Well it seems that Sony are untouchable, they keep getting sued and keep winning, the latest case they won is “The people Vs Sony” in regards to PSN being hacked, here are a couple of quotes from the final court document:
SONY GAMING NETWORKS AND CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION
I. Factual Background
This action arises out of a criminal intrusion into the computer network system used to provide
PlayStation Network (“PSN”) services. Plaintiffs, a putative consumer class, allege that Sony Computer
Entertainment America, LLC (“SCEA”), Sony Network Entertainment International, LLC and Sony
Network Entertainment America, Inc. (collectively, “SNE”), Sony Online Entertainment, LLC (“SOE”),
and Sony Corporation of America (“SCA”) (collectively, “Sony” or “Defendants”) failed to follow basic
industry-standard protocols to safeguard its customers personal and financial information, thereby
creating foreseeable harm and injury to the Plaintiff class.
Sony develops and markets the PlayStation Portable (“PSP”) hand-held device and the
PlayStation 3 (“PSP”) console (collectively, “consoles”)
Among their key features are their ability to let users play games, connect to the Internet, access the PlayStation Network
(“PSN”), Qriocity, and Sony Online Entertainment (“SOE”) (collectively, “Sony Online Services” or
“SOS”), . For additional fees, the PSN also allows access to various third party
services such as Netflix, MLB.TV, and NHL Gamecenter LIVE (“Third Party Services”).
These additional fees are paid to the source of the service rather than to Sony. Many who subscribe to
these Third Party Services can only access them through their PSN account. As of
January 25, 2011, PSN had over 69 million users worldwide,[Id], and SOE had over 24.6 million users
When establishing accounts with PSN, Qriocity, and SOE, Plaintiffs and other Class members
were required to provide personally identifying information to Sony, including their names, mailing
addresses, email addresses, birth dates, credit and debit card information (card numbers, expiration dates
and security codes) and login credentials (“Personal Information”), which Sony stores and maintains on
its Network. Sony continually monitors and records users’ PSN activities, purchases and
usage, and maintains this usage data on its Network.3
Plaintiffs allege that on April 16 or 17, 2011, hackers accessed Sony’s Network, stealing the
Personal Information of millions of Sony customers, including Plaintiffs and the other Class members
(the “Data Breach”). On April 17, 2011, Sony discovered that PSN and Qriocity user data
had been stolen. Three days later, Sony took the PSN and Qriocity offline, stating that
“[w]e’re aware certain functions of PlayStation Network are down. We will report back here as soon as
we can with more information.” As a result of the Data Breach, Sony was forced to shut
down the PSN and Qriocity for almost a month while it conducted a systems audit to determine the
cause of the data breach. Meanwhile, SOE remained offline for more than two weeks.
During this prolonged downtime, Plaintiffs and the other Class members were unable to access PSN,
Qriocity, and SOE, unable to play multi-player online games with others, and unable to use online
services available through the PSN, Qriocity or SOE. Plaintiffs and the other Class members were also
unable to access and use prepaid Third Party Services.
For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants’
motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs have until November 9, 2012 to file an amended Consolidated Complaint.
Specifically, the Court makes the following findings with respect to Defendants’ instant motion:
1. GRANTS Defendants’ supplemental request for judicial notice as to all documents, but
not as to the contents of the Privacy Protection Guidelines;
2. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of Article III standing as to Defendants
SOE and SCA with leave to amend;
3. DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of Article III standing as to the
remaining Sony Defendants;
4. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Sixth Cause of Action for negligence
with leave to amend;
5. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the First, Second, and Third Causes of
Action under the UCL, FAL, and CLRA with prejudice as to non-resident Plaintiffs and
Plaintiffs claims for restitution, and with leave to amend with respect to the remaining
6. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Fourth Cause of Action under the
Breach Act with prejudice as to non-resident Plaintiffs, and with leave to amend as to
resident Plaintiffs and all remaining claims;
7. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Fifth Cause of Action alleging unjust
enrichment with prejudice;
8. GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss as to the Seventh Cause of Action alleging
bailment with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 11, 2012
To read the full document, download it here.Tweet this!