[eridius]

That doesn't really have any bearing on Sony's contractual obligations as a console vendor. And you'll note PC games are often DRM-laden, and the DRM vendors surely have their own contractual obligations to do as much as they can to prevent their DRM platform from being compromised. Similarly, I know for sure that back when Apple sold DRM-laden music, they had contractual obligations to the music labels to fix any FairPlay holes they could.

[middleorigin]

...which are again on Sony for signing in the first place.

I mean it's their right to be a purely gaming console, but they should also accept blame for tanking their reputation with the open source community.

[eridius]

They should be given kudos for even trying, not blame for failing at what appears to be an impossible task. Sony thought they could offer Linux-on-PS3 and still keep the PS3 secure. For a while it seemed to work, but eventually it was demonstrated that Linux-on-PS3 broke the security model of the PS3. Sony really had no choice, because it's a gaming console first and foremost and they had to protect that. Yeah it sucks for everyone who was interested in using it as a Linux machine, but if you can't recognize that Sony had an obligation to protect the gaming console over the Linux support, I don't really know what to say to you.

[middleorigin]

However you view it, the damage is done.