(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Amazon gives PlayStation 3 owner partial refund because of the firmware 3.21 update that removed Other OS feature.



In the latest repercussion of Sony's troubled firmware update, NeoGAF forum moderator ‘iapetus‘, cited European law to argue that his original 60GB console no longer operated as advertised.

The online retailler gave the gamer a refund - without return - of around 20 per cent of the console’s original value. The EU law, Directive 1999/44/EC, cited by 'iapetus' states: "(a product) be fit for the purpose which the consumer requires them and which was made known to the seller at the time of purchase.”

Amazon had to shell out rather than Sony as the directive puts the onus on the retailer rather than manufacturer, although the cost will probably be passed on to the electronics giant.

Sony maintains it can change software as it doesn't alter hardware. It will be hoping other PS3 owners won't be following 'iapteus' actions otherwise it will be forced, either to reinstall the 'Other OS' feature or go to court to show it's acting legally.

You must login or register to view this content.

Personally I think this is ridiculous...
but then again, why should Sony remove a feature for all the early adopters of their system, if you think about it, that is one of the features we PAID FOR, what gives them the right to remove something we own just to cover their own backs?

He didn't have to update... so its pretty jacked up that he got away with suing amazon. I mean he had to say okay to the process of having it updated, and the user was prompted a few times making sure that they knew the "Other OS" system was being removed. Sony had every lawful right to do that. Still sucks, but it was lawful. Furthermore, no one was forced to do it.

I agree that it was necessary to stop Other OS so the hacking of the system couldn't go any further but they should reinstate it with more protection. This mean we would have the feature back and would be un hackable so we would all be happy aprt from geohot who wasted his life the sad twat

I agree that removing the option was pretty deplorable, but I also see their point to prevent the hacking problems it could create. However, I did like having more settable controls over my PS3 without disrupting anything in game or online. Sony should try to find a way to put the feature back in, but with more protection.

I honestly don't know how I feel about when they removed the reverse compability with PS2 games, because I still have my PS2 to play PS2 games on, and moving the information from one to the other is not difficult if need be (which I don't have a reason to do so). I kept it also because it's a backup DVD and music player, and I do still like playing Final Fantasy 12 on it, as well as some of the older Maddens ('07 was the last one, because when they changed the format in the '08 version...it sucked, hate how it rewards shitty players).

If he didn't update, then he would be unable to use the PlayStation Network, which was another advertised feature. You can't pick and choose, he paid for both.

I say all the power to him, and I hope other people follow in his tracks. If enough people continue to try and get their money back, perhaps Sony will add the feature back.

97% of people who own a PS3 bought it before this update so this still applies, what if that 97% asked for a refund? Sony would have the 2nd OS back in under 24 hours

Not true at all dude... Purchase of a PS3 does not entitle the consumer the right to utilize the PSN. On the box it says:


Which means the consumer has the right to sign up, but you have to agree to its terms to use it. I'm pretty sure it was ammended before or during the update to reflect that one could not connect with the other OS option enabled, or something similar to that affect. Since I'm pretty sure part of the agreement stated that the terms were subject to change WITH OUT notice.

More to the point when you updates your system software you were told the other OS feature was being removed and that if you didn't apply the update you would not be able to connect to the PSN. So it's not a choice of either/or it is a choice of keeping a feature you may want to keep or not.

Also he may have been able to get away with suing the vendor, but the vendor doesn't know the agreements listed in the PS3 for its system and usage, so they naively gave him the money, if it went to court dude would have lost, unless the lawyers were idiots.

No where in the liscense and agreements of owning a PS3 is one entitled to using the PSN. Nor is it a feature that PS3 is compelled to give to its users. They could completely shut it down and no one could do a damn thing about it becuase its a privledge that PS allows to its consumers, not a right.

Hes a lucky person!

i applaud amazons decision, but in the end i believe sony should be the one responsible not amazon.

It would be funny if more people got their money back from amazon, and then amazon tried to sue Sony for their money back, and then Sony just laughed at them for giving away money when the DID NOT HAVE TO DO SO