PS4 News on Facebook! PS4 News on Twitter! PS4 News on YouTube! PS4 News RSS Feed!

Home PS4 News - Latest PlayStation 4 and PS3 News

April 28, 2010 // 9:42 pm - Update #4: Forum user phoenixfire425 has posted a response he received from his attorney stating that the Class Action Law Suit has finally been approved in regards to the PS3's OtherOS removal.

Update #3: IGN now reports of a fourth lawsuit (PDF) from Keith Wright of San Diego for removing the "Other OS" feature from the PlayStation 3, a fifth lawsuit (PDF) which demands a jury trial, a sixth lawsuit (PDF) which includes user comments from the US and EU Playstation Blog, IGN, ArsTechnica and Facebook, and even a seventh lawsuit from Michael Trebilcock of Australia.

Update #2: IGN now reports that two more lawsuits have since been filed against Sony for the removal of OtherOS, both Antal Herz and Todd Densmore (PDF) and Jason Baker, Sean Bosquett, Frank Bachman, Paul Graham and Paul Vannatta (PDF) versus Sony Computer Entertainment America.

Update: Rebecca Coll, the attorney from the firm Meiselman, Denlea, Packman, Carton & Eberz P.C. who filed the suit against Sony has now explained (details below) to IGN what the PS3 Class Action Lawsuit means for the average consumer.

On April 27, 2010 Anthony Ventura of California represented by Rebecca Coll filed a class action lawsuit with the San Francisco office of California's Northern District Court against Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc for the PS3 3.21 Firmware update that removed OtherOS functionality.

Needless to say, this comes as no surprise and isn't the first time Sony has been targeted with a class action suit over their PlayStation 3 entertainment system.

To quote: "This class action seeks redress for Sony's deliberate removal of valuable functions in one, with the availability of the PlayStation 3 video game console was advertised originally.

This distance is only a fraction of the contract between Sony and its customers and a breach of good faith is not it also means an unfair and deceptive trade practices at the expense of millions of unsuspecting consumers."


1. 1st Breach of Contract
2. 2nd Fraction of good faith
3. 3rd Unjust Enrichment
4. 4th Violation of the California Unfair Competition Law
5. 5th Violation of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act

Coll said it's entirely too early in the case to predict when this might go to trial. But she said everyone who purchased a PS3 can be included.

We are going to ask the court to let us proceed as a nationwide class action. If the court agrees, the court will 'define the class,'" she told IGN. "Right now, our proposed 'class definition' includes everybody in the country who bought the PS3 from the time of launch until March 27, 2010."

"This class definition reflects, in part, that Sony commanded a much higher price for the gaming console based on the functionality of the 'Other OS' feature at the time of its launch and trumpeted the 'Other OS' feature in its subsequent marketing," she explained. "As a result, consumers paid much more for a product than they should otherwise have been charged now that Sony has disabled the 'Other OS' feature."

"If the court adopts this definition, then everyone fitting within that definition would automatically be included in the class action, unless they choose to 'opt out,'" she added.

Coll explained that notifications of the class action will then be sent to PS3 owners through various ways.

"Once the court defines the class, the court will order that the 'class' receive notice of the action," she said. "Notice methods vary. Sometimes notice is by publication in newspapers, by mail, by email, through internet postings, or any combination of those" she said. "The notice will advise class members how long they have to 'opt out' of the class. Sometimes, if there is a settlement at or before the time the class is certified, this 'class notice' also lets people know how they can file a claim, and tells people the deadline to file their claims."

"In other words, people technically do not need to do anything to 'sign on' to the lawsuit–if they fit within the class definition then they are automatically part of it unless they affirmatively ask to be let out of it after the class is certified," she explained.

Jason Baker, Sean Bosquett, Frank Bachman, Paul Graham and Paul Vannatta, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated V Sony Computer Entertainment America, LLC successor to Sony Computer Entertainment America, INC filed on April 30, 2010.

Nature Of Action

1. Sony Computer Entertainment America, LLC successor to Sony Computer Entertainment America, INC ("Sony") marketed and sold its Playstation3 video games console ("PS3") as including valuable functions, such as the "Other OS feature, unified online gaming service, Playstation Network, multimedia capabilities and Blu-Ray technology. The PS3 could run a Linux operating system that transforms the PS3 into a home computer. Because of such exception features, the PS3 was the most expensive gaming console on the market when launched in 2006.

2. Sony has now intentionally disabled valuable functions of the PS3 for which consumers paid a premium price over other gaming consoles. This retroactive cripplingPS3 functionality breaches the contract between Sony and its PS3 customers, breaches the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violates the California Consumers legal Remedies Act and Unfair Competition Law.

3. Plaintiffs seek to represent a class of all persons in the United States who purchased a PS3 during the period beginning November 17, 2006 through March 27, 2010, and still owned their PS3 as of March 27 2010 ("Class"). Plaintiffs seek to recover for themselves and each Class member compensatory damages, restitution, injunctive relief, attorneys fees and the costs of this suit.

Todd Densmore and Antal Herz V Sony Computer Entertainment America, INC, a Delaware corporation filed on May 5, 2010.

Nature Of Action

1. Since Sony introduced the Playstation 3 ("PS3") in 2006, one of its advertised features included the "Install Other OS" function that allowed users to install and run other operating systems such as Linux.

2. On April 1, 2010 Sony released a PS3 firmware update version 3.21 ("Firmware 3.21") for the specific purpose of disabling the "install Other OS" function, PS3 users who do not install Firmware 3.21 lose the ability to sign on to the Playstation network ("PSN"), play online games, access other online features, and play PS3 games or Blu-Ray discs that require Firmware 3.21 or higher

3. Defendant intentionally accessed PS3 systems and intentionally transmitted Firmware 3.21 with the knowledge and intent of disabling its advertised "Install Other OS" function.

4. Plaintiffs paid for PS3 features and functions that defendant has rendered inoperable as a result of Firmware 3.21.

5. Defendants actions have resulted in injury in fact and lost money or property plaintiffs. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the proposed Class (as defined in paragraph 33 below), hereby seek damages and other relief the court deems just.

As expected, Sony representatives told IGN the company does not comment on pending litigation.

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Sony for PS3 3.21 Update

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and drop by the PS3 Hacks and PS3 CFW forums for the latest PlayStation 3 scene and PS4 Hacks & JailBreak updates with PlayStation 4 homebrew.

#31 - tragedy - June 6, 2010 // 2:08 pm
tragedy's Avatar
Quote Originally Posted by psp4lifeee View Post
Sony refunding all PS3 owners for removing an advertised feature

If this is true, Sony will surely decide it's cheaper to reinstate otheros than pay 50% back, so I'm sure we'll see an appeal from them soon.

Either way, it's awesome.

#30 - tragedy - June 6, 2010 // 2:06 pm
tragedy's Avatar
Quote Originally Posted by Madthemez View Post
Feature removal by Sony has 'Nothing' to do with security issues or preventing hacking... It's just one more non essential feature that Sony can remove from the system & make it a few $/ £ cheaper to manufacture in future.

This makes no sense. Current retail units didn't have other OS anyway. Removing it from existing fat PS3s doesn't make any difference to cost of manufacture.

#29 - psp4lifeee - June 6, 2010 // 10:34 am
psp4lifeee's Avatar
Sony refunding all PS3 owners for removing an advertised feature

June 6 2010
In the end of April the firm had filed a class action lawsuit against Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc., for Sony's decision to force users of its Playstation 3 console to either install an update that would disable the console's "Other OS" feature or lose the ability to play games with other users in the network. Because Sony failed to defend it's intentions in court, the judge decided that Sony will have to pay every PS3 owner, who bought his PS3 before March 27, 2010, a refund of 50% of the price when purchased.

The firm thanks all the PS3 owners who mailed, which made our voice even louder. PS3 owners that haven't mailed us should make contact with Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc to claim their refund. An European firm will also file a class action law suit against Sony Computer Entertainment Europe, Inc. We hope that we've done the PS3 owners a service. We are very glad as this is once of the biggest victory's in our firm's history.

Sony will also be at handing out refunds at "E3", a large video-gaming event, to all registered PS3 owners. A new article will be posted very soon on how Sony will be handling this matter.

#28 - Madthemez - June 5, 2010 // 9:08 am
Madthemez's Avatar
Feature removal by Sony has 'Nothing' to do with security issues or preventing hacking... It's just one more non essential feature that Sony can remove from the system & make it a few $/ £ cheaper to manufacture in future.

The U.K. is constantly being ripped by sony, PS2 emulation, other OS, 2nd HDMI ports. If it lowers the manufacture price a little i wouldn't be surprised if they stopped CD music playback & allowed only MP3 DLC

#27 - Carbon0x - May 31, 2010 // 1:05 pm
Carbon0x's Avatar
I hope Sony loses this, they messed up big time.

#26 - Gunner54 - May 31, 2010 // 11:33 am
Gunner54's Avatar
I dont think sony should of removed that feature. Because the real hackers just dont have to update... simple as. The people that wont be hacking and want to use linux WILL update. So really Hackers STILL WIN and Consumers lose.

#25 - HirotoSama - May 31, 2010 // 12:44 am
HirotoSama's Avatar
Quote Originally Posted by wormie123 View Post
Why is it if people get a sniff at money they go running trying to gun them down.(1) It's their console their choice if it will reduce or attempt to reduce piracy then it's a fair option.(2) Fair enough people who are not involved in piracy get effected but this is the world we live in because people just want to get things cheep and ripped.(3) So it is going to effect everyone don't blame sony blame the pirates.(4)

1. It's not about the money! Sony pulled Bait and Switch! Consumers are angry, pure and simple!
2. Not if they cripple it to the point that it no longer serves its original and (at the time of sale) marketed purposes!
3. Sony killed OtherOS to try to stop GeoHot, no? He had to modify the hardware to use his exploit! And even before he pulled it off, he claimed to be against piracy and stated that his exploit would not enable it.
4. The pirates you speak of don't exist yet, the technicality being the exploit doesn't exist yet. Therefore, no software to enable piracy = no pirates on the system...
Quote Originally Posted by Okiri View Post
Wow, people now sue for everything... Good luck trying to win this case... against sony's lawyers!

Must I remind you of the DRM suit that Sony lost awhile back because they installed rootkits onto their users computers?.. They lost that case... horribly!
Quote Originally Posted by aries2k6 View Post
Ya, I wish the guy good luck. The consumers have rights too.

Amen to that!

#24 - PS4 News - May 23, 2010 // 6:05 am
PS4 News's Avatar
I have now updated the first post with news of the fourth lawsuit filed against Sony for the PS3 OtherOS removal via IGN ( and the fifth, which demands a jury trial.

#23 - TheShroomster - May 18, 2010 // 5:57 pm
TheShroomster's Avatar
Email her direct to join in...

Thank you for contacting us about the Sony PS3 class action lawsuit. Our complaint requests that the Court allow us to proceed on behalf of everyone in the nation who purchased a PS3 between November 17, 2006 and March 27, 2010. If you fit within these criteria, and if we prevail, you will automatically be included in the case (but will have the option of "opting out" if you wish). You will receive further information once we reach the stage of the lawsuit where we ask the judge to let us proceed as a class action.

We have added your email address to our database. Can you please provide the following additional information?

• Mailing address (if different from below)
• Telephone number
• Date of purchase
• State of purchase

Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions.

Danielle A. Burke, Paralegal
Meiselman, Denlea, Packman, Carton & Eberz P.C.
1311 Mamaroneck Avenue
White Plains, NY 10605
Direct: (914) 517-5058
Telephone: (914)517-5000 Ext. 258
Fax: (914) 517-5055

#22 - Lumute - May 1, 2010 // 8:15 pm
Lumute's Avatar
anyone interested in joining the class action can contact the attorneys in charge:

There is an email address at the bottom of the article... or email Rebecca Coll who was the attorney who filed the class action, this is her page: