Originally Posted by alex98uk
But once you buy a car, that is it. You don't continue to buy Ford software afterwards. Cars are made to be sold at a profit whereas consoles, to make them mainstream luxury, have to be sold at a loss leading price. It is games licensing etc... that makes up the profit and that is why it has to be protected.
But the car companies do not always make profits - GM and Chrysler went bankrupt. And you are also wrong, because if you buy a Ford, you can opt to buy Genuine Ford Parts and have your car serviced at a Ford dealership - both of which "add profit" for the company. However, you are not required to use Ford only parts for your Ford - and Ford won't be suing you for buying Monroe struts or Raybostos brake pads - nor will they sue you if you choose to rip out your seats, add a roll cage, and take the car out and bust it in a Rally. Of course, you won't get warranty service - but you are also not being sued.
So, the analogy isn't the same. If Sony/Microsoft made their profit on each console, then I would have much less sympathy, but then each console would have cost a lot, lot more to buy.
Why does it matter if they make profit or not? If they can't make money on a console, that's their problem. It's their business model that is at fault, not some hobbyist that wants to do some hardware hacking or mods. It's not like the hacker is asking for warranty repairs or anything.
Even if you follow your logic, legally, Sony suffers no damage from the hacking in question - in fact, it can entirely be demonstrated that the hacking and modding "adds interest", and thus, boosts sales of the product, and hence, is good for Sony.
And if the profit is in the software - then they should be making software that people want to purchase. It's not like this hacker was cracking the software, then selling the ripped off product and pocketing all the money.
Besides, a number of "super computers" have been constructed out of PS3s - and by Sony's logic, they have to sue all of them because the PS3 was never intended for such tasks, nor does Sony make the software for it, and hence, does not make any profit.
The only issue Sony can bring forth is that the hacking does damage to Sony or their product. Booting another OS certainly does no damage to Sony - the hacker bought the PS3 and Sony scored their money. If Sony can't turn a profit, that's Sony's problem - not some dual boot OS. Just like you are free to run Linux on an HP computer - because that does no damage to HP - though by your logic, if HP decided that the computer requires Win7 Home Premium - that is the only system you are allowed to run on it, with only the software they include, and adding even one application would result in instant lawsuits over it.