A legal expert says that such a case is "untested" in UK and EU law as to where the blame lies, with the manufacturer or the retailer. It's complex.
Anthony Ventura has filed with the North District of California court afor breaching sales contract after they removed support for Other OS by a firmware update, and accusing them of deceit behind their motives for doing so.
"This case raises questions about whether console manufacturers or retailers should be liable over the removal of features which were marketed to consumers at the point of sale but are removed subsequently," said Olswang LLP lawyer Jas Purewal, reports .
Amazon UK has already given out partial refunds to some customers according to reports, after customer complaints - it falls to the retailers in Europe if a product's features aren't compliant with what was promised at sale.
"This issue is relatively untested in the UK and Europe. Consumer protection is an important part of UK/EU law, which imposes certain minimum legal obligations on retailers regarding the sale of goods to consumers: for example, goods must be of satisfactory quality and must be fit for purpose," he explained.
"Consumers could argue that changes to console functionality are a breach of those obligations," he added.
"On the other hand, there is an argument that manufacturers should have leeway if the console needs to be modified for genuine reasons, such as security or anti-piracy." Sony cites security reasons for dropping Other OS support, which comes after claims that a hacker has successfully 'cracked' the PS3 inner workings.
"Clearly this matter raises quite complex issues and, if it was litigated in Europe, it would be interesting to see where the courts' sympathy would lie," added Purewal.
Surely the platform holders have a right to protect their systems providing their common sense ideas? Are Sony in the wrong here?