1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar

Consumer Affairs

Gamers Mad at Sony for Yanking PS3's Linux Compatibility

California class action alleges self-serving bait-and-switch


By Jon Hood
ConsumerAffairs.com

May 3, 2010
A group of Linux users has filed suit against Sony, upset about the company yanking Linux capability from its PlayStation 3 (PS3) game console.

When PS3 made its debut in 2006, it gave users the option to run a so-called alternate operating system, something that couldn't be said of Nintendo Wii or Xbox. The "Install Other OS" feature was popular among gamers who used Linux, the Unix operating system that is free to download.

But a software update released on April 1 neutered the option, labeling it a security risk. Although the update was technically optional, gamers who failed to install it would no longer be able to watch BluRay movies, play new games, or download copyright-protected videos from a central server.

Forgoing the update would also deny users access to the PlayStation Network, a prerequisite to playing online games and participating in PS3 chat, the system's bustling online forum.

The suit, filed last week in federal court in California, says Sony ramped up PS3 sales by marketing the system as Linux-friendly, then threw gamers under the bus once the money was in the bank.

"Sony knowingly and willingly accepted monetary benefits from Plaintiff and the Class, but Sony did not honor its obligations," according to the suit. "Rather, Sony benefited from the sales of PS3s with the Other OS function which it then forced purchasers to either disable or forgo other important PS3 functions."

The suit says Sony's alleged bait-and-switch constitutes an "unfair and deceptive business practice perpetrated on millions of unsuspecting consumers."

According to the complaint, lead plaintiff Anthony Ventura "chose to purchase a PS3, as opposed to an Xbox or a Wii, because it offered the Other OS feature." The plaintiffs point out that the PS3 console is "substantially more expensive" than many of its counterparts, and that, "[a]t the time of its launch, the PS3 was the most expensive gaming console available, retailing for $599.00 in part because it is capable of far more than merely playing games at home."

The suit also says Sony caught many gamers off guard, relying only on the update to tell them that Linux capability would soon be defunct. According to the complaint, "Sony did not provide any other notice to its customers that it would disable [the capability]. In fact, a substantial number of Sony's customers only realized that Sony had unilaterally disabled the Other Advertised Features when they attempted to use those features on April 1, 2010."

Jon of Cincinnati, Ohio, wrote ConsumerAffairs.com on April 2, the day after the update was released. His complaint echoed the lawsuit: "An advertised launch feature 'OtherOS' has been disabled in a required firmware update. No compensation or additional features has been offered. This was one of the 2 reasons I bought a PS3 versus an Xbox360."

The suit is brought as a putative class action on behalf of "all persons who purchased a PS3 during the period November 17, 2006 to March 27, 2010 and who did not resell their PS3 before March 27, 2010."

The suit alleges breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of the California Unfair Competition Law and California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act. The plaintiffs are seeking restitution for the money they spent on their game consoles.

Quantcast