I would think that should be pretty much as good of a proof as they will ever get. There isn't going to be many people who have a picture of their PS3 running yellow dog from before the update that includes a visible serial number and a receipt for the same serial number :)
yep, this is me actually. I bought the console specifically because of the Other O.S. feature, but they announced this "update" before I had a chance to use it, so I decided not to since I still wanted the other advertised features as well.
You can keep your 9$. Sony scammed me, lesson learned.
Re: 'Sacrifices must be made. Your rights for instance, those have got to go'
More likely you will end up with an even less satisfying result... Tax payers are punished paying out big bucks, no one involved is held accountable, lip service is provided to change (if you are lucky) and policies remain firmly in place.
Canada has several such laws. I assume stored means stored, just like it does with any/all computering legistlation and doesn't apply to temporary RAM / other pedantic semantic "this is technically storage" crap. Generally the laws here usually include the same restrictions for accessing the data as well anyway though.
Basically it means your government can't have laws that protects it's citizens private data from foreign governments that don't have decent privacy considerations.
"prohibits them from requiring local storage of data " Also has some pretty significant privacy implications, considering there is nothing preventing countries from having laws requiring their Gov't has access to all that data
Whether or not they have the right to charge for fair use, I'm at a bit of a loss as to how they have the opportunity. How exactly are they preventing people from quoting them in order to exact payment first? It's not really clear in the article as far as I could tell.
There is a slight error in the statement: "It is important to note that the lost sales estimated in this report represent hypothetical additional revenue that the recorded music sector would have earned, had infringement not taken place"
They mean the revenue they would have earned not just had the infringement not taken place, but had it been substituted with the purchase of a non-infringing copy. That's a massive difference.