The amendment states:
In reality, SCEI and SCEA removed this feature because it was expensive to maintain (as they previously admitted when the feature was removed from the “slim” models – but which they conveniently removed from SCEA’s website); they were losing money on every PS3 unit sold (due to poor decisions in the planning and design of the Cell chip as noted above and given the PS3′s extra features); SCEA needed to promote and sell games to make their money back on the loss-leading PS3 consoles (and there was no profit in users utilizing the computer functions of the PS3); and IBM wanted to sell its expensive servers utilizing the Cell processor (users could cluster PS3s for the same purposes much less expensively)
The updated amendment also states that it is “virtually impossible” to use Other OS functionality to pirate games, because a system must “perfectly emulate” the operating system it was originally designed for, including the API, which is the interface for the game OS that provides it full functionality.
The amendment goes on to say that when the Other OS was used, the PS3′s API and other hardware features are blocked, including the PS3′s graphic chip, which makes it “impossible to run a pirated game on the Other OS.”
Co-lead counsel James Pizzirusso, head of Hausfeld LLP’s Consumer Protection Practice Group, said that “Sony’s actions are like a car manufacturer telling a buyer that it is going to remove the engine because it does not want to service the part anymore and then telling the consumer, ‘tough luck, we are not going to give you a refund.’ This type of activity is exactly what our country’s consumer protection laws were designed to protect against.”
SCEA has until March 28th (that’s this coming Monday) to issue a response.