In 2006, Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC introduced the PlayStation 3 (PS3) gaming system, as ““the most advanced computer system that serves as a platform to enjoy next generation computer entertainment.” Sony promoted PS3’s innovative capabilities: access to online gaming through the PlayStation Network (PSN) and an “Other OS” feature, which enabled users to install other operating systems and use the console as a personal computer. In some promotional materials, Sony stated that it expected the PS3 to have a “ten year life cycle” and that it would “be a console that’s going to be with you again for 10 years.” However, the product license agreement and terms of service informed consumers that updates could result in some features losing functionality. 

In 2010, Sony released a PS3 software update that posed a difficult dilemma for PS3 owners. Installing the update would improve online gaming, but disable the Other OS feature; declining it would maintain the Other OS, but disable access to the PSN.

A group of disgruntled gamers sued Sony, claiming breach of express warranty. They argued that Sony expressly promised that the PS3 and all of its features would work for ten years, but later unilaterally took away a fundamental product feature after only four years. The district court dismissed the claim, reasoning that the companies’ statements did not amount to express warranties. The plaintiffs appealed.

Questions:

1. Did Sony’s statements amount to express warranties?

2. What is an express warranty?

3. Would you classify Sony’s claims about the ten year life cycle as more akin to puffery or an affirmation of fact?