Support NeoGAF

[mclem]

What do you mean?

That's not me telling you you're right or wrong. That's me having a mental void at the moment.

I mean previous cases should have no bearing on the judges' ruling in this case.

 

[Corto]

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

Denny Crane?

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

If Sony loses California jurisdiction, think they would drop the case or sue him in NJ?

Assuming these allegations by Team Hotz are true, and I have no reason at all to doubt them, how could Sony possibly win the jurisdiction ruling? I mean, ok, I know this is just a filing by Hotz's lawyers and therefore is SUPPOSED to look geohot look good, but if you read the filings by each respective side, it seems Sony is relying more on semantics, assumptions and hearsay while Team Hotz's filings deal more along the lines of fact. I mean we had that thread where Sony was saying they had IP info matching geohot's city and a console matching one he purchased. Ok, that might all be true but it is coincidental and not concrete evidence of anything. But then geohot's lawyers say the console serials don't even match. Why would they file that in an official court paper unless true? Just seems to me like they are the more logical one to believe.

 

[itxaka]

Really is SCEA paying these "fanthings"? Because otherwise, I fail to see how your assertion means SCEA is engaging in a PR campaign.

That is the saddest part, they are not being paid!

I would understand cheering for a company like it its a football team if you were getting paid or gaining something, but they do it for free!!

It's madness, I tell you.

 

[gokieks]

Which one is more plausible, though?

Sony claimed Hotz fled when it was clear what he did (the courts even knew where he was going before), and that everything that he was asked to turn over, even the CCs, were.

Hotz' lawyers is claiming that Sony tampered with documents, kept things concealed, went behind their backs, et al.

Hotz doesn't have a history of tampering with things or resorting to dirty tactics to win cases. Sony has done everything in their power in the past to win court cases and locking things down.

Who are you going to believe first? Someone who has no history of dodging anyone, or someone who has the history?

Based on all the antics even before the lawsuit brought upon him, I actually find it completely plausible that GeoHot purposefully removed the HDD controller PCB before giving it to TIG for no purpose other than spite.

Assuming that it's not illegal to do so, I also find it plausible that Sony made the documents unable to be OCRed, which, yes, would also be a douchey move. Albeit one that makes the comedic element of this case reach ever higher epic proportions.

And comparing the litigation history of Sony to GeoHot is completely pointless, because GeoHot being a 21 year old obviously does not have any. But saying they (or rather, their lawyers) are "doing everything in their power to win court cases" as a mark against them is just silly - that's what lawyers are supposed to do. Sony's lawyers are doing it, as are GeoHot's. They should be more concerned if either set of lawyers WEREN'T doing so.

 

[poppabk]

Which one is more plausible, though?

Sony claimed Hotz fled when it was clear what he did (the courts even knew where he was going before), and that everything that he was asked to turn over, even the CCs, were.

Hotz' lawyers is claiming that Sony tampered with documents, kept things concealed, went behind their backs, et al.

Hotz doesn't have a history of tampering with things or resorting to dirty tactics to win cases. Sony has done everything in their power in the past to win court cases and locking things down.

Who are you going to believe first? Someone who has no history of dodging anyone, or someone who has the history?

Sony never claimed that hotz had fled the country.
Hotz's lawyers admitted that the controller cards were not present on the hard drives provided to the third party.

 

[Dambrosi]

Really is SCEA paying these "fanthings"? Because otherwise, I fail to see how your assertion means SCEA is engaging in a PR campaign.

No, my point is that, like Nintendo in the '90s and Microsoft in the '00s, they don't have to - they have legions of drooling, sycophantic idiots to do it for them, free of charge.

So I'm kind of agreeing with you, in a roundabout way.

 

[DonMigs85]

Even if he didn't actually flee, it was still douchey to go on vacation after asking for handouts.
Unless I suppose he paid for the trip some time ago, but even then couldn't he just have it refunded maybe?

 

[enzo_gt]

Whoever said "no matter who wins, we all lose" was pretty on point about 3 threads or 20 bannings ago.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

Based on all the antics even before the lawsuit brought upon him, I actually find it completely plausible that GeoHot purposefully removed the HDD controller PCB before giving it to TIG for no purpose other than spite.

It's also plausible that he had his hard drives in a custom raid setup, or had bought cheap drives and repurposed them for a modern rig, either of which would have him hand over what he considered to be 'the hard drives' without realising it would be a problem - a problem that was quickly rectified when it turned out to be an issue.

 

[JWong]

It's also plausible that he had his hard drives in a custom raid setup, or had bought cheap drives and repurposed them for a modern rig, either of which would have him hand over what he considered to be 'the hard drives' without realising it would be a problem - a problem that was quickly rectified when it turned out to be an issue.

So he's a hardcore techie who didn't know that a harddrive needs a controller to run it?

About as dumb as not knowing SCEA exists.

 

[darkpower]

Based on all the antics even before the lawsuit brought upon him, I actually find it completely plausible that GeoHot purposefully removed the HDD controller PCB before giving it to TIG for no purpose other than spite.

But you cannot PROVE that that's what he was trying to do. How can you actually say that he was trying to sabotage the case by doing anything of the sort?

Assuming that it's not illegal to do so, I also find it plausible that Sony made the documents unable to be OCRed, which, yes, would also be a douchey move. Albeit one that makes the comedic element of this case reach ever higher epic proportions.

It would make it illegal for them to do because it's obviously tampering with evidence in which there would really be no other reason why they would need to do such. Hotz could've had a few reasons other than sabotage to remove the cards, so there is reasonable doubt there. What did Sony have as a reason to blank out anything or go behind backs? Remember, as well, about that court document from SCEA wanting the IP subpoena not including a sign off from Hotz' lawyers. Sony might not have even talked with Hotz' lawyers before drawing up that claim.

Thing is, these are far more serious charges than what Sony dreamed up about Hotz.

And comparing the litigation history of Sony to GeoHot is completely pointless, because GeoHot being a 21 year old obviously does not have any.

So the iPhone case had nothing to do with Hotz?

But saying they (or rather, their lawyers) are "doing everything in their power to win court cases" as a mark against them is just silly - that's what lawyers are supposed to do. Sony's lawyers are doing it, as are GeoHot's. They should be more concerned if either set of lawyers WEREN'T doing so.

The main problem with THAT statement is that it's Hotz' lawyers claiming that it was SONY that pulled these stunts, not Sony's lawyers, based upon stuff like serial numbers and things that can be looked at easily. Whereas Sony's claims could only be viewed as hearsay, Hotz' claims are easily researched.

Like I said, it might be far more of a dangerous situation for Sony to have to explain these things off.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

Forensive data recovery tends to use its own specific HDD controllers.

The drives weren't non-functional or unreadable, they were missing what is - effectively - an adapter. It is plausibly an oversight, particularly when dealing with a third party whose sole occupation is imaging HDDs forensically for legal purposes.

 

[Chrange]

It's kind of funny how people are so reasonably stating now that you can't trust what just one side's lawyers are saying when they were crowing in the 'Geohot flees country' thread over what Sony's lawyers had claimed lol

 

[phosphor112]

It's also plausible that he had his hard drives in a custom raid setup, or had bought cheap drives and repurposed them for a modern rig, either of which would have him hand over what he considered to be 'the hard drives' without realising it would be a problem - a problem that was quickly rectified when it turned out to be an issue.

HDD's set up in RAID still need the controller PCB on the hard drive...

 

[PSGames]

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

Didn't you create a thread pretty much damning geohot all based on Sony statements?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=425197

What a complete tool. Guess all those donations paid off for him!

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Didn't you create a thread pretty much damning geohot all based on Sony statements?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=425197

lol

 

[SiegfriedFM]

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.

I love this line of reasoning. Sony is so evil that you can actually point out three separate divisions doing evil stuff, which clearly means that in whatever dispute any division of Sony is ever in, they're wrong. Because they're evil.

 

[phosphor112]

It's kind of funny how people are so reasonably stating now that you can't trust what just one side's lawyers are saying when they were crowing in the 'Geohot flees country' thread over what Sony's lawyers had claimed lol

Do a little more research before you post next time. Even reading this thread, you would have realized Sony nor their Lawyers ever claimed he "fled." Only idiots sensationalizing headlines claimed he fled.

 

[darkpower]

I love this line of reasoning. Sony is so evil that you can actually point out three separate divisions doing evil stuff, which clearly means that in whatever dispute any division of Sony is ever in, they're wrong. Because they're evil.

Or because they've done it in the past.

What makes you think that they would be so innocent NOW?

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

HDD's set up in RAID still need the controller PCB on the hard drive...

No they don't.

A lot of RAID configurations replace the HDD controllers with a dedicated RAID controller, particularly if you are hardware hacking to get something fancy on the cheap.

 

[chubigans]

Didn't you create a thread pretty much damning geohot all based on Sony statements?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=425197

Based on Sony's statement which came directly from Geohot's lawyers? You bet I did.

I also made sure that the thread title said that Sony was the one claiming this was true. Plus I updated the OP with the other side of the story once that was out.

Nice try though.

 

[blu]

It's kind of funny how people are so reasonably stating now that you can't trust what just one side's lawyers are saying when they were crowing in the 'Geohot flees country' thread over what Sony's lawyers had claimed lol

You noticed that too? Interesting, I thought it was barely noticeable..

 

[squatingyeti]

Those who came to the conclusion that Geo fled are stupid. It's a civil case. The thing is, just because those idiots came to that conclusion, it doesn't mean you can spread misinformation as well. I see the same mentality showing up over and over again from you.

Which part is misinformation? Did Sony not claim he originally had an account by the name Geo1Hotz with no proof otherwise? Did Sony then not change to say he is actually blickmaniac with no proof otherwise, even withholding purchase info from the account that could prove otherwise? Did Sony not alter documents to make it so the defense could not use OCR? Did Sony not claim the SDK contained info about SCEA and therefore, they needed Hotz's hard drive to prove it, when in fact, the SDK contains NO such information?

What misinformation? Your mentality is to call people pirates and continue to believe there is a fundamental difference between the software of a phone being hacked and the software of the PS3 being hacked.

 

[PSGames]

Based on Sony's statement which came directly from Geohot's lawyers? You bet I did.

I also made sure that the thread title said that Sony was the one claiming this was true. Plus I updated the OP with the other side of the story once that was out.

Nice try though.

Originally we didn't know where the statement came from. Before you edited the story you based the thread on this link:

http://vghq.net/2011/03/23/george-hotz-runs-away-to-south-america-lies-about-having-psn-account/

Every claim in that article was attributed to Sony:

An official document (found here) filed by Sony from the Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC v. Hotz case recently detailed Hot’z recent actions. It said:

Additionally, Sony said:

Sony continued that even without his PSN account breach evidence, they already have enough evidence against him:

I'm not trying to bust your balls here but I think it's pretty clear you took the original article at face value and damned geohot in the process.

 

[Curufinwe]

Actually, the OP has been edited since I am now responsible for people posting in a thread without EVER reading EITHER of the links. No one sees something wrong with that? I'm pretty sure you're supposed to at least check a link before waxing philosophical.

You're supposed to say who you're quoting, not just quote them.

 

[darkpower]

You noticed that too? Interesting, I thought it was barely noticeable..

http://n4g.com/news/730618/sony-v-hotz-mismatched-serial-numbers-and-sealed-manuals/com

Again, THAT site continues to be the unique little snowflake in the gaming site medium. Why is it always THAT site that seems to attract the immature idiots?

 

[squatingyeti]

Do a little more research before you post next time. Even reading this thread, you would have realized Sony nor their Lawyers ever claimed he "fled." Only idiots sensationalizing headlines claimed he fled.

and people like Mama Robotnik were vilified for donating money. The thread title was changed by a mod to call everyone that donated "SUCKERS". It's complete bullshit that that thread exploded with all the nonsense and some in here claiming to be innocent of such were right there, based on SONY'S accusations, saying how terrible Hotz was. Yet, here we have a thread pointing out the stuff Sony has done, and there's nothing to see here...

 

[chubigans]

Before you edited the story you based the thread on this link:

http://vghq.net/2011/03/23/george-hotz-runs-away-to-south-america-lies-about-having-psn-account/

Every claim in that article was attributed to Sony:

I'm not trying to bust your balls here but I think it's pretty clear you took the original article at face value and damned geohot in the process.

Hotz lawyers already confirmed he was away before I posted that thread. In the previous thread we were all trying to figure out how they knew Hotz was away, until we found out that his council confirmed just that.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=418445&page=41

More specifically: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=26663415&postcount=4088

 

[squatingyeti]

You're supposed to say who you're quoting, not just quote them.

It was from TWO links in which someone SHOULD click before posting anything. The hypocrisy in this thread is reaching ridiculous levels. In every other thread posters are expected to actually at least glanced at a link before posting something. However, not only is there nothing to see here because it's from Hotz's attorney, but there is no need to even look at EITHER link before posting. Wow.

 

[phosphor112]

No they don't.

A lot of RAID configurations replace the HDD controllers with a dedicated RAID controller, particularly if you are hardware hacking to get something fancy on the cheap.

I have 4 HDD's in RAID. One of the HDD's PCB got fried. It wasn't being recognized anymore until I replaced the PCB on the HDD that wasn't working.

Unless this is something new, I don't know of a RAID controller that replaces the PCB's for a HDD...

Which part is misinformation? Did Sony not claim he originally had an account by the name Geo1Hotz with no proof otherwise? Did Sony then not change to say he is actually blickmaniac with no proof otherwise, even withholding purchase info from the account that could prove otherwise? Did Sony not alter documents to make it so the defense could not use OCR? Did Sony not claim the SDK contained info about SCEA and therefore, they needed Hotz's hard drive to prove it, when in fact, the SDK contains NO such information?

What misinformation? Your mentality is to call people pirates and continue to believe there is a fundamental difference between the software of a phone being hacked and the software of the PS3 being hacked.

You want to keep talking shit? Pull the exact quote that I called someone a pirate. Please do tell.

I've requested you do that before, and never have.

 

[darkpower]

It was from TWO links in which someone SHOULD click before posting anything. The hypocrisy in this thread is reaching ridiculous levels. In every other thread posters are expected to actually at least glanced at a link before posting something. However, not only is there nothing to see here because it's from Hotz's attorney, but there is no need to even look at EITHER link before posting. Wow.

You're talking to the same people that said that there was no way that Hotz could claim ignorance about SCEA's location.

Yet, it's okay for THEM to cherry pick what it is they want to actually read.

 

[squatingyeti]

People keep talking about the Hard drives, but tell me why Sony needed them? Remember, there is NO case going yet, this is merely about jurisdiction. Sony's excuse for needing access to his drives to prove jurisdiction, was because he could have the SDK on them, which contained info about SCEA, which might be shaky grounds for jurisdiction in California.

The problem was, Sony knew that didn't exist on the SDK and Hotz's attorney found out. When they did, Sony delayed a joint letter in order to stop them from being able to address this with the court.

So let's starting discussing the actual issues in this thread instead of saying "bu bu hotz".

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

I have 4 HDD's in RAID. One of the HDD's PCB got fried. It wasn't being recognized anymore until I replaced the PCB on the HDD that wasn't working.

Unless this is something new, I don't know of a RAID controller that replaces the PCB's for a HDD...

No, if anything it is a very old method for setting up drives in a RAID array.

If you're just using Windows autoconfig tool to set up a RAID array, you're using a software controller not a hardware controller. The modern ease of setting up disk options makes hardware methods somewhat obsolete if you just want basic RAID functions on a windows box.

More expensive RAID solutions - for example if you are running a server, or if your main occupation is as a self employed software engineer - frequently do require removing the 'default' drive controllers and replacing them with a dedicated RAID hardware controller and manually configging accordingly.

 

[PSGames]

Hotz lawyers already confirmed he was away before I posted that thread. In the previous thread we were all trying to figure out how they knew Hotz was away, until we found out that his council confirmed just that.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=418445&page=41

More specifically: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=26663415&postcount=4088

It's just a shame that all the underhanded shit that Sony has done won't get anywhere near the press that the "geohot lies, steals money and flees country" stories did.

People keep talking about the Hard drives, but tell me why Sony needed them? Remember, there is NO case going yet, this is merely about jurisdiction. Sony's excuse for needing access to his drives to prove jurisdiction, was because he could have the SDK on them, which contained info about SCEA, which might be shaky grounds for jurisdiction in California.

The problem was, Sony knew that didn't exist on the SDK and Hotz's attorney found out. When they did, Sony delayed a joint letter in order to stop them from being able to address this with the court.

So let's starting discussing the actual issues in this thread instead of saying "bu bu hotz".

This is absolutely ridiculous. Wish this would gain more exposure.

 

[phosphor112]

No, if anything it is a very old method for setting up drives in a RAID array.

If you're just using Windows autoconfig tool to set up a RAID array, you're using a software controller not a hardware controller. The modern ease of setting up disk options makes hardware methods somewhat obsolete if you just want basic RAID functions on a windows box.

More expensive RAID solutions - for example if you are running a server, or if your main occupation is as a self employed software engineer - frequently do require removing the 'default' drive controllers and replacing them with a dedicated RAID hardware controller and manually configging accordingly.

I used rocketRAID to setup my RAID arrays.

 

[squatingyeti]

You want to keep talking shit? Pull the exact quote that I called someone a pirate. Please do tell.

I've requested you do that before, and never have.

Wait, you said I was spreading misinformation and you were taken to task on that claim, but you ignore all of it. You and I both know why you were banned as we were both in the thread. With no real search anymore I am not going to try to track down the exact quote as it's irrelevant to the overall thread. So, what misinformation?

 

[poppabk]

People keep talking about the Hard drives, but tell me why Sony needed them? Remember, there is NO case going yet, this is merely about jurisdiction. Sony's excuse for needing access to his drives to prove jurisdiction, was because he could have the SDK on them, which contained info about SCEA, which might be shaky grounds for jurisdiction in California.

The problem was, Sony knew that didn't exist on the SDK and Hotz's attorney found out. When they did, Sony delayed a joint letter in order to stop them from being able to address this with the court.

So let's starting discussing the actual issues in this thread instead of saying "bu bu hotz".

All this info comes from the lawyers defending Hotz. ie its their argument against jurisdiction, and is therefore bound to present facts against jurisdiction in California. Have sony's lawyers stated that they a) wanted the HDD's purely to look for the SDK which contained information about SCEA and b) that they know that the SDK doesn't contain that information?

 

[gokieks]

It's also plausible that he had his hard drives in a custom raid setup, or had bought cheap drives and repurposed them for a modern rig, either of which would have him hand over what he considered to be 'the hard drives' without realising it would be a problem - a problem that was quickly rectified when it turned out to be an issue.

No they don't.

A lot of RAID configurations replace the HDD controllers with a dedicated RAID controller, particularly if you are hardware hacking to get something fancy on the cheap.

I don't think you understand what HDD controller PCBs (the PCBs that are physically attached to the HDDs when you buy a bare drive) are. Those PCBs are specifically designed/tested to work with one model (or more likely, one manufacturer lineup) of HDDs. The RAID controllers you speak of are used to replace the SATA (or IDE, SCSI, etc) controllers on the motherboard, not on the HDD itself.

But you cannot PROVE that that's what he was trying to do. How can you actually say that he was trying to sabotage the case by doing anything of the sort?

I did not say that he was, and as I'm only speaking as a 3rd party observer of the case, I have no burden of proof either. What I said was that I would find it plausible that he did - because there really aren't any plausible reasons for him to remove the HDD controller PCB otherwise.

It would make it illegal for them to do because it's obviously tampering with evidence in which there would really be no other reason why they would need to do such. Hotz could've had a few reasons other than sabotage to remove the cards, so there is reasonable doubt there. What did Sony have as a reason to blank out anything or go behind backs? Remember, as well, about that court document from SCEA wanting the IP subpoena not including a sign off from Hotz' lawyers. Sony might not have even talked with Hotz' lawyers before drawing up that claim.

Are you sure that making the document in a non-OCRable format is tampering with evidence? (serious question). If so, then I assume the judge will deal with it appropriately. But if not, then it strikes me as much the same as GeoHot removing the PCBs - becase again, I'm pretty much drawing a blank on legitimate reasons that he could've had for removing the HDD controller PCBs. So I'm viewing the actions of both in much the same way - a douchey move (that, personally, makes the case seem more comedic).

So the iPhone case had nothing to do with Hotz?

I don't believe Apple bought a lawsuit against him for it, but rather it was a DMCA exemption that the EFF (or some other advocacy group) asked for and Apple objected to.

The main problem with THAT statement is that it's Hotz' lawyers claiming that it was SONY that pulled these stunts, not Sony's lawyers, based upon stuff like serial numbers and things that can be looked at easily. Whereas Sony's claims could only be viewed as hearsay, Hotz' claims are easily researched.

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm wonder if the distinction between SCEA and SCEA's lawyers is one that exists (or rather is pertinent) - when it's relating to court filings, I would think both are treated the same way.

 

[squatingyeti]

It's just a shame that all the underhanded shit that Sony has done won't get anywhere near the press that the "geohot lies, steals money and flees country" stories did.



This is absolutely ridiculous. Wish this would gain more exposure.

People do not want to seem to discuss what Sony has unequivocally done. They will point out there's no way Hotz didn't know SCEA existed, yet somehow SCEA didn't know there was nothing regarding them or California in the SDK they asserted would be on Hotz's hard drive. They will point out Hotz left out the controller for the hard drives, which Sony KNEW they had no need to for jurisdiction proving. However, they will ignore that Sony both withheld documents from Hotz's attorney and made it so the ones they did turn over could not be subjected to OCR. They will point out he left the country (although planned previously and both the court and Sony knew), but ignore Sony has made two claims now that they can prove Hotz accessed PSN and neither claim has ANY proof.

Why can't we even discuss the claims of Hotz's attorney? Yet people were ready to ruin Hotz over Sony's claims?

 

[MrBelmontvedere]

THIS IS FROM AN ATTORNEY.

fixed. can immediately be dismissed out of hand.

 

[Evlar]

People do not want to seem to discuss what Sony has unequivocally done. They will point out there's no way Hotz didn't know SCEA existed, yet somehow SCEA didn't know there was nothing regarding them or California in the SDK they asserted would be on Hotz's hard drive. They will point out Hotz left out the controller for the hard drives, which Sony KNEW they had no need to for jurisdiction proving. However, they will ignore that Sony both withheld documents from Hotz's attorney and made it so the ones they did turn over could not be subjected to OCR. They will point out he left the country (although planned previously and both the court and Sony knew), but ignore Sony has made two claims now that they can prove Hotz accessed PSN and neither claim has ANY proof.

Why can't we even discuss the claims of Hotz's attorney? Yet people were ready to ruin Hotz over Sony's claims?

In my view, the chief obstacle to discussing the claims of Hotz's defense team is that you, the OP, keep muddying the water about what it is we're discussing. We are NOT discussing findings of fact by the court, or points that neither side contests. We ARE discussing the (as yet unsubstantiated) claims of one party's lawyer.

Stop saying you KNOW Hotz's lawyer is correct in one breath and marveling that no one wants to engage you in the next.

 

[squatingyeti]

All this info comes from the lawyers defending Hotz. ie its their argument against jurisdiction, and is therefore bound to present facts against jurisdiction in California. Have sony's lawyers stated that they a) wanted the HDD's purely to look for the SDK which contained information about SCEA and b) that they know that the SDK doesn't contain that information?

This is a hearing about jurisdiction. That is what their discovery must look for. Also, their reason for asking for the Hard drives was to show he had the SDK (which they are not sure he does, but they can look if it might prove jurisdiction) because the SDK, SCEA claimed, had information that would show Hotz MUST know about SCEA and know California would be involved.

Would you believe SCEA did NOT know the SDK actually had nothing about SCEA and California? Hotz's attorney discovered this and the judge was to get a joint letter from the two sides. Sony would not cooperate on the letter until it was late (emails back this claim up) and until Hotz could not file his part claiming what they had found.

 

[darkpower]

In my view, the chief obstacle to discussing the claims of Hotz's defense team is that you, the OP, keep muddying the water about what it is we're discussing. We are NOT discussing findings of fact by the court, or points that neither side contests. We ARE discussing the (as yet unsubstantiated) claims of one party's lawyer.

Stop saying you KNOW Hotz's lawyer is correct in one breath and marveling that no one wants to engage you in the next.

Which is what he pointed out, and which he had to edit the OP to say because people were too fucking lazy to click a link!

And when has he muddied the waters when he is pointing out exactly what is said in the dockets? Seems like you didn't click anything, either!

 

[squatingyeti]

In my view, the chief obstacle to discussing the claims of Hotz's defense team is that you, the OP, keep muddying the water about what it is we're discussing. We are NOT discussing findings of fact by the court, or points that neither side contests. We ARE discussing the (as yet unsubstantiated) claims of one party's lawyer.

Stop saying you KNOW Hotz's lawyer is correct in one breath and marveling that no one wants to engage you in the next.

So you would believe SCEA did not know the SDK did not contain what they claimed it did? That is not just a claim, that is either true or false and to believe it false would be so far beyond ridiculous it's stupid.

Hotz's attorney is, without a doubt, correct on some points. No side debates that Sony has now claimed they can prove Hotz was first Geo1Hotz (never could) and now blickmaniac (no proof, even withholding purchase info which could prove otherwise). The emails prove Sony delayed the joint letter discussing the SDK issue. The court evidence shows Sony is continually filing things that are public information as sealed. It can be proven Sony withheld the agreements between Sony Inc and SCEA till the evening Hotz's reply brief was due and after they had already agreed to turn over documents they had withheld previously.

So, there are absolutely things we know for a fact did happen.

 

[phosphor112]

Wait, you said I was spreading misinformation and you were taken to task on that claim, but you ignore all of it. You and I both know why you were banned as we were both in the thread. With no real search anymore I am not going to try to track down the exact quote as it's irrelevant to the overall thread. So, what misinformation?

I never directly called anyone a hacker. Someone just felt the need to ban a Junior for a week because I said that statistically, there will be a Gaf member(s) that pirates a game.

You can keep bringing it up if you like but I NEVER directly called someone a pirate.

Anyway, you're spreading what these lawyers say as fact, THAT is the misinformation I'm talking about.

 

[squatingyeti]

I never directly called anyone a hacker. Someone just felt the need to ban a Junior for a week because I said that statistically, there will be a Gaf member(s) that pirates a game.

You can keep bringing it up if you like but I NEVER directly called someone a pirate.

Anyway, you're spreading what these lawyers say as fact, THAT is the misinformation I'm talking about.

See above and nothing I said has been misinformation. These are the responses to Sony's "misinformation" if that is the case. Also, as above, some things are fact.

 

[Evlar]

There is NOT consensus on the SDK issue. In fact, that's discussed in detail in this joint letter:

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3:2011cv00167/235965/98/0.pdf

Hotz's attorneys are presenting as established fact what Sony's lawyers contest.

Mr. Hotz’s Position
1. SCEA Made Material Misrepresentations to the Court and Refuses to Provide Mr.
Hotz’s Counsel with a Copy of the SDK to be Searched on Mr. Hotz’s drives.
SCEA made false representations to this court regarding the Software Developer’s Kit
(“SDK”) and whether it contains information that SCEA is in California. At the March 10
hearing, counsel for SCEA represented to the Court that the SDK contains information showing
that SCEA is located in California. The Court authorized a limited search of Mr. Hotz’s
impounded hard drives for the SDK based on SCEA’s statements. Counsel for Mr. Hotz has
discovered that SCEA’s statements are false and SCEA refuses to verify their statements or
provide Mr. Hotz’s counsel with the SDK to verify the same. A relevant portion of the transcript
is as follows:
MS. SMITH: Additionally, we're looking for information, such as any of the Sony
Developer Kit tools that might be contained on that computer. That
information would only be distributed by Sony Computer
Entertainment America, and would establish contacts between
SCEA and Mr. Hotz.
THE COURT: Or between Mr. Hotz and somebody who had them, and gave
them to him?
MS. SMITH: That's correct; but at the end of the day, he would have something
belonging to SCEA that he should have licensed.
THE COURT: Well, but you already say he's got something belonging to you.
This is not on the merits, right? This is about general and specific
jurisdiction.
MS. SMITH: Right. And one of his contentions is that he's not aware of Sony
Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC v. Hotz et al Doc. 98
Dockets.Justia.comComputer Entertainment America being in California. And we
believe that the SDK – the developer's kit -- would contain
information showing him that SCEA is in California.
THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Kellar, both of those things seem relevant.

SCEA’s Position
A. The SDKPlaintiff SCEA’s counsel has not made any misrepresentations to the Court regarding the
SDK. This is yet another manufactured dispute by Mr. Hotz’s counsel.
SCEA is the exclusive distributor of the PS3 System SDK in the United States. This is
exactly what counsel for SCEA has represented to the Court.
1
The SDK includes software,
hardware, electronic manuals and other materials. As SCEA represented to counsel in meet and
confer discussions today, the SDK does contain material that references Sony Computer
Entertainment America. SCEA’s counsel even confirmed in an email to Mr. Kellar, attached
hereto as Exhibit 5. Specifically, the SDK contains an electronic Reference Tool Instruction
Manual that references SCEA and lists the company as Developer Support for the tool. The
electronic manual is distributed as part of the SDK within the United States. A true and correct
copy of the first and last page of the Instruction Manual is attached hereto as Exhibit 6.
Moreover, Mr. Hotz’s representation that SCEA has refused allow counsel for Mr. Hotz
access to the SDK is simply false. Attached as Exhibit 7 is an email from SCEA’s counsel to
Mr. Hotz’s counsel stating that SCEA will allow Mr. Hotz’s counsel to inspect an exact duplicate
of the SDK materials being provided to the third party neutral, TIG. Because the SDK includes
proprietary source code, SCEA required that the review be done under the usual protocols
associated with the review of source code. In meet and confer, Mr. Hotz’s counsel did not take
issue with this process except that he wanted to ensure the ability to install the software on the
stand-alone computer himself. SCEA’s counsel confirmed that this would be permitted so long
as he did not use his own special installation software. See Exhibit 8. SCEA’s proposed order,
attached hereto as Exhibit 9, even allows for such a review. See Paragraph 4 (a)-(f).

As you can see, there is plainly no consensus here. I have no idea why I'm expected to default to Hotz's view of the matter.

 

[test_account]

I'm not saying it could or couldn't happen. I pointed it out because there is reasonable doubt there that he was trying to sabotage the case because of that alone.

Hotz' lawyers, though, have a NUMBER of things in there that they are saying Sony has done in a deliberate attempt to sabotage the case in their own favor.

I understand, but i dont see any reasonable reason to remove the controller cards though. The only reason i see for doing this is for delaying the case (for whatever reason) or hoping that the judge would order Geohot to hand over the controller cards as well, which would resulted in that they couldnt search the harddrive.

What people still don't get is this is still about jurisdiction. Sony, as pointed out by Hotz's attorney, is attempting to use discovery to gather information that has nothing to do with jurisdiction. They will find NOTHING on the computers that would give California jurisdiction. Their original claim was the SDK could be on the computer which had info which would indicate something about SCEA. The reality was that the SDK does NOT contain such information.

That might be, but i was only talking about the controller cards to the harddisks and why they chose to remove those before turning them in for examination. If there was nothing to hide, why remove these cards? I'm not implying that there was something to hide, but i just dont see why these were removed.

About the quote, it says "Once Mr. Hotz’s counsel discovered the SDK does not contain what SCEA stated". Is "Mr. Hotz's cousel" his attorneys? If yes, does this mean that they only said that there wasnt anything on his harddrive?

 

[fernoca]

Which is what he pointed out, and which he had to edit the OP to say because people were too fucking lazy to click a link!

And when has he muddied the waters when he is pointing out exactly what is said in the dockets? Seems like you didn't click anything, either!

Well, the OP originally didn't made it any easier onto others.
The original thread title was quite biased and inflammatory, which a mod edited into something more neutral; followed by an main post of basically "Sony sucks even more", and replies attacking "Sony supporters" even though noone claimed to be a Sony supporter in the first place.

I think people would be more open to discussion and learn more about it, if the OP was at least open for discussion.

But the entire thread is basically a "well you guys talk shit about geohotz, so I'll talk shit about Sony..deal with it".