

Sony v. Hotz Ends with a Whimper, I Mean a Gag Order - grellas
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/04/sony-v-hotz-ends-whimper-i-mean-gag-order

======
Joakal
Hotz got SLAPP'd [0].

He's currently getting heat for his request for legal fee donations that was
sent due to his defence against Sony [1][2]. It seemed like he received
thousands [3].

You can read the court documents:
[http://ia700401.us.archive.org/35/items/gov.uscourts.cand.23...](http://ia700401.us.archive.org/35/items/gov.uscourts.cand.235965/gov.uscourts.cand.235965.docket.html)

[0] <https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/SLAPP>

[1] <http://geohot.com/>

[2] [http://geohotgotsued.blogspot.com/2011/04/joining-sony-
boyco...](http://geohotgotsued.blogspot.com/2011/04/joining-sony-
boycott.html#comments)

[3] [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109193-Geohot-
Hint...](http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/109193-Geohot-Hints-at-
Plans-After-Sony-Settlement)

~~~
Joakal
Just found this article of Sony having the records of those that donated to
PayPal: [http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/sony-wins-access-to-george-
hotz...](http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/sony-wins-access-to-george-hotz-paypal-
records-17-03-2011/)

Edit: The settlement that GeoHot can't discuss: [http://psx-
scene.com/forums/attachments/f6/26802-settlement-...](http://psx-
scene.com/forums/attachments/f6/26802-settlement-george-hotz-
case-127-stipulation.pdf)

------
Construct
This is truly disappointing. It's unfortunate when a large company can
exercise such tight control over information about their products. As far as I
know, Hotz never violated Sony's copyright. He just pointed out a flaw in
their system that could be used, down the line, to violate copyrights.

------
itg
Easy to call out and mock Hotz sitting in chair behind the computer but the
majority would be singing a different tune if they were in his place.

~~~
pstack
If you ran a small service website and some person randomly sued you, it would
be enough of a hassle and expense to respond to that through the legal system,
as it is. Doing so as an individual with the full force and might of one of
the largest multinational corporations on the planet which itself has the
support (against intellectual property concerns, etc) of the entire
government, including the president and vice president who have made ignorant
and vigorous statements against what they perceive you to be doing is an
entirely different situation. It is a situation that you almost surely can't
win and can't afford to fight and most _certainly_ can't afford to lose.

The problem here is that you also shouldn't go around making rap videos of
yourself talking about how you're going to completely fuck Sony up and
challenging them to "bring it on" while collecting contributions to your legal
defense fund, when you know full well that you're going to roll over when the
time comes, because you simply have no rational choice.

------
pdenya
"Here's hoping future security researchers will refuse to be intimidated"

Is this a dig at Hotz for not fighting a legal battle?

~~~
citricsquid
I hope it is and he deserves those digs. If I was in his situation I would
have done exactly the same, I would settle and run home crying to avoid being
financially destroyed forever, but for him to solicit donations under the
guise of doing good... and then do the opposite, it's ridiculous. He should be
ashamed and he deserves any negativity he takes for this.

~~~
wtallis
Hotz has said all along that any leftover donations would go to the EFF. If he
used part of those funds to get good lawyers, and those lawyers told him that
his case couldn't be won in a way that would strengthen the right to
jailbreaking, the the right thing for Hotz to do was settle ASAP and pass
along the leftovers to the EFF.

How would the typical Hotz donor feel if he fought the case all the way, only
to win on a technicality that didn't establish any meaningful precedent that
could protect future hackers?

EDIT: Hotz also took donations for a duration of _two days_ before he stopped,
deciding that he had enough to cover short-term legal expenses, and he didn't
want to have too much money lying around in case Sony won.

~~~
citricsquid
Hotz claimed he would not settle (unless very specific things were done, which
haven't been), he took donations when this was the understanding. I have seen
multiple people complaining that they donated because he wasn't going to
settle, they wanted to support his fight for "justice".

He settled.

Whether or not the money goes to the EFF is irrelevant.

"What if SCEA tries to settle? Lets just say, I want the settlement terms to
include OtherOS on all PS3s and an apology on the PlayStation blog for ever
removing it. It'd be good PR for Sony too, lord knows they could use it. I'm
also willing to accept a trade, a legit path to homebrew for knowledge of how
to stop new firmwares from being decrypted."

~~~
elithrar
Sony would never have agreed to those terms. Period. That is not how they
conduct their business or PR.

~~~
steevdave
That was kind of the point. He wasn't supposed to settle unless they did
something they obviously never would. AKA never settle

------
darklajid
Slightly off-topic: These "gag orders" never cease to amaze me. My (very
limited) understanding is that the US is _the_ country fighting for free
speech. It's valued higher than most other things (i.e. over here, in Germany,
it's restricted: You seem to be far more limited in what you can say without
legal consequences).

Yet, I regularly stumble upon rulings like these. Am I missing something?
Isn't that exactly the opposite of free speech, with a court nodding gravely
and supporting the outcome/helping to enforce this?

~~~
semanticist
It's not really a 'gag order', as much as he's signed an agreement with Sony
which contains 'confidentiality clauses'.

The court didn't mandate this agreement - he decided that it would be better
for him to settle than to face court, and part of settling included the
'gagging'.

------
JoachimSchipper
AFAIK, the EFF didn't support Hotz by e.g. "loaning" a lawyer or two. Does
anyone know why? I can imagine that they have other priorities, but Hotz might
not have settled if he'd had some serious backing. ("Thousands" in donations
just means that he'd bankrupt himself a few days later.)

------
aphexairlines
What's the penalty for violating a gag order like the one from this
settlement?

~~~
URSpider94
It's laid out in the settlement -- $10k per violation, plus $25k per violation
for actual hacking events.

------
slackerIII
I guess the next company he investigates knows what to do now.

~~~
praptak
This goes both ways. The wisest action for the next guy who digs up an exploit
is to release it anonymously.

------
jrockway
So what's the end result of this? Someone named "Heogotz" will now be
documenting his PS3 hacking from a VPN service in Europe?

