gamer. Sony, imo, got exactly what they wanted - they shut Hotz down ensuring he now can't contribute to the NGP/XperiaPlay hacking which will undoubtedly occur, showed people that they're happy to take people to court to protect their IP and did so without the negative PR that a massive fine against Hotz would have led to. Pretty much a win win for them as far as I can see.

What Sony wanted was to make hacking of consoles illegal in the US and failed. Geohotz was tertiary to this objective. That's what this case was about, not stopping Geohotz. Geohotz was their trojan horse. They saw their argument was week so backpedalled. All they achieved was to stop 1 hacker from hacking their consoles, there's thousands more out there. They changed nothing about the law and have shown hackers that they don't have a case against them. It's a loss for Sony no matter what way they spin it.

gizmo

Varik wrote: »

He would have been able to hack the Xperia Play as it's a phone and exempt from that law before this, and it's not like they could have undone the release or gotten any large amount of money from him.

Indeed he would have been able to hack it, in fact he had even said he intended doing so. Not any more though as that will probably fall under the banner of a Sony product...unless he starts to claim that he doesn't know that Sony is part of the Sony Ericsson venture.

As for getting money out of him, well that's also true, they could have gotten the judgement and never seen a penny but that's not the point. They would, however, have looked ridiculous in the process and the entire point of the suit would have been lost in the resulting furore.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

What Sony wanted was to make hacking of consoles illegal in the US and failed. Geohotz was tertiary to this objective. That's what this case was about, not stopping Geohotz. Geohotz was their trojan horse. They saw their argument was week so backpedalled. All they achieved was to stop 1 hacker from hacking their consoles, there's thousands more out there. They changed nothing about the law and have shown hackers that they don't have a case against them. It's a loss for Sony no matter what way they spin it.

Well I certainly disagree with the above but I guess time will tell who is right or wrong here. As for the console hacking and its legality in general, one thing is for certain, this is definitely not the end of it, especially from Sony's point of view.

Retr0gamer

I wouldn't be surprised if he hacks it and gets someone else to release it.

Retr0gamer

gizmo wrote: »

Well I certainly disagree with the above but I guess time will tell who is right or wrong here. As for the console hacking and its legality in general, one thing is for certain, this is definitely not the end of it, especially from Sony's point of view.

You really think Sony were just going after the one person? Sony was taking this case to court to try and get the judge to agree that console hacking is illegal and to get the law changed. They couldn't care less about one hacker when there's thousands out there. Sure they didn't even even make a show of Geohotz, he basically got away scot free and I'll bet if the agreement documents ever get leaked it will be favourable to Geohotz and include a non disclosure agreement about what he received. Do you honestly think that Sony making such a generous offer at such an early stage of the proceding was out of the kindness of their heart? If Sony could have crushed Geohotz, I'm sure they would have. Sony are just spinning this positively, try and read between the lines and don't be a sheep.

Varik

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I haven't read the agreement and the only people that have read the agreement are Sony and Geohotz legal teams. Sony have released a statement about what was in the agreeement and of course showed it in a positive light for them but they don't have to mention what else was promised in that agreement and I can tell you with how quick this decision came out it was a lot more favourable to Geohotz.

Stuff gets out, it been seen and that why i'm asking where you're getting that extra bit.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Yes true and this case would have been dismissed at a much latter date unless sony convinced the judge that the law needed to be changed which is what Sony was trying to do. I'm guessing that they knew their argument wasn't strong at all and this was them backpedalling.

unlike the iphone proceedings this is not one where laws can be change and the decision can only be made on the current laws. Only a precedent could be set not a new law.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

No it wasn't illegal at all. Geohotz only released tools and hacks that lead to other people making hacks that circumvented copyright protection. I'm also pretty sure it's not illegal to circumvent copyright protection unless you actually use it to for that purpose then it becomes illegal. Geohotz didn't use or modify any copyrighted code and only used a security key that was out in the open. He didn't even have to hack the key.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-circumvention

Digital Millennium Copyright Act

"No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title"

"The Act defines what it means in Section 1201(a)(3):
(3) As used in this subsection—

(A) to 「circumvent a technological measure」 means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and

(B) a technological measure 「effectively controls access to a work」 if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work."

It is illegal to distribute circumventions regardless of there use, how liable he was for the piracy and hacking of others due to his work was up for debate but under that he was guilty. He release a cfw which even if he did not make every part of it he did distribute it.

gizmo

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You really think Sony were just going after the one person? Sony was taking this case to court to try and get the judge to agree that console hacking is illegal and to get the law changed. They couldn't care less about one hacker when there's thousands out there. Sure they didn't even even make a show of Geohotz, he basically got away scot free and I'll bet if the agreement documents ever get leaked it will be favourable to Geohotz and include a non disclosure agreement about what he received. Do you honestly think that Sony making such a generous offer at such an early stage of the proceding was out of the kindness of their heart? If Sony could have crushed Geohotz, I'm sure they would have. Sony are just spinning this positively, try and read between the lines and don't be a sheep.

Yes and no. He was, as we all know, not the only one working on the PS3 hacking but ever wonder why it was Hotz who publicly published the Metldr key and not Fail0verflow? In doing so he became the face of the hacking and it made perfect sense for Sony to go after him. They didn't need, in this case at least, to get the law changed, they only needed to show that they're not afraid to go after individuals who publish such work.

Many of the details of the agreement have been leaked, not all I'm sure but they do shed more light on what went down. As I said above, this is only the first step in the console hacking saga and judging by the terms used in the agreement above, it's not the last time we'll hear the words "unauthorized access".

As for crushing him, they could have done that without going for an all-out win, as others have pointed out they could have simply let him bleed dry via legal fees but that would have been terrible PR for them when they can get nearly everything they wanted this way.

Retr0gamer

gizmo wrote: »

They didn't need, in this case at least, to get the law changed, they only needed to show that they're not afraid to go after individuals who publish such work.

It's not much of a threat to other hackers though. It's basically, mess with us and we'll let you off, no fines of criminal charges. If they had a better case I'm sure they would have made Geohotz gize up some of his colleagues? You don't see the american music record labels going so soft for lesser crimes?

gizmo

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's not much of a threat to other hackers though. It's basically, mess with us and we'll let you off, no fines of criminal charges. If they had a better case I'm sure they would have made Geohotz gize up some of his colleagues? You don't see the american music record labels going so soft for lesser crimes?

I'm not sure about them letting him off, they knew they couldn't get much money out of him so they got the next best thing, they "ensured" he couldn't contribute to the hacking efforts on the rest of their platforms. Sure there are plenty of other hackers out there as you pointed out, but at least now, from their perspective, there's one less of them.

As for the record labels, you certainly don't see them going soft on people, but what has that accomplished? All I see is a ton of negative publicity and a public which is firmly against them. Look at the Jamie Thomas trial, after the dust had settled what had happened? She was fined over $1.5m for 24 songs which she downloaded. But when that trial is discussed, what do people talk about? Is it the over zealous RIAA? The lawyers? The absolutely insane judgement against her? Or was it the fact that she actually downloaded the music illegally?

F1ngers

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I haven't read the agreement and the only people that have read the agreement are Sony and Geohotz legal teams.

So it's safe to say that everything you said in this thread could be untrue?

Do you have a link to back up anything you have stated in this thread?

You seem to know an awful lot about US laws, but offer no links to back up what you say.

Retr0gamer

F1ngers wrote: »

So it's safe to say that everything you said in this thread could be untrue?

Do you have a link to back up anything you have stated in this thread?

You seem to know an awful lot about US laws, but offer no links to back up what you say.

I'm just trying to give a different perspective on this than the one Sony is spinning because so far that's the only side of the story we are getting and of course they are going to spin this in a positive light. The only information on the settlement has been 'leaked' by Sony. They say this is a win for them but it very obviously isn't. I'm just going by other court cases that have settled up this early and also have non disclosure agreements in them about what the other party receives out of them. If you really think a bunch of lawyers gave geohotz such a good deal out of the goodness of their hearts then you are watching too many movies. Sony haven't exactly been afraid of a bit of bad publicity either.

gizmo

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'm just trying to give a different perspective on this than the one Sony is spinning because so far that's the only side of the story we are getting and of course they are going to spin this in a positive light. The only information on the settlement has been 'leaked' by Sony. They say this is a win for them but it very obviously isn't. I'm just going by other court cases that have settled up this early and also have non disclosure agreements in them about what the other party receives out of them. If you really think a bunch of lawyers gave geohotz such a good deal out of the goodness of their hearts then you are watching too many movies. Sony haven't exactly been afraid of a bit of bad publicity either.

I don't think anyone is trying to say that the agreement reached was reached out of the goodness of their own hearts, quite the contrary I think it was extremely beneficial to them. Would they have preferred an eventual ruling that console hacking is specifically illegal? I don't doubt it, but I still think they got enough out of this that it can be considered a win.

With regards the publicity, it's also not really about publicity for them as a company, one need only look at the fact that Hotz has now jumped on the Sony boycott brigade and vowed to offer coverage of the OtherOS lawsuits as testament to that. PR wise what they have succeeded in doing is ensuring that the majority of public support still resets on the anti-hacking side rather than, for instance, the RIAA case above where public opinion has turned against those organisations and away from the fact that downloading such content is illegal.