?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Deunan
Shaken, not stirred 
27th-Jan-2011 11:56 pm
Might as well follow up on my last entry - geohot got served with TRO just now.

I read the papers he got served and I'm confused. While I fully expected DMCA to be used at some point... how exactly does SONY get to use it in a CIVIL lawsuit? You can do that in US courts? If so, your legal system is completly wacky.

At first I thought SONY was just trying to present a case, and DMCA was only mentioned to express urgency and necessity of the TRO. You know, like by saying "He is a bad guy, Your Honor, he must be stopped before he does more damage". So I can fully understand statements like "breach of contract" and "interference with contractual relations". This is what SONY claims and must prove - obviously it remains to be seen if they can do that.

But the main reason for ordering TRO was mostly DMCA violation. How the hell does that work? Violating DMCA is penal offence/crime. Someone, please, explain it to me how does SONY get to motion anything in a civil case based on that? And more importantly, how does a judge rule in a civil case with penal law? Because this blows my mind...
Comments 
(Deleted comment)
27th-Jan-2011 11:16 pm (UTC)
Not to mention said DMCA violation is alleged at best. SONY might as well have called him a rapist... wait, that sounds familiar...
6th-Feb-2011 03:55 am (UTC)
Indeed...welcome to the USA. It's a sad fact that you can literally sue anyone for virtually anything in this country. I read recently about a woman who decided to sue Sean Combs for, among other things, the twin towers disaster and losing a poker chip worth a kazillion dollars. Seriously...I'm not kidding. Of course things like that will eventually get thrown out, but in the meantime it wastes time and money, which going back to the topic at hand, is probably Sony's main point in all this...to teach a lesson and show everyone what disaster will befall those who dare oppose them. They're now preparing an attempt to sue a bunch of others, in addition to sending out hundreds(if not more) DMCA notices to every organization they can possibly think of. What gets me confused about all of this is how they seriously think they can sue and serve notice upon non-US citizens and organizations...that doesn't even make any sense. It's borderline insanity and blatant stupidity in my opinion...but hey, what do I know? lol
6th-Feb-2011 04:42 am (UTC)
It's a copyright case, how would it be anything *other* than a civil suit?
This page was loaded Jul 20th 2019, 8:22 am GMT.