Support NeoGAF

[squatingyeti]

Here is the link to the groklaw breakdown of what has recently been happening:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110327185437805
All of it very interesting and turns the tables on Sony in some key areas. Of biggest interest is the "Abuse of Discovery" by Sony section. Of course, we should all know Hotz is terrible, avoided all discovery, and fled the country...according to Sony. As Scientology would put it, What are your crimes Sony?

Here is the full pdf link: http://www.groklaw.net/pdf2/SonyvHotz-117.pdf

EDITED and now BOLDED: for those crying no one would have a clue this is Hotz's legal answer to claims made by Sony. THIS IS FROM HOTZ'S ATTORNEY. IT DIRECTLY ADDRESSES CLAIMS MADE BY SONY. Again HOTZ'S ATTORNEY. This must all be invalidated because it is Hotz's attorney /sarcasm.

It is also worth noting that SCEA has failed to proffer any PSN TOS that could be applicable to Mr. Hotz, even assuming everything SCEA has said is true, because the PSN TOS SCEA has proffered was created after Mr. Hotz purportedly created a PSN account.

Finally, SCEA has yet to offer any proof that Mr. Hotz accepted the PSN TOS. From the start of this case, SCEA has asserted dubious arguments, which are often contradictory, pertaining to the PSN. Initially, SCEA stated that Mr. Hotz had a PSN account under the name “Geo1Hotz”, which incidentally, does not include any information relating to Mr. Hotz. Dkt No. 31, Gilliland Dec. Ex. A. Nonetheless, SCEA argues that jurisdiction exists as a virtue of this account and points to the fact that Mr. Hotz frequently utilizes the username “geohot”, wholly ignoring that all other information indicates it has no connection with Mr. Hotz.

Now, SCEA claims that Mr. Hotz must have created a PSN account for the name “blickmaniac” because the serial number of one of the Playstation Computers that Mr. Hotz purchased-- including 3 Playstation Computers that were purchased used-- was used to register a PSN account. The serial number utilized by SCEA, however, is different from the serial number proffered by Mr. Hotz's attorney. Compare Law Dec., Ex. A, with Kellar Dec., Ex. L. Moreover, such information does not include any information relating to Mr. Hotz.3 The sole way SCEA attempts to demonstrate that “blickmaniac” is Mr. Hotz is an unauthenticated and hearsay blog posting where an individual attempts to sell an unlocked cell phone -- which is not unusual and major product retailers like Amazon.com sell.

3 Curiously, the exhibit proffered by SCEA regarding the purported “blickmanic” account indicates that there was some form of purchase or transaction relating to this account. Law Dec. Ex. A. Consistent with SCEA's general refusal to provide Mr. Hotz with its requested discovery responses, SCEA has not provided any information pertaining to this transaction to Mr. Hotz's counsel.

The produced business agreement has been modified to a shade of light grey. Because of the lightening of the file and the normal black text of the Bates stamps, I was unable to run optical character recognition software (OCR) on the file or any other file from SCEA that was produced in this form. Because the exhibit was marked by SCEA’s counsel as Attorneys Eyes Only, it has been filed under seal.

In contrast, SCEA's document production failed to comply with the instructions to produce TIFF files and SCEA intentionally sabotaged its produced files to prevent the use of OCR software, disabling Mr. Hotz from searching for text therein. Kellar Dec. Ex. L (compare Bricker Dec. filed with Court with Bricker Dec. produced to Mr. Hotz). SCEA also propounded nine interrogatories on Mr. Hotz. Similarly, he responded to each one. Finally, SCEA demanded an inspection of Mr. Hotz's impounded hard drives and Mr. Hotz's PS3s. SCEA subsequently withdrew its request to inspect the impounded hard drives, but now has reasserted this request.

At a hearing with Judge Spero, SCEA said it needed to search Mr. Hotz’s hard drives for a Software Developer’s Kit (“SDK”) because, they claimed, it contains information that SCEA is in California. Dkt. No. 93, 10-12. Judge Spero ordered the parties to meet and confer and submit a joint letter by March 16. Order Dkt. No. 96 3:16-18. SCEA refused to meet in person regarding the letter. Once Mr. Hotz’s counsel discovered the SDK does not contain what SCEA stated, Mr. Hotz sought to bring this matter to the Court’s attention in the joint letter. To prejudice Mr. Hotz’s position, SCEA refused to timely provide its portion of the letter, preventing Mr. Hotz from rebutting its arguments. Dkt. 99. SCEA’s bad faith acts caused the March 16 letter to be delayed. Id. SCEA is not in a position to vilify Mr. Hotz when it is SCEA that continues to proceed in bad faith.

Further, SCEA abuses the sealing process by filing documents under seal which have no business being sealed. SCEA seals periodicals and publicly accessible web pages, falsely designating such items as Confidential...SCEA is thwarting the openness of the Courts with its abusive sealing, yet in its latest filing, SCEA intentionally published Mr. Hotz’s home address despite the fact it knows the massive media coverage this case receives

To put a cap on SCEA’s bad faith acts, SCEA waited until the eve Mr. Hotz’s reply brief was due to produce the most damning evidence of all: agreements between Sony Inc. and SCEA that eviscerate SCEA’s position that George’s acts were aimed at SCEA. SCEA produced these documents well after it agreed to produce all discovery documents. SCEA cannot be permitted to pervert the discovery process in this way.

A very good read on groklaw! Also, should we now be able to ridicule everyone supporting Sony because their behavior is clearly an attempt to harass and thwart discovery from the defense, but they went on the PR campaign in the media against Hotz.

 

[Neuromancer]

:lol Sony, it was a good try though.

 

[Shambles]

Are we jumping on the 'The law should side with whoever is less annoying' point of view again in this thread? I thought I might just try to head that off by saying that it probably doesn't matter since it would be a dead heat anyways.

 

[Alexios]

Are we jumping on the 'The law should side with whoever is less annoying' point of view again in this thread? I thought I might just try to head that off by saying that it probably doesn't matter since it would be a dead heat anyways.

What? There are barely any responses yet, did you want to post in the previous thread or what?

 

[squatingyeti]

Are we jumping on the 'The law should side with whoever is less annoying' point of view again in this thread? I thought I might just try to head that off by saying that it probably doesn't matter since it would be a dead heat anyways.

Absolutely not. In fact, what I am arguing is all of those that ran in the last thread believing Hotz has done all the terrible things and seeks to thwart the whole case from moving forward, face reality. Time to stop cheering the corporation which seeks to use the media to bring public opinion against an individual while they do just as much, if not more of what they accuse the individual.

 

[squatingyeti]

More as I sift through the actual PDF:

Mr. Hotz's personal website where he posted his Code is passive for purposes of personal jurisdiction. Pavlovich v. Superior Court, 29 Cal.4th 262 (2002) is controlling law on this sub-ject. It is an identical fact pattern in which the defendant posted a computer program, which could be downloaded by third parties, allowing them to circumvent DVD encryption technology. The Court found that merely posting the information for download was not sufficient for personal jurisdiction. SCEA alleges the exact same set of facts and comes to the opposite conclusion.

LOL

According to Mr. Bricker, 13,400 people (note, the actual claim was first 5,700, but Sony upped the claim using numbers that accrued AFTER the case was filed. AKA trying to skew the numbers) in California downloaded the Jailbreak, but over three hundred thousand people outside of California also downloaded it. If nothing else, this proves the release was not directed at California

Mr. Hotz's software release does not allow for direct infringement without substantial modification

BOOM goes the piracy boat Sony was trying to insinuate all along.

 

[Shambles]

What? There are barely any responses yet, did you want to post in the previous thread or what?

It was an attempt to divert the conversation away from the idea that the legal system should be setup around an American Idol method of casting votes based on popular opinion at the time. Previous threads have been quite scary in that regard as large portions of people seem unaware that a legal system will only function well if it's based on impartial judgement using facts and evidence.

 

[Alx]

Sometimes it reaches surreal levels :

Hotz's Declaration tells the court what you suspected, that he never opened the documentation that came with his new Playstation3. He still has the sealed bag, or more accurately his lawyer does. You can see pictures of it in exhibits attached to Stewart Kellar's Declaration. The other consoles he got used didn't come with any instruction manuals, and consequently he never knew SCEA existed, let alone that it was in California or that it had any connection to Playstation3, and he thought and still thinks that Sony Japan owns Playstations3s. When he looks at his consoles, they all reference Japan, Sony Computer Entertainment. Not a word about SCEA.

Consequently, when he offered to help Sony improve its security, he surely wasn't talking to SCEA, an entity he'd never heard of and didn't know existed.

 

[Threi]

I've said it in every thread and i'll say it again: this would make a great movie.

 

[UnblessedSoul]

Doesn't look good for Sony they might as well drop it now

 

[obonicus]

I've said it in every thread and i'll say it again: this would make a great movie.

It'd make a terrible movie, it'd be the lawyers and plaintiffs derping at each other.

 

[squatingyeti]

Sometimes it reaches surreal levels :

So that's what you took out of all of this? Not the fact that everything says Sony of Japan, including the firmware? Or the fact the SCEA has an agreement with SCEI that destroys what they have been alleging? Hotz could not have been targeting SCEA.

More:

SCEA fails to recognize that Mr. Hotz was able to gain counsel to represent him solely because many attorneys have been watch-ing the actions of SCEA, along with the rest of the world, in disbelief. Mr. Hotz counsel had been actively assisting him pro bono...

Response to Sony stating that because Hotz was able to get counsel, it isn't a burden to have the case in California. Sounds like a sound argument...

 

[Mr_Brit]

Simply pathetic Sony, the actual fact that this even made it this far doesn't speak to highly of the US legal process. I'm sure most modern countries would have thrown out the suit by now and made Sony pay all legal costs for both sides.

 

[Alx]

So that's what you took out of all of this? Not the fact that everything says Sony of Japan, including the firmware? Or the fact the SCEA has an agreement with SCEI that destroys what they have been alleging? Hotz could not have been targeting SCEA.

I'm not taking side in this case... I just find it funny that they can say with a straight face "I didn't know that SCEA existed because I never opened the manual".
Of course technically you can't disprove it, but nobody will believe it. It's all the charm of lawsuits, I guess.

 

[chubigans]

Hotz claims he's never heard of SCEA huh. What a bunch of BS.

 

[squatingyeti]

They were sure Geo1Hotz was him and sooo many people were quick to jump on the "caught him now derp derp" wagon. Never ever to even remotely prove it was him and now, they've moved on to claiming a different account is his with no proof. I need to find the arguments where they were trying to convince the judge the first account was assuredly him.

Hotz claims he's never heard of SCEA huh. What a bunch of BS.

I love how I can comb through and post so much shit that SCEA is trying to pull and yet, rather than say a bunch of people shouldn't have jumped on Hotz, we get stuff like this. That's not personally against you chub I just know there will be many more posts repeating and have been two already now.

It really doesn't matter if he knew they existed, the argument that he wouldn't be directing the statement at them, as they have nothing to do with the actual PS3 OR the firmware, still stands.

 

[LiK]

I've said it in every thread and i'll say it again: this would make a great movie.

Get Aaron Sorkin to write it.

 

[gcubed]

So that's what you took out of all of this? Not the fact that everything says Sony of Japan, including the firmware? Or the fact the SCEA has an agreement with SCEI that destroys what they have been alleging? Hotz could not have been targeting SCEA.

More:



Response to Sony stating that because Hotz was able to get counsel, it isn't a burden to have the case in California. Sounds like a sound argument...

no, he's pointing out that it is both completely ludicrous and humorous. You can still have your agenda but laugh at idiocy

 

[The Faceless Master]

lol, why would he know about SCEA? most people don't know Toyota makes cars in the USA either. why would he not equate Sony with Japan?

kinda shady how the Sony peeps messed with the documents to make them not OCR readable.

 

[WickedLaharl]

i am completely shocked that sony would act like weaselly douchebags in this situation.

 

[itxaka]

As I said in the other thread, justice is now trying to fed the judge with as many as half trues you can hoping that something will stick.

Ugh.

 

[Jocchan]

It'd make a terrible movie, it'd be the lawyers and plaintiffs derping at each other.

But it would have an awesome climax with rabid posters fighting to the death on Internet forums.
Wait, still terrible.

 

[fernoca]

I don't remember something...
Wasn't one of Geohotz' lawyers the one that said he was out of the country and not Sony? (when contacted by someone from Sony about surrendering some cards he removed or something?)

As always, throw me in the in between camp. Geohotz is a big douche and Sony is a big drama queen. Being against Hotz, doesn't mean I applaud Sony and want them to win.

 

[chubigans]

lol, why would he know about SCEA? most people don't know Toyota makes cars in the USA either. why would he not equate Sony with Japan?

kinda shady how the Sony peeps messed with the documents to make them not OCR readable.

He's not most people. He knows Sony firmware. He knows the PSP, PS3 and how that hardware works. He knows Sony's history with firmware updates and OtherOS. He damn well knows who SCEA is. To pretend not to because he has a sealed manual and doesn't read the comments on his blog is laughable.

That said I hope Sony loses and Hotz has tens of thousands in legal fees.

 

[Salaadin]

I don't remember something...
Wasn't one of Geohotz' lawyers the one that said he was out of the country and not Sony? (when contacted by someone from Sony about surrendering some cards he removed or something?)

As always, throw me in the in between camp. Geohotz is a big douche and Sony is a big drama queen. Being against Hotz, doesn't mean I applaud Sony and want them to win.

Itd be nice if they both lost.

 

[DMeisterJ]

No idea that SCEA exists? Yeah, okay.

 

[Starwolf_UK]

I've said it in every thread and i'll say it again: this would make a great movie.

If by Movie you mean courtroom only Ace Attorney case then I agree. I mean, the prosecution (Sony) have so many contradictions but each time they seem to find some "well but...what about this?" or "That may be true Mr. Wright but I have ABSOLUTE PROOF AND SURPRISE WITNESSES!".

That said the bit with the hard drive may contain files proving Sony is in California had me laughing my head off.

 

[Mama Robotnik]

So just to be absolutely sure on this:

George Hotz and his team are still fighting the case, and haven't absconded on a holiday cruise paid with deceptively-gained donation money, evading the swift, deserved and honourable justice being wielded by Sony like a corporate Excalibur of truth and righteous holy good?

Glad for the clarification. It means that a number of people in that other thread that caught the scent of blood, were jumping to faulty conclusions.

 

[graywolf323]

It is also worth noting that SCEA has failed to proffer any PSN TOS that could be applicable to Mr. Hotz, even assuming everything SCEA has said is true, because the PSN TOS SCEA has proffered was created after Mr. Hotz purportedly created a PSN account.

I seem to remember having to agree to a new TOS with every new firmware and the PSN TOS changes even

reading through that Groklaw does not come across as even remotely unbiased and objective in all of this

 

[Prophet Steve]

If by Movie you mean courtroom only Ace Attorney case then I agree. I mean, the prosecution (Sony) have so many contradictions but each time they seem to find some "well but...what about this?" or "That may be true Mr. Wright but I have ABSOLUTE PROOF AND SURPRISE WITNESSES!".

That said the bit with the hard drive may contain files proving Sony is in California had me laughing my head off.

Yes, exactly what I thought. Much better for an Ace Attorney case (still not great though).

 

[Evlar]

Groklaw. Now there's a neutral source for legal analysis.

 

[squatingyeti]

Yep, let's ignore everything else and talk about Hotz saying he didn't know SCEA existed. Never mind the ridiculous stuff SCEA is trying to do themselves.

More:

SCEA has filed this action in bad faith, knowing that it did not have a reasonable basis for jurisdiction, and has attempted to distract the Court by flooding the record. Mr. Hotz did not create the PSN Accounts it has put forth, yet has claimed that he created them nonetheless and conveniently omitted the information that demonstrates they do not belong to him. SCEA knows that the majority of people who have downloaded the Code Hotz created are not from California, yet it conveniently omits these figures. SCEA knows that this matter is supposed to pertain to jurisdiction, yet it constantly includes irrelevant and prejudicial exhibits with sealed documents of public web pages that include hearsay statements from users with dubious names like 'dragon ninja" to make Mr. Hotz look bad.

All the stuff I've posted, let's keep talking about whether he knew if SCEA existed or not. Ignore the fact that it wouldn't matter if he did or did not, because their OWN agreement states they have nothing to do with the PS3 or the firmware.

no reasonable person (that is a sound legal argument) owning a Playstation Computer would have arrived at such a conclusion. In-deed, pursuant to SCEA's own statements, it is essentially nothing more than a distributor and marketing company.

Groklaw. Now there's a neutral source for legal analysis.

Seriously?!?! I'm posting quotes DIRECTLY from the PDF. Groklaw is a shorter read for people and I posted BOTH links.

 

[Evlar]

Yep, let's ignore everything else and talk about Hotz saying he didn't know SCEA existed. Never mind the ridiculous stuff SCEA is trying to do themselves.

More:



All the stuff I've posted, let's keep talking about whether he knew if SCEA existed or not. Ignore the fact that it wouldn't matter if he did or did not, because their OWN agreement states they have nothing to do with the PS3 or the firmware.

Perhaps before you post up these giant blocks of quoted text with bolded sections you could clarify, for the GAF public who aren't going to click on your link or won't know what they're looking at when they do, that the document you are quoting from is a brief by Hotz's lawyer. If it sounds damning toward Sony, that's because it's his job to make those arguments.

 

[TommyT]

So just to be absolutely sure on this:

George Hotz and his team are still fighting the case, and haven't absconded on a holiday cruise paid with deceptively-gained donation money, evading the swift, deserved and honourable justice being wielded by Sony like a corporate Excalibur of truth and righteous holy good?

Glad for the clarification. It means that a number of people in that other thread that caught the scent of blood, were jumping to faulty conclusions.

People jumped to conclusions and on the bandwagon and aren't going to eat their crow? Astounding!

 

[Slightly Live]

So just to be absolutely sure on this:

George Hotz and his team are still fighting the case, and haven't absconded on a holiday cruise paid with deceptively-gained donation money, evading the swift, deserved and honourable justice being wielded by Sony like a corporate Excalibur of truth and righteous holy good?

Glad for the clarification. It means that a number of people in that other thread that caught the scent of blood, were jumping to faulty conclusions.

Not only that, but Geohot's "side" have just as many, if not more, complaints about Sony failing to follow legal procedures.

This is proving to be an interesting case to follow.

 

[Inanna]

Perhaps before you post up these giant blocks of quoted text with bolded sections you could clarify, for the GAF public who aren't going to click on your link or won't know what they're looking at when they do, that the document you are quoting from is a brief by Hotz's lawyer. If it sounds damning toward Sony, that's because it's his job to make those arguments.

Thanks for the clarification. Nothing really changed then, all this stuff makes sense now.

 

[cjtiger300]

Perhaps before you post up these giant blocks of quoted text with bolded sections you could clarify, for the GAF public who aren't going to click on your link or won't know what they're looking at when they do, that the document you are quoting from is a brief by Hotz's lawyer. If it sounds damning toward Sony, that's because it's his job to make those arguments.

Exactly. Big surprise.

 

[squatingyeti]

So just to be absolutely sure on this:

George Hotz and his team are still fighting the case, and haven't absconded on a holiday cruise paid with deceptively-gained donation money, evading the swift, deserved and honourable justice being wielded by Sony like a corporate Excalibur of truth and righteous holy good?

Glad for the clarification. It means that a number of people in that other thread that caught the scent of blood, were jumping to faulty conclusions.

Nope, but Sony will likely file a new case seeking jurisdiction in Brazil seeing as he has once visited South America. I mean, that is as much of an argument as what they are using for jurisdiction here.

People, understand this, nothing about this case is being heard EXCEPT jurisdiction. Sony has asked for all of the shit they have in order to just show jurisdiction.

 

[The Extractor]

Yep, let's ignore everything else and talk about Hotz saying he didn't know SCEA existed.

I agree. I'm not shocked he doesn't know what SCEA is, in almost every picture I've seen of him he looks a little retarded.

 

[Datschge]

I'm not sure why so many think it's unbelievable for someone to not know SCEA and that they are located in California. I mean, sure, Sony should have some American subsidiary, but I likely wouldn't know that the one behind video games is called SCEA if I weren't visiting boards like this one. Any of you ever looked at how many different subsidiaries Sony actually has?

 

[chubigans]

Perhaps before you post up these giant blocks of quoted text with bolded sections you could clarify, for the GAF public who aren't going to click on your link or won't know what they're looking at when they do, that the document you are quoting from is a brief by Hotz's lawyer. If it sounds damning toward Sony, that's because it's his job to make those arguments.

Pretty much. You can trust Hotz's lawyer briefs just as much as you can trust Sony's.

 

[Forsete]

Ooopsie.

 

[Proxy]

Here is the link to the groklaw breakdown of what has recently been happening:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110327185437805
All of it very interesting and turns the tables on Sony in some key areas. Of biggest interest is the "Abuse of Discovery" by Sony section. Of course, we should all know Hotz is terrible, avoided all discovery, and fled the country...according to Sony. As Scientology would put it, What are your crimes Sony?

Here is the full pdf link: http://www.groklaw.net/pdf2/SonyvHotz-117.pdf


















A very good read on groklaw! Also, should we now be able to ridicule everyone supporting Sony because their behavior is clearly an attempt to harass and thwart discovery from the defense, but they went on the PR campaign in the media against Hotz.

I'd like to know more about this PR campaign that SCEA has engaged in regarding this case. Perhaps you can point me in the right direction?

 

[Inanna]

Pretty much. You can trust Hotz's lawyer briefs just as much as you can trust Sony's.

Exactly, which is why I wouldn't pay much attention to this.

 

[Dr Frasier Crane]

I'm not sure why so many think it's unbelievable for someone to not know SCEA and that they are located in California. I mean, sure, Sony should have some American subsidiary, but I likely wouldn't know that the one behind video games is called SCEA if I weren't visiting boards like this one. Any of you ever looked at how many different subsidiaries Sony actually has?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIA0kaGFIhQ

 

[squatingyeti]

Perhaps before you post up these giant blocks of quoted text with bolded sections you could clarify, for the GAF public who aren't going to click on your link or won't know what they're looking at when they do, that the document you are quoting from is a brief by Hotz's lawyer. If it sounds damning toward Sony, that's because it's his job to make those arguments.

Really? I provide TWO links and it should be fairly clear what is being posted here. I am now responsible for people NOT reading anything? Of course, it was perfectly OK for all those to jump on the "Hotz fled the country and did all this procedural stalling because Sony says so".
Furthermore, I bolded the portions that were the most interesting so people didn't have to read a giant wall of text. Of course that never happens on any other OP's. Amazing.

 

[Dr. Malik]

Perhaps before you post up these giant blocks of quoted text with bolded sections you could clarify, for the GAF public who aren't going to click on your link or won't know what they're looking at when they do, that the document you are quoting from is a brief by Hotz's lawyer. If it sounds damning toward Sony, that's because it's his job to make those arguments.

Thanks for the clarification. Nothing to see here I suppose.

 

[notworksafe]

So a brief by Hotz's lawyer makes Sony look bad? What a shock!

Excellent job mentioning that in the OP and thread title.

 

[Inanna]

I'd like to know more about this PR campaign that SCEA has engaged in regarding this case. Perhaps you can point me in the right direction?

What? Where? I haven't even seen or read anything about this case directly from Sony, either on their forums or official websites.

 

[darkpower]

Perhaps before you post up these giant blocks of quoted text with bolded sections you could clarify, for the GAF public who aren't going to click on your link or won't know what they're looking at when they do, that the document you are quoting from is a brief by Hotz's lawyer. If it sounds damning toward Sony, that's because it's his job to make those arguments.

But you can say the same thing about Sony's lawyers. You can't have it both ways. The thing we have to consider is which one sounds more feasible given past issues. Hotz has a court win on his side that stemmed from research and quality arguments. Sony has had a history of dodgy court strategies and a history of locking things down for no good reason.

Unless this judge is in Sony's back pocket, he's going to consider how dodgy Sony has been with the LG thing, the OtherOS suit, and in the past with the CD rootkit that caused so many problems a few years ago, and then see which story makes more sense.

Remember, in the documents that stated that they needed the IPs, it was only Sony's signature. None of Hotz' lawyers signed it. Now we have a suspicion that Sony was trying to keep them from having a say in any of the proceedings, and that they were deliberately trying to conceal evidence so they couldn't present a case or a counter to any of their arguments. By law, both sides have to know about the evidence that is to be presented before a case (that's the way I understand it, anyway). That makes it REALLY hard on Sony right now.