New Judicial Hero: Philip Gutierrez Goes Ballistic On Ridiculous Gov't Prosecutors During Xbox Modding Trial
from the good-for-him dept
Wow. I don't think anyone expected the trial of Matthew Crippen for modding Xboxes to kick off the way it did: with a half an hour rant from the judge complaining about nearly everything having to do with the government's case. The judge, Philip Gutierrez, even stepped back from his ruling last week that fair use couldn't be used as a defense. The judge slammed prosecutors for putting two witnesses on the stand who had apparently broken the law -- including one, a security employee from Microsoft, who had admitted to modding Xboxes himself in college -- while trying to hide that fact from the jury. But the most important point may be Gutierrez highlighting how the government seemed to be going against its own claims about the DMCA concerning the willfulness of breaking the anti-circumvention clauses:The fair-use issue came up as the judge berated prosecutor Allen Chiu's proposed jury instructions, which included the assertion that the government need not prove that Crippen "willfully" breached the law, in what is known as "mens rea" in legal parlance. The judge noted that the government's own intellectual property crimes manual concerning the 1998 DMCA says the defendant has to have some knowledge that he was breaking the law.After the verbal drubbing was over, apparently stunned federal prosecutors asked the judge if they could recess to think about possibly dropping the case, or maybe offering Crippen a plea deal of some sort. All too often we see judges simply fall over themselves to agree with the government's position on intellectual property cases. It's nice to see some judges pushing back on some rather important points. Update: Apparently, despite all of this, the government is moving forward with its case, believing it will still prevail.
"The first prosecution 12 years later, and you're suggesting a mens rea that is akin to exactly contrary to the IP manual: that ignorance of the law is no excuse?" the judge barked.
"You didn't even propose a middle ground," Gutierrez continued. "What's getting me more riled, it seems to me I cannot communicate the severity to you of what's going on here."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: dmca, fair use, modding, philip gutierrez, xbox
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
How is that not completely hypocritical?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't see how this is hypocritical. Unless the witness just recently graduated college, then modding Xboxes is something he used to do, not something he is currently doing. In this particular case, the witness probably didn't realize he was doing something wrong; he probably just got a job and started spending his time doing other stuff. But regardless of why he stopped, he did stop.
Besides, since when is not being a hypocrite a criterion for being a witness? Whether the witness should also be charged with breaking the law for modding Xboxes is irrelevent to the question of whether the defendent broke the law by modding Xboxes. It may not look good, but who else are you going to get as an expert witness on modding Xboxes other than someone who's actually done it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
How do you know they didn't charge the witness? How do you know that his testifying isn't part of a plea bargain as a result of said charges? How do you know they won't charge him after they prove modding is illegal?
OK, maybe based on the literal definition of hypocracy, the prosecution is being hypocritical, but then so is any other case of a criminal getting a deal for testifying for the prosecution. Again, if you're trying to prove something is illegal, especially something as technical (to most people) as modding, then you need someone to explain it who has some credibility. I personally don't think that modding an Xbox is or should be illegal, but using this witness seems like a reasonable tactic given the prosecution's goals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Maybe it's the fact that the government tried to cover the whole thing up?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I has a happy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I has a happy.
PS- I like to mix metaphors, so what? :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I has a happy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
High hopes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's always fun seeing them go on the attack, they have the best rants :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's about time...
the pendulum starts swinging in the other direction.
One can always hope this judge dismissed the pretrial defense motions and thereby allow the trial to begin, so he could squash those who for too long have shown their true colors: by thinking and acting as if they are above the law.
Copyright law certainly has its place in our world, but when those in power unilaterally expand and abuse those rules, they should expect no quarter drawn or given. I feel this judge will be showing the prosecution just how foolish it is to spit into the oncoming wind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's about time...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's about time...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fair Use Aspect
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fair Use Aspect
The DMCA was A BAD PIECE OF LAW! It should have never been passed in the first place, at least not with the anti-circumvention clauses.
We should be LEGALLY ABLE to break DRM on ANYTHING if it keeps us from doing Fair Use things, like playing backups!
If these companies don't like us doing that... MOVE TO A NON-VOLATILE/DAMAGEABLE FORMAT! Meaning.... SSD drives or USB Flash drives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The best part about this.
But I have one for them...
Owned.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The case is proceeding
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/no-deal-in-xbox-modding-case-trial-begins/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The case is proceeding
No surprise there. I don't know why everyone got their hopes up. This "hero" judge will probably be signing off on this guy's guilty verdict in the very near future.
I don't really follow how the debate over which mens rea the prosecution needs to prove has anything to do with fair use. It doesn't. The issue was whether or not the statute required the defendant know he was breaking the law. That's got nothing to do with fair use.
Besides, as the judge made perfectly clear is his recent ruling, not to mention as Congress made perfectly clear when enacting the DCMA, there is no fair use defense available in this case. I'm not saying I agree with that, but that's what the law says.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The case is proceeding
He also modded Xboxes. But that must clearly have been fair use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The case is proceeding
Want to bet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The case is proceeding
You should have asked me earlier. I would have taken you up on it. Kind of silly the prosecutor didn't know what level of mens rea they needed to prove. I guess that sort of thing happens with a seldom used statute. They won't make that mistake again I should think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I am completely unable to parse this sentence. What was 12 years ago? What is the IP manual? Which particular law?
Can someone please chew and recite this quote to me as though I was a stupid baby?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
From TFA - "The judge noted that the government's own intellectual property crimes manual concerning the 1998 DMCA[...] "
2010 - 1998 = 12 (assuming a decimal base, of course)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Video
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apparently the new update is the case has been dropped
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/crippen-dismissed/?utm_source=feedburner&utm _medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29&u tm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Apparently the new update is the case has been dropped
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Update to the Update: Case is dropped
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The prosecution’s decision to continue would come back to haunt them as the government’s first witness ultimately unraveled their case.
Witness No. 1, Tony Rosario, was an undercover agent with the Entertainment Software Association who told jurors Wednesday that he paid Crippen $60 in 2008 to modify an Xbox, and secretly videotaped the operation. Rosario had responded to Crippen’s advertisement on the internet, and met Crippen at his Anaheim house.
All of that had been laid out in pre-trial motions. But during his testimony, Rosario also said Crippen inserted a pirated video game into the console to verify that the hack worked. That was a new detail that helped the government meet an obligation imposed by the judge that very morning, when Gutierrez ruled that the government had to prove Crippen knew he was breaking the law by modding Xboxes.
But nowhere in Rosario’s reports or sworn declarations was it mentioned that Crippen put a pirated game into the console. Shortly before Rosario’s testimony during opening statements, defense attorney Koren Bell told jurors that there would be no evidence of that kind.
Defense attorney Callie Steele objected to the new testimony. And as court was to get underway here early Thursday, prosecutor Chiu told the judge that he first learned of Rosario’s newfound recollection days before trial. Chiu conceded he never forwarded that information to the defense.
“That fact was disclosed on Sunday,” Chiu told the judge. “We should have disclosed that to the defense right away.”
In light of that omission and “based on fairness and justice,” Chiu moved to dismiss the case, conceding that the government had made errors in its prosecution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There is a big difference - the first they can re-try him any time before applicible statues of limitation expire. (or so I understand - IANAL or even American)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]