Lucky few got game: Crowds go after PS3s, mayor goes after Sony

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
linky

We had to rush in 12 police cars with officers there and take them off the streets of our city where they?re doing their patrols, to squelch the crowd that we had there,? Menino said, referring to a throng of 500 at Copley Place.

?It?s something that should not be tolerated,? he said. ?It?s wrong to take advantage of the public that way, wrong by the manufacturer and by the retailer.?

Japan-based Sony made only 400,000 PlayStation 3?s available for the product?s launch, and thousands camped out for days at stores across the nation for a shot at shelling out $500-plus for the holiday must-have.

?The mayor feels this is a ploy by big business to fill the pockets of their stockholders on the public?s back without any regard for public safety,? said Menino?s spokeswoman, Dot Joyce.

Police had to control crowds at the Copley Plaza Mall?s Sony Style, where throngs rushed the doors at 5 a.m., and at the Fenway Best Buy, where more than 400 people were lined up by noon Thursday.

?It was ridiculous,? said Fernando Villanueva, 22, of the South End, who camped out in the rain starting Wednesday and paid $630 for a PS3. ?We tried to keep it orderly by creating a list and having a roll call every half hour,? he said. ?But the store said our list was meaningless; it?s going to be a mad rush, and whoever gets through the doors first gets one.?

Police eventually convinced Best Buy to honor the list. But elsewhere, mobs of customers stampeded into stores, injuring a man in Wisconsin and forcing authorities to close a Wal-Mart in California.

In Connecticut, two armed thugs tried to rob a line of people outside a Putnam Wal-Mart at 3 a.m. Michael Penkala of Webster refused to give up his money and was shot, police said. He was in stable condition yesterday at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center in Worcester with non-life-threatening injuries, said Connecticut State Police Lt. J. Paul Vance.

Sony spokesman Dave Karraker said 400,000 PS3?s were all the company could produce for the launch. The chaos ?is not something we planned or foresaw,? he said.

If Sony didn?t, nearly everyone else seemed to know that limited supplies and high demand were a formula for trouble.

?All this hype was created by some marketing ?genius? who didn?t think out the end game,? said Hub public relations guru George Regan. ?When you have people waiting for hours, even days, in the rain, and someone gets hurt, all for the ?privilege? of paying $600 for some game, sooner or later, it?s going




hmm personally i think he should be suing the crap out of the idiots that did it. NOT Sony.

so what do you guys think? please try to ignore the past stupid stuff Sony has done. do you think they should be held liable for the riot? what about say when a sports team wins the championship, should they be held responsible (or are they?)?
 

DainBramaged

Lifer
Jun 19, 2003
23,454
41
91
Sony spokesman Dave Karraker said 400,000 PS3?s were all the company could produce for the launch. The chaos ?is not something we planned or foresaw,? he said.

Bullfvckingshit.
 

zoiks

Lifer
Jan 13, 2000
11,787
3
81
Unless this was part of Sony's ploy to make the PS3 more appealing and exclusive by executing a marketing tactic, the mayor has no merit.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: zoiks
Unless this was part of Sony's ploy to make the PS3 more appealing and exclusive by executing a marketing tactic, the mayor has no merit.

even if they did reduce the supply does that really make sony responsible for someont rioting?

wouldnt that be the choice of the person? soney didnt force them to riot. not to mention it has been well known that supply was short.
 

invidia

Platinum Member
Oct 8, 2006
2,151
1
0
If two armed thugs came up to me, I have the right to murder and/or take down them out of society.
 

drum

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2003
6,810
4
81
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
Sony spokesman Dave Karraker said 400,000 PS3?s were all the company could produce for the launch. The chaos ?is not something we planned or foresaw,? he said.

Bullfvckingshit.

agreed

bollocks
 

MedicBob

Diamond Member
Nov 29, 2001
4,151
1
0
I am not sure Sony is at fault. However Best Buy and other retailers are, they could of done it alot calmer and just gave out the tickets to the first whatever number in line.
 

intogamer

Lifer
Dec 5, 2004
19,219
1
76
Sony didn't have to release it on November 17th with ONLY 400,000 units

The factories could only produce that much because Sony choose the fvcsking date
 

zoiks

Lifer
Jan 13, 2000
11,787
3
81
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: zoiks
Unless this was part of Sony's ploy to make the PS3 more appealing and exclusive by executing a marketing tactic, the mayor has no merit.

even if they did reduce the supply does that really make sony responsible for someont rioting?

wouldnt that be the choice of the person? soney didnt force them to riot. not to mention it has been well known that supply was short.

They still could definitely be charged if the defense was only that point.
I remember a lawyer telling our engineering class that if you installed roof shingles that exuded some kind of toxic chemical when it rained, you still could be liable for toxic pollution even if you had no knowledge of the shingles being toxic.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
Sony spokesman Dave Karraker said 400,000 PS3?s were all the company could produce for the launch. The chaos ?is not something we planned or foresaw,? he said.

Bullfvckingshit.

They didn't even sell 400k consoles at launch. They came in at ~250,000 between Japan and North America.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: zoiks
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: zoiks
Unless this was part of Sony's ploy to make the PS3 more appealing and exclusive by executing a marketing tactic, the mayor has no merit.

even if they did reduce the supply does that really make sony responsible for someont rioting?

wouldnt that be the choice of the person? soney didnt force them to riot. not to mention it has been well known that supply was short.

They still could definitely be charged if the defense was only that point.
I remember a lawyer telling our engineering class that if you installed roof shingles that exuded some kind of toxic chemical when it rained, you still could be liable for toxic pollution even if you had no knowledge of the shingles being toxic.

I don't see how that can compare.

in that you have someone who should know what the product contains before putting it on someones house.
the other is teh idea of controlling a 3rd party's actions (wich is not possible). i just don't see how you can compare them.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
33,030
12,396
136
while sony released a very low number of consoles, they are in no way responsible for the actions of dumbasses. im defending sony on this because this comes down to personal responsibility. the mayor is trying to blame sony instead of arresting rioters.
 

zoiks

Lifer
Jan 13, 2000
11,787
3
81
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: zoiks
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: zoiks
Unless this was part of Sony's ploy to make the PS3 more appealing and exclusive by executing a marketing tactic, the mayor has no merit.

even if they did reduce the supply does that really make sony responsible for someont rioting?

wouldnt that be the choice of the person? soney didnt force them to riot. not to mention it has been well known that supply was short.

They still could definitely be charged if the defense was only that point.
I remember a lawyer telling our engineering class that if you installed roof shingles that exuded some kind of toxic chemical when it rained, you still could be liable for toxic pollution even if you had no knowledge of the shingles being toxic.

I don't see how that can compare.

in that you have someone who should know what the product contains before putting it on someones house.
the other is teh idea of controlling a 3rd party's actions (wich is not possible). i just don't see how you can compare them.


Sure. It happens every day. If you develop a product that causes indirect injury and pain to someone even though that was not your intention, you're still liable for it though I have to say that I'm not sure if Sony intended this to turn out this way or not.
If the PS3 was marketed in a way to instigate hype and popularity and then you have injury and mayhem as an indirect consequence, in my opinion they could be held responsible.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: zoiks
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: zoiks
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: zoiks
Unless this was part of Sony's ploy to make the PS3 more appealing and exclusive by executing a marketing tactic, the mayor has no merit.

even if they did reduce the supply does that really make sony responsible for someont rioting?

wouldnt that be the choice of the person? soney didnt force them to riot. not to mention it has been well known that supply was short.

They still could definitely be charged if the defense was only that point.
I remember a lawyer telling our engineering class that if you installed roof shingles that exuded some kind of toxic chemical when it rained, you still could be liable for toxic pollution even if you had no knowledge of the shingles being toxic.

I don't see how that can compare.

in that you have someone who should know what the product contains before putting it on someones house.
the other is teh idea of controlling a 3rd party's actions (wich is not possible). i just don't see how you can compare them.


Sure. It happens every day. If you develop a product that causes indirect injury and pain to someone even though that was not your intention, you're still liable for it though I have to say that I'm not sure if Sony intended this to turn out this way or not.
If the PS3 was marketed in a way to instigate hype and popularity and then you have injury and mayhem as an indirect consequence, in my opinion they could be held responsible.

I can see Sony responsible if the PS3 got up and rioted. but Sony is not harming anyone directly like you are showing.

but this is a 3rd party. PS3 is not causing something. they are rioting becasue they couldnt get it. how is that sony's fault again?

every product is marketed for hype and popularity. so since i can't get crystal pepsi is it ok for me to go bash in some windows?

 

Riverhound777

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2003
3,360
61
91
I would blame the idiots at the store who let them run in. I got my Nintindo yesterday at Costco and had no problems whatsoever. They handed each person who had a membership card a ticket an hour before the store opened. They let us do whatever we wanted at that point. When they opened we all walked in and lined up according to our number on the ticket. They had two stacks of Wiis at two registers. The whole thing took about 30 mins to sell 47 Wiis. It wasn't that hard. No problems at all.
 

OSX

Senior member
Feb 9, 2006
662
0
0
Originally posted by: zoiks
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: zoiks
Unless this was part of Sony's ploy to make the PS3 more appealing and exclusive by executing a marketing tactic, the mayor has no merit.

even if they did reduce the supply does that really make sony responsible for someont rioting?

wouldnt that be the choice of the person? soney didnt force them to riot. not to mention it has been well known that supply was short.

They still could definitely be charged if the defense was only that point.
I remember a lawyer telling our engineering class that if you installed roof shingles that exuded some kind of toxic chemical when it rained, you still could be liable for toxic pollution even if you had no knowledge of the shingles being toxic.

The only issue I could see with that is that it would be hard to prove that Sony intentionally under produced units. They can just say they weren't prepared to make so many units in a short period of time. It's not like the PS3 is dangerous, the PS3 didn't cause the riots. The people in line were the ones who rioted.
 

zoiks

Lifer
Jan 13, 2000
11,787
3
81
If a certain individual performs some manic act that causes damage and injury to other people then that person will definitely be prosecuted. However if it does get proven that Sony willfully tried to induce mass monomania about the PS3, then they probably also can be held liable for consequences resulting from that hysteria. I'm not saying that its an argument that will play or not but I'm sure it can be carried.
I guess it would have to be proven that Sony did in fact provoke the hype and resulting rage by making sure a smaller number of PS3s are shipped.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
This is even more hilarious because the majority of scalpers are getting almost meaningless profits considering the time, money, effort, and stress they had to go through.

60GBs are around $1k and 20GBs are around $800 on eBay. Definitely not worth the effort in Copely, or for the guy that got shot.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: jpeyton
This is even more hilarious because the majority of scalpers are getting almost meaningless profits considering the time, money, effort, and stress they had to go through.

60GBs are around $1k and 20GBs are around $800 on eBay. Definitely not worth the effort in Copely, or for the guy that got shot.

heh had some guy try to sell me today for $1100.

i went for lunch with my sister. we were talking about birthday/christmas presants (my b-day is early december). i mentioned i wanted a PS3 but coldnt find one. the guy next to us said he had 4 and would sell it to us for $1500. i laughed and said no and turned back to my food.

he then lowered it to $1400. eventually got down to $1100. i finally said no but i will buy it for $200.
he said something like "wtf you stupid!? i paid $600 for it!"

i said " yeah thats why you should take $200! you been trying to sell it and reduced the price $400 in 10 minutes. by tommorow it will be worthless! you better try to salvage what you can so you don't look like a total fool!" he just sat down. though my sister and his im guessing GF were laughing.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: jpeyton
This is even more hilarious because the majority of scalpers are getting almost meaningless profits considering the time, money, effort, and stress they had to go through.

60GBs are around $1k and 20GBs are around $800 on eBay. Definitely not worth the effort in Copely, or for the guy that got shot.

Unless Sony starts replenishing the supply chain those may go back up some. The number of PS3s on eBay is dropping fast. Looks like most everybody listed their's on Friday or Saturday and all those auctions are ending.
 

DeviousTrap

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2002
4,841
0
71
Originally posted by: zoiks
If a certain individual performs some manic act that causes damage and injury to other people then that person will definitely be prosecuted. However if it does get proven that Sony willfully tried to induce mass monomania about the PS3, then they probably also can be held liable for consequences resulting from that hysteria. I'm not saying that its an argument that will play or not but I'm sure it can be carried.
I guess it would have to be proven that Sony did in fact provoke the hype and resulting rage by making sure a smaller number of PS3s are shipped.

Exactly, and everybody in this thread seems to be missing the point of the action. That article a bit different than the one that I read this morning. From what I read earlier the Mayor is not suing Sony because they are the makers of the PS3. He is suing Sony, as the owners of the "Sony Style" store. Had there been riots in front of Best Buy and police were called there he would be suing Best Buy instead.

Edit: More Specific Article
 

b0mbrman

Lifer
Jun 1, 2001
29,470
1
81
Originally posted by: MedicBob
I am not sure Sony is at fault. However Best Buy and other retailers are, they could of done it alot calmer and just gave out the tickets to the first whatever number in line.

Or raise the price and let the problem solve itself...