19 January 2001

From: Allonn Levy <ael@hsapc.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:12:31 -0800


Appellate Court Responds to Supreme Court Ruling - Issues immediate stay of lower court proceedings:

The Appellate Court issued an Order to Show Cause why the relief we requested on behalf of Mr. Pavlovich should not be granted. In other words, in order to avoid the granting of Mr. Pavlovich's petition, DVD CCA must demonstrate "good cause" to the Appellate Court. DVD CCA's briefs are due February 15, Pavlovich may respond within 20 days of that date.

The Appellate Court, on its own motion, also issued an immediate stay of all proceedings in the lower court based on a finding of good cause. The stay may only be lifted through a subsequent order by the Appellate Court or a higher court.

You may recall that the trial Court issued an order on August 29th 2000, denying LiVid Project leader Matthew Pavlovich's motion to quash service for lack of jurisdiction. This office immediately filed a petition for writ of Mandate with the Sixth District Appellate Court. That Petition for Writ of Mandate, was denied and the issue was placed before the state's High Court through a petition for review.

The Petition for Review to the California Supreme Court argued that because the case raises precedent setting issues regarding the use of Internet effects as a basis for jurisdiction, the High Court should grant review of the decision. Numerous groups filed Amicus Curiae letters in support of Mr. Pavlovich's position, urging that the Court review the case. Amici included the prestigious Computer Communications Industry Association (representing numerous high tech companies totaling $300 billion in revenues) and the Association of Defense Counsel of Northern California and Nevada.

Although very few Petitions for Review are granted by the Supreme Court, on December 14, 2000, the Supreme Court served on Counsel its order granting the Petition of review. The Court went on to issue an order transferring the case to the Court of Appeal with directions to vacate its order denying Mandate and to issue a new order directing the Superior Court to show cause why the relief sought in the petition should not be granted. The Supreme Court issued its order unanimously, with all seven justices concurring.

- I'm informed that Filings are available on Cryptome.org [http://cryptome.org/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS]

Underlying Case:

The underlying case, headed by defendant Andrew Bunner continues to proceed through discovery. Mr. Bunner's deposition has been taken and un-sealed portions of the transcript will be made available soon. Numerous additional depositions are set, world-wide; Mr. Johnsen's deposition has been set through the Norwegian Court and is anticipated in mid February.

DVD CCA also conducted a jurisdictional deposition of a Scotland resident by the name of Derek Fawcus. Mr. Fawcus has also filed a motion to quash service of process, alleging that the California Court does not have jurisdiction over him.


The New York case continues through the appellate process. Appellants briefs are expected to be filed in January, with numerous organizations filing Amicus Curiae in support of our position. [See EFF statement of 19 January: http://cryptome.org/eff011901.htm]


http://www.cryptome.org -- tends to get the most recent filings fairly quickly

EFF Archive for DVD-CCA Cal. trade secret case:


EFF's DVD Archive: