Not true. National ID identity theft would simply be big business. By definition you cannot control all the hardware in such a scenario and so there would be workarounds.

In this case any rights that Sony would be trying to enforce come from a law which is provided by the state. If that law prevents you from exercising those rights then it is indeed the state interfering with your rights (perhaps on the behalf of the Corporation). To my knowledge you do not need to sign a contract with Sony in order to obtain a PS3, and without that contract you "should" retain all the rights associated with owning a piece of property. Notwithstanding copyrights which are written into the constitution the federal laws should grant Sony no special powers over your property. Sony should be left with only a copyright claim, which would be pretty weak.

Now I am not so naive to believe that the system works that way, but in short Sony should have no hold on your usage of your hardware. (Obviously since this case is in Germany a whole different framework applies, however.)

And this is where we part ways. You cannot have the right not to be offended, even if the government says you do. Such a right (perfectly enforced) would lead to a society where noone could say anything to anyone for fear of offending them. And it wouldn't stop there as I personally know people who'd be happy to take there offense at the slightest smell to a judge. Wearing the wrong cologne today?

The bar must be set higher to have logically consistent rules.

The original argument was that countries with socialized medicine would not have astronomical costs for the cash buyer. They shouldn't get it free, but the actual amount charged (to whoever is actually paying for the device) is what is at issue here.