that really isn’t a fair comparison at all and i’d imagine if the article was about them suspending accounts associated with any/all hacked consoles then the tone would've been very different..
in this case, they’re denying access to their service to users who both: violated the tos by messing with their devices, and (more importantly) utilized that to steal a product (one that cost likely in excess of $100MM to develop).
even if you’re in favour of less restrictive copyright law, or against closed systems in general, there still are, and in my opinion should-be, limits. and i wouldn’t fault apple either if they locked-out jailbroken iphones that allowed users to freely download paid app-store apps (or music/videos from itunes), and i’m sure the developers of those apps (or content publishers) would agree.
in this case, they’re denying access to their service to users who both: violated the tos by messing with their devices, and (more importantly) utilized that to steal a product (one that cost likely in excess of $100MM to develop).
even if you’re in favour of less restrictive copyright law, or against closed systems in general, there still are, and in my opinion should-be, limits. and i wouldn’t fault apple either if they locked-out jailbroken iphones that allowed users to freely download paid app-store apps (or music/videos from itunes), and i’m sure the developers of those apps (or content publishers) would agree.