Post: Sony response to geohot dismissal appeal
Options
01-24-2011, 08:21 PM
#1
Fletcher
Banned
Part1:
I. HOTZ HAS DONE “SOMETHING MORE” BY AFFIRMATIVELY DIRECTING HIS
ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES AT SCEA BASED IN FOSTER CITY, CALIFORNIA
Hotz attempts to analogize his conduct to a mere operator of a passive web site that
just so happens to be accessible in California. There is nothing, however, about Hotz’s
activities aimed at SCEA’s California business that can be described as “passive.” Hotz did
not merely make a few postings on a website, but rather he affirmatively induced and
encouraged PlayStation®3 computer entertainment system (“PS3 System”
consumers touse his illegal circumvention devices with the knowledge that this activity would directly harm
SCEA in this District. Hotz’s conduct was deliberately targeted and aimed at SCEA in
California, and it had the predictable effect of causing extreme harm to SCEA at its
headquarters in Foster City, California. Hotz is not permitted to avoid California jurisdiction
by aiming his malicious conduct at a California business from a New Jersey address.
In his supplemental brief, Hotz tries to refute this fact by characterizing his website as
“passive” and claiming that he “neither encourages nor facilitates illegal circumvention
devices to be downloaded on his website.” Supplemental Brief, pp. 12, 13. This is false.
Not only does Hotz publish the “Metldr Keys” on his website, he also provides links on his
website to his other circumvention devices, including the 3.55 Firmware JailBreak and
the Signing Tools, encouraging and enabling individuals to download these
circumvention devices, and thus facilitating video game piracy. See Declaration of
Ryan Bricker filed on January 11, 2011 (“Bricker Decl.”
, ¶¶22, 21, Exhs. U, T. And contraryto his after-the fact denials, Hotz deliberately aimed his conduct at SCEA in this District when
he published the “Metldr Keys” on his website and wrote to SCEA: “if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me.” Bricker Decl., ¶22, Exh. U.1 In addition,
Hotz has touted his illegal hacking exploits on his interactive “On the PlayStation 3” blog
(Second Supplemental Declaration of Ryan Bricker filed on January 13, 2011,¶4, Exh. C
(“Second Suppl. Bricker Decl.”
). On that blog, Hotz openly interacts with others regardinghis hacking of the PS3 System.2 Additionally, Hotz has used other interactive tools based in
this District, such as Twitter and YouTube, to report on his hacking of the PS3 System. Id. at
¶¶2-3, Exhs. A-B; Bricker Decl., ¶24, Exh. W.
As the above demonstrates, Hotz’s unlawful conduct – the unauthorized accessing
of the PS3 System, circumvention of its technological protection measures, and trafficking
in circumvention devices that enable the piracy of video games – is both intentionally aimed
at and had the effect of injuring SCEA in the Northern District of California where it has its
principal place of business.3 Hotz was well aware of the impact of his conduct on SCEA
and game publishers. Bricker Decl., ¶27, Exh. Z. Consequently, there can be no doubt
that Hotz’s unlawful conduct satisfies the Ninth Circuit’s test of “something more” indicating
that Hotz “purposefully (albeit electronically) directed his activity in a substantial way to the
forum state.” Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc., 130 F. 3d 414, 418 (9th Cir. 1997);
Panavision Int’l, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316, 1320 (9th Cir. 199
. To find otherwisewould allow a hacker to intentionally distribute circumvention devices in California with the
knowledge that a California business is being harmed, while preventing a California court.
Part2:
In his declaration, Hotz now summarily denies that he sought employment from SCEA.
Declaration of George Hotz (“Hotz Decl.”
, ¶15. It does not matter, however, how he nowretroactively characterizes his conduct – the fact remains that his statement conclusively
demonstrates that his conduct was expressly targeted at SCEA in California. Indeed, Hotz
even states that “t would be fun to be on the other side.” Bricker Decl., ¶22, Exh. U.
2 In attempting to avoid jurisdiction, Hotz disingenuously argues that since Google maintains
the site, Google is responsible for its interactivity and not Hotz. Yet it is Hotz who chose to
blog about his unlawful conduct and to have discussions with third parties regarding that
same conduct over the Internet.
3 Hotz’s conduct also has had the effect of harming other publishers of games for the
PlayStation 3, many of whom are based or located in this District, including, for example,
Electronic Arts (Redwood City).
from taking action to protect its residents who have been tortiously injured. See
Panavision, 141 F. 3d at 1324.
II. HOTZ FAILS TO UNEQUIVOCALLY DENY HOLDING A PLAYSTATION
NETWORK (“PSN”
ACCOUNTHotz again fails to unequivocally deny that he has, or has ever had, a PSN account.
In his supplemental declaration, Hotz merely – and carefully – denies that he has ever
accessed the PSN to install a firmware update. See Hotz Decl., ¶¶11-13.4 Hotz also claims
to have accessed the PS3 System firmware not through the proper channels of the SCEA
website, but instead “via direct download links available on the internet.” Hotz Decl., ¶11.
Though he disavows association with various email addresses in SCEA’s database, he
pointedly does not state that he has not now, nor has he ever, maintained a PSN account.
His failure to unequivocally deny that he has held a PSN account is telling.
Hotz’s attorney further submits a declaration attempting to show that the PSN does
not have to be accessed when updating firmware via the PlayStation website. See
Declaration of Yasha Heidari. However, even if the firmware was downloaded pursuant to
the PlayStation website as done by Hotz’s attorney, the user is still subject to the PlayStation
website’s terms and conditions at You must login or register to view this content..
These terms prohibit, among other things, “using, making or distributing unauthorized
software or hardware in conjunction with the Sites, or taking or using any data from the Sites
to design, develop or update unauthorized software or hardware.” The terms also include
a forum selection clause and consent to jurisdiction in San Mateo County, California.
They also incorporate by reference the terms of the PSN User Agreement. Therefore, a user
who downloads the firmware via the PlayStation website, instead of the PSN, nonetheless
consents to jurisdiction in California.
III. CONCLUSION
Hotz’s unlawful conduct is intentionally directed at SCEA in the Northern District of
California and is causing substantial harm to SCEA here, warranting this Court’s exercise of
personal jurisdiction. Hotz has failed to show otherwise. Accordingly, SCEA respectfully
requests that the Court grant its Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.
Download of PDF: (easier to read)
https://www.mediafire.com/?gq2au9abcp2ocon
01-27-2011, 01:49 AM
#30
ResistTheSun
In Flames Much?
Originally posted by Fletcher
Sony will try and pull everything to win. Its all down to geohot and his lawyers to counter this, otherwise I think he's screwed.
This
All i know sony pretty annoyed at this i can see
That said it a major fail on there part another company done the sae mistake IW cough....
Soon we see measures to stop cheaters like on PC thanks to this.
01-27-2011, 01:32 PM
#31
mEdiivalXvirrus
Brute
Originally posted by sSkylit
I don't care what you want to call it. All I am saying is Sony has a right to take whatever action they deem necessary and we (consumers) have no right to object. The fact that you are an Xbox fan boy just makes me think you are trolling even more, lol.
Hey i bought the god dam console with my money. Bitches aint tellin me what to do with it...
01-27-2011, 03:38 PM
#32
xXM@DM@RCXx
Maggbot timeout!
Originally posted by Fletcher
Sony will try and pull everything to win. Its all down to geohot and his lawyers to counter this, otherwise I think he's screwed.
He aint got a leg to stand on, Sony is going to rape him, just like he did to their ps3! imo
01-27-2011, 03:38 PM
#33
DentyneIce360
Gym leader
Bricking your console. That's something I doubt they'd do. Banning your console from PSN. Something they can and should do.
01-27-2011, 06:11 PM
#34
PlayDude77
Gym leader
Didn't Geohot state on his website that he wanted to work for Sony?
If you can't beat them, join them! Hint, hint. :carling:
If you can't beat them, join them! Hint, hint. :carling:
01-27-2011, 06:40 PM
#35
mEdiivalXvirrus
Brute
Originally posted by ISmokeyTheBear
The PSP got "hacked" really badly with cheating online and downloadable games.
There is rarely new PSP online games.
Sony doesn't want to see that happen to the PS3 :mad:
There is rarely new PSP online games.
Sony doesn't want to see that happen to the PS3 :mad:
Who cares?.....:puke:
01-27-2011, 08:52 PM
#36
sSkylit
In Hopes of Serenity
Originally posted by mEdiivalXvirrus
Hey i bought the god dam console with my money. Bitches aint tellin me what to do with it...
Lol, you can't be serious.
You wouldn't even have that PS3 had Sony actually sold it at a profitable margin. Regardless of that though, the PS3 is Sony's "invention" and they SHOULD be able to take whatever action they feel necessary. There is no arguing that.
01-27-2011, 09:17 PM
#37
meyamuppet
Do a barrel roll!
Originally posted by mEdiivalXvirrus
Hey i bought the god dam console with my money. Bitches aint tellin me what to do with it...
Your right they cant tell you what you can do with it, its yours, you paid for it
But
when you want to game on line on their servers, you agreed a contract when you signed up to the PSN, stating that you would not Hack Crack Whack or Back up any games, like everyone else
Copyright © 2026, NextGenUpdate.
All Rights Reserved.
