GeoHot Claims Sony Is Misleading the Courts in PS3 Legal Battle

| 21 Mar 2011 14:37

The fine print in the PS3 software developer kit has become an important point in the ongoing battle between Sony and jailbreaker GeoHot.

Sony's lawsuit against George "GeoHot" Hotz, has hit another jurisdictional snag as Hotz's legal team have accused the corporation of deliberately misleading the court in order to get the case tried in California. According to Hotz's lawyers, Sony isn't being entirely candid with the court, and is withholding important information.

This complaint seems to hinge on the exact wording of the PS3 Software Developer Kit. According to Sony, if it found the SDK on Hotz's computer, that would prove the connection between Hotz and California - where SCE America is based - and would thus settle any dispute over jurisdiction. Sony petitioned the court for permission to search Hotz's computers for evidence of the SDK.

Hotz's lawyers said that there was no validity to this argument however, as the SDK was actually the property of SCE Japan, and that Sony had concealed that fact in order to gain access to Hotz's computers, a request that the court would have turned down had it had all the relevant information. The lawyers said that Sony was hoping that during its search for the SDK - which it knew was actually useless in determining jurisdiction - that it might find something else linking Hotz to California.

Sony responded to the accusation by saying that SCEA was the sole distributor of the SDK in the US, as well as the developer support contact. It seems that the company is being cagey about letting Hotz's lawyers actually look at the terms and conditions of the SDK however, without them first signing a non-disclosure agreement. Even then, the company is only willing to show the SDK at its offices.

This is going to be a bitter and hard fought case. These arguments aren't even part of the original complaint. Instead, they're to determine in which state the case should be heard. It will be some time before the case even really gets underway, and months - or maybe even years - before it's resolved.

Source: Ars Technica

Comments on