As you probably remember, a few years back there was a huge mess when Sony Music (at the time, Sony BMG) was caught installing a rootkit via the DRM it used on CDs. That created a huge legal headache for Sony, with the company eventually agreeing to replace all those CDs. You would think that Sony, as a whole, would now be a lot more careful about such things. Yet, as TorrentFreak points out, an analysis of the new PS3 firmware suggests that there's a rootkit in there, which will allow Sony to control the PS3 device that you thought (incorrectly) that you bought. It's almost as if Sony is telling people to stop buying PS3s. Update: A lot of folks are claiming this isn't really a rootkit, and that the story has been blown out of proportion. Reading through the details suggest this is absolutely a possibility.

When you watch politicians and judges make total fools of themselves on technology issues, sometimes you wonder if there just isn't a better system overall out there. Take, for example, the already ridiculous situation in which George Hotz (Geohot) has been gagged for his basic hack of the PS3, allowing it to re-enable a feature that Sony used to include, but has since removed. Remember, if he had done this same exact thing on an iPhone, it would be allowed. But because it's a slightly larger computer that you don't carry in your pocket, it means this could lead to jailtime.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain how all of that makes any sense.

However, making the scenario even more ridiculous are the details that the judge put into the temporary restraining order. Not only is Hotz supposed to shut up, but he's also been told to turn over basically all of his computing equipment that might have included some or all of this code. As his lawyer notes, the code itself is less than 100 kb of data. It seems pretty silly to force him to turn over all of his computers and storage -- including terabytes of data -- over one little crack.

Furthermore, the judge has ordered Hotz to "retrieve the code" that has been distributed. Yes, think about that for a second. Retrieve the code. As if it were a dog that went out for a saunter. You don't "retrieve" code once it's out there on the internet. It doesn't go away. You would think that anyone alive during the whole AACS debacle would recognize the pointlessness of trying to suppress released code that is already of great public interest.

It's scenarios like these that make me wonder what the judges who make such orders (and the politicians who make such laws) are thinking (if they're thinking) when they do so. They're trying to legislate or order the impossible, and it doesn't increase respect for the law. It does exactly the opposite. When the rules are completely ridiculous and try to order the impossible, all you do is end up having everyone mock our laws and our judicial system, while doing absolutely nothing to respond to the underlying legal issues.

You would think that Sony, of all companies, would know better than to overreact to a DRM issue -- given its experience with the infamous CD rootkit a few years back. However, the company can't seem to resist making itself look foolish. Beyond seeking to gag the guy who figured out how to get around Sony's digital locks on the PS3 to re-enable the "Other OS" functionality that Sony remotely disabled, it's now sending DMCA takedowns to GitHub (and possibly others) ordering them to remove repositories of code around such cracks (found via Slashdot). I'm really curious how Sony and its lawyers could possibly think all of this is a good idea. It's not like any of these efforts will actually slow down or stop these cracks getting out there and used. In fact, all it does is call that much more attention to these hacks, and convince more people to either get involved or just to use them.

We've already noted the ridiculousness of the situation with copyright law today that makes jailbreaking your iPhone perfectly legal, but jailbreaking your computer gaming console potentially a jailable criminal offense. While some judges have noticed how ridiculous this is, it hasn't stopped console makers from going overboard.

Take, for example, Sony's reaction to a recent jailbreaking of the PS3. As you may recall, last year, Sony simply deleted a feature on the PS3 that would let users install alternative operating systems, such as Linux. This feature was used by operations such as the US Air Force to build supercomputers. Recently, a hacker by the name of George Hotz jailbroke the PS3 in order to let people bring back the "Other OS" feature that Sony had dumped.

Sony's response? To bring out the legal guns, get a restraining order against Hotz claim that he violated both the DMCA and the CFAA, and that "all circumvention technology" that Hotz used should be "impounded."

Hopefully Hotz is willing to fight this, and a court is willing to go beyond even what that last judge did, and point out that the laws, as currently written, go beyond what is Constitutional in blocking the way people can make use of their own hardware.

Back in March, we wrote about Sony's bizarre decision to delete a feature on PS3's, that would let you install other operating systems. This was an advertised feature that, while not used by most PS3 buyers, was used pretty widely and creatively. In fact, we noted in that post that the US military had used PS3s to build a supercomputer. While Sony has now been sued for this form of bait-and-switch, Ars Technica checked in on the Air Force folks who built that PS3 supercomputer, and found out that they're not particularly happy about this development. While it doesn't immediately impact them (since their PS3s aren't connected to the network and don't need the upgraded firmware that will break the Linux support), it does mean that if machines break down and replacements are needed, the Air Force could be in trouble:

"We will have to continue to use the systems we already have in hand," the lab told Ars, but "this will make it difficult to replace systems that break or fail. The refurbished PS3s also have the problem that when they come back from Sony, they have the firmware (gameOS) and it will not allow Other OS, which seems wrong. We are aware of class-action lawsuits against Sony for taking away this option on systems that use to have it."

The article also details how this wasn't just a gimmick by the Air Force, but it really was a cheap and effective way of building a supercomputer -- significantly cheaper than other options. After comparing a bunch of different solutions, they found that there were only two options for the kind of performance they wanted: the PS3 option or a Xeon-based multithreaded system. But in comparing the cost, the Xeon system would be "more than an order of magnitude greater than the PS3 technology."

You would think that Sony would know better than to piss off the US Air Force.

We recently noted how Sony decided to make their Playstation 3 game console less useful by removing the ability to run alternative operating systems. Sony wanted to retain stricter control of the hardware to battle piracy, but it's something that annoyed some hobbyists -- who'd found a number of creative uses for the feature. The decision made it clear that in the broadband age, the product you thought you purchased isn't always the product you now own -- and it raised the question whether products made less useful post purchase demand a refund. One UK customer thought so, using a UK consumer protection law to force Amazon to give him a 20% rebate. At the time, we noted how a class action lawsuit seemed likely in the U.S., and right on cue -- Sony's now facing a lawsuit:

"The suit claims that the "Install Other OS" function was "extremely valuable." According to the suit, the plaintiff he has not yet installed the latest firmware update so that he can continue to use the Other OS feature. The suit also notes that PS3 owners who choose not to update their firmware cannot access the PlayStation Network, play PS3 games online, nor can they play new games or Blu-ray videos that require firmware 3.21."

So with the recent Avatar DRM flap in mind, users not only lose useful functionality, but if they refuse to update their system with the latest firmware -- they also lose the ability to go online, or watch/play the latest Blu-Ray titles or games. In other words, if you refuse a hardware downgrade designed to battle piracy (which punishes paying customers), your PS3 console becomes progressively less useful. So what exactly is a Playstation 3 worth if it can't be used to do anything?

It used to be when you bought a product, you owned it. Simple, right? And once you owned it, you could do what you want with it? But, lately, thanks to digital products and an always connected world, many companies have changed things around -- so the products you thought you owned, you actually rent. But, it can go even further than that, where a product you thought you owned can be irrevocably changed without your permission, long after you bought it. Take, for example, the recent story of Sony deleting a feature on the PS3 that let users (not owners, apparently) install other operating systems, such as Linux. It's going away. Sony announced that when the next PS3 firmware upgrade comes along, it'll wipe out this feature, whether you used it or not. The only way to avoid that is not to upgrade, but that will also greatly limit what you can do with your PS3.

So why is Sony retroactively taking away a feature that it sold to people? Apparently because some people might possibly use it in a way that Sony didn't intend. The EFF has the whole backstory:

The backstory is that Sony provided the Other OS feature in order to support IBM's Cell Project, which produced the PS3's CPU and made it practical to use PS3 consoles as compute nodes for a scientific supercomputer. The U.S. Army did just that, buying more than 2,000 PS3s to build a supercomputer. Lots of hobbyists also made use of the Other OS feature, using it to write their own games and creatively repurpose their PS3s.

Recently, however, a hobbyist named Geohot announced that he was able to use the Other OS feature along with a bit of soldering in a manner that gave him more control over the PS3 hardware than Sony had intended. Sony responded with the "upgrade" that removes the Other OS feature.

This is, frankly, obnoxious -- and I half wonder if there will be a lawsuit over this. People were sold one thing and then Sony retroactively decided to take away a feature that some found quite useful However, I imagine that in a world of interconnected devices, stories like this are going to become more common. Isn't it time that someone created a movement to highlight what products you actually own once you've bought them?

I have to admit that this story seems so bizarre that I'm not quite sure I believe it. A bunch of folks have been submitting the news that the Nigerian government is apparently so upset by a Sony Playstation commercial that it's demanding an apology from Sony for allegedly "portraying Nigeria as a home of fraud where its citizens hardly do genuine business." Must be quite a commercial right? The only problem is that the commercial does no such thing: It just mentions, in passing, as a part of the joke of the commercial that "You can't believe everything you read on the Internet. Otherwise I'd be a Nigerian millionaire by now." I don't quite see how that implies that Nigerian citizens hardly do genuine business. It just suggests that there are Nigerian scammers out there -- which is hardly something the government can credibly deny. Hell, there are popular songs in Nigeria all about fleecing dumb Americans in online scams. Honestly, the whole complaint from the Nigerian gov't seems so odd, that it feels like part of Sony's marketing campaign...

Earlier this year, there was an uproar when Hulu and Boxee got into a back and forth "blocking" of Hulu content on Boxee (with Boxee posting workarounds for every Hulu block) at the request of Hulu's content partners, who were worried about pissing off cable companies. The whole thing was silly. Boxee wasn't doing anything illegal or wrong. It just provides a specialized video web browser. Today, already, anyone who can hook up a computer to a TV can access Hulu on their TV using a regular browser. The only difference with Boxee was that it was a better browser for the TV. It's hard to see why that should be blocked. Then, a few weeks ago, the same thing happened with the PS3 suddenly being blocked from displaying Hulu content as well. Not surprisingly, Hulu has now admitted basically the same thing: it came under pressure from content partners. Hulu is (again) reasonably apologetic and open and honest about the situation, but again it raises questions about whether or not Hulu can really survive as it serves two masters, one of whom is so backwards looking it thinks that pissing off consumers who are doing something completely legal is a good business strategy.

Sony's attempts at a turnaround have been pretty slowgoing, but their latest quarterly results -- showing profits double last year's -- generated some enthusiasm that things were on the right track. Although some parts of the company's business have picked up, the biggest factor in the increased profits was a weakening yen, which boosted the value of overseas sales. Investors shouldn't discount the currency effect, but they do have some other reasons to be upbeat: the company's movie unit is doing well, and its Sony Ericsson mobile phone joint venture continues to grow its market share. While the electronic business overall is looking healthier, Sony's TV unit is still underperforming, and the gaming business is still in the can. Sony's video-game unit boosted its sales by 60 percent over the same quarter last year, which is great, except that its losses grew as well, partly because it's still selling the PS3 for less than it costs to build. The game unit got a new boss a little while ago, but it doesn't yet look like he's making a lot of progress. Sony announced a price cut for the US on one PS3 model, and also said it will deliver a new high-end version and a load of new games. But it's hard to see those small changes making a big difference in terms of getting the mass market to buy into the PS3, particularly when you contrast Sony's strategy to that of Nintendo, whose business is booming. Still, Sony's problems are far from solved -- but it is showing some signs of life.