Geohot Claims He's Never Heard of Sony Computer Entertainment of America
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Ignorance of the law is not a defense. Ignorance of facts often is, and rightly so. If you press a doorbell and the house attached to it, as a direct result, blows up, your ignorance of the fact that the doorbell was wired to a large amount of explosives is the difference between innocence and murder of the occupants of the house.ekkaman said:
In this particular case, which is a purely civil matter, it is purely a question of jurisdiction, and amounts to, "When I do this legal thing that may annoy someone, where is it reasonable for me to expect to be sued?", if, as is plastered on the box and in the startup messages and in other places, you believe the PS3 to be designed and produced by Sony, a Japanese company, is it reasonable for you to be sued in California as opposed to your home jurisdiction or Japan?
Ignorance, before the blitz ex-parte TRO attempt, that SCEA, a completely distinct company (not even a subsidiary) from Sony has anything to do with the PS3, or that it even exists, makes it unreasonable to expect to be sued in California for his actions in New Jersey. Of course, that they don't have anything to do with the PS3 if you don't sign in to the PSN and aren't producing licensed games makes it unreasonable to expect to be sued in California for actions that don't involve a contract with them or modification of one of those licensed games.
Jurisdiction is, at least supposed to be, about what is reasonable for both parties. It's common for cases to be dismissed if you attempt to sue someone outside of their local jurisdiction for actions taken in their local jurisdiction.
SCEA, contrary to your assertion, is not a corporate entity "completely distinct" from Sony Corporation (Japan). SCEA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sony Corporation of America Inc. Sony Corporation of America Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sony Corporation (Japan). Accordingly, Sony Corporation (Japan) owns SCEA's parent, Sony Corporation of America Inc., and any underlying assets, including SCEA.GryMor said:
And, for the purpose of a personal jurisdiction analysis, ignorance born of "willful blindness" doesn't get anyone of the hook. If Hotz, as he himself claims, deliberately avoided reading the EULA and other documents that came with his PS3 Slim and which, had he read them, would have made SCEA's existence patently clear to him, then he cannot reasonably rely on any resulting ignorance. The information was there for the taking. That he chose not to take it is his fault, not SCEA's.
Furthermore, you conveniently overlook the fact that among the alleged actions taken by Hotz within the jurisdiction of New Jersey is the posting to the internet of a root key and other information that would enable others to bypass the access control mechanism of the PS3. Accordingly, the effect of that conduct can be felt in any one of all 50 states in the Union. The conduct at issue and its resulting effect as alleged is by no means limited to within the borders of New Jersey.
What's more likely to happen is that the next time he passes his Legal Defense Fund Hat around, all those folks who thought he was some sort of gallant defender of consumer rights willing to take on the evil Big Corporation will by then finally realize that he's nothing more than a complete bullshit artist and his hat will contain nothing more than a quarter, two dimes, three nickels, and forty-seven pennies.Low Key said:
I think you'd be surprised. I didn't give the guy a cent, but this is pure entertainment at it's finest. This lawsuit is basically Sony throwing a hissy fit with George taunting them. Until Sony stops throwing a hissy fit, it serves them right to have some bullshit served up.JDKJ said:
Besides, jurisdiction is important to establish. Depending on the state laws, one could be harsher than another. I don't know so I can only assume California has some pretty strict IP laws since that's where Hollywood is and all. I also assume if jurisdiction isn't established in California, it will be established in New Jersey, which again assuming, they have less strict IP laws. Don't let the sheer stupidity of George's argument fool you. If he's willing to risk perjury for it, you have to know his lawyers have pretty concrete backing. This type of shit happens all the time.
If California is in fact a more favorable forum for SCEA, it probably has more to do with Silicon Valley (which is located in the same county where the case currently resides) than Hollywood. At the same time, California has some of the most pro-consumer and anti-corporation courts in the country. Certainly more anti-corporation than the courts of New Jersey. It may well be nothing more that SCEA being conveniently located a short drive away from the courthouse. Who knows?Low Key said:
And, yes, I am well aware that litigants can and often do bend the truth to fit their own selfish needs, even under risk of perjury. But there's a point at which the bending begins to work to their disadvantage. Hotz' feigned ignorance comes close to that point, if you ask me. But it's his nuts in SCEA's ViseGrips, not mine. If he and his attorney think that having him play the role of a retarded moron works well for them, then more power to them.
This guy is good, he has certanly played his card right in legal regard. Although it's obviously untrue... right?
I, for one, have only heard about the Japanese sony. I honestly (I'm serious!) had no idea there was a sony in calaforna. When did that get there? Plus I threw those manuals in the trash as well.
I, for one, have only heard about the Japanese sony. I honestly (I'm serious!) had no idea there was a sony in calaforna. When did that get there? Plus I threw those manuals in the trash as well.
Another thing that bothers me is people not knowing what the hell Hotz is being sued for. They've fallen for his wannane internet Che Guevera attitude and fail to see that SCEA isn't going after him for modding his console. They're going after him for stealing secutiry detail that wasn't his and distrubuting it online.JDKJ said:
A lot of people need to get over themselves here. This is not a case of precedence because there is no precedence being set. He's being sued for hacking and information theft. And more charges may come out of the preliminary hearings.
Actually I can tell you why they want the case in California so badly. Historically, California seems to be the only State in the United States to take video game related cases seriously. If the case were heard in New Jersey, the court would have a jury that would be less educated about the way video game companies or hacking, or the laws pretaining the aformentioned. It's just a more fair trial in California because the Judge will go through the case evidence more precisely.JDKJ said:
God, everything I hear about this guy makes me hate him. Just that picture up there makes me want to punch him.
Of course he'd know of the SCEA by now. He's being sued by them, afterall.JimmyHill said:
I'm not sure why people are expecting him to pull a jesus out of his ass and follow by scapegoating him as some sort of red herring messiah representing the hacking community when this is a perfectly viable and clever loophole to utilize, especially considering that Sony almost managed to frame him having a PSN account. He's never had any moral high ground of any kind, he's just a man in another court preceeding. This is probably the most ingenious "fuck you" I can think of, and even then I don't see how this is pathetic enough that it compares to what Sony tried setting him up for. It sounds stupid, yes, but as has been stated pages ago which people stupidly skimmed by, no one is arguing that his ignorance will make him exempt from the law. It's the idea that if Sony can't prove that he didn't know SCEA existed as a corporate entity before he got sued, they can't sue him in California. This case would have to be picked up by Japan, which that alone is extremely unfeasible and more than likely wouldn't warrant the amount of extra effort required for them to go through this.
Tl;dr, the case won't end if GeoHot's claims are proven false. It'd just have to take place elsewhere. It just so happens that as it stands, it isn't likely to happen.
This is Ace Attorney logic at it's finest, and to be honest I'd love to see GeoHot get off the hook, simply on the account of this. It'd be absolutely hilarious.
