Sony

Sony is giving TCL control over its high-end Bravia TVs

Sony, tcl, Tech, TVs / Kris Guyer / January 20, 2026

TCL is taking majority ownership of Sony’s Bravia series of TVs, the two companies announced today.

The two firms said they have signed a memorandum of understanding and aim to sign binding agreements by the end of March. Pending “relevant regulatory approvals and other conditions,” the joint venture is expected to launch in April 2027.

Under a new joint venture, Huizhou, China-headquartered TCL will own 51 percent of Tokyo, Japan-headquartered Sony’s “home entertainment business,” and Sony will own 49 percent, per an announcement today, adding:

The joint venture will operate globally, handling the full process from product development and design to manufacturing, sales, logistics, and customer service for products including televisions and home audio equipment.

The joint venture will continue to release TVs and home audio gadgets under the “Sony Bravia” branding; however, the TVs will rely on TCL display technology. The joint announcement suggested focuses on bigger TVs, higher-resolution displays, and “smart features.”

The news comes as the TV industry has struggled with decreasing margins and has become more competitive. Meanwhile, devices have become cheaper, and people are buying new TVs less frequently. Competition between Chinese companies, like TCL and Hisense, and South Korean firms, like LG and Samsung, has heated up, with Chinese companies making increasingly competitive budget and mid-range-priced TVs, and the South Korean government reportedly pushing local TV firms to work together. Numerous Japanese companies, including Toshiba and Sharp, have already exited or reduced their TV businesses.

The upcoming joint venture also comes as Sony has focused less on electronics in recent years. For example, it stopped making its Vaio PCs in 2014 and quit Blu-rays last year. Meanwhile, it has been focusing on intellectual property, like anime and movies, as Bloomberg noted. The joint venture should allow Sony to focus on its more lucrative businesses and allow TCL to gain an advantage by leveraging Sony’s more high-end Bravia devices and brand.

Sony is giving TCL control over its high-end Bravia TVs Read More »

Texas sues biggest TV makers, alleging smart TVs spy on users without consent

Hisense, lg, Policy, samsung, smart tvs, Sony, tcl, texas / Mike M. / December 16, 2025

Automated Content Recognition brings “mass surveillance” to homes, lawsuits say.

Credit: Getty Images | Maskot

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued five large TV manufacturers yesterday, alleging that their smart TVs spy on viewers without consent. Paxton sued Samsung, the longtime TV market share leader, along with LG, Sony, Hisense, and TCL.

“These companies have been unlawfully collecting personal data through Automated Content Recognition (‘ACR’) technology,” Paxton’s office alleged in a press release that contains links to all five lawsuits. “ACR in its simplest terms is an uninvited, invisible digital invader. This software can capture screenshots of a user’s television display every 500 milliseconds, monitor viewing activity in real time, and transmit that information back to the company without the user’s knowledge or consent. The companies then sell that consumer information to target ads across platforms for a profit. This technology puts users’ privacy and sensitive information, such as passwords, bank information, and other personal information at risk.”

The lawsuits allege violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, seeking damages of up to $10,000 for each violation and up to $250,000 for each violation affecting people 65 years or older. Texas also wants restraining orders prohibiting the collection, sharing, and selling of ACR data while the lawsuits are pending.

Texas argues that providing personalized content and targeted advertising are not legitimate purposes for collecting ACR data about consumers. The companies’ “insatiable appetite for consumer data far exceeds what is reasonably necessary,” and the “invasive data harvesting is only needed to increase advertisement revenue, which does not satisfy a consumer-necessity standard,” the lawsuits say.

Paxton is far from the first person to raise privacy concerns about smart TVs. The Center for Digital Democracy advocacy group said in a report last year that in “the world of connected TV, viewer surveillance is now built directly into the television set, making manufacturers central players in data collection, monitoring, and digital marketing.” We recently published a guide on how to break free from smart TV ads and tracking.

“Companies using ACR claim that it is all opt-in data, with permission required to use it,” the Center for Digital Democracy report said. “But the ACR system is bundled into new TVs as part of the initial set-up, and its extensive role in monitoring and sharing viewer actions is not fully explained. As a consequence, most consumers would be unaware of the threats and risks involved in signing up for the service.”

“Mass surveillance system” in US living rooms

Pointing out that Hisense and TCL are based in China, Paxton’s press release said the firms’ “Chinese ties pose serious concerns about consumer data harvesting and are exacerbated by China’s National Security Law, which gives its government the capability to get its hands on US consumer data.”

“Companies, especially those connected to the Chinese Communist Party, have no business illegally recording Americans’ devices inside their own homes,” Paxton said. “This conduct is invasive, deceptive, and unlawful. The fundamental right to privacy will be protected in Texas because owning a television does not mean surrendering your personal information to Big Tech or foreign adversaries.”

The Paxton lawsuits, filed in district courts in several Texas counties, are identical in many respects. The complaints allege that TVs made by the five companies “aren’t just entertainment devices—they’re a mass surveillance system sitting in millions of American living rooms. What consumers were told would enhance their viewing experience actually tracks, analyzes, and sells intimate details about everything they watch.”

Using ACR, each company “secretly monitors what consumers watch across streaming apps, cable, and even connected devices like gaming consoles or Blu-ray players,” and harvests the data to build profiles of consumer behavior and sell the data for profit, the complaints say.

We contacted the five companies sued by Texas today. Sony, LG, and Hisense responded and said they would not comment on a pending legal matter.

Difficult opt-out processes detailed

The complaints allege that the companies fail to obtain meaningful consent from users. The following excerpt is from the Samsung lawsuit but is repeated almost verbatim in the others:

Consumers never agreed to Samsung Watchware. When families buy a television, they don’t expect it to spy on them. They don’t expect their viewing habits packaged and auctioned to advertisers. Yet Samsung deceptively guides consumers to activate ACR and buries any explanation of what that means in dense legal jargon that few will read or understand. The so-called “consent” Samsung obtains is meaningless. Disclosures are hidden, vague, and misleading. The company collects far more data than necessary to make the TV work. Consumers are stripped of real choice and kept in the dark about what’s happening in their own homes on Samsung Smart TVs.

Samsung and other companies force consumers to go through multistep menus to exercise their privacy choices, Texas said. “Consumers must circumnavigate a long, non-intuitive path to exercise their right to opt-out,” the Samsung lawsuit said. This involves selecting menu choices for Settings, Additional Settings, General Privacy, Terms & Privacy, Viewing Information Services, and, finally, “Disable,” the lawsuit said. There are “additional toggles for Interest-Based Ads, Ad Personalization, and Privacy Choices,” the lawsuit said.

The “privacy choices are not meaningful because opt-out rights are scattered across four or more separate menus which requires approximately 15+ clicks,” the lawsuit continued. “To fully opt-out of ACR and related ad tracking on Samsung Smart TVs, consumers must disable at least two settings: (1) Viewing Information Services, and (2) Interest-Based Ads. Each of which appear in different parts of the setting UI. Conversely, Samsung provides consumers with a one-click enrollment option to opt-in during the initial start-up process.”

When consumers first start up a Samsung smart TV, they “must click through a multipage onboarding flow before landing on a consent screen, titled Smart Hub Terms & Conditions,” the lawsuit said. “Upon finally reaching the consent screen, consumers are presented with four notices: Terms & Conditions: Dispute Resolution Agreement, Smart Hub U.S. Policy Notice, Viewing Information Services, and Interest-Based Advertisements Service U.S. Privacy Notice, with only one button prominently displayed: I Agree to all.”

Deceptive trade practices alleged

It would be unreasonable to expect consumers to understand that Samsung TVs come equipped with surveillance capabilities, the lawsuit said. “Most consumers do not know, nor have any reason to suspect, that Samsung Smart TVs are capturing in real-time the audio and visuals displayed on the screen and using the information to profile them for advertisers,” it said.

Paxton alleges that TV companies violated the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act with misrepresentations regarding the collection of personal information and failure to disclose the use of ACR technology. The lawsuit against Hisense additionally alleges a failure to disclose that it may provide the Chinese government with consumers’ personal data.

Hisense “fails to disclose to Texas Consumers that under Chinese law, Hisense is required to transfer its collections of Texas consumers’ personal data to the People’s Republic of China when requested by the PRC,” the lawsuit said.

The TCL lawsuit doesn’t include that specific charge. But both the Hisense and TCL complaints say the Chinese Communist Party may use ACR data from the companies’ smart TVs “to influence or compromise public figures in Texas, including judges, elected officials, and law enforcement, and for corporate espionage by surveilling those employed in critical infrastructure, as part of the CCP’s long-term plan to destabilize and undermine American democracy.”

The TVs “are effectively Chinese-sponsored surveillance devices, recording the viewing habits of Texans at every turn without their knowledge or consent,” the lawsuits said.

Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry.

Texas sues biggest TV makers, alleging smart TVs spy on users without consent Read More »

Supreme Court hears case that could trigger big crackdown on Internet piracy

Justices want Cox to crack down on piracy, but question Sony’s strict demands.

Credit: Getty Images | Ilmar Idiyatullin

Supreme Court justices expressed numerous concerns today in a case that could determine whether Internet service providers must terminate the accounts of broadband users accused of copyright infringement. Oral arguments were held in the case between cable Internet provider Cox Communications and record labels led by Sony.

Some justices were skeptical of arguments that ISPs should have no legal obligation under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to terminate an account when a user’s IP address has been repeatedly flagged for downloading pirated music. But justices also seemed hesitant to rule in favor of record labels, with some of the debate focusing on how ISPs should handle large accounts like universities where there could be tens of thousands of users.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor chided Cox for not doing more to fight infringement.

“There are things you could have done to respond to those infringers, and the end result might have been cutting off their connections, but you stopped doing anything for many of them,” Sotomayor said to attorney Joshua Rosenkranz, who represents Cox. “You didn’t try to work with universities and ask them to start looking at an anti-infringement notice to their students. You could have worked with a multi-family dwelling and asked the people in charge of that dwelling to send out a notice or do something about it. You did nothing and, in fact, counselor, your clients’ sort of laissez-faire attitude toward the respondents is probably what got the jury upset.”

A jury ordered Cox to pay over $1 billion in 2019, but the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit overturned that damages verdict in February 2024. The appeals court found that Cox did not profit directly from copyright infringement committed by its users, but affirmed the jury’s separate finding of willful contributory infringement. Cox is asking the Supreme Court to clear it of willful contributory infringement, while record labels want a ruling that would compel ISPs to boot more pirates from the Internet.

Cox: Biggest infringers aren’t residential users

Rosenkranz countered that Cox created its own anti-infringement program, sent out hundreds of warnings a day, suspended thousands of accounts a month, and worked with universities. He said that “the highest recidivist infringers” cited in the case were not individual households, but rather universities, hotels, and regional ISPs that purchase connectivity from Cox in order to resell it to local users.

If Sony wins the case, “those are the entities that are most likely to be cut off first because those are the ones that accrue the greatest number of [piracy notices],” the Cox lawyer said. Even within a multi-person household where the IP address is caught by an infringement monitoring service, “you still don’t know who the individual [infringer] is,” he said. At another point in the hearing, he pointed out that Sony could sue individual infringers directly instead of suing ISPs.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked Cox, “What incentive would you have to do anything if you won? If you win and mere knowledge [of infringement] isn’t enough, why would you bother to send out any [copyright] notices in the future? What would your obligation be?”

Rosenkranz answered, “For the simple reason that Cox is a good corporate citizen that cares a lot about what happens on its system. We do all sorts of things that the law doesn’t require us to do.” After further questioning by Barrett, Rosenkranz acknowledged that Cox would have no liability risk going forward if it wins the case.

Kagan said the DMCA safe harbor, which protects entities from liability if they take steps to fight infringement, would “seem to do nothing” if the court sides with Cox. “Why would anybody care about getting into the safe harbor if there’s no liability in the first place?” she said.

Kagan doesn’t buy Sony’s “intent” argument

Kagan also criticized Sony’s case. She pointed to the main principles underlying Twitter v. Taamneh, a 2023 ruling that protected Twitter against allegations that it aided and abetted ISIS in a terrorist attack. Kagan said the Twitter case and the Smith & Wesson case involving gun sales to Mexican drug cartels show that there are strict limits on what kinds of behavior are considered aiding and abetting.

Kagan described how the cases show there is a real distinction between nonfeasance (doing nothing) and misfeasance, that treating one customer like everyone else is not the same as providing special assistance, and that a party “must seek by your action to make it occur” in order to be guilty of aiding and abetting.

“If you look at those three things, you fail on all of them,” Kagan said to attorney Paul Clement, who represents Sony. “Those three things are kind of inconsistent with the intent standard you just laid out.”

Clement said that to be held liable, an Internet provider “has to know that specified customers are substantially certain to infringe” and “know that providing the service to that customer will make infringement substantially certain.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch indicated that determining secondary liability for Internet providers should be taken up by Congress before the court expands that liability on its own. “Congress still hasn’t defined the contours of what secondary liability should look like. Here we are debating them, so shouldn’t that be a flag of caution for us in expanding it too broadly?”

Alito: “I just don’t see how it’s workable at all”

Clement tried to keep the focus on residential customers, saying that 95 percent of infringing customers are residential users. But he faced questions about how ISPs should handle much larger customers where one or a few users infringe.

Justice Samuel Alito questioned Clement about what ISPs should do with a university where some students infringe. Alito didn’t seem satisfied with Clement’s response that “the ISP is supposed to sort of have a conversation with the university.”

Alito said that after an ISP tells a university, “a lot of your 50,000 students are infringing… the university then has to determine which particular students are engaging in this activity. Let’s assume it can even do that, and so then it knocks out 1,000 students and then another 1,000 students are going to pop up doing the same thing. I just don’t see how it’s workable at all.”

Clement said that hotels limit speeds to restrict peer-to-peer downloading, and suggested that universities do the same. “I don’t think it would be the end of the world if universities provided service at a speed that was sufficient for most other purposes but didn’t allow the students to take full advantage of BitTorrent,” he said. “I could live in that world. But in all events, this isn’t a case that’s just about universities. We’ve never sued the universities.”

Barrett replied, “It seems like you’re asking us to rely on your good corporate citizenship too, that you wouldn’t go after the university or the hospital.”

Kagan said that if Sony wins, Cox would have little incentive to cooperate with copyright holders. “It seems to me the best response that Cox could have is just to make sure it never reads any of your notices ever again, because all of your position is based on Cox having knowledge of this,” she said.

Clement argued in response that “I think willful blindness would satisfy the common law standard for aiding and abetting.”

Purpose vs. intent

Some of the discussion focused on the legal concepts of purpose and intent. Cox has argued that knowledge of infringement “cannot transform passive provision of infrastructure into purposeful, culpable conduct.” Sony has said Cox exhibited both “purpose and intent” to facilitate infringement when it continued providing Internet access to specific customers with the expectation that they were likely to infringe.

Sotomayor said Cox’s position is “that the only way you can have aiding and abetting in this field is if you have purpose,” while Sony is saying, “we don’t have to prove purpose, we have to prove only intent.” Sotomayor told Clement that “we are being put to two extremes here. The other side says, ‘there’s no liability because we’re just putting out into the stream of commerce a good that can be used for good or bad, and we’re not responsible for the infringer’s decision.’”

Sotomayor said the question of purpose vs. intent may be decided differently based on whether Cox’s customer is a residence or a regional ISP that buys Cox’s network capacity and resells it to local customers. Sotomayor said she is reluctant “to say that because one person in that region continues to infringe, that the ISP is materially supporting that infringement because it’s not cutting off the Internet for the 50,000 or 100,000 people who are represented by that customer.”

But a single-family home contains a small number of people, and an ISP may be “materially contributing” to infringement by providing service to that home, Sotomayor said. “How do we announce a rule that deals with those two extremes?” she asked.

Clement argued that the DMCA’s “safe harbor takes care of the regional ISPs. Frankly, I’m not that worried about the regional ISPs because if that were really the problem, we could go after the regional ISPs.”

Cox’s case has support from the US government. US Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart told justices today that “in copyright law and more generally, this form of secondary liability is reserved for persons who act for the purpose of facilitating violations of law. Because Cox simply provided the same generic Internet services to infringers and non-infringers alike, there is no basis for inferring such a purpose here.”

Terminating all access “extremely overbroad”

Sotomayor asked Stewart if he’s worried that a Cox win would remove ISPs’ economic incentive to control copyright infringement. “I would agree that not much economic incentive would be left,” Stewart replied. “I’m simply questioning whether that’s a bad thing.”

Stewart gave a hypothetical in which an individual Internet user is sued for infringement in a district court. The district court could award damages and impose an injunction to prevent further infringement, but it probably couldn’t “enjoin the person from ever using the Internet again,” Stewart said.

“The approach of terminating all access to the Internet based on infringement, it seems extremely overbroad given the centrality of the Internet to modern life and given the First Amendment,” he said.

Oral arguments ended with a reply from Rosenkranz, who said Clement’s suggestion that ISPs simply “have a conversation” with universities is “a terrible answer from the perspective of the company that is trying to figure out what its legal obligations are [and] facing crushing liabilities.” Rosenkranz also suggested that record labels pay for ISPs’ enforcement programs.

“The plaintiffs have recourse,” he said. “How about a conversation with the ISPs where they talk about how to work out things together? Maybe they kick in a little money. Now, they won’t get billion-dollar verdicts, but if they believe that the programs that Cox and others have aren’t satisfactory, they can design better programs and help pay for them.”

Supreme Court hears case that could trigger big crackdown on Internet piracy Read More »

Fans’ reverse-engineered servers for Sony’s defunct Concord might be in trouble

concord, gaming, Reverse-engineering, server, Sony / Mike M. / November 17, 2025

A group of dedicated coders has managed to partially revive online gameplay for the PC version of Concord, the team-based shooter that Sony famously shut down just two weeks after its launch last summer. Now, though, the team behind that fan server effort is closing off new access after Sony started issuing DMCA takedown requests of sample gameplay videos.

The Game Post was among the first to publicize the “Concord Delta” project, which reverse-engineered the game’s now-defunct server API to get a functional multiplayer match running over the weekend. “The project is still [a work in progress], it’s playable, but buggy,” developer Red posted in the game’s Discord channel, as reported by The Game Post. “Once our servers are fully set up, we’ll begin doing some private playtesting.”

Accessing the “Concord Delta” servers reportedly requires a legitimate PC copy of the game, which is relatively hard to come by these days. Concord only sold an estimated 25,000 copies across PC and PS5 before being shut down last year. And that number doesn’t account for the players who accepted a full refund for their $40 purchase after the official servers shut down.

Better safe than sorry

Red accompanied their Discord announcement of the first “playable” Concord match in months with two YouTube videos showing sample gameplay (“Don’t mind my horrible aim, I spend so much time reverse engineering that I no longer have the time to actually play the game,” he warned viewers). In short order, though, those videos were taken down “due to a copyright claim from MarkScan Enforcement,” a company that has a history of working with Sony on DMCA requests.

Fans’ reverse-engineered servers for Sony’s defunct Concord might be in trouble Read More »

AMD and Sony’s PS6 chipset aims to rethink the current graphics pipeline

AMD, chipset, gaming, GPU, pipeline, raytracing, Sony / Rejus Almole / October 10, 2025

It feels like it was just yesterday that Sony hardware architect Mark Cerny was first teasing Sony’s “PS4 successor” and its “enhanced ray-tracing capabilities” powered by new AMD chips. Now that we’re nearly five full years into the PS5 era, it’s time for Sony and AMD to start teasing the new chips that will power what Cerny calls “a future console in a few years’ time.”

In a quick nine-minute video posted Thursday, Cerny sat down with Jack Huynh, the senior VP and general manager of AMD’s Computing and Graphics Group, to talk about “Project Amethyst,” a co-engineering effort between both companies that was also teased back in July. And while that Project Amethyst hardware currently only exists in the form of a simulation, Cerny said that the “results are quite promising” for a project that’s still in the “early days.”

Mo’ ML, fewer problems?

Project Amethyst is focused on going beyond traditional rasterization techniques that don’t scale well when you try to “brute force that with raw power alone,” Huynh said in the video. Instead, the new architecture is focused on more efficient running of the kinds of machine-learning-based neural networks behind AMD’s FSR upscaling technology and Sony’s similar PSSR system.

From the same source. Two branches. One vision.

My good friend and fellow gamer @cerny and I recently reflected on our shared journey — symbolized by these two pieces of amethyst, split from the same stone.

Project Amethyst is a co-engineering effort between @PlayStation and… pic.twitter.com/De9HWV3Ub2

— Jack Huynh (@JackMHuynh) July 1, 2025

While that kind of upscaling currently helps let GPUs pump out 4K graphics in real time, Cerny said that the “nature of the GPU fights us here,” requiring calculations to be broken up into subproblems to be handled in a somewhat inefficient parallel process by the GPU’s individual compute units.

To get around this issue, Project Amethyst uses “neural arrays” that let compute units share data and process problems like a “single focused AI engine,” Cerny said. While the entire GPU won’t be connected in this manner, connecting small sets of compute units like this allows for more scalable shader engines that can “process a large chunk of the screen in one go,” Cerny said. That means Project Amethyst will let “more and more of what you see on screen… be touched or enhanced by ML,” Huynh added.

AMD and Sony’s PS6 chipset aims to rethink the current graphics pipeline Read More »

Sony makes the “difficult decision” to raise PlayStation 5 prices in the US

gaming, microsoft, Nintendo, PlayStation 5, Sony, Tech / Mike M. / August 20, 2025

Sony will join Microsoft and Nintendo in raising US prices across its entire game console lineup, the company announced today. Pricing for all current versions of the PlayStation 5 console will increase by $50 starting tomorrow.

The price of the PS5 Digital Edition will increase from $450 to $500; the standard PS5 will increase from $500 to $550; and the PS5 Pro will increase from $700 to $750. If you’ve been on the fence about buying any of these, retailers like Target and Best Buy are still using the old prices as of this writing—for other console price hikes, retailers have sometimes bumped the prices up before the date announced by the manufacturer.

“Similar to many global businesses, we continue to navigate a challenging economic environment,” wrote Sony Global Marketing VP Isabelle Tomatis. “As a result, we’ve made the difficult decision to increase the recommended retail price for PlayStation 5 consoles in the U.S. starting on August 21.”

Sony says it’s not increasing prices for games or accessories and that this round of price increases only affects consoles sold in the US.

Sony was the last of the big three console makers to raise prices this year. Microsoft raised the prices for the Xbox Series S and X consoles in March. And Nintendo has gone through two rounds of price increases—one for Switch and Switch 2 accessories in April and another for more accessories and Switch 1 consoles earlier this month.

Sony makes the “difficult decision” to raise PlayStation 5 prices in the US Read More »

Engineer creates first custom motherboard for 1990s PlayStation console

classic gaming, Crowdfunding, electronics engineering, Game consoles, gaming, Gaming History, hardware hacking, hardware preservation, Open Source, PCB design, PlayStation, retrocomputing, retrogaming, retrotech, Reverse-engineering, Sony, Vintage computing / Rejus Almole / June 13, 2025

The nsOne project joins a growing community of homebrew PlayStation 1 hardware developments. Other recent projects include Picostation, a Raspberry Pi Pico-based optical disc emulator (ODE) that allows PlayStation 1 consoles to load games from SD cards instead of physical discs. Other ODEs like MODE and PSIO have also become popular solutions for retrogaming collectors who play games on original hardware as optical drives age and fail.

From repair job to reverse-engineering project

To understand the classic console’s physical architecture, Brodesco physically sanded down an original motherboard to expose its internal layers, then cross-referenced the exposed traces with component datasheets and service manuals.

“I realized that detailed documentation on the original motherboard was either incomplete or entirely unavailable,” Brodesco explained in his Kickstarter campaign. This discovery launched what would become a comprehensive documentation effort, including tracing every connection on the board and creating multi-layer graphic representations of the circuitry.

A photo of the nsOne PlayStation motherboard. Credit: Lorentio Brodesco

Using optical scanning and manual net-by-net reverse-engineering, Brodesco recreated the PlayStation 1’s schematic in modern PCB design software. This process involved creating component symbols with accurate pin mappings and identifying—or in some cases creating—the correct footprints for each proprietary component that Sony had never publicly documented.

Brodesco also identified what he calls the “minimum architecture” required to boot the console without BIOS modifications, streamlining the design process while maintaining full compatibility.

The mock-up board shown in photos validates the footprints of chips and connectors, all redrawn from scratch. According to Brodesco, a fully routed version with complete multilayer routing and final layout is already in development.

As Brodesco noted on Kickstarter, his project’s goal is to “create comprehensive documentation, design files, and production-ready blueprints for manufacturing fully functional motherboards.”

Beyond repairs, the documentation and design files Brodesco is creating would preserve the PlayStation 1’s hardware architecture for future generations: “It’s a tribute to the PS1, to retro hardware, and to the belief that one person really can build the impossible.”

Engineer creates first custom motherboard for 1990s PlayStation console Read More »

Trump admin tells SCOTUS: ISPs shouldn’t be forced to boot alleged pirates

Cox, Policy, Sony / Kris Guyer / May 29, 2025

Enhanced damages can be $150,000 per work, instead of the usual cap of $30,000. The jury in the case “was instructed that it could find Cox’s violations willful if Cox knew that its subscribers had committed infringement,” Sauer wrote. “That instruction was mistaken because it allowed the jury to award enhanced damages even if Cox reasonably believed that its own conduct in declining to terminate infringing subscribers’ Internet access was consistent with the Copyright Act.”

Reject Sony petition, US says

Sony wasn’t happy with the 4th Circuit ruling, either, because it threw out the $1 billion award and a finding of vicarious infringement. Sony argued that Cox profited from infringement by failing to terminate infringing subscribers and that the ruling “eliminates an especially important tool in the digital age where pursuing direct infringers—in this case, thousands of faceless individuals who cannot be identified except through an Internet service provider like Respondent—is impractical at best and impossible at worst.”

Sauer urged the Supreme Court to reject Sony’s petition for a review. “The court of appeals correctly held that Sony had not satisfied its burden of showing that Cox financially benefited from infringement on its network. As the court explained, Cox charges its customers a flat fee for Internet service, regardless of what its users do online,” Sauer wrote.

Sauer compared Cox to a landlord who charges a fixed rent regardless of what tenants use the leased premises for. “There was no evidence that Cox would be forced to collect a lower fee if the users of its Internet service ceased to infringe; that subscribers were drawn to Cox’s Internet service because of the ability to engage in copyright infringement using that service; or that Cox had used the opportunity for customers to infringe to lend credibility to the service it offered,” Sauer wrote.

On the vicarious liability question, “there is no conflict among the circuits, which all apply the same financial-benefit requirement to different fact patterns,” Sauer wrote. “Sony has not identified any court of appeals decision that reached a different result on facts similar to those here.”

Cox issued a statement welcoming the US court brief. “We are pleased the solicitor general agrees the Supreme Court should review this significant copyright case that could jeopardize Internet access for all Americans and fundamentally change how Internet service providers manage their networks,” Cox said.

Trump admin tells SCOTUS: ISPs shouldn’t be forced to boot alleged pirates Read More »

Why console makers can legally brick your game console

brick, EULA, gaming, hacking, microsoft, Nintendo, PlayStation, Sony, Switch, xbox / Mike M. / May 23, 2025

Consoles like these may get banned from Nintendo’s online services, but they tend to still work offline. Credit: Kate Temkin / ReSwitched

“Unfortunately, ‘bricking’ personal devices to limit users’ rights and control their behavior is nothing new,” Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Victoria Noble told Ars Technica. “It would likely take selective enforcement to rise to a problematic level [in court],” attorney Richard Hoeg said.

Last year, a collection of 17 consumer groups urged the Federal Trade Commission to take a look at the way companies use the so-called practice of “software tethering” to control a device’s hardware features after purchase. Thus far, though, the federal consumer watchdog has shown little interest in enforcing complaints against companies that do so.

“Companies should not use EULAs to strip people of rights that we normally associate with ownership, like the right to tinker with or modify their own personal devices,” Noble told Ars. “[Console] owners deserve the right to make otherwise legal modifications to their own devices without fear that a company will punish them by remotely bricking their [systems].”

The court of public opinion

In the end, these kinds of draconian bricking clauses may be doing their job even if the console makers involved don’t invoke them. “In practice, I expect this kind of thing is more about scaring people away from jailbreaking and modifying their systems and that Nintendo is unlikely to go about bricking large volumes of devices, even if they technically have the right to,” Loiterman said.

“Just because they put a remedy in the EULA doesn’t mean they will certainly use it either,” attorney Mark Methenitis said. “My suspicion is this is to go after the people who eventually succeeded in jailbreaking the original Switch and try to prevent that for the Switch 2.”

The threat of public backlash could also hold the console makers back from limiting the offline functionality of any hacked consoles. After citing public scrutiny that companies like Tesla, Keurig, and John Deere faced for limiting hardware via software updates, Methenitis said that he “would imagine Nintendo would suffer similar bad publicity if they push things too far.”

That said, legal capacities can sometimes tend to invite their own use. “If the ability is there, someone will want to ‘see how it goes.'” Hoeg said.

Why console makers can legally brick your game console Read More »

The PlayStation VR2 will get a drastic price cut, but that might not be enough

gaming, Mixed Reality, PlayStation, PlayStation 5, playstation vr2, psvr2, Sony, virtual reality, vr, XR / Tim Belzer / February 28, 2025

Sony’s first PlayStation VR for the PlayStation 4 hit stores at the right price at the right time and ended up being one of VR’s biggest hits. The PlayStation 5’s PlayStation VR2? Not so much, unfortunately. In either an effort to clear unsold inventory, an attempt to revitalize the platform, or both, Sony has announced it’s dropping the price of the headset significantly.

Starting in March, the main SKU of the headset will drop from $550 to $400 in the US. Europe, the UK, and Japan will also see price cuts to 550 euros, 400 pounds, and 66,980 yen, respectively, as detailed on the PlayStation Blog. Strangely, the bundle that includes the game Horizon: Call of the Mountain (originally $600) will also drop to the same exact price. That’s welcome, but it’s also a little bit difficult not to interpret that as a sign that this is an attempt to empty inventory more than anything else.

The headset launched in early 2023 but has suffered from weak software support ever since—a far cry from the first PSVR, which had one of the strongest libraries of its time. It didn’t help that unlike the regular PlayStation 5, the PSVR2 was not backward-compatible with games released for its predecessor.

About a year ago, there were reports that Sony was temporarily pausing production because it wasn’t able to move the inventory it already had. Later, the company released an adapter and some software for getting it running on PCs. That made it one of the most attractive PC VR headsets, at least on paper. However, setup was clunky, and some features that were supported on the PS5 weren’t supported on PC.

PSVR2 games are still getting announced and released, but the VR market in general has slowed down quite a bit in recent years, and most of the remaining action (such as it is) is on Meta’s Quest platform.

The PlayStation VR2 will get a drastic price cut, but that might not be enough Read More »

Sony removes PlayStation account requirement from 4 single-player Steam games

gaming, God of War Ragnarok, helldivers 2, horizon zero dawn, Marvel's Spider-Man 2, PC Gaming, PlayStation, PlayStation Network, Sony, Spider-Man 2, steam, The Last of Us Part II / Paul Patrick / January 29, 2025

Sony’s game publishing arm has done a 180-degree turn on a controversial policy of requiring PC players to sign in with PlayStation accounts for some games, according to a blog post by the company.

A PlayStation account will “become optional” for Marvel’s Spider-Man 2, God of War Ragnarok, The Last of Us Part II Remastered, and Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered. Sony hasn’t lost hope that players will still go ahead and use a PlayStation account, though, as it’s tying several benefits to signing in.

Logging in with PlayStation will be required to access trophies, the PlayStation equivalent of achievements. (Steam achievements appear to be supported regardless.) It will also allow friend management, provided you have social contacts on the PlayStation Network.

Additionally, Sony is providing some small in-game rewards to each title that are available if you log in with its account system. You’ll get early unlocks of the Spider-Man 2099 Black Suit and the Miles Morales 2099 Suit in Spider-Man 2, for example—or the Nora Valiant outfit in Horizon: Zero Dawn.

Some of these rewards are available via other means within the games, such as the Armor of the Black Bear set for Kratos in Ragnarok.

Sony removes PlayStation account requirement from 4 single-player Steam games Read More »

Horizon: Zero Dawn gets the graphical remaster a modern classic deserves

gaming, horizon zero dawn, Sony / Rejus Almole / December 20, 2024

So when Sony put out the recent “remaster” of Zero Dawn, I was cautiously optimistic. Any sort of non-half-assed PS5 reworking ought to reduce load times, right?

Machines make it hard to enjoy the view.

I meant to dip into the world of Zero Dawn only for a few hours, but I ended up playing through the whole game and its expansion, The Frozen Wilds, over the last few weeks. The arrow-based gameplay, complex story, and voice acting were still terrific, and the remastered elements were far more than a simple cash-in. Even little things, like the way the adaptive triggers on the PS5 controllers mimic the tension of a bowstring, felt perfect.

I didn’t expect to get sucked back into the game’s world for so many hours, but I had a great time doing it and wanted to spread the good word for those who might be looking for an engaging single-player experience over the holidays.

Big changes

When it comes to major changes, the remaster has three.

First, the game loads fast. It feels like a ground-up PS5 title. Death—and its attendant reloads—no longer makes me want to throw my controller across the room during difficult battles. It’s great.

Second, the game looks unbelievable. This is not a case of just upping the resolution to 4K and calling it a day. Sony claims that the game features “over 10 hours of re-recorded conversation, mocap and countless graphical improvements that bring the game to the same visual fidelity as its critically acclaimed sequel.” Also, the game’s characters have “been upgraded, bringing them in line with current generation advances in character models and rendering.”

This is not just marketing fluff. The faces look incredible, even in close-up cinematic interludes, but what really caught my eye was the lighting. From the moment a young Aloy spelunks into a cave and finds an electronic gadget attached to a skeleton lying peacefully in a sunbeam, the revamped lighting engine makes its presence clear. No, it’s not “realistic”—everything looks like a postcard shot. But I found myself pausing the game just to look at the sunlight scattered by a snowstorm or dawn breaking over a mountain range. The lighting interacts with a volumetric set of effects that bring fog and dust devils to life like few other games I’ve seen. When Aloy tramps through a winter squall, leaving footsteps in the mountain snow as she walks, the effect is magical. (Until a Glinthawk swoops in, screaming, and attacks.)

Horizon: Zero Dawn gets the graphical remaster a modern classic deserves Read More »