Back in 2011, the PlayStation Network was attacked by hackers. The intruders brought the service down for three weeks and put millions of users' personal information at risk.

Afterward, Sony offered a "Welcome Back" program as an apology, but a few particularly irate consumers didn't think this was sufficient. Hence, the lawsuits leveled at the electronics titan. Now, as reported by Polygon , Sony and the plaintiffs have reached a $15 million settlement agreement.

Those who did not receive any games during the Welcome Back program get two benefits: Either a game for the PS3 or PSP, three PS3 themes, or a three-month subscription to PlayStation Plus. You can choose two of the same benefit if you wish; these will be given away on a first-come, first-served basis until the total compensation value hits $6 million. If that cap is reached, users can then receive one month of Plus.

If you did get games during the Welcome Back program, you can snag one additional PS3 or PS3 title, three PS3 themes, or one three-month Plus membership. These will be handed out until the total valute hits $4 million, after which a month of Plus is on the table. You just have to bear in mind that these Plus benefits are only for those who have never subscribed to the service before.

Here are the available titles:

The settlement still has to be approved by a judge but once that happens, all of this is finally over.

Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
6 years ago

That was kinda confusing but whatever. Damn those sorcerers! *shakes fist*

Nas Is Like
Nas Is Like
6 years ago

Your icon shows you about to kick in something. Preferably a door.

Corvo
Corvo
6 years ago

Still think this is completely unnecessary. But it shows Sony DOES care about its users. Xbox was hacked a few days ago and was down for about 29 hours. I believe it was just the 360 though. Funny how that never made news. Well I guess it did since I read about it, but I mean like freakout levels of news.

Shauneepeak
Shauneepeak
6 years ago

There was a MAJOR hack of XBL quite a while before the PSN hack and Microsoft to this day refuses to acknowledge it was any fault of their own. Thousands of users had their credit card numbers stolen and accounts hacked.
Microsoft had actually tried to blame it all on a security hole in that year's FIFA game….. except this fell apart when hundreds of people who were hacked and people still being hacked had never even touched a FIFA game.

Yet none of this is remembered also don't believe it even got any major news coverage. =

SASSYGIRL82
SASSYGIRL82
6 years ago

Got all the ps3 stuff but rain I'll take it lol

Ather
Ather
6 years ago

Going to get me Rain.

Underdog15
Underdog15
6 years ago

That's an incredibly small amount for a class action suit that affected millions of users. It's like a slap on the wrist that says they could have done more. (Probably completely covered by insurance.)

Actually, if insurance does cover it, and they distribute 6 million in their own product, they'd essentially earn whatever money they get covered by insurance that doesn't pay out to a third party…

Well played, Sony. Well played.

Harerazer
Harerazer
6 years ago

Let's keep in mind that they got hacked. Sony was the victim here (as well as us). This is kinda like having your neighbor's house broken into and then telling him he has to pay back for what *may* have been stolen.

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what Sony's fault in this was.

Underdog15
Underdog15
6 years ago

It's not really about who the bad guy is. The hackers broke the law by accessing locked info (a sort of B&E if you will). Sony is responsible for handling any information it's clients give them. The more sensitive and valuable the information is, the greater the responsibility.

If the courts decide they could have done more to protect it than they did, they would be charged with a percentage of the guilt.

For example, lets look at a drinking and driving manslaughter charge for example. The person drinking and driving would be convicted of a large portion of blame. Lets say you, a perfectly sober person, pulled out into traffic irresponsibly. The drunk driver technically had the right of way, however, it is determined had he not been drunk, he could have stopped. The drunk driver, depending on the judge, would likely be given the bulk of the blame if it was proven he could have stopped in time. But you would also be given a percentage of blame for not driving with proper care: a degree of some negligence pulling out into oncoming traffic. (Lets say the passenger sitting next to you had died)

Then on top of it all, the bar as an establishment as well as the person who served that person to the point of intoxication would also acquire part of the blame for not cutting them off, calling the police to tell them a drunk person is driving, and not recommending they call a cab or something, essentially dividing the blame (unevenly) among 4 parties.

Just because you are basically a victim of an impaired driver (as well as the establishment owners who might not have even been there that night and provided the proper training to the person who served them properly), the law would determine that since you did not do everything the way you should have, you own part of the blame.

It might seem unfair, but that's how the law works.


Last edited by Underdog15 on 7/25/2014 11:11:14 AM

Rachet_JC_FTW
Rachet_JC_FTW
6 years ago

well i can get a free game then infamous would be the one i would like to get.

happy gaming