Thought the same thing but reckoned I’d have to send back the PS3 - will pick this one up with HMV (where I bought mine) in the morning :tiphat:
I’ve emailed amazon… will see what they say I quoted the EC directive and such.
Amazon don’t agree.
My original mail to them reads thus:
As you may know, Sony have remotely prevented the PS3 from running 3rd party operating systems, as part of their upgrade to firmware 3.21. This was an integral part of the original product description from yourselves, and under EU Directive 1999/44/EC:
"The goods must:
* comply with the description given by the seller and posses the same qualities and characteristics as other similar goods * be fit for the purpose which the consumer requires them and which was made known to the seller at the time of purchase.”
I consider this item is not as was made known to me by Amazon at the time of purchase.
I look forward to your response.
Thank you for your email.
We take this opportunity to express our regret at the issues you have had with the Sony PS3.
We have considered carefully the points expressed in your email, and we recommend that you bring this matter to the attention of the manufacturer, Sony. We do not consider the application of either EU Directive 1999/44/EC or the Sale of Goods Act 1979 to be relevant in these circumstances.
We apologise that we cannot assist you further on this occasion.
Sony can be contacted at:
Uk customers: http://www.sony.co.uk/ (08705 111999)
International customers can use the following link to access Sony help page:
If you have any further concerns please contact us at the above email address.
Thank you for shopping at Amazon.co.uk
Hmm, EXECUTIVE customer relations, no less
Thank you for your response.
I would like to refer you to this link
The second link quotes directly from Amazon’s response to that customer.
I am certain Amazon as a company does not wish to be seen to waver in their responses to identical issues, and I look forward to receiving the same treatment as your other customer in this matter.
I shall once more quote the EU directive to clarify:
The goods MUST:
comply with the description given by the seller…
be fit for the purpose … which was made known … at the time of purchase.
I very much consider the application of this directive to be relevant in these circumstances.
Furthermore, in European Law, responsibility lies with the seller and not with the manufacturer. My contract is not and was not with Sony, but with Amazon.
I look forward to your further comments
And a remarkably rapid response (like within 7 mins):
We have considered the points raised in your further correspondence, and we must again recommend that you contact Sony directly regarding this issue. Unfortunately, we do not consider the application of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 or the EU Directive 1999/44/EC to be relevant in these circumstances.
The product which you purchased from Amazon continues to work as originally described. Up until the point of accepting software update 3.21 from Sony, the product retains the ability to run the OtherOS feature, and remains compatible with games and other media available at the date of purchase, and with releases made after the date of purchase. The manufacturer, Sony, issued Update 3.21 to take effect from 1 April 2010 once accepted by the end user (customer). The Sale of Goods Act 1979 does not require Amazon, as seller, to provide a refund or offer any other compensation for optional changes to the product’s software implemented by the manufacturer of the product and which were not contemplated at the time of the sale of the product.
Manufacturers often offer software updates and downloads to pre-installed software and firmware. These updates are governed by the agreement between the user and the manufacturer. Further, it is not uncommon for such updates to vary the state of the product as purchased from the seller. Once the software and firmware has been updated, it may alter the machine. On each occasion the consumer agrees to those changes and accepts the terms and conditions from the manufacturer.
In our view, the product no longer falls within the remit of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 or the EU Directive 1999/44/EC on the grounds you described. In particular, the test for satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose, as set out in the Sale of Goods Act 1979, is not to be construed as a warranty that all future releases and functionality from the manufacturer will be supported by the product.
Unfortunately, we have nothing further to add in relation to this incident.
You could try arguing that had you not updated you would have no longer had access to the PSN network… and that would have limited your console… so either way it was a loss to you…
other than that… contact sony ? lol
I think the measure of the response being so fast is probably down to the number of people to have tried this, that looks like a template stock email to me
I do not know much about it but the interesting bit mentioned by amazon was accepting the toc if I read and interpreted right.
if this was a silent update ? what Toc was availble to agree to ?
I am right in saying no option existed to say ‘No’ to the update ?
Na it wasnt a silent upgrade… you had the option to refuse the update… But if you happen to refuse it you lost access to the PS Network… and im sure there would be T&C to read… as there was with every other update I did to my PS3 before I sold it
an interesting article on this topic popped up tonight on the Google news pages
Yup, you have to agree to the TOC.
Playstation Network is the commercial bleed to promote users to acquire products. If you need it, as far as I can see at the mo, upgrade. I didn’t.
Don’t play games much myself on the PS3, but my lot have had slapped in say, Little Big Planet, and the auto download update thingy works fine. Much to their annoyance.
I’ve not seen any other loss of function.
Is it just me or does the thread title read a bit wrong ? lol
Ye I know I typed it
Who you calling fat ?
I’m just big-boned