3026
General Gaming / Re: PSN = Privacy? Security? Never!
« on: February 23, 2011, 09:55:52 PM »Sony hired him because of what he did was technically impressive. The reason it was shady was because they were basically profiting off of other people's work. Would Microsoft be happy if a company created a emulated version of Halo: Reach that worked on PlayStation 3?
While your example of Halo: Reach working on a Playstation 3 is a valid analogy to what Bleem! did and why Sony was pissed, I don't think there was anything legally shady, and I think it's a bit unfair to say they were profiting off of other people's work. If I recall correctly, you had to have a legitimate copy of the game to be able to use Bleem!, so there couldn't be any claims of piracy in this version of emulation. Sony was just pissed that someone was trying to make a way to play Playstation games without owning the console. And based on the rulings, it seems like the court system didn't see that there was anything illegal about that.
While this is an old system, I kind of see it as being analogous to if Nintendo would sue the people who make those NES/SNES combo consoles. And the only reason I could really see why Sony thought it might have a case is because Bleem! was released in 1999, which was a year before the next generation Playstation came around making the original obsolete. They could make a claim that it was causing another source of cannibalizing their Playstation 1 sales, but I'm not knowledgeable enough of the law in this case to know if that would break any sort of law.