First amendment rights wouldn't apply in this case, would they? And if he was banned, it was probably for a reason...

Agoraphobia sucks, but you'd think if that was his only means of communication (no computer?) that he'd behave a little better and follow the rules.

......What a dick.

Since his PSN ban he's been playing a lot of Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe on the Xbox 360 and he told GamePolitics that he's "a bit obsessed" with the character of The Joker. "I plan to wear a purple suit during my court trials," he said. "No joke!"

And he just lost any sympathy he was thinking about getting from the new judge. This guy needs to learn something, you sign your first amendment rights away with the fucking EULA.

Edit:I just thought of this, if he is truly agoraphobic how does he plan to go to court for that trial in the first place, or will his defense be seen via streaming video?

Malygris:
"I plan to wear a PURPLE SUIT during my court trials," he said. "No joke!"

Joker, why not just go as Edgeworth more badass in a suave way.

Why... What is stopping this man from just getting another account? What is stopping him from just playing other games? Why can't he leave well enough alone? Nothing will come out of this but pain and misery. Even if, by the magic of the California court system, he wins, Sony will just appeal his win and they'll be going at this until he's dead.

He can join an Agoraphobics united club online. They'll have meetings via webcam. It'll be great.

This guy needs a PS3 to communicate with others???

WHY HASN'T HE TRIED THE INTERNET???

Malygris:

Neither case seems very likely to proceed very far, in no small part because Estavillo is representing himself in both. Since his PSN ban he's been playing a lot of Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe on the Xbox 360 and he told GamePolitics that he's "a bit obsessed" with the character of The Joker. "I plan to wear a purple suit during my court trials," he said. "No joke!"

Oh yeah, that'll go down a treat.

matrix3509:
How is Sony "not subject to First Amendment obligations?" Anything that operates in the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws. Unless he was making threats, all speech is protected speech.

When you sign up to Sony's ToS/EULA, you agree to abide by their ToS/EULA. Haven't read it all myself but I'm fairly certain there'll be a "We can ban you whenever we want, for whatever we want." style thing in there.

The guy could have avoided all this if he hadn't been a colossal cock and gotten banned in the first place. It's quite clear he didn't value his PSN account highly enough to warrant not acting douchey enough to be on the end of a banstick.

matrix3509:
How is Sony "not subject to First Amendment obligations?" Anything that operates in the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws. Unless he was making threats, all speech is protected speech.

The first amendment states that the government can't take away your right to free speech, but it says nothing about private companies not being able to do it.

Flos:
Why... What is stopping this man from just getting another account? What is stopping him from just playing other games? Why can't he leave well enough alone?

I agree, you can make another PSN account, it is free and the only thing he would lose would be his friends (if he has any) and trophies. But that is it, a small price to pay I believe.

matrix3509:
How is Sony "not subject to First Amendment obligations?" Anything that operates in the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws. Unless he was making threats, all speech is protected speech.

Yeah, stick it to the man!

In all fairness, having agoraphobia doesnt entitle him to be a douche online, he was likely doing something out of order, or he wouldn't of gotten banned in the first place, besides I'm pretty sure Sony are going to win this one, along with the fact the EULA/Terms of Use, which he agreed to when he signed up.

Flos:
Why... What is stopping this man from just getting another account?

From the previous articles I have seen on this case, it isn't just about him being cut off from his "only form of socialization" (he does have an Xbox). He is pissed because he would have his mom/dad/sibling/someone go to Gamestop and buy him PSN money for his wallet online. Apparently he had accrued something of (if I remember right) $120 in his wallet which, when the account was banned,was lost to him.

From the looks of it, the media is more focused on the agoraphobia part of the case. Honestly, I think that he has a terrible case and am appalled that he is even considering appealing. Really though, either way you look at it, he has no case. Who really gathers $120 worth of PSN money and just lets it sit in his account. He obviously wasn't using it if he had that much.

This is just way out of hand...

(Feel free to fact check me on the amount in his wallet)

matrix3509:
How is Sony "not subject to First Amendment obligations?" Anything that operates in the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws. Unless he was making threats, all speech is protected speech.

Except it is not. Speech on private property is not protected in any way.

Gxas:

Flos:
Why... What is stopping this man from just getting another account?

From the previous articles I have seen on this case, it isn't just about him being cut off from his "only form of socialization" (he does have an Xbox). He is pissed because he would have his mom/dad/sibling/someone go to Gamestop and buy him PSN money for his wallet online. Apparently he had accrued something of (if I remember right) $120 in his wallet which, when the account was banned,was lost to him.

From the looks of it, the media is more focused on the agoraphobia part of the case. Honestly, I think that he has a terrible case and am appalled that he is even considering appealing. Really though, either way you look at it, he has no case. Who really gathers $120 worth of PSN money and just lets it sit in his account. He obviously wasn't using it if he had that much.

This is just way out of hand...

(Feel free to fact check me on the amount in his wallet)

That makes a twisted kind of sense, but no amount of money, short of a couple million, is worth taking on Sony. He's going to lose quite a bit more than $120 for this, unless he happens to be representing himself.

Flos:
That makes a twisted kind of sense, but no amount of money, short of a couple million, is worth taking on Sony. He's going to lose quite a bit more than $120 for this, unless he happens to be representing himself.

Exactly, he has no case here. He signed the EULA. He's toast. No amount of people in purple suits will change this.

Yeah, I think this guy sounds like a twat (hope he doesn't sue me for saying that). Just another person who thinks that they're an exception to the rules and that the world owes them something: the world doesn't give a shit about him. Oh well...Maybe this turn of events will encourage him to actually go outside.

ViktorValentine:
......What a dick.

My sentiments exactly.

Just get a new account and chalk the 120 up to payment for being stupid enough to get banned. And how do you even get banned on PSN?

As for stocking up on cash in the PSN there is no need to run to Gamestop. A credit card will do the trick. I'll assume he has one if he can't leave home, what with all the shopping online that forces him to do. ANd next time don't let that amount of green loaf around on PSN. Just transfer what is needed for a given purchase and not more. Simple.

What is it with you Americans? Always sueing each other over pointless things.

matrix3509:
How is Sony "not subject to First Amendment obligations?" Anything that operates in the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws. Unless he was making threats, all speech is protected speech.

The 1st amendment prohibits Congress from passing laws which abridge freedom of speech, press, religion and free assembly. Sony is not Congress. Sony didn't pass a law. 1 st Amendment has no bearing.

matrix3509:
How is Sony "not subject to First Amendment obligations?" Anything that operates in the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws. Unless he was making threats, all speech is protected speech.

By that logic there shouldn't be anyone banned from here. And what about the digital contract he signed? Why does the first amendment give him the freedom to break the rules of a contract he agreed too?

Man I hope the courts fine him $180,000 for wasting thier time. And then Sony can sue him for taping his conversation with customer support (without authorization) and posting it on youtube for another $180,000.

.... he likes the Joker, eh? That would explain why he's acting so crazy. *ba dum tish*

ok i could understand that he's angry but come on its his own fault all the time he's wasting he could have gone got another psn with out any problems jeez

What was he banned for in the first place?

I saw we formally invite Eric to participate in the Escapist Forums. As long as he complies with the forum rules, I think it would be a much healthier outlet than constantly sueing poor SCEA. And if he ever tries to sue the website, no worries over legal fees - you won't need to hire a lawyer, we'll self-represent!

Two stipulations, Eric:
-Obey the community rules and no body gets b&!
-Bring your purple suit. I'll bring my top-hat and penguins. ;)

nathan-dts:
What is it with you Americans? Always sueing each other over pointless things.

Because judging 400 million people by the actions of a select few is not a dickish move. Nope.

squid5580:

matrix3509:
How is Sony "not subject to First Amendment obligations?" Anything that operates in the U.S. is subject to U.S. laws. Unless he was making threats, all speech is protected speech.

By that logic there shouldn't be anyone banned from here. And what about the digital contract he signed? Why does the first amendment give him the freedom to break the rules of a contract he agreed too?

Man I hope the courts fine him $180,000 for wasting thier time. And then Sony can sue him for taping his conversation with customer support (without authorization) and posting it on youtube for another $180,000.

I'm pretty sure they could figure out a way to do it, too. It's called "Punitive Damages", AKA "The-God-I-Don't-Believe-In's gift to the courts".

Gxas:

Flos:
That makes a twisted kind of sense, but no amount of money, short of a couple million, is worth taking on Sony. He's going to lose quite a bit more than $120 for this, unless he happens to be representing himself.

Exactly, he has no case here. He signed the EULA. He's toast. No amount of people in purple suits will change this.

What about ten?

NotPigeon:
What was he banned for in the first place?

In essence: Being a douchebag. I believe it was on Killzone 2.

My own opinion: I'd been on the guy's side until I found out he taped the phone conversation. And that he'd been basically provoking the people he was online with.

For an agoraphobic, a purple, attention-getting suit, and several trips to court seems a little... not-so-agoraphobic.

If you catch my drift.

I'm worried.

The Escapist bans people regularly for being twats - what if one of them turns out to be agoraphobic :O

This guy probably deserved what happened to him. I say that because I've said some really messed up things all over PSN. In fact, me and a couple of friends made different characters of different races in the Home Beta and walked into each other and said some really messed up things. It didn't bother us because we're culturally diverse group and we just tore into each other and anybody who joined in. Not once did any of us get talked to, receive any emails, or warnings. What the hell was this guy saying that got him banned for life?

PSN is privately owned, they can set any rules they want as long as they aren't discriminatory against race, gender or religion. It's like if the escapist banned you for cussing out a mod, it's not a first amendment issue.

If he was being a cock or broke the rules, then he gets banned. Its not like he has a right to PSN or whatever anyway.

Me thinks we have an attention whore on our hands.

Seriously, I think he's just going through all of this to get a bunch of people talking about him so he can have his 15 minutes of fame. After all, it's working, isn't it?

Unless he can afford Sony's range in lawyers, he doesn't have a chance