Transcript of Trial - Day 1, MPAA v. 2600

NY; July 17, 2000

Transcript courtesy of the EFF

See related files:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video (EFF Archive)
http://jya.com/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS (Cryptome Archive)
http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs (2600 Archive)
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/ (Harvard DVD OpenLaw Project)


                                                             
                                                            

1



   1   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
       SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
   2   ------------------------------x

   3   UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.,
       et al,
   4
                      Plaintiffs,
   5
                  v.                           00 Civ. 277 (LAK)
   6
       SHAWN C. REIMERDES, et al,
   7
                      Defendants.
   8
       ------------------------------x
   9
                                               July 17, 2000
  10                                           9:00 a.m.

  11   Before:

  12                       HON. LEWIS A. KAPLAN,

  13                                           District Judge

  14                            APPEARANCES

  15   PROSKAUER, ROSE, L.L.P.
            Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  16   BY:  LEON P. GOLD
            CHARLES S. SIMS
  17        CARLA MILLER
            WILLIAM M. HART
  18
       FRANKFURT, GARBUS, KLEIN & SELZ
  19        Attorneys for Defendants
       BY:  MARTIN GARBUS
  20        ERNEST HERNSTADT
            DAVID ATLAS
  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




2



   1            THE CLERK:  Universal versus Reimerdes.  Is the

   2   plaintiff ready?

   3            MR GOLD:  Ready for the plaintiff.

   4            THE CLERK:  Is the defendant ready?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  We are not, we understand we are going

   6   ahead.

   7            THE COURT:  You are going ahead, unless you have some

   8   new reason to tell me that I haven't heard before.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  We have a motion pending and it seems to

  10   me that it would be appropriate until such time that the Court

  11   renders a decision to not go ahead.

  12            THE COURT:  You are going ahead.  I am not rendering

  13   any opinion now, but rather in the course of the morning or

  14   perhaps later in the day.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  May we have an opportunity to go to the

  16   Second Circuit to get a stay?

  17            THE COURT:  You have the opportunity to do whatever

  18   you want, but the trial is now and if you wish to make an

  19   opening statement, I will hear it now.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Would the Court grant a stay?

  21            THE COURT:  No.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Then we will immediately go to the

  23   Second Circuit.  I will make an opening statement.

  24            THE COURT:  You are the defendant, Mr. Garbus.  The

  25   plaintiff goes first.




3



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you very much.

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, you may proceed.

   3            MR GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.  Good morning.  My

   4   name is Leon Gold.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  May I just interrupt one moment?

   6            If I understand your ruling, we cannot go to the

   7   Second Circuit until such time that we have a decision?

   8            THE COURT:  You will have it shortly.

   9            Mr. Gold?

  10            MR GOLD:  My name is still Leon Gold.  I'm a partner

  11   at Proskauer Rose and I represent the motion picture studio

  12   plaintiffs.

  13            In 1998, Congress recognized the ease with which

  14   digital copyrighted works such as movies and records could be

  15   copied and distributed worldwide virtually instantaneously via

  16   the Internet subjecting copyright owners to losses of material

  17   portions of the value of their copyrights virtually overnight.

  18            Congress determined that sound copyright economic and

  19   Internet policy dictated that this risk of loss had to be

  20   addressed.  Congress then provided that extra protection over

  21   and above existing copyright laws that were needed for the

  22   works since disastrous harm could occur well before any Court

  23   could act under the copyright laws, well before plaintiffs

  24   could get injunctions for infringement or copyright or for

  25   contributor infringement.




4



   1            The anticircumvention law was passed as a result.

   2   Defendants and their supporters disagree with Congress'

   3   findings and with the anticircumvention law.  They believe the

   4   interests of a free Internet, of free access to digital copies

   5   of movies, records and books deserve more respect and more

   6   attention than protection of copyrighted artistic work.

   7            They believe in the right to take this work without

   8   any permission, but no one has the right to steal another

   9   person's copyright to steal their intellectual property and

  10   Congress may provide and has provided additional protection

  11   for intellectual property when new technology has

  12   substantially increased the risks of infringement.

  13            We note this is not the appropriate forum for the

  14   expression of defendant's beliefs about effective social,

  15   economic and Internet policy.  Congress has decided and we

  16   respectfully submit the Courts must act promptly to protect

  17   these interests in the manner that Congress intended.  Not to

  18   do so eliminates the purposes, eliminates the existence truly

  19   of the act in question.

  20            In the anticircumvention law Congress provided that

  21   owners of copyright digital materials could protect their work

  22   with technological measures which would prevent unauthorized

  23   access to their copyrighted works.  Congress provided that if

  24   copyright owners protected their works with such measures,

  25   circumvention devices could not be offered or trafficked to




5



   1   the public and trafficking in such a device was forbidden and

   2   could be enjoined by a Federal Court.

   3            Congress intended that the injury that the Court

   4   would protect against would be the loss of the device

   5   protecting the copyrighted material.  The security afforded by

   6   such protective device is the asset protected by the

   7   anticircumvention law.

   8            Plaintiff's harm is first the loss of that asset

   9   which could create irreparable loss and the threat of

  10   uncontrollable copying.  After all, we will show the studios

  11   were not going to go forward into the digital world with this

  12   new product, DVD, without such protective technology.

  13            Congress did not provide that the Court would not

  14   grant injunctions in the anticircumvention law until actual

  15   infringement, actual copying or contributory infringement took

  16   place.  Had Congress imposed that prerequisite, there would

  17   have been no need for the anticircumvention law in the first

  18   place.

  19            We will briefly show that when digital copyrighted

  20   material -- and I'm referring now to music on CD's -- were

  21   sold without inscription to protect against access to the

  22   artistic work, the record -- the record industry found that

  23   all of its copyrighted work were infringed and that virtually

  24   every copyrighted song in their libraries were all made

  25   available on the Internet via Napster at no cost with millions




6



   1   and millions of downloads of songs taking place every week.

   2            For months, the record companies have been working

   3   their way to a preliminary injunction hearing which is, in

   4   fact, scheduled for July 26th.  Napster, the operation of the

   5   a center of this activity, is the most frequently visited web

   6   site in the U.S.  However, movie companies with respect to

   7   DVD's were able to take advantage of inscription and the

   8   digital millennium copyright act and are here to protect

   9   against such a result, protect against waking up one morning

  10   and finding out they've been Napsterized and only then seeking

  11   to enjoin the copyright.

  12            Once record companies' songs have been copied and

  13   widely distributed, something that happens right away,

  14   irreparable harm has taken place.  Defendants argue that the

  15   DeCSS does not quite yet provide a threat of copying because

  16   copying is many months to several years away, but even

  17   defendants don't deny that at some point, overwhelming -- the

  18   overwhelming probability of copying and transmission over the

  19   Internet will take place.

  20            The movie companies, however, prefer to rely on DMCA

  21   rather than the assurances of those who make such assertions.

  22   Plaintiffs want to keep their films protected.

  23            The Internet now contains offerings of movies with

  24   good visual and audio quality, something that did not happen

  25   before the advent of DeCSS.  Buyer rated movies played from




7



   1   decrypted DVD's are also now being sold in hard copies.  It

   2   doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand how this

   3   happened.

   4            Defendants are wrong because decryption of DVD's with

   5   DeCSS and the offering and transmission of the contents on the

   6   Internet has begun, as your Honor will soon see.  It's picking

   7   up steam and it will become an avalanche unless halted by this

   8   Court.

   9            Once a film is decrypted and exchangeable on the Net

  10   for down loading, that film's protection is lost for good.

  11   More powerful transmission lines at increased hard drive

  12   storage capacities are the most rapidly developing area of

  13   current Internet development.  That makes the copy problem a

  14   certainty.  The danger of immense harm is upon plaintiffs.  We

  15   will clearly show in this case our right to an injunction.

  16            We will establish that CSS is a device meant to be

  17   protected under the statute and that trafficking in DeCSS is

  18   unlawful.  The studios will show that CSS is a technological

  19   measure effectively controlling access to copyrighted DVD

  20   movies.

  21            In the ordinary course of its operations, it requires

  22   the application of information or a process or a treatment

  23   with the authority of the copyright owner to gain access to

  24   the work.  The studios will show that DeCSS is a technology, a

  25   device, a component designed for the purpose of circumventing




8



   1   CSS and placed in a copy -- placing a copy of the DVD movie on

   2   the user's hard drive.  We will show it has no other purpose.

   3   The studios will show that DeCSS has a limited

   4   commercially-significant purpose or use other than to

   5   circumvent.  It has no such commercial purpose other than to

   6   circumvent.

   7            Defendants admit that they've posted DeCSS on their

   8   web site and have linked to other web sites which post DeCSS

   9   and, thus, have offered this device to the public and

  10   trafficked in DeCSS.

  11            As we have set forth in our in limine motions, we

  12   submit respectfully that there aren't any material triable

  13   issues in this case.  The reverse engineering and

  14   encryptographic research exceptions don't apply to our

  15   trafficking claims as a matter of statutory policy and

  16   statutory interpretation and because defendants have admitted

  17   their acts had nothing to do with reverse engineering or

  18   encryptographic research.

  19            Fair use is not a defense to a trafficking claim and,

  20   your Honor, that some few people may make some acceptable use

  21   of DeCSS does not excuse offering it to the world on the

  22   Internet.

  23            Finally, plaintiffs have already suffered great

  24   damage because their protective device has been taken away by

  25   defendant's acts.  Their films are on DVD's are no longer




9



   1   protected by an anticircumvention device.  Plaintiffs would

   2   not have issued DVD's without a protective encryption system

   3   and the threat of widespread copying is here and the process

   4   has begun.

   5            Your Honor, this case relates to the protection of

   6   artistic works and to the health of the American motion

   7   picture industry.  While the computer and the Internet are

   8   extraordinary developments that have an impact on every person

   9   in the world every day, still the computer and the Internet

  10   are machines and systems with no moral sense and no ability to

  11   choose the ends to which they are put.

  12            Like the old machines and the old system and the old

  13   systems, these new technologies can be used to promote

  14   artistic expression, economic growth and educational

  15   opportunities or they can be used to steal and invade the

  16   rights guaranteed by our Constitution and our laws.

  17            Congress has made some critically important policy

  18   decisions with respect to some of these matters.  The Digital

  19   Millennium Copyright Act is one of those decisions.  As we all

  20   know, laws passed by legislative bodies, Congress' acts can be

  21   rendered meaningless by the absence of prompt enforcement of

  22   Congress' will.  Then chaos will reign and the most important

  23   technological developments of our age will be employed to our

  24   detriment.

  25            We note that there are a large number of brilliant




10



   1   creative productive people who lead the American technological

   2   revolution.  Their wisdom and counsel are critical to

   3   solutions of some of these problems.  However, their voices

   4   will not be heard in this trial.

   5            A good deal of loud noise, much of it irrelevant and

   6   much of it untrue, has preceded today's events.  Today the

   7   rule of law begins to assert itself.  It's a welcome day.

   8            Your Honor, plaintiffs are ready and anxious to

   9   present their case.

  10            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Gold.

  11            Mr. Garbus?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, it's a great privilege and a

  13   pleasure to be here and to argue and to deal with the issues

  14   that are raised by this statute.  The statute -- this is the

  15   first case interpreting that statute.  This is a statute that

  16   will define the future of American technology in many ways.

  17   In many ways, it will define how the technology and the laws

  18   will encompass each other.

  19            The position that we take, which is very clear is one

  20   of protection, is one of protection of copyright interests and

  21   one of protection of the First Amendment and one of protection

  22   of fair use, a concept that has been with us for a very long

  23   period of time.

  24            (Continued on next page)

  25




11



   1            MR. GARBUS:  The issue that we are facing I think is

   2   a little more complicated than I think Mr. Gold makes it out

   3   to be.  I think the issue is how do you balance the need for

   4   copyright protection.  After all, the Constitution talks about

   5   the creation of copyright, we recognize that copyright must be

   6   protected so that artists and creators can be reimbursed for

   7   the work that they do, and we recognize that movie studios and

   8   others must also be reimbursed and entitled to make whatever

   9   profit that they can make as a result of the work that they

  10   do.  We also recognize -- and your Honor has seen in this

  11   case, many of the other issues that are involved.  We

  12   recognize that there are certain needs for research, there are

  13   certain needs for technology, there are certain needs for

  14   librarians.  The case is larger than I think Mr. Gold

  15   interprets it, and I think that the facts are different than

  16   the facts that were given to the Court in the first instance.

  17            It turns out that the DeCSS or the cracks of the

  18   codes go back to 1997, and the avalanche that the movie

  19   studios have been talking about have never occurred.  The most

  20   recent experiment that we learned about, and we learned about

  21   it in this case -- and you will hear it from the first witness

  22   that the plaintiff calls, Mr. Michael Shamos -- and what

  23   Mr. Shamos tells you is that after trying to download a DVD,

  24   and then to do this illegal copying, it took him working in

  25   the middle of the night with an assistant some 20 hours to do




12



   1   it.  And what you will learn is the kind of technology that he

   2   had when he did it.  You will also hear from our experts what

   3   it takes most people in a normal time to do.  This is not the

   4   Napster case.  The fundamental issue here -- and it's a very

   5   complicated one, and we have not had a chance to develop it --

   6   is what is the future of the Internet, to what extent do all

   7   the horrors that Mr. Gold talks about really ever take place.

   8   How fast will things move?  How fast will they move within a

   9   year?  How fast will they move within two years?  How long

  10   will DVDs be around?  How long will there be other encryption

  11   systems.

  12            You will hear that the motion picture industry said

  13   in testimony to Congress back in May out in Stamford that DVD

  14   audio for example, and they raised all the horrors, cannot be

  15   distributed, cannot be shown, is not available, and they have

  16   said that it was withdrawn for a variety of reasons.  We will

  17   show you in court that you can walk out today to Tower and buy

  18   these DVD audios.

  19            There was testimony in the case, and you have seen

  20   the affidavits, about the DVD audios, that they stopped making

  21   the machines.  You can go out to Tower and buy the machines.

  22            So, what you will find I think with respect to each

  23   claim is that it is false, it is easy to say in a case the sky

  24   is going to fall tomorrow.

  25            What happened in the Napster case, the downloading




13



   1   has not happened here.  What he is talking about is something

   2   that may happen in the future.  If that future happens, then

   3   you have what happens in the Napster case, you go out to the

   4   people who did the file sharing.  I told you at the very

   5   beginning of the trial, and they told you something opposite

   6   than what I said, and you said one of us was speaking baloney.

   7            As of yesterday, they did not have the name of one

   8   single person who had ever used DeCSS to illegally copy a

   9   film.  As of yesterday they did not know of one single

  10   instance of illegal copying of a film.

  11            The MPA has extraordinary resources.  What you will

  12   learn in this case is that early on they learned exactly about

  13   the breaks and they learned exactly about the Linux Group and

  14   the attempt to make a Linux.  Now what happens to the owner of

  15   the DVD, the movie studio that makes the DVD?  The Linux

  16   player, if you take the DVD, the Linux person buys it, he pays

  17   $15, he pays $20, and he puts it in his Linux machine.  And

  18   the owner of the DVD gets paid for that.  The only thing that

  19   that Linux operator may not have is a license.  You are

  20   familiar with the license structure.  We have gone through the

  21   license structure at great length.

  22            You will I think also hear from some of the other

  23   plaintiffs' witnesses today, and you will learn from them that

  24   up until a little while ago not one of them -- this is the MPA

  25   with its vast resources -- had every tried to do this




14



   1   allegedly illegal act, even though they came into court and

   2   said it was going to happen tomorrow.  Not one of them, with

   3   the vast resources of the MPA, the vast resources of the

   4   motion picture industry, the vast resources of the DVD, can

   5   point to one single case of copying, not one person, not one

   6   single place.

   7            They have chosen as a defendant Mr. Goldstein.  The

   8   reason they have chosen Mr. Goldstein is obvious.  There are

   9   university sites that post DeCSS object and source codes.

  10   There are newspapers, the San Jose Mercury News, the New York

  11   Times, that link the sites.

  12            Disney is a plaintiff in this case.  If you go to

  13   Disney's search engine and you type in DeCSS and make a

  14   search, you will find sites all over the place.  If you go to

  15   Go, which is also Disney's search engine, you will also find

  16   sites, forgetting about Mr. Goldstein, all over the place.

  17            The statute is very clear with respect to the

  18   benefits that a journalist has.  I will shortly before I

  19   finish just answer the question that you placed last week with

  20   respect to where you saw the issues in this case.

  21            Before I do that, I note, and you have noted, that

  22   the academics from the leading universities have come in on

  23   the side of the defendants in this case.  You have briefs

  24   submitted by Professor Samuelson at the very eminent Berkeley

  25   Center, you have affidavits of Professor Nessom at Harvard




15



   1   University, from Margaret Smith at Harvard University,

   2   Professor Bengler at NYU, and Professor Moglen at Columbia.

   3   So that the issues in this case are far more complex I think

   4   than my friend Mr. Gold concedes.

   5            I recognize that this case is only the very first

   6   small step.  It's a beginning in deciding these issues.  As a

   7   trial court judge the inclination to overrule a law of

   8   Congress because it's bad would be inappropriate.  We are not

   9   saying you should overrule a law because it's a bad law.  I

  10   don't think that's the function of the argument that's being

  11   made here today.  I think that this case will proceed.  It

  12   will go to the Second Circuit, it will go to the United States

  13   Supreme Court.  I think all of us have a very heavy

  14   responsibility to make a record in this case that is adequate

  15   for the kinds of determinations that are going to be made for

  16   a statute of this kind.

  17            At the end of the day DVD, there may or may not be

  18   DVD movies, but there will be at least for a period of time

  19   DVD encryptions on books, DVD encryptions on audio, which is

  20   now out, contrary to what the MPA said.

  21            So, what you are really talking about is does this

  22   new digital technology fundamentally mean the end of fair use.

  23   And that is the issue that is faced.  And when the MPA went to

  24   Congress, they said we have reconciled it.  Betamax is still

  25   the law, there still is fair use.  I won't go through Betamax




16



   1   with you.  The Court knows it.  I won't go through the Sega

   2   case with you.  The Court knows it.  I won't go through the

   3   Connectix case again because the Court knows it.  I won't go

   4   through the monopoly issues again because the Court knows

   5   them.

   6            Again I think it's a privilege for all of us to be

   7   here and to have a chance to establish a record that many

   8   courts and judges and the public will be looking at in the

   9   years to come.  Thank you.

  10            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Garbus.  Mr. Gold, your

  11   first witness.

  12            MR. GOLD:  Mr. Sims will present our first witness.

  13            MR. SIMS:  Dr. Michael Shamos.

  14            THE COURT:  I am one of the judges who requires one

  15   lawyer for each witness.  The first lawyer who objects on

  16   direct or questions on cross will be the lawyer for that

  17   witness.

  18    MICHAEL I. SHAMOS,

  19        called as a witness by the Plaintiffs,

  20        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I presume with respect to whether a

  22   witness is qualified as an expert or not, given this is a

  23   nonjury trial, you may care to hear that at some other time.

  24   Or would you care to have that at the very beginning.

  25            THE COURT:  I don't need to have it at the very




17



   1   beginning.  I don't follow the practice of having the witness

   2   tendered.  If there is an objection on the grounds of

   3   expertise, you should make the objection, and if I think I

   4   need to hear argument, I will hear it.  If not, we will

   5   reserve it.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Mr. Hernstadt was going to make that,

   7   but I was going to cross-examine the witness.  I don't know if

   8   that violates your rule.

   9            THE COURT:  Technically, but I will allow you to do

  10   that.

  11            MR. SIMS:  I think if you stay about an inch or so

  12   further from the microphone, the sounds might be a little

  13   better.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Does Mr. Hernstadt now make the

  15   objection or --

  16            THE COURT:  I don't even know what the questions are,

  17   so I can't very well rule on the objection.  There will come a

  18   point I suppose when Mr. Sims is going to ask him do you have

  19   an opinion on some subject, and then if one of you, either one

  20   of you wants to make that objections, I will hear whichever

  21   wants to make it.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we are objecting to

  23   presenting any evidence.  If he is being presented as a fact

  24   witness, almost all of the evidence he is going to present is

  25   hearsay.  If he is being presented as an expert, he is




18



   1   presenting evidence based on the work of his assistant which

   2   in large part he didn't even observe and without a basis for

   3   the expert testimony.

   4            THE COURT:  Let's do this one step at a time, please.

   5            MR. SIMS:  I really had plans to do this the old

   6   school way and present the witness's qualifications.  I think

   7   it will be clear at the right point.

   8   DIRECT EXAMINATION

   9   BY MR. SIMS:

  10   Q.  Dr. Shamos, what is your current occupation?

  11   A.  I am currently employed on the faculty of Carnegie Mellon

  12   University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  I am director of the

  13   Universal Library and codirector of the Institute of

  14   Electronic Commerce at CMU.  I have a senior faculty position

  15   in the School of Computer Science and the Graduate School of

  16   Industrial Administration, which is CMU's business school.

  17   Q.  What is the Universal Library?

  18   A.  The Universal Library is a project in which we are

  19   attempting to digitize all public domain works and make them

  20   available over the Internet.

  21   Q.  Do you hold any positions with respect to e-commerce?

  22   A.  Yes, as I mentioned I'm codirector of the Institute for

  23   Electronic Commerce.  I'm in charge of the academic program in

  24   electronic commerce from the technology side as opposed to the

  25   business side.




19



   1   Q.  Describe briefly your educational and employment

   2   backgrounds.

   3   A.  Yes.  I began computer programming while in high school in

   4   1962 and have been programming ever since then.  I went to

   5   Princeton University but was obliged to major in physics

   6   because the field of computer science was not offered as a

   7   major when I started.

   8            I graduated from Princeton in 1968 with a Bachelors

   9   degree in physics.  I immediately began working for IBM

  10   corporation in East Fishkill, New York.  I was a programmer

  11   programming automated test equipment to test integrated

  12   circuits.

  13            During the Vietnam era I was obliged to go into the

  14   Service.  I entered the public health service in 1970, served

  15   at the National Institutes of Health, the Cancer Chemotherapy

  16   National Service Center in Bethesda, Maryland, where I was a

  17   supervisory programmer looking after systems that processed

  18   cancer test data.

  19            In 1972 I went to Yale University to obtain a Ph.D.

  20   in computer science.  Yale had just begun its department.  I

  21   left Yale in 1975 to take a faculty position at Carnegie

  22   Mellon.  I was hired in the computer science and mathematics

  23   departments there from 1975, received my Ph.D. from Yale in

  24   1978 and I --

  25            THE COURT:  What field?




20



   1            THE WITNESS:  Ph.D. was in computer science.

   2            In 1978 I began to study law.  While I was a faculty

   3   member at CMU I was a law student at night, I went to Duquesne

   4   University in Pittsburgh and obtained a law degree in 1981.

   5            1981 I left the university because I had started a

   6   computer software company.  We were selling the precursor of

   7   desk top publishing software based on some technology that had

   8   been developed at CMU.

   9             From 1981 until 1987 I was the president of two

  10   software companies in Pittsburgh which I sold in 1987, took

  11   what might be referred as a sabbatical for the next three

  12   years, and in 1990 I joined the Webb law firm.  That's

  13   W-E-B-B, a law firm in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which is the

  14   largest intellectual property practice in western PA.  I was

  15   an attorney there rising to partner.

  16            I left the practice of full-time law in 1998 to

  17   return to Carnegie Mellon University to direct the Universal

  18   Library project.  When we began the Institute for Electronic

  19   e-commerce the next year, I was named codirector of that and

  20   have been teaching in it ever since.

  21   Q.  Describe your present teaching activities.

  22   A.  I teach four different courses at Carnegie Mellon.  One is

  23   on intellectual capital.  One is on e-commerce technology,

  24   which is a survey of all the technologies that we believe

  25   pertain to electronic commerce.  I teach a course in




21



   1   electronic payment systems which are the technologies

   2   surrounding how one pays for things on the Internet, and a

   3   course in Internet law and regulation.

   4   Q.  Do you lecture in these areas as well?

   5   A.  I have a very extensive lecturing schedule largely

   6   organized by Carnegie Mellon University.  In addition to the

   7   four courses I teach, I give approximately 400 outside

   8   lectures per year, mostly to corporations that want to become

   9   educated in the Internet.

  10   Q.  Which major U.S. corporations do you presently lecture for

  11   and where do you do that lecturing?

  12   A.  The major clients for that are Morgan Stanley Dean Witter

  13   where I teach in New York and London.  I'm scheduled to also

  14   teach in Chicago and San Francisco for MacKenzie & Company.  I

  15   have been asked to give Internet training to all 6,000 of

  16   their consultants worldwide, so I have been doing that in a

  17   variety of countries, Austria, France, the UK, United States.

  18   Q.  Are those lectures extended and do they address the issues

  19   including bandwidth file transfer, web architecture,

  20   compression, networking, Internet technology that are at issue

  21   in this case?

  22   A.  They do, because they are fundamental topics in e-commerce

  23   technology.  Basically the outside lecturing I do are very

  24   short and compressed summaries of the courses that I teach at

  25   Carnegie Mellon.




22



   1   Q.  Can you describe your scholarly output?

   2   A.  Yes.  Of course when I became an assistant professor

   3   originally at Carnegie Mellon University there was the

   4   obligation of publication, so I have something like 18

   5   publications largely in the field of computational geometry

   6   which I invented myself while at Yale University.  Subsequent

   7   to that I was on leave from the university for 17 years during

   8   which I had virtually no scholarly output.

   9            Upon returning to the university and becoming

  10   involved principally in Internet activities, the time lag

  11   between when one writes a paper and when it appears in print

  12   is so long that the Internet has substantially changed by that

  13   time, so the vast bulk of my scholarly output now consists of

  14   maintaining the technology portion of the CMU Institute for

  15   E-Commerce's website which contains freshly updated

  16   information and links to hundreds and hundreds of sites

  17   dealing with e-commerce technology.  And my scholarly output

  18   of course is also the lectures that I give and accompanying

  19   slides.

  20   Q.  Let me show you what has been marked as Plaintiffs'

  21   Exhibit 129 --

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  May we have a copy, please?

  23            MR. SIMS:  Yes.

  24   Q.  -- and ask you whether this is the declaration you

  25   submitted earlier in this case and with particular reference




23



   1   now a copy of your CV?

   2   A.  It is my declaration and it is a copy of my CV.

   3   Q.  Is the CV complete and up to date?

   4   A.  The CV is not complete.  It's accurate as far as it goes,

   5   but it's what I refer to as my short r=82sum=82.  It concentrates

   6   principally on my major output and major invited talks.  I

   7   haven't listed everything that I have done.

   8   Q.  Have you testified in any court cases?

   9   A.  Yes, I have.

  10   Q.  Which ones that have any reference to computer matters?

  11   A.  I testified I believe approximately on six to eight cases

  12   involving computer matters, and I testified in one case

  13   involving Internet matters.

  14   Q.  What is that?

  15   A.  That was the "I Crave TV" case that was decided earlier

  16   this year, January, February.

  17   Q.  Were you qualified as an expert in that case?

  18   A.  Yes, I was.

  19   Q.  By what court?

  20   A.  That was the Western District of Pennsylvania.

  21   Q.  Do you recall what subject you were qualified as an expert

  22   in?

  23   A.  Yes, it was Internet technology, networking, transmission

  24   of video over the Internet.

  25   Q.  Are you being compensated for your engagement here?




24



   1   A.  Could you repeat the question?

   2   Q.  Are you being compensated for your engagement by

   3   plaintiffs?

   4   A.  I certainly hope so.

   5   Q.  How do the rates you are charging compare to the rates you

   6   do charge for consulting work for Morgan Stanley and

   7   MacKenzie?

   8   A.  For expert witnessing I charge approximately one third of

   9   what I do for teaching to industrial corporations.

  10            MR. SIMS:  This is the point at which I would have

  11   tendered the witness as an expert.

  12            THE COURT:  Ask your next question.

  13            MR. SIMS:  Thank you, your Honor.

  14   Q.  Are you familiar, Dr. Shamos, with the term CSS?

  15   A.  Yes.

  16   Q.  What does CSS stand for?

  17   A.  It stands for Contents Scrambling System.

  18   Q.  What is your understanding of what CSS is?

  19   A.  CSS is an access control and copy protection mechanism

  20   that's utilized to control access to and the copying of

  21   copyrighted works that appear on DVDs.

  22   Q.  What is your understanding of what CSS does?

  23   A.  Well, CSS is a comprehensive scheme that involves

  24   contractual relations, hardware and computer software.  What

  25   CSS on the hardware level does is enables a licensee of the




25



   1   system to put copyrighted material on a disk so that it is in

   2   scrambled form and cannot be descrambled unless one knows the

   3   secret.

   4   Q.  In what kind of DVD players can authorized disks be

   5   played?

   6   A.  Well, authorized disks are supposed to be able to be

   7   played only in what are referred to as compliant players,

   8   players manufactured by licensees of CSS.

   9   Q.  And what kind of disks will authorized players play?

  10   A.  Well, to my knowledge authorized players play compliant

  11   disks.

  12   Q.  Should they play other disks?

  13   A.  I believe it's a requirement, a licensing requirement that

  14   they be constructed to not play unlicensed disks.

  15   Q.  Do you know what DeCSS is?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  What does it do?

  18   A.  DeCSS is a computer program that circumvents the

  19   protections on the CSS DVD.

  20   Q.  Were you asked by plaintiff's counsel in this case to

  21   perform any studies or tests?

  22   A.  Yes, I was.

  23   Q.  Would you describe for the Court briefly what you were

  24   asked to do.

  25   A.  Yes.  The request was extremely specific.  I was asked to




26



   1   go out and purchase a brand new computer that had no prior

   2   software.  We were asked to go out and purchase brand new DVDs

   3   from a store in their sealed packages.  We were asked to

   4   obtain --

   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  I might as well make the objection

   6   now.  Everything that he is telling you as "we" is for the

   7   most part at least as set forth in his declaration "he," and

   8   he is his assistant Eric Burns.  So I would object to any of

   9   the testimony that Dr. Shamos is going to present that was not

  10   performed by him, and that includes almost all of the

  11   experiments, and that also includes things like how long the

  12   process took.  We could go through it on a piece by piece

  13   basis, but I would like to make the initial part of the

  14   objection known.

  15            I don't think Dr. Shamos should be permitted to

  16   testify about any of this stuff until we have had an

  17   opportunity to depose Mr. Burns, because Mr. Burns conducted

  18   most of the experiment.

  19            THE COURT:  I take it that the bottom line of all of

  20   this, Mr. Sims, is that you are going to ask for some opinion

  21   from Dr. Shamos.

  22            MR. SIMS:  Absolutely.  And Dr. Shamos was asked to

  23   conduct it, and he did conduct it, and he had the help of his

  24   assistant Mr. Burns.  And I am quite confident in the courts

  25   of this country when experts testify as to studies that they




27



   1   have been responsible for, they sometimes have assistants who

   2   have performed some of that work under their supervision.

   3            THE COURT:   Rule 703 I believe of the Federal Rules

   4   of Evidence provides that the facts or data in a case upon

   5   which an expert bases an opinion or an inference may be those

   6   known to him or made known to him.  If they are of a type

   7   reasonably relied upon by experts in the field in forming

   8   opinions or inferences on the subject, the data need not be

   9   admissible in evidence.  It need not be, in other words,

  10   firsthand knowledge, it can be hearsay.

  11            With this broad level of generality, Mr. Hernstadt, I

  12   can't sustain your objection because I don't yet know what

  13   foundation is going to be offered.  So your objection is

  14   overruled for now and we will see what kind of foundation

  15   there is.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.

  17   Q.  Dr. Shamos, I think you were in the course of describing

  18   what you were asked to do, and I think it might be helpful

  19   just to go through it, because I'm not sure exactly where you

  20   left off.

  21   A.  Right.  It was to obtain a brand new computer capable of

  22   reading authorized DVDs, obtain a copy of some authorized

  23   DVDs, obtain a copy of DeCSS through defendant's website,

  24   attempt to use DeCSS to descramble one or more of the DVDs;

  25   having done that, attempt to rip the result into DiVX, attempt




28



   1   to find other DiVXs on the Internet, trade those with whoever

   2   might make them available and then conduct studies to

   3   determine how long it would take to transfer DVDs and DiVXs

   4   over networks and the Internet.

   5   Q.  Did you perform all of this work yourself?

   6   A.  No.

   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  I'm going to renew the objection.  Of

   8   that list of things, first of all this was an experiment

   9   solicited by the Proskauer firm.  They were asked to do those

  10   particular things, they did that.  Dr. Shamos was not present

  11   for the study of how long it took to transfer the DiVX.  He

  12   was not present for finding other DiVXs.  He has never used an

  13   IRC channel on his own.  He didn't know that that's where you

  14   are supposed to go, or at least he testified that his

  15   assistant told him that's where you have to trade this stuff.

  16            He also was informed by his assistant how to find --

  17   well, I guess he could have found the DiVX anyway, but the

  18   assistant performed the entire DiVX rip.  He observed, he

  19   testified, for some of it.  He watched his assistant do this

  20   stuff.  In terms of the time, his assistant told him how long

  21   it took.  In very general terms his assistant did not keep any

  22   records, and he doesn't even know -- there is an upload and a

  23   download at the same time.  He doesn't know whether one took

  24   longer than the other or how long it actually took.  There is

  25   no evidence of any of this.




29



   1            THE COURT:  One thing I know for sure is I don't know

   2   any of it because I haven't heard the evidence yet.

   3            MR. SIMS:  The objection, your Honor, is premature.

   4            THE COURT:  Yes, it's premature.

   5   Q.  Dr. Shamos, I think I had asked you whether you performed

   6   other work yourself, and you were about to provide an answer.

   7            THE COURT:  Before he answers, let me just make a

   8   request to you both.  It's no secret to you I'm getting

   9   realtime transcripts, that is, I'm seeing a draft of the words

  10   almost as soon as they are spoken.  It is perfectly obvious to

  11   me that this is going to be essentially useless, and your

  12   transcript in this case will be essentially useless, with all

  13   due respect to my very able court reporters, if you people

  14   don't give them a glossary by tomorrow, not an explanation of

  15   what the terms mean but simply a list of the terms.  Because I

  16   can't imagine that they are doing anything but trying to do

  17   things like phonetically render on a stenotype machine DiVX,

  18   and you guys know what that is, and I at least know that it is

  19   an acronym or an abbreviation, and I know what the letters

  20   are, but they don't have a clue.

  21            MR. SIMS:  I appreciate that.  At five of nine we put

  22   that on our to-do list this morning, and we will have that

  23   later today or no later than first thing in the morning.

  24            THE COURT:  Now, Dr. Shamos, please answer the

  25   question if you remember.




30



   1            THE WITNESS:  I think the question was did I do

   2   everything myself, and the answer is no, and I think of course

   3   not.

   4            When the CEO of a corporation reports his company's

   5   earnings, he doesn't add up the numbers personally himself.

   6   So, I engaged an assistant whose name is Eric Burns.  Eric

   7   Burns has been working with me for two and a half years.  He

   8   works on the Universal Library project where his principal

   9   responsibility is the creation of videos and installing videos

  10   in the Universal Library.  I have worked with him very

  11   extensively, and I have come to rely on both his knowledge and

  12   his truthfulness.

  13            Furthermore, the materials that he provided to me

  14   were not simply his own words but various pieces of physical

  15   evidence that I am able to examine in order to determine

  16   whether I thought there was anything wrong with what he was

  17   saying.  Furthermore, all of the actions that were performed

  18   here were done under my supervision or direction, with the

  19   exception of some activities that took place while I was on

  20   vacation for 12 days.

  21   Q.  Do computer scientists and professors such as yourself

  22   customarily rely on intelligent, experienced, brilliant

  23   computer students for some of their research and work?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  What is your opinion of Mr. Burn's intellectual




31



   1   qualifications as a computer scientist?

   2   A.  They were the reason I asked him to assist me in this

   3   project.

   4   Q.  Now, I would like you to take us through the steps from

   5   the beginning that you used in your study, and we have some

   6   charts here that may be helpful as we work through it.

   7            In connection with the first part of your test to see

   8   if you could obtain DeCSS.

   9            THE COURT:  Who is the gentlemen who just came inside

  10   the well?

  11            MR. SIMS:  Mr. Hart, one of my partners.

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we have never seen these

  13   charts.

  14            MR. SIMS:  Yes, you have.  They are exhibits and I

  15   believe you have them.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  What exhibits are they?

  17            MR. HART:  Starting with 105.

  18            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, may I have Mr. Hart help me

  19   with the charts?

  20            THE COURT:  You may certainly.

  21   Q.  In connection with the first part of your testimony to see

  22   if you could obtain DeCSS from the defendant's site and

  23   descramble one of plaintiff's films, did you begin by buying a

  24   new computer?

  25   A.  Yes, we went out to -- both Eric and I went out to Comp




32



   1   USA in Parkway Center Mall in Pittsburgh, and we needed to

   2   find a machine that day that would be capable of playing DVDs,

   3   so we bought a high-end Sony laptop.

   4   Q.  For the purposes of your research and experiment here,

   5   what was the purpose of buying a new laptop?

   6   A.  We wanted to avoid any suggestion that there were rogue

   7   pieces of software or things that we had created that had been

   8   lingering on the disk.  We wanted to make sure there was

   9   absolutely nothing on this machine except the operating system

  10   and software that we specifically downloaded to the machine as

  11   noted in my declaration.

  12   Q.  Is it a typical consumer computer?

  13   A.  I'm not sure I would refer to it as a typical consumer

  14   computer.  It's a laptop for one thing, and typically

  15   consumers have home PCs.  And at the laptop end, it's fairly

  16   at the high end, although it costs significantly less these

  17   days than a home desktop used to cost.

  18   Q.  How does its functionality compare to those that many

  19   Americans would have either at the university or if they were

  20   in high school and in an upper middle class community?

  21   A.  In terms of its processor capability, it's about at the

  22   middle range of what one gets in desktops now, but it is at

  23   the high end of what one gets in laptops.  It was a 650

  24   megahertz machine.  In terms of its disk storage it had 18

  25   gigabytes of disk, which is large for a laptop but not large




33



   1   for a desktop as currently sold now.

   2   Q.  Did you proceed to try to decrypt the CSS-scrambled movie

   3   using DeCSS?

   4   A.  We did.

   5   Q.  Where did you get DeCSS?

   6   A.  Okay.  First, we purchased a copy of Sleepless in Seattle

   7   from the same store that we purchased the laptop from.  We

   8   then came back, and I think if we look at Exhibit 105 --

   9            THE COURT:  Are you sure it wasn't Sleepless in

  10   Hollywood?

  11            THE WITNESS:  We were sleepless actually during a lot

  12   of this experiment.

  13   A.  So, we went to defendant's website, 2600.com.

  14   Q.  Is Exhibit 105 connected somehow to defendant's website?

  15   A.  Yes, I should explain that most of these exhibits on these

  16   charts are going to be what are referred to as screen shots.

  17   Screen shots are basically capturing in static form exactly

  18   what was being displayed on the screen of the laptop at the

  19   time that these actions were taken.  So, they are the

  20   equivalent of having stood there and photographed the screen.

  21            So, one can see from a line -- and I am pointing with

  22   this laser pointer to some of that.  I will try to keep it out

  23   of your eyes -- up here is a line that says address.

  24            An address indicates the domain name of the website

  25   that we are visiting, in general the URL, the specific




34



   1   resource that we were asking to be downloaded to the screen.

   2            And this is the home page of defendant's website.

   3            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, are the books sufficient for

   4   your use, or would you like to be handed a loose copy of the

   5   exhibit?

   6            THE COURT:  No, I don't need a loose copy if they are

   7   in the books.

   8            MR. SIMS:  We will move in, needless to say, the

   9   paper ones.

  10            THE COURT:  I'm sorry?

  11            MR. SIMS:  You already have those.  I don't need to

  12   give the witness the paper one because he has the chart.

  13            THE COURT:  If he can see it.

  14            THE WITNESS:  Yes, I can.

  15            Then I think in the next exhibit, one has to scroll

  16   down a little bit from the top of the home page.

  17            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims, are you offering 105?

  18            MR. SIMS:  I was going to offer them in a group.

  19            THE COURT:  That's fine.  What is the next one?  106?

  20            MR. SIMS:  106.

  21   Q.  What does 106 show?

  22            MR. HART:  I have 107.

  23            THE COURT:  Let's do 106.

  24   Q.  What does Exhibit 106 show?

  25   A.  This one, because of the small size of the text, I would




35



   1   appreciate having a paper copy.

   2            THE COURT:  Let's make this a little easier.  I have

   3   been provided with an extra copy of these exhibits.  Why don't

   4   you take them down there, Dr. Shamos, and they are all tabbed

   5   and can you use them.  I take it that's the same as the other

   6   set?

   7            MR. SIMS:  It is, absolutely.  For awhile anyway.

   8   Q.  What is Exhibit 106?

   9   A.  Exhibit 106 shows more of the home page of defendant's

  10   website, what happens when one scrolls down further in the

  11   site.

  12            In this section "how you can help:  While we have

  13   every intention of sticking this out to the end" -- I believe

  14   "this" refers to this litigation -- "we have to face the

  15   possibility that we could be forced into submission.  For that

  16   reason it's especially important that as many of you as

  17   possible, all throughout the world, take a stand and mirror

  18   these files."  Where "these files" are shown in red and

  19   underlined on the page, that indicates a hyperlink, which if

  20   one clicks with a mouse one will get to these files.  These

  21   files are indicated I think in the next exhibit.

  22   Q.  And did you click on the hyperlink to these files?

  23   A.  We did.

  24   Q.  Turn to Exhibit 107, if you would.

  25            What is the list of things here, and what is




36



   1   represented by the purple color in the middle?

   2   A.  Yes, Exhibit 107 shows the result of clicking on "these

   3   files" on Exhibit 106, and one is presented with a long list

   4   of places.  We didn't visit every one of them but presumably

   5   because of what is stated in the web page each of these is

   6   some place where one can obtain DeCSS from.

   7            We clicked on an

   8   "HTPP://home.rmci.net/bert-fuckthelawyers"

   9            If your Honor would excuse me for the necessity to

  10   use such terminology in the courtroom, but it is evidence.

  11            So we clicked on that link and we are taken to a site

  12   which I think is shown in Exhibit 108.

  13   Q.  And is this the page you obtained by clicking on the

  14   purple line in Exhibit 107?

  15   A.  Yes, it is.  In fact if one looks up at the address line,

  16   again at the top of the browser it shows that the page being

  17   viewed is precisely the page that was referred to on the

  18   previous exhibit.

  19   Q.  So, that if we look at the browser line on Exhibit 107,

  20   the address is still at the defendant's website, 2600.com?

  21   A.  Yes, it shows that and it shows the specific file that was

  22   being displayed on the browser at that moment.

  23   Q.  And then the very next screen you obtained has transferred

  24   you to another website obtainable through the defendant.

  25   A.  That's correct.




37



   1   Q.  What does Exhibit 108 show?

   2            THE COURT:  You say "obtainable through the

   3   defendant."  I take it you are not meaning to suggest by that

   4   that Exhibit 108 is on the defendant's site.  Rather, it's a

   5   site that you get through clicking, is that right?

   6            THE WITNESS:  Precisely.  The page shown on Exhibit

   7   108 is not at the defendant's website.  It's at bert's

   8   website.

   9   Q.  And what else does Exhibit 108 show of relevance to your

  10   experiment?

  11   A.  Well, this is a way to obtain DeCSS, because it says this

  12   is simply a mirror of the files necessary to decrypt the copy

  13   protection built into DVD players.  Mirror refers to a site

  14   that essentially contains an identical copy of material found

  15   on another website.  It's common to mirror materials, either

  16   whole web sites or portions of websites.

  17            The first entry where it says DeCSS.zip says this is

  18   the utility used to rip the .VOB files off DVDs to be copied

  19   to your hard drive.

  20            Now, copying to a hard drive is something that

  21   compliant DVD players are not allowed to do, because once the

  22   materials are copied to the hard drive they can be freely

  23   played, freely edited, freely distributed.  So, DeCSS.zip

  24   refers to a program or refers to data that has been compressed

  25   with a program called Zip, which is commonly used on the




38



   1   Internet to reduce the size of files to speed up their

   2   transfer.

   3            And it's all arranged so that when you click on this

   4   link, this DeCSS.zip link, that an automatic procedure is

   5   invoked that causes the file to be downloaded to your own

   6   computer.

   7            (Continued on next page)

   8

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




39



   1   Q.  And was that done?

   2   A.  That's what we did; yes.  We clicked on that link.  That's

   3   why it shows up in purple, as opposed to being in blue.

   4   Q.  Let me show you Exhibit 109 and ask whether that is what

   5   you obtained after clicking on DeCSS.zip?

   6   A.  Yes.  This is a -- what's shown here I think is probably

   7   not the entire screen at the time.  This is a blowup of just

   8   the file download window that got opened automatically when

   9   the DeCSS.zip link was clicked that invokes a utility under

  10   Windows that informs the user he has asked to have a file.

  11   Downloaded and the system wants to know whether the file

  12   should just be opened directly from the web site or saved to

  13   the user's own hard disk.

  14            We clicked that to save this file to disk.  As you

  15   can see from the dot inside the radio button where it says

  16   "save this file to disk" and then we clicked "O.K."

  17   Q.  What came on the screen next?

  18   A.  I think it's Exhibit 110.

  19            Actually, it's likely that we were asked to give a

  20   file name for the file that we were going to save and I think

  21   that's not shown in the screen shot here.

  22   Q.  What does Exhibit 110 show?

  23   A.  Exhibit 110 is a screen shot that was captured during the

  24   actual download of DeCSS.zip from the lawyer's web site and

  25   what it shows is that after we had transferred 38.3 kilobytes,




40



   1   only one second estimated remained, and that we had copied

   2   already more than half of the file.  So, it took about two

   3   seconds to do that download.

   4   Q.  To download DeCSS altogether?

   5   A.  Yes.  Once having selected, we wanted to start the

   6   download, the actual download took about two seconds.

   7            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I would offer Exhibit 129,

   8   which is Dr. Shamos' CV together with Exhibits 105 to 110.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  No objection.

  10            THE COURT:  Received.

  11            (Defendant's Exhibits 105 through 110 received in

  12   evidence)

  13   Q.  Did you and your assistant then proceed to use the DeCSS

  14   that you had obtained by a link through defendant's web site?

  15   A.  Yes, we did.  The first thing, of course, we had to do was

  16   unzip it, so we had to run winzip in order to expand the

  17   DeCSS.zip file to something called DeCSS.exe -- DeCSS.

  18            When I say "dot," I mean the "period" character.

  19   Q.  And do you know how long that took?

  20   A.  The unzipping?

  21   Q.  And to find the utility?

  22   A.  Well, yes.  We had now advanced from a web site called

  23   FM4, what utilities we were going to need to do all of the

  24   things we were going to do.  So, I stated in my declaration,

  25   we obtained off the Internet three pieces of required software




41



   1   to do.

   2   Q.  And what were those pieces of software?

   3   A.  One of them was winzip, which we knew what was going to be

   4   required to decompress files.  Another was called FTP207.  FTP

   5   stands for "file transfer protocol."  That software that's

   6   used for transfer filings over the Internet.

   7            Then mIRC 3.71 is a piece of software for engaging in

   8   Internet relay chat.  That's a procedure whereby multiple

   9   people and also two people on the Internet can basically talk

  10   to one another, not through voice, but by typing at their

  11   terminals.  When one person types, the other person sees what

  12   that person is typing.

  13   Q.  Are these pieces of software which many computer users

  14   would already have on their computer?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Pardon me.  I object to the question.

  16            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  17   A.  Not only would many users already have them, but they are

  18   freely available over the Internet.

  19   Q.  How did you use DeCSS with Sleepless in Seattle?

  20   A.  Well, we inserted it into the DVD drive --

  21   Q.  I'm sorry?

  22   A.  We inserted the Sleepless in Seattle DVD into the DVD

  23   drive of the laptop and we invoked DeCSS.exe.

  24   Q.  How long did that process take?

  25   A.  Well, the invocation was very fast, but we have to go




42



   1   through the actual process of descrambling the DVD and the

   2   entire process for doing all of this from start to when we

   3   finished took about 45 minutes, but the actual processing time

   4   to do the descrambling is in the range of 20 to 30 minutes.

   5   Q.  That is from the moment you applied the DeCSS to Sleepless

   6   in Seattle, the descrambling time was?

   7   A.  That was in the range of 20 to 30 minutes.  It was a

   8   computationally-intensive process.

   9   Q.  And what was the result that you obtained from applying

  10   DeCSS to a store-bought copy of Sleepless in Seattle?

  11   A.  Yes, I think we have -- I guess we don't have exhibits

  12   here.  Well, the result of DeCSS'ing is what are called VOB

  13   files, video object files, that are playable through the

  14   laptop.  And so, we obtained a file of Sleepless in Seattle.

  15            The first time we did it, it wasn't complete because

  16   the complete VOB file, I believe, is 4.3 gigabytes and we

  17   couldn't get the system to create a file larger than four

  18   gigabits.  But we had a perfectly playable file and we played

  19   it and it was the equivalent to the DVD of the movie Sleepless

  20   in Seattle.

  21   Q.  And how did you know that the computer was at that point

  22   playing the DeCSS'd version of the store-bought copy rather

  23   than the DVD that you had put into the hard drive?

  24   A.  Oh, because to demonstrate that we specifically removed

  25   the DVD from the DVD disk itself of Sleepless in Seattle from




43



   1   the DVD drive so the thing could only have been playing from a

   2   file that was on the hard disk.

   3   Q.  Now, are there ways to make the file you obtained, that

   4   is, the file of Sleepless in Seattle resulting from the

   5   application of DeCSS, are there ways to make that file small?

   6   A.  Well, not directly by itself, O.K.  There are two kinds of

   7   ways of making a file smaller.  One is referred to as loss

   8   less compression.  The other is referred to lossy L-O-S-S-Y

   9   compression.

  10            In loss less compression, enough information is

  11   stored about the data so that it can be reconstructed exactly

  12   bit for bit.  It is not a failing to attempt to do loss less

  13   compression on a VOB file, essentially one can't compress it

  14   any further.

  15            There are, however, ways of compressing the file in

  16   the lossy manner so that it can become much smaller.  And

  17   smaller files are better as long as the visual acuity doesn't

  18   suffer because they can be transferred to people faster and

  19   more of them can be put on the same media or like DVD's or

  20   CD-Roms.

  21   Q.  In your experience, does doing so require a high degree of

  22   expertise?

  23   A.  When you say "doing so," you mean the process of going --

  24   of performing a lossy compression on a VOB file?

  25   Q.  That's correct.




44



   1   A.  It requires some degree of expertise.  Fortunately, all of

   2   that expertise can be acquired through instructional tutorials

   3   on the Internet, which is how we did it.

   4   Q.  And from where did you get the information that told you

   5   how to proceed to compress the DeCSS file you had obtained?

   6   A.  There's a web site called FM4.org that provides that

   7   information.

   8   Q.  Let me put on the chart stand Exhibit 112 and ask you to

   9   explain what that is.

  10   A.  Well, 112 is the home page of FM4.org, as one can

  11   determine by again looking at the address line shown in the

  12   browser and it says, welcome to FM4.org, free MPEG4.  That's

  13   F-R-E-E-M-P-E-G-4 as one word -- is a group created to provide

  14   you with the best quality new and classic movies encoded with

  15   MPEG4 technology.

  16            You can join the channels #DiVX point is the number

  17   sign character like a music sharp sign -- you can join the

  18   channels #DiVX and point free MPEG4 on the EFNET, IRC network

  19   to visit us.

  20            And then down further at the bottom of the page under

  21   the news entry, May 1, 2000, it says, "Big thanks to BCKSPACE

  22   for letting me rape his DiVX tutorial."

  23            And that DiVX tutorial is a something like that link

  24   where one can find out about how to make DiVX's, but because

  25   FM4 was able to raise it, it was necessary to go to back




45



   1   spaces web site.  It could be obtained directly from FM4.org.

   2   Q.  Did you and your assistant click on the FM4 tutorial?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  And let me show you Exhibit 113 and ask what that --

   5   A.  Yes, 113 is the page on the FM4.org web site that contains

   6   the tutorial as is fairly clear from again looking at the

   7   address line on the browser which shows that it's the FM4.org

   8   page named tutorial or it's in the directory tutorial.  It's

   9   probably default at html or something in, but it's in the

  10   tutorial directory.

  11            And what this explains is this tutorial will take you

  12   through the process of creating your own DiVX movies step by

  13   step, credit for the content of this tutorial should go to

  14   backspace E for creating the original and allowing me unFKN

  15   real -- I don't want to pronounce that as it's intended to be

  16   pronounced to modify for FM4.  And there are -- then there are

  17   five steps listed that one must go through in order to produce

  18   a DiVX from a decrypted DVD.

  19   Q.  And will you read what it says in step 1?

  20   A.  Step 1:  DVD-extraction/decryption:  There's a hyperlink

  21   DeCSS.  It says, to decrypt the *.VOB files on the DVD and

  22   copy them to hard disk.

  23   Q.  And you had already done that?

  24   A.  We had already obtained DeCSS and done that.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  I object.




46



   1            It seems to me at some point we get into questions of

   2   material off the Internet and whether or not that material is

   3   or is not hearsay and it seems to me that's a start that we

   4   will start to get into and this information is getting from

   5   some outside source.  And he's presenting it, I presume, for

   6   the truth of it.

   7            THE COURT:  As I understand it, he is presenting it

   8   to explain what he did.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I presume -- I understand he's doing it

  10   for the purpose of the truth of it.

  11            MR. SIMS:  Only for the truth of what he did.

  12            THE COURT:  The bottom line is that he is saying that

  13   he followed these steps and the result was that he, I assume,

  14   had himself a decrypted DiVX movie so he -- it's sort of like

  15   a policeman testifying that there was a call over the radio

  16   that says there was a holdup at Broadway and 118th Street and

  17   he ran as far up Broadway and 118th Street, and lo and behold,

  18   there was somebody holding a gun on somebody.

  19            And certainly the radio call is not admitted for the

  20   truth of the purpose.  It's offered to explain why the

  21   policeman went to 118th and Broadway and happened to find the

  22   robbery.  I think this is the same thing; is it not?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think, and I can barely read

  24   these exhibits with the copies that I have.  I think it talks

  25   about other people having done other things and other people




47



   1   having downloaded films.

   2            THE COURT:  Yes, look I take it Mr. Himself you're

   3   not offering any of that for the truth.

   4            MR. SIMS:  Absolutely not.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

   6            THE COURT:  To that extent, sustained.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

   8   Q.  Dr. Shamos, what did you do since you had already

   9   performed, you and your assistant, the part of this of getting

  10   DeCSS, what did you do next?

  11   A.  We performed all the remaining steps 2 through 5 on

  12   Sleepless in Seattle.

  13   Q.  And are those reflected in the next series of exhibits

  14   that you provided?

  15   A.  They are.

  16   Q.  Turn then if you would to Exhibit 114B.

  17            THE COURT:  Is this B or D?

  18            MR. SIMS:  114B.

  19            THE COURT:  "B" as in boy?

  20            MR. SIMS:  We skipped over "A" for a moment.

  21   A.  Well, step 1 is DVD ripping the right way and the advice

  22   given on FM4 down in the second paragraph.  It says, to start,

  23   run DeCSS and starting with the first one going file select,

  24   the files to decode from the first to the last file in the

  25   series.




48



   1            So, the result of running DeCSS is it produces a

   2   bunch of files that one can select from those that one wants

   3   to make a DiVX of.  And we chose the as shown by the screen

   4   down there, it tells you how to make that selection.

   5   Q.  And the ones that are purple on the bottom right, are

   6   those the files that you chose -- selected?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  What did you do next?

   9   A.  Well, we followed step 2.

  10   Q.  114, please.

  11            What does Exhibit 114C show?

  12   A.  114 is an example that shows how to extract the video

  13   portion of the DeCSS to DVD.  Of course a video has both video

  14   information and audio information and it's necessary in this

  15   procedure to extract the video information separately, the

  16   audio information separately, and then merge them together and

  17   attempt to synchronize them to result in a DiVX that will

  18   actually make sense when it's played so that the speech of the

  19   actors is properly synchronized with their emotion.

  20   Q.  And to what extent does the FM4 tutorial lead you through

  21   that process?

  22   A.  Well, completely.  I mean, we followed every step in here

  23   to the letter.

  24   Q.  So, you undertook the video extraction as shown on 114C?

  25   A.  Yes.




49



   1   Q.  And then, what did you do?

   2   A.  We went to step 3.

   3   Q.  Will you put up 114D.

   4            What does Exhibit 114D show?

   5   A.  O.K., Exhibit 114D is step 3 in which one having already

   6   extracted the video now must go and extract the audio from the

   7   DeCSS DVD and this explains how to do that.

   8   Q.  What was the next step?

   9   A.  The next step was step 4.

  10            MR. SIMS:  114E, please.

  11   A.  That's correct.  And they refer to this as multiplexing

  12   which is basically the process of merging the audio and video

  13   together, it says, so now you have an AVI file that has only

  14   video and an enormous WAV file.  What do you do?  And then

  15   this shows you what to do in order to merge the two to create

  16   a result that's supposed to have some semblance of

  17   synchronization.

  18   Q.  Was there any further step you needed to undertake?

  19   A.  Yes, the result of this produced what I would -- what I

  20   believe are referred to in the declaration as a horribly

  21   desynchronized DiVX in which the sound was not occurring at

  22   the same time as the action in the movie.

  23   Q.  And did FM4 explain how to solve that problem?

  24   A.  Yes, to some extent.  There is another --

  25   Q.  Will you put up 114A.




50



   1            Is there an explanation of how to address the

   2   desynching problem on 114A?

   3   A.  Yes, a little bit more than halfway down the page, it

   4   says, fixing the desynch.  If your video audio does start out

   5   synced, but gradually becomes desynched, you can skip this

   6   step, etc.

   7            What was necessary to do in our case at that time was

   8   do a lot of fiddling around with the -- with the audio and

   9   video portions in order to get them synchronized properly.

  10            This required eliminating the opening trailer of the

  11   movie because the opening trailer is recorded at a different

  12   frame rate than the movie itself and the process assumes that

  13   either one or the other of those speeds is going to be used

  14   all the way through.  And so by eliminating the opening

  15   trailer, we were eventually able to get the DiVX properly

  16   synchronized.

  17   Q.  By "opening trailer," do you mean an advertising for the

  18   film?

  19   A.  The opening trailer typically contains previews of other

  20   films and anything that the video company wants you to see

  21   before you see the movie.

  22   Q.  So that the first time that you and your assistant went

  23   through this process, how long did it take you altogether to

  24   end up with a DiVX'd -- that's DiVX'd?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Are you through?




51



   1            MR. SIMS:  No.

   2   Q.  -- with a DiVX'd copy of Sleepless in Seattle on the hard

   3   drive obtained through DeCSS?

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I understand when this was

   5   done, Mr. Shamos was not there.

   6            THE WITNESS:  The understanding is not quite correct.

   7   I was not there at the moment of completion of the process.

   8   Q.  Were you there?

   9   A.  I was present at various times during the process.

  10   Q.  And where is your office in relationship to your

  11   assistant's office?

  12   A.  It's two offices away, approximately 20 feet.

  13   Q.  What was -- so, the first time you went through it, you

  14   and your assistant weren't through it, how long did the

  15   process take?

  16   A.  The first time we were complete novices and the whole

  17   thing took about 20 hours.

  18   Q.  And much of that was related to the desynching issue that

  19   came up?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  And have you undertaken with Mr. Burns to do it

  22   subsequently?

  23   A.  We have done various experiments.  We believe that we can

  24   now do it in about 10 hours.

  25   Q.  What was the end result of the DiVX process?




52



   1   A.  The end result was a DiVX'd version of Sleepless in

   2   Seattle that was substantially smaller than the original by a

   3   factor of I recall something like 5.6.

   4            THE COURT:  5.6, what, gigabytes?

   5            THE WITNESS:  No, it was smaller than 20 percent of

   6   the size of the original file.  It -- the size had been

   7   reduced by a factor of 5.6, so it came down to something over

   8   700 megabytes.

   9            THE COURT:  So, what I want to be clear on is what

  10   the two comparisons are.  Is the starting comparison, that is,

  11   the precompression file the file that you had after you ran

  12   DeCSS on the DVD?

  13            THE WITNESS:  Yes, I'll make it -- I will be very

  14   specific with the numbers.  The video object file, the .VOB

  15   file that we obtained by DeCSS Sleepless in Seattle was 4.3

  16   gigabytes.  After we completed the DiVX process, it was down

  17   to 750 megabytes.

  18   Q.  That's a ratio of about 5.67?

  19   A.  Yes.

  20   Q.  Now, have you --

  21            THE COURT:  How much of that compression was

  22   attributable to the elimination of the trailer?

  23            THE WITNESS:  I think the trailer lasts something

  24   like three minutes and the movie lasts close to two hours.

  25   It's just a tiny -- tiny percentage.




53



   1   Q.  And have you and your assistant been able to obtain DiVX

   2   copies of DeCSS films in the size of around 650 megabytes?

   3   A.  Yes, we have by playing with the compression ratio, if you

   4   increase the compression ratio higher than 5.67, then you can

   5   get it down to and the objective of all of this is to get it

   6   down so that it fit on one CD-ROM and CD players and CD-ROM

   7   recorders are readily available through computer stores, so we

   8   fiddled through it to get it down.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  My understanding is this was done

  10   without this witness' knowledge and while he was in Hawaii.

  11   It was not done at his direction.  It was not part of this

  12   experiment.  It was not part of the -- done under his

  13   supervision.

  14            THE WITNESS:  Nevertheless, I did see the result and

  15   I have no reason to disbelieve my assistant of two and a half

  16   years.

  17            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Sims.  This is a matter of

  18   cross-examination, Counsel.

  19   Q.  Does DiVX work directly on CSS encrypted DVD movies?

  20   A.  I'm sorry.  Could you repeat --

  21   Q.  Can you obtain an intelligible perceptually useful version

  22   of a film if you apply DiVX to a store-bought DVD?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the form of the question.

  24            THE COURT:  I don't understand the question.

  25            Sustained.




54



   1   Q.  Dr. Shamos, if you attempted to attempt to compress

   2   Sleepless in Seattle as you bought it directly from the store

   3   having -- would it be possible to compress the store-bought

   4   version encrypted of Sleepless in Seattle?

   5   A.  If we did not attempt to do so.

   6   Q.  Would it be possible?

   7   A.  If we tried to do so, I don't know if the tools available

   8   to us would even do the processing, but if it did the

   9   processing, garbage would result because there would be no way

  10   to decrypt or descramble the material on the DVD.

  11            THE COURT:  It would be useful at this point, Dr.

  12   Shamos, for you to place what the DiVX acronym or whatever it

  13   is means and what precisely it is.

  14            THE WITNESS:  Certainly.  There are a number of

  15   compression technologies that are used on video.  The whole

  16   idea is that visual information on a computer requires a huge

  17   amount of storage space because each individual little square

  18   on the screen.  What we refer as pixels, information must be

  19   stored about the brightness of the pixel and exactly what the

  20   color composition of the pixel is.

  21            And in order to achieve high resolution images, a

  22   tremendous number of pixels are required, therefore, the size

  23   of the single frame in the video is large.  What this results

  24   in is unless compression is performed, an entire video takes

  25   up so much digital storage space that there is no medium on




55



   1   which it can be delivered.

   2            We don't have that technology right now at any

   3   affordable price, so it's always necessary to compress the

   4   videos.  And there is an organization called the Motion

   5   Picture Experts Group, MPEG, which has been doing studies for

   6   a long time on how one can compress video in such a way that

   7   even though it is lossy, none of the -- or very little of the

   8   visual quality is lost to the human being.

   9            And this is done by a process called perceptal

  10   encoding.  Cognitive psychologists have studied the human

  11   visual system and they know the ways in which the human eye is

  12   sensitive to certain things.

  13            For example, the human eye is insensitive to small,

  14   slow changes in color, but it is extremely sensitive to

  15   changes in contrast.  That's what enables us to pick out edges

  16   of objects.

  17            So, in perceptual encoding, which is used in MPEG,

  18   that information from the video stream is eliminated that a

  19   human being cannot see.  Therefore, if you can't see it, even

  20   though there's less information there, it still looks as good.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, so far as I know, this

  22   witness has never written on MPEG, has never testified with

  23   respect to MPEG and is not an expert on MPEG, which is a very

  24   different area than the other areas we've been going through.

  25            THE WITNESS:  I lecture 50 times a year on




56



   1   compression technologies.

   2            THE COURT:  I'm going to hear the attorney.  If you

   3   have other testimony on this subject, I will hear yours as

   4   well.

   5            And, Dr. Shamos, we will do better here if you don't

   6   argue with Mr. Garbus.

   7            THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry, your Honor.

   8   Q.  Dr. Shamos, once the movie has been subject to DeCSS --

   9   A.  I hadn't completed the answer.

  10   Q.  I'm sorry.  Excuse me.

  11   A.  And so, DVDs are compressed -- the video stream from the

  12   original Hollywood movie, in order to create a DVD of it is

  13   compressed using a format called MPEG2 which came from the

  14   Motion Picture Experts Group.

  15            There are subsequent compression technologies which

  16   achieve a higher degree of compression, in particular MPEG4,

  17   which is an encoding that has the encoder for which has

  18   apparently been stolen and is not referred to as DiVX in the

  19   underground world.

  20   Q.  Once a movie on a DVD has been subjected to DeCSS and then

  21   compressed through the use of DiVX'd, does it take the 20

  22   hours or the 10 hours that your assistant eventually got it

  23   down to to be able to -- does the process that took either 20

  24   hours or 10 hours have to be gone through again?

  25   A.  No.  That one could think of that as sunken costs, sort of




57



   1   like the cost of actually producing the movie in Hollywood in

   2   the first place.  Once that's done and copies of it exists,

   3   copies could be readily distributed around.

   4   Q.  Is it possible for you to demonstrate here today the

   5   respective perceptual quality of the store-bought DVD as

   6   compared with the version that you obtained through the

   7   experiment you just have been testifying about?

   8   A.  Yes, it is.  My assistant, Eric Burns, is here and he's

   9   prepared to operate the very laptop that we used to do all of

  10   this and show it on the screen in the courtroom.

  11            THE COURT:  Before we do that, we are going to take a

  12   recess for about 15 minutes.

  13            (Recess)

  14            THE COURT:  Just to be clear, folks, we are going to

  15   continue to use the jury box for you, only so long as there

  16   are too many people to fit if the back.  You will have to move

  17   if space opens up.

  18            But let's go ahead.

  19            MR. SIMS:  Thank you, your Honor.

  20   DIRECT EXAMINATION Continued

  21   BY MR. SIMS:

  22   Q.  I think, Dr. Shamos, I was about to ask or I did ask,

  23   where you could demonstrate the prospective perceptual quality

  24   of the store-bought Sleepless in Seattle to use a different

  25   example and the DiVX'd DeCSS version that you obtained through




58



   1   your experiment.  This is Eric Burns, your assistant?

   2   A.  That's correct.

   3            MR. SIMS:  And, your Honor, if we might -- if we

   4   might, we would like to show first the -- a minute or so of

   5   the authorized DVD and then the DiVX'd DeCSS version.  Mr.

   6            Burns has been handed a store-bought copy.  I showed

   7   it to Mr. Hernstadt and asked if I had his permission, which

   8   he graciously gave for us to break the seal while the break

   9   was taking place so we could move things along.

  10            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I would object.  What they're doing is

  12   they are showing it on a particular instrument that is not the

  13   kind of computer screen that people allegedly look at these

  14   when they are downloaded.  So, the relationship of how you see

  15   it here has nothing, nothing, to do with how it would look on

  16   a computer screen.

  17            They can, if they want to make this demonstration,

  18   bring in a large computer screen, but this is not that.  You

  19   will not see what a person will see on a computer and there's

  20   absolutely no reason why they haven't brought in a large

  21   computer other than to mislead the Court as to what you see

  22   when you see a downloaded film.

  23            THE COURT:  Well, I assume that you will address

  24   those questions to the witness on cross and you will hear the

  25   witness' testimony about what, if any, difference there is




59



   1   between this screen and any other screen, and if you then want

   2   to produce a witness to testify that a different screen would

   3   produce a different result, you can do that.  And if you want

   4   to bring in a different screen and have the thing played for

   5   me, you can do that as well.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  As you know, just to keep clear the

   7   issues between us, we had no foreknowledge of this.  This was

   8   never discussed at his testimony that such an exhibit was

   9   going to -- such a demonstration was going to be made, that we

  10   met Mr. Shamos the first time on Saturday.

  11            As of now, I don't even have, I don't think, though

  12   some people in my office may have his full deposition

  13   transcript, if we are to make arrangements either to get to

  14   cross-examination concerning this exhibit or the chance to

  15   show what a viewer of a personal computer would see.

  16            At an appropriate time, I would request a continuance

  17   so that we could do that.

  18            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Sims.

  19            MR. SIMS:  Thank you, your Honor.

  20            And by the way, Mr. Burns has in front of him the

  21   Sony computer that the experiment was performed on.

  22            THE COURT:  I really would prefer to hear the

  23   evidence from the witnesses on the stand, not from the

  24   lawyers, either you or Mr. Garbus.

  25            MR. SIMS:  I would just invite your Honor to look at




60



   1   that screen during the demonstration, if you would like to.

   2   Q.  Dr. Shamos, can you with your assistant show us first what

   3   a minute or so of the store-bought version looks like.

   4            THE COURT:  Well, just a minute.  Would that obviate

   5   your problem, Mr. Garbus, if I looked at the laptop here

   6   rather than that screen?

   7            THE WITNESS:  If it may assist the Court.

   8            THE COURT:  No, please just a minute.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I think it would help.

  10            THE COURT:  All right.  I will do that.

  11            THE WITNESS:  The only issue, your Honor, is we can't

  12   show it on both screens at the same time.

  13            THE COURT:  We will show it here.

  14            THE WITNESS:  It's one or the other.  In order to do

  15   that, it is simply necessary to insert the authorized

  16   Sleepless in Seattle DVD into the DVD drive and it will

  17   automatically begin playing.  Then in order to do the

  18   comparison with the DiVX'd that we made, it would be necessary

  19   to skip directly to the film itself, as opposed to watching

  20   the whole opening trailer.

  21            (Video played)

  22            MR. SIMS:  There's the opening trailer.  And Eric

  23   will stop the video and then skip directly to the movie.  And

  24   full screen it.

  25   Q.  Dr. Shamos, is there a difference in perceptual quality




61



   1   depending on who is doing the laptop screening?

   2   A.  It's very popular with a laptop to be directly on axis, to

   3   be perpendicular to the screen and hopefully in the center of

   4   the screen, which would not be necessary with a TV set.

   5   Q.  Dr. Shamos, can you see the screen and narrate what it is?

   6   A.  I could do it if I came down there, but.

   7            THE COURT:  Come on down.

   8   A.  Well, this is the opening scene of Sleepless in Seattle

   9   and I think we are going to look at this until just about the

  10   opening credits begin to see a variety of different kinds of

  11   scenes.

  12            This is a long shot.  Then we are going to take a

  13   closeup of human faces and some exceptional detailing in the

  14   movie, which is achievable with DVD.

  15   Q.  If you would, as we go along just point out the qualities

  16   of the picture that you think are worth pointing out.

  17            THE COURT:  Let's not turn up the sound.

  18   A.  Later on, we can see the shrubbery in the background is

  19   shown.  There's a high degree of details with the flowers back

  20   here and for, if it's in focus, which that is, this is not the

  21   highly detailed also with the shrubbery.

  22            Then there's a point in this scene where a reflection

  23   appears in the glass over there of exceptionally high detail.

  24   In general, because of the DVD quality, everything is of a

  25   high degree of sharpness.




62



   1            THE COURT:  Have we seen enough of this one?

   2            THE WITNESS:  I think that's sufficient.

   3   Q.  Now, Dr. Shamos, can you have Eric copy by the way of

   4   Sleepless of Seattle is Exhibit 2?  Can you have him play the

   5   version of Sleepless in Seattle that came through the DeCSS?

   6   A.  Wait.  Please remove the authorized DVD from the drive.

   7   Take it out, and put it off to the side.

   8            THE COURT:  The record will reflect that it has been

   9   removed.

  10   A.  And leave the DVD open and please place the DiVX'd file

  11   that we created.

  12            It is possible that upon close examination to find

  13   certain effects in here that are referred to as artifacts

  14   which are differences between the DVD quality and the DiVX'd

  15   quality.  I'll try to point out some of them, although it's

  16   extremely difficult to find them.

  17            We've conducted numerous lay experiments in which we

  18   asked people to come in the room and tell whether or not this

  19   was a DVD or DiVX.

  20            THE COURT:  That's obviously hearsay.

  21            THE WITNESS:  Eric, if you see any artifacts that I'm

  22   missing, please point them out.

  23            MR. HERNSTADT:  We object.

  24            THE COURT:  No, sustained.  Objection sustained.

  25            The flowers look substantially identical from the way




63



   1   they looked on the DVD.  And we can look again at the

   2   reflection in the glass that I pointed out earlier.  It's the

   3   same.

   4   A.  That reflection is substantially the same.  I thought I

   5   spotted a couple of artifacts in the back area.  This wall

   6   should be a constant texture and color.  There's some tiny

   7   changes where a little bit red showed up and it was time

   8   varying.  So, there was something obviously wrong because the

   9   wall itself was not changing or moving during that time.

  10            In general, one can look at large areas of constant

  11   color and see motion where there shouldn't be motion and I'm

  12   not seeing that right now, but that did happen with the wall

  13   behind a little bit earlier.

  14            THE COURT:  O.K.  You may go back to the witness

  15   stand.  Thank you, Dr. Shamos.

  16            (The witness resumes the stand)

  17   BY MR. SIMS:

  18   Q.  Dr. Shamos, do you have an opinion as to the quality

  19   available to viewers in terms of perceptual quality of the

  20   DiVX'd DeCSS version as compared to the store-bought version?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I'm going to object.

  22            It seems to me that this is certainly not within the

  23   area of his expertise.

  24            THE COURT:  I'm going to receive it for what it's

  25   worth, but I understand your point, Mr. Garbus.  It's really a




64



   1   question for me to decide anyway, I think to the extent it's

   2   material.

   3   A.  There are many different compression ratios one might

   4   choose in order to make a DiVX.  So, I don't think it's

   5   possible to make a general statement that DiVX is comparable

   6   in quality or not comparable in quality to a DVD.

   7            What I think we've just demonstrated and it's not my

   8   opinion, but anybody, including the Court, who observed it

   9   that at this compression ratio, 5.67 on this movie, that the

  10   quality of the DiVX was nearly indistinguishable from the DVD

  11   except possibly to an expert.

  12            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I would like to offer Exhibits

  13   112, 113, 114B, 114C, 114D, 114E, 114A, 2, and 111; 111 being

  14   the -- I believe being the Sleepless in Seattle DiVX DeCSS

  15   version.

  16            THE COURT:  Well in what form does that manifest

  17   itself?

  18            MR. HART:  We've burned that to CD-ROM.

  19            THE COURT:  Where is it?

  20            MR. SIMS:  Eric, do you have this -- I'm sorry.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I presume since I don't know

  22   how that was made that we could save that for

  23   cross-examination, so I can reserve my right, and with respect

  24   to the other documents that are going in, I've previously made

  25   an objection, which I believe the Court has sustained with




65



   1   respect to that which is hearsay, so that subject to that

   2   continuing objection, the documents I will permit them to go

   3   in.

   4            THE COURT:  Well, the others are the screen shots;

   5   right?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I thought 112 was going in.

   7            THE COURT:  Right, these are screen shots.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  Which has information on it.

   9            THE COURT:  I'm just trying to find out what they

  10   are.

  11            MR. SIMS:  They are, your Honor, for example, the FM4

  12   materials and as you've indicated and it was certainly our

  13   intention they're offered, not for the truth of particular

  14   statements therein, but as the -- they provided the

  15   instructions that Dr. Shamos followed.

  16            THE COURT:  I understand.  So, Plaintiff's 112, 113

  17   and 114A through E and 2 are received.

  18            (Plaintiff's Exhibits 112, 113, 114A through 114E,

  19   and 2 received in evidence)

  20            THE COURT:  I'm going to reserve on 111.

  21            112 to 114A are received subject to the same

  22   limitation as before and I take it fundamentally, Mr. Garbus,

  23   the point here is if maybe in a better analogy, if somebody

  24   tells you the combination to the vault at Chase Manhattan,

  25   your repetition of that doesn't prove that's the combination




66



   1   to the vault.  Your testimony that somebody gave it to you,

   2   you went there, you tried the combination and the vault

   3   opened, that's evidence.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  I agree, your Honor.  Thank you.

   5            (Continued on next page)

   6

   7

   8

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




67



   1   BY MR. SIMS:

   2   Q.  Dr. Shamos, by the way, how was the content of the

   3   Sleepless in Seattle on Exhibit 111 placed onto that CD-ROM?

   4   A.  Yes, Eric went out yesterday and purchased a CD-ROM

   5   burner, an external CD-ROM burner that could be attached to

   6   the Sony laptop.  We have the burner with us here in court

   7   today.  He connected it and I was present during the process

   8   as the CD-ROM was burned with the DiVX box.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Can we at the lunch break examine both

  10   the CD-ROM and the burner that was utilized to make this?

  11            THE COURT:  I take it there is no objection.

  12            MR. SIMS:  No objection.

  13            THE COURT:  Certainly.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  And of course the exhibit itself.

  15   Q.  Now, Dr. Shamos, let me move to a related subject which is

  16   the electronic transfer of movies that have been obtained by

  17   the process you have testified to over the last hour or so.

  18            First, did you attempt to obtain DiVX motion pictures

  19   from other websites?

  20   A.  We did.

  21   Q.  What did you do?

  22   A.  I had Eric go on internet relay chat into the chat room

  23   pound detective investigation, which is recommended by FM4.org

  24   as a source of DiVX investigation.

  25   Q.  What is Internet relay chat?




68



   1   A.  That's a program and facility that allows people on the

   2   Internet to communicate via the keyboard with one another.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I guess I have a continuing objection to

   4   things that this witness did not do but that other people did,

   5   even if Mr. Burns is his assistant.

   6            THE COURT:  Before I know what the point of the

   7   testimony is, I don't know whether it's appropriate under 703,

   8   I don't know whether it's being offered for the truth and to

   9   what extent, and so it's really very difficult for me to deal

  10   with this in the abstract.  If we get to a specific point on

  11   which you want to make a point, feel free to make it, but I

  12   can't do it in the abstract.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  14            THE WITNESS:  If there is a pending question, I need

  15   it repeated.

  16   Q.  No, I'm getting a new question.  Thank you.  What led you

  17   to decide to try to obtain a DiVX'd motion picture off the

  18   internet?

  19   A.  Well, that is what Mr. Hart asked, whether we could

  20   successfully do that.

  21   Q.  And what did you ask your assistant, if anything, to do to

  22   obtain such a film?

  23   A.  Go on internet relay chat and try to find somebody who

  24   would be willing to furnish us with a DiVX.

  25   Q.  And did he do so?




69



   1   A.  Yes.

   2   Q.  Did he do so under your supervision?

   3   A.  He did so under my direction.  I was not present for the

   4   entire Internet relay chat session.

   5   Q.  How do you know that he obtained a motion picture that had

   6   been DiVX'd as a result of his engaging in the Internet relay

   7   chat?

   8   A.  Yes, because a log was made of the Internet relay chat,

   9   which is one of our exhibits, and I have no reason to believe

  10   that that log was fabricated.  And it resulted in the transfer

  11   of DiVXs in both directions between us and the person who was

  12   willing to supply a DiVX.

  13   Q.  Let me show you what has been marked as Exhibit 115A.

  14            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, in the book there are two

  15   pages.  We are only offering one, and I am handing the

  16   reporter and the witness that.

  17            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  18            MR. GARBUS:  I would just like to see that exhibit.

  19            I think as I understand this now, it's more

  20   appropriate for cross.

  21            THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you.

  22   Q.  Could you identify 115A, please.

  23   A.  Yes, 115A is a print-out of the log of the Internet relay

  24   chat session in which we obtained the movie the Matrix from

  25   another individual on the Internet.




70



   1   Q.  I want to point out a few aspects of 115A and ask you to

   2   identify what they indicate to you.

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  First, there is a session start.  What does that reflect?

   5   A.  Okay.  What happens is on Internet relay chat one goes

   6   into a chat room where many people can read and see on their

   7   screen what people are doing and what people are typing.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I don't want to persist in the

   9   objections.  I understand this witness's testimony, he didn't

  10   do this, he didn't do the Internet chat, his expert did it.

  11   So far as I know from his deposition, this witness has never

  12   been on the Internet chat room.

  13            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, right now I have the witness

  14   explaining what a session log of an Internet chat session

  15   looks like.  I believe he is qualified.

  16            THE COURT:  If he is qualified to do that.

  17   Q.  Dr. Shamos, what is the time on the top line signal?

  18            THE COURT:  Look, let me ask this before that.

  19   What's the basis of your knowledge about Internet relay chat

  20   and what session start and the other indications on this page

  21   is?

  22            THE WITNESS:  In my courses I teach various Internet

  23   protocols.  Internet relay chat is one I teach.  I'm not a

  24   regular user of Internet relay chat myself.

  25            THE COURT:  All right.  Overruled.  Go ahead.




71



   1   Q.  What does the session start time reflect?

   2   A.  Let me explain how it works.  Initially when one goes into

   3   a chat room, that gives many people on the Internet the

   4   ability to simultaneously communicate with one another.

   5            Once two of them decide they would like to continue

   6   an interaction privately, that's what "session start"

   7   indicates.  So, the session started when my assistant Eric,

   8   whose name for the purposes of this chat is VaioBoy, engaged

   9   with someone named air row sell, AEROSOL, after having

  10   previously found air sole through the public chat.  So session

  11   start with whether the two of them get down to by and are

  12   going to discuss exchanging DiVXs.

  13   Q.  And VaioBoy refers to the name of the computer that you

  14   and your assistant had purchased?

  15   A.  Well, he had to make up a name or a handle for himself,

  16   and since he was on the Sony Vaio computer, he called himself

  17   VaioBoy.

  18   Q.  Who is eaRoSoL?

  19   A.  I don't know.  EaRoSoL is an individual who was in the

  20   chat room who offered to exchange DiVX with us.

  21   Q.  The person communicating with eaRoSoL as indicated on this

  22   page the handle changes from VaioBoy to VaioKid some way

  23   through this page.  Can you explain what that indicates?

  24   A.  Yes, that's correct.  Approximately one third of the way

  25   down the page there is a change in handle from VaioBoy to




72



   1   VaioKid, but there is no overt indication of that other than

   2   the fact that the name changes.

   3            What happened there is that the two of them had to

   4   make an agreement as to how the transfer was going to occur,

   5   and at the time Eric was using a wireless card in his

   6   computer.  The wireless card didn't provide sufficient

   7   bandwidth, so he wanted to change over to a land Ethernet

   8   line, and so he had to disconnect out of the chat room.  When

   9   he reconnected, the Internet relay chat didn't recognize that

  10   he had left, and when he attempted to use the same name again,

  11   it instead defaulted to his default name which was VaioKid,

  12   which is what he specified originally at the beginning of the

  13   chat session.

  14            You specify a primary name and a secondary name.  It

  15   automatically defaulted to VaioKid.  He didn't have to do

  16   anything explicit in order to make that happen.  But VaioBoy

  17   and VaioKid are the same person here, they are both Eric.

  18   Q.  Is the work that Mr. Burns did in terms of participating

  19   in this chat and his record to you the sort of thing that

  20   computer science professors and teachers and consultants such

  21   as you are would rely on and do rely on?

  22   A.  Well, I can explain the basis for my reliance.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  It's a bit leading.  I object.

  24            THE COURT:  As to leading, it's overruled.  But I

  25   think that it's still kind of out there in space in terms of




73



   1   bringing to bear on anything specific here --

   2            MR. SIMS:  I will.

   3            THE COURT:  -- or for what purpose.

   4   Q.  Would you explain the basis of your reliance?

   5            THE COURT:  Start by telling us what you relied on it

   6   for.

   7            THE WITNESS:  I rely on it as being an accurate

   8   transcript of what went on between Eric and eaRoSoL, and I

   9   also look at the language of it and the kind of information

  10   that is being exchanged, the various numbers that are in there

  11   and the fact that at the end of it a DiVX of the Matrix, which

  12   we previously did not have and never accquired from any other

  13   place, existed on the hard drive.

  14            MR. SIMS:  The purpose of this, your Honor, is just

  15   to show that the film --

  16            THE COURT:  I understand.  It's chain of custody

  17   evidence in the electronic era.

  18            MR. SIMS:  Exactly.  Thank you, your Honor.

  19   Q.  Is the chat log accurate and complete?

  20   A.  Well, the chat log is accurate and the chat log is

  21   complete as it records the beginning of the private session

  22   between eaRoSoL and VaioBoy.

  23   Q.  Was there part of the conversation that is not reflected

  24   on 115A?

  25   A.  There is not part of the conversation between the two of




74



   1   them.  The part of the conversation in which Eric located

   2   eaRoSoL took place over a period of about 20 minutes prior to

   3   this in which he had to find somebody who was willing to

   4   exchange a DiVX with him.  That's not here.

   5   Q.  Why is it that the session log maintained on the computer

   6   omits that portion?

   7   A.  Well, this is a log feature of Internet relay chat.  It

   8   records this log separate.

   9   Q.  And what was the line preceding what is represented here

  10   which led eaRoSoL to participate in the conversation, which

  11   prompted eaRoSoL to participate in a conversation?

  12   A.  Yes.  In my declaration, since the dialog appears to begin

  13   in the middle of nowhere, with this person eaRoSoL suddenly

  14   showing up and saying, sure, etc., it appears to be in

  15   response to a question.  I thought that for counsel and the

  16   Court, that log itself would be confusing, so I asked Eric

  17   what was the line immediately preceding the initiation of the

  18   private chat that would lead eaRoSoL to say "sure."  And that

  19   line was "Anyone have any DiVXs to trade for Sleepless in

  20   Seattle?"

  21            THE COURT:  Well, how do you know that?

  22            THE WITNESS:  I only know it because Eric told me.

  23            THE COURT:  All right.  Well, I think there it is

  24   offered for the truth, and if there is an objection, it's

  25   sustained.




75



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  There is an objection.

   2            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   3            MR. SIMS:  If I may, subject to tying it up, I will

   4   put Mr. Burns on the stand for the purposes of asking that

   5   question.

   6            THE COURT:  I have an even better suggestion.  Over

   7   the lunch break, why don't you, Mr. Hernstadt and Mr. Garbus

   8   see if you can't agree that if called he would give that piece

   9   of testimony.

  10            MR. SIMS:  Thank you, your Honor.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  You should know that we had asked over

  12   the weekend to depose him.  We had also insisted that he be in

  13   court today, and we would like to take an opportunity to

  14   depose him.

  15            THE COURT:  He is here.  I am going to deal with that

  16   later.  Discovery is over in this case, but maybe there are

  17   special grounds to permit it.  I will hear that at the end of

  18   the day.

  19            Go ahead, Mr. Sims.

  20   Q.  Did you and your assistant Mr. Burns proceed to download

  21   the Matrix from eaRoSoL?

  22   A.  Yes, as reflected by the log, what happens here is they

  23   are making an agreement on what kind of equipment they are

  24   going to use, what kind of connection they are going to have

  25   and what is going to be traded for what, so this is an even




76



   1   Steven exchange in which we give up a Sleepless in Seattle and

   2   we receive a Matrix in return.

   3   Q.  Do you know how long it took your assistant to download

   4   Matrix from eaRoSoL?

   5   A.  Yes, it took six hours approximately.

   6            THE COURT:  How do you know that?

   7            THE WITNESS:  I know it in two ways.  He has told me

   8   it, but also I was in my office during the time of the

   9   transfer and was regularly coming into his office saying how

  10   is it going, how is it going, and sometime somewhat more than

  11   six hours after it began I went in and it was finished.

  12            THE COURT:  All right.  On the second basis?

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I object to it.

  14   Q.  Do you know what the technical parameters of the

  15   connection were?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  What were they?

  18            THE COURT:  Let me just back up.  Did you observe the

  19   download begin?

  20            THE WITNESS:  No.

  21            THE COURT:  Did you observe it end?

  22            THE WITNESS:  No.

  23            THE COURT:  So whatever you are telling me about how

  24   long it took is what your colleague told you, is that right?

  25            THE WITNESS:  No, it can't be any longer than what




77



   1   I'm testifying to, because I observed before it began and I

   2   observed after it ended, and that period was approximately in

   3   the range of six hours.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

   5            THE WITNESS:  It could have been less.  It couldn't

   6   have been more.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  If there is a log, I would like to see

   8   it.  I object to the testimony.  He wasn't there.

   9            THE COURT:  Well, it seems to me that based on what

  10   the witness has just said he has a basis in personal knowledge

  11   at least for the purpose of admissibility for testifying that

  12   it didn't take more than six hours.  I do not accept because

  13   of the hearsay rule his testimony about what Mr. Burns told

  14   him.  That's the ruling.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  16   A.  So, the technical parameters here were that we believe

  17   that eaRoSoL was in the State of Connecticut and had a cable

  18   modem connection.  The reason for that is the IP address

  19   listed for him here going to --

  20            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, excuse me.  Mr. Garbus?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.

  22            THE COURT:  Sustained.  That answer is stricken.  I

  23   don't even think it was responsive to a question.  Mr. Sims?

  24   Q.  Do you have any information or way to calculate the

  25   technical parameters of eaRoSoL's connection?




78



   1   A.  Well, we better be specific about what technical

   2   parameters we are talking about.  If you are talking about the

   3   bandwidth available to eaRoSoL, then we can only surmise.  If

   4   you're talking about the actual bit rate that was achieved

   5   during the transfer, that's easy to measure because we know

   6   how many bits were transferred and how long it took to do

   7   that.

   8   Q.  What was the effective bandwidth of the transfer of the

   9   Matrix from eaRoSoL?

  10   A.  We were getting about 250 kilobits per second.  The way

  11   you calculate that is to take the size of the file that was

  12   transferred, divide by the number of seconds in six hours.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I suppose we could save it

  14   for cross-examination, but there are so many variables with

  15   respect to that answer, namely what time of day this happened,

  16   what were the various media, what time did the upload start.

  17            THE COURT:  I think you should save it for cross.  I

  18   appreciate your being helpful on this point, but I'm well

  19   aware a lot of things affect transfer rates.

  20   Q.  Dr. Shamos, you testified that you knew from your personal

  21   presence in the room at various points that the transfer of

  22   the film took approximately six hours, that is, transfer of

  23   the Matrix.

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  Was anything else being transferred on that line at the




79



   1   same time?

   2   A.  There was a simultaneous transfer in both directions.  We

   3   were transferring Sleepless in Seattle up to aeRoSoL, and

   4   eaRoSoL was transferring the Matrix down to us simultaneously.

   5   Q.  And within that six hour period were both films

   6   transmitted?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  What is the Internet connection that your assistant had

   9   during the transfer?

  10            MR. GARBUS:  If I may, with respect to both films

  11   being transmitted I presume that comes from information from

  12   Mr. Burns.

  13            THE WITNESS:  No, that comes from my observation

  14   after having entered the room after Mr. Burns was finished.

  15            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

  16   Q.  What Internet connection did your assistant have during

  17   this transfer and how do you know that?

  18   A.  He was in his office with this machine connected to CMU's

  19   100 megabit switch network.  The limiting factor in this

  20   transfer obviously --

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I object.  That is not the Internet

  22   connection.

  23            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Garbus, I understand that's

  24   your cross-examination point, but it isn't an objection.  It's

  25   not a ground for objection.  If a witness says that I observed




80



   1   someone transfer heroin, it is not a proper objection to say

   2   no, he didn't.

   3   Q.  Dr. Shamos, can you perform a demonstration similar to the

   4   one that was done a few moments ago of the authorized store

   5   bought DVD copy of the Matrix with the DiVX copy that you and

   6   your assistant testified to downloaded from eaRoSoL?

   7   A.  Yes, in exactly the same manner.  It will start with an

   8   authorized DVD of the Matrix and show a scene that is

   9   completely different in nature from the scenes in Sleepless in

  10   Seattle.  The quality of DiVXing depends on various factors

  11   including the original scene that is being transferred.  So,

  12   for example, scenes that have a high degree of action are

  13   difficult to compress because the scene is changing so

  14   quickly.  And the Matrix in distinction to Sleepless in

  15   Seattle has a lot of very fast action, bullets flying and

  16   rotary blades, so we will take a look at that one.

  17   Q.  I am going to hand up Exhibit 115D and ask you if you know

  18   what this is.

  19   A.  Yes, 115D is a CD-ROM that was burned again using the

  20   CD-ROM burner attached to the same Sony laptop, and it

  21   contains the DiVX of the Matrix that we obtained from eaRoSoL.

  22   Q.  Were you in the room yesterday when that burning took

  23   place?

  24   A.  Yes, I was.

  25            MR. SIMS:  And I am going to hand to Mr. Burns, if I




81



   1   might, Exhibit 2.34.  It's one of the DVDs in Exhibit 2, a

   2   store bought copy with a cellophane wrapper of Matrix.

   3            THE COURT:  2.34?

   4            MR. SIMS:  Well, Exhibit 2 is on the Exhibit list,

   5   and there were a number of DVDs and we will supply you with --

   6            THE COURT:  What was the Exhibit 2 that I already

   7   admitted without any qualification?

   8            MR. HART:  Sleepless in Seattle.

   9            MR. SIMS:  I will supply that, your Honor.

  10            THE COURT:  Let's get that straightened out at the

  11   lunch break.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Here again the burned CD I will have a

  13   chance to look at it over the lunch break, and the burner.

  14            THE COURT:  Yes, of course.  We will take a brief

  15   comfort break.  Five minutes.

  16            (Recess)

  17            THE COURT:  Just for your guidance, we are going to

  18   break for lunch at 12:15 and resume at 2 to give you a little

  19   more time, Mr. Garbus, to examine the disks, so I will be in a

  20   position to file the opinion by 2 o'clock.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I should say also, your Honor, with

  22   respect to the disks, I think we got them this morning.  I

  23   don't know.  We will take a look at it.  It's absolutely clear

  24   to me that we will probably need some time.

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  The disks that you were given are




82



   1   different than the disks that we were given.  They were burned

   2   at a different time, so we would like to compare them all.

   3   That's all.

   4            THE COURT:  All right.  You will have that

   5   opportunity.

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, Judge.

   7            THE COURT:  All right, Mr. Sims.

   8   BY MR. SIMS:

   9   Q.  Dr. Shamos, could you and your assistant perform a

  10   comparison of the exhibit of the Matrix that has just been

  11   marked as an exhibit, the store bought copy of the Matrix that

  12   has been marked, so that the Court can look at that and then

  13   look at the DiVX copy of the Matrix obtained from eaRoSoL.

  14   A.  Yes, we can do that the same way we did Sleepless in

  15   Seattle if we go down to the laptop.

  16            MR. SIMS:  With the judge's permission, we will

  17   surround the Sony computer and you can narrate.

  18            THE COURT:  If there is going to be a lot more of

  19   this -- this is it?  Because I was going to suggest you agree

  20   on a monitor so we don't have to rearrange the courtroom.

  21            MR. SIMS:  We have set that one up so it will read

  22   like a TV screen.

  23            THE WITNESS:  What is happening now is Eric has

  24   inserted the film the Matrix, the authorized DVD of the Matrix

  25   into the DVD drive.




83



   1            THE COURT:  That's Exhibit 2.34, as I understand it,

   2   right?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, if you want, given the fact

   4   that we have already been through this process once, if it

   5   makes it easier to now look at it off the screen.

   6            THE COURT:  If that's okay with you, we will do it

   7   that way.  This exhibit is 2.34.  That's the store bought copy

   8   of the Matrix.  We are going to mark the disk itself before

   9   the day is out.

  10            And I take it, counsel, just for my guidance, if I

  11   take these disks and I stick them in the disk drive in my home

  12   computer which I got from mail order just like everybody else,

  13   they should play, right, and I can look at them on my own

  14   screen.

  15            MR. SIMS:  I'm going to ask Dr. Shamos to answer that

  16   question.

  17            THE WITNESS:  They will play if you have a compliant

  18   player.

  19            THE COURT:  Well, I have no idea.

  20            MR. SIMS:  We have some computer experts here.

  21            For the record, the copy of Sleepless in Seattle

  22   which is store bought is 2.28.  There is in your binder a

  23   photocopy of the cover.

  24            THE COURT:  2.38?

  25            MR. SIMS:  2.28.  Sleepless in Seattle.




84



   1            THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.  So the record will

   2   reflect that it is 2.28 that I received earlier, not 2.

   3   Proceed.

   4   BY MR. SIMS:

   5   Q.  Mr. Burns, I notice that you have broken the seal on the

   6   store bought copy of the Matrix and put it into the hard

   7   drive.  Dr. Shamos, would you continue the demonstration.

   8   A.  Yes.  Please start it by just closing the CD-ROM door.

   9            Now, we have chosen a portion of the movie that's

  10   particularly difficult to compress, one that has a lot of

  11   action and scene changes.  So, if you would go to, when it

  12   starts, to the chapter that we have decided to display,

  13   although we are perfectly prepared to display any portion of

  14   the movie --

  15            THE COURT:  I am going to come down anyway, because

  16   my eyes aren't that good.

  17   A.  What will happen is there is not only a lot of action but

  18   numerous special effects are also taking place.

  19            THE COURT:  Lower the sound, please.

  20            (DVD played)

  21   Q.  Dr. Shamos, when you want it switched over, just tell me.

  22   A.  I think that's enough.

  23            Now, if you could attempt to find the same place in

  24   the DiVX that was obtained from eaRoSoL and play that, please.

  25   I am going to attempt to point out to the Court the DiVXs




85



   1   artifacts that I see in the frame.  There are some.  There are

   2   more than there are in Sleepless in Seattle.

   3   Q.  Eric, will you take the DVD out -- let the record reflect

   4   that the DVD was removed and that the DVD door is open.

   5            THE COURT:  It so reflects.

   6            Would you pause it?  Pause it, please.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Even a third suggestion, even if it's

   8   possible, if we can watch it here and there at the same time.

   9   Is that possible?  If that's possible, then you could see the

  10   difference between the two technologies.

  11            THE COURT:  It's one or the other right now?

  12            MR. HART:  Yes.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Is there a way of setting it up so you

  14   can watch both simultaneously?

  15            THE COURT:  Let me ask you this.  I was serious about

  16   the question I asked before.  Does anybody have any objection

  17   to my looking at these two things on my own home computer and,

  18   if not, is there any reason to suppose that that will produce

  19   an appropriate conclusion, whatever it is?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Can we think about it?

  21            MR. SIMS:  It will take us a moment to find the right

  22   spot.

  23            (DVD played)

  24   A.  In looking around for artifacts, I am looking for any

  25   large flat areas of the screen where things are changing that




86



   1   should not be changing.  It would be difficult here to see the

   2   rain spilling down on the walls.  However, there are some

   3   places where you can see some things.

   4            It's possible that a real videophile would be able to

   5   see the real artifacts, but I haven't been able to see them.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  It seems to me, since I am familiar with

   7   the Matrix and I looked at this one, I can clearly see the

   8   differences without -- and it seems to me it would be

   9   appropriate for the Court at some time to look at the store

  10   bought and then look at this DiVX one, and then I think the

  11   Court can see the difference between the two at the same time.

  12            I don't know how the Court now looking at this and

  13   see the difference in the shadows and the texture unless you

  14   have seen the original one 35 time.

  15            THE COURT:  35 times is a considerable investment for

  16   this movie.  This is not Gone With the Wind.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  Have you seen that 35 times?

  18            THE COURT:  I assure you not.  Okay.  Are we done?

  19   Q.  Dr. Shamos, am I correct that the two demonstrations we

  20   have just seen, the two side by side demonstrations, one

  21   relating to Sleepless in Seattle, one relating to the Matrix,

  22   in each case compared to the store bought one is a film which

  23   has been subject to DiVX, is that correct?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  And you have indicated for the record the extent you have




87



   1   some or some not difference in perceptual quality in your own

   2   view.  If we had looked at the DeCSS version before DiVX was

   3   applied, what would have been the comparison in your opinion?

   4   A.  Well, it would have been identical to the store bought

   5   DVD.

   6            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I would like to offer 2.34 and

   7   115D, the comparison of the videos we have just been through.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I assume I will have a chance to look at

   9   the copy.  I will object to it until I have a chance to see

  10   it.

  11            THE COURT:  I will receive it subject to a motion.

  12   And as far as a side-by-side comparison, if you think that's a

  13   appropriate, set it up and I will do it, not the whole movie,

  14   but a comparable segment, whatever segment you want.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  16   Q.  Now, Dr. Shamos, let me turn to the subject of file

  17   transfer times.  Did you and your assistant Mr. Burns proceed

  18   to make further inquiry into the amount of time it would take

  19   to transfer DiVX copies of the Matrix?

  20   A.  Yes, we did a couple of experiments on the CMU network.

  21   Q.  CMU refers to?

  22   A.  Carnegie Mellon university.

  23   Q.  Okay.  What did you do?

  24   A.  Well, we used both the 10 megabit per second and the 100

  25   megabit capability at CMU, and we were able to transfer the




88



   1   Matrix.  It took approximately 20 minutes to transfer it at 10

   2   megabits and approximately 3 minutes to transfer it at 100

   3   megabits.

   4   Q.  Now, what is the extent to which either 100 megabits or

   5   the other number you just gave me are available throughout the

   6   United States in universities or Internet service providers

   7   for example.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I would object to that.

   9            THE COURT:  I want to hear a foundation.

  10   Q.  Dr. Shamos, are you familiar and in connection with your

  11   teaching do you have occasion to teach the present and

  12   expected extent of bandwidth capacity in the United States

  13   Internet, I mean in the Internet available in the United

  14   States?

  15            THE COURT:  Restate the question, please.

  16   Q.  Dr. Shamos, do you teach and lecture with respect to

  17   Internet bandwidth developments?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  And to whom?

  20   A.  To both my university students and the corporations to

  21   whom I give training.

  22   Q.  Are the transfer times you have just indicated, 20 minutes

  23   using -- how many megabits was that?

  24   A.  10.

  25   Q.  10, and 3 minutes using 100, are those fast transfer times




89



   1   based on your knowledge?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I object to it.  The foundation was

   4   insufficient.

   5            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   6   A.  Yes, they are fast.  The reason I say that is that

   7   Carnegie Mellon University has a high degree of network

   8   capability not found at all other universities.

   9   Q.  What is available to the students in the dormitories at

  10   Carnegie Mellon?

  11   A.  They get 10 megabit.

  12   Q.  And to your knowledge is that unusual among universities

  13   and colleges in America?

  14   A.  No, it's very typical, because basically the lowest speed

  15   that Ethernet runs at is 10 megabit these days.

  16   Q.  Is Carnegie Mellon unique in having a 10 megabit

  17   connection?

  18            THE COURT:  Hold it.  You say the Internet runs a

  19   minimum of 10 megabits per second, but the fact is a lot of

  20   the world is doing this with 56K modems and slower.

  21            THE WITNESS:  Correct.  I didn't say the Internet

  22   runs at that speed.  I said Ethernet, which is being used

  23   purely within the university network.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I also do note there has been no

  25   foundation for these last answers.  In other words, I don't




90



   1   know what he teaches in class, I don't know what he knows

   2   about universities.

   3            THE COURT:  The last answer was directed to Carnegie

   4   Mellon.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Right.  But prior to that it wasn't.

   6            THE COURT:  And I sustained that objection or I cut

   7   off the line of testimony.  So, now I assume what I'm getting,

   8   unless I hear otherwise, is his personal knowledge of what is

   9   available at the institution he works at.  I'm glad he knows

  10   that.  I don't know what I have, but I'm glad he knows that.

  11            You do know that, I take it, of your own knowledge?

  12            THE WITNESS:  I do.

  13            THE COURT:  Okay.  Let's talk about Carnegie Mellon.

  14   Q.  You testified that 10 megabits is available to the

  15   students at Carnegie Mellon?

  16   A.  In their dormitories.  In general we have 100 megabit

  17   available in classrooms and offices and ten megabit in the

  18   dormitories.

  19   Q.  Do you lecture with respect to the growth of bandwidth in

  20   recent years and expected future increases?

  21   A.  Yes, it's of exceptional interest to my corporate

  22   education clients.

  23   Q.  Have you lectured on those subjects to Morgan Stanley and

  24   the MacKenzie Company?

  25   A.  Yes.




91



   1   Q.  Do you expect bandwidth available at homes and to people

   2   in universities and at various work sites to continue to grow

   3   over the next few years?

   4   A.  Yes, I do.  There is a manic need for bandwidth.

   5   Companies that have web sites want to deliver more.  People

   6   who use the Internet want faster and faster access, they want

   7   their browsing to be more convenient, so there is a crying

   8   need for additional bandwidth, which many private entities are

   9   attempting to supply.

  10   Q.  Could you describe for the Court the extent to which

  11   bandwidth available in homes has increased over the last 18

  12   months or so?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I would object unless I hear more

  15   foundation.

  16            THE COURT:  I want to hear more foundation.

  17   Sustained.

  18   Q.  Dr. Shamos, have you lectured with respect to the

  19   increases in bandwidth over the last year or so?

  20   A.  Available to the home?

  21   Q.  Yes.

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  And what is the information that you use in your teaching

  24   based on and sourced from?

  25   A.  It's based on, first, personal experience, since I have




92



   1   been using, I have been accessing computer networks from my

   2   home since 1970.  I have followed with keen interest the

   3   availability of bandwidth, since I would be a personal

   4   beneficiary of it if I was able to obtain it.

   5            And, of course, in being able to lecture

   6   intelligently on the topic I have endeavored to inform myself

   7   from a variety of sources on what is going on, particularly

   8   various kinds of web pages, news reports and information

   9   posted by the corporations themselves that are involved in

  10   bandwidth provision.

  11   Q.  Do you have a DSL connection at home?

  12   A.  I do now.

  13   Q.  What is a DSL connection?

  14   A.  A DSL connection is a capability provided by a telephone

  15   company that has a line running to a subscriber's house, in

  16   which they are able to give dedicated service to that

  17   subscriber without his having to share it with someone else.

  18   Q.  Is it larger bandwidth than a 56K modem would afford?

  19   A.  Yes.

  20   Q.  And is it increasingly available in some communities in

  21   the United States?

  22   A.  Yes, there is a rush among the telephone companies to make

  23   DSL more available because they are able to charge high prices

  24   for it and make a profit.

  25   Q.  Have you lectured in connection with e-commerce and the




93



   1   other topics you have testified about with respect to the

   2   projections of increased bandwidth and its impact on commerce

   3   over the Internet?

   4   A.  Yes, every course on e-commerce technology that I teach

   5   has a unit on bandwidth and bandwidth increases.

   6   Q.  And are you familiar with a report or a prediction by

   7   Motorola made a couple of years ago with respect to projected

   8   increases in bandwidth?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I will object to the next question after

  10   he says, yes, he is familiar with the report.

  11            THE COURT:  Let me find out what the next question

  12   is.

  13   A.  Yes, I am.

  14   Q.  And what is the report you advised me of?

  15            THE COURT:  I guess it's a report by Motorola on

  16   expected increase in bandwidth.

  17   Q.  Yes, with the prediction that Motorola made.  When did you

  18   read it?

  19   A.  Mr. Roberson, who was the chief technology officer of

  20   Motorola in 1998, made a presentation to the Internet

  21   Engineering Task Force.  I have reviewed the powerpoint slides

  22   of his presentation.

  23   Q.  And what --

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.  I have never seen the

  25   powerpoint slides.  Even if I did, it would still be hearsay.




94



   1            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I have --

   2            THE COURT:  I haven't gotten there yet, Mr. Garbus.

   3   Next question.

   4   Q.  And what was the projection in 1998 that Mr. Roberson made

   5   with respect to increases in bandwidth by the year 2000?

   6            THE COURT:  Now, Mr. Garbus.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I think I would like to object.

   8            THE COURT:  All right.  This you are offering for the

   9   truth, right?

  10            THE WITNESS:  No, I believe.

  11            THE COURT:  Now wait a minute.  I know you went to

  12   law school, but I have enough lawyers in this courtroom.

  13   Mr. Sims.

  14            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, this is historical.  He is

  15   going to testify that there was a projection in 1998 and he is

  16   going to testify to the present state of the world, and I

  17   don't think that's hearsay.  I think that's testimony that

  18   goes to the --

  19            THE COURT:  Okay.  So you are not offering whatever

  20   Mr. Roberson said two years ago for the truth of what Mr.

  21   Roberson said.  In fact you are offering it for the purpose of

  22   proving how wrong it was.  Is that right?

  23            MR. SIMS:  I'm not offering for the purpose of its

  24   truth at the time, yes.

  25            THE COURT:  Overruled.




95



   1   Q.  What was the projection Mr. Roberson, CTO of Motorola,

   2   made in 1998?

   3   A.  In 1998, before the Internet Engineering Task Force, he

   4   predicted that for early home adopters -- and an early home

   5   adopter is someone who is ready willing and able to buy the

   6   latest new thing that is made available, but of course it has

   7   to be made available to the home, as opposed to the more

   8   conservative people or people with insufficient wallets who

   9   wait for a while either for prices to come down or for the

  10   technology to be proven -- so, for early home adopters, he

  11   predicted that in the year 2000 seven megabits would be

  12   available in the home.

  13   Q.  In the year 2000, based on your knowledge and expertise,

  14   is 7 megabits available to homes?

  15   A.  Yes, I have it in my home and it's made generally

  16   available by Bell Atlantic where they make DSL service

  17   available.

  18            THE COURT:  Now, DSL service is not available

  19   everywhere, isn't that true?

  20            THE WITNESS:  Quite right.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  We were given Mr. Shamos's affidavit,

  22   and as I understand what his testimony was going to be, it was

  23   going to relate to the experiment that he performed.  As I

  24   look at the affidavit, he refers in paragraph 31 to available

  25   bandwidths increasing in the United States at such and such a




96



   1   rate, and I would just ask whether or not he has any

   2   documentation?  I can save that for cross, I suppose.

   3            THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.  Mr. Sims?

   4            MR. SIMS:  Yes.

   5   Q.  Dr. Shamos, what would happen if large numbers of CMU

   6   students attempted to transfer DiVXs at the same time?

   7   A.  Well, if they were attempting to do that at the CMU

   8   network, they would of course clog the network.  Every network

   9   has finite capacity, and if people use it up indiscriminately,

  10   then by clogging the network, the available transfer rates, as

  11   observed by the people attempting to do the transfer, would

  12   become slower and slower and slower, until they became

  13   frustrated and would cease to engage in such activity.

  14   Q.  You testified a few minutes ago that students --

  15            THE COURT:  Essentially the same principle as

  16   everybody trying to drive in in the morning on the FDR Drive,

  17   right?

  18            THE WITNESS:  Yes, I think congestion is an apt

  19   analogy.

  20   Q.  You testified a few moments ago with respect to a 20

  21   minute download within the CMU network available in the

  22   dormitories, is that correct?

  23   A.  Yes.

  24   Q.  Now, do you believe the result of that test reflects

  25   practical and not merely theoretical results?




97



   1   A.  Yes, at that rate we were getting approximately a third of

   2   the available bandwidth.  We were getting nowhere near 100

   3   percent of it.

   4   Q.  To what extent?

   5            THE COURT:  I don't understand your answer.

   6            THE WITNESS:  Well, if conditions had been perfect,

   7   and there had been no one else on the network, we might have

   8   been able to achieve triple the speed, so it would have taken

   9   under seven minutes instead of 20.  But because we made no

  10   effort to try to achieve perfect conditions but just use the

  11   network in its condition at the time, we got approximately a

  12   third of the theoretical maximum.

  13            THE COURT:  So, is it correct for me to understand

  14   that in order for you to achieve this 20 minute transfer rate,

  15   using the 10 megabytes per second capability at Carnegie

  16   Mellon, you were using a third of the whole system?

  17            THE WITNESS:  No, we were using a third of the

  18   capacity of the switch that our machine was connected to.

  19            THE COURT:  Okay.

  20   Q.  So the record is clear, is it 10 megabits?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  Not 10 megabytes.

  23   A.  Right.

  24   Q.  Now, do you believe that a 10 megabit connection is widely

  25   available today?




98



   1   A.  It's widely available.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

   3            THE COURT:  Sustained.  This is not a matter for

   4   religious testimony.  This is presumably objectively knowable.

   5   Q.  Do you have any information with respect to whether 10

   6   megabit connections are available today other than at CMU?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  What is that information?

   9   A.  First of all, let's just talk within a university, without

  10   talking about going out on the Internet.  You basically can't

  11   get LANS these days that run at less than 10 megabits.  It's

  12   the Ethernet standard capacity.  So universities that provide

  13   local area networks to their students all have 10 megabit.

  14   Q.  Is it common for major universities to have local area

  15   networks for their students?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  To what extent do you have information with respect to the

  18   availability of that kind of connection outside of

  19   universities?

  20   A.  Well, outside of universities there are numerous

  21   corporations that have that capacity and greater.  Where you

  22   don't get that capacity is typically in the home.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I would object to the foundation, your

  24   Honor.

  25            THE COURT:  Overruled.




99



   1   Q.  Based on your teaching and your experience in the

   2   institute of e-commerce --

   3            THE COURT:  Let me go back to that ruling.  You are

   4   not seriously disputing, Mr. Garbus, are you, that lots of

   5   corporations in the United States have networks with greater

   6   than 10 megabit or megabyte capacity per second?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I don't know.

   8            THE COURT:  Well, maybe you ought to talk to your

   9   technical advisors and come back to me on that.  If that's

  10   seriously in dispute, I am prepared to strike the answer, but

  11   I took that as a given.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  13   Q.  And based on your experience teaching e-commerce issues,

  14   teaching of e-commerce and Internet connections, what do you

  15   see as the implications of fast Internet connections and

  16   increased bandwidth for copyright owners of motion pictures

  17   released on DVDs?

  18   A.  Well, I think it's clear what is going on in the music

  19   industry.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question, your Honor.

  21            THE COURT:  Overruled.  I am going to hear it,

  22   Mr. Garbus.  You obviously have arguments and

  23   cross-examination.

  24   A.  It's clear what has gone on in the music industry, that

  25   compressed audio files are being made available and are being




100



   1   traded back and forth among people and being acquired from

   2   archives of such things and are being used to replace the need

   3   to purchase music from other sources.  The difference between

   4   audio and watching movies is of course that movies are much

   5   longer and, therefore, are represented by longer files.

   6   Furthermore, they have video in addition to audio, and that

   7   also increases the size of the files, and therefore the

   8   transfer time for these things is larger.

   9            However, with increases in internet capacity and

  10   bandwidth availability to the home and other places, it's

  11   completely clear to me that exactly the same thing is going to

  12   happen with videos as has happened with Napster.  In fact the

  13   entire movie industry is attempting to explore video on

  14   demand.  They want to be able to sell you the movies directly

  15   to your home if it can be done in a secure manner.

  16   Q.  Other than your experience that you have testified to

  17   concerning the particular Internet relay chat that Mr. Burns

  18   had, do you have reason to believe, and do you have an opinion

  19   based on your experience and teaching that trading in digital

  20   copies of DiVX films is growing?

  21   A.  Yes.  I have an opinion and the opinion is it sure is.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.  I object to the question and

  23   the answer.

  24            THE COURT:  I am going to take it for what it's

  25   worth, but obviously, Mr. Sims, the better the foundation the




101



   1   the more persuasive it is.

   2            MR. SIMS:  Let me hand up Exhibit 116B, which we have

   3   given to the defendants.

   4   Q.  Dr. Shamos, what is this document?

   5   A.  This document is a print-out of a number of pages obtained

   6   from the website iSONEWS.

   7   Q.  Was it printed out under your direction?

   8   A.  Yes.  I pointed you to it, and together we printed out the

   9   pages.

  10   Q.  When did we do that?

  11   A.  Yesterday.

  12   Q.  Now, is iSONEWS a website?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  And what part of the iSO website do these pages represent?

  15   A.  ISONEWS is a place where people may obtain information

  16   about the existence of various movies in different kinds of

  17   formats, so we went to iSONEWS and asked what it knew about

  18   DiVXs.

  19   Q.  Does it organize the different kinds of materials for

  20   which information is provided into various formats?

  21   A.  Yes, it does.  DiVXs is in their own separate category,

  22   and we looked only at DiVXs, and the DiVXs in the terminology

  23   of iSONEWS had been "released."  That doesn't mean released by

  24   Hollywood.  That means released by the pirates who were

  25   descrambling them and DiVXing them.  This lists.




102



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.

   2            THE COURT:  I couldn't hear you, Mr. Garbus.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I object to this statement.

   4            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   5   A.  And the way the DiVX section of iSONEWS is organized, is

   6   it shows you by each month, starting in January 2000, which

   7   movies have become available for trading on the Internet

   8   through the DiVX format.  What it shows -- unfortunately this

   9   is on the last page, SMS68.  It shows that in January 2000 no

  10   releases were found.  But on the preceding page, SMS67, this

  11   is the list of DiVXs from February where there were

  12   approximately nine available.  Then in March it appears as

  13   though a couple of hundred became available.  And if you

  14   include everything from the zero in January through the July

  15   listing -- and of course we are not even at the end of July --

  16   the total exceeds 650, which I understand to be more than 10

  17   percent of all DVDs available in the United States.

  18            THE COURT:  All right.  We are breaking for lunch

  19   here, and I obviously know that Mr. Garbus has the word

  20   "hearsay" at the tip of his tongue, and you might think about

  21   it over lunch, Mr. Sims.

  22            (Luncheon recess)

  23

  24

  25




103



   1            A F T E R N O O N   S E S S I O N

   2            2:00 p.m.

   3   MICHAEL SHAMOS, resumed.

   4            THE COURT:  Sorry for the delay.  Let's continue.

   5   DIRECT EXAMINATION Continued

   6   BY MR. SIMS:

   7   Q.  Dr. Shamos, I believe the last question had to do with

   8   explaining what you see in Plaintiff's Exhibit 116B, which was

   9   this printout of a list of titles of films on iSONEWS.  Have

  10   you completed your answer?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me, your Honor.  We did not at

  12   the beginning of trial discuss the whole question of exclusion

  13   of witnesses.

  14            THE COURT:  No, we didn't.  Nobody brought it up.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  I would ask that all witnesses be

  16   excluded from the courtroom, if they are going to then

  17   testify.

  18            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims?

  19            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I think this is the sort of

  20   case that doesn't involve who did what to whom when and when

  21   the accident happened.  So, I don't think it's necessary.

  22            THE COURT:  It's not an optional matter under the

  23   Rule.

  24            MR. SIMS:  If it's not an optional matter --

  25            THE COURT:  If there's anybody who may be a witness




104



   1   in this case in the courtroom, they are going to have to wait

   2   outside until their testimony is concluded one by one.  So, if

   3   there is anybody in the courtroom, you are out.

   4            If you would like, folks, you can use the jury room,

   5   because we obviously don't have the jury.  It should be open.

   6            MR. SIMS:  One moment, your Honor.

   7            THE COURT:  The Rule, of course, allows each side to

   8   have one designated representative of a party.  I think it's

   9   Rule 613, folks.

  10            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, Mr. Gold -- can Mr. Gold be

  11   excused to get our representative back, Ms. Kean?  Thank you.

  12            THE COURT:  Yes.  That's the wrong rule.  It's 615.

  13   BY MR. SIMS:

  14   Q.  Dr. Shamos, I think you were testifying about what you

  15   understand and see in Exhibit 116B.  Have you completed your

  16   answer?  Do you recall?

  17            THE COURT:  I'm not sure he started.

  18            MR. SIMS:  O.K.

  19   Q.  Why don't you explain what 116B is?

  20   A.  O.K., I think I explained that, just to review it quickly

  21   that this was a printout of pages made from the iSONEWS web

  22   site under the section hyper letter linked DiVX'd and this

  23   appears to constitute a list, at least by its own term, it

  24   says it constitutes a list of DiVXs that have been "released

  25   month by month since January of 2000," in sum total exceeding




105



   1   650 of them, which I then testified it was my understanding

   2   that that constitutes more than 10 percent of all DiVXs -- of

   3   all DVDs available in the United States.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I have made an objection to that on the

   6   grounds of hearsay.

   7            THE COURT:  I am sure you are offering that one for

   8   the truth; right, Mr. Sims?

   9            MR. SIMS:  The number that I want in, your Honor, is

  10   the number of films on this list and as to that, I know that

  11   the witness counted them up himself because I watched him do

  12   it.

  13            THE COURT:  But how do I know that these films are

  14   actually out there?

  15            MR. SIMS:  I think he's testifying to the number of

  16   films on the list and not whether they are actually out there.

  17   And I think that --

  18            THE COURT:  What is the relevance of a list of things

  19   unless they are out there?

  20            MR. SIMS:  I believe, your Honor, that we'll tie it

  21   up and we'll show you that it's relevant over the next few

  22   moments.

  23            THE COURT:  Well, I will take it subject to

  24   connection, but obviously its relevance depends on your

  25   producing evidence, competent evidence sufficient to persuade




106



   1   me that, in fact, these movies are out there.

   2            MR. SIMS:  I believe that I will be able to connect

   3   it up for relevant purposes.  It may not be that precise fact,

   4   your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. Garbus' objection is well

   6   taken at this point.

   7   BY MR. SIMS:

   8   Q.  Dr. Shamos, look, if you would, at page SMS66 toward the

   9   back of this.  And do you see a film on March 14th identified

  10   with that date and the word "ant"?

  11   A.  Yes, I do.

  12   Q.  Did you click on anyplace on that line and obtain further

  13   information?

  14   A.  Yes, if you click on the icon on the extreme right-hand

  15   edge of the page, which looks like a little notebook, then

  16   that calls up a page of information about that particular

  17   film.

  18            MR. SIMS:  If I may approach, your Honor, may I

  19   hand -- I'm not sure this is in the books, 114F.

  20            THE WITNESS:  It's in the book.

  21   Q.  Is this the printout of the information you obtained when

  22   you clicked on the word "ants" on page SMS66 of iSONEWS?

  23   A.  Yes.

  24   Q.  Now, does anything on 114F suggest to you -- let me

  25   rephrase that.




107



   1            THE COURT:  While you are thinking about that, let me

   2   say for the information of counsel that I have just signed an

   3   order denying the motion put out by the defendants and as soon

   4   as the copy machine does its job, you will have copies.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  May we have an appropriate stay to go to

   6   the Second Circuit?

   7            THE COURT:  Denied.

   8            MR. SIMS:  I'll come back to that in a moment, Dr.

   9   Shamos.

  10   Q.  Have you formed an opinion about the feasibility of

  11   locating and downloading DiVX'd decrypted DVDs from the

  12   Internet?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  What is that?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  I object to that.

  16            THE COURT:  Grounds?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I don't know -- there's no foundation

  18   for it that he's an expert in this area and he's finding stuff

  19   on the Internet.

  20            THE COURT:  Excuse me?  You dropped your voice.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  He's not an expert of finding materials

  22   on the Internet.  It's a factual matter.

  23            THE COURT:  Overruled.  Overruled.

  24   Q.  Before you tell me what your opinion is, tell me what it's

  25   based on?




108



   1   A.  I have several bases for it.  One is the personal

   2   experience in observing the result of the Matrix having been

   3   exchanged over the Internet and the apparent availability of

   4   other films that we could obtain by communicating with pound

   5   on the pound DiVX chat room and also the existence of iSONEWS

   6   and the pointers that it gives to 650 movies which have been

   7   ripped and are available in DiVX format now on the Internet.

   8   Q.  Does the information you printed on No. 114F point back to

   9   the instructions you used with respect to making the DiVX'd

  10   decrypted copy of Sleepless in Seattle?

  11   A.  Yes, it does.

  12   Q.  Where?

  13   A.  Well, we can do it a couple of ways.  I can point you to

  14   it directly now or we can just go through it in order.  But it

  15   says, approximately two-thirds or three-quarters of the way

  16   down on the second column, back space, BCKSPC sends personal

  17   greetings/props to he can prog of FM4 for help on rip

  18   techniques.

  19            Decoding this for humans, it seems to mean that the

  20   person who ripped this particular movie into DiVX'd format

  21   obtained instructions from how to do so from FM4.org which, of

  22   course, recommends that step 1 be DeCSS.

  23   Q.  And is FM4 the web site you went to and obtained

  24   instructions from and followed in connection with the

  25   experiment you testified about this morning?




109



   1   A.  Yes.

   2   Q.  What is your opinion about the feasibility of locating and

   3   downloading DiVX'd decrypted DVDs from the Internet?

   4            THE COURT:  The question is compound.  Ask it in

   5   separate parts.

   6   Q.  What does -- what is your opinion of the feasibility of

   7   locating DiVX'd decrypted DVDs from the Internet?

   8   A.  My opinion.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I object to it.

  10            THE COURT:  Let me just review the question again.

  11            Overruled.  I will take it for what it's worth.

  12   A.  My opinion is that if one goes to Internet relay chat, it

  13   is relatively easy to do it.  If one attempts to contact the

  14   people who list themselves on iSONEWS, it's much more

  15   difficult.

  16   Q.  What is your opinion as to the feasibility of downloading

  17   DiVX'd decrypted DVDs from the Internet?

  18   A.  Well, since we did it, I could testify that it's feasible.

  19   Q.  Have you formed an opinion of the likelihood that the

  20   incidence of decryption using DeCSS and compression of

  21   authorized DVDs is on the rise?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  What is that opinion based on?

  24   A.  The opinion --

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.




110



   1            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   2            Again, your point goes to the weight, Mr. Garbus.  I

   3   do understand your point.

   4   A.  My opinion -- could you read the question back?

   5   Q.  Yes, what is your opinion based on and the opinion I'm

   6   referring to and I haven't yet asked you what that opinion is

   7   is whether you have an opinion of the likelihood that the

   8   incidence of decryption using DeCSS in compression of

   9   authorized DVDs is on the rise?

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.

  11            THE COURT:  Same ruling.

  12   Q.  What is that opinion based on?

  13   A.  The opinion is based on the increase in Internet bandwidth

  14   that has both been observed and predicted.  The trends in the

  15   music industry which are basically on a parallel with this one

  16   and also on the rise month by month, in huge rise month by

  17   month in the number of titles mentioned on iSONEWS as having

  18   been DiVX'd ripped.

  19   Q.  What is your opinion?

  20   A.  My opinion is that it's on the rise.  I believe that as

  21   long as there's a DVD out there, the people who are ripping

  22   them won't stop until they're all ripped.

  23   Q.  Have you formed an opinion as to the role that DeCSS has

  24   played in the availability of these decrypted compressed DVDs

  25   available on the Internet?




111



   1   A.  Yes.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I'll object.

   3            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   4   Q.  What's the basis for that opinion?

   5   A.  The basis for the opinion is in examining the web sites on

   6   the Internet that give people advice and instructions on how

   7   to obtain a DiVX'd copies of movies from DVDs, the tool --

   8   DeCSS is frequently listed as the tool of choice.  It's listed

   9   so on FM4 and on other web sites.

  10            Not only that, credit is given by several people on

  11   iSONEWS which appears to state that they have used or

  12   benefited from advice from FM4, which is precisely to use

  13   DeCSS.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I also object on the grounds that

  15   everything he has just said, I gather, was based on other

  16   people who have said.  It's also a hearsay objection.

  17            THE COURT:  So far all he's given is the basis for

  18   his opinion.  He hasn't told us the opinion, although I'm sure

  19   you have a heads up on what it will be.

  20   Q.  Dr. Shamos, what is your opinion as to the role that DeCSS

  21   is likely playing in the availability of decrypted compressed

  22   DVDs on the Internet?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question.

  24            THE COURT:  I'm going to hear the answer, Mr. Garbus,

  25   but I understand your point and I'm by no means sure that it




112



   1   is reliable evidence.

   2   Q.  Dr. Shamos?

   3   A.  My opinion is that it plays a major role because it's an

   4   extremely easy-to-obtain tool and easy-to-use tool and a

   5   highly-recommended tool.

   6   Q.  So far as you know, is there any reliable way to ascertain

   7   whether any particular DiVX'd unscrambled motion picture

   8   available on the Internet or obtained from the Internet is the

   9   result of DeCSS?

  10   A.  I don't know of such a way of making that determination.

  11   Q.  Is there any other descrambling mechanism other than DeCSS

  12   that you consider a more -- a more feasible way, an easier way

  13   of obtaining a DiVX'd DeCSS film other than DeCSS?

  14   A.  Well, I'm not aware of any, but I've given in deposition

  15   testimony that I don't have deep familiarity with the other

  16   methods.

  17            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I'd like to offer Exhibits

  18   115A, which is the session of the Internet relay chat which

  19   shows the provenance of the copy of Matrix that was obtained

  20   by Dr. Shamos.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I object to both of these documents on

  22   the grounds previously stated.

  23            MR. SIMS:  I think maybe the record should get the

  24   second one that I'm offering before --

  25            THE COURT:  Yes, I don't know what the second one is




113



   1   yet.

   2            MR. SIMS:  And the second one is 116B, which is the

   3   list of -- from iSONEWS and is offered, not for the fact that

   4   these particular films can be obtained, but for the fact that

   5   they are listed as having been obtained in the increasing

   6   availability that the iSONEWS exhibit reflects.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I don't have to repeat my objection.

   8            THE COURT:  I'm going to take them for what they are

   9   worth.

  10            (Plaintiff's Exhibits 115A and 115B received in

  11   evidence)

  12            MR. SIMS:  I'm told there's one exhibit that I left

  13   off and it's the one on the stand; 114F.  I would offer that

  14   as well.  114F, the "ants" piece, there's a stipulation of

  15   authenticity between the attorneys, your Honor, and it's -- I

  16   offer it.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I object to that on the grounds that it

  18   is hearsay, also.

  19            THE COURT:  Here, I think you are not offering it for

  20   the truth.

  21            MR. SIMS:  No, it is available.  Dr. Shamos knows

  22   it's available and it advises people of tools, including DeCSS

  23   to obtain -- to unscramble and transmit this.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I object on the grounds of hearsay.

  25            THE COURT:  Look, in part, it's obviously offered and




114



   1   I think it was explicitly indicated by the witness to be one

   2   of the bases of an opinion and certainly to that extent, it's

   3   admissible.

   4            I'm not sure looking at it that it really is offered

   5   for a hearsay purpose, but I will certainly consider that and

   6   if we ever get to the point of post-trial briefing or closing

   7   arguments, I am simply going to take that into account and

   8   what I typically do in non-jury trials is not get too hung up

   9   on the hearsay rule on something like this, but rather simply

  10   make clear when I rule in the case what I have relied on and

  11   what I haven't because if I ultimately don't rely on this, it

  12   doesn't matter.

  13            So, I'm going to take these three exhibits, but I'm

  14   going to take it on that understanding that if the defendants

  15   ever want any further clarification, they are certainly at

  16   liberty to make a motion to strike further along in the case.

  17   And if I have concluded at that point that it really is being

  18   offered for a hearsay purpose, and it really is hearsay, then

  19   I will strike it.

  20            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, that concludes this witness'

  21   testimony.

  22            If I could have a few minutes to address the question

  23   of Mr. Burns that had been raised earlier?  Mr. Hernstadt and

  24   I have spoken at a little bit at length on this.

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, I think it's -- well, we




115



   1   haven't raised the question of Mr. Burns at this point, so.

   2            THE COURT:  I'm not sure I understand what you are

   3   all saying to me.

   4            MR. SIMS:  We had offered the -- I'm sorry.  May I

   5   have a moment, your Honor?

   6            (Pause)

   7            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I've completed the

   8   examination.

   9            THE COURT:  Pardon me?

  10            MR. SIMS:  I've completed the examination.

  11            MR. HERNSTADT:  The question of Mr. Burns, I think on

  12   cross-examination, it will be very clear we need to have his

  13   deposition and he needs to be a witness in this case.  I don't

  14   know.  I'm told Dr. Shamos has concluded with his testimony

  15   that there isn't anything to address on that, but we are happy

  16   to do it now, if your Honor wishes.

  17            THE COURT:  Well, if it's not clear before you cross

  18   this witness whether there's anything to address on the other

  19   one, why don't I hear it now.  Let's just go ahead with the

  20   cross-examination.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  I think it will all be clear.

  22            Your Honor, there is one other issue before we start

  23   cross-examination.  We've notified the plaintiffs that

  24   Mr. Stevenson, Frank Stevenson, one of our declarants is

  25   actually in New York and he's going to be here until tomorrow.




116



   1            I think we mentioned that to your Honor as well and

   2   we sent him letters and there's nothing new about this.  We'd

   3   like to take his testimony while he's here, if that's

   4   possible.

   5            THE COURT:  I will hear him out of order.

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  O.K.  We can give them an opportunity

   7   to meet with him tonight to take his deposition, if they want,

   8   or just to talk to him, if they want, and we can take him

   9   tomorrow.  He's leaving tomorrow.

  10            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, any problem?

  11            MR. GOLD:  Yes.  This was a witness that was

  12   designated approximately one week to one and a half weeks

  13   after we were done naming witnesses.  They've known that

  14   Mr. Stevenson -- I think he submitted an affidavit before the

  15   preliminary injunction motion was decided.  But --

  16            THE COURT:  Well, not before the preliminary motion

  17   was decided.

  18            MR GOLD:  After the preliminary injunction, but it

  19   was months ago.  So, this isn't a new person that they've run

  20   into and I don't understand why we would be naming witnesses

  21   so long after the Court's order.

  22            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt?

  23            MR. HERNSTADT:  It's, as we've explained to the

  24   plaintiffs and your Honor, he lives in Oslo and it was just

  25   not clear that he was going to be able to be here and I've




117



   1   informed the plaintiffs of that on several occasions as well

   2   and it turns out he was able to come for four days and he's

   3   leaving tomorrow.

   4            MR. GOLD:  Well, we had no notice and at the time I

   5   first heard about this witness, I said, O.K., there are planes

   6   to Oslo.  We'll go take his deposition.

   7            THE COURT:  We will discuss this more later on.

   8   Let's proceed with the cross.

   9            Look, it is an expedited case within reasonable

  10   limits.  I'm going to give everybody some leeway.  My concern

  11   is to make sure I have the facts.  That's what I want to get

  12   to.

  13            Now, let me just also be clear before Mr. Garbus

  14   starts.  I'm not sure that the exhibits that were used on the

  15   Matrix demonstration were ever offered.  111, 115D, and my

  16   clerk has passed me a note about 2.34; 2.34 was not Matrix;

  17   2.34 was Sleepless in Seattle, or am I wrong?

  18            MR. SIMS:  I thought I offered them, but I can

  19   certainly give you the proper numbers for each examination.

  20   The first demonstration involved 2.28 and Exhibit 111.  And I

  21   believe I offered them.  If I didn't --

  22            THE COURT:  My notes indicate that I received 2.28.

  23   They don't indicate that 111 was received.  That's the burned

  24   in CD.

  25            MR. SIMS:  That's correct.




118



   1            THE COURT:  Any objection?

   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  We object to that.  It's not the same

   3   CD that was provided to us.  Ours is different.  And there's

   4   also some mysterious date problems in terms of when it was

   5   created and when it was modified as reflected on the CD.  It's

   6   something that we would want to inquire of the person who made

   7   the CD.

   8            THE COURT:  Look, I've already said you could examine

   9   that CD.

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  We examined the CD and the CD told

  11   us, I'm actually not sure, are we talking about the CD of

  12   Sleepless in Seattle?

  13            MR. SIMS:  Yes.

  14            MR. HERNSTADT:  That it was created yesterday?

  15            THE COURT:  That's what I think counsel said earlier.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  Right.  However, on the hard drive,

  17   it says that that was created on -- yeah, it was created on

  18   July 9th and it was modified on June 26th.

  19            THE COURT:  Whose hard drive?

  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  On the hard drive from the file.  In

  21   other words, the file from which it was burned the other

  22   computer hard drive from which the CD was burned states that

  23   it was created on July 9th and that file was modified on June

  24   27th.

  25            THE COURT:  Right.




119



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  That's obviously impossible, so it

   2   makes me wonder.

   3            THE COURT:  I see what you are saying.

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  We are more alert about the drive.

   5            THE COURT:  I will take 111 subject to a motion to

   6   strike because that, in fact, was the one that was played.

   7            MR. SIMS:  That's correct, your Honor.

   8            THE COURT:  There's no dispute about that; right, Mr.

   9   Hernstadt?

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  No, your Honor.

  11            THE COURT:  If there's really a question about what

  12   it is, obviously we will get to the bottom of it.

  13            MR. SIMS:  The second demonstration, your Honor,

  14   involved Matrix which was 2.34 and 115A, I believe.

  15            THE COURT:  2.34 is in.  I received that and 115D.

  16   115A was not offered.

  17            MR. SIMS:  115D, your Honor.

  18            MR. HERNSTADT:  Which is the one that's the burned?

  19            MR. SIMS:  115D is the burned Matrix that the

  20   testimony --

  21            THE COURT:  That's already been received; D.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  O.K., I didn't understand that it

  23   had.  We object to that as well.  We wanted to look at the

  24   hard drive and at that disk.

  25            THE COURT:  You are welcome to look at that, too.




120



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  We have.  And it's even more

   2   problematic because the burned versions that we got have

   3   modified -- dates of modification that are different, June 14

   4   and June 19, and it also on the hard drive says it was created

   5   on July 9th and modified on June 15th.

   6            THE COURT:  Which is a nice trick in anybody's

   7   technology.

   8            MR. HERNSTADT:  Which is a nice trick.

   9            THE COURT:  Same ruling on that.  You can move to

  10   strike it if there's really a problem here.

  11            MR GOLD:  Your Honor?

  12            THE COURT:  Yes?

  13            MR GOLD:  May I have one more sentence on the

  14   Stevenson matter?  If the Court is going to permit his

  15   testimony tomorrow, we'd like a chance tonight to take a short

  16   deposition.

  17            THE COURT:  We'll talk about it at 4:30.

  18            MR GOLD:  Thank you.

  19            THE COURT:  Let's go ahead, Mr. Garbus.

  20   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  21   BY MR. GARBUS:

  22   Q.  Mr. Shamos, directing your attention to this exhibit, it's

  23   not numbered here.

  24   A.  It's numbered on the back on the upper right side.

  25   Q.  106.




121



   1   A.  Yes.

   2   Q.  Mr. Sims asked you to read the first sentence and the

   3   second sentence of -- under the heading "how can you help"?

   4   A.  I don't think he asked me to read it, but I did read it.

   5   Q.  And what is the third sentence?  Will you read the first

   6   two sentences?

   7   A.  Yes. "While we have every intention of sticking this out

   8   to the end, we have to face the possibility that we could be

   9   forced into submission.  For that reason, it's especially

  10   important that as many of you as possible all throughout the

  11   world take a stand and mirror these files.

  12   Q.  What is the sentence?

  13   A.  Don't do this because you just want to copy DVDs.  That's

  14   not what the -- what this fight is about at all.  This is

  15   about freedom of information.  The right we all still have.

  16   Q.  That's all.  Now, with respect to Exhibit 116B, did you

  17   download any of these films?

  18   A.  No.

  19   Q.  With respect to ants that you testified about before, did

  20   you download ants?

  21   A.  No.

  22   Q.  Tell me how you came to be in this case?  Did Proskauer

  23   approach you?  Did the MPA approach you?

  24   A.  I received a telephone call in the range of a month ago,

  25   maybe a little bit more, from an attorney Mark Litvak, who




122



   1   works for the MPAA.

   2   Q.  And how did you know him?

   3   A.  How about if I finish the first answer, then I'll answer

   4   the second question?

   5   Q.  Go ahead.

   6   A.  O.K.  And Mr. Litvak said to me, we have a case going on

   7   in New York.  How would you like to help us out like you did

   8   on the "I Crave TV Case"?

   9   Q.  Now, are you finished with your answer?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  Was the MPA involved in the "I Crave TV Case"?

  12   A.  Yes, I don't believe the MPAA was a party, but

  13   representing the movie industry, including a huge number of

  14   plaintiffs, it had an involvement.

  15   Q.  And what is your best judgment about the total amount of

  16   fees that you're going to earn as a result of your testimony

  17   in the "I Crave" case and in this case?

  18   A.  The "I Crave" case, the total fees were $20,000.  In this

  19   case, I could make an estimate, but I think it's going to

  20   depend on how long you cross me.

  21   Q.  Let's assume we finish with you by tomorrow at lunch, if

  22   the judge permits that, what would your total fees be?

  23   A.  Yes, probably something in the range of $30,000.

  24   Q.  And how much do you get an hour for your testimony?

  25   A.  I'm not paid for my testimony.  I'm paid for the time that




123



   1   I put in on the case.  I don't charge a different rate while

   2   I'm up on the stand than I do for background research.

   3   Q.  And it's the same rate if you're flying here or traveling

   4   here?

   5   A.  If I have to have dead time that I can't use for other

   6   purposes, I do bill that; yes.

   7   Q.  Now, and is that rate about $400 an hour?

   8   A.  It's exactly 400.

   9   Q.  Now, when Proskauer first came to you -- pardon me.

  10            When Mr. Litvak first came to you, tell me what you

  11   and he said?

  12   A.  Well, as I testified, he asked me if I would be willing to

  13   help him out again.  And I said, well, I certainly have to

  14   know what the case is all about.  And my recollection is that

  15   he thereupon brought in Mr. William Hart, who's an attorney at

  16   Proskauer, in a conference call with me and the basics of the

  17   case were described to me.

  18   Q.  And were you sent any of the affidavits or pleadings in

  19   the case?

  20   A.  Yes, I was sent a pile of pleadings, documents filed in

  21   the case.  I recall that it was approximately 3 or 400 pages

  22   worth of the material.

  23   Q.  And did you read the affidavit of Dr. Abelson?

  24   A.  I don't recall whether I read the affidavit of Dr. Abelson

  25   then or subsequently, but I have read the affidavit of Dr.




124



   1   Abelson.

   2   Q.  Who is Dr. Abelson?

   3   A.  Dr. Abelson is a computer scientist at MIT.

   4   Q.  And you described him at the deposition on Monday --

   5   pardon me -- on Saturday as a fabulous computer scientist?

   6   A.  I'm not sure if I used the word "fabulous," although I

   7   would agree with that characterization.  I think I used the

   8   word outstanding.

   9   Q.  Now, did you also read the affidavit of Dr. Teretsky?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  And is Dr. Teretsky at Carnegie-Mellon?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  And did Dr. Teretsky post DeCSS and CSS on his web site?

  14   A.  He posts DeCSS in course code form and in various other

  15   forms on his web site.

  16   Q.  When you say, he posts it in various forms on his web

  17   site, can you tell me in what forms he posts it?

  18   A.  Yes.  He has the C language source code of DeCSS.  He has

  19   a tee shirt, a graphic image of a tee shirt on which the

  20   source code appears.

  21            He has a graphic image of a page on which the source

  22   code is printed.  He has a version of the algorithm for DeCSS

  23   which has been written in a hypothetical computer language of

  24   Dr. Teretsky's own creation.  He has a version of the DeCSS

  25   source code interspersed with English language commentary and




125



   1   I think he also has an English language description of the

   2   DeCSS algorithm without any code in it.

   3   Q.  And to your knowledge, can anyone with a computer have

   4   access to that, to Dr. Teretsky's web C page?

   5   A.  Anyone who can access the Internet can access that web

   6   page.

   7   Q.  Do you know how long Dr. Teretsky has had it on his web

   8   page?

   9   A.  No, I don't.

  10   Q.  Has Carnegie-Mellon, to your knowledge, ever suggested

  11   that he take it down?

  12   A.  Not to my knowledge.

  13   Q.  Do you know how many students have downloaded that from

  14   his page?

  15   A.  No, I don't.

  16   Q.  Do you know how many hundreds of thousands of people have

  17   downloaded that from his page?

  18   A.  I would have no way of knowing that.

  19   Q.  Now --

  20   A.  Although it's possible we could get the logs from the CMU

  21   system administrator.  I haven't been asked to do that and I'm

  22   not such an administrator.

  23            THE COURT:  Do you have any knowledge that the

  24   number, in fact, is in the hundreds of thousands?

  25            THE WITNESS:  No, I don't.




126



   1   Q.  Did you also look at the affidavit of Dr. Appel?

   2   A.  Yeah, I recall scanning it.  I don't recall any details of

   3   it.

   4   Q.  Dr. Appel is at Princeton?

   5   A.  Yes.

   6   Q.  And is he a well-known and respected computer scientist?

   7   A.  Very much so.  He got his Ph.D. at CMU.

   8   Q.  And do you know that Dr. Appel links to Teretsky's web

   9   site?

  10   A.  I didn't know that.

  11   Q.  Do you know who Dr. Ed Felton is?

  12   A.  No, I don't.  I mean, I know that he gave a declaration in

  13   this case that I scanned, but I don't have any independent

  14   knowledge of who he is.

  15   Q.  How about Professor Peterson?

  16   A.  Same.

  17   Q.  Now, you testified yesterday that -- well, let me continue

  18   with you and Proskauer.

  19            So, after you had this first conversation, what then

  20   happens?

  21   A.  Well, I received the documents.  I looked over the

  22   documents, and the reason I asked for the documents was to

  23   make sure that I had at least some material from the defense

  24   so I could understand what the defense's position was.

  25            I was also sent a copy of the order granting




127



   1   preliminary injunction so I could determine what the judge's

   2   preliminary thinking in this case was.  On that basis, I

   3   decided to participate.

   4   Q.  And you saw the various estimates that the defendants

   5   declarants -- Beckers, Abelson, Felton, Peterson had made with

   6   respect to times transmissions of information over the

   7   Internet?

   8   A.  Well, I have seen that prior to sitting here today.  I

   9   don't recall whether I saw those prior to deciding whether to

  10   enter the case or not.

  11   Q.  And you had seen in their affidavits their testimony

  12   concerning compression, times of compression and times of

  13   transfer, is that right?

  14   A.  Yes.

  15   Q.  Now, did you at some point go to a search engine to see if

  16   you could find a reference to DeCSS?

  17   A.  Yes.

  18   Q.  When did you do that?

  19   A.  I did that before preparing my declaration.

  20            (Continued on next page)

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




128



   1   BY MR. GARBUS:

   2   Q.  And which search engine was it?

   3   A.  I used HotBot, H-O-T-B-O-T.

   4   Q.  And what did it indicate?

   5   A.  It indicated a huge number of pages on the Internet that

   6   made reference to the stream DeCSS.

   7   Q.  Do you know of one person who copied illegally a DVD as a

   8   result of any information posted by the defendant in this

   9   case?

  10            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  Calls for a legal conclusion.

  11            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.

  12   Q.  Do you know of any one person who copied a DVD as a result

  13   of any download from 2600, yes or no?

  14   A.  Of my own personal experience, other than Eric and myself,

  15   no.

  16   Q.  Now, has anyone at the MPA ever told you that they know of

  17   any one person that ever copied a DVD as a result of

  18   downloading material from 2600.com?

  19   A.  I testified in deposition that the sum total of my

  20   conversations with the MPA in my lifetime has been

  21   approximately five minutes, and during that five minutes, no,

  22   they did not communicate that to me.

  23   Q.  What is the sum total of your conversations with the

  24   Proskauer law firm?

  25   A.  Pardon me?




129



   1   Q.  What is the sum total --

   2   A.  Oh, well, my presence at the Proskauer law firm and

   3   engaged in conversations with people at the Proskauer firm is

   4   probably something like 20 hours, 25 hours.

   5   Q.  And in addition to that, have you sought on the outside to

   6   get any anecdotal information about 2600.com?

   7   A.  Anecdotal meaning what?

   8   Q.  Meaning asking people things, talking to people.

   9   A.  I haven't talked to people about 2600.com.  Any

  10   investigation I did was on the Internet by visiting it myself

  11   and looking for links.

  12   Q.  Did anyone at the Proskauer law firm in the 20 hours you

  13   spent with them ever tell you that a copy was ever made as a

  14   result of a download from 2600.com?

  15   A.  No specific person was identified as having done so.

  16   Q.  Has anyone ever told you that any of the films that are on

  17   Exhibit 116B ever came from any copy that originally came from

  18   2600.com?

  19   A.  No.

  20   Q.  Has anyone ever told you that with respect to Sleepless in

  21   Seattle, that that ever came from a DeCSS download?

  22   A.  No.

  23   Q.  Has anyone ever told you that any of the films contained

  24   on 116B, told you they got there by virtue of the use of

  25   DeCSS?




130



   1   A.  No.

   2   Q.  Has anyone ever told you that with respect to the Matrix,

   3   that that had DeCCS applied to it?

   4   A.  No.

   5   Q.  Did you ever ask?

   6   A.  No.

   7   Q.  Do you know what the resources of the MPA are?

   8   A.  I don't, but I would assume they are considerable.

   9   Q.  Do you know any studies that the MPA made in November and

  10   October and December of last year in an attempt to determine

  11   when the crack was made?

  12   A.  No.

  13   Q.  Do you remember testifying on Saturday about documents you

  14   had seen concerning the first cracking of CSS?

  15   A.  Yes.

  16   Q.  And to your knowledge, when was CSS first cracked?

  17   A.  Well, if you are willing to allow me to rely on hearsay,

  18   then it would be 1997.

  19   Q.  Now, when you say if I'm willing to allow you to rely on

  20   hearsay, tell me what that hearsay was based on.

  21   A.  You want me to rely on the very same kinds of documents

  22   that you objected to when I attempted to testify to them on

  23   direct.

  24            THE COURT:  Dr. Shamos, you just answer the

  25   questions.  Let Mr. Gold represent his client.




131



   1   A.  Web pages.

   2   Q.  Where were these web pages?

   3   A.  Out on the Internet, but I accessed them through a website

   4   at Harvard which is maintaining information about this case.

   5   Q.  So, the website at Harvard told you, as I understand it,

   6   that the first CSS crack was in 1997, is that right?

   7   A.  Not quite.  It wasn't the website at Harvard.  It was the

   8   website at Harvard which pointed me to other sources, and in

   9   reading those other sources there seemed to be agreement among

  10   them, there is some dispute, but there is also some agreement

  11   that CSS was first cracked in 1997, ostensibly prior to DeCSS.

  12   Q.  Now, do you know what the original site was that the

  13   Harvard site sent you to?

  14   A.  There were many of them.  I looked at several.  I could

  15   probably reconstruct for you which ones they are.  Some of

  16   them pointed to articles of a scholarly or semischolarly

  17   nature that I had sent to me and therefore I relied on them.

  18   Q.  So, it's been no secret since at least 1997 that CSS has

  19   been cracked, is that right?

  20            MR. SIMS:  Objection.

  21            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.

  22   Q.  Do you know the way that the MPA searches out websites for

  23   information concerning cracks?

  24   A.  No, that wasn't within the five minutes of conversation.

  25   Q.  Have you ever seen the documents that were given to




132



   1   Mr. Schuman in this case concerning the MPA's investigation of

   2   the CSS crack?

   3   A.  I have never seen any documents about any MPA

   4   investigation.

   5   Q.  Do you have any idea how much money and investigative

   6   resources the MPA has spent since November in order to

   7   determine whether there is one single person who ever

   8   downloaded and copied a DVD through DeCSS?

   9   A.  I would have no way of knowing that.

  10   Q.  Now, you were talking before a bit about the future.  Is

  11   it fair to say, sir, based on your expertise, that in the

  12   future DVDs will probably replace videotapes?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  And why is that?

  15   A.  Because the quality is extremely high, the convenience of

  16   using a DVD is much greater, because one can skip around

  17   arbitrarily inside the DVD, which you can't do easily with

  18   videotape, and because DVD has CSS, and there are content

  19   providers that are more willing to provide their content if

  20   they think it can be protected.

  21   Q.  Do you have any idea of the amount of video sales that

  22   have dropped as the amount of DVD sales have increased?

  23   A.  I don't.

  24   Q.  Do you know when the industry predicts that the videos

  25   will be stopping and DVD market will just take over?




133



   1   A.  No.

   2   Q.  Let's for a minute get to your study.  By the way, who

   3   told you to perform this particular study?

   4   A.  Mr. Hart.

   5   Q.  This was not an independent research you did at the

   6   university.

   7   A.  No, it itself isn't directly related to my university

   8   research, although I expect I will be teaching about it

   9   afterwards.

  10   Q.  It was a specific experiment for the purposes of your

  11   testifying in this litigation, is that right?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  And they picked you out presumably and modestly because

  14   you were knowledgeable in the area.

  15   A.  Yes, I think so.

  16   Q.  And you were given, were you not, precise instructions on

  17   how to carry out this study.

  18   A.  For that part of what I did, I was given precise

  19   instructions.

  20   Q.  Tell me what you mean by "precise," and tell me who gave

  21   you those precise instructions.

  22   A.  Well, I think in my direct testimony I was asked what I

  23   was asked to do in the course of this study, and I listed all

  24   of those instructions, and I thought I identified Mr. Hart as

  25   the person who had asked me to do them.




134



   1   Q.  And you did exactly everything that Mr. Hart asked you to

   2   do, is that right?

   3   A.  Yes, for that part of the study.

   4   Q.  You even prepared an affidavit and took out any reference

   5   to the New York Times because Mr. Hart told you to take out

   6   that reference, isn't that right?

   7   A.  Well, it didn't occur quite that way.

   8   Q.  Tell me how it -- well, let me ask the question then.

   9            Did you originally prepare a document that made some

  10   reference to the New York Times?

  11   A.  Yes I prepared a computer file on my computer.

  12   Q.  Does the final document that you have filed in this court

  13   contain any reference to the New York Times?

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  And was there a conversation between you and Mr. Hart

  16   concerning the deletion of the New York Times from your

  17   affidavit?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  Why?

  20   A.  In describing what I did when I went to 2600 News, that

  21   there were a number of sites pointed to by 2600 News, and one

  22   of them was the New York Times, and that wasn't the website

  23   that we obtained the version of DeCSS from, so, one, it seemed

  24   irrelevant to him that I mention the New York Times, but I

  25   think he didn't want the New York Times, because it's a




135



   1   newspaper, clouding the case up with First Amendment issues.

   2   That's my impression.

   3            THE COURT:  Is that what he said or is that your

   4   impression?

   5            THE WITNESS:  That's my impression.

   6   Q.  No, no.  You testified on Saturday that he used the words

   7   "First Amendment."  Do you remember that?

   8   A.  I recall talking about the First Amendment.  I don't

   9   recall that I said that he said that.

  10   Q.  Who used the words "the First Amendment."

  11   A.  In my deposition testimony I used the words First

  12   Amendment.

  13   Q.  And what did Mr. Hart say about making no references to

  14   the First Amendment?

  15   A.  I don't believe he said anything.  I think he said it

  16   would be better to take out the reference to the New York

  17   Times.

  18   Q.  And you understood why?

  19   A.  I believe so.

  20   Q.  And you did.

  21   A.  I did.

  22   Q.  Why did you put it in in the first place?

  23   A.  I don't know.  I have been reading the New York Times

  24   since I was a kid.

  25   Q.  Speaking about the New York Times, when the Napster case




136



   1   first came out, was that a matter of great public attention?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  And when the DVD case came out, this case, was that a

   4   matter of great public attention?

   5   A.  It appears to have been.

   6   Q.  And hundreds and hundreds of newspapers carried this story

   7   to your knowledge?

   8   A.  Carried this?  I assume that hundreds and hundreds of

   9   newspapers carried this story.

  10            THE COURT:  How many of the hundreds did you read?

  11            THE WITNESS:  I didn't read any.  I just assume that

  12   a story of great public interest would be carried through the

  13   Associated Press.

  14            THE COURT:  If this is really relevant as to how many

  15   newspapers, Mr. Garbus, get on Lexis and find out.  Just as

  16   you didn't want this witness giving me a lot of baloney about

  17   how many people have DSL connections based on some impression,

  18   which is a perfectly valid point you made, I don't think it is

  19   helpful to get the same kind of testimony on this.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I think this is a different issue.

  21   Q.  2600.com, to your knowledge, did they cover the discovery

  22   of the hack back in November?

  23   A.  I didn't see it back in November.  I would surmize that

  24   they did.

  25   Q.  And how many other websites covered the story, to your




137



   1   knowledge, if any?

   2   A.  I don't have specific knowledge of any at that time, since

   3   I didn't read it from the website at that time, but I wouldn't

   4   be surprised if the number was significant.

   5   Q.  Have you ever read the Hacker Quarterly?

   6   A.  I have seen pages from the Hacker Quarterly.  I'm not a

   7   regular reader of it.

   8   Q.  Have you seen pages there referring to the CSS hack?

   9   A.  I don't recall whether I have.  I might have actually in

  10   preparation for this case.

  11   Q.  And have you seen any back issues where the Hacker

  12   Quarterly talks about the 1977 hack of CSS?

  13   A.  1997?

  14   Q.  Yes.

  15   A.  No.

  16   Q.  Now, when you went to HotBot, how many references did you

  17   get to sites that had source code or object code?

  18   A.  Let me describe how the search was done.  The search was

  19   not organized nor would have it been feasible to obtain that

  20   very easily.

  21            What I asked for was all web pages that HotBot

  22   indexes which contained the stream DeCSS.  So DeCSS source

  23   code would have come up, articles about DeCSS.  Any use of

  24   DeCSS as an acronym totally outside the context of this case

  25   would also have appeared.  The number was very large.  The




138



   1   reason I know it was large is that I abandoned looking at the

   2   hits after I got through a few hundred of them.

   3   Q.  When was this again?

   4   A.  This was in preparation for this case, prior to my filing

   5   the declaration.

   6   Q.  Approximately when in June?

   7   A.  Within the last month.

   8   Q.  And at that time did it indicate that 2600.com was posting

   9   the DeCCS object or source code?

  10   A.  When you say "it," if you mean the list of hits?

  11   Q.  Yes.

  12   A.  Yes, I believe 2600.com was one of the hits.  I visited it

  13   and saw that it had references to the source code, but I

  14   didn't see the source code itself on 2600.

  15   Q.  Did you check out any of these sites to see whether or not

  16   there were not merely references to the DeCSS but the actual

  17   object or source code itself?

  18   A.  Yes, I recall visiting a number of sites that had the

  19   source code.

  20   Q.  And how many sites did you visit that had the source code?

  21   A.  A handful, but I would say something like between five and

  22   ten.

  23   Q.  Was that object and source code?

  24   A.  The only place I actually recall seeing the object code at

  25   that time was FM4.




139



   1   Q.  Now, you know what Infoseek is.

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  Is that the search engine owned by Disney, one of the

   4   plaintiffs in this case?

   5   A.  I wasn't aware that it was owned by Disney, but I have no

   6   reason to disbelieve it.

   7   Q.  Have you ever gone to Infoseek to see how many postings or

   8   references they had?

   9   A.  I don't use Infoseek.

  10   Q.  Now, you didn't just get the DeCSS access accidentally,

  11   did you, from 2600.com.  You were specifically directed to go

  12   there by the Proskauer firm.

  13   A.  I was specifically directed to go to the 2600 website and

  14   obtain DeCSS from there, yes.

  15   Q.  Do you know of anyone other than you who has ever obtained

  16   the source code or the object code from 2600.com?

  17   A.  I don't know, but I assume that the network administrator

  18   ought to know.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  I move to strike "I assume."

  20            THE COURT:  Stricken after "I don't know."  Mr.

  21   Shamos, just answer the questions.

  22   Q.  Let's get to your test for a moment.  So after you meet

  23   Proskauer, and after you read the affidavits, and after you

  24   and Mr. Hart had this discussion about the First Amendment,

  25   then what happened?




140



   1   A.  No, this was not after we had the discussion about the

   2   First Amendment.  The test occurred before then.

   3   Q.  Okay.  Tell me about the test again.

   4            THE COURT:  You think you might want to make that a

   5   little more specific.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Okay.

   7   Q.  You said that the test had several steps, as I remember.

   8   First you had to find DiVX, is that right?

   9   A.  Well, when you say we had to find DiVX, we had to find

  10   #DiVX.  That was one of the steps to engage in a chat, to

  11   engage another DiVX.

  12   Q.  By the way, how long have you been on computers?

  13   A.  Since 1962.

  14   Q.  And how much of your day is spent on computers?

  15   A.  Oh, a normal day it's huge.  More than four hours.

  16   Q.  So it's fair to say that with respect to computers or

  17   surfing or the Internet you are fairly -- and I know you would

  18   say this modestly -- a sophisticated user of computers?

  19   A.  I think so.

  20   Q.  By the way, you mentioned that you teach corporations

  21   also, is that right?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  And from that you earn about $700,000 a year?

  24   A.  It may turn out to be that this year.

  25   Q.  And you teach them about computers and other technologies?




141



   1   A.  Well, it's more specific than that.  I teach --

   2   Q.  Tell us what it is.

   3   A.  I teach courses in e-commerce technology.  That's

   4   typically what the corporations are interested in now.  They

   5   are interested in having their people who have been casual

   6   Internet users learn more about how the Internet works, and so

   7   I give a very concentrated crash course that lasts for two

   8   days, consist of ten lectures.  It's basically a condensed

   9   version of one of our full courses at Carnegie Mellon

  10   University on that topic.  I also give courses to them on

  11   Internet law, and I give a simplified version of the

  12   e-commerce technology course for people who aren't

  13   technologically sophisticated.

  14   Q.  Tell me something about the academic qualifications of

  15   your assistant.

  16   A.  My assistant has completed or is within one course of

  17   completing a dual degree program at Carnegie Mellon including

  18   receiving a degree in computer science.

  19   Q.  Has the computer system in Carnegie Mellon changed very

  20   much with respect to speeds over the last six months?

  21            THE COURT:  I think you need to be more specific

  22   about speeds of what.

  23   Q.  The LAN, local area network, has that changed?

  24   A.  I don't know, but I have not experienced any such change.

  25   Q.  Over how long a period of time?




142



   1   A.  I believe I have had the same level of network access at

   2   CMU for at least the past two years.

   3   Q.  So that the same levels of speed that exist today with

   4   respect to LAN are the levels of speed that existed two year

   5   ago?

   6   A.  Available to me at CMU, I believe so, yes.

   7   Q.  And with respect to students' availability?

   8   A.  I believe students' availability has not been increased

   9   during that time.

  10   Q.  So, for the last two years --

  11   A.  Well, I'm sorry.  Students in dormitories.

  12   Q.  By the way, how many students does Carnegie Mellon have?

  13   A.  Approximately 5,000.

  14   Q.  And this may sound strange, but did school end June 15th

  15   this year?

  16   A.  School ended actually around the middle of May, but there

  17   are a number of programs that run for 12 months.  The

  18   E-Commerce Institute for example is a 12 month program.

  19   Q.  You say school basically ends in May.  Then when does it

  20   begin?

  21   A.  Late August.

  22   Q.  So, at the time that you did your study school was

  23   basically out.

  24   A.  I don't agree that school was basically out.  The

  25   undergraduate program was in recess.




143



   1   Q.  And how many students are there in the undergraduate

   2   program?

   3   A.  About 4,000.

   4   Q.  Do you think that based on your expertise that the amount

   5   of usage on the computers when school was out or basically out

   6   is different than when school is in?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  Did you ever state in your report that at the time that

   9   you made these studies Carnegie Mellon University was

  10   basically out of school?

  11   A.  I did not so state.

  12   Q.  Did anyone at Proskauer ever ask you about whether the

  13   information you put in the report reflected the normal usage

  14   at Carnegie Mellon?

  15   A.  No, I don't think there is any reference in there about

  16   normal usage.

  17   Q.  Do you have any idea how long it would take to make the

  18   same transmissions in the middle of the school year?

  19   A.  No.

  20   Q.  By the way, wasn't some of this study done after midnight?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  And tell me why?  Is there a difference with respect to

  23   the number of people who use the Internet in the middle of the

  24   day and after midnight?

  25   A.  Yes.




144



   1   Q.  Did you say in your report what time you conducted these

   2   studies?

   3   A.  No.  The studies were conducted at various times during

   4   the day.  I can state that no particular effort was made --

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Can I ask the question?  Judge, may I?

   6            THE COURT:  Yes, of course.

   7   Q.  Did Mr. Hart tell you at what time he wanted these studies

   8   conducted?

   9   A.  No.

  10   Q.  Did you know that to conduct the studies after midnight,

  11   when school is out, would bring you a different result than

  12   conducting these studies when school is in session during the

  13   middle of the day?

  14   A.  Well --

  15   Q.  Just answer that yes or no, please.

  16   A.  Do I know that there is a difference?

  17   Q.  Yes.

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  So --

  20            THE COURT:  We will take the afternoon break here,

  21   about ten minutes.

  22            DEPUTY COURT CLERK:  All rise.

  23            (Recess)

  24            THE COURT:  The witness has just indicated to me that

  25   if there is any possibility, Mr. Garbus, that you could finish




145



   1   today, he would be grateful.  And I would be prepared to stay

   2   a little later if that will accommodate him.  I don't know

   3   whether it will or not.  I would do that for anybody.  So, you

   4   will let me know.  Proceed.

   5   BY MR. GARBUS:

   6   Q.  You were mentioning your assistant Eric before.

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  Did he become your assistant because he was an especially

   9   qualified student in this area?

  10   A.  Well, when you speak of "this area" I can tell you how he

  11   became my assistant.  He is my assistant for two purposes.  He

  12   has worked for me for two and a half years on the Universal

  13   Library project, and in fact his involvement with that project

  14   predated my return to Carnegie Mellon University in 1998.

  15            He was already doing some work as a college sophomore

  16   at the Universal Library, and then I became his college

  17   supervisor and we worked closely together in the last two and

  18   a half years.

  19            When I was asked to become involved in this case, it

  20   clearly involved somebody who was familiar both with the video

  21   technology, the Internet and somebody who had the right

  22   vocabulary to be able to participate in activities resulting

  23   in the collection of DiVXs, and Eric, of all the people I know

  24   at Carnegie Mellon University, was the best suited person to

  25   do that.




146



   1   Q.  So, it took the two of you highly qualified people in the

   2   middle of the summer, when school was out, in the early

   3   morning hours, approximately 20 hours to download the DVD and

   4   send it, is that right?

   5   A.  That's not quite correct.  As you have stated, obviously

   6   if something took 20 hours, it couldn't have all been in the

   7   middle or early morning hours.

   8   Q.  Thank you.  Now tell me the timing when this started,

   9   because I didn't see it in your report.

  10   A.  We purchased a computer on Friday afternoon, had it back

  11   at the university at 3 p.m. and immediately began the steps

  12   involved at that time.

  13   Q.  Is there any document which indicates you started at 3

  14   p.m.

  15   A.  No.

  16   Q.  Who told you what kind of computer to buy?

  17   A.  No one did.  We needed a computer that was clean and had

  18   the capability to do what we were being asked to do.

  19   Q.  Who?

  20   A.  Mr. Hart.  As I testified, he didn't tell me what kind of

  21   computer to get.  He told me to get a computer that would be

  22   able to do the following things.  We went to Comp USA,

  23   reviewed the ones that were in stock and available and bought

  24   one which could do the job.

  25   Q.  And this was done on the week before the July 4th weekend,




147



   1   is that right?

   2   A.  That is my recollection.

   3            THE COURT:  So this was the Friday that commenced the

   4   holiday weekend, is that correct?

   5   Q.  Is that right, sir?

   6   A.  I'll have to review.  Yes.

   7            THE COURT:  So this was done in the early morning

   8   hours over the 4th of July weekend?

   9            THE WITNESS:  No, it was -- I --

  10            THE COURT:  You might even have gotten technical

  11   support on the phone.

  12            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I think --

  13   A.  Yes, I left for vacation early morning Saturday, July 1.

  14   I wrote the affidavit on June 30, and so I had sent off the

  15   affidavit prior to my leaving for the 4th of July weekend, so

  16   it was all completed before then.

  17   Q.  I'm not clear.  Maybe you answered the question to the

  18   Judge, but I didn't hear it.  So this was done on a Friday?

  19   A.  My recollection is that that's the day that we purchased

  20   the computer.

  21   Q.  Have you ever before been in your lab or in your office on

  22   a July 4th weekend at 3 or 4 in the morning to conduct any

  23   kind of tests?

  24            MR. SIMS:  It misstates the testimony.  The witness

  25   has indicated on Friday, the 23rd.




148



   1            THE COURT:  Sustained.  Sustained.

   2            THE WITNESS:  Something hardly seems right to me

   3   about this, because if -- June 30 was a Friday.  It's

   4   impossible for us to have purchased the computer the afternoon

   5   on Friday and had all of this completed by Friday.

   6   Q.  What are you referring to, by the way?

   7   A.  The document I'm referring to?  I'm looking at my own

   8   declaration.  So, we must have purchased the computer prior to

   9   that, probably the previous Friday.

  10   Q.  Okay.  And tell me what happens after you purchased the

  11   computer.  I'm sorry to be slow about this but ...

  12   A.  I went through all this on direct.  We purchased the

  13   computer.

  14   Q.  But some of this you didn't go through on direct.

  15   A.  Well, I think I went through the steps but...

  16            THE COURT:  Let's not argue about whether you did.

  17   Let's just do it.

  18   A.  After getting the computer and buying the DVDs at Comp

  19   USA, we immediately returned to Carnegie Mellon University,

  20   set up the computer, connected to the network and went through

  21   all of the steps involved in obtaining DeCSS and running DeCSS

  22   to obtain a DeCSS'd copy of Sleepless in Seattle.

  23   Q.  When you say "we" it's you and Eric together at this time?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  So you and Eric buy the computer, you and Eric download




149



   1   the programs, you and Eric get the DeCSS?

   2   A.  Yes, and we DeCSS'd Sleepless in Seattle.

   3   Q.  Had you ever gotten DeCSS before?

   4   A.  No.

   5   Q.  Had you ever used any of the other programs such as DVD

   6   Rip?

   7   A.  No.

   8   Q.  Do you know what it is?

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  What is it?

  11   A.  DVD Rip is a program that creates DiVXs from DVD.

  12   Q.  Do you know how long it takes to create a DiVX from a DVD

  13   with DVD Rip?

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  Do you know if it's ten times faster than using DeCSS?

  16   A.  No.

  17   Q.  Did you ask anybody at Proskauer whether or not there

  18   weren't other "copying techniques" that were ten to 20 times

  19   faster than DeCSS?

  20   A.  No.

  21   Q.  Was it worth your while to get a free copy of Sleepless in

  22   Seattle, to spend 20 hours working through the night over the

  23   weekend?

  24            MR. SIMS:  Objection.

  25            THE COURT:  Sustained.




150



   1   A.  Well --

   2   Q.  Can you think of anybody in their right mind --

   3            THE COURT:  Sustained.  I'm afraid of the answer.

   4   Q.  Do you know anything about DOT Stripper?

   5   A.  Yes.  I don't think there is a T in it, but I've heard of

   6   it.

   7   Q.  What does that do?

   8   A.  It appears to be another program that rips DiVX.

   9   Q.  And do you know how long it takes that program to do it?

  10   A.  No.

  11   Q.  Have you ever done it?

  12   A.  No.

  13   Q.  How about your assistant Eric, has he ever done that?

  14   A.  I don't know.

  15            THE COURT:  When you say it rips DiVXs, what exactly

  16   do you mean?

  17            THE WITNESS:  It creates DiVXs from an MPEG2 stream,

  18   video stream.

  19   Q.  You said on Saturday one of the reasons you chose Eric was

  20   because he also knew something about the piracy underground

  21   and where to get information.  Do you recall that?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  Tell me what Eric knew and tell me why that was relevant

  24   to this inquiry.

  25   A.  Okay.  Of course in the two and a half years that I have




151



   1   known Eric we have engaged in many conversations.  He has

   2   occasionally invited me into his office to say something like,

   3   hey, take a look at this.  And in fact only a few months ago,

   4   before I had heard about this case, he hurriedly called me

   5   into his office and said, what do you think of this?  And I

   6   was watching a video movie, and I asked him at what bit rate

   7   it is required for you to get something of this quality, and

   8   he said 500 kilobits, and I didn't believe it and he explained

   9   to me how it was done, and it was a DiVX.

  10   Q.  Is one of the reasons that you chose Eric was because he

  11   had this background of knowing the underground Internet world,

  12   as it were?

  13   A.  That was one of the reasons.  I had to review all of the

  14   people that I knew that I could engage on a relatively rapid

  15   basis on this project because of the time frame, and Eric was

  16   the ideal one.

  17   Q.  Do you know what a ripper is?

  18   A.  I have heard of it.

  19   Q.  Have you ever used it?

  20   A.  No.

  21   Q.  Do you know how long, has anyone ever told you how long it

  22   takes you utilizing that to make a DVD?

  23   A.  No.

  24   Q.  Do you know if it's ten times as fast as DeCSS?

  25   A.  No.




152



   1   Q.  Have you ever heard of Read DVD?

   2   A.  No.

   3   Q.  Have you ever heard of CSS Cat?

   4   A.  No.

   5   Q.  Have you ever heard of CSS Auth., A-U-T-H?

   6   A.  Not a level where I could say anything about it.  I may

   7   have encountered the word.

   8   Q.  In any event, these things you haven't heard of I presume

   9   you never used?

  10   A.  I presume so too.

  11   Q.  How about CSS Descramble?

  12   A.  No.

  13   Q.  How about something called Anonymous Source, have you ever

  14   heard that term before?

  15   A.  I have heard the term.  I don't know what it means.

  16   Q.  Do you know what the speed of CMU's Internet connection

  17   was two years ago?

  18   A.  I'm assuming that the Internet connection available to me

  19   was probably the same speed that it was two years ago.

  20   Q.  And students?

  21   A.  Students -- everybody at CMU, we have only one gateway to

  22   the outside world, and it's through the Pittsburgh Super

  23   Computer Center, so everybody goes out the same way.

  24   Q.  Would that be the same four years ago both with respect to

  25   CMU Internet speed and LANS?




153



   1   A.  I don't know.

   2   Q.  Now, with respect to these other universities, do you know

   3   whether or not their Internet speeds have changed or their LAN

   4   speeds have changed over the last four years?

   5   A.  The general trend is that people's LAN speeds and people's

   6   Internet speeds are increasing.  I don't have specific

   7   knowledge about other universities.

   8   Q.  Why is it that CMU's is not if everyone else's is

   9   increasing?

  10   A.  The first question you asked me is over the past two

  11   years.  The second question is over the past four years.

  12   Q.  Let's make it over the last two years.  To your knowledge,

  13   isn't it true that LAN speeds and Internet speeds over the

  14   major universities have not changed?

  15   A.  I don't know that.

  16   Q.  Do you know what Northern Lights is?

  17   A.  Northern Light is a search engine.

  18   Q.  Did you ever look on Northern Light to see whether or not

  19   they had mirror codes or any references to DeCSS?

  20   A.  No, HotBot is my default search engine.

  21   Q.  Would it surprise you to learn that there are over 700,000

  22   references on Northern Light?

  23            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  It assumes facts not in

  24   evidence.

  25            THE COURT:  Well, it's cross.  I mean obviously the




154



   1   question is no evidence of the facts.

   2   A.  It would not surprise me to learn that there are 700,000

   3   pages on the web that have the stream DeCSS in them.

   4   Q.  Of those 70,000 pages would it surprise you to learn that

   5   300,000 are mirror sites?

   6            MR. SIMS:  That really does assume facts not in

   7   evidence.

   8            THE COURT:  It depends on what would surprise him.

   9   If it surprises him that pigs fly, it doesn't prove that pigs

  10   fly.

  11   A.  It would surprise me because that number seems huge to me.

  12   Q.  Do you have any idea as you sit here today how many sites

  13   in the United States have DeCSS in object or source code?

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  As you sit here today, do you have any knowledge about how

  16   many sites outside of the United States have DeCSS in object

  17   or source code?

  18   A.  No.  There are at least some.

  19   Q.  By the way, after you went to your HotBot, did it occur to

  20   you to go to any other search engines?

  21   A.  I did actually go to Google, G-O-O-G-L-E.

  22   Q.  Thank you very much.  And what did Google indicate?

  23   A.  Google indicated a large number of sites having pages

  24   containing the stream DeCSS.

  25   Q.  How many pages?




155



   1   A.  I don't know.

   2   Q.  More or less than 10,000?

   3   A.  I don't know.

   4   Q.  Did you go to Yahoo?

   5   A.  No.

   6   Q.  Does AOL have a search engine?

   7   A.  I believe AOL licenses a search engine from outside.  A

   8   search capability is available through AOL.

   9   Q.  Did anyone at the MPAA or at Proskauer ever tell you that

  10   the Disney search engines Infoseek and Go link to mirror sites

  11   of DeCSS and CSS?

  12   A.  No.

  13   Q.  Now, do you know the Internet connection from Carnegie

  14   Mellon University to the Internet?

  15   A.  Well, it depends what you mean.  There is a very fast

  16   connection between CMU and the Pittsburgh Super Computer

  17   Center.  The Pittsburgh Super Computer Center routes through a

  18   number of back bones in the United States.  I am not familiar

  19   with the speeds of those back bones, but in general they are

  20   very high.

  21   Q.  Are they the same that existed two years ago?

  22   A.  I don't know.

  23   Q.  When you say it's very fast --

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  -- do you have any sense of what that is?




156



   1   A.  Well, CMU is an advanced technological university with a

   2   world wide reputation in computer science.  We try to have the

   3   best stuff and as fast communications as we can rationally

   4   afford.

   5   Q.  Isn't it fair to say that CMU is one of the leading

   6   schools in the United States with respect to this entire area

   7   and has one of the best Internet and LAN connections in the

   8   United States?

   9   A.  Yes, but it's by no means unique.

  10   Q.  Getting back to your test again.  After you downloaded

  11   DeCSS -- and as I understand it, from the time you found the

  12   DiVX until you downloaded the DeCSS was about an hour, 30

  13   minutes for each process.

  14   A.  It was between 30 minutes and an hour.  It was about 45,

  15   the total the first time we did it.

  16   Q.  Then you went to the tutorial, is that right?

  17   A.  Wait a minute.  The first thing that we did is to go from

  18   the DVD to run DeCSS to produce the DeCSS version of the DVD.

  19   That was the part that took 45 minutes the first time.

  20   Q.  Right.  Then what happened?

  21   A.  Then we attempted to make the DiVX by going to --

  22   Q.  Was that at the same time, right afterwards or a different

  23   day different time?

  24   A.  It was later the same day.

  25   Q.  Can you tell me what time that was?




157



   1   A.  My recollection is that it was late.

   2   Q.  What time?

   3   A.  Well, approximately 10 o'clock at night.

   4   Q.  So, let me see if I understand.  So at 10 o'clock at night

   5   you and Eric went where to do this?

   6   A.  We didn't go anywhere.  We were where we were.  He was in

   7   his office and I was in my office.

   8   Q.  10 o'clock at night.

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  And had you prior to that time -- what time had you

  11   finished the other process, namely obtaining the DeCSS?

  12   A.  The first Sleepless in Seattle DeCSS was finished in the

  13   afternoon, approximately 5 p.m.

  14   Q.  Let me see.  I think I may be getting confused.

  15            With respect to the first film Sleepless in Seattle,

  16   about what time did you get the DeCSS onto your computer?

  17   A.  About 5 p.m.

  18   Q.  Okay.  And then you started to deal with DiVX at 10

  19   o'clock that night, is that right?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21            (Continued on next page)

  22

  23

  24

  25




158



   1   Q.  And had you and Eric made an appointment to do it at 10

   2   o'clock that night?

   3   A.  No.

   4   Q.  Why didn't you start it at 5 o'clock as soon as you had

   5   DeCSS?

   6   A.  Because we were both busy with many other things going on

   7   at the same time and I had to spend time preparing some

   8   lectures.  I just wasn't available to do it at that time and I

   9   recall that he had to eat.

  10   Q.  So, it's now 10 o'clock at night.  This is Friday night

  11   and where are you?

  12   A.  Again, I don't recall whether it was Friday night.  That

  13   seems inconsistent with the scheduling.  It might have been

  14   Tuesday night.  I'm going to have to check the sales receipt

  15   on the computer.  That will tell us the date that it began.

  16   Q.  Do you have that with you?

  17   A.  No, it's on my mantle in my bedroom at home.

  18   Q.  Now, so let's assume it's 10 o'clock at night now.  It's

  19   you and Eric, is that right?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  Then what happens?

  22   A.  Then what happens is the process of learning how to do

  23   DiVXs begins from FM4.org.

  24   Q.  The process of learning?

  25   A.  Yes.




159



   1   Q.  This was the first time you had ever done it?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  So, you had to learn it?

   4   A.  Well, I certainly had never done it before.

   5   Q.  Had Eric ever done it?

   6   A.  I don't know, but what we wanted to do was to go through

   7   this as if we had done nothing about it, so we wouldn't be

   8   making any implicit use of his expertise.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I presume Eric is out of the room

  10   because he's a potential witness or we think it's a potential

  11   witness, but pending a resolution of that wish, I would hope

  12   that he's not in the room.

  13            MR. SIMS:  I don't know whether he's in the room or

  14   not.

  15            THE COURT:  He's just leaving.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Can I hear the last question, please?

  17            (Record read)

  18   Q.  Let me see if I understand?  So, at this point, you don't

  19   know whether he's done it or not, is that right?

  20   A.  That's right.

  21   Q.  So, it may be that prior to this time, he's done it 30

  22   times or never, is that right?

  23   A.  Yes.

  24            THE COURT:  I think we all know what "don't know" is.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  I sometimes do.




160



   1   Q.  Now, tell me how long did it take you to do the tutorial?

   2   A.  To do the tutorial?  O.K., the process of creating the

   3   DiVX was done in pieces.  There are a number of steps that you

   4   have to remember, as I testified before, using the exhibits.

   5            The most part of the process is merging the audio and

   6   video, which is largely a trial and error process.  The

   7   various steps were broken up.  This wasn't done in 20 hours

   8   consecutively at a time.

   9   Q.  You say it's a trial-and-error process?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  The fact that Eric, whatever expertise -- he brought

  12   whatever expertise he had to this, certainly made the trial

  13   faster and the errors fewer, is that right?

  14   A.  Assuming he brought relevant expertise, which I don't

  15   know.

  16   Q.  Now, did you also, as you were going through this, learn

  17   something about the tutorial?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  And how long were you on the tutorial?

  20   A.  The tutorial can be read in easily within 15 minutes.

  21   Q.  And you and Eric were both there reading it?

  22   A.  I read pieces of it with him and sat there with him while

  23   we were engaging in some of the steps.  Others, I went off to

  24   my own office and read.

  25   Q.  It would be very helpful if you could just tell me when




161



   1   "we" means you and Eric or "he" means you and Eric, or

   2   whatever.  Tell me when you're there and where Eric is there.

   3   A.  O.K., of the 20-hour process, my participation in it was

   4   heavy at the beginning and sporadic thereafter until it was

   5   completed.

   6   Q.  So, it's now 10 o'clock.  You had gone through the

   7   tutorial, then what happens?

   8   A.  We began the initial steps together.  We did not complete

   9   the final steps together.  Eric did that.

  10   Q.  Now, you say there are difficulties in synchronization?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  And tell me what those difficulties are?

  13   A.  The difficulties are that after applying the tools that

  14   are listed on FM4, you end up with a separate audio track and

  15   a separate video track.

  16            The audio track and video track have to be

  17   synchronized together so that when people are speaking, the

  18   sounds correspond to the movement of their mouths.  There a

  19   are apparently many effects that occur that make it difficult

  20   to cause the synchronization to happen.  In fact, there may

  21   even apparently be some DVDs that one can DiVX properly

  22   because you can't get the synchronization error.

  23            In the particular case of Sleepless in Seattle, we

  24   believe it had to do with the difference in frame rate between

  25   the trailer and the movie proper.




162



   1   Q.  So, if you can't do that synchronization with respect to

   2   the -- with respect to the DiVX, that means with respect to

   3   certain films, that means DeCSS is useless with respect to

   4   certain films?

   5   A.  No, I don't say that.  Because it's not my understanding

   6   that following the steps from FM4 is the only way to create a

   7   DiVX from a DeCSS DVD.

   8   Q.  To your knowledge then how long -- by the way, had you

   9   ever -- I presume you had never prior to this time attempted

  10   the synchronization process?

  11   A.  No, I never have.

  12   Q.  To your knowledge, had he ever attempted synchronization

  13   process?

  14   A.  I think he had.

  15   Q.  And how many times had he done that?

  16   A.  I don't know.

  17   Q.  So, he was somewhat expert at it?

  18   A.  I'm not sure that it would be right to say he was expert

  19   at it.  He may have had relevant expertise and may have done

  20   it sometimes.  I don't know how many times.  He's generally

  21   familiar with the problem of synching audio and video, that is

  22   true.

  23   Q.  And do you have reason to believe that without Eric, you

  24   would have been able to do the synchronization?

  25   A.  I believe I would have been able to do it.




163



   1   Q.  And how long would you think -- withdrawn.

   2            How long did the synchronization process take?

   3   A.  About 10 out of the 20 hours.

   4   Q.  And tell me what's involved in that process.

   5   A.  What one has to do is run some tools, try out the result,

   6   pick various pieces of sound track and try and match them up

   7   with the video track, merge them together, take a look after

   8   them, see if they are in ink.  If they aren't, go back, make

   9   an adjustment, do it again.  That's what I meant by "trial and

  10   error."

  11   Q.  Would you agree with me that that's very tough stuff?

  12   A.  It is not fun.

  13   Q.  Not only not fun, it's very, very difficult; isn't it?

  14   A.  Well, very, very difficult is relative.  It's a lot easier

  15   than making the movie in the first place.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you very much.

  17   Q.  Now, when he was trying to do this for the 10 hours -- by

  18   the way, the synchronization process, if you do DVD rip, do

  19   you have to do that?

  20   A.  I don't know.

  21   Q.  If you do DVD ripper, do you have to do that?

  22   A.  In general, the result is separate audio and video stream,

  23   then you have to synchronize them.  If the result is something

  24   else, then you don't.

  25   Q.  Now, with respect to this 10 hours that he was there, how




164



   1   much of that time were you there?

   2   A.  I wasn't there during that 10 hours.

   3   Q.  So, you start at 10:00 o'clock at night, I gather he's

   4   working until -- let's say 10 hours would mean 8 in the

   5   morning, is that right?

   6   A.  No, no.  I think I testified that the various pieces of

   7   creating the DiVX'd were done in separate chunks.  They were

   8   not done 20 hours consecutively.

   9   Q.  So, it's 10 o'clock some night, let's say either Tuesday

  10   or Friday.  Let's call it X night.  Then when we go -- let's

  11   call it night No. 1.  Is that all right?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  Now, let's go to day No. 2.

  14   A.  Yes.

  15   Q.  Tell me what happens.

  16   A.  I don't recall.  I don't -- there were so many things were

  17   going on at the same time, I don't remember the different

  18   times that I stopped in to Eric's office to find out what

  19   particular step was in process at that time.  I can't put that

  20   together for you.

  21   Q.  So, but on day 2, I'm just having trouble.  It's 10

  22   o'clock at night.  At some time, do you leave that office or

  23   does he leave that office?

  24   A.  It was done in his office, so you would be the one to

  25   leave.




165



   1   Q.  So, he's there at 10 o'clock on night on day 1.  What time

   2   does he leave the office?

   3   A.  I don't know.

   4   Q.  Are there any notes that are made about when he leaves the

   5   office?

   6   A.  I don't have any.  It's possible that he might, but I

   7   doubt it.

   8   Q.  So, after he leaves the office, then what happens?  Do you

   9   see him the next day?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  And what time on day 2 do you see him?

  12   A.  I don't recall.

  13   Q.  And when you see him, has he gone through this 10-hour

  14   process?

  15   A.  No, there are still more steps to do.

  16   Q.  How much has he done the first time that you see him?

  17   A.  My recollection is that when I saw him, I said, how is it

  18   going?  He said, it's going fine.  I said, is it done?  No,

  19   there's a lot to do yet.

  20            My involvement during this process was largely

  21   getting and cajoling and making sure that he was actually

  22   working on it and getting toward a conclusion.

  23   Q.  And when did he have the conclusion of the

  24   synchronization?

  25   A.  I don't recall that either.  However, we can probably




166



   1   reconstruct it easily because the -- it was right after he

   2   completed it when we attempted to the trade with eaRoSoL.

   3   Q.  And when is that?

   4   A.  So, now I see from the declaration that the log of that is

   5   Tuesday, June 27th.  So, the Fridays that we are talking about

   6   were the week prior to the start of the July 4th weekend.

   7   Q.  So that Tuesday, July 27th, that's day 1?

   8   A.  No, Tuesday July 27th is when we engage in the Internet

   9   relay chat to try to trade the DiVX.  We couldn't trade the

  10   DiVX until we had the DiVX, so it was done by then.

  11   Q.  So, it's June 27th that you're starting to do the chat, is

  12   that right?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  Now, how do you know that it took 10 hours from 10:00 p.m.

  15   the night before to the time you do the chat to do the DiVX'd?

  16   A.  I asked Eric how long it took him to do the

  17   synchronization, how much of the 20 hours he spent.  He said,

  18   10 hours.

  19   Q.  And you never saw how many hours he spent at what time or

  20   anything like that?

  21   A.  No.

  22   Q.  And you never asked him for any report, is that right?

  23   A.  I certainly never asked him for any written report.  I

  24   certainly asked him to narrate to me the steps that he took.

  25   Q.  Did you know that you were being asked to prepare this




167



   1   information for the purposes of filing an affidavit in court?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  Did you know that you were being asked to prepare this

   4   information for the purpose of testifying in court?

   5   A.  I assumed I would be called to testify.

   6   Q.  Did anybody at the Proskauer firm suggest to you that you

   7   keep time sheets?

   8   A.  No.

   9   Q.  Did anybody at the Proskauer firm suggest to you that you

  10   use Eric or was that your idea?

  11   A.  They didn't know Eric.  It was completely my idea.

  12   Q.  When for the first time did they learn that your assistant

  13   or associate had participated in this test?

  14   A.  O.K., I think that when Mr. Hart gave me an outline of

  15   what he wanted us -- what he wanted me to do, I said, I'm

  16   going to have to engage an assistant to do this.  And he said,

  17   O.K.

  18   Q.  He didn't say, keep any records?

  19   A.  Yes.

  20   Q.  Of the experiment?

  21   A.  No.

  22   Q.  So, with respect to whether it's 10 hours, 20 hours or 60

  23   hours, all that we have is either your word or your

  24   assistant's words?

  25   A.  That's right, along with individual pieces of documentary




168



   1   evidence like the IRC log.

   2   Q.  Now, with respect to the IRC log, is the entire log here?

   3   A.  No, I've testified already about exactly how this log

   4   differed from the other log in the creation of this log and

   5   the addition, subtraction of the single first line on this.

   6   Q.  Where is the rest of the log?

   7            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  The witness' testimony is

   8   clear.  This is the entire log that was transcribed with

   9   respect to the Matrix.

  10            THE COURT:  Is that right, Mr.  -- Dr. Shamos?

  11            THE WITNESS:  O.K., there are two logs.  There's a

  12   log of the initiation of the IRC session when there are a

  13   bunch of people, more than two people in the chat room

  14   talking, then after you engage with a single person, there's a

  15   separate log of the so-called private conversation that takes

  16   place.  This is the complete log of the private conversation.

  17   Q.  And where -- and is there another log of the other

  18   conversation?

  19   A.  I believe there is.

  20   Q.  And where is that?

  21   A.  If it exists, it would be on the laptop.

  22   Q.  Would you please produce it?

  23            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, at lunchtime, we provided

  24   that.  We showed that log to Mr. Hernstadt at least in part.

  25   We made arrangements.  It contains some items relevant to




169



   1   other matters other than this lawsuit and this engagement and

   2   we made arrangements to make it available with those excisions

   3   after we leave today.

   4            THE COURT:  All right.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I'm sorry.  I wasn't part of that

   6   conversation.  Which excisions?

   7            MR. SIMS:  The ones that have nothing to do with this

   8   lawsuit and an engagement by Proskauer.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I would ask that those documents be

  10   given to the Court and the Court make the determination about

  11   whether or not we are entitled to see it.

  12            THE COURT:  I'm going to accept the representation

  13   unless I see some reason not to.

  14   Q.  Now, after the first 10 hours, then what happens?

  15   A.  Well, the first 10 hours of the DiVX'ing process takes us

  16   up to the point where the multiplexing needs to occur and

  17   that's where the trial-and-error part of that process begins.

  18   Q.  On the log that we have which is in your exhibit there is

  19   certain information redacted.

  20   A.  The log of what?

  21   Q.  It's the log which is attached to your affidavit.

  22            THE COURT:  What exhibit are you referring to,

  23   Counsel?

  24            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, as you've seen, the exhibit

  25   that we moved into evidence has no redactions.




170



   1            THE COURT:  115A is what I understand we have been

   2   discussing as "the log."

   3            MR. GARBUS:  The affidavit that we had originally

   4   been given had redactions, I gather, of the exhibit.

   5            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, Mr. Garbus has had the

   6   unredacted copy more than a week.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Pardon me?

   8            THE COURT:  Look, I really don't have to have any of

   9   this.  Mr. Garbus, rather graciously acknowledged that he was

  10   looking at the wrong piece of paper and I don't need any of

  11   this.

  12   Q.  Let me show you Defendant's Exhibit BBH and at page --

  13            MR. SIMS:  May I have a copy?

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Pardon me?

  15            MR. SIMS:  May I have a copy?

  16            THE COURT:  I would like a copy too, Mr. Garbus.

  17            Thank you.

  18   Q.  And the first sentence VaioBoy, "Anybody have any DiVX's

  19   to trade for Sleepless in Seattle?"

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  Did that come off a log?

  22   A.  No, I explain that in deposition and earlier in testimony

  23   today.

  24   Q.  So, in other words, you typed that in, although it wasn't

  25   there originally in the log, is that right?




171



   1   A.  That's correct.

   2   Q.  And why did you do that?

   3   A.  I typed it in because Eric told me that's what the

   4   statement that he made on IRC chat and it was necessary to

   5   make the log make sense.

   6   Q.  Now, did you in your declaration indicate that any part of

   7   the log had been typed in and did not reflect what the log

   8   itself was?

   9   A.  No.

  10   Q.  When you spoke to Mr. Hart, did you and he discuss whether

  11   or not that was an accurate transcript --

  12   A.  No --

  13   Q.  -- of the log?

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  Did Mr. Hart know that that first sentence in the log did

  16   not appear in the log?

  17   A.  I don't believe he knew that.

  18   Q.  So, now we are into -- we have synchronized it and then

  19   what happens?

  20   A.  We play it to verify that it's synchronized and then we

  21   are ready to trade.

  22   Q.  Who's the "we"?

  23   A.  Eric and I, because he, after he was done, he was

  24   naturally excited to tell me so and he came and got me in my

  25   office and we looked at the result, the DiVX'd.




172



   1   Q.  He was excited because he achieved something that was very

   2   difficult?

   3   A.  I don't know why he was excited.  I presume he was excited

   4   because he knew he had achieved the result that we were after.

   5   Q.  And what was the result you were after?

   6   A.  A DiVX'd of a decrypted DVD.

   7   Q.  And at that time, do you know whether or not that had

   8   originally -- withdrawn.

   9            So, what time are we now on, day 2?

  10   A.  As I say, I don't recall.

  11   Q.  And after he tells you he synchronized it, that took 10

  12   hours, and then what happens?

  13   A.  Then it's time to trade with whoever we can get to trade

  14   another DiVX for ours.

  15   Q.  And what time do you start to trade?

  16   A.  Approximately between 11 and midnight.

  17   Q.  11 and midnight during the time when -- I won't belabor

  18   it -- school is out?

  19            THE COURT:  I got it the first time, Mr. Garbus.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I just wanted to know it's out every

  21   day.

  22   Q.  So, it's 11 o'clock at night and we have Eric sitting in

  23   his office?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  And where are you?




173



   1   A.  I'm in his office.

   2   Q.  And then what happens?

   3   A.  He says, I'm going to try to find somebody we can trade

   4   with.  He goes off and does so.  I come back a little while

   5   later while he's in the middle of this chat session.  I was

   6   fascinated by the dialogue.

   7   Q.  Can I ask you something, just so I get it clear.  So, the

   8   trading then is four days after all this starts?

   9   A.  As I say, I have to check the record of when we purchased

  10   the computer to know on the date on which this starts.

  11   Q.  But is it your best memory now that it takes from the time

  12   you purchase the computer to the time you start trading the

  13   four days?

  14   A.  It's not my best recollection.  It isn't my recollection.

  15   It's possible that it was.  But it did not involve continuous

  16   work because both of us had many other things to do at the

  17   same time.

  18   Q.  Now, so you start trading at 11 o'clock at night?

  19   A.  Yes.

  20   Q.  Then what happens?

  21   A.  Well, after Eric made the deal with eaRoSoL to do the

  22   trading, he initiated the simultaneous upload and download and

  23   I repaired to my office to finish up some work.

  24   Q.  Do you know the speed of the eaRoSoL connection?

  25   A.  We don't know the speed of the connection.  We have




174



   1   surmised about the speed of the connection.  We know the speed

   2   that was actually achieved during the transfer.

   3   Q.  Now, let me ask the question again.  Do you know the speed

   4   of the connection?

   5   A.  No.

   6            THE COURT:  He said no.

   7   Q.  Do you know to what extent the theoretical capacity of the

   8   speed was utilized?

   9   A.  From our surmise, we believe it was approximately a third.

  10   Q.  And this is at -- were you there while the conversation

  11   was going on on the chat room?

  12   A.  Yes, for part of it.

  13   Q.  For how long did it go on in the chat room?

  14   A.  Oh, it was reasonably short time.

  15   Q.  How long?

  16   A.  I don't know.  I wasn't there for the entire time.  I

  17   stayed for a few minutes of it and was interested in the

  18   VaioBoy handle and some of the language that was being used in

  19   the transcript.

  20   Q.  Do you recall testifying at your deposition?

  21            THE COURT:  Excuse me, Mr. Garbus.  Before you ask

  22   that question.

  23            The log, what you've identified as the log,

  24   Plaintiff's Exhibit 115A says:  Start time:  2315.  Session

  25   closed:  2342.  Would I be wrong in concluding that the




175



   1   duration of the dialogue was 27 minutes or can you not tell

   2   that from this?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I would ask Mr. Shamos.

   4            THE COURT:  I'm asking the witness, Dr. Shamos.

   5            THE WITNESS:  Oh, yes, the times in the log have not

   6   been altered.

   7            THE COURT:  That wasn't the question.

   8            THE WITNESS:  You would be correct in presuming that

   9   that was the duration of the chat.

  10            THE COURT:  O.K.  Go ahead.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  As I recall, this Court has rules about

  12   with respect to reading from deposition?

  13            THE COURT:  Yes.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  You're not supposed to say, you're just

  15   supposed to read the question?

  16            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

  17   BY MR. GARBUS:

  18   Q.  You just said you were there at the IRC conversation for a

  19   while.  Page 245:  "When did you leave?  Were you there for

  20   any of the IRC conversations?"

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, for the reporter's sanity,

  22   when you do read, read the "Q" and read the "A" so she knows

  23   when; you're quoting.

  24   Q.  Page 245:

  25            "Q.    When did you leave?"




176



   1            Line No. 11, my colleagues --

   2            "Q.    When did you leave?  Were you there for any of

   3   the IRC conversations?

   4            "A.    No."

   5   Q.  Do you recall giving that answer back on July 16th which I

   6   think was yesterday?

   7   A.  I don't recall giving that answer.  I must have misspoke.

   8   Q.  When?  Yesterday or today?

   9   A.  Yesterday.

  10   Q.  Now, had you ever been on an IRC chat room before?

  11   A.  No.

  12   Q.  So, is it fair to say that without Eric, you wouldn't have

  13   known how to get on an IRC chat room?

  14   A.  Without Eric, I would not have known how to do it without

  15   further research.

  16   Q.  And what kind of research would you undertake to learn?

  17   A.  I would have gone to a search engine, typed IRC or

  18   Internet relay chat, probably within the first page of hits, I

  19   would have found a tutorial on how to do it.

  20   Q.  Now, do you know how Eric found a person to trade with?

  21   A.  I've asked him how he did it and he's told me, so I

  22   believe I know.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  Judge, what I'm told, and I don't know

  24   whether this is so or not, but the exhibit that we have is not

  25   the entire log, so that the times that you're referring to in




177



   1   the exhibit do not refer to the entire IRC conversation.

   2            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor?

   3            THE COURT:  I think the witness has made abundantly

   4   clear that there are two logs.  That the one that we have here

   5   is the entire unaltered log of that part of the conversation

   6   that took place privately between eaRoSoL and VaioBoy and that

   7   that was preceded by a dialogue that occurred on the chat room

   8   that was visible to the public and we do not here have a

   9   transcript or log of the public session.

  10            That's what I understand to be the fact.  Now, do I

  11   have it right, Dr. Shamos?

  12            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

  13   BY MR. GARBUS:

  14   Q.  And we don't know how much time the public session took,

  15   is that right?

  16   A.  I know how long Eric told me it took.

  17   Q.  Are there any notes indicating how long Eric told you it

  18   took?

  19   A.  Well, I've thought the log had been provided to you.

  20   Q.  Now, once you started the trade, how long did that then

  21   take?

  22   A.  The trade took approximately six hours.

  23   Q.  And are there any records of that?

  24   A.  It's possible that we might be able to go back to the

  25   director on a hard disk and find the date of creation of the




178



   1   relevant files.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I would like that hard disk, sir.

   3   Perhaps you can bring it in tomorrow morning.

   4   Q.  Now, let me ask you this --

   5            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, that's an application to be

   6   made to the Court and to be made later.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I apologize.  I apologize.  I apologize.

   8   I'm told by Mr. Hernstadt that --

   9   Q.  Now, I guess what I have trouble understanding is by the

  10   way, how many other cases have you testified in?

  11   A.  Between five and ten.

  12   Q.  And these are cases where you've actually got on the stand

  13   and testified as a witness?

  14   A.  I either testified on the stand as a witness or was

  15   deposed.

  16   Q.  And how many other cases were you retained where you did

  17   not testify?

  18   A.  I don't recall, but it's a small number, possibly two.

  19   Q.  And haven't attorneys, when they have retained you, told

  20   you to keep records of what you've done in case you testify in

  21   a courtroom?

  22   A.  It has never happened.

  23   Q.  No one has ever told you to keep a record of any

  24   experiment you've ever done?

  25   A.  That's right.




179



   1   Q.  When you do experiments for the university, do you keep

   2   records of that?

   3   A.  That presumes that I do experiments for the university.

   4   Q.  Do you?

   5   A.  I don't do what you would refer to as "experiments."

   6   Q.  Now, sir, what time then does that whole process finish,

   7   about 6 in the morning?

   8   A.  Something like that.

   9   Q.  And did there come a time, by the way, when you watch the

  10   film that you have traded for?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  And when is that?

  13   A.  I believe I watched it either soon after its completion,

  14   either right that night or after I had gotten some sleep.

  15   Q.  And you're in your office, I gather, that night from what

  16   is it, 11 to 6?

  17   A.  No, I suspect that I -- as I say, I don't have a specific

  18   recollection, but it sounds like the kind of time that I would

  19   have left, about 4.

  20   Q.  About 4?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  That you would have left about 4?

  23   A.  Yes.

  24   Q.  And did you bill Proskauer for your time, those five

  25   hours?




180



   1   A.  Well, I'm sure I billed -- I will be billing Proskauer for

   2   more than five hours that day.

   3   Q.  No, no.  The five hours that you were in your office from

   4   11 to 5 while Mr. Burn was down -- was trading film?

   5   A.  If I was working on this case, then I would be billing

   6   them for that.  If I was working on other material, I wouldn't

   7   be billing them for it.

   8   Q.  Do you have time sheets with you here today?

   9   A.  No.

  10   Q.  Did we ask you for time sheets Saturday?

  11   A.  Yes, I was unable to locate them because they're on a

  12   computer that I can't access from here.

  13   Q.  Did you make an attempt to access that computer?

  14   A.  Yes.

  15   Q.  Didn't you tell us that Mr. Burns would bring that

  16   computer when he came here Tuesday?

  17   A.  No, I did not say that.

  18   Q.  Don't you recall a conversation where we asked you to

  19   produce the computer?

  20   A.  Yes -- it's computer?  No.  You didn't ask me to produce

  21   the computer.  The computer is a desk top that's sitting in my

  22   office at CMU.

  23            I thought at the time that the file in question might

  24   have been on my home computer, in which case, I might have a

  25   CD-ROM backup of it with me and be able to obtain the file.




181



   1   It's unfortunately on my office computer.

   2   Q.  Now, for these three days, let's say from the time you

   3   bought the computer until the time this process ends, how many

   4   hours did you bill Proskauer?

   5   A.  I haven't billed Proskauer for any hours yet.  What I do

   6   is I write down the number of hours I spend on each day on a

   7   particular matter and what I do for that time, I don't write

   8   it down by time of day.

   9   Q.  And where are those records?

  10   A.  The place I precisely told you just now.  They're on a

  11   file on the computer in my office at CMU.

  12   Q.  Now, would that file in any way indicate what you did

  13   when?

  14   A.  No, it would indicate what I did.  It wouldn't indicate

  15   what I did when and there's not a high degree of specificity

  16   to it.

  17            THE COURT:  Kind of like lawyers' diaries.

  18   Q.  And how much did you charge, if anything, for the time

  19   that of your colleague?

  20   A.  I'm charging $100 an hour for the time of my colleague.

  21   Q.  What is he being paid?

  22   A.  $100 an hour.

  23   Q.  How much time has he put in?

  24   A.  I don't know.

  25   Q.  Now, so you viewed the film on what, day 4?




182



   1   A.  I don't actually know when we started counting days, but

   2   I'm viewing the film on the 28th of July.

   3   Q.  Of June?

   4   A.  June, June.

   5   Q.  And where are you when you're viewing it?

   6   A.  In Eric's office at CMU looking at the Sony laptop that we

   7   viewed today.

   8   Q.  And when is this?

   9   A.  I don't recall the time of day.  As I say, I presume it

  10   was either very late at night or early the very next morning.

  11   Q.  We are talking about the viewing?

  12   A.  Yes, the viewing, I wanted to view it as soon as it was

  13   produced.

  14   Q.  And what is your best recollection as to what time you're

  15   viewing this film, if you have any?

  16   A.  I don't have a better recollection than I've given you.

  17   Q.  Now, you mentioned going off to Hawaii?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  And is that the time that Eric does the other test?

  20   A.  I'm not sure what you mean by "the other test."

  21   Q.  Was there another film that Eric tried to apply DiVX do?

  22   A.  I believe Eric tried to apply -- tried to DiVX The Fight

  23   Club.

  24   Q.  And when was that?

  25   A.  I don't know.




183



   1   Q.  And what happened?

   2   A.  He was not successful.

   3   Q.  Did he do that at your direction?

   4   A.  No.

   5   Q.  Now, you say he was not successful.  Tell me what

   6   happened.

   7   A.  Well, I wasn't -- I wasn't in.  I can give you what he's

   8   told me that DeCSS doesn't work on The Fight Club.

   9   Q.  And why doesn't DeCSS work on The Fight Club?

  10   A.  I don't know.

  11   Q.  Did you try and make determination as to why it doesn't

  12   work?

  13   A.  No.

  14   Q.  By the way, do you know that DeCSS doesn't work on any

  15   Disney films?

  16   A.  I don't know that.

  17   Q.  Have you ever heard of that before?

  18   A.  I've heard that it doesn't work on The Jungle Book.

  19   Q.  And do you know why that is?

  20   A.  No, I have surmised, but I don't know.

  21   Q.  Now, again let me get it straight.  So, we have used the

  22   compression techniques, the DiVX, let's say for Sleepless in

  23   Seattle.  When does Eric next use a compression technique, is

  24   that when you're in Hawaii?

  25   A.  I don't know, because the only things that I've testified




184



   1   to are the things in my declaration.  Anything he's done=20

   2   subsequent to that don't appear in my declaration which was=20

   3   submitted prior to my going to Hawaii.

   4   Q.  But you know he failed let's say on the DiVX'd.  Do you

   5   know what movie he was trying to compress?

   6   A.  He was trying to go -- he was trying to deal with The

   7   Fight Club.  He was unable to do it.  I don't know why he did

   8   it, other than it sounds like a very intelligent experiment to

   9   me.

  10   Q.  Do you know if he tried to use DeCSS?

  11   A.  I believe he did.

  12   Q.  And did you ever ask him -- he was here today.  Did you

  13   ever ask him why he couldn't use DeCSS to make a copy of The

  14   Fight Club?

  15   A.  I did ask him.

  16   Q.  And what did he say?

  17   A.  He said, I don't know.

  18   Q.  Do you know how long he spent trying to make a copy of The

  19   Fight Club?

  20   A.  No, I don't know.

  21   Q.  30 hours?  50 hours?

  22            THE COURT:  We know what "don't know" means.

  23            Next question?

  24   Q.  Do you know if he made any memos or notes?

  25   A.  I don't know.




185



   1   Q.  Did you ever tell anybody at Proskauer that you could not

   2   use DeCSS to make a copy of The Fight Club?

   3   A.  I don't recall.  It's logical that I would have, but I

   4   don't specifically recall doing that.

   5   Q.  And do you know as you stand here today any other

   6   individuals who have tried to use DeCSS and failed?

   7   A.  Do I know them personally?  I have anecdotal evidence that

   8   they exist.  I don't know any of them personally.

   9   Q.  And you say you have anecdotal evidence that other people

  10   have tried DeCSS and it does not work, is that right?

  11   A.  On specific films; yes.

  12   Q.  Which specific films?

  13   A.  As I said, The Jungle Book.

  14   Q.  That's the only one?

  15   A.  It's the only one I know of.

  16   Q.  Has anyone ever told you that it works on any particular

  17   film other than the ones you tried it on?

  18   A.  DeCSS specifically?

  19   Q.  Yes.

  20   A.  No human being has told me that.

  21   Q.  Going through Exhibit 116B, which is the list of all of

  22   the films that you saw, do you know whether DeCSS can be used

  23   for any one of them?

  24   A.  I think Sleepless in Seattle is on the list, so.

  25   Q.  Other than that?




186



   1   A.  No.  I know it's alleged to have been used by the people

   2   who supposedly did it, but I don't know that it was done that

   3   way.

   4   Q.  Thank you very much.

   5            Now, when you say it was alleged to have been used,

   6   do you know if the MPA ever tried to contact any of these

   7   people who ever said they used DeCSS?

   8            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, if we have to go through this

   9   stuff -- examination twice, we'll really be here for a long

  10   time.

  11            THE COURT:  And your point is what?

  12            MR. SIMS:  Asked and answered.  He asked that

  13   question and it was answered.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think I asked that question, not

  15   that question.

  16            THE COURT:  I don't think precisely that way.

  17            Overruled.

  18   A.  No, I don't know.

  19   Q.  Are you an expert on security systems?

  20   A.  I wonder if you could make more precise what you mean by

  21   "security systems."

  22   Q.  Security systems for computer technologists, code CSS,

  23   water marks?

  24   A.  I'm an expert to the extent that I follow the field and I

  25   give lectures on the topic.  I'm not an expert to the extent




187



   1   that I do active forefront research in that area.

   2   Q.  Now, did you at any time ask anybody at Proskauer or the

   3   MPA what they did after they first learned that there were

   4   cracks in CSS in 1997?  I know you learned it later on, but

   5   when you learned it, did you ever ask anybody at Proskauer or

   6   the MPA:  Why didn't you do anything for two years when you

   7   knew there were cracks?

   8            MR. SIMS:  Objection.

   9            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  10   Q.  Any conversation like that?

  11            MR. SIMS:  Objection.

  12            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  13   Q.  Would you agree that the DiVX version of the Matrix you

  14   saw is darker than the original DVD?

  15   A.  It didn't seem that way to me.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  The Court, I'm sure, will see it and

  17   form its own conclusion.

  18   Q.  With respect to computer connections, can we agree that

  19   the transfer rate is limited by the slowest part of the entire

  20   connection?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  So, even if you have the fastest Internet available, if

  23   your connection to the Internet is slow, the transfer rate is

  24   slow, is that correct?

  25   A.  Yes.




188



   1   Q.  Do you know anything about the difference in the loads at

   2   Carnegie during particular hours?

   3   A.  I can describe generally the factors that would contribute

   4   to there being differences.  I don't know numerical statistic

   5   on what the loads are.

   6   Q.  Now, you talked about this 20-minute transfer?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  Is it fair to say if 10 students were doing it at the same

   9   time on the same Internet to the same machine that that

  10   transfer would take more than three hours?

  11   A.  O.K.  The transfer that involved 20 minutes did not

  12   involve the Internet.  That was purely done internally at CMU.

  13   Q.  And how many people were on that connection at that time?

  14   A.  I don't know.  We were receiving a third of the available

  15   bandwidth.

  16   Q.  Do you know if anybody else was on it?

  17   A.  I presume that they were or we would have gotten more than

  18   of the bandwidth.

  19   Q.  You've never traded a DiVX'd with anyone ever found

  20   through iSONEWS, is that right?

  21   A.  That's right.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I think I may be through.  Just a

  23   moment, your Honor.

  24            (Pause)

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Just a few questions.




189



   1   Q.  How much time did it take to install Windows and redo the

   2   first steps of the experiment?

   3   A.  The installation of Windows was relatively rapid.  Eric

   4   has done that numerous times.  The redo of all the initial

   5   steps took about half the time the second time as it did the

   6   first time.

   7   Q.  Did you use CMU's Windows, is that right?

   8   A.  Yes.

   9   Q.  And wasn't that in violation of CMU's regulations by which

  10   you're not allowed to do that for your own private use?

  11   A.  I don't know.  I don't necessarily regard this as my own

  12   private use.

  13   Q.  Isn't it a violation of Carnegie-Mellon's rules for you to

  14   do this for Proskauer's use?

  15   A.  I don't believe so.  Faculty frequently consult are

  16   encouraged and some departments required to consult.  They are

  17   able to use the facilities provided for them by CMU seemingly

  18   without any violation of university policy.

  19   Q.  Have you ever seen the site license of Carnegie-Mellon?

  20   A.  I have seen site licenses at vary times in my career at

  21   Carnegie-Mellon.  I haven't seen it for Windows.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  We'll have Mr. Teretsky from

  23   Carnegie-Mellon in a few days.

  24            That's all for now.

  25            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Any redirect?




190



   1            MR. SIMS:  Yes, your Honor.

   2   REDIRECT EXAMINATION

   3   BY MR. SIMS:

   4   Q.  Dr. Shamos, just so we are clear, the session of your

   5   experiment that dealt with DeCSS'ing Sleepless in Seattle, did

   6   that require -- did that depend on the amount of traffic going

   7   on in the land at CMU at that time?

   8   A.  No, the DeCSS'ing process is done completely locally on

   9   the client machine, in this case the Sony laptop.  In fact, my

  10   recollection is that the connection to the land was even

  11   disconnected during the time after we had obtained the

  12   necessary software, but it didn't use any land connection.

  13   Q.  And would traffic on the land affect in any way the DiVX

  14   processing time that you recorded on?

  15   A.  No, once all the tools obtained to do it, that is again a

  16   legal process on the client.

  17   Q.  Now, once a DeCSS'd DiVX'd copy of a motion picture had

  18   been created, is it available for transfer for the next 20

  19   years regardless of whether it was made at night or during the

  20   day?

  21   A.  Presumably there isn't some technological revolution of

  22   that would obsolete the format on which it started.  Yes, it

  23   is available until such revolution.

  24   Q.  Do you know whether the traffic on the land of CMU is

  25   greater or lesser from 6 to midnight than it is during the




191



   1   day?

   2   A.  I don't.  The population of users who use it and what they

   3   do with it changes at the various times during the day.

   4   Students are in class during the day, but they're in their

   5   dorm rooms at night.  That's when they use it.

   6            Faculty is in their offices during the day and often

   7   at home at night, and so the office use is lower at night.

   8            MR. SIMS:  Nothing else, your Honor.

   9            THE COURT:  All right.

  10            Thank you.  Anything further for this witness, Mr.

  11   Garbus?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, we had made a motion to

  13   exclude him as an expert.  Given the fact that this is a

  14   non-jury trial, I suppose we can wait for another time to

  15   discuss that.

  16            THE COURT:  Yes, I think so.

  17            All right, anything further?

  18            MR. SIMS:  Nothing further.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  Nothing -- the only thing is we worked

  20   out a practice I think last week, your Honor, that in order to

  21   avoid unnecessary cross-examination, we could just put in

  22   deposition testimony and appropriately designated and they

  23   could object and we could object and you can -- so, we will

  24   then put in -- we've just -- we haven't yet gotten it all.  We

  25   will designate --




192



   1            THE COURT:  That's fine.

   2            The witness is excused.

   3            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, just so we are clear, that was

   4   not an arrangement we made.

   5            THE COURT:  No.  That's what Mr. Garbus asked for

   6   that and I said it was fine.  There was really no sense with

   7   100 people sitting in the courtroom listening to somebody read

   8   what I can sit down and read.  We could have gotten the phone

   9   book, too.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  I think there are two open issues unless

  11   I can raise them.

  12            THE COURT:  The two I have on my list is Mr.

  13   Stevenson and Mr. Garbus.  Let's take up Mr. Stevenson first.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  We have him here.  He had been involved

  15   in this early on.  They have reports of his.  He has submitted

  16   an affidavit.  We had put him on the witness list.  We are

  17   prepared to give him, as they requested, an hour's deposition

  18   and have him testify out of turn tomorrow.

  19            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, as you may recall --

  20            THE COURT:  Before you go, Mr. Sims, give me a short

  21   offer of proof, I mean short, from Mr. Stevenson just so I

  22   know what we are talking about.

  23            MR. HERNSTADT:  Mr. Stevenson is a computer

  24   program -- he's an expert in source code and object code.

  25   He's an enthusiast who was the first person who wrote the




193



   1   crypt analysis.  I would call him an expert in photography as

   2   well, he did the crypt analysis.

   3            THE COURT:  And in substance, what is he going to

   4   tell me?

   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  He's going to tell you how difficult

   6   it is to break the CSS code.  He's going to talk about the

   7   connection between the CSS and Linux.  He's going to talk

   8   about the assets and open source of the DVD player.  He's

   9   going to talk about --

  10            (Continued on next page)

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




194



   1            THE COURT:  There is no disagreement that there is no

   2   open source DVD player.  Is there a disagreement about that?

   3            MR. SIMS:  There are in fact licenses which have been

   4   granted, and people are undertaking to create them.  They have

   5   licenses, but there is no dispute that there is not one

   6   available for purchase at any store in Manhattan.

   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  In fact that's incorrect.  There are

   8   closed source licenses that have been granted to a couple of

   9   people who are attempting to develop a Linux DVD player, but

  10   it's my understanding that under no circumstances will persons

  11   developing a closed source DVD player be permitted to release

  12   the source, so other people can take that DVD player as it's

  13   normally done in the community.

  14            THE COURT:  That piece of it is an object of

  15   controversy.  Mr. Sims like most good lawyers has a lot of

  16   trouble just saying yes to something the other side proposes.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  May I interfere?

  18            THE COURT:  Yes.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  One of the issues in the case, and your

  20   Honor has mentioned this, is why was DeCCS created, was it

  21   created as a tool for pirates or was it created for the Linux

  22   system.  And I think that your Honor will make his own

  23   determination clearly about whether or not that's relevant to

  24   the circumvention under 1201, but what Mr. Stevenson can

  25   testify to, since he was involved in the work in creating the




195



   1   DeCSS so that the Linux people could have an open source

   2   system, he could also testify about the other kinds of rippers

   3   and the efficacy of DeCSS, but I think it's most clinical, and

   4   your Honor hasn't seen that yet, and it was not given to you

   5   at the preliminary injunction hearing, there is a pack of

   6   papers about six pages high -- about six inches high, maybe a

   7   foot high --

   8            THE COURT:  You got my hopes up for a minute.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  -- where there is a discussion about the

  10   Linux group and the attempt of the Linux group to create the

  11   Linux machine.  And the extent to which Frank Stevenson can

  12   give you information about that, that I think becomes

  13   relevant.  Again, the details of his testimony are better

  14   known to Mr. Hernstadt than I, but I find that relevant.

  15            THE COURT:  How long do you expect to have him on

  16   direct?

  17            MR. HERNSTADT:  I think we can finish his direct in

  18   an hour and a half, probably an hour.

  19            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims?

  20            MR. SIMS:  In the first place, I believe it is

  21   undisputed that Mr. Stevenson did not create DeCSS, and we

  22   don't believe that it's an issue in the case in any event.

  23            Second of all, if your Honor will recall we had

  24   repeatedly said we were prepared to depose everyone who might

  25   be coming to trial and ask for dates.




196



   1            THE COURT:  I remember that.

   2            MR. SIMS:  And there was a discovery deadline first

   3   of June 5 and then June 11.

   4            THE COURT:  July 5.

   5            MR. SIMS:  Absolutely, July 5 and 11.  We have

   6   repeatedly asked for dates and were provided no date for

   7   Mr. Stevenson prior to those times, and we therefore sent your

   8   Honor last week a letter asking for Mr. Stevenson to be

   9   excluded on the grounds of the failure to comply with

  10   discovery deadlines set by the Court.

  11            THE COURT:  All right.

  12            MR. SIMS:  In addition, there is a pending motion in

  13   limine that would exclude him.

  14            THE COURT:  I understand that.  You have all kept me

  15   busy with other matters for the last couple of days.

  16            MR. SIMS:  If I might, I'm also advised this

  17   testimony is cumulative of the deposition testimony of two

  18   other people who are being brought to trial:  Mr. Snyder and

  19   Mr. Appel.

  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  Mr. Stevenson did the crypt analysis.

  21   He is the man on the scene.  He can talk about things from

  22   experience, from personally having done it as opposed to

  23   assessing it.

  24            Additionally he is a participant in a lot of the

  25   Linux lists, so he can talk about the connection between CSS




197



   1   and DeCSS and Linux, which Mr. Snyder cannot.

   2            THE COURT:  All right.  Here is what we are going to

   3   do.  It is clear that the defendants did not comply with the

   4   orders relating to this aspect of discovery, and there is a

   5   nontrivial argument made by the plaintiffs that I should rule

   6   them out.

   7            Nonetheless, contrary to some things that have been

   8   said, I'm very mindful of the expedited schedule in this case

   9   which serves a lot of interests, even for parties who don't

  10   always recognize them, and I think in all the circumstances

  11   some balance ought to be made to permit this man to testify,

  12   and I think that's doubly appropriate since he is I'm informed

  13   the President of Norway and it's not clear that it was within

  14   the power of the defendant simply to order him to show up in

  15   New York for a deposition.  So, I will hear his testimony, and

  16   I am also going to give them the opportunity to depose him

  17   tonight, as has been suggested.  What we will do, because

  18   obviously everybody has a lot of demands on their time right

  19   now, is this:  The direct tomorrow is not to exceed an hour

  20   and a half.  The deposition is not to exceed an hour and a

  21   half.  If you people work out a different arrangement for a

  22   longer deposition, I will work out a different arrangement on

  23   the length of the direct.  It just seems to me that that's a

  24   fair balance.  And anything pretty much that you can agree to

  25   between yourselves, even if it is at some variance with that,




198



   1   probably will be acceptable.

   2            I do once again urge that to the extent this man is

   3   coming here to tell me things that are not genuinely disputed,

   4   that you simply stipulate to it.

   5            Now, I do appreciate that there is probably some

   6   element of perhaps the man wants to testify in this case.  I

   7   don't know that to be true, but it might be.  I understand

   8   that too, but let's just try to do this as efficiently as

   9   possible.

  10            That takes care of Mr. Stevenson.

  11            What about Mr. Burns?

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  I think it has become clear that Mr.

  13   Burns did most of the experiment.  I think the reason that it

  14   is important to talk to Mr. Burns is that I think it has also

  15   become clear that that experiment was directed entirely by

  16   Proskauer, that Dr. Shamos was given direct instructions to

  17   purchase a computer, to do this, to do this, to go to 2600 and

  18   through 2600 get the DeCSS and he carried out those

  19   instructions.  There is no expertise required for that.  I

  20   would say that a 13 year old can do it, but that goes without

  21   saying.  I think even a person who is computer illiterate

  22   could follow those directions given enough time.  No expertise

  23   at all was required.

  24            So, it's a question of fact, what happened.  And

  25   there are definitely disparities in terms of the burn date on




199



   1   the movies, what happened on the IRC channel, what other

   2   things went on during the DiVXing process.  I think we are

   3   entitled to know the basis for the opinions that were stated

   4   by Dr. Shamos, and to the extent they were provided by work

   5   done solely by Mr. Burns, and a significant part of it was

   6   done by Mr. Burns, we are entitled to see what Mr. Burns did.

   7            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims?

   8            MR. SIMS:  I think if Congress had enacted or the

   9   Judicial Conference had enacted a different version of Rule

  10   703, that would be a perfectly good argument, but under 703 I

  11   think an expert is entitled to rely on the kinds of materials

  12   relied on by persons in that field.  And I believe that

  13   persons in that field are allowed to and they customarily do,

  14   the testimony is that they do rely on those kinds of

  15   assistance for this kind of work.  Therefore, I think under

  16   Rule 703 --

  17            THE COURT:  That gets Dr. Shamos's opinion in, but it

  18   doesn't necessarily go beyond it.  If we were trying a plain

  19   old ordinary medical malpractice case and the alleged

  20   malpractice was some kind of misdiagnosis by the hospital, and

  21   the attending physician came in and testified that he received

  22   a report from the pathology lab that said something was not

  23   cancerous and it turned out to be cancerous, it may have been

  24   perfectly reasonable for the attending to have relied on a

  25   report from the pathology lab, and there may well have been




200



   1   malpractice anyway if the pathologist failed to perform the

   2   review of the tissue appropriately.  So, you haven't really

   3   touched their point yet, Mr. Sims.

   4            MR. SIMS:  Well, I thought that I had, your Honor.

   5   The experiment was conducted, directed by Dr. Shamos, and he

   6   was in and out of the room, and he checked on the result and

   7   he checked on the things that were done, and I believe that

   8   that's the way experts customarily testify.

   9            THE COURT:  Look, you have offered me CD-ROMs that

  10   Mr. Burns burned on the basis of the DiVX versions that

  11   allegedly were made, using DeCSS on files swapped over the

  12   Internet, and you have invited me to draw conclusions about

  13   the quality of the resultant product.  Now, it seems to me in

  14   those circumstances they are entitled to go into the question

  15   of what is on those CD-ROMs and how it got there, because it

  16   goes to the issue of whether the product that you have offered

  17   me is or isn't persuasive evidence.

  18            MR. SIMS:  Then we will make Mr. Burns available.

  19            THE COURT:  I thought that was the right answer.

  20   Okay.

  21            Now the one other thing I want to remind you before

  22   we break for the day is that you must provide the court

  23   reporters with that glossary I mentioned before we start

  24   tomorrow.

  25            What time are we starting now?  9 o'clock, folks.




201



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  May.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  May we keep our documents here?

   3            THE COURT:  You certainly may.  The courtroom is

   4   going to be locked.  There is a lot of sensitive material in

   5   the courtroom, and we give no representations or warrantees

   6   about how effective our security is, but we will endeavor to

   7   lock the courtroom and keep people out and keep everything

   8   secure.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  May I ask one further question?  When

  10   cross-examining, in direct examination, using confidential

  11   documents and referring to confidential documents or

  12   privileged documents, I presume the practice would be if there

  13   is any question about it to let the Court see it before the

  14   examination on that document.

  15            THE COURT:  Yes, I think that absolutely has to be

  16   the case.  There is no question about that.

  17            MR. SIMS:  It would be helpful, your Honor, if we

  18   could have first thing in the morning or after the lunch break

  19   from our adversaries a list of what is going to come up so we

  20   can review it.

  21            THE COURT:  To whatever extent you people can work

  22   that out, please work it out.  If it comes up in the course of

  23   the day we will deal with it.  And I really would urge both

  24   sides to manage the examinations in a way -- and I would be

  25   surprised if it couldn't be done -- that would enable me to




202



   1   avoid closing the courtroom at any point in this trial.  I

   2   don't want to do that.  Okay.  Thank you.

   3            MR. SIMS:  Thank you, your Honor.

   4            (Trial adjourned to July 18, 2000 at 9:00 a.m.)

   5

   6

   7

   8

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




203



   1                        INDEX OF EXAMINATION

   2   Witness                    D      X      RD     RX

   3   MICHAEL I. SHAMOS.........16    120     190

   4                         PLAINTIFF EXHIBITS

   5   Exhibit No.                                     Received

   6    112, 113, 114A through 114E, and 2 ...........65

   7    115A and 115B ...............................113

   8                         DEFENDANT EXHIBITS

   9   Exhibit No.                                     Received

  10    105 through 110 ..............................40

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25


Transcript of Trial - Day 2, MPAA v. 2600 (NY; July 18, 2000)  

Transcript of Trial - Day 2, MPAA v. 2600

NY; July 18, 2000

Transcript courtesy of the EFF

See related files:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video (EFF Archive)
http://jya.com/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS (Cryptome Archive)
http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs (2600 Archive)
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/ (Harvard DVD OpenLaw Project)


                                                             

204



   1   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
       SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
   2   ------------------------------x

   3   UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.,
       et al,
   4
                      Plaintiffs,
   5
                  v.                           00 Civ. 277 (LAK)
   6
       SHAWN C. REIMERDES, et al,
   7
                      Defendants.
   8
       ------------------------------x
   9
                                               July 18, 2000
  10                                           9:00 a.m.

  11   Before:

  12                       HON. LEWIS A. KAPLAN,

  13                                           District Judge

  14                            APPEARANCES

  15   PROSKAUER, ROSE, L.L.P.
            Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  16   BY:  LEON P. GOLD
            CHARLES S. SIMS
  17        CARLA MILLER
            SCOTT P. COOPER
  18        MICHAEL MERVIS

  19   FRANKFURT, GARBUS, KLEIN & SELZ
            Attorneys for Defendants
  20   BY:  MARTIN GARBUS
            ERNEST HERNSTADT
  21        DAVID ATLAS

  22

  23

  24

  25



205



   1            (Trial resumed; in open court)

   2            THE COURT:  Good morning, everyone.

   3            MR. GOLD:  Good morning.

   4            THE COURT:  Are we taking Mr. Stevenson out of turn?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, your Honor.

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes, your Honor.  The defendants call

   7   Frank Stevenson.

   8    FRANK STEVENSON,

   9        called as a witness by the defendants,

  10        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

  11            DEPUTY COURT CLERK:  State your name for the record.

  12            THE WITNESS:  My name a Frank Andrew Stevenson.

  13            THE COURT:  You may proceed, Mr. Hernstadt.

  14   DIRECT EXAMINATION

  15   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

  16   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, where do you live?

  17   A.  I live in Oslow, Norway.

  18   Q.  What is your present employment there?

  19   A.  I do work as a programmer in the research department at

  20   FunCom.

  21            THE COURT:  For what?

  22            THE WITNESS:  The research department.

  23            THE COURT:  That was the part I understood.

  24            THE WITNESS:  FunCom, F-U-N-C-O-M.

  25   Q.  What kind of company is FunCom?



206



   1   A.  FunCom is a games producer.  We are in fact the largest

   2   games producer in Norway and one of the largest games

   3   producers worldwide, the largest independent, I should say.

   4   Q.  What is your position there?  What is your title?

   5   A.  My title there is head of R&D, research and development.

   6   I am in charge of directing efforts into research to determine

   7   which areas of research would be fruitful to devote to

   8   efforts, and also I do the research myself.

   9   Q.  Do you have any responsibilities with respect to security?

  10   A.  I frequently get involved when security questions are

  11   brought up.  Our company will do online payments through our

  12   website, and in this respect I have been part of reviewing the

  13   security of the website.

  14   Q.  Could you tell the Court something about your background

  15   with computers.

  16   A.  I started programming at the age of 12.  My father taught

  17   me how to write my own programs, and I have been programming

  18   ever since.  I have programmed through learning a number of

  19   programming languages, started out with BASIC and I have gone

  20   to assembly line language and now for the main part I do

  21   programming C and C++.

  22   Q.  Okay.  Can you tell me something about your background in

  23   cryptography?

  24   A.  Around 1992 I got involved in a cryptography related

  25   mailing list on the Internet and became immediately very



207



   1   interested in cryptography as a science.

   2   Q.  And what have you done to pursue that interest?

   3   A.  I have tried to read as many research papers as I can and

   4   also done studies on my own.

   5   Q.  Did one of those studies include a study of the CSS

   6   cipher?

   7   A.  Yes, as part of a program that Bruce Snyder has put on how

   8   to teach yourself cryptographic skills, he suggested that a

   9   student could look at various ciphers that are put out.  New

  10   ciphers are put out, some are strong and some not so strong,

  11   and in an effort to hone my own cryptographic skills, I

  12   decided to look at the CSS encryption system.

  13   Q.  Who is Bruce Snyder?

  14   A.  Bruce Snyder is a very well respected author and lecturer

  15   in cryptography.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, just so you know,

  17   Mr. Snyder is going to be our expert witness on cryptography.

  18   We are presenting Mr. Stevenson as a fact witness about his

  19   personal involvement in various matters that are associated

  20   with this case.

  21            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  22   Q.  Could you please continue to tell us about your inspection

  23   of the CSS cipher.

  24   A.  When I first found the CSS cipher on the web page, it

  25   didn't take me long to determine that it had serious



208



   1   weaknesses.  I also saw that the weaknesses that I found would

   2   be useful for the development of a Linux DVD player.  At the

   3   time they did have a problem in that they did not have enough

   4   player keys so they could successfully decrypt all movies, and

   5   also my research was useful to that respect.

   6   Q.  How is that?

   7   A.  When I first joined the list, there was only a single

   8   player key that was publicly known.  This key was not capable

   9   of decrypting the Matrix the movie, and so I looked at the

  10   algorithm and found ways of determining other ways.

  11   Q.  Was that difficult?

  12   A.  It took me three days, and I expect that a person more

  13   capable than I am would possibly be able to do it in a shorter

  14   amount of time.

  15   Q.  What was the result of your research?  Did you develop

  16   attacks or?

  17   A.  I posted three messages directly to the Livid mailing list

  18   on three subsequent days, describing three different attacks

  19   on the CSS system.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I thought the witnesses were excluded.

  21   Isn't this Miss King?

  22            THE COURT:  I certainly don't know.  Voice.

  23            MR. COOPER:  That is Miss King, and she is the

  24   representative of one of the plaintiffs.

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  Mr. Reporter, could you read back the



209



   1   last question.

   2            (Record read)

   3   Q.  What would the result of the attacks be if applied.

   4   A.  The first attack would possibly enable somebody to decrypt

   5   a DVD with only the encrypted files available, not the keys

   6   that are stored in a separate place.  The second attack made

   7   it possible to derive a player key or a set of player keys

   8   from a single known player key.  And the third attack made it

   9   possible to decrypt a DVD movie without knowing any player

  10   keys at all.

  11   Q.  And how long in the second attack, how long would it take

  12   to find those keys?

  13            THE COURT:  Just before you go to that, I want to be

  14   sure I'm understanding this.

  15            You tell me, sir, that the first attack would

  16   possibly enable one to decrypt a DVD with only the encrypted

  17   files, not the keys, and the third attack made it possible to

  18   decrypt the movie without knowing any keys.  How is the first

  19   attack different from the third attack?

  20            THE WITNESS:  The keys are stored in a separate

  21   sector on the DVD drive.  The first attack could possibly work

  22   if you did not have any information about the keys stored on

  23   the disk.  The third attack works from the keys stored on the

  24   disk and determines which key the disk is encrypted with

  25   without knowing any player keys.  That's the keys that are



210



   1   embedded in the licensed DVD player.

   2            THE COURT:  Are you talking about two different kinds

   3   of keys or only one kind of key?

   4            THE WITNESS:  There are two different kinds of keys.

   5            THE COURT:  What are they?

   6            THE WITNESS:  There are actually three different

   7   kinds of keys.  One kind of key is the player key, which every

   8   licensed player is issued, I believe with a set of keys, which

   9   are used to decrypt the title key.  And every DVD is encrypted

  10   with a title key, so when you have a player key and a DVD you

  11   can then find the title key, and the title key is then used to

  12   decrypt the individual sectors of the DVD which are encrypted

  13   with a key derived from the title key.

  14            THE COURT:  Which is the third kind.

  15            THE WITNESS:  The first attack determines the third

  16   kind of key.

  17            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Go ahead, counsel.

  18            MS. MILLER:  First of all, we would like to interpose

  19   an objection to the witness' last answer in that he has

  20   attempted to describe the function of the CSS encryption

  21   system.  Mr. Hernstadt has not offered him as an expert

  22   witness on either DeCSS or cryptography on any of these issues

  23   related to the areas he has just testified.

  24            THE COURT:  I understand your point, but I asked the

  25   question because he was describing three attacks that he



211



   1   posted to the Livid list and he spoke in terms that were

   2   confusing to me, and now I know what he meant.  So for that

   3   purpose I need it.

   4   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, could you explain what cryptographers mean

   5   when they talk about an attack.

   6   A.  Well, usually a --

   7            MS. MILLER:  Objection, your Honor.  Mr. Hernstadt

   8   has already said that this witness is not an expert in

   9   cryptography.  They are not tendering him as an expert, as a

  10   cryptographic expert.

  11            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  12   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, could you tell us what you mean when you

  13   talk about an attack.

  14   A.  An attack is a weakness in a cipher.

  15            THE COURT:  Is an attack a weakness or is an attack a

  16   tactic to take advantage of a weakness to break the code?

  17            THE WITNESS:  An attack is when you find a weakness,

  18   you publish that as an attack on the cipher.  That would then

  19   be considered a potential attack of the cipher.

  20            THE COURT:  So go back to a different era of

  21   cryptography.

  22            Attack on the German codes came when the allies got

  23   the Enigma machine and began putting the codes through the

  24   Enigma machine.  The weakness was whatever was inherent to the

  25   code and the fact that the allies had the decryption device,



212



   1   right?

   2            THE WITNESS:  I think in decrypting, the word

   3   "attack" there would be more precisely described as

   4   cryptoanalysis, where you have the cipher and you start

   5   analyzing it.  When you find a weakness you publish that as an

   6   attack.

   7            THE COURT:  Okay.  I'm understanding you to say

   8   essentially what I'm saying, and, that is, while the

   9   publication of a weakness is described as an attack in a sense

  10   that any information that would help someone to decrypt a code

  11   of any kind would be useful in cracking the code, attack also

  12   is appropriately used to describe the effort to crack the

  13   code, whatever kind of code it may be.  Is that fair?

  14            THE WITNESS:  That can be so.

  15            THE COURT:  I'm sorry?

  16            THE WITNESS:  That could be so.

  17            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

  18            MR. HERNSTADT:  In terms of terms of art, I will have

  19   Mr. Snyder address it more completely.

  20   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, how did the cryptoanalysis that you

  21   published assist in the development of a Linux DVD player?

  22   A.  As I said, at the time I only knew of a single public

  23   player key, and I have reason to believe that as a result of

  24   my second attack a few days later a fuller list of player keys

  25   was posted to the Livid mailing list.



213



   1   Q.  Why would you help with the development of a Linux DVD

   2   player?

   3   A.  I am a Linux user myself, and it is in my interest that

   4   Livid become a fully capable operating system and not be

   5   inferior to a Windows operating system in any respect.

   6   Q.  How long have you been a Linux user?

   7   A.  I first used the Linux operating system something like

   8   five years ago.  That was for a short period of time only.  I

   9   have been continually using it on my own computer for two

  10   years.

  11   Q.  Why would DeCSS be a Windows program instead of a Linux

  12   program?

  13            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  Vague.

  14            THE COURT:  Certainly sustained as to form.

  15   Q.  Do you know why DeCSS was released as a Windows program?

  16            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  17            MS. MILLER:  Objection.

  18            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  I will move on.

  20            THE COURT:  I'm not foreclosing the area, Mr.

  21   Hernstadt.  You just haven't asked the proper question.

  22            How can he testify about why someone else did

  23   something?

  24   Q.  What is your understanding of why DeCSS was released as a

  25   Windows program?



214



   1            MS. MILLER:  Objection.

   2            THE COURT:  Sustained.  His state of mind is not at

   3   issue here.

   4   Q.  Is DeCSS a Windows program?

   5   A.  Yes.

   6   Q.  Can you explain why a Windows program would assist in the

   7   development of a Linux DVD player?

   8            THE COURT:  I can't hear the question.

   9   Q.  Can you explain how a Windows program would assist in the

  10   development of a Linux DVD player?

  11   A.  It is my understanding that at the time the DeCSS, the

  12   Windows program was released, the Linux operating system did

  13   not have the capabilities to read the UDF file system that is

  14   used on the DVD disks themselves, so for this reason if you

  15   want to play a DVD you would have to do the decryption under

  16   an operating system that did support the UDF file system, and

  17   Windows is one such file system.

  18   Q.  Was Linux or a Linux program capable of reading DVDs if it

  19   didn't support the UDF file system?

  20   A.  It shouldn't be.

  21            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  No foundation.

  22            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  23   Q.  Did you do anything else with the cryptoanalysis?

  24   A.  I also posted some messages to some prominent cryptography

  25   mailing lists pointing to my work in the Livid mailing list,



215



   1   and I also did relate it to some of the plaintiffs' problem in

   2   reiterating or providing additional protection for DVDs

   3   released for early viewing on aircraft.  They had sought to

   4   add additional protection to the DVDs that were to be played

   5   on aircraft, and I thought my research demonstrated that these

   6   proposed measures were inadequate.

   7   Q.  In what respect were the measures inadequate?

   8   A.  They could not achieve their objectives of protecting DVDs

   9   released from being decrypted.

  10   Q.  And how did you know that the plaintiffs were interested

  11   in this particular area?

  12   A.  While using search engines and searching for CSS I came

  13   across a website describing this effort.

  14   Q.  The effort on the part of the movie industry?

  15   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  16            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  No foundation.

  17            THE COURT:  Well, I will take it just as I did things

  18   yesterday, to explain why he did whatever he did, not for the

  19   truth.  Obviously he doesn't have personal knowledge regarding

  20   anything about the airplanes.  He read something on the

  21   Internet and he did something.

  22   Q.  Are you familiar with any programs that are capable of

  23   decrypting DVDs?

  24   A.  I have downloaded DeCSS on my computer.  I have run the

  25   program but not used it to decrypt a DVD.  I have downloaded



216



   1   and used the DOD Speed Ripper on my computer, and I have had

   2   some of the other rippers on a computer but did not use them,

   3   but I do have an understanding of how the Windows operating

   4   system works, and I believe I understand the principle by

   5   which the other rippers operate.

   6   Q.  What other rippers are you talking about?

   7   A.  There is a ripper called Power Ripper which is capable of

   8   intercepting the frames as they are being displayed to the

   9   screen on the Windows computer, and another ripper called DVD

  10   Rip, which is able to intercept the compressed data stream as

  11   they are being fed to some of Microsoft's libraries that are

  12   responsible for decompressing them.

  13            MS. MILLER:  Your Honor, I would object to the

  14   witness's last answer and move to strike it.  As I understand

  15   it, this witness is not being offered as an expert as to the

  16   operation of any of these other rippers that he has been able

  17   to download and test.

  18            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt?

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  The witness is being offered to

  20   describe what he has done and what he knows about the rippers.

  21   He is not being offered as an expert about them.

  22            MS. MILLER:  I don't think the witness has testified

  23   that he has used all the rippers, and I fail to see the

  24   relevance of his use of any of these additional rippers he has

  25   testified about.



217



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  I don't think the witness has

   2   testified that he has used them to decrypt a DVD, but I think

   3   he has testified that he has looked at them or he has them on

   4   his computer and is familiar with how they work.  I think he

   5   can testify to his personal knowledge.

   6            THE COURT:  Well, the motion is granted.  I don't

   7   think that's accurate.  He said he has downloaded DeCSS and

   8   run it, but if I understand his testimony correctly it was to

   9   the effect that he has not used it to decrypt a DVD.  He then

  10   said that he had used DOD Speed Ripper but he didn't say for

  11   what or anything else about that, and that he had downloaded

  12   but not used some others but he understands the principle.

  13   And there is no foundation as to how he got that

  14   understanding, and I rather suspect that you are probably

  15   getting into expert testimony even if he has an appropriate

  16   foundation.

  17            So, I have granted the motion.  If you want to try to

  18   lay a better foundation, go ahead, but it's not there yet.

  19   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, you said that you downloaded Speed Ripper,

  20   is that correct?

  21   A.  That is correct.

  22   Q.  And you used it, is that correct?

  23   A.  I downloaded Speed Ripper because a friend of mine wanted

  24   to see if it was possible to make a video CD copy of a DVD

  25   movie that he had, and I went and asked another friend



218



   1   knowledgeable in which tools would be appropriate, and he did

   2   recommend that the DOD Speed Ripper was the best tool to use

   3   for the job, and for this reason I used the DOD Speed Ripper.

   4   Q.  And did it decrypt the DVD?

   5   A.  Yes, it did decrypt the DVD.

   6   Q.  Have you been affected personally by the institution of

   7   this litigation?

   8            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  Vague.

   9            THE COURT:  Where are you going, Mr. Hernstadt?

  10   Q.  Have you been affected personally in terms of your studies

  11   in cryptology --

  12   A.  Well, I know for one thing --

  13   Q.  -- by this litigation?

  14   A.  I know for one thing that the material I have produced has

  15   been pulled off the 2600 website as a result of this

  16   litigation.

  17   Q.  Okay.  Have you experienced any other effects?

  18   A.  No.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Mr. Stevenson.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  I'm sorry.

  22   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, did you do a declaration in this case?

  23   A.  I have done two declarations in this case.

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  May I approach the witness, your

  25   Honor?



219



   1            THE COURT:  Yes.  Are the exhibits you have handed

   2   the witness marked?

   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes, they are.  I'm sorry.

   4            THE COURT:  What are they?  Just tell me and I will

   5   mark my copy.

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  I have to look at the exhibits.

   7            MR. ATLAS:  I may be able to shed some light on this.

   8   In haste to get the documents prepared for trial, the copies

   9   we had made were not marked with the formal defendant exhibit

  10   stickers with a number on it, so what we have been doing is

  11   the original that is going to go in the record, we have the

  12   stickers here, we have been marking them.  Every copy should

  13   have the exhibit number.  It's one, two or three letters that

  14   appear at the bottom of the exhibit typically.

  15            THE COURT:  Well, one of the two that was just handed

  16   to me has an otherwise unexplained AE in the corner.

  17            MR. ATLAS:  That would be the defendants' exhibit

  18   number.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  That's a reply declaration?

  20            THE COURT:  It is.  Now the other one doesn't have

  21   two letters.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  It has a "U."

  23            THE COURT:  It looks like a page number.

  24            MR. ATLAS:  I apologize.  For the record, we will

  25   have them marked later.



220



   1            THE COURT:  Thank you.

   2   Q.  Are those the two declarations you did in this case?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, rather than take

   5   Mr. Stevenson through the declarations, I would move that they

   6   be admitted into evidence.  You can review them for yourself.

   7            MS. MILLER:  Your Honor, we are going to object to

   8   the introduction of Mr. Stevenson's declarations into

   9   evidence.

  10            As you will see when you read the declarations, he

  11   has testified in a lot of areas which is clearly an area of

  12   expert testimony.  He has not been qualified as an expert.  He

  13   has not been tendered as an expert.  There are also areas in

  14   the declaration where it's clear he is not testifying to any

  15   personal knowledge, and large areas in the declaration relate

  16   to the other rippers he has used, as he just testified today,

  17   and we would object to the introduction of that evidence on

  18   the grounds of relevance.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, I would suggest that it

  20   makes more sense for you to review it and take those

  21   paragraphs that you believe are applicable and use them rather

  22   than go through the declaration paragraph by paragraph.

  23            THE COURT:  But, look, I'm mindful also of what Mr.

  24   Garbus said in his opening, that this case isn't stopping here

  25   no matter what I decide, and I do have an obligation to create



221



   1   a record that is reasonably sensible.

   2            Now, if I start receiving what here amounts to --

   3   well, the pages aren't numbered -- but one long and one short

   4   declaration -- on the view that here I will somehow sort out

   5   what I think is reliable and what isn't, it's really rather

   6   different from taking one snippet of testimony, which I will

   7   do for both sides.  What it does is to place upon me the

   8   burden of going through hundreds and possibly thousands of

   9   pages of material to in effect cross out everything I think is

  10   incompetent or hearsay so that whether or not I rely on it at

  11   this point will be absolutely clear to the Court of Appeals,

  12   so that either side which went through this exercise couldn't

  13   go to the Court of Appeals and say, well, there was evidence

  14   in the record below to the proposition X, which I may not have

  15   relied on but perhaps I didn't cross out, even though it's my

  16   view it's not properly admissible.

  17            So, I think with respect to this I'm going to sustain

  18   the objection.  If there is anything specific you want to

  19   adduce, let's do it.

  20            I do appreciate the effort to save time, but I think

  21   that the objection at least in this case of this witness is

  22   perfectly appropriate.  I mean he's got all kinds of

  23   statements in here as to which there is no basis for my

  24   assuming he has personal knowledge.

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, I'm happy to take that



222



   1   approach.

   2   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, could you take a look at your declaration,

   3   Exhibit U in this case.

   4   A.  Yes.

   5   Q.  If you look at the first paragraph, do you have a personal

   6   knowledge as to the matters set forth in that paragraph?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  Okay.  Looking at the second paragraph, do you have

   9   personal knowledge as to the matters set forth in that

  10   paragraph?

  11            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  If I could have

  12   Mr. Hernstadt identify what he is referring to.

  13            THE COURT:  There was some noise and I couldn't hear

  14   what you said when you turned away.

  15            MS. MILLER:  I would just like some clarification as

  16   to what paragraphs Mr. Hernstadt is referring to.

  17            THE COURT:  Ms. Miller, you keep turning your head to

  18   Mr. Hernstadt, and every time you do I can't hear what you are

  19   saying.

  20            MS. MILLER:  I am sorry.  I would just like some

  21   clarification so I understand what paragraphs in the

  22   declaration Mr. Hernstadt is referring to.

  23            THE COURT:  It's Defendants' Exhibit U, which is the

  24   first one, and the paragraphs all have numbers, so if you use

  25   the numbers.



223



   1            MS. MILLER:  I didn't have a Defendants' Exhibit U.

   2            THE COURT:  You don't have it?  Mr. Hernstadt, let's

   3   see if you can get it.

   4            MS. MILLER:  I have it, but I didn't have the actual

   5   U.  So the first declaration is Exhibit U?

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  That's correct.  The reply

   7   declaration is Exhibit AE.

   8            THE COURT:  All right.  Let's go.

   9   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, do you have personal knowledge as to the

  10   matters set forth in paragraph 2?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  Do you have personal knowledge as to the matters set forth

  13   in paragraph 3?

  14   A.  Yes.

  15   Q.  And do you have personal knowledge as to the matters set

  16   forth in paragraph 4?

  17   A.  Yes.

  18            THE COURT:  Let's just pause on that.  You say there

  19   are at least four programs in wide circulation that use CSS

  20   ciphers.  What does "wide circulation" mean?

  21            THE WITNESS:  They are easy to locate on the Internet

  22   and they can be found at more than one place.

  23            THE COURT:  That's the definition of wide

  24   circulation.

  25   Q.  Have you found each of these on the Internet?



224



   1   A.  Yes.

   2   Q.  In more than one place?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4            THE COURT:  How do you know as you state in paragraph

   5   4 that Livid members cooperatively wrote css-auth -- that's

   6   A-U-T-H -- and css-cat?

   7            THE WITNESS:  I subscribed to the mailing list and

   8   would get frequent e-mails when changes were made to these

   9   programs, so I know in fact they were working on them.

  10            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  That's hearsay.

  11            THE COURT:  Yes, I think so, Mr. Hernstadt, isn't it?

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  That's fine.

  13            THE COURT:  That sentence is not received.

  14   Q.  If you look at paragraph 7, do you have a personal

  15   knowledge that the anonymous source is a short section of a

  16   source code that describes all the CSS cipher modes of

  17   operation required to decrypt a DVD movie?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  Do you have personal knowledge as to the other matters set

  20   forth in that paragraph?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  In paragraph 8 you say that css-auth is a Linux BSD

  23   program written by the LiViD group.  Let me ask you, do you

  24   have personal knowledge as to the first part of that sentence,

  25   that it is a Linux BSD program?



225



   1   A.  The LiViD group would be the place that maintained all the

   2   changes to this program, and as such it would be developed on

   3   the LiViD forum or in the LiViD group.

   4            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  That's hearsay.

   5   Q.  Have you looked at the archives on the LiViD forum and

   6   examined the changes that were made to the css-auth program?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  Are all those changes posted and available to be used by

   9   you on the LiViD forum?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11            MS. MILLER:  Objection, your Honor, hearsay.

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, he's looked at these.  He

  13   has looked at the DeCSS program and all the changes of the

  14   program in its various iterations, and the changes are

  15   available on the LiViD forum.

  16            MS. MILLER:  But there has been no foundation

  17   established on who created that program or that anything on

  18   that forum is accurate in fact.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  All right.  I think I will ask

  20   another question.

  21            THE COURT:  This is Mr. Garbus's point from

  22   yesterday.  He quite appropriately said yesterday the fact

  23   that it's on the Internet doesn't make it true.  It's hearsay.

  24   Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  Let me ask it a different way, if you



226



   1   will, your Honor.

   2   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, have you found the source code for css-auth

   3   on the LiViD forum?

   4   A.  Yes, I have.

   5   Q.  Have you found different iterations of the source code, in

   6   other words different versions of the source code that have

   7   been changed and improved in various ways?

   8   A.  Yes.

   9            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  Foundation?

  10            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  11   Q.  Now, do you have personal knowledge that when running

  12   css-auth it will perform the authorization to the DVD drive

  13   enabling the reading of a hidden block of data?

  14   A.  I performed those steps, yes.

  15   Q.  And the steps set forth in the third sentence of paragraph

  16   8?

  17   A.  Which paragraph?

  18   Q.  That's the hidden block of data containing the list of

  19   title keys encrypted under various disk keys and a hatch?

  20   A.  Yes, I have performed that.

  21   Q.  Have you examined css-cat?

  22   A.  I have looked at the source.

  23   Q.  Where did you find the source for css-cat?

  24   A.  On the LiViD website.

  25   Q.  Do you have personal knowledge that it is capable of



227



   1   decrypting the bulk of movie data after authentication?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  And that it is based in part on the anonymous source?

   4   A.  There are sections of code in the css-cat that are very

   5   similar to the anonymous source, but I have not compared or

   6   done an exact comparison.

   7            MS. MILLER:  Objection and move to strike that last

   8   answer.  If the witness hasn't performed an exact comparison,

   9   it's hard to imagine that we could possibly say that they are

  10   similar.

  11            THE COURT:  Overruled.  If you look at a green

  12   Mercedes and a blue Mercedes, you can say they are similar

  13   without doing an exact comparison.

  14   Q.  Do you have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in

  15   paragraph 11 of your declaration?

  16   A.  Which paragraph?

  17   Q.  11.  I'm sorry.  I skipped ten.  Do you have personal

  18   knowledge of the matters set forth in paragraph 10 of your

  19   declaration?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  Do you have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in

  22   paragraph 11 of your declaration?

  23            THE COURT:  Look, you can do it this way,

  24   Mr. Hernstadt, but I'm just going to tell you up front, it

  25   isn't terribly persuasive, I'm speaking of paragraph 10, to



228



   1   have the witness simply say the incantation of personal

   2   knowledge without developing some basis for his making the

   3   statement that css-auth and css-cat are functionally

   4   equivalent to DeCSS.

   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, your Honor.

   6   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, what is the basis for your statement in

   7   paragraph 10 that taken together css-auth --

   8   A.  DeCSS.exe program is capable of decrypting a DVD, and I

   9   believe that is the reason we are all present here today.  I

  10   have seen a css-auth and css-cat perform the same function.

  11            MS. MILLER:  Once again we would object and move to

  12   strike, because I don't believe as you posed the question that

  13   this witness can still draw the conclusions, since he is not

  14   an expert, that these two programs together are functionally

  15   equivalent to DeCSS.exe.

  16            THE COURT:  Goes to the weight.  Overruled.

  17   Q.  What does css-auth do?

  18   A.  Css-auth performs the secret handshake or authentication

  19   to the DVD drive, and the DVD drive will respond by making

  20   available a block of keys and a title key and will also allow

  21   the reading of the encrypted files.

  22   Q.  What does css-cat do?

  23   A.  Css-cat takes the encrypted title key and the key block

  24   and will find the keys that are needed to decrypt the bulk of

  25   the DVD and perform the decryption and copy the DVD to a disk



229



   1   in unencrypted form.

   2            THE COURT:  You say needed to decrypt the bulk of the

   3   DVD.  What part of it doesn't enable you to find the keys that

   4   are necessary to do cryptographs, if that question was clear.

   5            THE WITNESS:  No.

   6            THE COURT:  You said css-cat takes the encrypted

   7   title key and the key block and will find the keys that are

   8   needed to decrypt the bulk of the DVD.

   9            THE WITNESS:  That will be the bulk files that are

  10   several gigabytes.

  11            THE COURT:  The VOB files?

  12            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

  13            THE COURT:  Are there other files that are necessary

  14   to decrypt the DVD?

  15            THE WITNESS:  No.  The .IFO files are not encrypted.

  16            THE COURT:  What?

  17            THE WITNESS:  IFO files.

  18            THE COURT:  Okay.

  19   Q.  Mr. Stevenson, thank you very much.  I have nothing

  20   further for this witness, your Honor.

  21            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Ms. Miller?

  22   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  23   BY MS. MILLER:

  24   Q.  Good morning, Mr. Stevenson.

  25   A.  Good morning.



230



   1   Q.  You have heard of the DeCSS program, is that correct?

   2   A.  I have heard about the DeCSS.exe Windows program, that's

   3   correct.

   4   Q.  Is it correct that you did not personally create the DeCSS

   5   program?

   6   A.  I have no part in the creation of this program.

   7   Q.  Now it's also correct that you have never posted the DeCSS

   8   Windows executable utility to your website, is that correct?

   9   A.  That is correct.

  10   Q.  You have never personally examined or analyzed the DeCSS

  11   Windows executable utility, is that correct?

  12   A.  That is correct.

  13   Q.  And you have no personal knowledge of who actually created

  14   DeCSS, is that correct?

  15   A.  I know a fellow here present today who claims to have

  16   authored the program.

  17   Q.  You know a fellow here that's here today who claims to

  18   have authored the program?

  19   A.  Yes.

  20   Q.  But you gained that knowledge how?

  21   A.  By talking to this person.

  22   Q.  Who is the person that you are referring to,

  23   Mr. Stevenson?

  24   A.  I'm referring to Jon Johansen.

  25   Q.  And Jon Johansen is in the courtroom today?



231



   1   A.  Yes, he is.

   2            MS. MILLER:  The defendants on several occasions have

   3   indicated that Jon Johansen might be called as a witness in

   4   this trial.  At this point he has not been indicated on the

   5   witness list, but to the extent that he is present and could

   6   possibly be called as a witness, we would like to initially

   7   exclude him from the courtroom, since all other witnesses have

   8   been excluded.

   9            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt?

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we learned two weeks ago

  11   that Mr. Johansen was going to be in New York, and we

  12   mentioned at that point that we might want to use him as a

  13   witness.  He is 17 years old, and he has been here for four

  14   days.  We have had almost no chance to talk to him, so we

  15   hadn't intended to put him up as a witness.  If your Honor

  16   would like to hear from him, since he is sort of the horse, we

  17   can --

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, why don't we exclude him for

  19   now and we can talk about these other issues later.

  20            THE COURT:  Well, then, Mr. Johansen, you will have

  21   to leave the courtroom.  You are welcome to sit in the jury

  22   room back under the clock.

  23            All right, Ms. Miller, let's proceed, please.

  24   Q.  Now, you gave a deposition in this matter last night, is

  25   that correct, Mr. Stevenson?



232



   1   A.  Yes.

   2   Q.  Now, you indicated in your deposition that you had never

   3   heard of CSS until you read a report on Slashdot about the

   4   creation of DeCSS, is that correct?

   5   A.  That is not correct.  It was about the creation of

   6   css-auth.

   7   Q.  Okay.  So the original report that you read on Slashdot

   8   was about css-auth, correct?

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  And until that point in time you had never heard of CSS,

  11   is that correct?

  12   A.  Not that I'm aware of.

  13   Q.  So you had not engaged in the encryption activities

  14   related to CSS, is that correct?

  15   A.  Excuse me.

  16   Q.  Up until the point in time that you first read about

  17   css-auth on Slashdot, you had not been involved in the

  18   encryption research activity related to CSS, correct?

  19   A.  That is correct.

  20   Q.  Now, as far as you know, Mr. Stevenson, the CSS algorithm

  21   was not derived by a brute force attack, is that right?

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection.  It's beyond the scope.  I

  23   did not ask him any questions about how it was derived.

  24            THE COURT:  Well, I'm certainly going to sustain it

  25   as to form for starters, because the terms are not clear.



233



   1            THE WITNESS:  Not to me either.

   2            MS. MILLER:  I will move on.

   3   Q.  The cryptoanalysis of the CSS algorithm that you prepared

   4   was only prepared after your examination of what was posted on

   5   the LiViD group as the anonymous source, is that correct?

   6   A.  That is correct.

   7   Q.  And you testified that you contributed your cryptoanalysis

   8   to the LiViD mailing list, is that correct?

   9   A.  That is correct.

  10   Q.  Now you also have testified that you contributed some

  11   attacks, I believe was the word you used, to the LiViD mailing

  12   list concerning how one might derive encryption keys for

  13   purposes of decrypting a DVD, is that correct?

  14   A.  Those were my contributions to the LiViD mailing list.

  15   Q.  And those were your only contributions to the LiViD

  16   mailing list, is that correct?

  17   A.  I performed also some discussion one-to-one with other

  18   members of the list.

  19   Q.  But as far as actually contributing any of the code for

  20   the Linux DVD player that was under development, those were

  21   the only three?

  22   A.  I only submitted these three pieces of code to the list,

  23   yes.

  24   Q.  Thank you.  You don't know, however, whether in fact any

  25   of the attacks that you contributed were used in any aspect of



234



   1   the Linux DVD player that was being developed on the Linux

   2   mailing list, is that correct?

   3   A.  As I mentioned, I believe that some player keys might have

   4   been determined as a result of the code that I posted, and

   5   that those in turn were useful for the development of a LiViD

   6   or Linux DVD player.

   7   Q.  But you testified in your deposition last night that you

   8   have no way of knowing to be sure whether in fact what you

   9   posted was used to derive those player keys, correct?

  10   A.  As I did not derive those player keys, of course I cannot

  11   testify to that.

  12   Q.  Now, you testified today that you believe that your

  13   cryptoanalysis was removed from the 2600 website as a result

  14   of this lawsuit, is that correct?

  15   A.  That is correct.

  16   Q.  Now, isn't it true that Mr. Corley asked your permission

  17   to link to your site which posted the cryptoanalysis that you

  18   performed on CSS?

  19   A.  He asked for permission to mirror the content of my

  20   website.

  21   Q.  Now, you have no knowledge of whether in fact Mr. Corley

  22   was involved in any reverse engineering activities related to

  23   the Linux DVD player, is that correct?

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection, your Honor.

  25            THE COURT:  Sustained.  Beyond the scope.



235



   1            MS. MILLER:  No further questions.

   2            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Mr. Hernstadt?

   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  I have nothing further.  Thank you

   4   very much, Mr. Stevenson.

   5            THE COURT:  Mr. Stevenson, you may step down.

   6            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, may we have a two-minute

   7   break?

   8            THE COURT:  Five minutes.

   9            (Recess)

  10            (Continued on next page)

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



236



   1            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

   2            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I would like to call Mr. Robert

   3   Schumann as our next witness.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, let me make a preliminary

   5   remark with respect to this witness as well as the next

   6   witness, and perhaps I should have made it with respect to the

   7   other witness.  It's just a cautionary remark that the

   8   witnesses each have a certain limited area of expertise.

   9            For example, Mr. Schumann testified originally as a

  10   security expert and over the course of time, the expertise of

  11   these witnesses is blown up so that they now cover a good deal

  12   of other areas.  I just caution that, at this point, and I'll

  13   make the appropriate objection.

  14            THE COURT:  You make the appropriate objection.  I

  15   would be a lot happier if none of the attorneys make little

  16   pieces of closing argument along the way in the sense of being

  17   helpful.  I appreciate the helpfulness.  I recognize also that

  18   many of them are intended for public audiences, and that's

  19   true of both sides, and we are going to try this case by the

  20   book.

  21            You have an objection.  You make the objection at the

  22   right time.  That goes for everybody.

  23    ROBERT W. SCHUMANN,

  24        called as a witness by the plaintiff

  25        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:



237



   1            THE CLERK:  State your name.  Spell your last name

   2   slowly.

   3            THE WITNESS:  Robert W. Schumann S-C-H-U-M-A-N-N.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, you may proceed.

   5   DIRECT EXAMINATION

   6   BY MR. GOLD:

   7   Q.  Good morning, Mr. Schumann.

   8   A.  Good morning.

   9   Q.  Mr. Schumann, by whom are you employed?

  10   A.  Cinea LLC.

  11   Q.  And what is your position with Cinea?

  12   A.  I'm president and CEO of Cinea.

  13   Q.  What is --

  14            THE COURT:  Spell Cinea?

  15            THE WITNESS:  C-I-N-E-A.

  16            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Proceed.

  17            I didn't know if it was a showy summer flower or --

  18            MR GOLD:  It will soon be a very large blossoming

  19   flower.

  20   Q.  What is the business of Cinea?

  21   A.  Cinea is a startup corporation whose business or area of

  22   business expertise is the creation and development of security

  23   systems, with a focus on digital content, in particular,

  24   video.

  25   Q.  Now, you said that Cinea designs and develops security



238



   1   systems, is that correct?

   2   A.  That's correct, yes.

   3   Q.  Who does it develop them for?

   4   A.  It develops them for people who have a need to protect

   5   their content.  Typically, this is the movie studios or other

   6   people who have video content, such as television groups or

   7   corporations, anybody who has content that they would like to

   8   protect and insure the integrity of.

   9   Q.  Have you heard the term "high value digital content"?

  10   A.  Yeah, it's a term we use commonly in our description of

  11   the company.  We -- our early market focus is what we call the

  12   high value digital video, which is the time when a movie is

  13   released.  It goes through what's called windows of release.

  14            So, first, it's created.  Then it's released to the

  15   theater.  Then it typically goes into hotels and airplanes and

  16   other what's called window venues.  Then it's released to home

  17   video, and then it goes to pay per-view.  And as it moves

  18   through those stages of distribution, it changes its value

  19   proposition for the studio.

  20            So, when it's first released, they spend a tremendous

  21   amount of money to create this content, but have realized no

  22   revenue from the content.  It has a tremendous amount of

  23   future revenue, but has no realized revenue and so, as it

  24   leaves the theater, it has received a portion of its future

  25   revenue, so now it has some realized revenue, it continues to



239



   1   sustain future revenue.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I object on the grounds that this

   3   witness is not an expert, and move to strike.

   4            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   5   Q.  Is it true that the higher the content value, as you've

   6   just described of the digital material, the more potential

   7   customers are likely to spend on the security system?

   8   A.  Absolutely.

   9   Q.  What is a DVD?

  10   A.  DVD is a -- stands for "digital versatile disk" and it

  11   describes a family of standards and in common perception

  12   products, the consumer knows DVD as the video disk, commonly

  13   as the video disk, as described here in this hearing, but it

  14   really encompasses a set of standards, including the standards

  15   for the physical disks themselves and the readers and the

  16   structures of the disk commonly referred to as DVD-ROM, as

  17   well as video standards that describe how to store video and

  18   content on those disks.

  19   Q.  How much storage capacity can one usually expect to find

  20   on a DVD?

  21   A.  DVD support four or five different storage levels.

  22   Normally the minimum size is 4.7 gigabytes for -- and this is

  23   DVD-ROM.  There are four gigabytes DVD-ROM, which is the

  24   compressed ROMs support a minimum of 4.7 gigabytes and are

  25   typically released as 4.7 gigabytes or what's called



240



   1   dual-layer or dual-sided where they have between nine and ten

   2   gigabytes of data, essentially two 4.7 layers.

   3   Q.  Is there a difference in the quality of the digital data

   4   stored on a DVD and, for example, audio analog data like that

   5   stored on a video cassette disk?

   6   A.  Absolutely.  DVDs have a far higher degree of quality than

   7   VCR tapes or VHS tapes.  Typically, the people view it as a

   8   four times better quality.  It's hard to put a quantitative

   9   number like that on it, but it describes a much stronger -- a

  10   much higher resolution on the screen as well as much better

  11   color fidelity than is possible on videotape.  Also DVDs have

  12   a much better audio system than VHS tape does.

  13   Q.  Is there now a particular need for digital content?

  14   A.  There's a tremendous market acceptance for digital content

  15   as evidenced by the rise of DVDs and the spill of DVDs; yes.

  16   Q.  How long have you been with Cinea?

  17   A.  I have been with Cinea since its founding in June of 1999.

  18   Q.  And what did you do before that?

  19   A.  I was working for Digital Video Express, commonly known as

  20   "Divex."  I'll note for the Court that it's not the same Divex

  21   as been previously discussed in this room.

  22            And at Divex, I was -- when I joined Divex, I was one

  23   of the chief architects of the overall DiVX system.  And then

  24   I spent the last two years working on future business

  25   developments for Divex.



241



   1            THE COURT:  So, in the hope of producing a transcript

   2   here that is intelligible to the rest of the world, let's

   3   adopt this convention, Amy:  When someone is speaking of DiVX

   4   in the sense we heard yesterday, that is, as the compression

   5   method, that gets rendered, as I understand, the capital DiVX.

   6            "Divex" meaning the name of this gentleman's former

   7   company, let's render it as "Divex" with no capitals in the

   8   middle of the word.

   9            Let's proceed.

  10   Q.  What was Divex's business?

  11   A.  Divex's business was essentially a better way to rent

  12   movies for consumers.  It created products, both distributed

  13   videos as well as technology that went into players which

  14   allowed the retail sale of movies at a four dollars -- $4.49

  15   and essentially what was sold was the physical media and what

  16   we'll call one free rental period.

  17            So, a consumer was able to go into a store such as

  18   Circuit City or grocery store or their favorite video store

  19   and "buy the movie" and what they would do then is they could

  20   take that movie home and unlike a movie rented at

  21   Blockbuster's, your rental period or your two-day period

  22   started when you put the movie in the player, and not when you

  23   left the store; O.K.

  24            And so, I could buy it on a Monday, put it in the

  25   player on a Friday night when I like to watch my movies, and



242



   1   then would have all weekend to watch it, just as I did with a

   2   rental movie that I got at Blockbuster and then at the end of

   3   the weekend, I wouldn't have to take it back.  It was

   4   basically a convenience product for the consumer.

   5   Q.  Was the technology of that particular DiVX product that

   6   you just described similar to present DVD technology?

   7   A.  It was in the base technologies of how the video stored,

   8   how the video was played back, and how the structure and

   9   quality of the video, in fact, we used the DVD specifications

  10   for those portions where we differed was that we had a

  11   different security system and a slightly different menuing

  12   system.

  13   Q.  What was your title when you were at Divex?

  14   A.  My title when Divex was shut down was director of

  15   strategic technology.

  16   Q.  And what were your responsibilities as director of

  17   strategic technology at Divex?

  18   A.  In that role, I was responsible for working with other

  19   content areas, essentially to promulgate the DiVX technology

  20   into both other applications as well as into other platforms

  21   such as digital cinema and other high-value areas.

  22   Q.  Was there a digital content security aspect to DiVX

  23   technology?

  24   A.  Absolutely.  The DiVX system was dependent on a robust

  25   security subsystem.



243



   1   Q.  Prior to the time that you became director of strategic

   2   technology at Divex, did you hold another job at Divex?

   3   A.  Yes, I was chief architect at Divex.

   4   Q.  And what did you do as chief architect at Divex?

   5   A.  I was -- I had responsibilities for the overall system

   6   design, both of players as well as the back end, and also was

   7   one of the key -- key members of the team that developed the

   8   DiVX security architecture.

   9   Q.  I'd like to show you a document that's been marked as

  10   Exhibit 4 for identification, Defendant's Exhibit 4.

  11            THE COURT:  Plaintiff's or defendant's?

  12            MR GOLD:  Plaintiff's Exhibit 4.

  13            THE COURT:  Your roots are showing, Mr. Gold.

  14            MR GOLD:  Yes.

  15   Q.  Mr. Schumann, what is Exhibit 4?

  16   A.  It's a copy of my resume.

  17   Q.  And is all of the information on that document accurate?

  18   A.  Yes, it is.

  19            MR. GOLD:  I'd like to introduce that document as

  20   Plaintiff's Exhibit No. -- what, in evidence?  4.  Plaintiff's

  21   Exhibit 4 in evidence, your Honor.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I have no objection.

  23            THE COURT:  It's received.

  24            (Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 received in evidence)

  25            THE COURT:  I note in looking at it that the spelling



244



   1   of the name of the witness' former company is DIVX, and

   2   notwithstanding that, we are going with the D-i-v-e-x

   3   convention to differentiate it from the other technology.

   4            O.K., let's go.

   5   Q.  Did there come a time when you were retained by the

   6   Proskauer law firm to assist plaintiffs in this case?

   7   A.  Yes, sir, I did.

   8   Q.  And what were you asked to do, sir?

   9   A.  I was asked to provide my expertise and to apply my

  10   knowledge of digital systems and security systems and DVDs and

  11   my background to this case.

  12   Q.  Were you asked to do anything in connection with CSS or

  13   DeCSS?

  14   A.  Absolutely.  I had performed an analysis for the MPAA and

  15   I was asked in the discussion with the folks at Proskauer to

  16   help them understand and provide a, I guess what's called an

  17   affidavit relative to my understanding of CSS and how it

  18   worked and also DeCSS.

  19   Q.  Did you have a written retainer agreement?

  20   A.  I did not.

  21   Q.  What were the terms of your retainer?

  22   A.  The terms of the retainer was that I would be compensated

  23   for my time on an hourly basis -- or I should clarify that --

  24   that Cinea would be compensated for my time on an hourly

  25   basis.



245



   1   Q.  And what is the rate charged by Cinea for your time?

   2   A.  $325 per hour.

   3   Q.  Mr. Schumann, what is DeCSS?

   4   A.  DeCSS is a Windows application which essentially removes

   5   the CSS protection mechanisms from content or video --

   6   audio-video content stored on DVDs.

   7   Q.  Does DeCSS run under the Microsoft Windows operating

   8   system?

   9   A.  Absolutely.  In fact, that's the only place that the DeCSS

  10   executable works.

  11   Q.  And what does DeCSS allow its user to do?

  12   A.  DeCSS allows its users to take a DVD disk that's protected

  13   with the CSS protection system, place it into the DVD drive of

  14   their Windows computer, then select essentially the files from

  15   that -- from that disk and ask them to be written to their

  16   hard drive or connected network machine and write -- and write

  17   the resultant file -- the resultant of what's called "plain

  18   text" in the security filed, but unencrypted data back to the

  19   hard drive.

  20            It essentially performs one and only function and

  21   that is to remove the CSS protection and allow the copying of

  22   the unencrypted data.

  23   Q.  So, at the end of the process, there is an unencrypted

  24   movie tape on the user's hard drive?

  25   A.  Absolutely.  The audio-visual content is stored on the



246



   1   user's hard drive in unencrypted form.

   2   Q.  And what can the user do with that unencrypted motion

   3   picture?

   4   A.  They can do anything they could do with any other file on

   5   their hard drive.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I'll object to it unless he's done it.

   7            THE COURT:  You need to lay a better foundation here,

   8   Counsel.

   9   Q.  Did you use DeCSS?

  10   A.  Yes, I have.

  11   Q.  Did you decrypt any movies with DeCSS?

  12   A.  Yes, I have.

  13   Q.  How many?

  14   A.  I have used DeCSS about four or five times now.

  15   Q.  And did you observe what it did?

  16   A.  Yes, I did.

  17   Q.  Can you tell us what DeCSS does to an encrypted DVD?

  18   A.  Absolutely.

  19            THE COURT:  I take it you have just told us, is that

  20   right?

  21            THE WITNESS:  I can provide more detail, if the Court

  22   would --

  23   Q.  Would you please, sir?

  24   A.  Absolutely.  DeCSS performs its function in four --

  25   essentially four discrete steps.  In order to extract the



247



   1   content and to unlock the disk, CSS provides two mechanisms to

   2   prevent access and to prevent the copying of the content.

   3            First, it provides a locking mechanism whereby a DVD

   4   drive will not release the CSS-protected content on the disk

   5   to a computer until the CSS drive has completed a handshake

   6   with the computer and is satisfied that the computer is -- to

   7   use the lay term -- "safe" to release the content to; O.K.

   8            So, that's the unlocking step.  So, when DeCSS is

   9   first brought up, it unlocks the DVD drive, so it can get

  10   access to the content.  It then provides a screen to the user

  11   which looks just like any other Windows screen where the user

  12   is able to select the files off of the DVD disk that they

  13   would like to extract and copy.  That's step 2.

  14            Step 3, the user then selects the target directory

  15   into which they would like to write the plain text or

  16   decrypted files.  That directory can be any directory on their

  17   Windows machine.  So, that could be the hard drive, could be a

  18   directory on the hard drive, it could be a directory on

  19   connected network machines.  It could be a directory on an

  20   attached tape drive or any -- essentially anywhere in the

  21   Windows someone sees as a directory.

  22            So, they select the files they want to copy, then

  23   they select where they want the output written to, and then

  24   finally they click the button that tells the program to start

  25   and then the program goes to the process of running the CSS



248



   1   decryption algorithms against that content and writes the

   2   resultant plain text to the output files.

   3   Q.  So, at the end of this process, is it true that you have

   4   descrambled the previously-scrambled DVD?

   5   A.  Absolutely.

   6   Q.  Have you ever visited the 2600.com website?

   7   A.  Yes, I have.

   8   Q.  How many times?

   9   A.  Probably several dozen now.

  10   Q.  Have you ever down-loaded software from the 2600.com

  11   website?

  12   A.  Yes, I have.

  13   Q.  Did you download DeCSS from that site?

  14   A.  Yes, absolutely, on multiple occasions.

  15   Q.  In what form was the DeCSS software that you downloaded

  16   from the 2600.com site?

  17   A.  The DeCSS software that I downloaded was in the form of a

  18   zip file, but that zip file contained the DeCSS executable,

  19   again, the Windows application that I formerly described.

  20   Q.  When you downloaded, was in it form of a Microsoft Windows

  21   executable utility?

  22   A.  Yes, it was.  Again, it was contained within a zip file

  23   which is -- which is a mechanism for compressing files for

  24   faster download and faster transmission, but after it was

  25   extracted from the zip file, that zip file contained the



249



   1   Windows executable.  So, effectively, it was a Windows

   2   executable that I downloaded.

   3   Q.  How do you know it was a Windows executable system that

   4   runs under the Microsoft operating system?

   5   A.  Executables are tightly coupled to the operating system

   6   they run on, and so, if it was not a Windows-executable,

   7   Windows would have refused to run the program.

   8   Q.  Do you know anything about whether DeCSS was created to

   9   run on a Linux system?

  10   A.  I can say that, to my knowledge, there was absolutely

  11   no -- it would not appear at all that it was and that's from

  12   several -- several aspects, No. 1, the thing is a Windows

  13   operating system.  It's written and runs on the Windows

  14   operating system; O.K.

  15            And somebody who is developing a program for the

  16   Linux operating system would not create a Windows executable.

  17   They would, in fact, create a Linux executable because the

  18   process and the interfaces are considerably different between

  19   those two.

  20            In addition, in my work for the MPAA --

  21            THE COURT:  I think there's an objection; is there?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, there is, your Honor.

  23            THE COURT:  And what is it?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  As for the MPA, it would be hearsay.

  25   With respect to the other material, it's conclusory.



250



   1            THE COURT:  Your voice is so low.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  There is no foundation for the

   3   conclusions that he's drawn and with respect to the other

   4   material, I presume it all to be hearsay.

   5            THE COURT:  Let's back up and I will strike this

   6   answer.  And let's come at it and lay a proper foundation.

   7   Q.  You've testified that DeCSS runs under the Microsoft

   8   operating system, is that correct?

   9   A.  That's correct.

  10   Q.  Did you observe any facts which led you to that

  11   conclusion?

  12            THE COURT:  We did that part.

  13            Do you have an opinion of whether this DeCSS was

  14   created to run on Linux machines?  That's the question; yes or

  15   no?  Do you have an opinion?

  16            THE WITNESS:  Yes, absolutely.

  17            THE COURT:  What is the opinion?

  18            THE WITNESS:  The opinion is that DeCSS was created

  19   to run on the Windows operating system.

  20            THE COURT:  And what's the basis for the opinion?

  21            THE WITNESS:  The basis for the opinion is that it

  22   was released in a Windows executable format.  I personally, in

  23   my looking through the web and looking at all of the

  24   available -- what's available for download that's referred to

  25   as DeCSS have never seen anything other than a Windows



251



   1   executable; O.K.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I object to it.

   3            THE COURT:  I'd like to hear the rest of the answer,

   4   then I will hear your objection.

   5            THE WITNESS:  And, lastly, based on my considerable

   6   expertise and history in creating software, you do not

   7   accidentally create an executable that runs on an operating

   8   system.  You do it very deliberately and very particularly.

   9            THE COURT:  I don't understand the last thing you

  10   said.

  11            THE WITNESS:  If I am asked to create a piece of

  12   software, O.K., one of the first questions I need to ask the

  13   user or the person who has asked me to create that software

  14   is:  Where do you want this software to run?  Do you want it

  15   to run on a McIntosh?  Do you want it to run on Windows?  Do

  16   you want it to run on Linux?

  17            And the software and the instructions and the source

  18   code I have to write are different between those applications;

  19   O.K.  And thus, I would not accidentally create a Windows

  20   application while I was creating a Linux application.

  21            THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. Garbus, I will hear you

  22   now on that.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  You'll hear me now?

  24            To the extent that this is based -- as I understand

  25   the testimony, basically he was asked to do a study and a



252



   1   survey of the Linux site and he then prepared a report with

   2   respect to that Linux site and that --

   3            THE COURT:  That's not what he said at all.

   4            MR. GOLD:  He's referring to testimony that was in

   5   his deposition which I haven't asked questions about.

   6            THE COURT:  That's not what I heard here this

   7   morning.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I'm sorry.  I thought he was referring

   9   to material that he had downloaded.

  10            THE COURT:  From your client's website.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, and that was part of the

  12   conclusion, the basis for his conclusion.  That's what I

  13   thought he said.

  14            MR GOLD:  We haven't gotten up to that part yet.

  15            THE COURT:  I don't think he said that, Mr. Garbus.

  16   What I understand here is essentially this:  And you may as

  17   well know what I understand so you can all address it, it is

  18   his opinion that DeCSS was written for Windows, not for Linux

  19   and he bases that on the following facts:

  20            First, that it runs under Windows.

  21            Secondly, that he has never seen any reference

  22   anywhere to a version of DeCSS that runs under any other

  23   operating system.

  24            And thirdly, he spoke several sentences about the

  25   extremely tight linkage between operating systems and



253



   1   applications programs, which he then extrapolated upon to say

   2   that you wouldn't accidentally create a program that runs on

   3   Windows if you were really designing it for a different

   4   operating system.

   5            Now, that's what I understood him to say.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

   7            THE COURT:  O.K.  Now, is there a problem with that,

   8   Mr. Garbus?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  No -- excuse me.  I think we can deal

  10   with it in cross, rather.

  11            THE COURT:  O.K., fine.  Mr. Gold?

  12   Q.  Was there anything else that you observed that caused you

  13   to reach the conclusion that DeCSS runs under the Microsoft

  14   operating system?

  15   A.  Yes.  In my reviews of the Linux logs, this was the study

  16   I performed for the MPAA.  There was several back and forth, I

  17   guess, operations or discussions as the DeCSS program was

  18   released into the Linux development environment and it is my

  19   opinion based on my review of those logs that DeCSS was

  20   provided from outside of the Linux development environment and

  21   thus, and some of the exchanges described in those logs

  22   described the source of that not even saying he likes --

  23   implicates that he doesn't particularly like Linux and Linux

  24   is not the operating system of choice.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  To the extent that this answer is based



254



   1   on hearsay, I move to strike it.

   2            THE COURT:  This is offered as further support for

   3   his opinion under Rule 703.  And to that limited extent it's

   4   admissible, for whatever it's worth.  It's not admissible for

   5   the truth of the underlying proposition.  It's admissible to

   6   assist me in evaluating the man's level of expertise and

   7   whether he has logically reached the conclusions that he has

   8   just offered.

   9            So, on that limited basis, it's received.

  10   Q.  Mr. Schumann, at this point, I would like to show you

  11   certain pages from what has already been premarked as

  12   Plaintiff's Exhibit 9 in this case?

  13   A.  O.K.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, these pages, as I

  15   understand, are two or three or four pages of the documents

  16   that I referred to yesterday which are part of the log of

  17   about two or three feet high from which he extracted these

  18   pages.  I would ask that the entire log go in, that this is

  19   just a small part of it.

  20            THE COURT:  Well, you can do whatever you like on

  21   cross or at least you can try.

  22            MR. GOLD:  The entire log has been submitted as a

  23   trial exhibit here, all two to three feet of it.

  24            THE COURT:  Well, look --

  25            MR. GOLD:  And they have not been moved in yet?



255



   1            THE COURT:  Yes, I understand that, the latter.

   2            MR GOLD:  We are about to do it.

   3            THE COURT:  It is a Federal case, but let's

   4   colloquially not make a Federal case out of this.  Whatever is

   5   going to come in, in all likelihood, your point is, Mr. Gold,

   6   that you want to talk about these three pages.

   7            MR GOLD:  It is, sir.

   8            THE COURT:  Nobody has to strain any muscles handling

   9   the other three feet of it or however much it is for this

  10   purpose.  Go ahead.

  11            MR GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

  12            THE COURT:  Let's call this 9A.  We are going to mark

  13   this 9A so we can differentiate it from the mountain.

  14   Q.  Mr. Schumann, have you ever seen those pages before?

  15   A.  Yes, I have.

  16   Q.  And how did you get them before today?

  17   A.  These are extractions from the list of the -- or the stack

  18   of the LiViD and I think they are Linux DVD.  I think it's

  19   called development logs that were supplied to me by the MPAA

  20   printouts of those development groups.

  21   Q.  Turning to the first page of Exhibit 9A, the first page is

  22   entitled DeCSS 1.1B has been released.  Do you see that?

  23   A.  Yes, I do.

  24   Q.  What does that mean?

  25   A.  This is a posting by Jon Johansen and what he describes



256



   1   here is that he has released a DeCSS source code provides --

   2   not source code, excuse me -- the DeCSS executable provides

   3   the location to go -- to go click to get that executable and

   4   also you'll note in the middle two sentences that he

   5   specifically says it works on Win '98 and Win 2K has not been

   6   tested on Win NT, not that there is no reference to Linux and

   7   any other operating system other than the Windows operating

   8   systems in this release of the original.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I presume there's a hearsay

  10   objection.

  11            THE COURT:  Again, it's exactly the same point I made

  12   before.  It's not for the truth.  It is here to explain the

  13   opinion he gave.

  14   Q.  Now, turning to the second page of Defendant's Exhibit --

  15   Plaintiff's Exhibit -- after 37 years, it's hard -- of

  16   Plaintiff's Exhibit 9A.

  17            Does it contain the message that you referred to

  18   earlier from Mr. Johansen?

  19   A.  Yes, it does.  And again, this is a -- what you see here

  20   is you're kind of, as you look at this, you're kind of

  21   stepping into the middle of a discussion and so you'll see

  22   that as you read through this text that there's reference to

  23   earlier things that have been said, some of them apparently

  24   privately, but this message was written by one of the members

  25   of the -- of actually this message was written by Jon



257



   1   Johansen, again, in reply to one of the members of the DVD

   2   group who apparently John Johansen has told this member that

   3   he doesn't like Linux.

   4            He's not quite sure why he released it to that

   5   environment.  He really prefers Free BSD, which is another

   6   open source unique environment and there appears to have been

   7   an angry exchange between these two about the merits of their

   8   respective operating systems.

   9            And I guess to the point of why does this lead me to,

  10   I guess, add or view this as another example that this was not

  11   created for Linux, people who are -- who develop things for

  12   Linux do not usually go around and then bad mouth the

  13   operating system that they're purportedly helping to create.

  14   It's not standard operation of the people on that group.

  15   Q.  Now, earlier, you testified that you downloaded DeCSS from

  16   2600.com as an executable utility?

  17   A.  That's correct.

  18   Q.  And what does that mean?  What is an executable utility?

  19   A.  An executable utility is the subject to -- it's such a

  20   program in its finished form.  It's ready to be operated by an

  21   end user with no further steps.

  22            So, when you get Microsoft word from Microsoft, you

  23   are, in fact, getting the executable.  You're getting help

  24   documentation and lots of other stuff, but you are getting the

  25   executable, which means that it is a program that is intended



258



   1   for reading and execution by the computer.  So, it's

   2   essentially in the computer's language, as opposed to the

   3   writer's language or in human readable form.

   4   Q.  And, therefore, the average computer user can use it

   5   easily, is that true?

   6   A.  Absolutely.  They just click on it the same way they would

   7   click on Microsoft word or any other application on their

   8   computer.

   9   Q.  Now, you mentioned the word or the word source code, what

  10   is that?

  11   A.  Source code is the -- that's the original form of a

  12   computer program.  It's the form in which the computer program

  13   is written and it is in a form that can be edited and

  14   understood and modified over time.  So, and it's typically

  15   written in a computer language, typically program language

  16   such as CC or 'C.'

  17   Q.  Now, getting back to DeCSS, can you tell us exactly what

  18   its function is?

  19   A.  I think as I described a little bit earlier, its function

  20   is to read the encrypted content off of a DVD, allow the user

  21   to select subsections of that content, if he so desires,

  22   select where they want to write the output and then direct the

  23   program to perform the actual decryption and copying of that

  24   content to the file or to the hard drive.

  25   Q.  With respect to the audio-visual content stored on the



259



   1   DVD, what is the end product of that process?

   2   A.  The end product of that process is an exact copy of the

   3   audio-visual content that was on the DVD with the only

   4   difference being that the CSS protection system has been

   5   removed from that content.

   6   Q.  And based on your experience and observations using DeCSS,

   7   does it perform any other functions other than to decrypt and

   8   copy the CSS-protected contents of a DVD?

   9   A.  No.

  10   Q.  Now, if a user was to use DeCSS to decrypt a DVD, and then

  11   DiVX'd the movie so that it was stored on his hard drive in

  12   DiVX form, what can he do with that decrypted DVD that's been

  13   DiVX'd?

  14   A.  He could do the same things he could with a nonDiVX'd

  15   decrypted version, which is he could provide that -- he could

  16   make copies of that content to transportable media.  DiVX

  17   would allow -- this is the DiVX referred to yesterday; I'm

  18   sorry -- would allow the writing potentially onto CD-ROM

  19   drivers because it could, in fact, compress the content to a

  20   smaller size.

  21            It would allow him to again transfer the files,

  22   provide them to people on the Internet, make them available on

  23   a website, e-mail them to friends potentially, put them on

  24   tapes, put them on transportable hard drivers, essentially

  25   anything you could do with a digital file provided that the



260



   1   place you're sending it to has the appropriate storage

   2   capacity, could be done with those files.

   3   Q.  If the decrypted DiVX'd DVDs were offered on the Internet

   4   for downloading by anyone, would any of the people who

   5   downloaded have to DiVX it again?

   6   A.  No, absolutely not.

   7   Q.  So, if approximately 100,000 people got that decrypted

   8   DiVX'd DVD, got it transmitted to their computer, not one of

   9   them would have to DiVX it again?

  10   A.  No.  I mean, that's the nature of these compression

  11   systems is that you don't need to recompress it.  It's already

  12   compressed, and then all you need is the decompression

  13   mechanism when you want to play it back.

  14            So, you don't need to go through the process and, in

  15   fact, a design -- in many cases, it's a design constraint of

  16   these compression systems that they are allowed to spend a lot

  17   of time on the compression side in the direction of making the

  18   depression or the viewing of the content to be very quick and

  19   effective.

  20            You'll often see these compression systems have very

  21   long compression times, but that's because they're intended to

  22   be run only once and it's irrelevant in the distribution of

  23   the content.

  24   Q.  And how long -- what is the computer lines found in most

  25   universities today?



261



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.

   2   Q.  Can you answer that?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I'll object to it.

   4            THE COURT:  Sustained; lack of foundation.

   5   Q.  Do you know anything about lines used by any colleges or

   6   universities and made available to their students?

   7   A.  Are you asking about networking connections and my

   8   understanding of networking?

   9   Q.  Yes.

  10   A.  Yes, I have a significant understanding of networking and

  11   how modern computer networks work.

  12   Q.  Based on that knowledge, how long would it take a college

  13   student having access to the university lines to have a movie

  14   transferred and downloaded?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

  16            THE COURT:  Sustained; no foundation.

  17   Q.  Going back to that DiVX'd decrypted DiVX'd DVD, could the

  18   owner of it, having it on his hard drive, join a file-sharing

  19   program on the Internet and offer that movie to anyone in that

  20   file-sharing program?

  21   A.  Absolutely.

  22   Q.  Are you familiar with the term "hyperlink"?

  23   A.  Yes, I am.

  24   Q.  How is it used in connection with the Internet?

  25   A.  A hyperlink is the kind of a core mechanism, if you will,



262



   1   of what's -- of the worldwide web and the interfaces that

   2   users have there.  It's the mechanism by which a user is able

   3   to -- to, I guess, link or to jump to other relevant pages.

   4            So, when you're looking at a worldwide web page, when

   5   the text says, you know, go here for this or there's a

   6   highlighted text and you click on it and you go to another

   7   page, that is typically a hyperlink or it's commonly referred

   8   to as "a link."

   9            And what it does is it then points you and directs

  10   your browser.  It's essentially a software instruction, your

  11   browser to go to another location to retrieve a new page.

  12   Q.  Does the word "linking" and the word "hyperlinking"

  13   describe the same thing?

  14   A.  Yeah, linking is the more typically-used shorthand and it

  15   refers to what in the literature is known as "hyperlinking."

  16   Q.  Are hyperlinks useful to Internet users?

  17   A.  Absolutely.

  18   Q.  And how?

  19   A.  They are the basic mechanism upon which the worldwide web

  20   is built.  It's the -- it's the critical, I guess, feature

  21   that you will -- that allows one user to go from one page to

  22   another in an easy and seemless fashion.

  23   Q.  How do people use hyperlinks on the Internet?

  24   A.  They use them in many ways.  They use them to link --

  25            MR. GARBUS:  I'll object.



263



   1            I assume Mr. Gold can lay a proper foundation.  I

   2   presume this witness has used it, but I think that should be

   3   done first.

   4            THE COURT:  Well, we can do that, but this is a

   5   matter really almost for judicial notice.  I mean, if you are

   6   serious about that, Mr. Garbus, we will do it, but it's a

   7   waste of time; isn't it?

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I'll withdraw it.

   9            THE COURT:  O.K., go ahead.

  10   Q.  You were describing how people use hyperlinks.

  11   A.  Yeah.  They are used in several ways.  They are used both

  12   to link -- when you're creating a site inside of your domain,

  13   so, if I was creating -- when we are creating our site for

  14   Cinea, we will have a plain page and then we will have

  15   subsidiary pages below that.

  16            So, we will, on our plain page, have links that link

  17   to more detailed information such as, you know, contact

  18   information, how do you contact Cinea, and so we'll have a

  19   link on that main page to the subsidiary pages within our site

  20   that provides that information.

  21            And then we'll also obviously have links on that site

  22   back up to our main page.  So, you link internally and then

  23   you also link externally to your site.  So, if you have

  24   information that you believe is of interest or that you want

  25   to make available to other people from your site, you can



264



   1   create those links and point them elsewhere in the Internet.

   2   Q.  When you visited the 2600.com website in connection with

   3   your work on DeCSS, did you view any hyperlinks on the site

   4   that appeared to be related to DeCSS?

   5   A.  Yeah, absolutely.

   6   Q.  When was your last visit?

   7   A.  My last visit was I believe last week to the site.

   8   Q.  And how many hyperlinks related to DeCSS did you note?

   9   A.  There were -- I didn't count them, but there were

  10   hundreds, I'm sure.

  11   Q.  Were you asked to do anything with respect to the

  12   hyperlinks on the 2600.com website?

  13   A.  Yes, I was.  I was asked to follow -- to pick a set of

  14   those links and to, in fact, download -- see if I could

  15   download DeCSS from those -- from those sites and through

  16   those hyperlinks, I guess.

  17   Q.  When was the first time that you conducted such an

  18   examination?

  19   A.  I conducted such the -- the hyperlink examination in, I

  20   guess it would have been January or February of this year for

  21   the first time.

  22   Q.  And what was the last time?

  23   A.  The last time would have been last week.

  24   Q.  Let me show you what's been marked as Exhibit 97 for

  25   identification.  First, sir, can you tell me if you know what



265



   1   Exhibit 97 is?

   2   A.  Yes.  This is a record or a trail, if you will, that I

   3   created of my last pass through 2600.

   4   Q.  Directing your attention to the top of page 1 of the

   5   document and the large "Stop the MPAA" banner.  Do you see the

   6   words "mirrors" under that?

   7   A.  Yes, I do.

   8   Q.  What is that?

   9   A.  That is the link, and this is one of these internal links,

  10   and this link then takes you -- I believe the following page

  11   shows the beginning of the page it's linked to and that page

  12   then contains a list of mirror sites.

  13            And "mirrors" are a commonly used term in the web to

  14   refer to sites that have copies of something that you are

  15   trying to provide to the public.

  16            THE COURT:  Can't we shortcut this? I'm assuming that

  17   there is no issue of fact as to the proposition that the

  18   defendant's website has links to sites that are mirrors DeCSS

  19   and from which executable copies of DeCSS may be downloaded.

  20            Is there any dispute about that, Mr. Garbus?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I think executable and source, there are

  22   certain links.

  23            THE COURT:  I'm sorry?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  With respect to source code and

  25   executable code, yes, I understand there are links to those



266



   1   sites.

   2            THE COURT:  All right.  So stipulated, Mr. Gold?

   3            MR GOLD:  Yes.

   4            THE COURT:  Let's move along.

   5   Q.  Did you click on any of the hyperlinks when you visited

   6   the site?

   7   A.  Yes, I did.

   8   Q.  Which ones?

   9   A.  I clicked on the, I think four -- four of the sub-sites.

  10   I would have to look at the exact to remember the names, if

  11   you want me to.

  12   Q.  Did all the hyperlinks work?

  13   A.  Yes, all the ones I clicked on, I think they all did.

  14   There may be one or two that did not.

  15   Q.  Turn to page 4 of Exhibit 97.  Were you able to download

  16   DeCSS?

  17   A.  From that site, yeah, absolutely.  And this would have

  18   been the site -- I can't see the site name here.  The copy is

  19   very bad.

  20   Q.  Did you make a download?

  21   A.  Yes, absolutely, I did.

  22   Q.  And --

  23            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor --

  24   Q.  Is the print on it of the download in this exhibit?

  25   A.  Yes, it is.  The following page shows the download taking



267



   1   place.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I think we can save time.  I think that

   3   these pages -- I would stipulate that these are pages that he

   4   downloaded from.  He has some comments on the pages that are

   5   typed, I presume that that's not necessary.

   6            Subject to the other objections, I would have no

   7   objection to these documents going in.

   8            THE COURT:  Subject to what other objections?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Well, it might be hearsay.  It might be.

  10            THE COURT:  I appreciate the offer, but I don't know

  11   what I'm getting.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I guess what I don't know what I'm

  13   getting is I don't know when if a site has CSS source or

  14   object code, some of the sites have inaccurate source and

  15   object codes.  So, I can't tell you whether this is accurate

  16   or inaccurate, but I do -- willing to stipulate that the sites

  17   refer to the fact that they have a source and executable code.

  18            THE COURT:  All right.  So, let me see if I can

  19   restate this and maybe we can get a stipulation and we will

  20   shorten this part of the examination.

  21            I take it it is stipulated as follows:  First, that

  22   Plaintiff's Exhibit 97 is a series of screen shots made by the

  23   witness on his last visit to 2600.com and in certain instances

  24   which are indicated by the URL lines on a particular screen

  25   shots and visits to sites reached through links that he found



268



   1   on 2600.com.

   2            Are we O.K. so far, Mr. Garbus?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, we've agreed that the commentary on

   4   the pieces of paper are stricken and there's no stipulation

   5   that the sites reached, whatever the screen pages said, in

   6   fact, DeCSS source or executable code.

   7            MR GOLD:  What are the notes that you want stricken?

   8            MR. GARBUS:  In other words, on each page, for

   9   example, it says starting at the -- he has the direction of

  10   how he got in.

  11            MR GOLD:  Well, I can ask the witness what those

  12   words on each page mean and he'll --

  13            THE COURT:  Let me just finish.

  14            MR. GOLD:  Yes, sir.

  15            THE COURT:  I said (1) because that was only the

  16   beginning.

  17            Now, Mr. Garbus, are you prepared to stipulate to

  18   what I read off just a moment ago, and I'll reread it?

  19            First, that Plaintiff's Exhibit 97 is, putting aside

  20   the little parenthetical typed comments at the top of the

  21   page, a series of screen shots made by the witness on his last

  22   visit to 2600.com and in certain instances which are indicated

  23   by the URL lines on particular screen shots of visits to sites

  24   reached through links and that he found on 2600.com.

  25            So far so good?



269



   1            MR. GARBUS:  So far so good.

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, so far so good?

   3            MR GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.

   4            THE COURT:  That much is stipulated.

   5            Second, can we also have a stipulation, Mr. Garbus,

   6   that if asked, the witness would testify that the little

   7   typewritten commentary to which you referred is prepared by

   8   him and reflects his description of what's on the pages that

   9   have the typewritten commentary?

  10            (Continued on next page)

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



270



   1            THE COURT:  All right.  So stipulated, Mr. Gold?

   2            MR. GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.

   3            THE COURT:  Is there anything else you wanted out of

   4   this line of questioning, Mr. Gold?

   5            MR. GOLD:  No, I was going to go on to whether he

   6   download DeCSS.

   7            THE COURT:  Fine.  Is there any objection to my

   8   receiving Plaintiffs' Exhibit 97?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  No, your Honor.

  10            THE COURT:  97 is received.  We have the stipulation.

  11   I hope we just saved a half hour.  Let's take a 15 minute

  12   break.

  13            (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 97 received in evidence)

  14            THE COURT:  While we are waiting for the absentees, I

  15   just thought I would mention to you that we have the pleasure

  16   of the company of Judge Kenji Shinoda from the District Court

  17   of Tokyo, Japan who is here in the United States and he has

  18   decided to observe this trial, and he is most welcome.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we request one

  20   clarification on Plaintiffs' Exhibit 97.  It's 23 pages long,

  21   and in terms of I think to clarify the stipulation, pages 1

  22   through 13 are screen shots of Mr. Schumann visiting four

  23   sites that he found on the 2600 mirror list and used a

  24   hyperlink to move from the 2600 site to the site that appears

  25   in the screen shot.



271



   1            Then pages 14 to 23 are screen shots of what

   2   Mr. Schumann did on his computer afterwards that shows him

   3   showing the four DeCSS programs that he downloaded on his hard

   4   drive, and then it shows him doing some kind of a comparison

   5   program that was on his hard drive, and then the results of

   6   them, and then it shows him using the DeCSS program, one of

   7   the DeCSS programs to decrypt a couple of files from the movie

   8   You Got Mail.  I think we are prepared to stipulate that's

   9   what the screen shots are and that there is commentary of his

  10   on the top to that effect.

  11            THE COURT:  I think that's right.  Mr. Gold?

  12            MR. GOLD:  Yes, it is right, but there are some other

  13   things I want to go into about those tests.

  14            THE COURT:  That's fine, but the stipulation is

  15   modified to the extent indicated.  I think you misspoke in one

  16   respect.  That is, you said pages 1 through 13 were visits to

  17   four other sites.  Some of them are, but some of them are the

  18   2600.com pages, right?

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  That's right.  It shows him going to

  20   2600, finding, using the hyperlink to visit another site and

  21   then going back to 2600 to find a link, using that link to

  22   visit a different site.

  23            THE COURT:  Right.

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  The plaintiffs have agreed to give us

  25   or to try and find clearer copies, because I can't read on the



272



   1   photocopy the results of the comparison test.

   2            MR. GOLD:  We will try to get clearer ones, but you

   3   can always walk over a couple of blocks and look at them.

   4   BY MR. GOLD:

   5   Q.  Mr. Schumann, did you download the executable utility

   6   DeCSS from any of the sites that 2600 linked you to?

   7   A.  Yes, I did.

   8   Q.  How many?

   9   A.  In this particular example, four sites.

  10   Q.  Did you perform an examination of any of the four?

  11   A.  Yes, I did.  I compared the four to insure that they were

  12   in fact all truly the DeCSS program, that they were identical

  13   and one in the same, to insure that what purported to be DeCSS

  14   was in fact DeCSS.

  15   Q.  Did you try to do anything with the effect with your --

  16   let me withdraw that.

  17            Did you do anything with any of the executable

  18   utilities that you downloaded other than what you have just

  19   described?

  20   A.  Yeah, after I had compared the four, and knowing now that

  21   they were identical, I could then use only one of them to

  22   continue the testing of running DeCSS, to insure that it was

  23   in fact then able to decrypt the contents.

  24            And subsequent to that, and there are no screen shots

  25   here, after performing the DeCSS I then went through the



273



   1   process of playing resultant clear text files to insure that

   2   they were in fact viewable by the viewers.

   3   Q.  What was the movie?

   4   A.  I think it was You've Got Mail in this particular case.

   5   Q.  What player did you use to play the movie back?

   6            THE COURT:  Are we just doing Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan

   7   in this case?

   8            MR. GOLD:  Meg Ryan is my second favorite lady in the

   9   world.

  10            THE COURT:  I wasn't going to pry, Mr. Gold.

  11   Q.  How was the quality of the playback?

  12   A.  The quality of the playback, as one would anticipate, was

  13   identical to the quality of the playback from the encrypted

  14   DVD.

  15   Q.  When you last visited the list of links on the 2600.com

  16   website, did you notice anything at the end of that list?

  17   A.  Yeah, the list, it's not shown here because I was not

  18   doing a representative sample of the entire page of links, but

  19   at the bottom of that page the 2600 website has a whole

  20   section where they ask people to mirror the sites, to provide

  21   them information about those mirrors, and basically encourages

  22   people to further copy DeCSS and provide them information

  23   where it is.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I will object to his testimony about the

  25   sites or what the documents indicate until the documents are



274



   1   introduced into evidence.

   2            THE COURT:  Sustained, but is there any real dispute

   3   about this, Mr. Garbus?

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.  It's his interpretation of it.

   5            THE COURT:  I'm not sure I heard any interpretation.

   6            MR. GOLD:  I didn't hear any interpretation.

   7            THE COURT:  He said that your client's site has a

   8   section where they ask people to mirror the sites and provide

   9   them with information about the mirrors.  So, what do you

  10   object to?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I don't object to what you just said.

  12            THE COURT:  I take it it's stipulated your client

  13   does in fact do what I just said.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  15            THE COURT:  And looking back at the realtime

  16   transcript, what you were I guess objecting to was the

  17   language "basically encourages" and so on.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  19            THE COURT:  Fine.

  20   Q.  Did you ever hear the term "input box" in connection with

  21   2600.com?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  Tell us what that is.

  24   A.  The bottom of that page, as part of the mechanism that

  25   2600 provides, has an input box where viewers of 2600 or



275



   1   people who have done mirrors can enter the URL or the address

   2   of where they have put those mirrors, and then they have a

   3   mechanism for sending that information to 2600, and I guess

   4   it's my opinion based on that, and the result that this list

   5   exists, that 2600 then takes that information and builds this

   6   list at least partially from that information.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I object to it.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained as to that part of it, the

   9   opinion, but I do hope that we are not just going to do

  10   essentially what is conducting a class on the rules of

  11   evidence on stuff that really isn't controversial.  I take it

  12   your client does build the list.  Obviously it's got the list

  13   on its website.  Let's go, Mr. Gold.

  14   Q.  What is a URL, Mr. Schumann?

  15   A.  URL stands for Uniform Resource locator.  It's the

  16   technical term for I guess the English name that's typically

  17   used to identify websites, you know, the www.2600.com as an

  18   example of the URL.

  19   Q.  Can the URLs be embedded within the pages of the sites

  20   themselves to provide hyperlinks to other pages?

  21   A.  Yeah.  What happens is that typically if you look at HTML,

  22   which is the language most of these pages are written, HTML

  23   specifically has effectively a programming language, and what

  24   it does is it allows you to, you can define what the text

  25   looks like on the screen, and then you define the instructions



276



   1   that are given to the browser when that text is clicked.

   2   Okay?  So I can write the text "click here" and I can write

   3   the text of "here" and then in my HTML the "here" will be the

   4   text that's shown to the user, and then www.Cinea.com might be

   5   the URL that's associated with that text.  So, when the user

   6   clicks on "here" the browser executes a search and retrieves

   7   the page that said www.Cinea.com.  Now it's certainly possible

   8   to make that text and the URL identical, so in the case of

   9   what's on these 2600 websites the text that's displayed is --

  10   I didn't look at them all, but I have no reason to believe

  11   it's not true that the text that's displayed is identical to

  12   the actual URL, and that's easy to look at in the source code

  13   for the HTML for the page.

  14   Q.  You have testified that you were able to save the film

  15   You've Got Mail in your computer hard drive.  Did you save the

  16   entire movie?

  17   A.  In this particular example that's shown here, I did not,

  18   because this was run on a lower end laptop that did not have

  19   enough hard drive storage to store the entire movie.

  20   Q.  How much disk drive space do you have on your personal

  21   computer?

  22   A.  On this particular laptop there was about 4.6 gigabytes of

  23   storage.  On the previous example, when I did this prior to I

  24   believe it was my third declaration in this case, that was

  25   done on a standard low end consumer player, and that one had



277



   1   10 gigabytes of hard drive space.

   2   Q.  In terms of your computer, approximately 5 gigabyte hard

   3   drive, is that a standard size for hard drives based on your

   4   knowledge and observation and experience?

   5   A.  In the laptop space, 5 gigabytes is probably the low end

   6   of what is available in laptops today.  For home personal

   7   computers 5 gigabytes is way too small to be sold.  I think

   8   the base size now is 10 to 15 gigabytes for even the lowest

   9   end.  I'm sure there are super low end ones, but for the basic

  10   consumer it's at least 10, potentially 15 gigabytes.

  11   Q.  Have you ever observed any trends in terms of the amount

  12   of hard drive space that's currently available on a standard

  13   computer?

  14   A.  Oh, absolutely.  I mean it's a well known fact in the

  15   computer industry --

  16            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question.

  18            THE COURT:  Isn't this perfectly obvious to anybody

  19   who knows anything about this field?  It's in the New York

  20   Times, it's on the Wall Street Journal.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I don't know his answer.

  22            THE COURT:  It's going up.  I mean everybody knows

  23   it's going up.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Is that the answer, the sole answer?

  25            THE WITNESS:  I mean the fact of the matter is that



278



   1   the hard drive space and computing power in general is

   2   collapsing on at least an order of 2X a year, and hard drive

   3   space in particular is going down faster than that at price

   4   points.  I mean it has gone through a tremendous decrease in

   5   cost for hard drive space in the last four or five years.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I will object to the answer.

   7            THE COURT:  I will strike that answer.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  That's what I understood the answer was

   9   going to be.

  10            THE COURT:  You have greater prescience than I do.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  No, I just read his affidavits.

  12            THE COURT:  Do you want to try again, Mr. Gold, to

  13   get to the part you really want?

  14   Q.  Has the amount of hard driver space available in computers

  15   sold to the general public been increasing at a rapid rate?

  16   A.  Absolutely.

  17            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.  No further

  18   questions.

  19            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Gold.  Mr. Garbus.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  We worked that out nicely.

  21   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  22   BY MR. GARBUS:

  23   Q.  By the way, Mr. Gold asked you if you were retained by

  24   Proskauer in this case and you said yes.  Is that true?

  25   A.  Yes.



279



   1   Q.  And prior to the time that you were retained by Proskauer

   2   in this case, you had been retained by the MPAA, is that true?

   3   A.  That's correct.

   4   Q.  And since you had been retained by Proskauer in this case,

   5   because of your good work you have been retained by Proskauer

   6   in another case, is that right?

   7   A.  Not another case, no.

   8   Q.  Tell me what it is, without mentioning the name of the

   9   client.

  10   A.  I was hired by Proskauer for another matter, but there was

  11   no client involved.  It was an internal Proskauer affair.

  12   Q.  Now, your company was formed in 1996, is that right?

  13   A.  19 --

  14   Q.  1999.  Pardon me.

  15   A.  Yes.

  16   Q.  And you own 86 percent of that company, is that right?

  17   A.  Approximately, yes.

  18   Q.  And 50 percent of the income for that company this year

  19   comes from either Proskauer or the MPAA, is that right?

  20   A.  That's certainly possible, yes.

  21   Q.  You say it's certainly possible.  Is it right or is it

  22   wrong?

  23   A.  So far this year that is accurate, but I don't anticipate

  24   that being true at the end of this year.

  25   Q.  Now, your firm consists of two people, is that right?



280



   1   A.  No, right now it's myself, I have two minority partners,

   2   and then we have two employees at this point in time.

   3   Q.  And for this year thus far it would seem that the primary

   4   source of your income will be from Proskauer and the MPAA?

   5   A.  Thus far this year, yes, that's accurate.

   6   Q.  Had you ever done any work for Proskauer before?

   7   Withdrawn.

   8            Let me show you -- by the way, you remember

   9   testifying at the deposition back in May when I asked you some

  10   questions?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  And do you remember talking about an article in the

  13   Toronto Star?

  14   A.  Yes, I do.

  15   Q.  Now, do you know of anyone who has used DeCSS and then

  16   compressed it and then sent it to some other computer?

  17            THE COURT:  The question is not clear, Mr. Garbus.

  18   Used DeCSS, compressed DeCSS?

  19   Q.  Used DivX and then sent it to another computer.

  20            THE COURT:  Used DivX to do what?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  To compress the movie.

  22            THE COURT:  Okay.

  23   A.  I have not personally done that, but I have seen certainly

  24   plenty of articles of people who have.

  25   Q.  Did Proskauer at any time ask you as an expert to try and



281



   1   use DeCSS to encrypt a DVD and then to use DivX and then to

   2   send it to see how long the entire process would take?

   3   A.  They did not.

   4            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  What is the objection?

   6            MR. GOLD:  I think that he asked him about encrypting

   7   a DVD.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   9   Q.  Now, do you know of anyone who has had any experience in

  10   using DeCSS to decrypt a film and then to compress it and then

  11   to send that to some other computer?

  12   A.  I certainly have -- again in relation to the articles and

  13   discussions in other industry environments, it appears very

  14   clear that this is happening, but I personally do not know

  15   anyone who has done so, no.

  16   Q.  And at the deposition you testified that the only instance

  17   you knew of it was the article referred to in the Toronto

  18   Star, is that right?

  19   A.  At that time, that was my only knowledge, yes.

  20   Q.  Let me show you what has been marked as Defendants'

  21   Exhibit I.  Does this refresh your recollection that that is

  22   the Toronto Star article that you referred to in your

  23   deposition at page 64 and in your affidavit, the third

  24   affidavit?

  25            THE COURT:  What are you asking him?  Whether he



282



   1   remembers the page number or what?

   2            MR. GARBUS:  Remembers reading the article.

   3            THE COURT:  Do you remember reading this article,

   4   Mr. Schumann?

   5            THE WITNESS:  This appears to be effectively the

   6   article.  I mean I couldn't swear that it's word for word the

   7   same but ...

   8   Q.  It's the same article that's referred to in your affidavit

   9   as the Toronto Star article of May 4 that you have read?

  10   A.  It seems to have the same gist of discussion that I read.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Can I just read the article briefly?

  12            THE COURT:  It hasn't even been offered into

  13   evidence.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I offer it.  It's their exhibit,

  15   Plaintiffs' Exhibit 78.

  16            MR. GOLD:  For what purpose?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  What the article does is it shows the

  18   difficulties.

  19            THE COURT:  For what purpose are you offering it?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  To show how it's nearly impossible to

  21   use DivX and DeCSS --

  22            MR. GOLD:  Objection.

  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.  Hearsay.

  24   Q.  Did you on the basis of this article form any opinion as

  25   to the difficulties of using DeCSS and DivX to download a film



283



   1   and then to send it?

   2            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, we haven't offered this

   3   witness as a DivX expert.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  It's in his affidavit.

   5            THE COURT:  Let me just look back over the direct.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  He testified, as I remember, about

   7   sending this material over the Internet.  I presume that that

   8   implies the ability to make it, to compress it and then to

   9   send it.

  10            THE COURT:  Give me a moment to look at my notes.

  11            The witness testified at one point that if a user

  12   used DeCSS and then DivX'd the movie, he could do the same

  13   things with it as with any nondecrypted version, including

  14   copy it to transportable media like CD-ROM, transfer files

  15   over the Internet, e-mail it to friends presumably, put it on

  16   tape or on a hard transportable media I guess as long as there

  17   was enough storage capacity.  Overruled.

  18            Mr. Gold?

  19            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, we didn't even ask him if he

  20   DivX'd it.  He certainly knows all about transmitting files

  21   and how any file can be transmitted, but we didn't even ask

  22   him if he DivX'd it.

  23            THE COURT:  No, I think you opened the door a little

  24   bit at least.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  May I read the article?



284



   1            THE COURT:  No.

   2   Q.  Can you tell us, to the best of your recollection, what

   3   happened when the person who wrote that article tried to use

   4   DeCSS and then to compress the file?

   5            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

   6            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   7   Q.  Now, let me show you Plaintiffs' Exhibit 78.  You testify

   8   as to your knowledge as to whether Jon Johansen had been

   9   involved in using DeCSS for links, and you testified that it

  10   was on the basis of articles that you had read.  Do you recall

  11   that?

  12   A.  I don't believe --

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I would like the Proskauer lawyers to

  14   stop signaling the witness.

  15            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I was looking at the

  16   Proskauer lawyers, and if they were signaling the witness, the

  17   President was flying through the back of the courtroom.  It

  18   was not happening.

  19            MR. SIMS:  We don't have a copy of the exhibit, your

  20   Honor.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Plaintiffs' Exhibit 78, I think you have

  22   a copy of it.

  23            MS. MILLER:  May I?

  24            THE COURT:  Yes, why don't you go get it.

  25            MR. GOLD:  We have it, your Honor.  Thank you.



285



   1            THE COURT:  What is the question, Mr. Garbus?

   2   Q.  Is this one of the articles, Plaintiffs' Exhibit 78,

   3   entitled "Meet the Kid Behind the DVD Hack" that you read?

   4   A.  I'm sorry.  Is part of your earlier -- is this a

   5   continuation of your earlier question?

   6            THE COURT:  Did you read that article, Mr. Schumann?

   7            THE WITNESS:  I don't specifically recall whether or

   8   not I read the article.

   9            THE COURT:  Okay.  Next question, please.

  10   Q.  By the way, how did you get involved in this with

  11   Proskauer?  Who contacted you?  What did you do, and what did

  12   they ask you to do?

  13   A.  I was contacted by a gentleman from Proskauer named Bill

  14   Hart, and at the time I was first contacted I was asked if I

  15   would be willing to be involved in this case and specifically

  16   to initially at least to do an affidavit related to this case,

  17   related specifically in that case to DeCSS and where it came

  18   from and what it did.

  19   Q.  And what happened next?

  20   A.  What happened next is I agreed to -- again we did this all

  21   verbally, there is no written agreement -- but I agreed to

  22   work with the plaintiffs and the Proskauer firm in this case.

  23   Q.  And at some time did you prepare a report concerning the

  24   work you had done for Proskauer?

  25   A.  A report concerning the work I had done for Proskauer?



286



   1   Q.  Or for the MPAA?

   2   A.  Not for Proskauer, no.  I think as I testified earlier I

   3   was hired by the MPAA to do an analysis of the DVD or DeCSS

   4   development in the Linux community based on the logs, and I

   5   did a report on that.

   6   Q.  And did you submit that report, or to your knowledge was

   7   that report submitted to the Court on the motion for

   8   preliminary injunction?

   9   A.  I have no knowledge of that.  It was not an attachment to

  10   my declaration.

  11   Q.  You submitted three declarations in this case?

  12   A.  Yes, I have.

  13   Q.  Did you submit that report as part of any of those

  14   declarations?

  15   A.  No, I did not.

  16   Q.  Now, when you did the report, did you first do an interim

  17   report and then a final report?

  18   A.  For the MPAA?

  19   Q.  Yes.

  20   A.  Yes, I did a short interim report and then I did a more

  21   detailed final report, yes.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, this is one of those

  23   documents that I referred to at the end of the day yesterday.

  24   I think it has -- and I may be wrong -- it has attorney/client

  25   work product.



287



   1            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor --

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims, that's enough.

   3            MR. SIMS:  I just meant we waive privilege as to that

   4   document.  I was just advising him that there is no claim of

   5   privilege to that document.  I am sorry I was misunderstood.

   6            THE COURT:  All right.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Let me show you a copy of that document.

   8            THE COURT:  The document marked?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I have Defendants' Exhibit CS.

  10   Q.  Now, prior to the time that you prepared that report, did

  11   you get any documents from the MPAA?

  12   A.  Yes, I did.  This report was based on a stack of documents

  13   I received from the MPAA, yes.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Let's mark as the next exhibit the

  15   documents, the stack of documents from the MPAA.

  16            Your Honor, can I just take a two minute break?  I

  17   have to find some documents, if I may, just two minutes.

  18            THE COURT:  All right.  Quarter to 12.

  19            (Recess)

  20            THE COURT:  All right, Mr. Garbus.

  21   BY MR. GARBUS:

  22   Q.  Now, Mr. Schumann, you indicated before that the documents

  23   were given to you by the MPAA.  This was when, back in

  24   November?

  25   A.  Yes, November of 1999.



288



   1   Q.  What did those documents consist of?

   2   A.  They consisted of printouts from what were essentially a

   3   chat group or two development groups within the Linux

   4   community that were focused on the development of DVD play

   5   back capability for Linux.

   6   Q.  You say that were -- what is the LiViD group itself?

   7   A.  LiViD was one of these development groups that was focused

   8   on the creation of DVD playback capability.

   9   Q.  For the Linux machine?

  10   A.  Yes, for the Linux operating system, yes.

  11   Q.  When was the LiViD group started?

  12   A.  I don't know exactly when they started.  The logs I

  13   received began in I think June of 1999, and it appears they

  14   were active significantly before that time.

  15   Q.  Did you make any attempt to get the logs from before June

  16   of 1999?

  17   A.  No, I did not.

  18   Q.  And did you see a discussion on the -- by the way, do you

  19   understand that most of the people or many of the people on

  20   the LiViD group are Linux users?

  21   A.  That would I guess appear to be kind of self-evident.  The

  22   people who are in that kind of area tend to be very biased in

  23   terms of what machines they run and what operating systems

  24   they like, and people who do Linux are very passionate about

  25   their operating systems, so they wouldn't have been there if



289



   1   they didn't care.

   2   Q.  And during the course of your investigation or your

   3   observing of these logs, did you come across the name Derek

   4   Fawcus?

   5   A.  Yes, I did.

   6   Q.  And did you come across a number of named people who were

   7   involved in the LiViD group?

   8   A.  Absolutely, there were a number of active members of that

   9   group.

  10   Q.  And how did you know, for example, that Derek Fawcus was

  11   an active member of the group?

  12   A.  In my report part of the report talks about what I called

  13   people who are active members of the community or people who

  14   are active developers in that community, and as you went

  15   through the -- and the paper I got was a very large stack, a

  16   very large number of posts into these news groups.

  17            Going through it, it became very obvious who was very

  18   involved in helping to create this both from a technical

  19   perspective as well as providing their time, energy and their

  20   skill sets into the environment.  Derek Fawcus was one of

  21   those members.

  22   Q.  Now, do you know what css-auth is?  You have heard of

  23   that?

  24   A.  Css-auth?

  25   Q.  Yes.



290



   1   A.  Yes, css-auth is a program that exists today in the Linux

   2   environment.

   3   Q.  It does the same things as DeCSS?

   4   A.  No, it does not.

   5   Q.  How is it different?

   6   A.  It performs a small portion of what DeCSS does.  Earlier I

   7   talked about that one of the subfunctions necessary before you

   8   can access the content of the DVD is that you need to unlock

   9   the DVD drive so that the DVD drive is happy or believes it's

  10   talking to a trustworthy host, and css-auth does that

  11   particular function.

  12   Q.  In connection with css-cat?

  13   A.  No, css-auth is a stand-alone program.

  14   Q.  What does css-auth work with?

  15   A.  It's a program that runs on the Linux operating system.

  16   Q.  Now, with respect to Derek Fawcus, when for the first time

  17   did you see him appear in the Linux dialog, on the LiViD

  18   group?

  19            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, my objection is I don't

  20   understand the relevance of this line, and I think it's past

  21   anything I opened up on direct.

  22            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  The question I understood that

  24   Mr. Schumann answered was that he understood that DeCSS was

  25   not originally created for the purposes of a Linux open source



291



   1   system.  I think that if you look at the Linux logs, and if

   2   you look at his report, you see that it specifically was

   3   created for the Linux Group.  If we don't have a disagreement

   4   on that, then I won't pursue it.  But that seems to me, what

   5   the logs and report indicate, and the function of the report

   6   that he was hired to do says Linux CSS development analysis.

   7            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

   8            MR. GOLD:  I'm trying to remember exactly what Mr.

   9   Garbus told me that we have an agreement about.  And I did not

  10   hear enough of that to know.  I apologize.

  11            THE COURT:  I didn't understand Mr. Garbus to say

  12   that he thought he had an agreement with you.

  13            MR. GOLD:  Oh.

  14            THE COURT:  If he was asking you to agree to

  15   something, then I'm confident you are not going to agree to

  16   it.

  17            MR. GOLD:  That's right.  But I don't remember every

  18   word he said.

  19            THE COURT:  Look, you elicited from this witness his

  20   opinion that DeCSS was not developed for Linux, and he gave

  21   the basis for his opinion.  Mr. Garbus is now seeking to

  22   challenge the correctness of the opinion.  That's what I

  23   understand is going on.  Now, is there some reason he

  24   shouldn't be allowed to do that?

  25            MR. GOLD:  The basis for the opinion were several



292



   1   pages from these logs.  There may have been thousands.

   2            THE COURT:  That's exactly Mr. Garbus's point.

   3            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

   4            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Garbus.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I would like to offer into evidence some

   6   of the thousand pages.  Excuse me before I approach the bench.

   7            If we can have the witness take a look at the

   8   documents that are marked Exhibit AA.

   9            Your Honor, may I approach the bench and give this to

  10   the witness?

  11            THE COURT:  You may approach the witness.

  12   Q.  Mr. Schumann, would you take a look at those documents and

  13   tell me to the best of your recollection if these were the

  14   documents that were furnished to you originally I guess back

  15   in November and December by the MPAA?

  16   A.  How much time do I have?  I will be happy to take a quick

  17   look, but --

  18            THE COURT:  The record should reflect that it appears

  19   that there is at least 1500 pages in the exhibit.

  20            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, if I may, this witness said

  21   that he based his opinion on three pages in the logs.  Now, if

  22   Mr. Garbus believes there are other pages in the logs which

  23   refute that or might change the witness's testimony, then I

  24   would suggest he should show those pages to the witness and

  25   ask him about them.



293



   1            THE COURT:  Are you folks prepared to stipulate that

   2   Defendants' Exhibit AA is in fact the logs that were given to

   3   the witness?

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, are you so prepared?

   6            MR. GOLD:  Do you have a copy of Plaintiffs' Exhibit

   7   9 before the witness?

   8            THE COURT:  No, he has Defendant's AA.

   9            MR. GOLD:  I don't know about that, but I know this

  10   is the logs (indicating), and it's Plaintiffs' Exhibit 9.  If

  11   it's identical to that, it's going to take a little while.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I will take it in in either form.  I

  13   accept Mr. Gold's statement.

  14            THE COURT:  So, let's work with Exhibit 9.  You both

  15   stipulate that Exhibit 9 are the logs that were given to the

  16   witness, do you?

  17            MR. GOLD:  Yes, I do, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  19            MR. GARBUS:  I will just take a look at it, but I

  20   presume it's the same thing.

  21            THE COURT:  Believe me, Ms. Miller, I just want one

  22   of them.

  23            MS. MILLER:  The entire exhibit comprises two

  24   binders.

  25            THE COURT:  And "want" in this context is a term of



294



   1   art.

   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, may I get?

   3            THE COURT:  Yes, you are welcome to have the other

   4   papers back, Mr. Hernstadt.

   5            Some of my colleagues out West think that litigation

   6   has become entirely digital and paperless.

   7            Let's proceed, folks.

   8   Q.  Now, have you ever been told by anyone at the MPAA or at

   9   Proskauer that they know the name of one single person who

  10   ever copied a DVD film through DeCSS and transmitted it over

  11   the Internet?

  12   A.  I'm aware of I guess the earlier witness in this case at

  13   the time that I was permitted to be in the trial, but other

  14   than that I have not been told by anyone, by either of those

  15   two groups.

  16   Q.  So, to your knowledge, as you sit here today, do you know

  17   of one person who has ever copied a DVD through the use of

  18   DeCSS and used it for home use?

  19   A.  There are certainly references in these logs to people who

  20   have copied DVDs with DeCSS.  I am not capable of surmising

  21   what they did with those copies.

  22   Q.  And do you know of the name of one person other than in

  23   the logs who has ever sold a copy of a DVD that has been

  24   deencrypted through DeCSS?

  25   A.  No, I have no personal knowledge.



295



   1   Q.  Have you had conversations with Proskauer or the MPAA to

   2   determine whether or not they know of any one person who ever

   3   made a copy of a DVD through DeCSS and either sold it or sent

   4   it over the Net?

   5            THE COURT:  Let's find out if this is really an issue

   6   in this case.

   7            Mr. Gold, do the plaintiffs contend that there is an

   8   identifiable human being that it can point to who has done any

   9   of these things?  I should say "identified."

  10            MR. GOLD:  I think that that is not one of the

  11   contentions we have in issue in this case.  That's an easier

  12   answer to answer than -- I may later today be able to answer

  13   the question with a yes or no.

  14            THE COURT:  All right.  I guess we will just have to

  15   wait.  Let's go, Mr. Garbus.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Does that mean I should wait until this

  17   afternoon?

  18            THE COURT:  No, it means you should go ahead.

  19   Q.  To your knowledge, has anyone at the MPA ever said to you,

  20   or at Proskauer ever said to you, that they saw a film that

  21   was transmitted over the Net, the film coming from a DeCSS

  22   deencryption of DVD?

  23   A.  Again, with the exception of the earlier testimony in this

  24   case that I heard in the audience, the answer to that is no.

  25   Q.  Let's take Mr. Shamos out of it with respect to all the



296



   1   other questions I ask you if that's all right.

   2   A.  Fine with me.

   3   Q.  Did anybody ever tell you that anybody ever purchased on a

   4   street, in a store, in a business any DVD that had ever been

   5   deencrypted by DeCSS?

   6   A.  I have no personal knowledge with the exception of having

   7   seen what appears to be a pirated DVD where the content

   8   clearly had the CSS encryption removed.

   9   Q.  Do you know how the CSS encryption was removed?

  10   A.  No, I cannot definitively say how the CSS encryption was

  11   removed.

  12   Q.  So the answer to my question then is no.

  13            Now, do you know of one single copy, a physical copy

  14   of a DVD that has been sold anywhere in the world that has

  15   been deencrypted by DeCSS?

  16   A.  Not without absolute certainty, no.

  17   Q.  Do you know -- if I'm being redundant, I'm sorry and I'm

  18   sure the Court will stop me.

  19            Do you know of any one movie that has ever been sold

  20   in a physical copy on the street that was ever deencrypted

  21   through DeCSS?

  22   A.  Again, I have no absolute knowledge, no.

  23   Q.  Do you know if any one film trafficked over the Internet

  24   was ever deencrypted through DeCSS?

  25            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, to the whole line, as you know



297



   1   we submitted a motion in limine which stated that actual

   2   copying, while it is another violation of law, is not one that

   3   is critical to the --

   4            THE COURT:  I understand, and I can play both your

   5   arguments here as if I were a videotape player or a DVD

   6   player.

   7            I know that his argument is that there is no injury

   8   and that's what this is all for.  And I understand your

   9   argument as well.  And obviously this part of the trial is not

  10   addressed to persuading me of anything.  This part of the

  11   trial is directed by both of you to a show.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I'm not interested in show.

  13   I am willing to state what you asked Mr. Gold before, namely

  14   if this is not part of the case there is absolutely no reason

  15   for me to ask any questions about that.

  16            THE COURT:  Well, I'm glad to hear that.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  That has always been part of my

  18   position.

  19            THE COURT:  I don't think it is part of the case.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think it is either.  I think

  21   they have walked away from that, and I think these questions

  22   that I'm asking are fundamentally irrelevant, namely -- not

  23   irrelevant, but --

  24            THE COURT:  You know, I mean it's a little bit silly,

  25   because in some ways it's kind of like -- and I don't know if



298



   1   the facts are comparable or not -- but it's kind of like

   2   calling in the chairman of the board of Proctor & Gamble who

   3   makes 12 billion tons of Pampers every year and ask him if he

   4   can identify by name any baby who ever used one.  The Pampers

   5   are getting made, they are going out of the factory and he has

   6   some reason for supposing that they are being used for the

   7   intended purpose.  Now obviously that's different from this

   8   case because we don't have quite the same reason for

   9   supposing.  But you are asking the Pampers questions right

  10   now.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I'm absolutely not asking the Pampers

  12   question, and let me see if I can indicate why it is

  13   different.

  14            There are ways of determining who buys something if

  15   you are interested in determining who buys something if it's

  16   being sold, whether that's Pampers or drugs or cars.  If the

  17   MPAA wanted to determine whether or not there are people out

  18   there using DeCSS to break down DVD movies, there are many,

  19   many different ways of doing it.

  20            What I was saying is this:  I believe that -- and

  21   it's not the Pampers question, and I think that's where there

  22   is a fundamental disagreement, and it's not the CEO of a

  23   corporation.  I believe, and I am prepared to take a

  24   stipulation and not ask anymore questions about it, that at

  25   the present time there is absolutely no proof that DeCSS is



299



   1   being used for any copying or pirating of any kind.  Now, it

   2   may well be that that doesn't answer the legal question before

   3   you as you see it, and I respect that, but I think that the

   4   answer is obvious, and I think putting me through making the

   5   questions is not my putting on a show but just failing to

   6   resolve an issue that at this point in time, after four months

   7   of depositions, is so obvious.

   8            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

   9            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, in fact there are people who

  10   know about these things and spend their life knowing about

  11   these things, and who believe for reasons one, two, three and

  12   four there are copies of decrypted DVDs being offered on the

  13   Internet and being sold in hard copy, and they can state the

  14   reasons why they believe that.  They believe it.  I believe

  15   it.

  16            THE COURT:  And are they going to testify in this

  17   case?

  18            MR. GOLD:  I think so, your Honor.  And I think I'm

  19   reminded that Dr. Shamos did.  We believe there are reasons.

  20   Now if he wants names, addresses and post office boxes, I will

  21   agree I don't have one.  But we know from the work that we

  22   have done, these folks believe -- and they are experts in

  23   finding this sort of thing out -- that it's being done in a

  24   lot of places.

  25            THE COURT:  So let's see if we can get to the



300



   1   stipulation that Mr. Garbus says he will take and quite

   2   reasonably says he will take, and let's see if we can avoid

   3   this line of questioning, because it's not identical to the

   4   Pampers question but it is down to the names and addresses,

   5   and nobody reasonably could expect I think proof by name and

   6   address.  In any case, on anybody's view of the case, names

   7   and addresses aren't necessary.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  Can I just say one thing, your Honor?

   9            THE COURT:  Sure.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  I can walk out onto the street and get

  11   50 people who use Pampers.  I think the analogy is

  12   inappropriate.

  13            THE COURT:  Fine, whatever.  But with all respect,

  14   Mr. Garbus, I think that the ability of this witness or any

  15   other witness in this case to give you names and addresses of

  16   particular people, which in substance is what you are asking

  17   for, couldn't be less relevant.

  18            There is all sorts of evidence here that there are

  19   postings on the Internet, that people are out there at least

  20   offering to swap films.  Now, I don't know whether they really

  21   swap them.  I don't know what those postings mean, but there

  22   is at least a glimmer of something to suggest that maybe there

  23   is a problem.  Maybe it's a little problem.  Maybe it's a big

  24   problem.  I have no way of knowing.  That's why we are having

  25   a trial.



301



   1            MR. GARBUS:  May I respond?

   2            THE COURT:  Yes.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  It's the easiest thing in the world to

   4   find out.  Easiest thing in the world to find out.  They have

   5   two defendants in this case.  I don't want to argue.  It's the

   6   easiest thing in the world to find out.

   7            One of the problems we have had in discovery, and

   8   that's one of the main issues that's been going on between all

   9   of us, is that we have tried to find out what they have done

  10   to find out what is perfectly obvious to anybody.  We have

  11   tried to find out the names and addresses of people who have

  12   this information, who have made some attempt to get this

  13   information.

  14            Now, if we agree that it is not relevant about any

  15   damage to date, then we can leave that alone and that issue is

  16   over.  If the next issue is is there any actual damage going

  17   on out there, that's what we have been, you and I and

  18   Proskauer, fighting over with respect to discovery.

  19            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  And that's an area that we have been

  21   precluded from proving conclusively, that there are many

  22   different ways of finding out whether anything out on those

  23   file sharers come from DeCSS or not.

  24            THE COURT:  I am just not rising to the bait, Mr.

  25   Garbus.  You have not been precluded from that or otherwise.



302



   1   Let us just go on.  I am going to hope that we are going to

   2   have this subpart of this controversy resolved by stipulation

   3   by 2 o'clock.

   4            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I might note that we tried in

   5   a very good way to find out.  We asked who downloaded.

   6            THE COURT:  Look, this is not a seminar on what you

   7   have both done in this case.

   8            MR. GOLD:  We asked who downloaded from defendants'

   9   website DeCSS, which we can tell if we get access to that

  10   computer, and they won't give that, and they won't reveal it.

  11            THE COURT:  I understand that.

  12            MR. GOLD:  Then we could have paraded in a lot of

  13   witnesses who used DeCSS to decrypt DVDs, a lot, but we didn't

  14   get the information.  It's not as easy as Mr. Garbus states,

  15   because he didn't give it to us.

  16            THE COURT:  All right.  Next question.

  17   Q.  Have you looked at any of the file sharing sites on the

  18   Net?

  19   A.  You are referring to like Gnutella and those types of

  20   sites.

  21   Q.  Yes.

  22   A.  Yes, I have, or to movie file.  They are not sites so much

  23   as systems.

  24   Q.  And have you been involved in any IRC chat rooms?

  25   A.  No, I have not.



303



   1   Q.  And do you know whether or not in chat rooms -- have you

   2   been involved in chat rooms of any kind?

   3   A.  I don't normally go to those environments.  I'm sure I

   4   have been there once or twice, but I don't have that much time

   5   in my life.  I'm sorry.

   6   Q.  Now, in the file sharing rooms, do you know the name of

   7   some of the companies that share -- websites that have file

   8   sharing with respect to films?

   9   A.  I think in all of the current set of file sharing

  10   utilities, I think it's important to distinguish between what

  11   I will call file sharing sites versus these newer and more

  12   insidious file sharing utilities.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Maybe we can strike the word

  14   "insidious."

  15            THE COURT:  Let's just go on.

  16   A.  But if you look at these file sharing utilities, they can

  17   all be used to transmit essentially any type of digital file,

  18   and that certainly includes full audiovisual content.

  19   Q.  And is there any way of getting information about who uses

  20   any of these particular sites?

  21   A.  That depends on the system in question.  A system like

  22   Napster that implements a centralized indexing and I guess

  23   user ID type of system could clearly have the potential of

  24   identifying their users, at least to the block they come from,

  25   to use an earlier analogy.



304



   1            Other newer systems such as Freenet and to a lesser

   2   degree Gnutella have been very carefully architected to try to

   3   provide as much anonymity as absolutely possible to the people

   4   transmitting the people.

   5   Q.  To your knowledge as a security expert, is that anonymity

   6   unbreakable?

   7   A.  It probably depends on the resources of the people trying

   8   to do it.  I wouldn't venture to guess what some three letter

   9   agencies are capable of.  But to a normal environment it's

  10   extremely difficult to break that type of system.

  11   Q.  Do you know whether the MPA has ever made any attempt to

  12   break any of that system?

  13   A.  I have no knowledge.

  14   Q.  Now, with respect to the people who you referred to in the

  15   logs who said that they made DVDs through DeCSS, to your

  16   knowledge did the MPA ever try to contact any of those people?

  17   A.  Again, I have no knowledge.

  18   Q.  Now, in the LiViD group there are e-mail addresses, are

  19   there not?

  20   A.  Yes, certainly.

  21   Q.  And how many different e-mail addresses were there in the

  22   LiViD group documents that you saw over the three to four

  23   month period that you looked at it?

  24   A.  I'm sure there are potentially hundreds of identified

  25   participants in those groups.



305



   1   Q.  To your knowledge did the MPAA, Proskauer or anybody else

   2   ever try and find one of these people?

   3   A.  No.  Again, I have no knowledge of what they did outside

   4   of my interactions with them.

   5   Q.  Now, you talked about Derek Fawcus.  Had Derek Fawcus been

   6   involved in the Linux Group?

   7   A.  Yeah, absolutely, he was a very integral member certainly

   8   in the areas I looked at.

   9   Q.  And which areas did you look at?

  10   A.  The logs, this immense sheet of paper here is actually

  11   only a subsection of the overall DVD development logs that

  12   exist around this time, and they are focused specifically on,

  13   not specifically, but primarily around discussions relating to

  14   DVD security and the DVD player development.  There are

  15   clearly other postings in these electronic versions of these

  16   logs that are not in this paper.

  17   Q.  I'm not clear.  You say these logs were a subset of some

  18   other set.

  19   A.  That's correct.  These logs are printouts of the full

  20   development group logs, or these are essentially development

  21   postings, if you will, and they are a subset of the areas of

  22   discussion in that, and they are the subset that focuses on

  23   the decryption capability and the need to do decryption and

  24   related chats that people discussed.

  25            (Continued on next page)



306



   1   Q.  And are there other subsets that deal with the development

   2   of the Linux DVD player?

   3   A.  Yeah, absolutely.  I mean, in terms of the overall

   4   relevance of CSS and the encryption and decryption functions

   5   necessary to play a DVD versus the other set of functionality

   6   necessary to play a DVD, the security aspect is maybe

   7   1 percent of the total project that's required in order to do

   8   that.

   9   Q.  Now, in the other subset of LiViD DVD information, is

  10   there any dialogue in there about CSS, DeCSS or the encryption

  11   code that's needed?

  12   A.  I have not reviewed the full set of the Linux development

  13   chats.  I was asked and I reviewed and my reports are based on

  14   the material that was provided to me by the MPAA.

  15   Q.  So, the MPA selected out of the Linux or LiVid Group, the

  16   material that they wanted you to see, is that right?

  17   A.  I would not characterize it that way.

  18   Q.  Did you get everything from the LiVid group?

  19   A.  I clearly did not get a full set of logs.  It appears that

  20   and I don't know who selected these or under what criterion,

  21   but in my -- as I reviewed through them, there were no obvious

  22   missing holes or references to -- to discussions that would

  23   have referred to other postings in these logs that were not

  24   there.

  25            In other words, this appears to have been at least a



307



   1   reasonably complete subset of the overall logs as it relates

   2   to the CSS portions of the DVD.

   3   Q.  But you don't know -- who made the selection process, Mark

   4   Litvak?

   5   A.  I don't know who at the MPA made the selection process.

   6   These materials were provided to me by Mark Litvak of the MPA.

   7   Q.  Now, do you know if there are any other postings in the

   8   LiVid group about reverse engineering?

   9   A.  Reverse engineering is a critical feature for somebody who

  10   is -- people who are undertaking this type of a project and I

  11   would have no doubt that the other logs may -- or the other

  12   parts of the log may well talk about reverse engineering to,

  13   for example, tell you how to identify the language tracks or

  14   how AC3 works or who knows, there are many other parts.

  15   Q.  Now, when you went to 2600.com, did you find their source

  16   an executable code?

  17   A.  The listings in 2600.com and the links that it goes to

  18   frequently reference DeCSS executable and also occasionally

  19   reference DeCSS, what's referred to as "source code."

  20   Q.  You're not saying, are you, that when you went to

  21   2600.com, they were not posting the source code?

  22   A.  What I was trying to say as I was trying to finish my

  23   answer was the data over the files that were referenced as

  24   source codes, some of which I downloaded were, in fact, only a

  25   small subset of the full source code that would be necessary



308



   1   to actually implement and create a running DeCSS program.

   2   Q.  So, some of the source code that there was on 2600.com was

   3   linked to by 2600.com did not give you a complete source code,

   4   is that right?

   5   A.  I in any of the representations that I have seen of DeCSS

   6   source code, including those in the affidavits provided by the

   7   defense has not been a complete set of source code necessary

   8   to implement a full DeCSS program.

   9   Q.  And that's based on your understanding of what is

  10   necessary for a full source code to implement a DeCSS program,

  11   is that right?

  12   A.  I think after 15 to 20 years of writing software, I can

  13   very safely say that that is not the full DeCSS source

  14   program.

  15   Q.  Now, did you at any time ever see the full source code,

  16   are you stating that 2600.com did not post at any time the

  17   full source code for DeCSS?

  18   A.  I have not in my -- yes, eight months of involvement in

  19   this matter so far ever seen a full posting or a full set of

  20   DeCSS source code; no.

  21   Q.  Do you have -- how many times did you go to 2600.com?

  22   A.  Again, I think it may well be in the dozens by now.

  23   Q.  Do you have any records of that?

  24   A.  There are some records that I have provided in pieces of

  25   this.  There's -- I did not keep a log, a detailed log every



309



   1   time I went there; no.

   2   Q.  Is it your answer then that there are no records of when

   3   you visited 2600.com?

   4   A.  I'm sorry -- yes.  I did not keep detailed records of

   5   every time.  I kept records in a notebook of my interactions

   6   related to this case and when and where I was requested to do

   7   work and the work I did related to this case by the plaintiffs

   8   and some of those records may indicate that I was going out to

   9   those sites as part of particular functions I did.

  10   Q.  Now, is it your knowledge that in your notes, some of

  11   which have been furnished to us, you ever state going to

  12   2600.com at any particular time or at any particular place?

  13   A.  Again, I don't know if the -- I'd have to read through

  14   them in detail.  I don't know if they specifically reference

  15   2600.com.

  16            I may well have just said, go get DeCSS.  I don't

  17   know if those notes specifically reference 2600.com.  They may

  18   only reference getting DeCSS, and that type of stuff, because

  19   in those notes, I may have said, go get DeCSS, and then, for

  20   example, the last time I did this in the previously-entered

  21   documentation, obviously the documentation shows in detail

  22   where I went and what I did.

  23   Q.  Now, when your report, by the way, is entitled, is it not,

  24   "Linux CSS Development Analysis," is that right?

  25   A.  This is the report I did for the MPAA?



310



   1   Q.  Right.

   2   A.  I believe, I will check, but yes, that's the title that's

   3   on it.

   4   Q.  And did you do anything for that report other than analyze

   5   the documents that they had given you, namely, those logs?

   6   A.  Again, as it describes in that report, the report is based

   7   on what was provided to me by the MPA; that's correct.

   8   Q.  So, you made no independent investigation of your own

   9   about any contribution made to Linux by Johansen or Stevenson

  10   or anybody else?

  11   A.  I did -- I looked in no other places as the report clearly

  12   states, my conclusions are based on the contents of the logs.

  13   I may have -- well have on one or two occasions gone out and

  14   looked at these development logs, not during that.  Later, I

  15   did to validate that those were, in fact, representative of

  16   what was there.

  17   Q.  Now, with respect to Johansen, were you ever told that

  18   Norwegian lawyers had prepared a report concerning Johansen

  19   and then given to it Proskauer concerning Joe Hansen's

  20   involvement in DeCSS?

  21   A.  No, I was not.

  22   Q.  Do you know of any independent investigation that the MPAA

  23   ever made of any of the people whose names are identified in

  24   those logs as having been involved in the construction of

  25   DeCSS?



311



   1   A.  No.

   2   Q.  Do you know of any independent investigation that was ever

   3   made by the MPAA or anyone else of any of the people who

   4   allegedly claimed on those logs that they had used DeCSS?

   5   A.  Again, no.

   6   Q.  Do you know if the MPA ever made any investigation -- I

   7   don't think this is redundant, but I may have asked it

   8   before -- of any of the people in those logs and whether or

   9   not they had ever truly used DeCSS to download a film?

  10   A.  I'm sorry, DeCSS doesn't download film.

  11   Q.  DeCSS -- excuse me -- and then DiVX a film?

  12   A.  For the period covered by these logs in this report, to my

  13   knowledge, DiVX was not in existence.  It certainly wasn't

  14   referenced by that name in these logs.

  15   Q.  DiVX was not in existence in November and December of

  16   1999?

  17   A.  I don't believe it was.  It certainly didn't figure

  18   prominently that I remember in these logs.

  19   Q.  Now, do you know how long it takes to make a DiVX of a,

  20   let's say, 6 megabyte film -- 6 gigabyte film?

  21   A.  I'm sorry.  Could you describe to me what you mean by

  22   "making a DiVX"?  It's not clear.

  23   Q.  Do you know how long it takes to compress a "Sleepless in

  24   Seattle" or "Matrix"?

  25   A.  That, as I testified earlier, these algorithms including



312



   1   those using the MPEG4, the algorithms used in the DiVX system

   2   are characterized by the fact that they are designed such that

   3   more effort can be put into the compression portion of the

   4   and/or the creation portion of the content than in the

   5   playback portion of the content.

   6            And so, even in compression for DVD movies, the act

   7   of compressing those movies then to be nonrealtime,

   8   particularly if you want to have high quality, so there is no

   9   reason to believe that the DiVX technology itself will have

  10   any fast compression speed because you're typically not

  11   worried about that because that's a one-time operation and

  12   what you want to do is you want to ensure that you can

  13   decompress it and recreate the image in realtime as quickly as

  14   possible.

  15   Q.  You heard Mr. Shamos yesterday testify in court about the

  16   difficulties of synchronization with audio and visual when

  17   you're doing a decompression?

  18   A.  I heard his, I guess it's called direct testimony before I

  19   was asked to leave; yes.

  20   Q.  And did you hear him talk about spending 10 hours trying

  21   to synchronize the digital and the audio sections of the DVD?

  22   A.  I -- if that was his exact testimony, he clearly as a

  23   novice was understanding that synchronization of audio-video

  24   is a significant problem in the creation of these types of a

  25   compressed data files.



313



   1   Q.  And do you recall at all the Toronto Star talking about

   2   the difficulties in synchronization?

   3            MR GOLD:  Your Honor --

   4            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   5   Q.  Now, did you also come across the name Paul V-O-I-C-K-S

   6   when you were going through the logs?

   7   A.  V-O-I-C -- there was a Paul.

   8   Q.  It's in small print and my eyes aren't as they good as

   9   they should be.  V-O-L-C-K-E?

  10   A.  I don't know how to pronounce his name because he was a

  11   prominent member of the development group.

  12   Q.  The Linux DVD?

  13   A.  It's Linux DVD, he was a frequent contributor to that

  14   group; yes.

  15   Q.  And he was trying to work with DeCSS in order to make a

  16   Linux player, is that right?

  17            MR GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  19   Q.  And how did you learn -- and what was he doing, to the

  20   best of your knowledge?

  21            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  22            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  23   Q.  Do you know if anybody at the MPA ever tried to contact

  24   him?

  25   A.  Again, as I've previously testified, I have no knowledge



314



   1   about who the MPA may or may not have contacted.

   2   Q.  Now, do you know who Andreas Bogk is; B-O-G-K?

   3   A.  Yeah, Andreas was, again, another name that frequently

   4   showed up in the these development logs and was a member of

   5   these development groups.

   6   Q.  And in development logs, is he referring again to DeCSS?

   7   A.  If you can point me at a particular page.

   8   Q.  I will, after lunch.

   9            And does the name Johan Addis mean anything to you?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  And who is he?

  12   A.  Johan Addis was a, what in my report I describe as

  13   essentially an outsider and he was a person who showed up very

  14   briefly in the group, presented a key technology to the Linux

  15   development groups, and then appears to have disappeared again

  16   after that presentation of the technology.

  17   Q.  Do you know if he appeared again under any other different

  18   name?

  19   A.  I don't recall.  I mean, again, these are handles.  So,

  20   these may be handles.  These may be real people's names.  They

  21   may not be.  But to my knowledge, in my reading through these

  22   logs, I saw no indication that he came back again later under

  23   a different name.

  24   Q.  And could you tell if you saw someone come in with a

  25   different name talking about the same subject matter whether



315



   1   it's Addis or someone else?

   2            MR GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

   3            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   4   A.  In certain circumstances, if someone was trying to have

   5   two handles, they might accidentally reveal both of their

   6   handles.  So, I believe Jon Johansen did that in one case

   7   where he showed up as "digtech" earlier and then came back

   8   later in his own name, in that particular case, in his E-mail,

   9   he maintained the "digtech" E-mail name.

  10   Q.  So, it's not uncommon for people on the LiViD group to

  11   come in under one name, then a different name, then a

  12   different name?

  13            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  14            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  15   Q.  Other than Johansen, do you know of any other people who

  16   came in and out of the LiViD group with different names?

  17   A.  In that environment, I did not see many circumstances of

  18   that.  I believe I speculated around, I think it was Andreas.

  19   That was one of the German members of the group who may have

  20   come back with an anonymous posting that I thought might be

  21   related and I described that in my report.

  22            But in general, there was no indication.  I mean,

  23   this was not a group that was trying to hide what they were

  24   doing.  They had no reason to be anonymous and what they were

  25   doing, the people who were doing the actual Linux development



316



   1   were very open and very descriptive in terms of what they were

   2   doing.

   3            It was not an environment where they would want to or

   4   to have different pseudo names, if you will.

   5   Q.  And many of these people who were doing the Linux

   6   development were attempting --

   7            THE COURT:  The reporter couldn't get the question.

   8   I couldn't hear it.  Start on a new question, Mr. Garbus.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Now, I forgot the question.

  10            THE COURT:  Well, it's unanimous.

  11   Q.  Does the name Martin Mueller mean anything to you?

  12   A.  Yeah, I believe that was another name that was in the

  13   logs.

  14   Q.  And you understand that the people who were working on the

  15   DVD, the LiViD playback were also the people who were working,

  16   they were also, many of them working on DeCSS and the

  17   construction of --

  18            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  19            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  20   Q.  Your report to the MPA concluded that the effort to crack

  21   CSS was done as a part of a bona fide effort to write a Linux

  22   DVD player, is that right?

  23   A.  I don't know if I phrased it exactly that way.  What my

  24   report concluded was that there were clearly two groups who

  25   were trying to create a DVD player for Linux.



317



   1            There was tremendous discussion in those groups about

   2   how to do that and also about and in particular the groups

   3   were trying to create what I will call legal or

   4   distributable -- commercially-distributable DVD players for

   5   Linux.

   6            Now, as part of that effort, the groups or at least

   7   the portions of the groups that I looked at recognized that

   8   the ability to decrypt CSS was necessary in order to make a

   9   player that could play, I guess, all released DVD movies

  10   because CSS is not a requirement of a DVD movie, but again

  11   many movies are, in fact, CSS encrypted, but that the -- I

  12   would not at all characterize it that they were trying to

  13   create DeCSS.

  14            They were trying to understand how the encryption

  15   worked so that they could create a decryption function inside

  16   of the player so that could, in fact, play the movies.

  17   Q.  Thank you.

  18            Do you know enough about the history of the DVD, when

  19   DVD first started, was the whole question of CSS an integral

  20   part of the discussion of DVD?

  21            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to that.

  22            THE COURT:  Grounds?

  23            MR GOLD:  On the grounds that it doesn't have

  24   anything at all to do that I can see with the direct testimony

  25   and I don't think he has a foundation for it.



318



   1            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   2   Q.  Do you know anything about the use of CSS or the

   3   consideration of CSS when DVDs were first being created?

   4   A.  I'm sorry.  Can you repeat that question?

   5   Q.  You knew that -- did you know working in the field that

   6   you worked, that as a necessary incident to the sale and

   7   distribution of DVDs an encryption system had to be developed?

   8            THE COURT:  Did he know when?

   9   Q.  Did you know in 1945 -- 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998?

  10            THE COURT:  Let's take one of those years at a time.

  11   Do you want to start with 1945, Mr. Garbus?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  1995.

  13   Q.  When for the first time did you see a DVD?

  14            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I don't think we have a

  15   foundation for this line, your Honor.

  16            THE COURT:  I haven't heard the question yet.

  17   Q.  When for the first time did you see a DVD in a store?

  18   A.  In a store?  I believe it was late 1996, I think was when

  19   the format was released.

  20   Q.  And did you know that DVD had an encryption system -- a

  21   security system?

  22   A.  Absolutely, or that there was a security system associated

  23   with many DVDs; yes.

  24   Q.  And did you know prior to the time that there's a

  25   discussion about a release of a DVD, there was a concern that



319



   1   there had to be an encryption system provided so that it could

   2   not be ripped off?

   3   A.  I'm certainly aware that the -- that the CSS system was

   4   created to protect the content on DVDs.

   5   Q.  And do you know when the -- and was the creation of CSS at

   6   about the same time that they first started to distribute

   7   DVDs?

   8            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor --

   9            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  10   Q.  Do you know when they first created the CSS system?

  11            MR GOLD:  Your Honor --

  12            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  13            Do you know of your own personal knowledge when CSS

  14   was created?

  15            THE WITNESS:  I have a fair understanding of that

  16   matter; yes.

  17            THE COURT:  And how do you have this understanding?

  18            THE WITNESS:  Because I was active in the development

  19   of the Divex system and we were intimately tied into DVDs and

  20   the sale and completion of DVD technology.

  21            THE COURT:  And this is the D-I-V-E-X system?

  22            THE WITNESS:  Yes, D-I-V-E-X system; that's correct.

  23            THE COURT:  All right.  Go ahead, restricted to what

  24   you know of your own knowledge as distinguished from what you

  25   have heard, what people told you, what you have heard.



320



   1            THE WITNESS:  Yes, correct.

   2            THE COURT:  All right.

   3            THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.  What is the exact question?

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Can we have the question, again?

   5            (Record read)

   6   A.  The CSS system existed at the time of the first commercial

   7   sale of DVDs.

   8   Q.  And do you know when they first began based on your

   9   experience and based on your history with DiVX when they first

  10   began contemplating CSS?

  11   A.  No, I don't know the exact date of that.

  12   Q.  Do you know when they first began contemplating an

  13   encryption system for DVDs?

  14            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor --

  15            THE COURT:  Do you know who even Mr. Garbus is

  16   talking about when he says "they"?

  17            THE WITNESS:  I presume he means the developers of

  18   the DVD forum which was the body that was creating the

  19   technology.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Exactly, your Honor.

  21            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I think that we are delving

  22   into dates that run into '91, '92, '93 for what irrelevant

  23   reasons, I can't imagine.  They don't have very much to do

  24   with this case that's being tried in this courtroom.

  25            THE COURT:  Sustained.



321



   1   Q.  Did you state in an affidavit and in your testimony in a

   2   deposition that everybody knew that the CSS system would be

   3   broken at one time or another?

   4   A.  I believe I stated that every security system is presumed

   5   to be broken at one time or another.

   6   Q.  And with respect -- and is conspiracy a security system?

   7   A.  Conspiracy is a security system; yes.

   8   Q.  Now, were there any conversations that you were involved

   9   in while you were at DiVX about how long the CSS security

  10   system would exist until it was broken?

  11   A.  We -- we may have done some speculations about that, but

  12   it clearly was not a critical issue for us because we had a

  13   different security system.

  14   Q.  To the best of your knowledge, what were your judgments

  15   about how long the CSS system would exist before it was

  16   broken?

  17            MR GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  What's the relevance of this?

  19            MR. GARBUS:  I think it's relevant to show and I

  20   think we could show if we have the evidence that since 1997,

  21   the movie industry knew that CSS had been broken and they had

  22   to come up with another security system.

  23            THE COURT:  And how is that relevant?  I'm sorry.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  It's relevant in several ways.  It's

  25   relevant with respect to whether or not, as this Court phrased



322



   1   the question, whether this was an effective security system

   2   and whether the circumvention of it, the legal consequences of

   3   the circumvention of it, in other words, if the security

   4   system was known back in 1997 to be unable to protect the

   5   material, then the circumvention of it, it seems to me, has a

   6   different significance than if the motion picture industry or

   7   the plaintiffs did not know of it.

   8            And it is my understanding based on the some of the

   9   testimony that I have heard that they knew that in 1997, that

  10   it probably had a life history of a year, and it goes to the

  11   question of harm and it goes to the question of what the

  12   motion picture industry did knowing that.

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  14            MR GOLD:  The statements, obviously, we disagree with

  15   the statements that Mr. Garbus has made that he presumes to

  16   say are factual.  But I don't see how this witness can testify

  17   to what the movie studios knew.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  I'm not asking him that.  I'm asking him

  19   what was going on at that time based on the position that he

  20   had with respect of conspiracy and the system and the

  21   speculation he said and the basis for the speculation of how

  22   long that system would be viable.

  23            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, what is the relevance to this

  24   case, which is what I thought your objection was, of whether

  25   this was a good, bad or indifferent security system and



323



   1   whatever it was, what the movie studios knew about that?

   2            MR GOLD:  That has no relevance to this case.  There

   3   is a question of whether the effective system, as the statute

   4   uses it and defines it, which has absolutely nothing to do

   5   with the things --

   6            THE COURT:  The objection is sustained.

   7            The statute in explicit terms, which I didn't phrase,

   8   the Congress of the United States phrased, says that it is

   9   inappropriate to provide or offer to the public any technology

  10   that "is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of

  11   circumventing a technological measure that effectively

  12   controls access to a work protected under this title."

  13            If it ended there, the testimony would be relevant

  14   because it might be arguable that Congress intended that only

  15   good security systems be protected.  It does not end there.

  16   It goes on in 17 U.S. Code, Section 1201(a)(3) to define the

  17   term "effectively controls access to a work."

  18            The statute reads, "A technological measure

  19   effectively controls access to a work if the measure in the

  20   ordinary course of its operation requires the application of

  21   information or a process or a treatment with the authority of

  22   the copyright owner to gain access to the work."

  23            Objection sustained.

  24   Q.  The relevant part of the DeCSS source code, would you

  25   agree is functionally the same as css-cat and css-auth?



324



   1   A.  I'm sorry?

   2   Q.  Is it fair to say that the relevant parts of the DeCSS

   3   source code are functionally the same as css-cat and css-auth?

   4            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to that.  I find it

   5   vague and I'm not sure what it's meant to get to.

   6            THE COURT:  Well, I think I know what it's meant to

   7   get to.  The question is obviously compound because what I

   8   think Mr. Garbus is asking about is whether you put css-cat

   9   together with css-auth, you have something that's awfully like

  10   css-auth.  I understand where he is going.

  11            But we will break now for lunch until 2 o'clock.

  12            (Luncheon recess)

  13            A F T E R N O O N   S E S S I O N

  14                             2:00 p.m.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  I thought over lunch about a way that

  16   might save some time.

  17            THE COURT:  Good.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  I'd be glad to approach the bench for

  19   it, because I don't want the Court to indicate -- feel that

  20   I'm talking in somewhat for a larger audience and I'm glad to

  21   do it at the bench.

  22            THE COURT:  Fine.  Come up.

  23            (At the sidebar)

  24            MR. GARBUS:  It seems to me what this witness is

  25   being called to do, among other things, to go through a series



325



   1   of logs and out of that series of logs, he draws certain

   2   conclusions and he draws certain conclusions about whatever he

   3   has testified to.

   4            I would be comfortable doing the entire set of logs

   5   rather than going through it piece by piece.  He also has

   6   prepared two reports, a short interim report and a very long

   7   report.  I can take him through the report step by step, I

   8   think it's unnecessary.

   9            I, at the end of the day, his expertise, let's say in

  10   looking at these reports and making whatever conclusions he

  11   makes I think any judge in this is going to make his own

  12   conclusion based on these reports.

  13            Without denigrating him as an expert, I think the

  14   Court can come to his own conclusion.  I think to go through

  15   these reports or to go through these documents or through

  16   these postings is an enormous waste of time.

  17            (2) I think if we could have an agreement such as the

  18   judge suggested that we are not talking about yesterday's

  19   damage in any particular case, that the entire issue in this

  20   case, if harm is an issue, is the issue of some other kind of

  21   harm from tomorrow or something that has -- that's yet been

  22   discovered, but that we don't have to because you do not have

  23   names or addresses of particular people who did it.

  24            I would be agreeable to enter into a stipulation so

  25   we can do away with that issue.  I was prepared to do away



326



   1   with that issue early on.

   2            THE COURT:  Yes, I understand that.

   3            Mr. Gold?

   4            MR GOLD:  What was No. 1, you want to put in?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I see no point.  You took three logs

   6   out.  You put them in.  They come from this subset.  There's

   7   apparently a larger subset.  Forget about the larger subset.

   8   You put this subset in in the same way you put the other

   9   subset in.  That's issue No. 1.

  10            No. 2, he prepares two reports.  The first report is

  11   two pages.  The second one is somewhat larger.  He makes an

  12   analysis of these logs and he comes to certain conclusions.

  13   It seems to me that although they are logs and at some point

  14   in time the judge is going to have to make his own conclusion

  15   about that and I see no particular point or richness in

  16   spending time with him on his report particularly.

  17            I think anybody could have made those conclusions.  I

  18   may be wrong.  In any event, the judge is going to have to

  19   come to a decision on those issues.

  20            THE COURT:  What?

  21            MR GOLD:  Well, we think that the reports are --

  22   we've already agreed to their authenticity.  We think the

  23   reports --

  24            THE COURT:  I'm sorry, the reports?

  25            MR GOLD:  The two reports that this witness produced



327



   1   after he, a preliminary report and a final report after he

   2   went through these logs and did what the MPA asked him to do

   3   about the LiViD group.

   4            THE COURT:  Right.

   5            MR GOLD:  Certainly his -- we would agree to the

   6   authenticity of all of it.  His reports are reports that he

   7   wrote and believes accurate.  I have no problem with that.  I

   8   think the longer document is already marked and we've agreed

   9   to it as authentic, the exhibit he had --

  10            THE COURT:  Plaintiff's Exhibit 9.

  11            MR. GOLD:  Yes, we said it's authentic.  I think that

  12   it's irrelevant, but --

  13            THE COURT:  Look, it's obviously not irrelevant

  14   because he reviewed it and came to certain conclusions after

  15   reviewing it and so it's relevant to the extent, at least, of

  16   bearing on what weight ought to be given to the conclusions he

  17   drew.

  18            MR. SIMS:  For that purpose.

  19            MR. COOPER:  The question is being offered --

  20            THE COURT:  You're not offering it for hearsay.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  No.  In other words, he drew his

  22   conclusions based on other documents which I perceive to be

  23   subject to hearsay.  The Court allowed those conclusions to be

  24   drawn.  He was an expert, etc., etc., by putting in these

  25   documents and they have the same weight, I presume, as the



328



   1   other logs that went in.  We now have all the logs subject

   2   to --

   3            THE COURT:  So, if I understand where we are,

   4   everybody is agreeable to Plaintiff's 9 coming in for the

   5   limited purpose of illustrating the materials that the witness

   6   looked at in forming the conclusions to which he's already

   7   testified.  They obviously bear on the weight to be given his

   8   testimony.

   9            MR. GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.

  10            THE COURT:  Are we all agreed that far, Mr. Garbus?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, your Honor.

  12            THE COURT:  And it's not offered for any purpose?

  13            MR. GARBUS:  It's offered for whatever purpose the

  14   other logs are offered for, that which is for that purpose.

  15            MR. HART:  We are agreed to what you said.

  16            MR. GOLD:  The judge correctly said -- I understood

  17   everything the judge said, and we agree to it.

  18            THE COURT:  That takes care of this.  We come to the

  19   next question of two reports.  I take it, Mr. Gold, you want

  20   the reports in; right?

  21            MR GOLD:  No, we never offered them.

  22            THE COURT:  You, Mr. Garbus, want to offer the

  23   reports?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I offer both.

  25            THE COURT:  Are you offering them for the truth or



329



   1   for some other reason?

   2            MR. GARBUS:  It's his opinion and it's his

   3   statements.

   4            THE COURT:  Do you have any objection to the reports

   5   coming in?

   6            MR. GOLD:  Well, I don't think the -- no.

   7            THE COURT:  That's easy.

   8            MR GOLD:  That's easy.

   9            THE COURT:  Now, issue No. 3 is that Mr. Garbus and I

  10   are still both waiting for an answer on what we can do about

  11   this litany about did you ever know anybody who used

  12   Pampers -- injecting a note of humor, whether it's entirely

  13   apt or not.

  14            MR. GOLD:  I think it's apt to inject all the humor.

  15            MR. COOPER:  What is the suggestion being made with

  16   respect to that?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  That as of today, nobody knows any one

  18   person that has ever transmitted on the Internet or sold a

  19   copy of a DVD sourced by DeCSS either -- period, is that

  20   right?  I don't know if I stated.

  21            MR. GOLD:  (1) it's not true.  And (2) we can't

  22   stipulate to that.

  23            THE COURT:  What do you mean, it's not true?

  24            MR GOLD:  We do know some individual who -- we

  25   believe we know some individual who has, in fact, begun this.



330



   1            THE COURT:  How many?

   2            MR GOLD:  One, plus.

   3            MR. SIMS:  Not necessarily eight.  We can't

   4   conclusively prove that it was sourced from goods, the witness

   5   would say that he believes they are.

   6            MR. GOLD:  He would say --

   7            THE COURT:  Could we get back to the forest and away

   8   from the trees?

   9            MR GOLD:  Yes.

  10            THE COURT:  The forest is there as a broad

  11   proposition.

  12            If I understand what's being said here, you were able

  13   to give the name of A or B, these are options, more than a

  14   handful of people and the rest follows, as Mr. Garbus stated.

  15            MR. SIMS:  Who we are certain used DeCSS.

  16            MR. COOPER:  DeCSS; right.

  17            THE COURT:  And you are still claiming it happened

  18   and you're going to offer various evidence in an effort to

  19   establish that it happened.

  20            MR. GOLD:  But this is just the name, address,

  21   business.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.  Let the judge say it.

  23            MR. GOLD:  If it's the name-address business, we can

  24   make some leeway.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Do you want to state it, Judge, or shall



331



   1   I state it?

   2            THE COURT:  You try.  Let Mr. Atlas try.  Mr. Atlas

   3   is more articulate.

   4            MR. ATLAS:  It's an issue whether you can identify

   5   for sure.

   6            MR GOLD:  Name and address.

   7            MR. ATLAS:  I think they go by nicknames.

   8            MR. GOLD:  I see what you're saying.

   9            MR. ATLAS:  Handles.  I'm not sure what this evidence

  10   you're going to have.  I haven't seen any admissible evidence

  11   that you can identify a person or a company or an entity who

  12   has actually used DeCSS.

  13            THE COURT:  Identified by name or nickname or handle,

  14   how is that?

  15            MR GOLD:  Who has actually --

  16            MR. ATLAS:  Do you have any proof of anybody using

  17   DeCSS to pirate DVDs?

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Some guy on the Internet says, I used

  19   it, and his name is John Jones.  I'm taking that out of this

  20   because John Jones could have used it and not have used it.  I

  21   could go on the Internet say sending out 4,000 e-mails saying,

  22   I called the president.  I don't see that as having much

  23   relevant weight.

  24            MR. ATLAS:  It's inadmissible.

  25            MR. HART:  And this is why they're -- they want to



332



   1   talk about the weight of particular kinds of proofs.

   2            THE COURT:  No, look, you people are making a big

   3   problem where there isn't is problem, with all due respect.

   4            MR. GOLD:  It could well be.  I see a problem and I'm

   5   trying hard to see why I'm --

   6            THE COURT:  He wants a stipulation which in substance

   7   says putting aside whatever handful of specific cases you

   8   have, if any, that you cannot point by name.

   9            MR GOLD:  By name.

  10            THE COURT:  And the name is here broadly defined.

  11            MR GOLD:  Right.

  12            THE COURT:  You cannot point by name to a single

  13   individual who for sure DeCSS one of your disks, and

  14   transmitted it over the Internet or sold it.

  15            MR. ATLAS:  Actually, maybe.  Can you point to a

  16   single instance of this happening?

  17            THE COURT:  Say it again?

  18            MR. ATLAS:  A single instance.  They seem to be

  19   getting hung up or hang something on the name issue.  Can they

  20   point to a single instance where DeCSS used to do both of

  21   these things?  That's why we ask these questions of the

  22   witness.  We don't think there is an instance other than their

  23   own experts who have done any and traded it over the Internet.

  24            THE COURT:  They're going to ask me to infer from

  25   whatever other evidence they have that it has happened.  And



333



   1   your point is putting aside the inference to be drawn from

   2   other evidence, they have no direct evidence of a specific

   3   case of where that happened.

   4            MR. ATLAS:  Yes, I think that other evidence is

   5   certainly going to be offered for the truth, and it's hearsay.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Let's not offer that.

   7            THE COURT:  We'll deal with that later.  How about

   8   that?  How about the direct evidence inference formulation?

   9            MR. COOPER:  Do you have any problem with that?

  10            MR. SIMS:  There is no direct evidence of a --

  11            MR. COOPER:  Of a specific instance.

  12            MR. SIMS:  Of a specific individual who has used

  13   DeCSS and we can certainly establish that DeCSS was used to

  14   decrypt a DVD and transmitted.

  15            MR GOLD:  You mean, establish beyond any reasonable

  16   doubt.

  17            THE COURT:  Come on.

  18            MR. SIMS:  No, no, but we need to distinguish between

  19   inferences and --

  20            THE COURT:  I'm going to try and state when we go

  21   back, we will deal with the other points first.  You can think

  22   a little on this one.

  23            MR GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

  24            THE COURT:  I think we've made some progress on

  25   compression of the length of the trial.



334



   1            Plaintiff's Exhibit 9 is received for the limited

   2   purpose stated at sidebar essentially without meaning to

   3   modify in any way what was said at sidebar for the purpose of

   4   illustrating in part how this witness reached certain

   5   conclusions he's expressed and for the purpose of assessing

   6   what weight they are to be given.

   7            Second, the report, the interim report of the witness

   8   I believe to the MPAA will be received.

   9            What are the Exhibit numbers?

  10            (Plaintiff's Exhibit 9 received in evidence)

  11            MR. GARBUS:  There's so many different numbers on

  12   these documents.  I have -- I have something called 15 for

  13   identification and I have GD.

  14            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, if we have a minute --

  15   thank you.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  There's that and the interim report.

  17            THE COURT:  While Mr. Hernstadt is finding the

  18   Exhibit numbers, I will attempt to state what I conceive to be

  19   the agreement at sidebar on the point we were discussing

  20   before lunch and then we will find out whether I have done it

  21   to the satisfaction of everyone.

  22            It is the position of the plaintiffs in this case and

  23   they seek to establish, among other things, that the DeCSS has

  24   been used to decrypt CSS-protected movies on DVDs and that

  25   such decrypted movies, that is, those decrypted by DeCSS have



335



   1   been transmitted over the Internet and disseminated in other

   2   ways.

   3            With the exception of work that was done for purposes

   4   of the lawsuit under the supervision of the plaintiff's

   5   counsel, I understand plaintiffs now to be willing to

   6   stipulate that there is no direct evidence of any specific

   7   incident in which an identifiable person decrypted using DeCSS

   8   a CSS-protected DVD movie and then transmitted it via the

   9   Internet or otherwise distributed it.

  10            Assuming they stipulate to that, however, it is

  11   understood between both sides that it is nonetheless

  12   plaintiff's contention that on the basis of all of the other

  13   evidence at the trial, including circumstantial evidence, I

  14   should nevertheless draw the inference that it has occurred in

  15   the past and is likely to occur in the future and by entering

  16   into the stipulation, they are not in any way giving up that

  17   argument.

  18            Now, have I accurately stated it from your point of

  19   view, Mr. Gold?

  20            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, may I?

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims?

  22            MR. SIMS:  Well, first, I want to be clear because

  23   the first line you read said, we seek to establish, and it has

  24   been our position and remains our position that we don't need

  25   to establish that, and I just wouldn't want this --



336



   1            THE COURT:  I'm not deciding whether you need to

   2   establish.

   3            MR. SIMS:  I understand.  I just want the record to

   4   be clear.

   5            THE COURT:  Is the stipulation as I stated it, Mr.

   6   Gold, acceptable to the plaintiffs?

   7            MR GOLD:  Yes, obviously since you agreed with Mr.

   8   Sims, yes, your Honor, it is.

   9            THE COURT:  O.K., Mr. Garbus, is it acceptable to the

  10   defendants?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  It is.  The word "identifiable" we

  12   understand to include people's names, incidents, and I'm just

  13   trying to think that it covers the entire --

  14            THE COURT:  Names, nicknames, handles is what we

  15   discussed at the sidebar.

  16            Satisfactory to both sides?

  17            MR GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  19            THE COURT:  O.K.  It is so stipulated.

  20            I appreciate both counsels' efforts because hopefully

  21   that will really get us some very small compression ratio at

  22   least.

  23            Mr. Garbus, go ahead.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Let me then introduce into evidence at

  25   least the exhibits which are the two reports.  AI is the



337



   1   December 6, 1999 report designated as the interim report and

   2   CS is the report dated December 20, 1999 called the Linux CSS

   3   development analysis.

   4            THE COURT:  O.K., those are the right documents, Mr.

   5   Gold?

   6            MR GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.  We have no objection to

   7   the introduction of those documents.

   8            THE COURT:  Defendant's A as in "Alfred" I as in

   9   "Isador" and C as in "Charlie" S as in whatever you like are

  10   received.

  11            (Defendant's Exhibits A, I, C and S received in

  12   evidence)

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I just should indicate that that

  14   document CS has as a cover sheet, the people -- it's more than

  15   the report.  It has a cover sheet indicating to whom the

  16   report says, it has an appendix which I consider part of the

  17   report and the very last page is another cover sheet

  18   indicating, again, to whom it is sent.  That's the document

  19   that I have.

  20            THE COURT:  Any problem with that?

  21            MR GOLD:  Well, your Honor, what we said at the

  22   sidebar, I think, is we have no objection of the introduction

  23   of that into evidence for the purpose of which it's stated to

  24   be introduced, which is what did this witness rely on in

  25   coming to his conclusion?



338



   1            THE COURT:  Well, and what his conclusions were.

   2   This is a report on his conclusions.

   3            MR GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.

   4            THE COURT:  Any problem with the cover sheets, Mr.

   5   Gold?

   6            MR GOLD:  No.

   7            THE COURT:  Done.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you very much.

   9            THE COURT:  Proceed, Mr. Garbus, please.

  10   Robert Schumann, resumed.

  11   CROSS-EXAMINATION Continued

  12   BY MR. GARBUS:

  13   Q.  Do css-cat and css-auth together do the same thing as

  14   DeCSS?

  15   A.  Do they do the same thing?  No.

  16   Q.  What is the difference?

  17   A.  Css-auth and css-cat implement portions of what DeCSS do

  18   similar to like the parts of a lock, that they would be

  19   equivalent to pieces of a lock, but are clearly not the lock

  20   in its whole.

  21   Q.  Can you get any more specific than that?

  22   A.  Yes.  Css-auth, as I believe I've previously testified,

  23   specifically deals with the function of unlocking the DVD

  24   drive and it's a stand-alone program that runs under Linux

  25   command line with Linux.



339



   1            Css-cat is similarly a stand-alone Linux command line

   2   program whose -- which implements the decryption algorithms

   3   itself, the decryption portion of the function that DeCSS

   4   performs.

   5   Q.  And together do css-auth and css-cat result in a decrypted

   6   DVD?

   7   A.  Css-cat?

   8   Q.  And css-auth?

   9   A.  Do they together result in a decrypted DVD?

  10   Q.  Yes.

  11   A.  With specific -- under specific direction of the user;

  12   yes.

  13   Q.  And both of those are Linux programs?

  14   A.  Both of those are Linux command line programs.  They have

  15   no user interface or other usability type of features.

  16   Q.  Did css-auth predate DeCSS, to your knowledge?

  17   A.  Not to my knowledge, no.

  18   Q.  Do you know if it -- do you know one way or the other?

  19   A.  To my knowledge, css-cat was created -- I'm sorry.  I

  20   think I need to clarify my answer.  I believe css-auth may

  21   have existed prior to DeCSS.

  22   Q.  How long prior?

  23   A.  I don't know the exact amount.  It would have been after

  24   the authorization code was provided to the Linux DVD

  25   developers.  I can't remember the gentleman's name, the



340



   1   gentleman you asked about earlier in June, in the June time

   2   frame.

   3   Q.  And can DeCSS use css-auth?

   4   A.  I'm sorry.  Can you repeat that question?  I didn't follow

   5   it.

   6   Q.  Now, have you ever used DVD rip?

   7   A.  Have I ever used a program called DVD rip?

   8   Q.  Yes.

   9   A.  No, I don't believe I used a program by that name.

  10   Q.  Have you ever used a program named DOD Ripper?

  11   A.  I've used a program named DOD Speed Ripper which I believe

  12   is the same thing.

  13   Q.  And when did you use it?

  14   A.  I would have used it I believe prior to my second

  15   affidavit.  So, it would have been in January, February time

  16   frame.

  17   Q.  And you made notes of that, did you not, in the notes that

  18   you handed over to us, the notes -- excuse me?

  19   A.  Yes, I did.  And I'm sorry, it was prior to my third

  20   declaration in the case.

  21   Q.  Right.

  22            Now, tell me what happened when you used DOD Rip?

  23   A.  When I used DOD Speed Ripper?

  24   Q.  Yes.

  25   A.  DOD Speed Ripper is a Windows command line type of



341



   1   operation and it -- it performs some of -- again, it performs

   2   some of the functions of the DeCSS program in a manner that's

   3   actually similar to css-cat; however, it is my understanding

   4   again based on the materials I've reviewed that it has some

   5   functional problems in that it doesn't work against all DVD

   6   disks.

   7   Q.  And did you try that out on other DVDs?

   8   A.  I tried it against a disk.

   9   Q.  Did you work on a disk that you tried it on?

  10   A.  Yes, it worked on a disk I tried it on.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I might have to strike where he says it

  12   didn't work on other disks.

  13            THE COURT:  Yes, that part of the answer will be

  14   stricken.

  15   Q.  The DOD Stripper or the DOD Ripper?

  16            MR. GOLD:  Was the question did he know?

  17            THE COURT:  No, the question was whether this

  18   program, whatever it's called, has been around for a long

  19   time.

  20            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, it's -- I object on relevance.

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, why is it relevant?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  This deals with all the other programs

  23   that are out there.

  24            THE COURT:  Why are they relevant?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  It's relevant to the question of where



342



   1   these alleged illegally-copied films come from and one of

   2   the -- I think what we've learned here and, again, I'll go to

   3   the sidebar so it's not as if I'm making any statement.

   4            THE COURT:  Go ahead.  Go ahead.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  One of the things we've learned here is

   6   that it's very, very difficult between DeCSS and DiVX to

   7   create a pirated copy.  The point that we make here is that

   8   this material DeCSS was primarily constructed for use in a

   9   Linux machine.

  10            We believe that the evidence that has just come in

  11   through the expert's report and through the logs show

  12   conclusively contrary to a little ambivalence of this witness

  13   is that that was the purpose of DeCSS and the sole purpose of

  14   DeCSS.

  15            THE COURT:  How does the preexistence in that and the

  16   fact of other decryption software prove what you just said?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  It relates to two separate things.

  18            First of all, it relates to the question of harm, but

  19   what it also proves is that these other techniques were

  20   available and were being used, let's say, to rip off films

  21   that DeCSS, that if you wanted to just go copy and pirate

  22   films in any way, you had all these other alternatives, that

  23   DeCSS was constructed solely, primarily, for use on the Linux

  24   machine and what we think the LiViD logs show is that now you

  25   may conclude that its piracy or copying, whether or not it's



343



   1   on a Linux machine or not.

   2            You may conclude that that portion of our argument is

   3   invalid and that whatever we say about Sony Betamax, etc., is

   4   irrelevant and in view of the DMCA.

   5            But that's the argument that we make.  If we have a

   6   stipulation as to it, we can save a lot of time.

   7            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor --

   8            THE COURT:  Just a minute, Mr. Gold.

   9            It seems to me, I mean, you have strung together a

  10   whole series of different arguments in your response and maybe

  11   there's an appropriate relationship that I'm not seeing, but

  12   what it sounds like to me is that you are saying transposing

  13   this case now into the context, for example, of a patent

  14   infringement that it somehow would be a defense to

  15   infringement of a patent that other people were doing it

  16   first.

  17            Now, why isn't that line of logic perfectly

  18   applicable here?

  19            MR. GARBUS:  It is correct, if you interpret or it

  20   may be correct or is arguably correct that if you interpret

  21   the use of the DeCSS for the Linux machine, then -- and you

  22   equate that with copying and selling on the street and doing

  23   it illegally, we don't.  We say that DeCSS was made solely

  24   by -- for Linux.

  25            THE COURT:  But I understand.



344



   1            MR. GARBUS:  And that DeCSS has no piracy backing or

   2   using the Sony Betamax argument has such a minimal piracy

   3   value that its fair use application outweighs any infringing

   4   quality.

   5            I shouldn't have used "piracy" before.  I should have

   6   used the word "infringing."

   7            THE COURT:  But if I understood the testimony I heard

   8   yesterday, even if I take the best case -- the best

   9   interpretation of it from your point of view, it took 20 hours

  10   of work by people whom you would say are sophisticated to

  11   produce the disks we watched briefly yesterday and I can

  12   understand that it might well be entirely impractical to

  13   suppose that people are going to invest that kind of money and

  14   effort to produce a single disk on any scam, but I thought I

  15   heard that once you have the decrypted file, you can do with

  16   that decrypted file anything you can do with any other file on

  17   any other computer in the world.

  18            And, therefore, if somebody was of the mind to be in

  19   the business of selling pirated movies, one might very well

  20   invest 20 hours of work to pirate "The Jungle Book" or

  21   whatever is hot at the moment, and then turn out CD-ROMs at

  22   some enormously high rate of speed and, therefore, I just

  23   don't understand where the "therefore" is in your argument.

  24            (Continued on next page)

  25



345



   1            MR. GARBUS:  The "therefore" is why spend -- and

   2   remember what our witnesses say is that it doesn't take 20

   3   hours but it takes a very substantial multiple of 20 hours --

   4   our argument is that there are many other rippers out there

   5   that do it in a very small percentage of the time.

   6            THE COURT:  Okay.  I can understand that argument.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  So, that if you are going to get

   8   involved in infringing, if you are interested in making a

   9   buck, there are an infinite number of ways to do it at one

  10   tenth the cost or the price, or maybe even more -- I can't

  11   give you whether you are a Hong Kong pirate -- I don't want to

  12   use that pejoratively -- but you just photograph it or you use

  13   these other techniques to do it, so that's the argument,

  14   whether you accept it or not.

  15            THE COURT:  No, I understand, but I want to come to

  16   the next point which is back to the question to which the

  17   objection is taken.  What difference does it make if these

  18   others were out there before DeCSS if they are out there now?

  19            MR. GARBUS:  You are being asked to infer damage.

  20   You are being asked to infer either because you can turn on

  21   the TV today and you can allegedly through these file sharing

  22   techniques have 30 titles out there, or that two years from

  23   now there will be 3,000 titles out there.  And your question

  24   then is I think why should I permit DeCSS, assuming using that

  25   language, using that language roughly, to be out there if it



346



   1   has no other value, if there is no other purpose for it and if

   2   it serves no function at all.  We have several answers to that

   3   which I don't have to belabor here, and again I'm prepared to

   4   do it at the bench so that there is no claim that I'm doing it

   5   for any audience.

   6            THE COURT:  Relax, Mr. Garbus.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  So that our position is that DeCSS --

   8   and if I may, since we are having an argument, I will just go

   9   into something.  The Toronto Star article, which I think we

  10   will get into with his notes, other people that tried it,

  11   everybody has had -- as far as we know people have had the

  12   same experience as Mr. Shamos.  They didn't get Mr. Shamos out

  13   of the air.  They got the best person they could find with the

  14   best technical skills they could find, and they got this man

  15   in at 2 in the morning, when school was out, to do this, to

  16   come in with 20 hours.  We have people whose affidavits -- and

  17   you will hear from them -- and I don't --

  18            THE COURT:  But we are arguing an objection to a

  19   question, and the question that I keep putting to you is what

  20   difference does it make which came first?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I think that what we would like to prove

  22   is that there has been a piracy, illegal copying that existed

  23   long before DeCSS ever came around, and what it comes from are

  24   all these other technologies, and I'm not going to say, well,

  25   if there are ten technologies that rip or pirate, should we



347



   1   stop one that does.  I'm certainly not making that argument at

   2   all.  I am saying that not as a practical matter but as a real

   3   matter, that DeCSS -- and I'm telling you -- well, CSS had

   4   been cracked in '97.  DeCSS had clearly been cracked let's say

   5   in October, whatever the dates are.  And since then there has

   6   been no identifiable harm.  You are asked to draw a conclusion

   7   based on what is on the TV or other people that they bring

   8   in -- you will hear Ms. King who is in the court now give you

   9   this wild speculation that we know it's going to happen, we

  10   know it's going to happen.

  11            We spent as much time as we could with the movie

  12   studios or whatever to show that nobody has made any

  13   projections of any harm concerning DeCSS, because they know

  14   it's not true.  One of the depositions you quashed, if I may

  15   just say this, was of Macrovision.  Macrovision is a

  16   professional group, a security group, and they gave the MPA a

  17   report, and that report said basically that DeCSS would not be

  18   consumer friendly.  And I don't want to misstate the report,

  19   but that's the report that we have here today, and I think as

  20   I understand it every security company that has looked at

  21   DeCSS --

  22            THE COURT:  We have gotten way off the point here I

  23   think.  And even if DeCSS is not consumer friendly, it doesn't

  24   answer the question of whether a DVD that somebody is offering

  25   on the street for six bucks, which is ultimately traceable to



348



   1   a DeCSS decryption, is consumer friendly.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  Absolutely.

   3            THE COURT:  Okay.  Now --

   4            MR. GARBUS:  And.

   5            THE COURT:  No.  Let's go back to where are you

   6   coming from.  If what you are telling me is you think you can

   7   establish here that there are other technologies out there

   8   that will do the same thing, at least the same quality, that

   9   are less costly and less difficult for this hypothetical

  10   pirate to use, and in consequence there would be no reason for

  11   a hypothetical pirate to use DeCSS, that I think is a relevant

  12   argument, it's a relevant line of inquiry.  I don't know how

  13   strong it is, but it's certainly a relevant line of inquiry.

  14   If that's where you are going, I will let you try to go there.

  15            Mr. Gold?

  16            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I know --

  17            THE COURT:  I never know what to do when you get

  18   halfway out of your chair.

  19            MR. GOLD:  I know your Honor knows that most of that

  20   speech refers to things that there is no evidence in this

  21   record of, and there is a reason for that.

  22            THE COURT:  Look, there is enough trouble doing this

  23   case given the technology and the feelings.  We really don't

  24   have to have at each other all the time like this, Mr. Gold.

  25            MR. GOLD:  The other point maybe that I would like to



349



   1   make is that there is no evidence in this record that DeCSS

   2   was created to make a Linux-based DVD player.

   3            THE COURT:  I know that's your argument.  I just

   4   heard testimony from this witness that his opinion is no way,

   5   no how.  I understand that.  We can't get both sides' whole

   6   argument in every paragraph spoken in the trial.

   7            MR. GOLD:  I agree.  Thank you, your Honor.

   8            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, do you have anymore

   9   questions?

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Let me go on and I will try to be brief.

  11   BY MR. GARBUS:

  12   Q.  Do you know what an emulator is?

  13   A.  An emulator?

  14   Q.  Yes.

  15   A.  Yes, I do.

  16   Q.  And would a Linux-based Windows emulator like wine, would

  17   that permit a person using Linux to run a Windows application?

  18   A.  I understand that there are several Windows emulators that

  19   exist in the Linux environment.  However, like all attempts to

  20   create Windows emulators, including Sun's commercial product

  21   called WABI, creating such a product is in fact, such an

  22   emulator is an extremely difficult and often times

  23   unsuccessful exercise, such that in almost all cases only a

  24   small fraction of programs recreated for Windows ever actually

  25   executes successfully on those systems, because there are



350



   1   many, many pieces you must emulate, and it's very difficult to

   2   do that right without any help from Microsoft.

   3   Q.  Thank you.  Now answer my question.  Would a Linux-based

   4   Windows emulator like wine permit a person using Linux to run

   5   a Windows application?

   6            THE COURT:  I think he did answer the question.

   7            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor?

   8            MR. GARBUS:  Okay.

   9            THE COURT:  I take the answer to be maybe but not too

  10   likely.

  11   Q.  Have you ever tried that?

  12   A.  I have not used a Linux Windows emulator.  I have in the

  13   past tried to use Sun's WABI emulator.

  14   Q.  Any information you have about whether that's difficult or

  15   easy doesn't come from your personal knowledge, is that right?

  16   A.  It comes from my fairly significant expertise in the

  17   software development environment both in UNIX and Windows.

  18   And in previous positions I have held we actually attempted to

  19   replace Windows systems with UNIX and tried to use that stuff

  20   in the real world, and it just at that time didn't work, and

  21   everything I have read in my ongoing reading says that issue

  22   has gotten no better.

  23   Q.  Let me show you Exhibit BCK.

  24            Do you recognize what this document is, Mr. Schumann?

  25   A.  Yes, this is copies of my notes, my note pad.



351



   1   Q.  Getting back now to -- how many meetings have you had with

   2   Proskauer concerning this case?

   3   A.  By meetings, do you include phone conversations?

   4   Q.  Is it fair to say -- and then we will go into the

   5   documents themselves -- that you have been assisting them in

   6   this case with respect to the analysis of defendants'

   7   affidavits, making comments on the affidavits and helping them

   8   prepare this case for trial?

   9   A.  I believe that's a fair assessment, yes.

  10   Q.  And in helping them prepare this case for trial, tell me

  11   what you would have done.

  12   A.  I have both created and brought to the Court's attention

  13   three affidavits in this case.  I have worked with them in

  14   reviewing affidavits provided by others in this case, in

  15   particular defense affidavits, and I have also provided

  16   general technical background where I have been asked questions

  17   about such things.

  18   Q.  And you have also helped them, have you not, in suggesting

  19   questions to be asked in court itself by giving them this

  20   technical advice.

  21   A.  I have on my own initiative -- in reviewing the defense

  22   affidavits, I certainly made comments in those affidavits

  23   about what I saw as I guess issues or things that did not jibe

  24   with my understanding of how things worked is probably not the

  25   right word, but where I didn't agree with what was said in



352



   1   those affidavits.

   2   Q.  Let's be specific.  By the way, who was your prime

   3   contact, if anyone, at Proskauer?  Was it Mr. Hart?

   4   A.  Yeah, my prime contact was Mr. Hart.

   5   Q.  How many conversations did you have with Mr. Hart?

   6   A.  My guess is that it's dozens of conversations over the

   7   period of these six months.

   8   Q.  And I suppose you consider yourself as an independent

   9   expert even though you are part of the defense team, is that

  10   right?

  11            MR. GOLD:  Objection.

  12            THE COURT:  Can I hear the question again, Steve?

  13            (Record read)

  14            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  15   A.  I don't understand the context of -- I'm not a legal

  16   expert, and I think you are asking me a legal question, and I

  17   don't think I'm qualified to answer that.

  18   Q.  Let me ask you this.  By the way, the copy of the document

  19   I have is redacted in certain places, like page SCH01103.  I

  20   don't know the purpose of the redaction.  Let me just see,

  21   speak to my colleague and see what the history of that is.

  22            I don't know whether those are documents being

  23   withheld from me by the Court.  Let's assume in that document

  24   01103 there is a page that's redacted.  There are other

  25   redactions.



353



   1            THE COURT:  00103?

   2            MR. GARBUS:  01103.

   3            THE COURT:  You can be sure I can't shed any light on

   4   it.  Mr. Gold?

   5            MR. GOLD:  I believe the redactions in this document

   6   related to, if you will remember, the witness talked about

   7   another project for Proskauer, internal and not to this case,

   8   and they were redacted for that reason.

   9            THE COURT:  Okay.  That mystery is solved.  What is

  10   next?

  11   Q.  Now, these documents in Exhibit BCK, they are in time

  12   sequence?

  13   A.  They are in approximate time sequence.  This notebook,

  14   it's not a binder with pages you can't tear out.  I added

  15   clipped-on notes from other places, so wherever I took a note,

  16   I then brought it into this, so it is an approximate time

  17   sequence, but I'm sure it's not perfect time sequence.

  18   Q.  At page 2 is the name John Gilmore.

  19            THE COURT:  Page 2?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I will use the numbers.  SCH01094, which

  21   is the second page of this package of documents.

  22   Q.  Do you know who John Gilmore is?

  23   A.  To be honest with you, I don't know why I wrote that name

  24   on this particular page.

  25   Q.  How about the name Wagner?



354



   1   A.  Again, looking at it now, I'm not sure exactly why I have

   2   that name written there.

   3   Q.  Aren't those two of the people whose affidavits you read

   4   in this case for the defense?

   5   A.  It's possible there may be affidavits, but again those

   6   names do not ring a big bell to me as I sit here at this

   7   moment.

   8   Q.  By the way, take a look at page 01104.  Do you see that?

   9   A.  I'm getting there.  Yes.

  10   Q.  Now, what these notes indicate is what you were doing in

  11   order to prepare for your expert testimony, Mr. Schumann?

  12   A.  Again, they were done in the context we discussed earlier

  13   with my work with Proskauer in this case.

  14   Q.  It indicates the investigation you were making and the

  15   research material you were reading?

  16   A.  Generally it indicates the items that I saw fit at that

  17   time to write down.

  18   Q.  And the information that you sought and obtained during

  19   this period of time was the information that ultimately forms

  20   the opinions that you have testified to here today, is that

  21   right?

  22   A.  That would depend on the particular opinions.

  23   Q.  Now page 01104, do you see a reference to the Toronto

  24   Star?

  25   A.  Yes.



355



   1   Q.  And can you just read to me what it says under 5:10, after

   2   we are told that Bill Hart is likely to be at the Four Seasons

   3   and the New York Times has an article.  Can you tell me what

   4   the next sentence says?

   5   A.  Yeah, the next sentence says, "Call Frank Sevelya, ask for

   6   a copy of the Toronto Star," and it has a phone number.

   7   Q.  Why were you asking for a copy of the Toronto Star?

   8   A.  I believe in a conversation I had with Bill Hart on that

   9   day or the previous day he mentioned that there was an

  10   interesting article in the Toronto Star, had I seen it.  I

  11   told him, no, I had not, and I don't have a subscription to

  12   the Toronto Star, and he said that it might be good for me to

  13   take a look at it.

  14   Q.  Did he tell you why it was good for you to take a look at

  15   it?

  16   A.  I'm sure he indicated or I surmised it had some potential

  17   relevance to this case, the items discussed might be of

  18   interest.

  19   Q.  Did he indicate that the article talked about someone

  20   using DeCSS and DivX in order to make a copy of a DVD movie?

  21   A.  I don't recall if he specifically said that.  I'm sure I

  22   assumed based on the fact that we were talking about it that

  23   it had something to do with this case and thus had something

  24   to do with DeCSS.

  25   Q.  And did you then get a copy of the Toronto Star article?



356



   1   A.  I presume I did.

   2   Q.  And go down to the next place, 2 p.m., Frank Scavella,

   3   discussion of the Toronto Star article.  Who is Frank

   4   Scavella?

   5   A.  Frank Scavella is another person at the Proskauer firm.

   6   Q.  And what did you and he discuss about the Toronto Star

   7   article?

   8   A.  My guess is we discussed the essence of that Toronto Star

   9   article, and again I don't remember exact details, but I'm

  10   sure you have the article.

  11   Q.  You bet.  Now, do you remember being asked about the

  12   Toronto Star article at your deposition?

  13   A.  I remember there was a question about the Toronto Star

  14   article, yes.

  15   Q.  And do you remember putting the Toronto Star article into

  16   your affidavit?

  17   A.  I believe my affidavit mentions the existence of such an

  18   article and may even talk briefly about what it says.

  19   Q.  Do you remember the Toronto Star article talks about

  20   something using DeCSS and failing to use it a number of times?

  21   A.  Again, I would have to look at the detail of the article.

  22   I remember that the article describes some difficult in making

  23   I don't know if it was DeCSS or the DivX's encoding process

  24   work.  I remember portions of it surprised me, that I didn't

  25   quite understand why they had some of the problems they did.



357



   1   Q.  When you say "had some of the problems they did" -- by the

   2   way, prior to the time you saw the Toronto Star article, was

   3   that the first time you had heard of anybody trying to use

   4   DeCSS and then DivX to watch a DVD movie?

   5   A.  That may have been -- may potentially have been the first

   6   time I saw such a thing in print, but I mean as someone who is

   7   in I guess in this field, it's a pretty obvious thing to do if

   8   your desire is to make small sized copies to send around.  The

   9   combination of those two is not a unique combination.

  10            MR. GOLD:  I would like to move to strike the last

  11   question and answer because the question misstates the

  12   testimony.  This witness said the contrary to using the

  13   Toronto Star article to form the basis of his opinion.  The

  14   question --

  15            THE COURT:  The question was prior to the time you

  16   saw the Toronto Star article was that the first time you heard

  17   of anybody trying to use DeCSS and then DivX to watch a DVD

  18   movie.  Overruled.

  19   Q.  Sir?

  20   A.  I'm sorry.  Could you repeat the question, please.

  21   Q.  Yes.  Now, your memories was -- the article talked about

  22   the difficulties in synchronization of audio and visual

  23   aspects of a DVD?

  24   A.  Yeah, I believe it had that problem.

  25   Q.  The same problem Mr. Shamos spoke about.



358



   1   A.  Yeah, they appear to have encountered the same issue.

   2   Q.  And do you know how long the writer of that article said

   3   it took to try to reconcile the synchronization of the audio

   4   and the visual?

   5            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object.  This is simply an

   6   effort to put into the record things that are clearly hearsay.

   7            THE COURT:  Stand up.

   8            MR. GOLD:  Sorry.

   9            THE COURT:  Look, I don't get the point, Mr. Garbus.

  10   I know you would like me to consider the Toronto Star article

  11   for the truth of the matter.  Unless you find your way around

  12   the hearsay rule, I'm not going to do it when it comes in in

  13   your questions or otherwise, just as I'm not going to consider

  14   for the truth of the matter stuff on the Internet to which you

  15   have objected on hearsay grounds.  So, I don't know the

  16   purpose of this.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  The difference is if he formed any

  18   opinions in this case on the basis of this information.

  19            THE COURT:  You are entitled to it for that purpose,

  20   but just be aware that it's not being considered for the

  21   truth.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  That's all I'm asking for.

  23   Q.  Now, did that article tell you anything about the ability

  24   to use or help you form your opinion about the use of DeCSS

  25   and DivX as a way of pirating films?



359



   1            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor?

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

   3            MR. GOLD:  I'm not sure the witness gave an opinion

   4   on that matter.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I will withdraw the question.

   6   Q.  Now, going to page SCH01105, the Bill Hart discussion and

   7   then it says "homework."  Who was assigning the homework?

   8   A.  "Homework" was my own term I guess as a result of the

   9   conversation here, the areas that needed further exploration.

  10   It's not an assignment in the sense I had it in grade school.

  11   It's my own internal term I use for this is what is left to

  12   do.

  13   Q.  By the way, have you ever gone to graduate school?

  14   A.  I have not, no.

  15   Q.  Have you ever written any books on any subject?

  16   A.  No, I have not.

  17   Q.  Have you ever written any articles on any subject?

  18   A.  No, I have not.

  19   Q.  Now, you did three affidavits in this case, is that right?

  20   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  21   Q.  Now, with respect to the first affidavit, how many drafts

  22   of that affidavit were done?

  23   A.  Full drafts?  I don't recall exactly.  Maybe three or

  24   four.

  25   Q.  Tell me what that process was.  By the way, was this with



360



   1   Mr. Hart?

   2   A.  This was primarily with Mr. Hart.  There may have been

   3   occasionally other participants from Proskauer, but as I

   4   testified my primary interface was with Mr. Hart.

   5            The process by which that first affidavit was written

   6   was that after I had been brought into this case we spent a

   7   considerable period of time on a conference call walking

   8   through the issues in this case, in particular as they were I

   9   guess of interest to Proskauer at that point in time.

  10            So, Bill would provide -- essentially they would ask

  11   me a series of questions and we had essentially kind of a

  12   question and answer session where I went through my

  13   understanding of what I understood about the issues of the

  14   case at that time.

  15   Q.  And some of those questions related to the work that you

  16   had done when you were working for and being paid by the MPAA

  17   in November and December, is that right?

  18   A.  Some of the questions related to that matter.  I don't

  19   believe we discussed the report, if that's what you're trying

  20   to get at.  I mean we clearly discussed the things I had

  21   learned in that process, but I don't think there was any

  22   specific discussion of the report.

  23   Q.  Did Mr. Hart know you had prepared a report?

  24   A.  I know he knew that I had done work with the MPAA.  I

  25   don't know if he knew I had done such a report, no.



361



   1   Q.  To your knowledge, when for the first time did Proskauer

   2   learn that you had done this report?

   3   A.  Again, I have no knowledge as to when they may have

   4   learned that I did that report.

   5   Q.  When for the first time did anybody at Proskauer, if ever,

   6   discuss that report with you?  Let me focus you a little, if I

   7   can.

   8   A.  Yes, please.

   9   Q.  Was it after we first asked for it and demanded it at your

  10   first deposition?

  11   A.  I would be surprised if it had been that late.

  12   Q.  Was it after we had demanded the documents from you prior

  13   to the deposition?

  14   A.  I'm sorry.  I don't follow the timing of that.  I don't

  15   remember getting any request for documents other than starting

  16   at the deposition.

  17   Q.  Had Proskauer, prior to the time you came to the

  18   deposition, ever shown you a demand for documents that we had

  19   made?

  20   A.  Prior to the first deposition?

  21   Q.  Yes.

  22   A.  Not that I specifically recall, no.

  23   Q.  Now, with respect to your first affidavit, how long did it

  24   take to go through these three or four drafts?

  25   A.  I believe we completed that first affidavit in it might be



362



   1   a week or so.  Again, I don't remember the exact timing.

   2   Q.  Did you ever suggest to them that it might -- by the way,

   3   by that time had you seen some of the pleadings in the case?

   4   A.  By pleadings, do you mean official court documents?

   5   Q.  Yes.

   6   A.  No, I never saw any of that, certainly not prior, not

   7   prior to my first deposition, no.

   8   Q.  Prior to the time you did your first affidavit, had you

   9   ever seen any of the pleadings or documents in the case?

  10   A.  I'm sorry.  I misspoke.  I meant my first affidavit, not

  11   my first deposition.

  12   Q.  So, as I understand it, prior to the time you did the

  13   first affidavit you don't remember or did not see any

  14   pleadings or documents, but you did see it or you may have

  15   seen it prior to your first deposition.  Is that right?

  16   A.  It's possible.  If they were, they were -- I mean if I saw

  17   anything, it was official public record type of pleadings

  18   other than drafts of my own materials.

  19   Q.  And tell me the changes, if you can, that the drafts of

  20   your first affidavit went through, the three drafts?

  21   A.  The changes, as you would expect, as they went through the

  22   drafts the changes became less and less.  The first draft was

  23   as a result of the conversation with Bill Hart, so it was a

  24   very rough draft because Bill Hart, at the time I wasn't in a

  25   position to take the time to write, so he wrote down what he



363



   1   had understood from our discussion on the phone, and that is

   2   what I would consider the first draft, and that was, of

   3   course, extremely rough.  It had many things that were not

   4   completely accurate as one would expect from an initial

   5   discussion over the phone, so that the first draft was pretty

   6   rough.

   7   Q.  Tell me what was inaccurate, if you can remember.

   8   A.  I'm sorry.  Unless can you show me the draft, I can't tell

   9   you exactly what it was, but I remember we did extensive edits

  10   to the drafts.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  May I see those drafts, Mr. Gold?

  12            We never got them.  We have been asking for them.

  13            MR. GOLD:  I'm told that the drafts are not in the

  14   documents that we identified or in the 1,000 or so documents

  15   that Mr. Garbus identified as his documents in the case.  And

  16   I am also told there are no drafts which is why they were not

  17   in production.  There are no drafts that exist.

  18            THE COURT:  So the short answer is there are not any.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  There are none?

  20            THE COURT:  There are none anymore.  That's what he

  21   said.

  22   Q.  What happened to the drafts, Mr. Schumann.  Do you know?

  23   A.  I know that I certainly would have cleaned them up on my

  24   side, because that was old.  That's not the right word, but I

  25   have done a considerable number of patents and such, and I



364



   1   have learned to get rid of the old stuff that is not

   2   reflective of what the true meaning is in any case, so I

   3   pretty regularly clean up after I work on that type of

   4   material.

   5   Q.  Is this on your computer?

   6   A.  No, these drafts were done all on -- at least from my

   7   side, they were essentially all done on paper, certainly that

   8   first draft or that first --

   9            MR. GOLD:  Obviously my hearing isn't good enough,

  10   and I didn't pick up the messages coming from the far end of

  11   our table.  We do not know as we sit here without Mr. Hart

  12   that the drafts do not exist in our office.  So, I misspoke.

  13   I didn't hear that.  We will look, and if the drafts exist, we

  14   will bring them in, we will fax them over to your place

  15   tonight.

  16            THE COURT:  Okay.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I just want to indicate for the record

  18   we asked for those on May 15.

  19            THE COURT:  Is that right, Mr. Gold?

  20            MR. GOLD:  I do not know.  Is that the May 5

  21   deposition transcript that you are talking about?

  22            THE COURT:  He said May 15.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I will let Mr. Hernstadt speak.

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  During the deposition we agreed that

  25   in addition to making demands on the record in the deposition,



365



   1   I would also write a letter at the end of the deposition so

   2   that they could start to find the documents demanded during

   3   the deposition, if they existed, before getting the deposition

   4   transcript back.  I sent a letter on May 15 asking for all

   5   these documents in his files which would include obviously any

   6   drafts.

   7            THE COURT:  So, you were waving at Mr. Schumann.

   8            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes.

   9            THE COURT:  Mr. Schumann just told us they are not in

  10   his file.

  11            MR. GOLD:  Not in his file.

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  We asked for all the reports and all

  13   the backup on the report.

  14            THE COURT:  Look for the documents.  If you have

  15   them, you have no objection to producing them I understood.

  16            MR. GOLD:  Well, your Honor --

  17            THE COURT:  If you do, you do.  You will just tell

  18   me.

  19            MR. GOLD:  The affidavits have not been discussed in

  20   his direct.  We haven't offered the affidavits into evidence

  21   in this case.  I don't understand the point or why they are

  22   relevant.  So I do have that problem.  We are going into so

  23   many avenues that --

  24            THE COURT:  What's the point of this, Mr. Garbus?

  25   Mr. Garbus, what is the point of this?



366



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I want to see the variance between his

   2   affidavits and the drafts, if there is any.

   3            THE COURT:  That part I figured out.  But what is the

   4   relevance of that to your cross-examination based on his

   5   direct?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I would like to see what he said about

   7   whether Linux -- it really gets to what the issues are in the

   8   case, and it would get to the question of what his conclusions

   9   were, his preliminary conclusions before he wrote the draft

  10   interim report and then the other report on Linux and why

  11   DeCSS was created.  It's the background for that report based

  12   on the logs I presume.

  13            THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. Gold, you look for and

  14   see if you have a problem about producing them.

  15            MR. GOLD:  I certainly will, your Honor.

  16            THE COURT:  If there is going to be a problem about

  17   producing them, I certainly am going to want to know exactly

  18   what the state of the record is as to who asked for what when,

  19   because there have been a lot of general statements made on

  20   both sides about things like that, and they have not always

  21   been precisely accurate upon inspection.  I don't mean about

  22   this particular group of documents but I mean in general.

  23   Let's proceed.

  24   Q.  Now, do you know whether or not in October 1999 Linux did

  25   or did not support UDF?  Do you know what UDF is?



367



   1   A.  You're referring to the UDF file system?

   2   Q.  Yes.

   3   A.  Yes, I'm aware of what UDF is.

   4   Q.  So any work on a Linux DVD player would also have to be on

   5   a Windows system at least until Linux could support UDF, is

   6   that right?

   7            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to that.

   8            THE COURT:  Ground?

   9            MR. GOLD:  Compound, calls for speculation, no

  10   foundation.  Those are the three that come to my mind.

  11            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Let me see if I can break it down.

  13   Q.  Did Linux support UDF?

  14   A.  To my understanding I would have to look in detail, but

  15   the development versions of Linux absolutely support UDF in

  16   that time frame.

  17            THE COURT:  This is October of '99?

  18            THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's correct.

  19   Q.  In July?

  20            THE COURT:  What year?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  '99.

  22   A.  They may have been in the early phases of support of UDF.

  23   Again, I don't know exactly when UDF was available on Linux,

  24   but it was not to my recollection a subject of great

  25   discussion on the logs.



368



   1            Also, in order to read enough of the DVD you need a

   2   very, very small piece of UDF to be functional in order to

   3   read data off the DVD disk.

   4   Q.  Now, you have never participated in a group development of

   5   any Linux application, is that correct?

   6   A.  That is correct.

   7   Q.  So everything you know about developing a Linux

   8   application in November and December of 1999 you have learned

   9   from the logs, is that right?

  10   A.  Everything about the specific details of the sequence of

  11   events that took place during that time I learned from the

  12   logs.  In terms of what it takes to create a development

  13   program to create operating systems and create applications,

  14   that knowledge would have been based on my extensive

  15   experience in software development both as a developer and as

  16   a manager of software development efforts.

  17            THE COURT:  We will take a 15 minute break here.

  18   Excuse me.

  19            (Recess)

  20            THE COURT:  All right.  Let's proceed, please.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Could we approach the bench on something

  22   small again?  Can we have the same stipulation that we had

  23   before, basically, namely that there is no evidence or proof

  24   or claim that anybody ever downloaded anything from 2600.com

  25   and there is no evidence that anyone ever used anything from



369



   1   2600.com to make any illegal copy or transmission?  I have

   2   stated it perhaps not as artfully as I might have, but I think

   3   that's the --

   4            THE COURT:  The key missing word being "direct

   5   evidence" I take it.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Direct or indirect.  We can try it both

   7   ways.  We can try it direct and then indirect.

   8            THE COURT:  They wouldn't give you the "indirect"

   9   before.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  I will take the direct and then we'll

  11   move on.

  12            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  13            MR. GOLD:  No, your Honor, we would not like to

  14   stipulate to that.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Even as to the direct?

  16            THE COURT:  Even as to direct evidence?

  17            MR. GOLD:  That's right, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  Is this because you would not like to do

  19   it or because you really think you have some evidence?

  20            MR. GOLD:  Because we really think we have some

  21   evidence.

  22            THE COURT:  Apart from Mr. Shamos.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  Other than the plaintiffs' witnesses.

  24            THE COURT:  Look, I'm not going to take the time to

  25   do this right now.



370



   1            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, this does raise for the third

   2   or fourth time an issue about the fact that your order related

   3   to Mr. Corley's computer has not been complied with by

   4   defendants.

   5            THE COURT:  We are not going to have that right now.

   6   You have a witness on the stand.  Go ahead, Mr. Garbus.

   7   Q.  You have been in the security business for how many years?

   8   A.  Since the beginning of my work on the DivX, the digital

   9   video express project.

  10   Q.  You have heard of Macrovision?

  11   A.  Yes, I have.

  12   Q.  What is Macrovision?

  13   A.  Macrovision is a corporation in California that is the

  14   creator of what is known as the Macrovision copy protection

  15   system which is a system that works on analog video and

  16   provides an effective measure against VCR copies of the analog

  17   video signals.

  18   Q.  And were you at any time shown any reports that

  19   Macrovision did with respect to the effect of DeCSS hacks on

  20   the movie industry?

  21   A.  No, I have seen no such report.

  22   Q.  Have you ever had any conversations with anybody at

  23   Macrovision in your life?

  24   A.  I have had conversations with people at Macrovision, yes.

  25   Q.  Have you had a conversation within the last seven months



371



   1   with anybody from Macrovision?

   2   A.  Yes, I have.

   3   Q.  And have you had any conversations with them concerning

   4   any aspect of this case?

   5   A.  I have not.

   6   Q.  Are they one of the most respected security firms in the

   7   country, in your knowledge?

   8            MR. GOLD:  I object, your Honor.  This is --

   9            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  10   Q.  Now, prior to being contacted by the MPA, you had no

  11   involvement in any way with LiViD, is that right?

  12   A.  That's correct.

  13   Q.  You never looked at the LiViD group on the website?

  14   A.  No, I don't ever recall.  I have no reason to go there and

  15   I don't recall ever going there.

  16   Q.  You never used the Linux software?

  17   A.  I have used the Linux software but I haven't been involved

  18   in the development efforts, no.

  19   Q.  So everything you have learned about Linux or how Linux

  20   has been developed or Linux's development of the DVD player

  21   you have learned since the MPA fill you in in the case?

  22            THE COURT:  The question is compound.  If you really

  23   care about the different parts, you better break it down.

  24            (Record read)

  25   Q.  Everything you have learned about the development of the



372



   1   Linux DVD player you have learned since the MPA pulled you

   2   into the case?

   3   A.  Yes, all the details related to the development of the

   4   Linux DVD player I have learned since then, yes.

   5   Q.  And you know nothing about what went on prior to November,

   6   other than what you read in these logs?

   7   A.  That's correct.  My knowledge is based on my, for that

   8   period of time is based on my analysis of what was in the logs

   9   provided to me.

  10   Q.  And one of the things you would agree, would you not, at

  11   least is that those logs show a huge effort to make a DVD

  12   player for Linux, is that right?

  13   A.  Those logs show that there was a dedicated group, in fact

  14   two separate groups who were working on trying to create DVD

  15   players for Linux, yes, that's correct.

  16   Q.  Do you know how many people in those groups?

  17   A.  I don't have an exact count.  There were I would estimate

  18   again dozens of people across those two groups.

  19   Q.  Now, getting back just a bit to your note, and I believe

  20   that SCH01105 -- and I will try to do this in a very quick

  21   period of time.  I don't want to take you through all these

  22   notes laboriously -- the first homework is "strength of

  23   DeCSS."  What were you supposed to do with respect to your

  24   homework?

  25   A.  There was discussion about DeCSS, how it works and what it



373



   1   does.  Again, I don't remember specifically what this

   2   reference is to.  I believe this was relative to the logs, to

   3   the log files at that point in time.

   4   Q.  Look at 2A, "make case that this exists without CSS

   5   encryption."  As I understand it, you were to make that case?

   6   A.  Again, these are my notes to myself, and so part of the

   7   discussion was that in that discussion we had brought up or I

   8   had brought up that CSS is not necessary to make a DVD player,

   9   and in fact in many cases having CSS or having to deal with

  10   the encryption gets in the way of making the player, and so

  11   what I pointed out at that time in the discussion was that

  12   there was discussion within these logs about the fact that,

  13   you know, you should spend a lot less time worrying how to

  14   break CSS and spend a lot more time on how to make a

  15   functional player, because the player is really the big

  16   problem in the development effort.

  17   Q.  And I gather you did not look at all of the LiViD logs

  18   that were involved in developing the functional player rather

  19   than DeCSS.

  20   A.  Actually I think I very briefly referenced in response to

  21   one of your earlier questions that I had after I wrote my

  22   report actually gone and looked at the electronic copies of

  23   these logs, and I did that at the same time I would have done

  24   these exercises, specifically because I was looking for things

  25   I knew were there, and I went and retrieved the electronic



374



   1   versions and searched through those, looking for specific

   2   references, and at that time that reinforced my earlier

   3   impression based on this that these were in fact

   4   representative samples related to the CSS.

   5   Q.  Did you make copies of any of that electronic material?

   6   A.  I don't recall if I made copies.  I found when I looked

   7   them up and then I went back to the original paper where

   8   appropriate and made copies of these papers.

   9   Q.  I'm not clear.  With respect to the other documents that

  10   you looked at other than these logs --

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  -- other LiViD documents, did you ever print those out so

  13   that they became paper?

  14   A.  Again, it's possible that I printed out selections.  I

  15   don't know if I printed out -- when I found pages that were

  16   relevant, I don't know if I printed them out or if I went back

  17   to the physical copies I had in my office, which are

  18   represented by these.

  19            (Continued on next page)

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



375



   1   Q.  So, all the pieces of paper that you have are represented

   2   there in that pile in front of you, which is Plaintiff's

   3   Exhibit 9?

   4   A.  That's correct.  I don't recall finding any references in

   5   my electronic search of these logs that I couldn't find also

   6   in these -- in these printed form.

   7   Q.  Now, going down again to 01105, I see the name Teretsky,

   8   who is that?

   9   A.  Teretsky is, I believe, someone who submitted an affidavit

  10   for the defense in this case.

  11   Q.  And what were you asked to do with respect to Teretsky's

  12   affidavit?

  13   A.  I was provided Mr. Teretsky's affidavit prior to my

  14   deposition and I reviewed that and made, again, as I discussed

  15   earlier, I made comments as I reviewed through that -- through

  16   that deposition.

  17   Q.  And prior to the deposition --

  18   A.  Excuse me -- affidavit.

  19   Q.  Prior to the deposition, did you tell Mr. Harmon or

  20   anybody at Proskauer what you found to be accurate or

  21   inaccurate in the Teretsky affidavit?

  22   A.  Yeah, I believe we discussed the Teretsky affidavit prior

  23   to my deposition.

  24   Q.  And with respect to the Stevenson affidavit, which is

  25   referred to in the next -- were you asked by the Proskauer



376



   1   people to determine what was accurate or inaccurate in the

   2   Stevenson affidavit?

   3   A.  Again, it was -- I was provided these materials to review

   4   and I made my own comments about them and then we discussed

   5   them together.

   6   Q.  You say you made your own comments, but you gave your

   7   comments to the Proskauer people?

   8   A.  I gave -- I gave some of my comments to the Proskauer

   9   people.  In fact, up until the time that I provided the

  10   materials per the copies of my exact logs, the Proskauer

  11   people did not have all of my comments.

  12   Q.  And did you give them your comments orally or in written

  13   documents?

  14   A.  I provided all my comments, almost the vast majority of

  15   all of my interactions with the Proskauer firm orally over

  16   telephone conferences.

  17   Q.  Did you ever give them any written analyses or any written

  18   comments on any of defendant's documents?

  19   A.  No, not that I am aware of, other than obviously these

  20   notes that you have.

  21   Q.  Now, at 4, you say right blurb, what is a blurb in that

  22   context?

  23   A.  A blurb is a paragraph or a fragment of a larger thing.

  24   Q.  By that you mean a paragraph in the affidavit that you

  25   were going to write?



377



   1   A.  Yeah, this was partially done in the context of building

   2   the -- I don't know if it was the second, I guess the third

   3   affidavit in this case.

   4   Q.  And I will ask you to look at the next page, 6, pull up

   5   deposition testimony, can you tell me what that relates to?

   6   A.  I, again, I would -- I think I may have miswritten here.

   7   I still haven't gotten all these legal terms down.  This

   8   almost certainly refers to affidavit testimony.

   9            THE COURT:  Which is the legal term, "blurb" or "pull

  10   up"?

  11            THE WITNESS:  No, the deposition versus affidavit

  12   problem.

  13            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  14   Q.  The FF, what does that refer to?  Is that Franklin Fisher?

  15   A.  I think "fast forward."

  16            THE COURT:  Another legal term.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  It shows me not to ask the question that

  18   I don't know the answer.

  19   Q.  Paragraph 8, we are talking about Stevenson again?

  20   A.  That's correct.  I think, if I remember correctly, I'd

  21   have to look, but I believe Stevenson discussed the DiVX Kodex

  22   and discussed that future Kodex will be even better than that,

  23   which is not surprising to me.

  24   Q.  By the way, have you ever looked simultaneously at a DVD

  25   and a film that has been decypted through DeCSS?



378



   1   A.  Have I ever visually looked at them side by side?

   2   Q.  Yes.

   3   A.  No, I have not.

   4   Q.  Do you know whether Mr. Shamos ever had?

   5   A.  I have no knowledge.

   6   Q.  Did you or Mr. Shamos ever have a conversation about that?

   7   A.  We did not.

   8   Q.  Do you know why they retained Mr. Shamos after they had

   9   you as their expert?

  10   A.  I'm sorry.  I can't speculate as to why they did things.

  11   Q.  On page 01111, you talk about the Power Ripper?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  Have you ever used that?

  14   A.  No, I have not personally used Power Ripper.

  15   Q.  You then say, readdvd, have you ever been used that?

  16   A.  No.

  17   Q.  You say, and I'm sorry if I'm going back, you say css-cat,

  18   have you used that?

  19   A.  Yes, I have used CSS cats -- take that back.  I don't know

  20   if I used it.  I have reviewed the source code of css-cat.

  21   Q.  But you don't know whether or not you ever applied it?

  22   A.  I don't believe I did.  I may have, but I don't believe I

  23   did.

  24   Q.  And css-auth?

  25   A.  Again, same -- same thing.  I have looked at the source



379



   1   code and I'm very comfortable with what it does based on my

   2   review.

   3   Q.  And css-descramble, have you ever used that?

   4   A.  Css-descramble is unusable.  It's a fragment of code.

   5   Q.  And after that, you have Teretsky?

   6   A.  Are you referring to anonymous source.C?

   7   Q.  No, above that where it says CSS-descramble C, is that

   8   "Teretsky" written in?

   9   A.  Yes, that's Teretsky; yes.

  10   Q.  And Teretsky is one of the defendant's witnesses, you

  11   understand?

  12   A.  That's correct, or actually I have no idea if he's going

  13   to be a witness.  I know he submitted an affidavit in this

  14   case.

  15   Q.  Now, going to the next page, at the bottom, 5/31, 7:15

  16   a.m., review of what is -- is that "disks" or "declarations"

  17   by defendant?

  18   A.  Probably declarations by defense.

  19   Q.  So, who asked you to review those?

  20   A.  I reviewed those, I believe.  Again, I'd have to look at

  21   dates, but I probably reviewed them prior to going into my

  22   deposition.

  23   Q.  Now, up at the top, there's a list.  It may be a list of

  24   movies.  I recognize Malcolm X in "Dead Man Walking."  What

  25   was that list for?



380



   1   A.  That is a list, a partial list of disks that I found

   2   reference to either in the -- I believe this was in my search

   3   of the LiViD logs referencing disks that the Linux DVD people

   4   had identified as not having CSS encryption and, therefore,

   5   could be used in the development of a DVD player.

   6   Q.  How could those not have a CSS encryption?

   7   A.  CSS is a -- CSS is a system that is layered on top of the

   8   basic DVD spec, O.K.  So, it's very possible, in fact, happens

   9   frequently that DVD applications and DVD disks are created

  10   that do not use CSS.

  11   Q.  And what happens to those disks that do not use CSS, can

  12   they be played?

  13   A.  Absolutely.  They're completely normal, functional DVDs,

  14   except for whatever reason the owners of that content or the

  15   publishers of that content have chosen not to protect them

  16   with CSS.

  17   Q.  And do you have any idea why they were not protected?

  18   A.  Again, I couldn't possibly speculate on what would cause

  19   them to make that choice, other than there may be a licensing

  20   fee paid for CSS, I don't know.

  21   Q.  Now, just again getting to the next page and we can do

  22   this quickly, I see the name -- we are now 01113.  I see the

  23   name Teretsky, Wagner, Stevenson, Pavolich, and then DeBona.

  24   This is your analysis, is it not, where you disagree with or

  25   is it inaccurate in each one of those affidavits?



381



   1   A.  This is a copy of notes I made as I read through those --

   2   through those affidavits or it's as I wrote notes on a note

   3   pad and on this page as well as I think the pages that follow

   4   are those notes.

   5   Q.  And you gave this information to Proskauer?

   6   A.  No, as I previously testified, I discussed some of this

   7   information verbally with Proskauer, but they did not receive

   8   these notes until such time as I produced this document per

   9   your firm's request.

  10   Q.  Now, do you know who the name "Freeze" is at page 01114?

  11   A.  Could you point me -- oh, I see.

  12   Q.  Slightly below the middle.

  13   A.  Right.  Again, I would assume this was one of the

  14   affidavits.

  15   Q.  And Moblin, is that Professor Moblin from Columbia?

  16   A.  I would assume so; yes.

  17   Q.  And on the next page, Samuelson?

  18   A.  Same.  Again, this was a list of my notes of my review of

  19   the affidavits.

  20   Q.  Do you know if anyone other than you was providing

  21   technical assistance to Proskauer or the MPAA during this

  22   period?

  23   A.  Outside of the Proskauer firm?  Other than what I've

  24   learned in the last day or two, no.

  25   Q.  About Shamos coming in in mid-June?



382



   1   A.  I was not aware of Mr. Shamos until -- not aware of him

   2   until this trial began.

   3   Q.  So, it was your understanding, was it not, sir, from the

   4   time that you were first retained by Proskauer up until the

   5   trial began that you were the person providing the technical

   6   information for the defense of this case?

   7   A.  I knew that I was a person providing technical

   8   information.  I have no reason to believe one way or another

   9   whether I was the only one.

  10   Q.  Now, in addition to Mr. Hart, you also spoke to a man

  11   named Mike Hervis, who's sitting at the end of the table?

  12   A.  I have spoken with Mr. Hervis on occasion; yes.

  13   Q.  And you've spoken to Mr. Kulwich?

  14   A.  I have occasionally, but I believe I've spoken with him on

  15   occasion.

  16   Q.  And Jeff Carpenter?

  17   A.  That's possible.  Again, I know that there have been a

  18   variety of individuals who I have on occasion spoken with at

  19   the firm.

  20   Q.  How many people at Proskauer?

  21   A.  I may have talked -- I don't know, up to 10 or 12 people

  22   total.

  23   Q.  And how many people at the MPAA besides Mark Litvak?

  24            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, if the purpose of all this is

  25   to inform the trier of fact that a witness from Proskauer is



383



   1   paying hundreds of dollars an hour consulted extensively with

   2   him in preparation for testimony, I assume it.  You don't have

   3   to prove it.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  That's not what I was trying to show.

   5            THE COURT:  All right.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I was trying to show something else

   7   which I'm prepared to tell you, namely, he was not an expert

   8   witness, that he was part of the defense team, which I think

   9   is obvious.

  10            If I've made the point, I'll ask no further

  11   questions.

  12            THE COURT:  If those categories were mutually

  13   exclusive, we would have no expert testimony in the courts.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I think maybe we can talk about that

  15   some other time.

  16            THE COURT:  I think so.

  17            You should meet the fellow I see all the time who

  18   tells me when you ask him what he does for a living, he tells

  19   you he's the king of the courthouse orthopedists, hasn't seen

  20   a patient in 25 years.

  21            Anything else for this witness, Mr. Garbus?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  No.

  23            THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you.

  24            Any redirect?

  25            MR GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.



384



   1   REDIRECT EXAMINATION

   2   BY MR GOLD:

   3   Q.  Turning to the exhibit you've been discussing with Mr.

   4   Garbus, I think it's Defendant's BCK, turning to 0111, there

   5   is a list of movies on that page that you talked to Mr. Garbus

   6   about.

   7   A.  I don't even know if I talked to him about -- or I talked

   8   to Mr. Garbus about?

   9   Q.  You talked to Mr. Garbus during his cross?

  10   A.  Oh, yes; correct.

  11   Q.  Isn't it true that this list of movies came from the LiViD

  12   logs that you were reading?

  13   A.  Yeah, if I know that this was as a result of looking

  14   through those logs to find references to movies; yes.

  15   Q.  And do you know whether or not these DVDs were

  16   unencrypted?

  17   A.  I have not personally looked at these DVDs, but based on

  18   the encryption of logs, it's my belief that they are.  I know

  19   that Video Essentials, Video Essentials that I know is

  20   unencrypted.

  21   Q.  In drawing the conclusions that you testified to during my

  22   direct examination earlier today, did you in any way rely on

  23   the Toronto Star article or the Linux world article printed on

  24   CNN.com, those are the two articles that Mr. Garbus was

  25   talking about?



385



   1   A.  Are you talking in relationship to my conclusions about

   2   the source and nature of and purpose of the DeCSS development

   3   of DeCSS?

   4   Q.  Yes.

   5   A.  No, my assessment of the source and nature of DeCSS is

   6   entirely based on my analysis of the development logs and I

   7   believe I wrote about that in my assessment that I completed

   8   for the MPA.

   9   Q.  Did you rely on those documents for anything else that you

  10   testified to this morning?  Did you rely on them for any other

  11   opinion that you gave here this morning?

  12   A.  I'm sure I used those documents to form the basis of my

  13   understanding of many of obviously details of how CSS and the

  14   Linux development and all of that, so to try -- those

  15   documents certainly form the basis of it.

  16            MR. GOLD:  Thank you.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I move the documents into evidence.

  18   Hasn't he just been referring to, or did I miss it?

  19            THE COURT:  Well, it all depends what the antecedent

  20   of the phrase "those documents" is.  I understood the

  21   testimony to be that the antecedent was the development logs.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I thought the antecedent was -- let me

  23   ask a question.

  24            THE COURT:  Recross?  Go ahead and ask.

  25   RECROSS-EXAMINATION



386



   1   BY MR. GARBUS:

   2   Q.  Did you at any time look at anything other than the

   3   development logs or have any conversations to determine

   4   whether or not Johansen had anything to do with the creation

   5   of DeCSS like the Toronto Star that's referred to in your

   6   notes or the CNN news article?

   7   A.  In -- I'm sorry.  Could you clarify for me in reference to

   8   which time frame and to which --

   9   Q.  Did you ever at any time ever look at the Toronto Star or

  10   the CNN article, which I believe you referred to in your

  11   deposition, to determine whether or not the role that LiViD

  12   people played in the construction of DeCSS?

  13            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I --

  14            THE COURT:  He has not finished the question.

  15            MR GOLD:  I thought that he had.

  16            THE COURT:  He hasn't finished.

  17            MR GOLD:  I'm sorry.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  I think I had.

  19            THE COURT:  Well, the last phrase of your question

  20   was:  "To determine whether or not the role that LiViD people

  21   played in the construction of DeCSS," whether or not what?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Let me phrase the question again.

  23   Q.  Did you ever look at the Toronto Star article to form the

  24   basis for any part of any opinion that you have rendered in

  25   this case on any matter?



387



   1   A.  I don't remember.  I know I had some opinions on some

   2   matters.  I don't remember whether they were objected to or

   3   not, but I certainly know that the Toronto Star article would

   4   have caused me to -- to have an opinion relative to this case.

   5   Q.  Good.

   6            Now, let's ask the same thing -- do you remember, by

   7   the way --

   8            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

   9            THE COURT:  You may.

  10   Q.  Let me show you, Mr. Schumann, did reading that article,

  11   which you referred to in your deposition in any way form the

  12   basis for any information that ultimately results in any

  13   opinion on any aspect of this case?

  14            THE COURT:  What article were you referring to now?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Plaintiff's Exhibit, what is the number?

  16            THE WITNESS:  78.

  17            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I'm not sure I understand the

  18   question.  Does he mean opinion rendered in this court put on

  19   the record?

  20            THE COURT:  I hope so.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I hope so.

  22            MR GOLD:  I think that means yes.

  23   Q.  Sir?

  24   A.  I don't -- I think.

  25   Q.  I'm saying whether you agree or disagree --



388



   1   A.  I understand.  I understand.  I believe I have seen this

   2   article.  I have certainly heard claims similar to this

   3   article.  I do not at all understand the claims in this

   4   article based on all of my knowledge and understanding of the

   5   case so far and so, I don't -- while I have seen this article,

   6   it has some impact on my or changes my belief in or -- in my

   7   opinions about the source or the meaning of DeCSS relative to

   8   the Linux DVD.

   9   Q.  It is fair to say and I really want to be accurate, that

  10   you may have read the article, you did read the article, but

  11   that you disagree with it?

  12            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, that's not an accurate

  13   characterization.  It's a deliberate mischaracterization.

  14            THE COURT:  I don't care whether it's deliberate or

  15   inadvertent.  I don't think we need to get into that.  All I

  16   know it is remarkably beyond the scope of the redirect and the

  17   objection is sustained.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  I'll move into evidence -- it was my

  19   attempt to lay a foundation for the two documents.

  20            I'll move into evidence the Toronto Star.

  21            THE COURT:  What Exhibit is that?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Which is referred to also in his

  23   affidavit.

  24            THE COURT:  What is the Exhibit, please?  Is there an

  25   objection, Mr. Gold?



389



   1            MR GOLD:  Yes.  There is objection on hearsay

   2   grounds.  There's objection on --

   3            THE COURT:  Why isn't it hearsay, Mr. Garbus?  Mr.

   4   Garbus, why isn't it hearsay?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  It's information that he used to form

   6   his opinion.

   7            MR. GOLD:  The witness has not testified --

   8            THE COURT:  I haven't heard any such thing.

   9            Sustained.

  10            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Just one last question.

  12   Q.  I show you the affidavit dated June 1, 2000 and I direct

  13   your attention to paragraph 10.

  14            THE COURT:  What Exhibit is that, please?  What

  15   Exhibit is that, please?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  AD.

  17            THE COURT:  All right.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Shall I get a copy for the Court?

  19            THE COURT:  Please.

  20            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, this affidavit was not referred

  21   to in direct.  The witness -- I see no reason to mark it as an

  22   exhibit.  And it's beyond the --

  23            THE COURT:  It's already marked as an exhibit.  It's

  24   not received in evidence.

  25            MR GOLD:  That's what I was --



390



   1            THE COURT:  The question hasn't been completed.  When

   2   I hear the question, I will find out whether it's within the

   3   scope of the redirect.  So far, the question ends with:  I

   4   show you this exhibit and I invite your attention to paragraph

   5   10, or words to that effect.

   6   Q.  Does that refresh your recollection that you use the

   7   information in that article indicating how a computer user can

   8   take advantage of a DiVX compression technology in combination

   9   with DeCSS and whether that formed the basis for any opinion

  10   that you rendered in this court today?

  11   A.  I'm, again, I'm sorry, but without -- there have been

  12   numerous cases where I would have had an opinion had I been

  13   allowed to answer and without you pointing me at a specific

  14   opinion on the record, I don't believe I can answer that

  15   question.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, at this point in time, we

  17   would move the deposition of Mr. Schumann designated and move

  18   it into evidence.  I understood that was the practice that we

  19   had namely that after the completion of the testimony, we

  20   would put in the appropriate parts.

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  22            MR GOLD:  Can I have one second?

  23            THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  Were you finished, Mr.

  24   Garbus?  I thought you had finished.

  25            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, can I understand the purpose



391



   1   for which this is being offered into evidence?

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I thought we had an understanding that

   3   with respect, and I thought we then designated all the

   4   depositions with the understanding that if we did that, we

   5   would not have to go through the laborious questions and

   6   answers that we also went through in the deposition.

   7            THE COURT:  My understanding was close, but not

   8   exactly the same as what you said.

   9            What I understood the proposal was that you could

  10   designate parts of the deposition to supplement and I think

  11   what Mr. Gold is rising to is that you're now proposing simply

  12   to throw in his entire deposition.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  No, we have a deposition with designated

  14   portions.

  15            THE COURT:  You don't need to do that now.  The

  16   understanding was you will cross-designate and subject to

  17   whatever objections you have on the record, it will come in.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  19            THE COURT:  All right.  Do you have anything else for

  20   the witness, Mr. Garbus?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I do not.

  22            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, anything else for the witness?

  23            MR GOLD:  No, your Honor.

  24            THE COURT:  You are excused, Mr. Schumann.  Thank

  25   you.



392



   1            THE WITNESS:  Thank you, your Honor.

   2            (Witness excused)

   3            THE COURT:  Next witness, Mr. Gold?

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, could we approach the

   5   bench for a sidebar?

   6            THE COURT:  There's no jury.

   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  It's something that we'd like to

   8   address out of the hearing of the --

   9            (At the sidebar).

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  We'd like to raise again the question

  11   of Mr. Johansen.  He's here.  He's going back to Norway on

  12   Thursday, this time, not Tuesday.

  13            Not only -- well, there is a question of whether we

  14   are going to use him as a witness and we've mentioned that

  15   that was something we were considering.  At this point, he's

  16   also a rebuttal witness.

  17            He has, as Mr. Stevenson pointed out, direct personal

  18   knowledge of why DeCSS was posted.  We would ask him questions

  19   on exactly two areas that are connected, DeCSS and Linux and

  20   the connection between the two.  And that's it.

  21            There's been a number of suppositions, the e-mails,

  22   the postings with his name on it have been relied upon by the

  23   expert witness.  He can say, this is what happened.  This is

  24   not what happened.  This is true.  This is not true.  You'll

  25   have the direct, firsthand evidence.



393



   1            I can tell you, I've also spoken to Mr. Johansen for

   2   a total of less than three minutes.  That's what --

   3            THE COURT:  What do you want to do?  Do you want to

   4   call him out of turn?

   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  I'd like to call him out of turn.

   6            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

   7            MR. GOLD:  Call him out of turn?

   8            MR. HERNSTADT:  We could do him now.

   9            MR GOLD:  First of all, we had, I believe, a motion

  10   which said that, again, this came -- this has been going in

  11   and out of various lists.

  12            MR. SIMS:  And he was not on the list that was given

  13   to your Honor.

  14            THE COURT:  I'm glad we are having a sidebar.  Shall

  15   I pass the microphone around?

  16            MR GOLD:  I'm sorry.

  17            This wasn't on the list given to your Honor.  Before

  18   that, we've had a lot of in and outs about it.  I think he

  19   shouldn't be allowed to testify as a witness.  I think this is

  20   improper game play; however, if your Honor is going to allow

  21   him to testify as a witness, I think we would like to take his

  22   deposition on Thursday or Friday, more preferable.

  23            THE COURT:  When is he supposed to go back?

  24            MR. GOLD:  Why can't he go back on Saturday or

  25   Sunday?



394



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  He's not in our control.  This is a

   2   16 or 17-year-old kid.  He's here with his dad.

   3            MR GOLD:  He came here to support your cause and at a

   4   convention, he's making speeches with his father for a week.

   5   If he wants to support your cause, let him stay until Monday.

   6   We had lots of time to depose him before.  You brought him two

   7   or three times now.

   8            I just think if this -- I really think that we ought

   9   to depose him.  I wouldn't call it exactly leisure, but we not

  10   go -- I'll do it during the weekend, if I you prefer.  I think

  11   the gentleman can stay a few extra days.

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  Well, two things.  He's not just a

  13   witness on direct.  He's a rebuttal witness.  He can respond

  14   and contradict certain things testified to by Mr. Schumann.

  15            Second, he's not in our control.  He has made certain

  16   statements, but that's his voluntary thing.

  17            And third, we're arranging our schedule in mid-week

  18   to take Mr. Burns' deposition so as not to require him to stay

  19   through the weekend.  We are told he's due back in Pittsburgh.

  20   I don't think there's any reason to expect Mr. Johansen --

  21            MR. GOLD:  You insisted on his being a witness.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  And I don't think unreasonably.

  23            MR. GOLD:  I'm not insisting on this gentleman being

  24   a witness.

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  No, but you're insisting on his



395



   1   deposition.

   2            MR GOLD:  Well, only because he's going to be a

   3   witness.

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  We can sit down, as the judge

   5   suggested, we can sit down and you can have a conversation

   6   with him.  I'm telling you, I'm representing right now that

   7   I'm going to ask him an extremely small area of questions and

   8   you'll have an opportunity to ask him all of that.

   9            MR. COOPER:  May we just have a moment?

  10            THE COURT:  Yes.

  11            (Pause)

  12            MR GOLD:  The major point we are raising, your Honor,

  13   is that the -- if the gentleman is going to be a witness, we

  14   would like to depose him with a little time to think about it,

  15   a little time to get ready.  He's going to make some technical

  16   statements here.  It's not going to be:  Was he in a certain

  17   bar at 9 o'clock on a Tuesday night?  And we need a little

  18   time to get ready for it.  We are otherwise occupied.

  19            This has been going on for a long time and he's been

  20   here vacationing and helping to support this cause.  We only

  21   ask that he stay another couple of days in support of the

  22   cause, give us a chance to chat with him, and if we have to

  23   split his hotel bill with you, we will.

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  As a matter of fact, while you were

  25   caucusing, I asked Ms. Gross to ask his father if it's



396



   1   financial considerations were not a consideration, if he could

   2   stay, and his father says that his son is happy to testify,

   3   but the father has to go back to work.  The boy is 17 and

   4   can't stay here on his own.

   5            MR. GOLD:  Excuse me.  He's Scandinavian?

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  The boy is 17.

   7            MR GOLD:  He's Scandinavian?  He's probably a

   8   grandfather by now.

   9            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, that was really out of order.

  10            MR GOLD:  A weak attempt at humor.

  11            MR. HERNSTADT:  So, we asked his father if that were

  12   possible, if the added additional expenses were somehow

  13   arranged for, if he could stay, and the father said, no, he

  14   has to go back to work.

  15            THE COURT:  Look, is it true, Mr. Hernstadt, first of

  16   all, that he has been on and off your witness list at various

  17   points?

  18            MR. HERNSTADT:  It's true that I have been telling

  19   the plaintiffs that we are considering calling him.  We don't

  20   know if he's coming.  When we found out that he was coming, we

  21   didn't know if we could get him.  I have never spoken to him

  22   until I met him the first day of the trial.  He's not easy to

  23   get ahold of and he's certainly not in our control.

  24            THE COURT:  And he's going to say, what, exactly?

  25   Bottom line?



397



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  Bottom line, he's going to say that

   2   he did DeCSS, he and two other people did DeCSS in order to

   3   help the Linux DVD player.  And he's going to say that he

   4   didn't hate Linux and he doesn't have any problems with Linux

   5   and he's going to say that the reason that DeCSS is a Window

   6   executable is because Linux did not at that time support the

   7   UDF file system, which is the DVD file system, so that if it

   8   were a Linux executable, you couldn't test, it wouldn't run.

   9            In other words, you couldn't run DVD files on Linux

  10   and that's why it was a Window executable, at first.  That's

  11   what he's going to say.

  12            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, as we've said in our motions in

  13   limine and in other places, the fact that a few good people

  14   use the DeCSS, if that is true, does not excuse the charge or

  15   the claim we are making for the unlawful activity of this

  16   defendant.

  17            THE COURT:  That may very well be.

  18            MR. GOLD:  And I think the testimony is irrelevant.

  19            THE COURT:  Well, look, I think you both have part of

  20   a point here and if it's reasonable to get the testimony,

  21   whether it proves to be relevant ultimately or not, I guess

  22   the right word is "material" remains to be seen.

  23            I would like to have it.  On the other hand, given

  24   the nature of the subject matter, it is really totally unfair

  25   for it and I don't use the word in any pejorative sense to be



398



   1   sprung on the plaintiffs in this way without a deposition.

   2   It's technical subject matter.  It requires some thought and

   3   some preparation.

   4            So, what we will do is this:  I will hear him, if

   5   he's here and he wants to testify on Thursday, out of order,

   6   provided he's made available tomorrow night to the plaintiffs

   7   for a deposition.

   8            MR. COOPER:  Thank you, your Honor.

   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  We are going to check his -- that's

  10   our problem.

  11            THE COURT:  That's the ruling.

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, Judge.

  13            (In open court)

  14            THE COURT:  Next witness, sir?

  15            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor is going until what time

  16   tonight?

  17            THE COURT:  More or less, 4:30.

  18            MR. GOLD:  And you want the next witness to start?

  19   Thank you.

  20            THE COURT:  I'm afraid that this case violates the

  21   rule against perpetuity.

  22            MR. GOLD:  Marsha King.

  23    MARSHA KING,

  24        called as a witness by the plaintiff

  25        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:



399



   1            THE COURT:  Ms. King, before we start, were you here

   2   yesterday when I said anybody who's going to testify in this

   3   case has to leave the courtroom?

   4            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

   5            THE COURT:  Have you not been in the courtroom during

   6   the past testimony?

   7            THE WITNESS:  Yes.  They brought me back.  I left the

   8   room when you said that.

   9            THE COURT:  Who brought you back?

  10            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, you explicitly pointed out

  11   that representatives of the plaintiffs were expressly allowed

  12   to be here.

  13            THE COURT:  I said each side was allowed a

  14   representative is what I said.

  15            MR. COOPER:  Yes, your Honor.

  16            THE COURT:  So, this was the representative, is that

  17   right?

  18            MR. COOPER:  Yes, your Honor.

  19            THE COURT:  O.K., thank you.

  20            MR GOLD:  The only one that's been in the courtroom

  21   since the beginning of the case.

  22            THE COURT:  All right; fine.

  23   DIRECT EXAMINATION

  24   BY MR GOLD:

  25   Q.  Ms. King, who is your employer?



400



   1   A.  Warner Brothers.

   2   Q.  And what is your position with Warner Brothers?

   3   A.  I'm the executive vice-president worldwide business

   4   affairs for Warner Home Video.

   5   Q.  How long have you been with Warner Home Video?

   6   A.  Approximately 10 and a half years.

   7   Q.  Are you an attorney?

   8   A.  Yes, I am.

   9   Q.  What did you do prior to the commencement of your

  10   employment at Warner's?

  11   A.  I had a career in education.  I then went to law school.

  12   And after graduating from law school, I spent three years at

  13   the law firm of Rosenfield Iron & Sussman in Los Angeles.  I

  14   then spent a little over three years with 20th Century Fox and

  15   I've been at Warner Brothers since 1990, the very beginning.

  16   Q.  What is the present scope of your responsibilities at

  17   Warner Brothers?

  18   A.  I have responsibility for all legal and business affairs

  19   worldwide for the video division, and since January, also for

  20   the pay-per-view video on demand in the United States.

  21            I also handle human resources and I have been

  22   involved in the creation and launch of DVD since its

  23   inception.

  24   Q.  During your career in the motion picture industry,

  25   including your employment with Fox and with Warner, have you



401



   1   participated in any industry-wide organizations or committees?

   2   A.  In terms of the motion picture industry, I've participated

   3   in home video committees.  I participated in the Hollywood

   4   Advisory Committee, which gave advice on what features the DVD

   5   format should include from the motion picture studios.

   6            I've been, along with my boss, Warren Lieberfarb, on

   7   the Senior Executive Budget Committee of the MPAA.  I've also

   8   participated in the MPA's activities for the copy protection

   9   working group.  At first I did that, I went to all the

  10   meetings and now I work for the last, oh, two years on an

  11   as-needed basis.

  12            On the industry, I participated first in all the

  13   meetings of the copy protection technical working group.  Now

  14   I do it on an as-needed basis and I've been intimately

  15   involved with the DVD forum.

  16   Q.  Are you familiar with who the plaintiffs are in this case?

  17   A.  Yes, I am.

  18   Q.  And who are they?

  19   A.  They are all the major motion studios which make up the

  20   MPAA, which include the Warner Brothers, the Walter Disney

  21   Company, 20th Century Fox, Paramount Pictures, Universal and

  22   MGM.

  23   Q.  Could you describe for us the way in that motion pictures

  24   are distributed?

  25   A.  Once we complete a motion picture, we have windows of



402



   1   distribution to make back our investment in the product.  The

   2   first window is the theatrical window of distribution.

   3            Following that, we distribute the movies on airlines

   4   and in hotels.

   5            Following that, the movie is distributed in the home

   6   video marketplace.  After that, pay television, and after

   7   that, cable, and eventually free broadcast.

   8   Q.  Can you describe for us how motion pictures are

   9   distributed in the home entertainment market?

  10   A.  Let me see if I understand your question.  We release

  11   video in the home entertainment market on video cassettes.  We

  12   release them in certain parts of Asia on the video compact

  13   disk called the VCD, and now we distribute worldwide on the

  14   DVD format as well.

  15   Q.  Is the home video market important to the studios?

  16   A.  The home video market is extremely important to the

  17   studios.

  18   Q.  Why?

  19   A.  Well, starting in 1980, it was a way for us to refreshen

  20   our crown jewels of the studios.  Not only could we release a

  21   new picture into the home marketplace and people get excited

  22   about it like the Matrix, but we also had the ability during

  23   the '80s and the '90s to redistribute what the studios feel

  24   are their crown jewels are our library.

  25            In the case of Warner, that's over 6,000 films.  Now,



403



   1   we don't distribute them all, but they're a good part of our

   2   income and help the studios make a profit.

   3   Q.  What percentage of the total income from movie

   4   distribution at Warner's comes from the home video market?

   5   A.  It's approximately 40 percent.  It varies from year to

   6   year.

   7   Q.  And do you know how much -- what percentage DVDs are of

   8   that 40 percent?

   9   A.  Well, I can only speak for Warner, but this year, we think

  10   that the DVD revenue will make up 35 percent of our worldwide

  11   home video revenue.

  12   Q.  What is a DVD?

  13   A.  A DVD is a movie on an optical disk.  It looks like a CD,

  14   but it's really 26 millimeter substrates bonded together,

  15   which contains at a minimum power .7 gigabytes of information,

  16   so it can store a full-length motion picture in the quality --

  17   in high-digital quality.

  18   Q.  Can you compare DVDs and VCRs in terms of the quality of

  19   the product, the picture and the sound?

  20   A.  The quality is tremendously better.  It's a digital rather

  21   than an analog quality.  When we first tested the development

  22   of DVD, the pictures were remarkable.  They were much better

  23   than laser disk and very close to a D-1 master, the picture

  24   you see in the theater.

  25            The sound quality is much better with 5.1 surround



404



   1   sound, if you have it or Dolby digital.  It's much more like a

   2   theatrical experience.

   3   Q.  And how are the -- how is the audio-visual information

   4   stored?  In what form is it that it's stored on a --

   5   A.  In digital form.

   6   Q.  DVD?

   7   A.  In digital form.

   8   Q.  What are the studios' rights and movies that are

   9   distributed in DVD format?

  10   A.  The studios either own the copyrights or they have joint

  11   ownership in the copyrights.  That's a general statement.

  12   Q.  Are the studios that are plaintiffs in this case

  13   significant players in the DVD market?

  14   A.  The studios in this case make up the large majority of the

  15   DVD market.

  16   Q.  Did Warner Brothers -- do you recall whether or not Warner

  17   Brothers before DVDs were released had any concerns about

  18   distributing their movies on DVDs?

  19   A.  Yes, they did.  We were very concerned about putting our

  20   movies into a digital form because unlike a video cassette

  21   where if you make copies, they deteriorate, and they become

  22   grainy.

  23            A digital DVD makes a perfect copy and can continue

  24   to make perfect copies.  So, they're all like the original and

  25   they're all perfect.  So, it makes an even greater threat to



405



   1   piracy.

   2   Q.  Did you learn through the committees you testified that

   3   you were on that that concern was shared by all of the

   4   plaintiffs?

   5   A.  Yes, it was.

   6   Q.  What did the studios do about that concern?

   7   A.  The studios got together starting in the mid-'90s to work

   8   on some type of copy protection for our product.  In many,

   9   many meetings.  As a matter of fact, we met with the MPA

  10   companies and in other instances, we met with the Consumer

  11   Electronics Trade Group, which is called CEMA.

  12            We discussed what was necessary for the protection of

  13   our product in the digital arena and we came up with a

  14   three-pronged approach which included technological protection

  15   and legislation.  Those were the first two, and then the

  16   contracts that go with the technological protection.

  17   Q.  Why did the studios decide the contracts would help?

  18   A.  Well, I have to move a little further in the process.  We

  19   then brought in when we started out with legislation which was

  20   similar to the Audio Home Recording Act, we found out that the

  21   computer companies -- we had reached out at Warner to the

  22   computer companies earlier than that.

  23            We knew we needed them to be partners with us in

  24   creating a standard to protect our works because in the

  25   development of DVD, we could see that the digital area was



406



   1   coming into our own media.  It hadn't only come into audio at

   2   that time in the mid-'90s, so we reached out to companies like

   3   IBM and Intel and Microsoft early on in the process.

   4            When they eventually joined with the motion picture

   5   studios' copyright owners and consumer electronics companies,

   6   in open meetings with the three industries started working on

   7   this tripartite plan to protect our content.

   8            Did I respond to your question?

   9            (Continued on next page)

  10   BY MR. GOLD:

  11   Q.  Thank you.

  12   A.  Okay.

  13   Q.  Exactly what did the studios do to resolve their concerns

  14   about technical measures and their concerns about the video

  15   disks being in digital form?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Can we have it stated with respect to

  17   time, if we can?

  18            THE COURT:  Yes.

  19   Q.  What was the year that these discussions were going on

  20   before they resolved in any decision?

  21   A.  I believe they started in, it had to be like '95.  Maybe

  22   it was -- it was either late '95 or early '96, to the best of

  23   my recollection.

  24   Q.  And in what year was a decision reached about the

  25   technological issues that were being discussed relating to the



407



   1   DVDs?

   2   A.  '96.

   3   Q.  And what was the technological solution that the studios

   4   agreed upon?

   5   A.  CSS encryption.  And it wasn't just the studios.  It was

   6   the studios, the consumer electronics industry and the

   7   computer industry as well.

   8   Q.  Had Warner made any determination about whether it would

   9   release any DVDs without encryption?

  10   A.  Yes, it had.

  11   Q.  What was that determination?

  12   A.  That we wouldn't release it until we had encryption.

  13   Q.  Did you learn --

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Specific as to time?  We are talking

  15   about?

  16            THE COURT:  Yes.  When?

  17            THE WITNESS:  When did we make the decision or when

  18   did we release?

  19            THE COURT:  When did you decide not to release on DVD

  20   unless you had encryption?

  21            THE WITNESS:  We decided that we wouldn't release

  22   until we had the copying protection, when we started having

  23   these discussions and learning about the importance of this.

  24   Q.  What year was this?

  25   A.  I think it's around '95, end of '95 we were in the



408



   1   development of the DVD.  We had merged the two formats, and

   2   the next step was how do we protect our copyrights, and so

   3   then we started working on that.

   4            THE COURT:  Merge what two formats?

   5            THE WITNESS:  Originally DVD had two competing

   6   formats.  There was one developed by let's call it Toshiba and

   7   Time Warner, and there was one developed by Sony and Philips,

   8   and they were incompatible.  One was based on the CD and the

   9   other was new.

  10            THE COURT:  It was Philips and who?

  11            THE WITNESS:  Sony.

  12            THE COURT:  When was the decision made to merge

  13   those?

  14            THE WITNESS:  '95, summer of '95.

  15            THE COURT:  Go ahead, counsel.  Thank you.

  16   Q.  And through your participation in the industry committee

  17   as you testified to, did you learn whether any other studios

  18   had made the decision not to go forward with DVDs without the

  19   protection that Warner Brothers had decided?

  20   A.  It wasn't a joint decision, but it became quite obvious in

  21   these meetings that they weren't going to go -- that the

  22   studios generally were not going to go forward without copy

  23   protection.

  24   Q.  When for the first time did Warner's release motion

  25   pictures on DVDs?



409



   1   A.  We released in the United States in March of 1997.

   2   Q.  Were those DVDs encrypted with CSS?

   3   A.  Yes, they were.

   4   Q.  When did the other studios introduce their DVDs into the

   5   market?

   6   A.  I don't know the exact dates.  Columbia TriStar released

   7   very early like we did.  Other companies joined let's say

   8   midway, maybe through the end of '97 maybe.  I think that

   9   includes Disney, MGM.  The last two companies to release

  10   products into this format were I believe Fox and Paramount.

  11   Q.  Did all of the studios encrypt the DVDs that they

  12   released?

  13   A.  It is my understanding that all of the studios encrypted

  14   the DVDs they released.

  15   Q.  And they encrypted it with CSS?

  16   A.  And they all encrypted with CSS.

  17   Q.  Have you ever heard of the DVDCCA?

  18   A.  Yes, I have.

  19   Q.  What is that?

  20   A.  The DVDCCA is an organization that licensed to hardware

  21   manufacturers and computer manufacturers or software

  22   manufacturers that create DVD drives the ability to decrypt,

  23   they can make DVD players that play our movies because they

  24   license the decryption for CSS.

  25   Q.  To your knowledge, is there a uniform license agreement



410



   1   that DVDCCA uses?

   2   A.  Yes, I am sure you can do some individual negotiation but

   3   basically there is a uniform license agreement.

   4   Q.  What has happened with DVD sales since the adoption of

   5   CSS and the studios' decision to release their motion pictures

   6   in DVD format?

   7   A.  From our research at Warner Brothers it's the most

   8   successful launch of a consumer electronics product ever.

   9            THE COURT:  This is a good place to stop for the day.

  10            Anything else that we need to do this evening?  Okay.

  11   9 o'clock tomorrow morning, folks.

  12
                MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.
  13

  14            (Trial adjourned to July 19, 2000 at 9:00 a.m.)

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



411



   1                        INDEX OF EXAMINATION

   2   Witness                    D      X      RD     RX

   3   FRANK STEVENSON..........205    229

   4   ROBERT W. SCHUMANN.......236    278

   5                                   338     384     385

   6   MARSHA KING..............398

   7                         PLAINTIFF EXHIBITS

   8   Exhibit No.                                     Received

   9    4 ...........................................243

  10    97 ..........................................270

  11    9 ...........................................334

  12                         DEFENDANT EXHIBITS

  13   Exhibit No.                                     Received

  14    A, I, C and S ...............................337

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25


Transcript of Trial - Day 3, MPAA v. 2600 (NY; July 19, 2000)  

Transcript of Trial - Day 3, MPAA v. 2600

NY; July 19, 2000

Transcript courtesy of the EFF

See related files:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video (EFF Archive)
http://jya.com/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS (Cryptome Archive)
http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs (2600 Archive)
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/ (Harvard DVD OpenLaw Project)


                                                            

412



   1   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
       SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
   2   ------------------------------x

   3   UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.,
       et al,
   4
                      Plaintiffs,
   5
                  v.                           00 Civ. 277 (LAK)
   6
       SHAWN C. REIMERDES, et al,
   7
                      Defendants.
   8
       ------------------------------x
   9
                                               July 19, 2000
  10                                           9:00 a.m.

  11   Before:

  12                       HON. LEWIS A. KAPLAN,

  13                                           District Judge

  14                            APPEARANCES

  15   PROSKAUER, ROSE, L.L.P.
            Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  16   BY:  LEON P. GOLD
            CHARLES S. SIMS
  17        CARLA MILLER
            SCOTT COOPER
  18
       FRANKFURT, GARBUS, KLEIN & SELZ
  19        Attorneys for Defendants
       BY:  MARTIN GARBUS
  20        ERNEST HERNSTADT
            DAVID ATLAS
  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




413



   1            THE COURT:  Before we get started with the witness,

   2   let me just make a suggestion to you.

   3            We have been proceeding on the assumptions that

   4   everybody knows and that the record reflects such fundamental

   5   facts as what's a computer, what's an operating system, what's

   6   the Internet or the worldwide web, and so on.

   7            In the interest of having a complete record, it seems

   8   to me we ought not to assume those things.  So, I invite your

   9   attention to what I think are entirely uncontroversial

  10   findings on those points in U.S. v. Microsoft, basically

  11   defining the terms which is reported at 84 Fed.Supp.2d page 9.

  12   And the ones I thought particularly relevant were paragraphs

  13   1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, which simply lay out the

  14   background.

  15            I would invite you to look at them at some point and

  16   see whether you will stipulate to them.  And if you can't

  17   stipulate to them, address the question of why I shouldn't

  18   take judicial notice of the facts in those paragraphs.

  19   Obviously we are not trying the Microsoft case here.

  20            Let's proceed.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, may we approach the bench?

  22            THE COURT:  Yes.

  23            (At the sidebar)

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I have some suggested stipulations that

  25   may save a great deal of time and we may be able to -- (1)




414



   1   that there's no direct proof that any single copy of a movie

   2   has ever been sent out on the Internet, that is DeCSS and

   3   deencrypted --

   4            MR. GOLD:  If I may?  Your Honor, I would

   5   respectfully request that whatever stipulations Mr. Garbus may

   6   have in the case and whenever he has them, I would love to get

   7   them in writing so I can look at them and it seems to me the

   8   quickest way to do it, instead of grabbing a minute or two

   9   before a particular witness is examined --

  10            MR. GARBUS:  I'm trying to do this because of time.

  11            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor --

  12            THE COURT:  Don't everybody talk at once.

  13            I know you are, Mr. Garbus.  And I appreciate that

  14   you are trying to save time.  I don't want to take trial time

  15   unnecessarily with this.  I can't anticipate the discussion

  16   from yesterday's discussion and I think the solution on at

  17   least the one you read now is readily obvious, in light of the

  18   solution yesterday.

  19            I suspect that when Mr. Gold gets a chance to think

  20   about it, he will agree with the same caveats he agreed

  21   yesterday, that is, he's going to ask me to infer and he is

  22   going to want you to, at this point, I suppose that lots of

  23   people are offering movies that purport to be decrypted and

  24   that I should infer, even in the absence of specific knowledge

  25   as to what utility was used to decrypt them, that at least




415



   1   some of them were decrypted with DeCSS, and you will have your

   2   arguments on.

   3            Why don't you have that discussion between yourselves

   4   first.

   5            MR. SIMS:  We provided you five pages of proposed

   6   stipulations last week at the judge's request and we've never

   7   gotten any response and I've written about it.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I haven't seen them.

   9            THE COURT:  Work that out.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  The other thing I wanted to mention is

  11   since your Court has been very sensitive about the whole issue

  12   of press, I wanted to mention that over the of the two days, I

  13   have not spoken to any representative of the press.  I have no

  14   objection to the fact that other people have spoken to members

  15   of press.  They have every right to do so.

  16            I just wanted to point that out.  We have not in over

  17   the last two days not spoken to a soul.

  18            THE COURT:  We are just not going to get into that,

  19   Mr. Garbus.  You have made your assertion.  Ms. Gross and the

  20   Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is I gather financing

  21   this case, and she's sitting at counsel table with you,

  22   weren't covered by your remarks I noticed.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  They were.

  24            THE COURT:  Nor were any of a number of other people.

  25   So, let's --




416



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I was talking about myself.

   2            THE COURT:  Let's just avoid all these protestations.

   3            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, in the late afternoon

   4   yesterday, you asked us several questions about turning over

   5   of drafts of Mr. Schumann's declaration and we have run that

   6   down at this point.  Is it appropriate to do it now or would

   7   you rather wait?

   8            THE COURT:  Did I ask you questions?  I just asked

   9   you to turn them over, if you had it.  What's the problem?

  10            MR GOLD:  What happened is when we verified this with

  11   the records, after the deposition, we got a letter from

  12   defendant's firm asking very specifically for documents.  They

  13   did not ask for the drafts of any declarations; however, they

  14   did ask for some specific materials and what Mr. Schumann did

  15   is turn over his whole file at that point.

  16            The file contained drafts that he had in his

  17   possession of this declaration.  Although they had not been

  18   asked for, we took Mr. Schumann's file and turned it all over,

  19   including declarations, to the defendants.

  20            I know your Honor doesn't want me to bring up other

  21   issues that we have about documents with the defendants, so I

  22   will not.  So, there were drafts and they were turned over.

  23            THE COURT:  All right.  Let's go.

  24            (In open court)

  25    MARSHA KING, resumed.




417



   1        called as a witness by the plaintiff

   2        having been previously duly sworn, testified as follows:

   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, just to complete the

   4   record on that, I believe to the extent they were turned over,

   5   they were turned over within the last week after the second

   6   day of Mr. Schumann's declaration.

   7            THE COURT:  Look, could we please get on with the

   8   testimony.

   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.

  10            THE COURT:  Ms. King, you are still under oath.

  11   DIRECT EXAMINATION Continued

  12   BY MR GOLD:

  13   Q.  Good morning, Ms. King.

  14   A.  Good morning.

  15   Q.  You had just finished yesterday testifying about the

  16   nature of the importance the studios attributed to having an

  17   encryption system before they came out with their DVDs and I'm

  18   going to continue from there.

  19            What has happened with DVD sales since the adoption

  20   of CSS and the studio's decision to release their pictures in

  21   DVD format?

  22   A.  Well, the sales of DVD players have been quite successful.

  23   There are over, I believe it's about 5 million U.S. homes, the

  24   projections show probably 10 million by the end of the year

  25   2000.  The sales of DVD software have been quite robust both




418



   1   in the United States and where we are launched around the

   2   world.

   3   Q.  Approximately how many DVD players have been sold?

   4   A.  I think it's -- I think it's about 5 million.

   5   Q.  Is there current harm to the plaintiffs represented by the

   6   dissemination in the DeCSS hack?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the form.

   8            THE COURT:  What's the objection to the form?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  No foundation for it.  Could we hear the

  10   question again?

  11            THE COURT:  Read the question please, Amy.

  12            (Record read)

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question.

  14            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  15            The witness is the head of business affairs for the

  16   studio.

  17   A.  First of all, we lost what to us was our first line of

  18   defense in protecting our copyrights in the digital domain.

  19   The CSS encryption system was to provide protection for our

  20   works in DVD.  As I said before, the reason that the studios,

  21   including Warner Brothers, were willing to distribute their

  22   product in the digital domain in this new format was because

  23   they had this protection.

  24            So, the first thing is we've lost our protection.

  25   That in itself is of great harm to us.  Secondly, the second




419



   1   harm might be the loss of confidence in using.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  May I object, your Honor --

   3   A.  Excuse me.

   4            THE COURT:  You can cross-examine, Mr. Garbus.  You

   5   can't object to the answer.

   6   A.  The second problem is certainly the loss of confidence

   7   that the studios would have in continuing to distribute

   8   product in this format.  There's a tremendous amount of

   9   investment that's gone into the development of DVD, the

  10   investments of the studios, including in mastering a very

  11   expensive product, the investment of the consumer electronics

  12   industry, the investment of the computer industries and

  13   equally the investment of what will be we think 12 million

  14   consumers by the end of the year 20000 and purchasing a

  15   product that is widely accepted around the world.

  16            On top of that, we believe that we are beginning to

  17   lose legitimate sales of our product and will continue to

  18   increasingly lose legitimate sales of our product.

  19   Q.  Does Warner believe that the DeCSS --

  20            THE COURT:  Let's talk about what the witness

  21   believes, at least.  I don't think she can speak for untold

  22   thousands of individuals.

  23            MR GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

  24   Q.  Do you believe any other damage will flow to Warner from

  25   the DeCSS hack unless dissemination of DeCSS is enjoined?




420



   1   A.  Well, if the dissemination of DeCSS is not enjoined and if

   2   the legislation is not upheld, then we've lost our protection

   3   for products in the digital domain, not only could it have a

   4   tremendously adverse effect on the sale of DVD, but Warner

   5   Brothers at least is now looking into digital distribution of

   6   its movie in video-on-demand avenues.  They can be private

   7   video on demand through a pay-per-view network like direct TV

   8   or it could be through the Internet.

   9            But the only way I think that we would be willing to

  10   go ahead is if we had some type of protection for our product.

  11   Additionally, even if we had protection on video on demand, if

  12   there still was a hack like this of DVD, it could cut the

  13   window and cut off our future revenue from that new product

  14   stream.  So, our TV revenues as well as our video revenues

  15   would be impacted greatly.

  16   Q.  Have you ever heard the term "film library"?

  17   A.  Yes.

  18   Q.  What is that?

  19   A.  Our film library like the libraries of the other studios

  20   had a great value to us because in the reselling of our older

  21   catalog titles, what we call our "crown jewels" of the studio.

  22            We make income just to bring in new movies because

  23   there's a very small percentage of new movies that actually

  24   turn a profit over the short term.  So, the resale of our

  25   library and the value of existing products like "Casablanca"




421



   1   or "Gone With The Wind" are very valuable to the studios.

   2            A product like DVD gives the studios a chance to

   3   resell its library to a new -- to a new consumer and since

   4   video was the first consumer product in their hands provided

   5   by the motion picture studios, we have seen a tremendous sale

   6   of catalog product.  The continued dissemination of our movies

   7   not coming from the studios would impact those sales.

   8   Q.  Can you quantify the potential loss of revenue that Warner

   9   would suffer unless the dissemination of the DeCSS hack is

  10   enjoined?

  11            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

  13            THE COURT:  Pardon?

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I object to that.  There's no

  15   foundation.

  16            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  17   A.  I have not seen a quantification of projected harm.  I do

  18   know that our -- when I speak for Warner Home Video in which I

  19   work, that we have done our five-year projections and our

  20   five-year strategic plan.  And one of the great risks focuses

  21   on the growth of DVD which provides, not just income to

  22   balance out a mature business like video, but incremental

  23   income to show growth for our company.

  24            One of the tremendous risk factors that we list and

  25   that we emphasize every time we talk about the business is to




422



   1   the risk of digital piracy and digital copyright sharing.

   2   Q.  Does DeCSS create any problem with the public's image of

   3   motion pictures and motion picture distribution?

   4            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the form of the question.

   5            THE COURT:  What's the problem with the form?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  As to what the public is thinking?  As

   7   to what the public's image is?

   8            THE COURT:  I'm going to take it for what it's worth

   9   as a perception of the studio.  I don't know that it's worth

  10   much.

  11            Go ahead.

  12   A.  Well, I also can't speak, you know, for the entire public,

  13   but I can speak for how the studios look at what's happening

  14   in the marketplace today.

  15            One of the great problems that we believe at the

  16   studio is happening in the music industry is the perception

  17   that copyrighted music is free and whether that's grounded in

  18   prior law or whether that's grounded in just common practice,

  19   we are not sure, but it's a perception that exists in the

  20   marketplace that makes it very difficult for the music

  21   industry to make its case.

  22            In the movie industry, we are in a different -- we

  23   are in a different situation and we know that our movies are

  24   protected by copyright in that there is no right to make a

  25   copy of a movie.  There just isn't.  And we want to protect




423



   1   our movies now and into the future.

   2            MR. GOLD:  I have no further questions, your Honor.

   3            THE COURT:  Ms. King, I've got one.

   4            Is there any way to put this genie back in the

   5   bottle, I mean, the DeCSS genie by a Court order addressed to

   6   this defendant?

   7            THE WITNESS:  Well, I'm not a technical expert and I

   8   know that that is very difficult, however, I believe that the

   9   combination of the enforcement of the DMCA code, citizens

  10   being law-abiding citizens and the measures that we have in

  11   place in terms of our own antipiracy and anticopying efforts

  12   sends a message that I think it's a combination of the

  13   enforcement, further technological innovations that will put

  14   on our product, the enforcement of the law and the public

  15   perception -- the public understanding that you cannot just

  16   violate the copyright law and take product that has -- is up

  17   there because it's a violation of the law, it's being

  18   trafficked on, because it's violated the law.

  19            That's why I think -- that's why I think this is

  20   exceptionally important and I know my colleagues believe that

  21   as well.

  22            THE COURT:  Given the apparent dissemination of the

  23   DeCSS code, wouldn't your interests, if they are valid, be

  24   served to whatever extent a Court is able to serve them by

  25   declaratory judgment in determining whether or not what




424



   1   occurred here and what is threatened to continue occur with

   2   DeCSS, assuming there's a continued threat, is illegal or not?

   3            Do you follow me?

   4            THE WITNESS:  In other words, you're saying if it

   5   just was declared illegal, as opposed to --

   6            THE COURT:  As opposed to picking out one defendant

   7   to enjoin.  It's as if what you were trying to do here was to

   8   stop 37,000 kayakers coming down the Hudson River and you're

   9   asking for an injunction against one of them on the premise

  10   that coming down the Hudson River in a kayak is illegal.

  11            Even if you get that injunction, there are going to

  12   be 36,999 kayakers coming down the river.  Isn't what you are

  13   really after here a determination of whether it's illegal to

  14   kayak down the Hudson?

  15            THE WITNESS:  Yes, that is certainly what we are

  16   after here.  My response to that is that, at least as one of

  17   the studios involved in this lawsuit, we had to start

  18   somewhere.

  19            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  20   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  21   BY MR. GARBUS:

  22   Q.  Does anyone in the studio -- and I'm just repeating the

  23   stipulations now we were going to offer this is morning --

  24   have any direct proof that any single copy of a movie that has

  25   ever been sent out on the Internet was sent out after DeCSS




425



   1   encryption, yes or no, direct proof?

   2   A.  I can't answer that question for all the studios.

   3   Q.  For yourself?

   4   A.  Not that I know of.

   5   Q.  Now, you say you meet with other studios' representatives

   6   and heads, is that right?

   7   A.  From time to time.

   8   Q.  Has anyone at any studio ever told you -- have you ever

   9   seen a document -- let me rephrase that question.

  10            Have you ever seen a document from any studio or the

  11   MPAA or any third party showing any direct proof that any one

  12   single copy of a movie has ever been sent out on the Internet

  13   that was DeCSS encrypted?

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  Have you ever seen any direct proof that anyone ever

  16   downloaded source or object code from 2600.com?

  17   A.  Other than in this courtroom, I have not.

  18   Q.  Other than the plaintiff's witnesses, you mean?

  19   A.  Yes.

  20   Q.  Have you ever seen any direct proof that anyone ever made

  21   a copy of a DVD as a result of having downloaded anything from

  22   2600.com?

  23   A.  I don't recall ever seeing that.

  24   Q.  And in your conversations with the studio, has anyone ever

  25   told you that they ever saw any direct proof that anyone ever




426



   1   downloaded source or object code from 2600.com that was used

   2   to make a copy of a movie?

   3   A.  That was not a topic of any conversation I had with the

   4   studio people.

   5   Q.  Weren't you involved --

   6   A.  So, the answer is no.

   7   Q.  Weren't you involved in copy protection?  Wasn't that your

   8   issue?

   9   A.  Yes, I was involved in the development of copy protection

  10   technology in the initial licensing.

  11   Q.  Did you ever ask anybody at any studio whether or not

  12   there was one single document that indicated that anyone ever

  13   downloaded source or object code from 2600.com?

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  Did you ever ask anyone at any studio whether there was

  16   any proof that anyone ever made a copy of a film as a result

  17   of having downloaded object or source code from 2600.com?

  18   A.  No.

  19   Q.  Do you know of any direct proof or did anyone at the

  20   studio ever tell you or did you ever see a document that said

  21   that anyone did not buy a DVD because they saw a DeCSS

  22   deencrypted movie?

  23   A.  No.

  24   Q.  Do you have any direct proof or has anyone at the studio

  25   ever told you that any DVD, any one DVD in the United States




427



   1   was ever not sold because someone saw a DeCSS encrypted movie

   2   on the Internet?

   3            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I would object to this whole

   4   line as being irrelevant to the issues in this case.

   5            Moreover, if Mr. Garbus is going to continue with his

   6   questions about direct proof, maybe he ought to define what

   7   that is.

   8            THE COURT:  The witness is a lawyer.

   9            MR. GOLD:  A long time ago.  Sometimes --

  10            THE COURT:  You want the standard charge on the

  11   difference between direct and circumstantial proof, Counsel?

  12            Are you having any problem with the concept of direct

  13   proof, Ms. King?

  14            THE WITNESS:  No.

  15            THE COURT:  O.K.  Overruled.

  16   Q.  Do you or anyone at the studio have any projection for the

  17   year 2000 of the loss of any DVD sales as a result of films

  18   deencrypted by DeCSS either sold on the street or transmitted

  19   on the Internet?

  20   A.  I don't.  I can't speak for anyone at the studio.

  21   Q.  Is there anyone at the studio who would have that

  22   information, if such information exists?

  23   A.  I don't know of anyone that would have them.

  24   Q.  You mentioned on the direct examination a five-year plan?

  25   A.  Yes.




428



   1   Q.  Is there any word in that document that in any way relates

   2   to any anticipated loss of sales as a result of anything

   3   having to do with DeCSS specifically?

   4   A.  It is my recollection that in that documentation, under

   5   "risks," we list digital copyright protection as one of the

   6   major risks that we take as we go into the digital media.  It

   7   is set up as a risk.  It is not quantified.

   8   Q.  Please answer my question.

   9            Is there anything in that document that in any way

  10   indicates that DeCSS particularly, specifically, creates any

  11   risk for the next five years?

  12   A.  No, not --

  13   Q.  Do you have a copy of that document?  Pardon me.

  14   A.  Not specifically, no, it does not.

  15   Q.  Do you have a copy of that document here with you today?

  16   A.  No, I do not.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  Mr. Gold, may I see it?  She testified

  18   to it on direct.

  19            MR. GOLD:  Was this a document in our document

  20   designation?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Pardon me?

  22            MR GOLD:  Was this a document in our document

  23   designation?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  This is a document that she testified

  25   about on your question, a five-year plan, and I ask for that




429



   1   document.

   2            MR GOLD:  Well --

   3            THE COURT:  Do you have it here, Mr. Gold?  That's

   4   the first question.

   5            MR GOLD:  No.

   6            THE COURT:  No.  Ask the next question.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I ask that it be produced.

   8            THE COURT:  We will consider that later.

   9   BY MR. GARBUS:

  10   Q.  Now, you were in court when you saw Mr. Shamos testify, is

  11   that right?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  And have you been part of the defense team in this case?

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  Did you file an original affidavit in this case back in

  16   January?

  17   A.  Yes, I did.

  18   Q.  And were you deposed in this case?

  19   A.  Yes, I was.

  20   Q.  Has anyone at Warner's ever asked anybody to replicate or

  21   duplicate or to make the same kind of test that Mr. Shamos

  22   made with respect to the use of DeCSS, then DiVX'ing a movie,

  23   and then sending it out over the Internet?

  24   A.  To the best of my knowledge, and I don't know everyone at

  25   Warner Brother; no.




430



   1   Q.  Can you tell me why if DeCSS is such a threat, that no one

   2   prior to the time that Mr. Shamos was asked to do this test,

   3   anyone at Warner's or anyone at the other major studios or

   4   anyone at the MPAA never made such a test?

   5            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, that --

   6            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   7   Q.  Did you discuss Mr. Shamos' test with him at any time

   8   prior to the time he made it?

   9   A.  No.

  10   Q.  Since you saw Mr. Shamos in court, have you requested

  11   anyone at Warner Brothers to try and replicate the test?

  12   A.  Since I saw him the day before yesterday?

  13   Q.  Yes.

  14   A.  No.

  15   Q.  To your knowledge, since Mr. Shamos performed the test

  16   about a month ago, has anyone ever asked anyone at Warner's to

  17   replicate the test?

  18   A.  Not that I know of.

  19   Q.  To your knowledge, has anyone at any of the other major

  20   studios for the last eight months since DeCSS was cracked made

  21   any attempt to replicate the test that Mr. Shamos made?

  22   A.  I have no information about the other studios in this

  23   area.

  24   Q.  Do you have any direct proof of anyone who did not go to

  25   see a movie or watch an HBO film because they had previously




431



   1   seen a deencrypted copy of a DVD, deencrypted through DeCSS?

   2   A.  I have no direct proof.

   3   Q.  Do you know what the budget is of the MPAA to investigate

   4   piracy?

   5   A.  I can't remember off the top of my head, but I know I've

   6   been told in the past.

   7   Q.  Do you know what the budget of Warner Brothers is to

   8   investigate piracy?

   9   A.  We don't have a budget to investigate piracy.  We

  10   participate through the MPAA and provide them with

  11   information.  We have an intellectual property group that

  12   helps facilitate the work with the MPAA.

  13   Q.  And can you tell me if the MPA has offices in New York, in

  14   California, and in Washington, is that right?

  15   A.  I know there are offices in Washington and Los Angeles;

  16   yes.

  17   Q.  And they also have offices throughout the world?

  18   A.  I know they have offices, not in every country in the

  19   world, but I know they have offices in Europe and in other

  20   place.

  21   Q.  In Asia?

  22   A.  They have an office in Singapore.

  23   Q.  And do you know at these offices they have investigators?

  24   A.  Yes, they do.

  25            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, this is not a helpful line.




432



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I think we could deal with it all on a

   2   stipulation.  That's the stipulation I was offering before.

   3            THE COURT:  You offered five propositions for before.

   4   I think that you are now on about the 40th of the 5.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  No, no, I'm prepared to go through

   6   the --

   7            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, it is perfectly obvious that

   8   the studios have antipiracy efforts.  They have antipiracy

   9   resources, just about every trademark holder in America does,

  10   every copyright holder, everybody knows that.

  11   Q.  Were you here when you saw Mr. Schumann talk about the

  12   logs that had been developed?

  13   A.  Yes, I was in the courtroom.

  14   Q.  And do you know what the LiViD logs are?

  15   A.  No.

  16   Q.  Do you know what the logs were that he was referring to?

  17   A.  From what I gathered in the courtroom, they were logs

  18   relating to Linux development.

  19   Q.  The people have been involved in the cracking of the

  20   DeCSS, among other things?

  21   A.  No.

  22   Q.  To your knowledge, has anyone at the MPAA or any of the

  23   major studios made any attempt at all at any time to contact

  24   any of the people who were involved in the DeCSS crack?

  25   A.  To the best of my knowledge, the studios, once they were




433



   1   informed by the MPAA of the cracking of DeCSS spent an

   2   incredible amount of time talking together about what action

   3   they should take.  We took it as a unified group through the

   4   MPAA.

   5            That was a conscious decision, and we left together

   6   immediately after we heard about it.  This wasn't just

   7   something we put on the shelf.  There were immediate meetings

   8   and there were many of them.

   9   Q.  Let me ask you this:  To your knowledge, did anyone ever

  10   attempt to contact anyone who allegedly on the Internet is

  11   trying to sell or distribute or share a film that allegedly

  12   was deencrypted through DeCSS?

  13            That you can answer that, I think, yes or no.

  14   A.  No, I -- no, I can't.

  15   Q.  Let me rephrase it.

  16            Do you know the name --

  17            MR. GARBUS:  Judge, I think this is unnecessary.

  18            THE COURT:  I do, too.

  19   Q.  Do you know the name of any one person who was sharing

  20   films on the Internet who was sharing a film that has been

  21   deencrypted through DeCSS?

  22   A.  No, I don't.

  23   Q.  Have you ever seen a document from the MPAA, your studio,

  24   or any other studio that indicates that any attempt was made

  25   to learn the names of the people who allegedly claim on the




434



   1   Internet that they have used DeCSS to deencrypt movies?

   2            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the form of the

   3   question.

   4            THE COURT:  To the form, Mr. Gold?  What's wrong with

   5   the form?

   6            MR GOLD:  I thought it was compound and I didn't

   7   quite understand it myself.

   8            THE COURT:  Rephrase it, Mr. Garbus.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Can I hear the question again?

  10            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

  11            (Record read)

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I can break it is down into six

  13   questions, if you want.

  14   Q.  Have you ever seen any document --

  15            THE COURT:  I do you think the sarcasm is helpful, or

  16   is that designed to provoke a reaction?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  No, no, no, no, just trying to save

  18   time.

  19            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

  20   Q.  Have you ever seen a document from the MPAA that gives you

  21   the name of any person on the Internet who allegedly is

  22   seeking to share a deencrypted movie?

  23   A.  No.

  24   Q.  Have you ever seen any document which shows any attempt

  25   made by the MPAA to learn the name of any person who allegedly




435



   1   shares a movie allegedly deencrypted through DeCSS?

   2   A.  No.

   3   Q.  Have you ever seen a document from any studio, including

   4   yours, indicating any attempt to learn the name or the

   5   identification of any person who was allegedly sharing on the

   6   Internet DeCSS deencrypted movies?

   7   A.  When you say the identification, I do know that the MPAA

   8   looked for sites where they were posting the DeCSS code.  So,

   9   I did see documents that referred to that, but not names.

  10   Q.  Now, with respect to those sites, do you know if anyone at

  11   the MPA or the studios or Warner Brothers ever made an attempt

  12   to contact any of those sites?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  And what attempt was made to contact those sites other

  15   than 2600.com?

  16   A.  I know they sent out cease and desist letters and I don't

  17   know to the extent they sent out letters.  They had some take

  18   downs and that's about all I know.  I wasn't intimately

  19   involved, but I know they did that.

  20   Q.  Other than cease and desist letters, did they make any

  21   contact with by IPS server to determine the name of any

  22   individual who allegedly used DeCSS to deencrypt a movie?

  23   A.  Oh, I don't know.

  24   Q.  Do you know that IPS servers will give you that

  25   information, if requested?




436



   1   A.  I'm not familiar with that.

   2   Q.  Do you know that the technology now permits -- excuse

   3   me -- do you know that IPS servers have logs about who visits

   4   their sites?

   5            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the question.

   6            Could Mr. Garbus describe what an "IPS" is?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Internet Service Provider.  I'm sorry.

   8   I said "IPS."

   9            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Garbus, I had this point about

  10   four months ago and whatever merit it has, it has.  It's not

  11   getting any better or worse.  If you want to pursue it, I'm

  12   going to give you five more minutes.

  13   BY MR. GARBUS:

  14   Q.  Now, in your direct examination, you talked about the

  15   licensing structure.  Do you recall that?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  See if you can help me and let me just state it and you

  18   tell me if it's accurate, if that's an appropriate way to do.

  19            The DVD CCA has licenses with the movie studios

  20   concerning CSS?

  21   A.  Not necessarily.

  22   Q.  Then why don't you describe the licensing system.

  23   A.  Well, you need to have a license with DVD CCA to put the

  24   encryption on your disks, but that license could either be

  25   taken out by the motion picture studio or it could be taken




437



   1   out by their replicator who makes the disks.

   2   Q.  O.K.  We are getting at it the same way, and it also is

   3   taken out by the hardware manufacturer?

   4   A.  Yes, it is.

   5   Q.  So that the license from DVD CCA goes to the movie studio,

   6   it goes to the replicator, and it goes to the hardware

   7   manufacturer, is that right?

   8   A.  Yes, and if there's going to be a software implementation,

   9   I would assume it goes to that party as well.

  10   Q.  So that the only people who allegedly can play DVDs or use

  11   CSS are those people who have the licenses from DVD CCA, is

  12   that right?

  13   A.  That's correct.

  14   Q.  Now, if you buy -- do you have any information -- does

  15   Warner Brothers have any information on the number of sales of

  16   DVDs to Linux users?

  17   A.  No.  We don't follow that information.

  18   Q.  Do you know whether, in fact, the number of sales of DVDs

  19   have increased because they are now available for Linux users

  20   when they were not available before the DeCSS crack?

  21            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the question

  22   because it assumes facts that aren't in evidence.

  23            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.

  24   Q.  Are there any licensed Linux users?

  25   A.  I have been told that there are at least two licensed




438



   1   Linux implementations.

   2   Q.  Do you know if there are any people using or watching DVDs

   3   on Linuxes that do not have licenses?

   4   A.  I do not know that.

   5   Q.  Has there been any investigation -- I don't know if this

   6   is the same round or a different round --

   7            Has there been any investigation made by the MPA,

   8   your studio, any of the nine major studios over whether or not

   9   the extent to which Linux users who do not have licenses are

  10   using DVDs?

  11   A.  Linux users don't have to have licenses.  Linux users just

  12   have to use an authorized implementation.  So, I don't have

  13   that information.

  14   Q.  Let me ask the question another way.  Linux users, of

  15   course, can have a Windows system, so they can have a Windows

  16   system so they can watch a licensed DVD, isn't that correct?

  17   A.  That is correct.

  18   Q.  And if a Linux user does not have a Windows system,

  19   then -- withdrawn.

  20            Do you know how many sales of DVDs have been made to

  21   Linux users who do not have Windows operating systems?

  22   A.  We do not track the different types of computer operating

  23   systems that use our product.

  24   Q.  To make a DVD player, how many different licenses do you

  25   need?




439



   1   A.  I don't know.

   2   Q.  Is it more than five licenses?

   3   A.  I don't know.  I thought it was just one, but I'm not

   4   familiar enough with how they're licensing now.

   5   Q.  Do you know what the cost of those licenses are?

   6   A.  The cost of the license, which is royalty free, is

   7   $10,000, from my recollection.

   8   Q.  That's for the first year?

   9   A.  Yes.  I don't know.  I remember $10,000.

  10   Q.  You were talking about the increased sales of DVDs, is

  11   that right, and how it's mushroomed in the market?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  And given someone who's in this area, one would expect

  14   that the mushrooming would continue?  It's a highly-profitable

  15   business, is that right?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  And it's replacing videos?

  18   A.  Yeah.  I mean, it's a very complex -- excuse the word

  19   "matrix" to figure out how the business is growing.  I mean,

  20   we have VHS.  We have VCD in Asia.  We have DVD.  So, we are

  21   always analyzing what the growth is.  Is DVD taking anything

  22   away from our current business?  Is it incremental?  It's part

  23   of our business plan.

  24   Q.  And are there any projections within Warner Brothers in

  25   your business plan indicating the decrease in videos as a




440



   1   result of the DVD sales?

   2            THE COURT:  Asked and answered.

   3   Q.  What are those projections?

   4            THE COURT:  She said there were none.

   5   Q.  Does your five-year plan for Warner Brothers have no

   6   projections with respect to the loss of video sales as a

   7   result of the increase in the DVD market?

   8   A.  Let me see if I understand.

   9            THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  The question you asked a

  10   minute ago, I misheard.  You can go back to that, if you want,

  11   video versus DVD, Mr. Garbus.

  12   A.  Yes.  Our projections show the, as I said before, our

  13   sales of DVD are incremental to our video sales currently.

  14   But in our projections for the future, it shows that video

  15   would decline as DVD increases.

  16   Q.  Isn't it fair to say that the expectation is within a

  17   relatively short period of time, if the audio and video market

  18   would become very small as the DVD market becomes very large?

  19   A.  No, that's not accurate.

  20   Q.  Isn't it fair to say that as time goes on, a movie will

  21   not be released on both audio and video?

  22   A.  We have no projections that show that; none.

  23   Q.  Now, do you have any projection --

  24            THE COURT:  Just a second.  I mean, obviously people

  25   are not paying any attention to the words that are being used.




441



   1            Are movies being released on "audio and video"?

   2            THE WITNESS:  No.

   3            THE COURT:  O.K.  Mr. Garbus, you meant to say, "DVD

   4   and video."

   5            That's what you expected, Ms. King, so you answered

   6   the question that he didn't ask.

   7            Let's pay a little attention, folks.

   8   BY MR. GARBUS:

   9   Q.  With respect to DVD and video?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  Are there projections?

  12   A.  Certainly.

  13   Q.  And these projections show that the DVD market is

  14   increasing and as that increases, the sale of the video market

  15   will decrease, is that right?

  16   A.  Yes, to a certain extent; yes.

  17   Q.  And are there projections of when movies will be released

  18   on DVD, but will no longer be released on videos?

  19   A.  No.

  20   Q.  Have you seen any projections made by anyone other than

  21   Warner's about when video becomes fundamentally far less

  22   significant and has fewer films released on it?

  23   A.  I've seen no projections that show that we are not going

  24   to release our movies in the video cassette format which is in

  25   99 percent of American television homes.




442



   1   Q.  And in what percentage of American television homes right

   2   now are DVDs?

   3   A.  This is an estimate.  We are looking at I think 10 percent

   4   by the end of the year in the United States.

   5   Q.  And by the end of next year?

   6   A.  I don't remember.

   7   Q.  And by the end of the third year?

   8   A.  I don't remember.

   9   Q.  Now, do you recall that at the deposition we had been

  10   talking about the release of DVD audio?  Do you remember that?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  And you know that DVD audio is in the stores today?

  13   A.  I don't believe DVD audio in the sense that I think of DVD

  14   audio is in the stores today.

  15   Q.  Well, you say in the sense that you think DVD audio, is

  16   there something out there called DVD audio?

  17   A.  There's a bit of confusion about what DVD audio is.

  18   Q.  Let me ask you a question:  Is there something out in the

  19   stores now that you called first DVD audio players by

  20   Panasonic and by Phillips?

  21   A.  There may be.  I don't know.

  22   Q.  And DVD audio players are supposed to play DVD audio, is

  23   that right?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  And is it your testimony that there are DVD audio players




443



   1   out for sale today, but that there is no product for the DVD

   2   audio players?

   3            THE COURT:  The witness just said she didn't know if

   4   there were DVD audio players in the store today.  So, your

   5   question starts off on an erroneous premise that maybe you

   6   understand the facts right and the witness is not informed.

   7            But let's at least listen to the answers.

   8            (Continued on next page)

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




444



   1   BY MR. GARBUS:

   2   Q.  So when you say there is something out there, is there

   3   something out there called DVD audio which is used with the

   4   DVD audio players?

   5   A.  I don't know.  I have been told that there is some music

   6   in the marketplace that is in what is the video audio

   7   component of DVD.

   8            In other words, DVD video plays 5.1 surround audio

   9   which is even different from a normal CD.  You can put out

  10   music in 5.1 surround which is the video standard for sound.

  11   I'm trying to make this clear.  But that isn't DVD audio.  DVD

  12   audio is another standard, and I don't believe that any music

  13   is in the marketplace that meets that standard yet.  Although

  14   I could be wrong.  That's just what I have been told.

  15            THE COURT:  That meets which standard?

  16            THE WITNESS:  That meets the new DVD audio standard.

  17   The sound on the DVD video has a certain specification.  DVD

  18   audio goes beyond that specification, so it's an even added

  19   feature.

  20            THE COURT:  When you are talking about DVD audio, you

  21   are not talking about 5.1 surround, you are talking about a

  22   different standard, is that correct?

  23            THE WITNESS:  That's correct, that's what I would be

  24   talking about, yes.

  25            THE COURT:  Let's go.




445



   1            MR. GARBUS:  May I mark this as an exhibit?  It

   2   hasn't been marked as an exhibit before.  I can describe it or

   3   not.  These are things that I purchased last night at Tower.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

   5            MR. GOLD:  We object, your Honor.

   6            THE COURT:  Where are you going with this, Mr.

   7   Garbus?

   8            MR. GARBUS:  There is testimony in the record and

   9   there are affidavits in the record that DVD audio was not

  10   released because DeCSS somehow affected it and that DVD audio

  11   was going to be delayed for another year, and in fact they are

  12   out for sale now.

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  14            MR. GOLD:  It may well be, your Honor, that the DVD

  15   audio market, that the product that we are going to get into

  16   now was not on the market but this other DVD product that

  17   Ms. King described is, from her prior answers.

  18            THE COURT:  Well, I mean that's kind of an

  19   observation about what might be going on, Mr. Gold, but is

  20   there an objection, and, if so, what is it?

  21            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, we got a list of documents and

  22   I thought the way the games were played -- if they want to go

  23   out and buy some videos, they could have given them to

  24   Mr. Hernstadt last night when he was in our office and he

  25   could have given them to us, or we could have gotten some




446



   1   notice.

   2            The rules provide for appropriate notice, and all of

   3   your Honor's orders provided for appropriate notice.

   4            THE COURT:  I am going to sustain the objection.

   5            MR. GOLD:  Also, I don't think there is a foundation

   6   on that to that question.

   7            THE COURT:  Well, all we have had is a proposal to

   8   mark the disks.  You don't need a foundation to mark a disk,

   9   but I don't see the relevance of this, Mr. Garbus.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Let me see if I can explore a little

  11   further.

  12   Q.  Do you know what water marking is?

  13   A.  Yes, I do.

  14   Q.  And was that one of the potential encryption systems that

  15   were considered for DVDs?

  16            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, is this not way beyond the

  17   subject of direct testimony?  Is this not irrelevant?  I

  18   object on those grounds.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  I will make an offer of proof, basically

  20   that the movie studios knew back in --

  21            THE COURT:  Before you make any offer of proof, maybe

  22   you could respond to the objection.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I think it's relevant because I think it

  24   shows -- and I am prepared to do this at the sidebar, or if

  25   you want, I will do it from here.




447



   1            THE COURT:  Would you go ahead, please, Mr. Garbus.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  That at the time that the encryption

   3   system was placed on the DVDs, they knew that the encryption

   4   system would be broken in a very, very short period of time,

   5   and they got into the study of water marking, and different

   6   groups then competed for the kind of encryption system that

   7   was available.

   8            I think the proof will show, and it relates to the

   9   clause you read yesterday of the law, that they knew that it

  10   was not an effective device, and that since they have known

  11   about the cracking they have developed in fact other

  12   encryption codes that are superior to CSS which they can place

  13   immediately on DVDs.  It may cause some difficulty in how you

  14   put it into the machine, but in fact a security system is now

  15   available and can be used now to stop any potential loss of

  16   future sales.

  17            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor --

  18            MR. GARBUS:  And you then get into a very important

  19   economic issue, namely because you are concerned about and you

  20   indicated I think that the concern is not today's damage or

  21   may be today's damage to circumstantial proof, but certainly

  22   damage tomorrow.

  23            And what I would like to show, if we had an

  24   opportunity to do it, is that the movie studios know about it,

  25   knew about it two years ago, and have the total ability to




448



   1   stop that damage, unlike the audio business.

   2            THE COURT:  Whatever the movie studios may have known

   3   about two years ago is first of all not within the scope of

   4   the direct and second of all not relevant.

   5            It is not relevant because although you seem to have

   6   the view, and you are entitled to advocate it, that when the

   7   statute speaks of effective control of access to copyrighted

   8   works it should be construed to mean good or hard to crack

   9   control, that is not the way the term is defined in the

  10   statute.

  11            Indeed, if it were so defined in the statute, it

  12   would be meaningless, the entire statute, because the

  13   definition of something that effectively would control access

  14   would mean something uncrackable if it exists, and the only

  15   occasion for envoking the statute is where something has been

  16   cracked.  So, by definition any time something had been

  17   cracked, the control wouldn't have been effective.

  18            Now, I just don't read the statute that way, and you

  19   are welcome to take that up on appeal should the occasion

  20   arise, if indeed the plaintiffs win this lawsuit.

  21            Now, that having been said, that takes care of the

  22   past.  As to threatened harm, I think that the witness has

  23   raised the question of threatened future harm on direct, and I

  24   think certainly in terms of a claim for an injunction you are

  25   entitled to some latitude to explore her claim on that.




449



   1   That's the ruling.

   2   BY MR. GARBUS:

   3   Q.  Isn't it a fact that since CSS was cracked, the studios

   4   have been developing other encryption systems?

   5   A.  The studio?  The studio -- I'm not sure I know what you

   6   mean by other encryption systems.

   7   Q.  You know what water marking is?

   8   A.  Yes, but water marking is not the same as an encryption

   9   system, so that's why I say that.  They have been working on

  10   water marking, they have been working on a system for digital

  11   transmission for a long time in both of those systems.  Since

  12   CSS was cracked, you know, they have looked, they certainly

  13   have asked Matsushita Toshiba what they can do about it, if

  14   anything, and I have not heard that we have an instant or an

  15   immediate fix.

  16   Q.  Have you heard of CSS 2?

  17   A.  Yes.

  18   Q.  What is CSS 2?

  19   A.  CSS 2 is a similar encryption system to CSS that was meant

  20   to protect DVD audio.

  21   Q.  And do you know what CPPM is?

  22   A.  Yes, I believe that CPPM, to the best of my knowledge, is

  23   the encryption system that audio adopted after they

  24   disregarded CSS 2 upon being cracked in October.

  25   Q.  And when you say CPPM was adopted, that was after they




450



   1   learned that CSS 2 would not protect audio, is that right?

   2   A.  Let me rephrase what you said.  CSS 2 was a system similar

   3   to CSS.  When we found out about DeCSS, the music industry

   4   decided they did not want to use CSS 2 because it was

   5   vulnerable.  Therefore, they looked for another type of system

   6   to protect DVD audio, and I believe the one that they picked

   7   was CPPM, which is different than CSS 2.

   8   Q.  You have now talked about the way that the audio

   9   industry -- pardon me -- the audio industry has changed

  10   encryption systems or security systems.  Tell me what attempt

  11   the movie industry has made since October to develop security

  12   systems or encryption systems.  And I gather the word

  13   encryption system is not appropriate for water marking but the

  14   word security system is.  Is that correct?

  15   A.  Yes.

  16            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the form of that.

  17            THE COURT:  Overruled.  I think it's clear.  Go

  18   ahead.

  19   A.  The studios have spent a tremendous amount of time, I know

  20   because I have been tangentially involved, in coming up with a

  21   system that is now called 5C, which is for digital

  22   transmission.  It works on IEEE 1394 digital connections, and

  23   it protects the transmission from one digital device to

  24   another.  That's extremely important because in the CSS

  25   license we demanded that all digital ports be turned off so




451



   1   that product could not be transmitted.  We are looking for a

   2   strong protocol now for that, and it has taken up a tremendous

   3   amount of time and resources at every single studio in that

   4   discussion.

   5            Simultaneously with that, the studios have been

   6   working on a very difficult situation involving the choice of

   7   water marking.  And water marking does not provide an

   8   encryption system.  What it does is if encryption is broken or

   9   if for some reason circumvented, if you have a water mark then

  10   the copy would not play in an authorized player.  So it's

  11   another system of security as well.

  12            In addition to that, we would have loved to have

  13   chosen an immediate substitute system for DVD.  However, there

  14   are going to be, you know, I'm making a guess here, 12 million

  15   DVDs in the market by December.  If you put another encryption

  16   system on and you started encrypting your movies, then all of

  17   those players would be obsoleted and it's very difficult to

  18   trade in the installed base of CE players and those are just

  19   stand alone players.  There is probably 20 million or more DVD

  20   ROM drives that would also be obsoleted if we were to put a

  21   noncompatible encryption system on.  So the first thing we did

  22   was go to Matsushita Toshiba and say is there any way we can

  23   get a fix on this that would help us going into the future.

  24   The studios certainly have not sat on their thumbs but have

  25   put in a tremendous amount of time and resources to see what




452



   1   they could do to fix the situation.

   2   Q.  Can you tell us, do you have any document with you here

   3   today indicating when the studios project -- the judge asked

   4   before the question putting the genie out of the bottle.

   5   DeCSS has been posted regularly since October, at least since

   6   October of 1999, is that right, to your knowledge?

   7   A.  I imagine.

   8   Q.  It has been posted regularly in November, December,

   9   January, February, March, April, May, June.

  10            THE COURT:  We all know what the intervening months

  11   are, Mr. Garbus.  Another question, please.

  12   Q.  And is it fair to say that anyone who wants DeCSS or any

  13   number of people in the United States who wanted DeCSS in the

  14   last months already has had an opportunity to see it?

  15            MR. GOLD:  I object on the grounds that that calls

  16   for speculation.

  17            THE COURT:  Look, I guess it does, but the

  18   fundamental point is obvious.

  19   A.  Okay, it's available.

  20            THE COURT:  That's all right.  I am sustaining the

  21   objection.  There is no need to take time on it.  Somebody who

  22   wants it and knows anything about the Internet knows how to

  23   get it.  It's that obvious.

  24   Q.  And they have known how to get it since at least October.

  25            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, objection.




453



   1            THE COURT:  Yes.  Well, no, no.  I will allow that,

   2   but the witness needs to answer from her personal knowledge.

   3   Q.  From your personal knowledge, based on your involvement in

   4   the industry, since October, anyone in the United States with

   5   a computer can get a copy of DeCSS, is that true?

   6            THE COURT:  I suppose they need an Internet

   7   connection, don't they?

   8   A.  I was going to say, if they are knowledgeable about where

   9   to go and have the right connections.

  10   Q.  You say "if they are knowledgeable."  If you go to

  11   Disney's search engine and you punch in DeCSS, does it tell

  12   you where to go?

  13   A.  You have to be knowledgeable in knowing what DeCSS is.  I

  14   mean not everyone knows that.

  15   Q.  I see.  Can you go to let's say Infoseek and punch in CSS

  16   and then gets references to DeCSS?

  17   A.  I don't know.

  18   Q.  Can you go to Infoseek or to any search engine and punch

  19   in DVD and then get CSS or DeCSS?

  20   A.  I don't know.

  21   Q.  Do you know enough about the Internet to know that the

  22   search engines, there are variable ways of getting to DeCSS

  23   without punching in DeCSS?  Is that right?

  24            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the question.

  25            THE COURT:  Sustained.




454



   1   Q.  Do you go on the Internet?

   2   A.  Rarely.

   3   Q.  Have you ever used any of the search engines to see where

   4   DeCSS is?

   5   A.  No.

   6   Q.  Have you ever gone to 2600.com?

   7   A.  No.

   8   Q.  Now, Warner permits buyers of its DVDs to play them in a

   9   DVD player no matter where they purchase the DVD player, is

  10   that correct?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  Can Warner decide on its own to allow a company to play

  13   its DVDs without that company having a license from the

  14   DVD-CCA?

  15   A.  No, not if we have encrypted the movie.

  16   Q.  If you encrypted the movie and I created a player that

  17   could deencrypt that movie, could Warner sell that DVD to me?

  18   A.  I think that would violate the license with DVD-CCA.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  Can I have a moment, your Honor?

  20            THE COURT:  Yes.

  21   Q.  Now, do any of your business plans -- and I think you have

  22   mentioned this -- in Warner Brothers take into account DeCSS?

  23   The five year plan, that you have mentioned.  Does any other

  24   specifically take into account DeCSS?

  25            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I believe this has been




455



   1   covered in prior cross.

   2            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   3   Q.  Have you ever seen any press releases from the MPAA saying

   4   that -- let me show you Exhibit 2M.

   5            THE COURT:  M as in Michael?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.  May I approach the bench?

   7            THE COURT:  Yes.

   8   Q.  Did you ever see that press release?

   9            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, we are trying to come up with

  10   a copy of this.

  11            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, maybe you can give counsel a

  12   copy.

  13            MR. GOLD:  We have ZM.

  14            THE COURT:  Z as in zebra, Defendants' ZM.  Do you

  15   have it now, Mr. Gold?

  16            MR. GOLD:  Yes, ZM.

  17   Q.  Have you ever seen that press release before?

  18            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I believe -- this is a

  19   document as to which you have held it is work product.

  20            THE COURT:  What?

  21            MR. GOLD:  We have made the assertion that this is

  22   work product, this document.

  23            THE COURT:  This is one of the things that was

  24   produced under the no waiver?

  25            MR. GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.




456



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  No, your Honor, that one wasn't.

   2   There may have been others.

   3            THE COURT:  It has a Bates number on it.  You fellows

   4   ought to be able to figure this out.

   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  All the no waiver documents were

   6   stamped.

   7            MR. SIMS:  This was officially produced without a

   8   stamp, and we sent them a letter, it was privileged as they

   9   know because they have seen the other documents.  It was never

  10   released as a press release and it was drafted largely by

  11   lawyers.

  12            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Garbus, I think you are

  13   entitled to find out at a minimum whether it was ever

  14   released, because if it was there is no question of privilege.

  15   So, see if you can deal with that.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Mr. Gold, was it ever released?

  17            MR. GOLD:  We were advised it was not released.

  18            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold is not the witness.

  19   Q.  Ms. King, do you know if it was ever released?

  20   A.  I don't think it was released.

  21   Q.  Have you ever seen any statements made by Mr. Valenti

  22   saying that the so-called CSS hack is useless?

  23   A.  Well, I may have seen this draft.

  24            THE COURT:  That's not the question.  Forget the

  25   document.




457



   1            THE WITNESS:  Okay.

   2   Q.  Have you ever seen or have you ever heard Mr. Valenti say

   3   that the CSS hack is useless?

   4   A.  I don't remember that exact quote coming from Mr. Valenti.

   5   Q.  Well, in substance do you remember any quotes coming from

   6   the MPAA or any other movie studio saying fundamentally that

   7   the CSS hack is useless because the cost of making an illegal

   8   copy is too high?  Just yes or no.

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  Do you recall statements by Mr. Valenti that deencrypted

  11   movies on the Internet are useless because they are not of

  12   such a greater quality?

  13   A.  No.

  14   Q.  Do you recall any statements by Mr. Valenti, lengthy

  15   talking about the difficulty of making copies through DeCSS or

  16   the CSS hack?

  17   A.  No.

  18   Q.  Now, you say you saw the draft of this document?

  19   A.  It looks familiar.

  20   Q.  When did you see the draft?

  21   A.  To the best of my recollection probably a meeting at the

  22   MPAA.

  23            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, we just asserted our work

  24   product privilege as to this document.

  25            THE COURT:  Right now he is asking whether she saw it




458



   1   or drafted it.  I'm not sure which.

   2            MR. GOLD:  The question is did she see it.

   3            THE COURT:  Yes.

   4   Q.  Did you see it?

   5   A.  I think so.

   6   Q.  And how do you know that it was not released?

   7   A.  I believe we decided not to do a press release.  That's

   8   the best of my recollection.

   9   Q.  Why was that?

  10            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, that's part of the privilege.

  11            THE COURT:  Where was this decision made and by whom?

  12            THE WITNESS:  It was made by all lawyers at the MPAA,

  13   at a meeting to discuss how to handle this threat, what type

  14   of litigation should we take.  It was all in the context of

  15   deciding how to respond to DeCSS in an overall context.

  16            THE COURT:  Look, it seems to me that to the extent

  17   lawyers were sitting around discussing legal matters, that's

  18   one thing.  To the extent lawyers are sitting around being

  19   public relations consultants, that's another thing.  So, I

  20   don't see, I don't think, Mr. Gold, any valid objection to the

  21   witness testifying.

  22            MR. GOLD:  We respectfully suggest that if it was

  23   released then the lawyers were sitting around engaging in

  24   public relations, if a decision was made not to release it, I

  25   believe the lawyers were sitting around engaging in the




459



   1   practice of law.

   2            THE COURT:  I see.  Your theory is that in substance

   3   the nonrelease embodies the legal advice they gave their

   4   client.  What about that, Mr. Garbus?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I disagree.

   6            THE COURT:  I know you disagree, but is there a

   7   reason you disagree?

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I think functioning in the area of

   9   public relations and deciding what to release and what not to

  10   release, you are sitting -- well, first of all we get into who

  11   else was in the room.  Put that aside.

  12            I don't think that's a lawyer's function and that the

  13   whole question of press releases and public releases do not

  14   come within the attorney/client privilege.

  15            In this case, where you have a great deal of public

  16   information being released by the MPAA, either with or without

  17   its lawyers, then what is out there is certainly waived, and I

  18   think that that waiver also applies to what's in there.

  19            THE COURT:  Suppose you were advising a criminal

  20   defendant who had been indicted in a case as to whether or not

  21   to issue a press release giving the defendant's version of the

  22   facts and coming to the conclusion that the government was all

  23   wet in indicting him.  Do you think that's legal advice?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I think a criminal situation like that

  25   is totally different.




460



   1            THE COURT:  Could you just answer the question I put

   2   to you?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I can't.  I just think it's so

   4   different.  I think here you have a series of -- I think we

   5   can agree in this case that there had been a series of press

   6   releases.

   7            Let me move on to the next exhibit.

   8            THE COURT:  All right.

   9   Q.  Let me show you Exhibit RK.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

  11            THE COURT:  Yes.

  12   Q.  Is that your name at the top of that document?

  13            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, may we just wait until we

  14   can -- are we dealing with RV?

  15            THE COURT:  No, K as in knight.

  16            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

  17            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Garbus, please.

  18   Q.  Have you ever seen that document which is the first page?

  19   It says to Marsha King.

  20   A.  Well, I believe so.

  21   Q.  And is Dean Marks at the MPAA?

  22   A.  No, he isn't.

  23   Q.  Where is he?

  24   A.  Dean Marks is with Time Warner.

  25   Q.  John Schulman?




461



   1   A.  Warner Brothers.

   2   Q.  Ed Weiss?

   3   A.  Time Warner.

   4   Q.  Jeremy Williams?

   5   A.  Warner Brothers.

   6   Q.  Bernard Sorkin?

   7   A.  Time Warner.

   8   Q.  Now look at the next page.  Do you see a quote in the

   9   fourth paragraph from James Cardwell?

  10   A.  Yes, I do.

  11   Q.  Who is James Cardwell?

  12   A.  James Cardwell is the executive vice president of North

  13   American, Australia, New Zealand for Warner Home Video.

  14   Q.  Looking at that document, does this refresh your

  15   recollection that Mr. Cardwell told CNN --

  16            THE COURT:  Now, just a minute, Mr. Garbus.  She

  17   hasn't said that her recollection needed refreshing, first of

  18   all, so there is no foundation for the question.

  19            Secondly, you know perfectly well that this is

  20   hearsay.  If it was offered against you, you would have

  21   objected to it strenuously.  If you want to ask a question in

  22   an unsensational fashion, I think you know how.

  23   Q.  Do you know if Mr. Cardwell ever made a statement on

  24   behalf of Warner with respect to his expectation that the CSS

  25   code would be broken?




462



   1   A.  I was shown this article.  I was not there.

   2   Q.  Did you ever have a conversation with Mr. Cardwell --

   3   wasn't it the position of Warner Brothers they had expected

   4   the source code to be broken, that you weren't surprised it

   5   was broken and you believed there was no economic incentive to

   6   hacking the product?  Wasn't that the Warner Brothers

   7   position?

   8            MR. GOLD:  I object to the form of that question.

   9            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.

  10   Q.  Did anybody to your knowledge at Warner Brothers ever say

  11   we expected the source code to be broken?

  12   A.  I don't remember anyone actually saying that, but it could

  13   have been said.

  14   Q.  And what did they say, if not exactly that, what your

  15   expectation was --

  16            (Record read)

  17   Q.  -- with respect to the breaking of the code?

  18   A.  It's difficult.  We didn't have a joint expectation with

  19   respect to the code.  We always knew that with any code there

  20   was a possibility it could be hacked.

  21   Q.  And to your knowledge, did anyone at Warner -- by the way,

  22   after you saw this document, did you at any time speak to

  23   anyone at Warner Brothers to determine whether or not Cardwell

  24   had said that?

  25   A.  Yes, I did.




463



   1   Q.  Who did you speak to?

   2   A.  Mr. Cardwell.

   3   Q.  What did he say?

   4   A.  He said he didn't remember those exact words but he could

   5   have said it.

   6   Q.  And when did you speak to Mr. Cardwell?

   7   A.  The day that I saw this article or saw something similar

   8   to this article.

   9   Q.  And if he didn't remember the exact words, did he tell you

  10   what he did say?

  11            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object on hearsay grounds.

  12            THE COURT:  Mr. Cardwell?  Overruled.

  13   A.  No.

  14   Q.  Isn't it true -- by the way, this article is back in

  15   January 13 of the year 2000.  Did you ever ask him when they

  16   expected the source code to be broken?

  17   A.  No, I didn't.

  18   Q.  Did you ever ask anybody at Warner Brothers when they

  19   expected the source code to be broken?

  20   A.  I --

  21            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I don't understand so far as

  22   it relates to source code.

  23            THE COURT:  I think that point is well taken, but,

  24   you know, the witness can answer if she can.

  25   A.  I don't know the answer to that.  We didn't have a Warner




464



   1   expectation.

   2            THE COURT:  Does the concept of breaking a source

   3   code have any meaning to you, Ms. King?

   4            THE WITNESS:  No.  The way I'm thinking of it, I

   5   guess is breaking the encryption.

   6            THE COURT:  Proceed.

   7   Q.  Did he ever tell you that we expected CSS to be broken?

   8            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, hasn't that been asked and

   9   answered twice and ruled on, my objection?

  10            THE COURT:  I think so.  Sustained.  It's cumulative.

  11   Q.  And did you ask him about the sentence, we were surprised

  12   it wasn't broken earlier, what he meant by that?

  13   A.  No, that's not what I asked him.

  14   Q.  What did you ask?

  15   A.  I asked him if he had said this.

  16   Q.  And he said he had said it substantially, is that right?

  17   A.  He said he couldn't remember but it could have been said.

  18   Q.  Now, when you asked him that, who else asked him?  Who was

  19   in the room when that question was asked of him?

  20   A.  Warren Lieberfarb.

  21   Q.  And who is he?

  22   A.  He is the president of Warner Home Video.

  23   Q.  And did Mr. Lieberfarb say anything at that meeting?

  24   A.  No.

  25   Q.  Tell me how that meeting came about.




465



   1   A.  It came about because I had been at an MPAA meeting and

   2   they had shown me this very same piece of information and

   3   asked me if I could find out about it.  When I got back to the

   4   office, they were in a meeting together, and so I went in

   5   there and showed it to Jim, asked them if I could interrupt,

   6   and I did.

   7   Q.  And after Mr. Cardwell said whatever he said, what then

   8   happened?

   9   A.  Excuse me?

  10   Q.  Tell me what happened in the room.

  11   A.  Well, I asked him if he had said that, and, you know, he

  12   said he didn't exactly remember but he could have, and I said

  13   okay, and then I left basically.

  14   Q.  And did Mr. Lieberfarb say anything?

  15   A.  I don't remember him saying anything.

  16   Q.  Did you show him this article when you asked him if he

  17   said that?

  18   A.  Yes, I did.

  19   Q.  And do you know where that article comes from?

  20   A.  No.  I think I showed him this or something similar to

  21   this, but it was a similar quote.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I offer the document into evidence.

  23   It's an exception to the hearsay rule.  It come in as an

  24   exception because it explains a course of conduct that is

  25   ultimately taken, namely litigation here.  January 13 is the




466



   1   date of the lawsuit here and of course there is the litigation

   2   before in December.  And I think that all of these documents

   3   come in, and we have several others, as an exception to the

   4   hearsay rule because it shows exactly what Warner Brothers was

   5   doing to deal with this particular problem.  I offer it in

   6   evidence.

   7            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, this document, as is apparent

   8   from the cross-examination of the witness, is offered for the

   9   truth of the material contained therein, and I believe it's

  10   clearly hearsay.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I also believe that even the way the

  12   witness testifies to it, assuming it's of any significance,

  13   that it's an admission of a party.

  14            MR. GOLD:  Not this, your Honor.

  15            THE COURT:  Well, there is a double hearsay problem

  16   with that, Mr. Garbus, and the double hearsay problem is that

  17   if you had somebody testifying on personal knowledge to what

  18   Mr. Cardwell said, that would be an admission.  But what you

  19   have is a newspaper reporter saying that Mr. Cardwell told him

  20   something, and that's the link, that is the double hearsay

  21   problem.

  22            Nonetheless, it seems to me that so much of RK as

  23   consists on the cover sheet, and the sentence on the second

  24   page purporting to quote Mr. Cardwell, the whole purported

  25   quote from Mr. Cardwell comes in for what it's worth in light




467



   1   of Mr. Cardwell's direct admission to the witness that he

   2   could have said it and whatever else she said he said.  I

   3   think it is close enough that there is a foundation on which I

   4   could find that it was an adoption by the witness of the

   5   statement, and so it comes in on that basis and to that

   6   extent.

   7            THE COURT:  I meant to say an adoption by

   8   Mr. Cardwell, not an adoption by the witness.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, can we take our morning

  10   break now?

  11            THE COURT:  All right.  15 minutes.

  12            (Defendants' Exhibit RK received in evidence)

  13            (Recess)

  14            MR. ATLAS:  Before we go on the lunch break if we.

  15   could just figure out the scheduling for the next couple of

  16   days.  We are just trying to tell our witnesses with some

  17   precision when they are going to be called.  It would take

  18   maybe five minutes.  I think we are hoping to look for

  19   something like a Friday to begin our case.  If that's okay

  20   with the Court and if that's okay with the other side, we can

  21   get our witnesses lined up.

  22            THE COURT:  We will talk about it later.
                Mr. Gold, remind me, is there a claim for declaratory
  23   relief in this case?  Do you want to go back and check?  All
       right.
  24            Mr. Garbus, you may proceed.
                (Continued on next page)
  25




468



   1   CROSS-EXAMINATION Continued

   2   BY MR. GARBUS:

   3   Q.  Ms. King, I'm going to try and pick up where Mr. Gold

   4   began examination and I'll try and do it quickly so we can

   5   finish before lunch.

   6            When did you start at Warner Home Video?

   7   A.  Beginning of March 1990.

   8   Q.  And when did you start begin working on DVD?

   9   A.  We didn't call it DVD, but I did some work on that during

  10   the year 1990.

  11   Q.  What did you then call it?

  12   A.  We called it movie on a disk.

  13   Q.  And at some point does that get called DVD or whatever

  14   that predecessor was?

  15   A.  Then it was called Taz and then it was called DVD.

  16   Q.  And about when was it called DVD?

  17   A.  '96, it had been called SD as well.

  18   Q.  And at the very beginning of these conversations, was

  19   there a concern about a security system for whatever was

  20   called that was going to be released the movie on a disk?

  21   A.  Well, when it was just an idea, there wasn't a security

  22   system.

  23   Q.  When did it go beyond being just an idea?

  24   A.  Well, when it was coming into being reality and the studio

  25   started meeting, we talked about a security system.  I believe




469



   1   that was around 1995.

   2   Q.  So that the first time --

   3            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, if I may, this line of

   4   questioning that goes back in time, back before 1996 when this

   5   was released and on into the early '90s hasn't got any

   6   relevance to this case whatsoever.

   7            THE COURT:  Well, look, you know why Mr. Garbus wants

   8   to go into it and Mr. Garbus knows why he wants to go into it

   9   and it hasn't got much to do with the issues in the case and I

  10   know why he wants to go into it.  He's trying to do some

  11   discovery for another purpose.

  12            MR GOLD:  Yes, your Honor.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  No, I'm not.  I'll skip it.  That's not

  14   the point.

  15            THE COURT:  Pardon me?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  That's absolutely not the point and I'll

  17   skip it.  I'll start with 1996.  That has nothing to do -- I

  18   see what's implied and it has nothing to do with that at all.

  19   I don't know when it started.  I don't know when they thought

  20   of security systems.

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, relax.  There was something

  22   else I was going to say on that subject, but in light of your

  23   representation that that's not what it's all about and you

  24   will skip it, I will accept the representation that we will go

  25   on.




470



   1   Q.  Now --

   2            THE COURT:  If you want to press it, then we will

   3   deal with it.

   4   Q.  Now, when you started working on what we call DVD, let's

   5   say 1995, and don't tell me anything about before 1995, was

   6   that when the name DVD first came in or was it '96?

   7   A.  I can't exactly remember when the name DVD came in.  The

   8   two competing optical disk formats were converged I believe in

   9   September of '95.

  10            DVD as a name, since there was a convergence of two

  11   standards, one called SD and one called MMCD came in after

  12   that.  So, it was either late '95 or early '96.

  13   Q.  And when for the first time after January 1, 1995 did they

  14   start discussing encryption systems or security systems?

  15   A.  I can't -- I can't remember the initial date and I've been

  16   given nothing to refresh my memory.  I could find it, I'm

  17   sure, in my files.

  18            But around that time in '95, the motion picture

  19   companies started discussing legislation.  Originally it was a

  20   legislative proposal between consumer electronics and the

  21   motion picture industry to protect their product in the

  22   digital domain.

  23   Q.  And tell me just a little about those conversations?

  24   A.  Those conversations were -- originally we looked at the

  25   Audio Home Recording Rights Act where they had a big stream




471



   1   which had to be recognized.  We were looking at legislation

   2   similar to that, however, you wouldn't be able to make a copy

   3   as you are under the Recording Home Rights Act.

   4            The issue was:  Do we need the computer industry in

   5   the room?  We certainly at Warner said we did.  Other studios

   6   said we did, Disney included.  When we finally came up with

   7   some proposed legislation and brought the IT industry into the

   8   room, we stopped the legislation and sat down and started from

   9   scratch on a new security idea that that would be acceptable

  10   by the computer industry along with a new type of legislation

  11   to protect us.

  12   Q.  And the people --

  13            THE COURT:  Excuse me a minute, Mr. Garbus.

  14            Are you able to say from your own knowledge whether

  15   Warner was working on encryption prior to January of 1995?

  16            THE WITNESS:  No, we weren't.

  17            THE COURT:  Proceed.

  18   Q.  Now, with respect to, instead of encryption, how about the

  19   word -- since the judge asked the question -- how about

  20   security system?  Was there any concern prior to '95 expressed

  21   about security for the videos -- pardon me -- for the movies

  22   that were -- could be released?

  23   A.  I don't remember that being a topic that I participated

  24   in.

  25   Q.  You say you don't remember being a topic that you




472



   1   participated?

   2   A.  We were trying to come up -- we had a certain window of

   3   opportunity, we felt, in the video industry, at least at

   4   Warner Brothers, and we were part -- we were a large part of

   5   the development of DVD.

   6            We wanted to get this hard copy consumer product into

   7   the market before high definition television and before video

   8   on demand was widely available.  We wanted to get consumer

   9   acceptance and we knew we had a limited window of opportunity.

  10   So, before you can think about security, you have to think

  11   about having a product and we were immersed in developing the

  12   product.

  13   Q.  Now, one of the issues with the AHRA, do you know what

  14   that stands for?

  15   A.  The Audio Home Recording Rights Act.

  16   Q.  Yes, and that's 1992?

  17   A.  I don't know the date.

  18   Q.  One of the issues there was the question of security for

  19   audio recordings, is that right?

  20   A.  That's how I understand it.

  21   Q.  So, everybody understood after 1992 that you had to have

  22   some kind of security system for any product that was released

  23   into the market?

  24   A.  That's right.

  25            MR. GOLD:  I object to the form of the question, your




473



   1   Honor.

   2            THE COURT:  Yes, look, this is now enough, Mr.

   3   Garbus.  I have an affirmative obligation that I recognize.

   4   As far as I'm concerned, I have discharged it.  You can now

   5   proceed and handle this case.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

   7   Q.  Now --

   8            MR. GARBUS:  Can we just approach the bench for a

   9   moment, your Honor?

  10            THE COURT:  I'm sorry?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Can we approach the bench for a moment?

  12            THE COURT:  Yes.

  13            (At the sidebar)

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I'm not going to pursue this line of

  15   inquiry any further.  It seems perfectly obvious to me that

  16   even before the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 that anyone

  17   who was thinking of releasing any product into the consumer

  18   market was extraordinarily concerned about security.

  19            What this witness has just answered is, and I don't

  20   remember her question and answer, that you were not going to

  21   have a product released, she just gave a "yes" to my last

  22   question.  I'm not going to state it here and I'm not going to

  23   go any further with it, but it's inconceivable to me -- I

  24   won't say what's inconceivable to me.

  25            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, the witness has testified that




474



   1   Warner had made the decision that they were not going to

   2   release DVDs unless there was an encryption system that they

   3   felt good about.  She also testified that at the meeting, she

   4   went to in the industry, she heard and knew that the other

   5   studios felt the same way.

   6            THE COURT:  Look, I don't have to hear all of that.

   7   This is exceptionally simple.  The only reason I raise the

   8   question is because quite apart from what the parties have

   9   raised, I have an independent obligation under Section

  10   455(b)(2) of the Code to disqualify myself if it appears that

  11   someone with whom I practiced law at the time I did so was

  12   engaged by a party "concerning the matter."

  13            It is a subject in the context of this case on which

  14   I have no knowledge of my own.  I am entirely at the mercy of

  15   what the parties put before me.  I don't know that I had.  An

  16   obligation extending so far as to ask the question that I did,

  17   but I now have before me the witness' deposition testimony.  I

  18   have what she said here.

  19            I have the affidavits that were put before me on the

  20   motion.  And the issue is, as far as I'm concerned, closed

  21   absent new evidence.  I do not view this trial as a discovery

  22   proceeding for the purpose of conducting an expedition in

  23   search of that new evidence.  Obviously, if there is such

  24   evidence and it requires my disqualification, I will readily

  25   do so, but I haven't seen it and what we are here to try now




475



   1   is this case.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  So, can I understand something?  So,

   3   then I should not continue the line of questioning leading

   4   from the AHRA of '92 up to '95 and '96?

   5            THE COURT:  I can't make abstract rulings like that.

   6   I believe that I said in my opinion, Mr. Garbus, that one

   7   reasonably might infer, although I don't have the text in

   8   front of me, that somebody probably thought about security at

   9   some earlier point, but somebody thinking about security and

  10   my partner, former partner, having been engaged with respect

  11   to security, if indeed that would be enough, which I express

  12   no view on right now, in the period prior to August 22, 1994

  13   is a whole other matter.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  15            (In open court)

  16   BY MR. GARBUS:

  17   Q.  Any question that I ask you now, I want to direct, whether

  18   I state it or not, to only after January 1, 1995; is that

  19   clear?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  Now, at the time these various groups were meeting, was it

  22   all of the movie studio -- the representatives of all of the

  23   movie studios?

  24   A.  All of the MPAA members participated in the discussions on

  25   copy protection.




476



   1   Q.  And who else, if anyone?

   2   A.  We met separately and we met with the Consumer Electronics

   3   Manufacturing Association in the United States.

   4   Q.  And who was that?  Those are the people who make --

   5   A.  Those are the major consumer electronics companies, Sony,

   6   Phillips, Toshiba, Matsushita Electronics, Incorporated, I

   7   believe, the major players.

   8   Q.  Let me just see if I can, and correct me if I'm wrong:

   9   One group of people, the people who make the movies, the other

  10   group of people are the people, if the movies have been

  11   released, make the hardware to play the consumer products, is

  12   that right?

  13   A.  That's correct.  They were consumer electronics companies.

  14   Q.  And then what happened as to these discussions?  Was there

  15   ever a discussion of licensing of this product?

  16   A.  No, this was prior to CSS.  There was discussion of

  17   legislation.  That's what it basically was all about.  And

  18   like I said, when we came out with a draft legislative

  19   proposal, the computer industry rejected it and we started

  20   leading with the computer industry.

  21   Q.  And tell me just in short substance about those

  22   conversations.

  23   A.  Well, in short, the computer industry said, unlike in the

  24   Audio Home Recording Rights Act, they did not want their

  25   general purpose computers to be subject to legislation and




477



   1   regulation.  However --

   2   Q.  Why not?

   3   A.  Because that would mean they have to change the structure

   4   of all their computers.

   5   Q.  Why?

   6   A.  Because we were saying, computers -- we were saying that

   7   everyone had to put in a certain bit, anything that could

   8   record and they didn't want to be subject to that legislation.

   9            And Microsoft, for example, said it was religious

  10   with them not to be subject to that type of legislation, but

  11   all the computer companies felt strongly.

  12            So, we sat and met with them and listened to their

  13   proposal about a way that could be a good situation for

  14   everyone involved.  It was unprecedented that three major

  15   industries got together to talk about a way to be able to

  16   distribute to the consumer the highest quality of product,

  17   even in the computer environment, but yet to be protected.

  18   So, we sat down with the --

  19   Q.  Excuse me.  So, the three major industries are the

  20   recording industry, the motion picture industry, and the

  21   computer companies?

  22   A.  Well, when you say, "recording industry," the consumer

  23   electronic industry.  It's not the music industry.

  24            So, we sat down.  We had groups of engineers working

  25   and we had policy people talking about legislation and we




478



   1   had -- we set up a group called the Copy Protection Technical

   2   Working Group, which was open to the public.  And the meetings

   3   were announced, and what the computer industry said was, if

   4   you were to encrypt your product, if you were to scramble it,

   5   then we in the computer industry could decide whether or not

   6   we wanted our computers to have that feature on it.

   7            If we didn't, we'd just go ahead and make our

   8   computers, however, we want, and if we do want that feature on

   9   it, then since it's encrypted, we go and get a license and

  10   then we are subject to the rules within the license.

  11            And in addition, we talked about the third prong.  It

  12   was a three-pronged regime that we came up with in all these

  13   groups.  One was technology, whether it be encryption or water

  14   marking or digital transmission, but technology, the use of

  15   new technology that we in the motion picture industry had to

  16   embrace new technology as a way to protect our films and to

  17   use our films.  I mean, if you want to have digital films, we

  18   are using digital technology.

  19            Secondly, that with that technology comes

  20   responsibility and licensing.  So, if you want to show our

  21   movies, you need to make a deal with us that if you have the

  22   keys to unlock our house and look at our crown jewels, that

  23   when you leave, you're going to lock it up, O.K., so it can't

  24   be sent everywhere.  That was the second piece.

  25            Then the third piece was, well, if you have the keys




479



   1   to unlock our house, and you don't lock it up or you break the

   2   window and get inside, then we need legislation to protect

   3   someone who is stealing the keys and using it illegally.  So,

   4   it was a three-pronged regime that we came up in those

   5   multi-industry negotiations.  They took a long time.

   6   Q.  This is 1995, 1996?

   7   A.  This is 9996, at least.

   8   Q.  1996, at least?

   9            THE COURT:  "1996, at least" meaning when?

  10            THE WITNESS:  Meaning it wasn't prior to 1996.

  11            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  12   Q.  And go on.  Continue.

  13            THE COURT:  What's the question?

  14            THE WITNESS:  Yeah.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Pardon me?

  16            THE COURT:  What's the question?

  17   Q.  After you started to recognize the need for legislation,

  18   what did the movie industry do?  What did the consumer

  19   electronics industry do?

  20   A.  Well, our first focus was -- although legislation was

  21   always part of the three-pronged approach, our first focus was

  22   on the technology.

  23            The consumer electronics and computer industries

  24   wanted to bring this product to market.  They thought it was a

  25   good product.  We thought it was -- we at Warner Brothers




480



   1   thought it was a great product.  So, the first phase we went

   2   through it with was how are we going to protect the product

   3   and, therefore, we were looking at technologies to encrypt.

   4   Q.  And when you say -- and then what happened?

   5   A.  And then we adopted CSS.

   6   Q.  Were any consumers rights groups involved in any of these

   7   tri-industry discussions?

   8   A.  I know that the Home Recording Rights Coalition

   9   representatives were at all of these meetings.  So, I mean

  10   there were consumer advocate groups at the meetings; yes.

  11   Q.  And then what happened?  In other words, the technology

  12   moves apace, the attempts for legislation move apace, is that

  13   right?

  14   A.  We finalize the technology in mid-to-late '96 and I think

  15   simultaneously with finalizing the technology, we were working

  16   on the licensing agreements and I don't remember the exact

  17   timing.  I just know when Warner released its product at that

  18   point and we did not release until we had the ability to

  19   encrypt it.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Now, excuse me.  Can I hear the last

  21   answer, please?

  22            THE WITNESS:  We did not release our product until we

  23   had the ability to encrypt it.

  24   Q.  And when was that?

  25   A.  In the United States, it was March of 1997.




481



   1   Q.  Now, prior to that time, had a licensing scheme been

   2   worked out?

   3   A.  I can't give you exact specifics, but there were intense

   4   negotiations on the licensing scheme.

   5   Q.  And did you play a part in that?

   6   A.  I attended quite a bit of those discussions, many of those

   7   discussions.

   8   Q.  And are you familiar with licenses that are now used?

   9   A.  I was at one time.  I hadn't seen them in two to three

  10   years, I would guess.

  11   Q.  Let me show you Defendant's --

  12            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

  13            THE COURT:  You may.

  14   Q.  Defendant's Exhibit AJB.  Now, this is one of the

  15   documents that I'm not quite clear about.  Before I ask

  16   questions about it --

  17            THE COURT:  Is it the part in Japanese we are going

  18   to focus on?  Maybe Judge Shinoda can help us.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  It's the part that says "highly

  20   confidential."

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, what are we doing here?  What's

  22   the problem?  I see it's not Mr. Gold's documents, it's a

  23   non-party document.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, it's a document of DVD-CCA.

  25            THE COURT:  Right.




482



   1            MR. GARBUS:  But their interests are sufficiently

   2   similar.

   3            MR GOLD:  Well, this is a -- I see, as your Honor

   4   does, that it's the DVD-CCA has hacked this highly

   5   confidential attorney's eyes only and although we had -- we

   6   attended the deposition in this case, Mr. Hoy, who is with the

   7   DVD-CCA, I'm afraid I don't know why the DVD-CCA has marked it

   8   "confidential; attorney's eyes only."

   9            THE COURT:  Without discussing the terms of the

  10   document, which is a license agreement, Mr. Garbus, can you

  11   give me a clue without breaching the confidentiality on the

  12   public record where you are going with this?

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Just to show that the license exists,

  14   the terms of it.  It relates to the antitrust argument.

  15            THE COURT:  I don't know that you have made any

  16   antitrust arguments, sir.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  We have in our answer.

  18            THE COURT:  And it is what?  That the DVD, the DMCA

  19   violates the antitrust laws?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  No, that wasn't the argument.

  21            THE COURT:  What is the argument?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  The argument is that structure of this

  23   licensing agreement, namely, that the only people that can

  24   play like DVDs are people who are also signatories to the

  25   DVD-CCA license agreement.  That thereby excludes people like




483



   1   Linux and that that is anticompetitive and that's the same

   2   argument that was made successfully in the Sega case and in

   3   the Connectix case and whether or not the DMCA overrules that

   4   or not is an issue that this Court is going to decide.

   5            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, we have --

   6            MR. GARBUS:  That was indicated affirmatively in the

   7   answer.

   8            MR GOLD:  Every person can get a license from the DVD

   9   if they pay money and require it and if they sign the license

  10   agreement.  I know there are two Linux groups that have.

  11            THE COURT:  We heard all that.  Let's talk about

  12   this, what we are doing with this document.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I'm prepared just to offer the document

  14   into evidence without getting into any further -- other than

  15   if I can just address your attention to page A-1 and I'm

  16   prepared to do that at the bench.

  17            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, one has to lay a foundation

  18   for the document.

  19            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, are you really telling me you

  20   don't know if this is a real document at this point?

  21            MR GOLD:  I don't know if the witness can tell me if

  22   it's real document.

  23            THE COURT:  I don't know that either, but you are

  24   trying the case.  Presumably you know whether this is for real

  25   or not.




484



   1            MR. GARBUS:  It comes out of the file of the DVD-CCA.

   2   They have three.

   3            THE COURT:  I understand that, but we don't have a

   4   DVD-CCA witness here.

   5            MR GOLD:  I don't know as I stand here if this is a

   6   license that the motion picture companies have.

   7            THE COURT:  I would be tremendously surprised if the

   8   two of you, perhaps even involving a conference call with the

   9   lawyer for the DVD-CCA can't by the end of the day stipulate

  10   to as to whether this is authentic or not.

  11            Now, assuming it is authentic and it is what it

  12   purports to be, is there any objection to its being received

  13   in evidence, Mr. Gold?

  14            MR GOLD:  I think it's irrelevant to the case, your

  15   Honor.

  16            THE COURT:  Beyond that?

  17            MR. GOLD:  No, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  O.K.  I'm going to assume for present

  19   purposes that it is authentic.  I'm going to receive it

  20   subject to a motion to strike, if somebody can demonstrate to

  21   me that there's a real issue as to authenticity and the

  22   exhibit, just to be clear, is subject to the confidentiality

  23   order in this case.  It is going to be under seal.

  24            Now, that's so long as there's no application to open

  25   it.  And if there's an application to open it, obviously the




485



   1   DVD-CCA whose interests are those that are involved has to be

   2   given notice of the application.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I would just ask, as I mentioned before,

   4   page A-1.  I would just ask the question and I don't care

   5   whether the question is answered by this witness in open court

   6   or Mr. Gold, and I can stipulate to the answer, but I'll just

   7   ask the question which I don't think creates an issue, namely,

   8   how many separate licenses are issued by the CSS in order to

   9   allow -- in other words, to which part as we talked about

  10   before, movie studios, replicators and hardware manufacturers,

  11   how many different kinds of licenses are issued to control the

  12   entire process.

  13            If you know that, fine.  Don't look at the document.

  14   Do you know that?

  15   A.  I just looked at the document, but I certainly didn't know

  16   before I looked, I didn't remember.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  Perhaps Mr. Gold and I can discuss that.

  18            THE COURT:  I hope so.

  19   Q.  Now, before you mentioned the Home Recording Rights

  20   Coalition, that's funded by the consumer electronics industry?

  21   A.  I believe so.  I don't really know.

  22   Q.  Now, picking up on your narrative, if I can remember where

  23   it was, when does the DVD-CCA come into existence, if you

  24   know?

  25   A.  I wasn't participating in these meetings any longer when




486



   1   they came into existence, so I believe it's been in existence

   2   around a year.

   3   Q.  And let me, just getting away from the contracts, see if I

   4   can understand something.  If I go into Tower and buy a Warner

   5   Brother DVD, give me the name of a film that Warner Brothers

   6   makes so we can make it more specific.

   7            THE COURT:  It would have to have Tom Hanks and Meg

   8   Ryan.

   9   A.  "Matrix."  "You've Got Mail"; it's our movie.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  We'll use the judge's movie.

  11   Q.  "Sleepless In Seattle"?

  12   A.  Not our movie.

  13   Q.  Sorry.  "You've Got Mail."  If I go in, am I authorized by

  14   Warner Brothers from whom I buy it to look at that DVD?

  15   A.  Sure.

  16   Q.  Am I authorized by Warner Brothers to -- with respect to

  17   that DVD to somehow break it down so that I can look at it in

  18   my video box?

  19            THE COURT:  What's a video box?  What do you mean by

  20   that?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Video player.

  22            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the question.

  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  24   Q.  Am I authorized by Warner Brothers to make a copy of that

  25   DVD?




487



   1   A.  No.

   2   Q.  Am I authorized by Warner Brothers to take that DVD to an

   3   unauthorized player, one that does not have a contract with

   4   the DVD-CCA?

   5            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I cannot understand the

   6   relevance of this line.  He may be planning other lawsuits,

   7   but I don't understand the relevance to this one.

   8            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Garbus, it seems to me that

   9   what this is beginning to sound like is the start of a debate

  10   between you and the witness about what the Copyright Act

  11   permits the buyer of a copyrighted work to do with it.

  12            If that's what it is, that's a debate that you and

  13   Mr. Gold will have and I will decide.  It's a legal question.

  14   And it's not a matter for testimony.  If it's something else,

  15   I don't perceive what it might be.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  It's not a debate.  I just want to find

  17   out the facts as Warner Brothers understands it.

  18            THE COURT:  So, you want Warner Brothers'

  19   understanding of what the Copyright Act provides?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  No.  I want to know, she stands there on

  21   behalf of Warner Brothers.  And I want to know if I can

  22   whether as she -- in my contract, if you will, when I buy this

  23   from Tower, can I play this on any player, anywhere, anywhere

  24   in the world?  That's what I want to know.

  25            THE COURT:  The objection is sustained.




488



   1            The law is what it is.  And arguing with the witness

   2   about it, even in an entirely amicable way is not an

   3   appropriate part of this trial.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Well, it seems to me, and I'm not going

   5   to press it, and I say this amicably that it's a way of

   6   getting at least the facts in with respect to -- unless we can

   7   stipulate.

   8            THE COURT:  But the facts are perfectly obvious.

   9   There is no contract between Warner and the ultimate consumer.

  10   Warner sells the disks to whomever they sell them to.  Tower

  11   buys them from somebody.

  12            Tower then sells the disk to you or to whomever else

  13   and whatever rights you acquire beyond the naked ownership of

  14   the project, the hunk of plastic that constitutes the disk is

  15   a function of the Copyright Act and the DMCA and whatever

  16   other legislation is appropriate.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.

  18            THE COURT:  It's not a factual matter.

  19            (Pause)

  20   BY MR. GARBUS:

  21   Q.  What is the public position that Warner has taken with

  22   respect to whether or not one can make copies of DVDs for

  23   personal use?

  24            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I think that's been asked and

  25   answered already.




489



   1            THE COURT:  I don't remember it.  Overruled.

   2   A.  You can't make a copy.

   3   Q.  Now, if I buy a DVD in New York, can I play it -- a Warner

   4   DVD in New York, can I play it in France?

   5            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the question.

   6            THE COURT:  Why is it relevant, Mr. Garbus?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  The answer is "I can't."

   8            THE COURT:  The answer is you can't explain why?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  No, the answer is "I cannot."  In other

  10   words, I can buy a Warner disk on a licensed player for a

  11   licensed player.  If that licensed player is in Europe rather

  12   than in the United States, I can't play the disk, and that's

  13   the fact I was trying to get at.

  14            So, Warner Brothers is selling me a disk because of

  15   the licensing agreements that I can only use in certain areas.

  16            THE COURT:  Well, look, Mr. Gold --

  17            MR GOLD:  Again, your Honor, it's irrelevant to this

  18   case.

  19            THE COURT:  I have heard no explanation to the

  20   relevance and I also think, though I know what you are driving

  21   at, Mr. Garbus, that you haven't even stated it accurately.

  22            Certainly as I understand the facts, if you have a

  23   DVD player that you purchased here in the United States and a

  24   DVD that you purchased here in the United States and you took

  25   both to France and plugged the transformer into the wall to




490



   1   convert the current so that your DVD player didn't explode

   2   when you plugged it in, you could play it.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  That's correct.

   4            THE COURT:  I still haven't heard an explanation of

   5   why this is relevant.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  It seems to me, again, it goes to the

   7   antitrust issue.  But I'll move on.

   8            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

   9   Q.  I think that the DMCA has a section on authorization and

  10   what authorization means and the question then is when Warner

  11   "authorizes" the buyer of its DVDs, the question is what are

  12   the limitations in that authorization?

  13            You may say that's just a question of law.  I think

  14   we can all agree fundamentally as to the facts and let me just

  15   state what I understand the facts to be.  The facts as I

  16   understand it -- let me ask you a question.  This a better way

  17   to do it:

  18   Q.  Ms. King, the DVD-CCA consortium requires every maker of a

  19   DVD player that wants to play a DVD to sign a license, is that

  20   right?

  21   A.  That's correct.

  22            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, again, this is part of the very

  23   same irrelevant line of questioning.

  24            THE COURT:  Overruled, for the moment.

  25   Q.  And the CSS licensing technologist includes, does it not,




491



   1   restrictions on what features a DVD player can offer to the

   2   public?

   3   A.  To the best of my recollection, that's right.

   4   Q.  Is there anything so that without that CSS licensing

   5   technology, you couldn't have a DVD player that plays a DVD

   6   that can do things that the license would not otherwise

   7   restrict it to?

   8            MR. GOLD:  Objection as to form, your Honor.

   9            THE COURT:  I don't understand the question, Mr.

  10   Garbus.  Sustained as to form.

  11   Q.  So that if you had a DVD player that could play a DVD, it

  12   is the license that restricts what that DVD player can do, is

  13   that right?

  14            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, again, I object as to form and

  15   irrelevance.

  16            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form, at least.

  17   Q.  Let me put it this way:  If you previously said, and you

  18   correct me if I'm wrong, that the CSS license and technology

  19   includes restrictions on what features a DVD player can offer

  20   to the public, is that right?

  21   A.  Well, that's putting it a bit more broadly.  It has

  22   certain --

  23            MR. GARBUS:  We are getting into areas now that

  24   concern me because of the confidential nature of the document

  25   and I'm not sure --




492



   1            THE COURT:  Look, the document speaks for itself.

   2   Whatever it says, it says.

   3   Q.  So that --

   4            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I believe that Mr. Garbus

   5   needs to wait for the witness to finish speaking before he

   6   makes a speech about why he's asking the question.

   7            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Gold that's not helpful.  Thank

   8   you.  Next question?

   9   Q.  So, with Time Warner music, you can make personal copies

  10   of the music, but with respect to Time Warner movies, you

  11   cannot make personal copies, is that right?

  12   A.  Time Warner --

  13            MR GOLD:  If I may, I object to that question because

  14   I believe it calls for a legal conclusion.

  15            THE COURT:  Objection sustained.

  16            It's also argumentative.  There are two different

  17   statutes, two different technologies.

  18   Q.  Do you know -- is Warner Brothers as a result of the DeCSS

  19   making any plans to stop releasing DVDs?

  20   A.  Not that I know of.

  21   Q.  And with respect to the various security systems and

  22   encryption systems, do you have any idea when they can be put

  23   into place?

  24   A.  It's my understanding currently that with respect to

  25   digital transmission protocols that we are very close.  With




493



   1   respect to water marking, that although there has been some

   2   delay due to a conflict between two different proposals, that

   3   they're working on blending the proposals so we can have a

   4   water marking solution, and I'm not familiar with the status

   5   of any upgrade for CSS.  I know there were discussions, but I

   6   don't know the results.

   7   Q.  Now, you say with respect to digital transmission, they're

   8   very close.  Can you tell me what that means?

   9   A.  In the CSS license, if you took a CSS license, you weren't

  10   allowed to transmit the materials out of a digital port until

  11   there was proper copy protection.  There is a group called 5C;

  12   "5C" stands for five companies, the leader of which -- the

  13   leaders of which are IBM and Hitachi -- not IBM, excuse me --

  14   Intel and Hitachi.  I've got this confused -- let me go back.

  15            In 5C, Intel, Matsushita, Toshiba, Sony and one other

  16   company, I don't remember, have come up with a protocol and

  17   they have been negotiating with the motion picture industry on

  18   how this would work for some time and I believe they're

  19   getting very close.

  20            THE COURT:  Close to what?

  21            THE WITNESS:  To finalizing an agreement so that the

  22   digital ports can be opened up with a certain encryption

  23   protection so that materials can be transmitted from one

  24   digital media to another.

  25   Q.  And when you say, "very close," we talked about this month




494



   1   or next month?

   2   A.  Well, it's always hard to predict these things.  I know

   3   there was a meeting last week and they've been working on this

   4   for an extremely long time, probably a year.

   5            THE COURT:  This meeting is not at Camp David; is it?

   6            THE WITNESS:  It's equally as contentious, I think.

   7   I know that it's a drawn-out process.  My estimate would be

   8   within the next couple of months, it will be finalized.

   9            We have real time frames to do this in, because if

  10   this protocol is going to have significant meaning to this

  11   industry, we need to have it in things in set top boxes and I

  12   don't pretend to be an expert in this area, but I know the

  13   studios and the MPAA have been working with the FCC and with

  14   the cable industry to try to make an overall protocol where

  15   our content is protected.

  16            So, I know there are real time frames that are set by

  17   the Federal Government in this regard as well.

  18   Q.  So, the only thing -- the technology is there, is that

  19   right?

  20   A.  The technology, I believe, is there; yes.

  21   Q.  And the technology has been there for how long?

  22   A.  I don't know.

  23   Q.  A year?

  24   A.  They're constantly working on the technology and I

  25   wouldn't want to speculate.  I don't know.




495



   1   Q.  For the reason that it hasn't yet become operative is

   2   because the business negotiations surrounding that technology

   3   have not yet concluded, is that right?

   4   A.  That's right.  It's a very complicated negotiation.

   5   Q.  And what would be the effect of that digital technology

   6   with respect to the security for DVDs?

   7   A.  Well, it would protect our product when it's transmitted

   8   from one digital domain to another.

   9   Q.  And had there been an agreement between the parties on the

  10   economics, this could have been done a year ago, is that

  11   right?

  12            MR. GOLD:  I object to the question.

  13   A.  Excuse me.  It has nothing --

  14            MR. GOLD:  I object to the question, your Honor;

  15   calling for speculation.

  16            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  17   Q.  Do you have -- have you ever seen any documents concerning

  18   this digital technology and when it first became operative?

  19   A.  I don't remember seeing those documents.  I came into

  20   these negotiations, again -- I left the multi-industry

  21   negotiations.  They were turned over to Dean Marks a couple of

  22   years ago, who works for Time Warner.

  23            I started participating again in an effort to speed

  24   up the process around October or November of last year.  So, I

  25   have been there on an as-needed basis since then.




496



   1   Q.  So, as I understand it, and if I'm wrong, correct me

   2   because I'm less technical than you are, that this particular

   3   technology would stop the transmission, let's say, of a movie,

   4   a DVD movie over the Internet, is that right?

   5   A.  I don't want to characterize the technology.  I just don't

   6   know and I don't -- I don't want to speculate.

   7   Q.  Let me ask you a question:  Hasn't there been a technology

   8   that has been available for a year that stops the transmission

   9   of DeCSS deconstructed movies over the Internet?

  10   A.  I have no knowledge.

  11            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the question.

  12            THE COURT:  The witness doesn't know.

  13   Q.  Who would know at Warner Brothers?

  14            MR GOLD:  On top of that, your Honor, this is getting

  15   to the robustness and effective issue again and I think

  16   that --

  17            THE COURT:  It goes to the threat of irreparable

  18   injury, too.

  19            MR GOLD:  What's that, sir?

  20            THE COURT:  It's going to the threat of irreparable

  21   injury, too.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I'd like to go to the bench on this, if

  23   I may, so I'm not saying it before the public.

  24            THE COURT:  No.  Go ahead.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Pardon me?




497



   1            THE COURT:  Say what you have to say.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  It also shows that a year ago, they knew

   3   of the problem.  They could have stopped it, and that they

   4   couldn't work out their business arrangements with respect to

   5   it.

   6            THE COURT:  That may be your contention, but it

   7   certainly doesn't show that.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  That's what we are going to try and

   9   prove and that's what we tried to prove through discovery

  10   which we never finished.

  11            THE COURT:  I'm not rising to that fish on the

  12   surface either.

  13   Q.  Now, Ms. King, tell me who at Warner Brothers knows about

  14   this digital technology?

  15            MR GOLD:  Which digital technology?

  16   Q.  How about a Mr. Cookson, do you know that name?

  17   A.  Yes, I do.

  18   Q.  Has Mr. Cookson ever been deposed in this case, to your

  19   knowledge?

  20   A.  I don't believe he has.

  21   Q.  Who is Mr. Cookson?

  22   A.  He's an executive vice-president and chief technology

  23   officer for Warner Brothers.

  24   Q.  And where is he located?

  25   A.  In Burbank, California.




498



   1   Q.  And is he the person at Warner Brothers who would be most

   2   familiar with this digital transmission technology?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  How long -- and what is his background?

   5   A.  He's an engineer.

   6   Q.  How long has he been working on it?

   7            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, if I may object to this line of

   8   questioning about depositions and what they've been able to

   9   take.

  10            They never asked for the deposition of this

  11   gentleman, although they knew his name and title for a long

  12   time, they never asked.

  13            THE COURT:  O.K.

  14   Q.  Are there any documents, to your knowledge, at Warner

  15   Brothers that deal with the digital transmission technology?

  16            MR GOLD:  I object to the form of the question, your

  17   Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Garbus, what's the difference?

  19   One of the points you have spent a good deal of time trying to

  20   make is that CSS was only as good as whatever period of time

  21   it would take somebody to crack it.  Presumably that is true

  22   of this technology, just like the Japanese naval codes in the

  23   war, with all due respect to my colleague, just like our own

  24   codes that other people are reading.  Life is that.  Nothing

  25   is perfect.




499



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I can only deal with this case and in

   2   this case, I believe the evidence is clear that they could

   3   have stopped if they had wanted without changing -- I won't

   4   argue it because it's obvious -- and that goes to the question

   5   of harm and it goes to the other legal questions.

   6            THE COURT:  Look, if I understand you correctly, the

   7   net of your position is that people are free, notwithstanding

   8   an act of Congress, to circumvent technological measures

   9   because there's always another technological measure that

  10   could be used with which the particular mode of circumvention

  11   doesn't work ad infinitum.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  That's not my argument.

  13            THE COURT:  Well, I think it is.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  It's too intellectual for me.  I'm only

  15   dealing with this particular case.

  16            THE COURT:  Well, sir, it is this case.  It goes to

  17   the question of the relevance in this lawsuit of whether there

  18   were other protective means available to them.  It is, as I

  19   see the statute, no defense to a charge of circumventing a

  20   means of protection, No. 1, that there may be another means of

  21   protection available.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I think, and I don't know that this is

  23   the time for that debate, and I think I'd rather not get into

  24   it, but I think there is an appropriate response which we

  25   should make at an appropriate time, but I think for now,




500



   1   unless you preclude me, I would like to prove that a year ago

   2   they were -- the industry was perfectly capable of stopping

   3   any damage from this particular type of circumvention.

   4            And I'm not now dealing with whether or not the

   5   ultimate issue about whether this is an appropriate

   6   circumvention or inappropriate, because I think that you get

   7   into all of the balancing issues that are involved in the

   8   First Amendment and other issues.

   9            I don't think, and I think the Court disagrees with

  10   me, that you can take this and totally -- and I'm not

  11   suggesting the Court has done that -- not look at the other

  12   values.  In Sony v. Betamax and Sega v. Accolade, and the

  13   Connectix case, everybody recognizes that there is some degree

  14   of infringement.  And in Sony v. Betamax, the movies industry

  15   said, there would be a great deal of infringement.  And they

  16   were fundamentally correct, nonetheless the Court came to the

  17   conclusion that it did.

  18            Now, one can interpret --

  19            THE COURT:  Under a totally different statute.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.  So, one can suggest that the DMCA,

  21   and that is a legitimate argument which I disagree with, has

  22   rendered Betamax, Sega, Connectix not applicable to these

  23   technologies, that is an argument and that is an argument I

  24   think that we are prepared to deal with.

  25            But I think that what I would like to be able to do




501



   1   is to get into the whole question of proof about -- and we

   2   were not permitted, and I won't go back into discovery, but we

   3   have not done that.  We have not shown that the only reason

   4   that there is any possibility of any future economic harm,

   5   assuming DeCSS does everything that they say it does, they

   6   chose not to put into place technology that existed a year

   7   ago.

   8            You may find that irrelevant.  I think I'm entitled

   9   to get into it, getting --

  10            THE COURT:  You have gotten into it and I think what

  11   you have established through this witness is that she doesn't

  12   know.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Well, then we get into the other issues

  14   about -- and I don't want to put that on the table now, but it

  15   is an issue for me, where are the witnesses who know and how

  16   do we get that proof?

  17            That is an issue, I think, for another time and that

  18   goes back to some of the other issues we have been discussing.

  19   We have never had access to that information.  They can claim

  20   that we never sought it.  I don't think we have to go through

  21   that whole thing again either.

  22            (Continued on next page)

  23

  24

  25




502



   1            THE COURT:  Do you have another question for the

   2   witness?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I do.

   4            THE COURT:  Put it, please.

   5   BY MR. GARBUS:

   6   Q.  Now, prior to the DVD-CCA, were there other entities

   7   issuing licenses?

   8   A.  Matsushita issued licenses for a long time before the

   9   DVD-CCA, an interim license.

  10   Q.  Why was Matsushita issuing licenses?

  11   A.  Because they were the developer of CSS.

  12   Q.  They owned CSS.

  13   A.  Yes, along with Toshiba.

  14   Q.  Now, do you know when Matshushita first developed CSS?

  15   A.  No.

  16   Q.  Do you know, did they do it in collaboration with Toshiba

  17   or independently?

  18            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object on the basis of

  19   relevance.

  20            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  21   Q.  Was the DVD-CCA permitted --

  22            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object on relevance.

  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  May I make an offer of proof?

  25            THE COURT:  You can make the offer of proof in open




503



   1   court.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  That the DVD-CCA was created by the

   3   people who owned CSS to create a monopoly with respect to the

   4   movie companies and the hardware manufacturers with respect to

   5   the use of DVDs, that this entire monopoly was created so that

   6   you could not make copies as Sony Betamax said you could of

   7   things that you had purchased at the store by yourself for

   8   your personal use.

   9            THE COURT:  You think the witness is going to testify

  10   to that, right, Mr. Garbus?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  No, I don't think so.

  12            THE COURT:  An offer of proof, Mr. Garbus, is not

  13   supposed to be counsel's imagination of what counsel alleges.

  14   It is supposed to be what you think the witness would answer

  15   if permitted to answer.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  I understand.

  17            THE COURT:  So, we will do it this way.  I sustain

  18   the objection, and I will give you five minutes to make your

  19   offer of proof through the witness.  Let me know when you are

  20   done with the offer of proof.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I believe that this witness will be

  22   called upon to testify --

  23            THE COURT:  Make it through the witness.  Ask her.

  24   We will not have speculation about what she would say.  We

  25   will get her answers, I'll rule it out, and if after hearing




504



   1   your answers I think it's relevant, I will reverse my ruling.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I'm not sure where we are.

   3            THE COURT:  Go ahead and ask your question.  You have

   4   five minutes to develop this point through this witness, the

   5   point on which I've sustained the objection.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Can I hear my question again.

   7            (Record read)

   8            THE COURT:  Go ahead and answer, Ms. King.

   9   A.  I don't really know.  I know when Matsushita brought CSS

  10   to the multi-industry negotiations, that they said it had been

  11   developed by them in collaboration with Toshiba.  That's all I

  12   know.

  13   Q.  When you say the multi-industry negotiations?

  14   A.  They brought it to the Copy Protection Technical Working

  15   Group which was open to all parties who wanted to come.

  16   Q.  And these were the consumer electronics groups and the

  17   motion picture industry?

  18   A.  And the computer industry and anyone else who wanted to

  19   attend, like the Home Recording Rights Coalition.  I mean lots

  20   of parties were there.

  21   Q.  And as a result of that, the DVD-CCA or its predecessor

  22   was created.

  23   A.  Yes.

  24   Q.  And the purpose of that was to have that organization

  25   issue the licenses for anybody who would make movies that




505



   1   would use the encryption system, work as replicators, who

   2   would press out the DVD itself, or have the hardware that

   3   would show the DVD.  Is that right?

   4   A.  If you want to get the keys to decrypt our encrypted

   5   movies, you had to get a license to get those keys and play by

   6   the rules.  It's as simple as that.

   7   Q.  Tell me what the rules are.

   8            THE COURT:  They are in the license, Mr. Garbus.  We

   9   have been through that.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Okay.

  11   Q.  Are there any rules outside of the license?

  12   A.  Not that I know of.  I mean, you know, it's a complicated

  13   process.  In order to play a DVD you have to comply with the

  14   DVD specifications so that the machines are compatible with

  15   the disks.  I mean there are lots of things you can and can't

  16   do.  It's not simple but, you know, products are manufactured

  17   all the time that have to agree with certain standards and

  18   certain quality standards, as well as if you want to play

  19   movies you adhere to that standard.

  20   Q.  Isn't it also a fact that the technology has been

  21   developed so that merely by adding a small addition to the

  22   hardware you can play DVD movies with a different security

  23   system?

  24   A.  I have never heard of that.

  25   Q.  Have you ever heard of any attempts to develop that,




506



   1   namely keeping the hardware out there but just through some

   2   small addition making it safe to play DVD movies?

   3   A.  I'm not sure I understand your question.

   4   Q.  You testified before that to pull back the DVD movies or

   5   to go and change the encryption system would render useless

   6   all the hardware that's out there, is that right?

   7            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, is this yet not going back to

   8   robustness?  It sounds that way.

   9            THE COURT:  I don't think that's what it is actually.

  10   A.  Yes, if you put a new encryption system onto our disks and

  11   it wasn't backwardly compatible, then you would have the

  12   problem of the installed base of consumer electronics and

  13   computer products that are out there, and that's a major

  14   problem.

  15   Q.  And has there been research at Warner Brothers and the

  16   other major studios that had to deal with that problem?

  17   A.  I know that the motion picture studios went to Matsushita

  18   immediately after we heard about DeCSS and said would you work

  19   on something to help us upgrade this that would not obsolete

  20   the players.  I know they went ahead and tried to do that.  I

  21   don't know the results of those discussions at this time.  I

  22   know that it was difficult.  It wasn't an easy thing to do

  23   without obsoleting the players that were already out there.

  24   Q.  Isn't it a fact -- and you tell me if I'm wrong -- that

  25   Matsushita and Toshiba came back to the movie companies with a




507



   1   solution to that problem back in May?

   2            THE COURT:  May of what year?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  This year.

   4            THE COURT:  2000?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

   6   A.  I don't remember.  I mean they may have.  I'm not saying

   7   they didn't.  I know they were asked to, so it's very likely

   8   they could have, but I don't know what that solution is, and I

   9   wasn't attending all of those meetings.

  10   Q.  Who at Warner Brothers would know that solution?

  11   A.  I'm not sure anyone would know the solution, but the

  12   persons that attend those meetings on a regular basis are

  13   Chris Cookson from -- I mean we put our most senior technology

  14   experts on these committees.  That's how important Warner

  15   thinks this is.  Chris Cookson and Dean Marks, who is a senior

  16   intellectual property counsel for Time Warner, these are

  17   senior people.  Warner takes this quite seriously.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Now, I don't think we have to get into

  19   here again questions of discovery, documents or depositions of

  20   these witnesses.  I presume we can do that at some time before

  21   the bench rather than get into that hassle now.

  22            THE COURT:  Okay.  Are at the end of your offer of

  23   proof?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me, no.

  25   Q.  Who owns CSS at the moment?




508



   1   A.  I don't know if it's Matsushita or DVD-CCA.  I just don't

   2   know.  But it's either a combination of Matsushita and Toshiba

   3   or they have transferred it to the DVD-CCA, and I don't know

   4   the answer to that question.

   5   Q.  Can you tell me why it was transferred?

   6   A.  No.

   7   Q.  Do you know if the movie industry paid any price for that

   8   transfer?

   9            MR. GOLD:  I object to the form of that question.

  10            THE COURT:  There is nothing wrong with the form.

  11   Overruled.

  12   A.  No, I don't know.

  13   Q.  Do you know if any of the consumer electronics hardware

  14   manufacturers like Panasonic or Pioneer paid for the price of

  15   that transfer?

  16            THE COURT:  First of all, the witness said she didn't

  17   know whether there was a transfer, so how could she answer

  18   what somebody paid or didn't pay for the transfer that she

  19   didn't know whether it occurred?

  20   Q.  Who would know that at Warner Brothers?

  21   A.  I don't know that anybody would know that at Warner

  22   Brothers.  I think you would have to ask Matsushita.

  23   Q.  Now, DVD-CCA at the present time is a conglomeration of

  24   companies, is that right?

  25   A.  There is a board that consists of some companies, yes.




509



   1   Q.  Which companies are they?

   2   A.  I know that Time Warner is now sitting on that board along

   3   with 20th Century Fox.  That's the representatives from the

   4   motion picture industry.  I believe it's Matsushita and

   5   Toshiba from the consumer electronics industry, and I believe

   6   it's Intel and Compaq from the computer industry, but I'm not

   7   sure about the IT companies.

   8   Q.  So let me just see if I can understand.  So, some of the

   9   people that own CSS are the hardware manufacturers and some of

  10   them are representatives of the movie studios.

  11            THE COURT:  She just got finished -- objection is

  12   sustained.  You keep going over and over and over, and the

  13   answer that she has given over and over and over is that she

  14   didn't know.

  15   Q.  Who would know that at Warner Brothers?

  16   A.  I just answered that question.  I don't know that anyone

  17   would know that at Warner Brothers.

  18   Q.  Does any of the income from the licensing to let's say a

  19   hardware player go back to Warner Brothers?

  20   A.  No.

  21   Q.  Where does the income go?

  22   A.  Let me just describe the income.  The income is a fee for

  23   the administration of the licensing.  Toshiba and Matsushita

  24   were kind enough to donate whatever intellectual property is

  25   contained in CSS.




510



   1   Q.  Kind enough to donate?

   2   A.  Yes, kind enough, because they could have asked for money

   3   on a continuing royalty basis, but they didn't, so this is

   4   basically a not-for-profit organization that runs the

   5   licensing.

   6            Now, they didn't do it out of the kindness of their

   7   hearts.  They wanted to sell consumer electronics products, so

   8   they wanted the motion picture studios to be comfortable

   9   having an encryption scheme, but they didn't charge for the

  10   intellectual property like other patent holders, etc. might

  11   charge.  So, it's just an administration fee that they charge.

  12   Q.  Is this a patent or a copyright on CSS?

  13   A.  I don't know.  Whatever intellectual property is in CSS,

  14   there is not a running royalty on it.

  15   Q.  So, as I understand it -- and tell me if I'm wrong -- and,

  16   Judge, if I'm misstating it -- Warner Brothers then, which

  17   make the movies -- and I don't know, did you say that Warner

  18   Brothers sit on the board of DVD-CCA?

  19   A.  Yes, Time Warner, I believe.

  20   Q.  So, Warner Brothers --

  21   A.  Well, maybe -- one or the other.

  22   Q.  -- Warner Brothers or one of the Time Warner companies --

  23   A.  Yes.

  24   Q.  -- sits on DVD-CCA?

  25   A.  Yes, this is very recent.




511



   1   Q.  And it is DVD-CCA that decides who gets the licenses let's

   2   say to the hardware, is that right?

   3   A.  As long as you provide a robust implementation, anyone can

   4   take a license to make software or hardware for decrypting

   5   CSS.

   6   Q.  And you pay the money?

   7   A.  Any party --

   8   Q.  And you pay the money?

   9   A.  That's correct, but the money is just an administration

  10   fee to provide for this licensing so everyone can get it.  I

  11   mean we have Chinese hardware companies and Chinese software

  12   companies, and we have companies from all over the world that

  13   have applied and received licenses from DVD-CCA.

  14   Q.  Has anybody ever been turned down?

  15   A.  I don't know that anyone has ever been turned down.

  16   Q.  Has anybody at Linux ever been turned down?

  17   A.  I don't know.

  18   Q.  Has anybody ever made an application but wanted to get

  19   permission or the license without paying the requested fee?

  20   A.  I don't know.

  21   Q.  Have there been any attempts, to your knowledge -- and if

  22   you know nothing about it, I don't want to pursue this line of

  23   inquiry -- any attempts to your knowledge to negotiate those

  24   fees, or is it an absolute set fee, the same one in every

  25   contract?




512



   1   A.  I don't know.

   2            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I hope that it's useful.  They

   3   took the deposition of Mr. Hoy, who runs DVD-CCA, for a day

   4   and a half, and they have all of this information.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  And the information -- well, I will

   6   withdraw that.

   7   Q.  Have there been any lawsuits that you know of brought by

   8   the motion picture studios, the MPA or anyone concerning Power

   9   Rippers?

  10            THE COURT:  Is this still part of your offer of proof

  11   or are we now done with that?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I lost track.

  13            THE COURT:  We will deem it over.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Unless I can re-think it and remember

  15   it.

  16   Q.  Do you know what rippers do, Power Rippers?

  17   A.  Just in general, just in general terms, that they by brute

  18   force try to rip up an encrypted product.

  19   Q.  After you sat in court for several days and you heard Mr.

  20   Shamos, Mr. Schumann, do you know whether or not the MPA

  21   brought any other lawsuits, or Warner brought any other

  22   lawsuits concerning any of these other utilities?

  23   A.  Not that I'm aware of.

  24   Q.  And to your knowledge, do any of those other utilities

  25   have any relationship to Linux?




513



   1            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, this seems to be some defense

   2   I've never heard about, selective enforcement.

   3            THE COURT:  What's the objection?

   4            MR. GOLD:  Relevance.

   5            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   6   Q.  Have you had any conversations with anyone at Warner

   7   Brothers concerning the Linux system?

   8   A.  No.

   9   Q.  Do you know anything about the Linux system?

  10   A.  No, just that it's an open architecture system.

  11   Q.  Have you ever heard anything about the LiViD group before

  12   you came today?

  13   A.  Before I came to court this week?

  14   Q.  Yes.

  15   A.  No.

  16   Q.  Would you happen to know whether the MPAA since let's say

  17   January 1 has been keeping copies of the LiViD logs?

  18   A.  I have no idea.

  19   Q.  Have you never seen them?

  20   A.  No.

  21   Q.  And do you have any knowledge as you sit here today as to

  22   the growth of Linux in the market?

  23   A.  No.

  24            THE COURT:  How much more do you have for this

  25   witness, Mr. Garbus?




514



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I think I'm about a minute away or less.

   2            THE COURT:  Okay.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.

   4            (Pause)

   5   Q.  Now, you said that you were a member of the Copyright

   6   Protection Technical Working Group, is that right?

   7   A.  I attended quite a few of their meetings at the beginning.

   8   There was no membership.

   9            THE COURT:  Was the name Copyright Protection or Copy

  10   Protection?

  11            THE WITNESS:  Copy Protection.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Technical Working Group.

  13   Q.  I show you document AV1.

  14            MR. SIMS:  AUI?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  It looks like AV1.

  16   Q.  Do you remember discussions at the Copy Protection

  17   Technical Working Group about the weakness of the CSS system?

  18   A.  I remember they discussed the strength of copy protection

  19   systems at the CPTWG, yes.  I don't remember a discussion

  20   about weakness.  I remember a discussion about is it strong,

  21   is it weak, you know.  They were analyzing the encryption.

  22   Q.  Look at the second page of that document, which is dated

  23   January 31, 1997.  Were you ever told that a college student

  24   had broken CSS back in January of 1997?

  25   A.  I don't remember being told that, no.




515



   1   Q.  Did you ever see that document before?

   2   A.  No.

   3   Q.  Did you attend the Copy Protection Technical Working Group

   4   meeting, if you can remember, back in January 31?

   5   A.  I don't remember.

   6   Q.  Do you remember any discussions in any of the meetings

   7   about the CSS having been broken in 1997?

   8   A.  No.

   9   Q.  As you look at the document, does that refresh your

  10   recollection, the third paragraph --

  11   A.  No.

  12   Q.  -- about any conversations that were had at the Copy

  13   Protection Technical Working Group meeting about the breaking

  14   of CSS?

  15            MR. GOLD:  Which paragraph are you referring the

  16   witness to?

  17            THE WITNESS:  I'm looking at paragraph 3.  I have

  18   never seen this before, but it seems like they are talking

  19   about the encryption.

  20            THE COURT:  No, the question to you is only whether

  21   looking at this refreshes your recollection as to whether you

  22   were involved or had any knowledge of conversations in the

  23   Copy Protection Technical Working Group about the breaking of

  24   CSS in 1997.

  25            THE WITNESS:  I don't remember any such knowledge.  I




516



   1   don't remember that.

   2   Q.  Look at the fourth page of that document headed

   3   "California Student Unscrambles Internet Code," when is the

   4   first time that you learned --

   5            MR. GOLD:  I don't see this on what is marked on page

   6   4 here, but you may be on another page.

   7            THE COURT:  On the fifth page.

   8            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

   9            THE WITNESS:  Okay.

  10            THE COURT:  The page 4 with the number 5 on it.

  11   A.  This is not a hack of CSS.

  12            THE COURT:  You have told us earlier, did you not,

  13   several times that CSS encrypted disks were first put into the

  14   marketplace by Warner in March of '97, right?

  15            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

  16            THE COURT:  And is that accurate?

  17            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

  18            THE COURT:  And this memorandum is dated two months

  19   before the product was in the market, is that right?

  20            THE WITNESS:  That's right.

  21            THE COURT:  Let's move on.

  22   Q.  When for the first time did you learn that CSS was broken?

  23   A.  To the best of my recollection I learned about it in

  24   October of '99.

  25   Q.  Now, the Copyright Protection Technical Working Group was




517



   1   set up when?

   2   A.  I don't remember the exact dates.  '96 probably.

   3   Q.  And it was set up to deal with among other things DVD and

   4   DVD security.

   5   A.  Yes.

   6   Q.  And do you know when CSS or the 40 bit encryption code

   7   that later came to be put on DVDs was first released or made

   8   public?

   9   A.  Well, I don't think it has ever been made public.  That's

  10   why we have the licensing entity.  So, when they were finished

  11   and ready to license it, I don't know.  I do know it was

  12   before we released the product.

  13   Q.  So how many months, if you can tell me, if you know,

  14   before the product was released was information about the

  15   encryption code released?

  16            THE COURT:  If it was.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  If it was.

  18   A.  I don't think information about the -- I mean they made an

  19   announcement that they were licensing, I guess.  I really

  20   don't know.  I just know that Matsushita started licensing the

  21   product, that our replicator got a license and that we went

  22   ahead fairly quickly into the marketplace, because we had

  23   wanted to launch even sooner, so we were happy we had the

  24   encryption and ready to go.

  25   Q.  Do you know whether or not anybody at Warner Brothers or




518



   1   MPAA knew that even before they had released their product the

   2   code had been broken?

   3   A.  I don't believe --

   4            MR. GOLD:  I object to the question, your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  Objection sustained.  It assumes facts as

   6   to which there is no evidence.  There is nothing before me to

   7   suggest that it was cracked at that point.

   8   Q.  Look at this document now, Exhibit AVI.  Is that the form

   9   of documents, executive summaries that are issued by the Copy

  10   Protection Technical Working Group meeting?

  11   A.  They don't issue summaries.

  12   Q.  You have never seen anything like this before?

  13   A.  No.  This looks to me not to -- well, I don't know where

  14   it came from.

  15   Q.  What if I tell you it came from the DVD-CCA files.

  16   A.  Well it may have come from the DVD-CCA files but the Copy

  17   Protection Technical Working Group didn't produce documents

  18   like the one attached to this.

  19            THE COURT:  I thought the document from the DVD-CCA

  20   all were stamped DVD-CCA.  Is that not correct?

  21            MR. SIMS:  This came from Sony, your Honor.

  22            THE WITNESS:  That makes sense.

  23            THE COURT:  Okay.  Let me make this simple, Mr.

  24   Garbus.  You are assuming, I take it based on your questions,

  25   that the reference in this document to a 40 bit common key




519



   1   encryption system is CSS.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

   3            THE COURT:  Whether that is true or not is by no

   4   means clear, and the circumstances suggest -- though don't

   5   prove -- otherwise.

   6            Now, I imagine that there might be some relevant

   7   proof on whether they are the same, and even if they are not

   8   the same what the relevance of the cracking of a 40 bit key

   9   would be to the security of CSS, but I don't think a lawyer

  10   who does business affairs for a movie studio is a likely

  11   candidate to be able to give that kind of testimony.

  12   Q.  Can you tell me who at the MPAA might be able to give me

  13   that testimony?

  14   A.  I don't know --

  15            MR. GOLD:  I object to the question.  I'm not sure

  16   what testimony.

  17            THE COURT:  Yes, neither am I.  Sustained.

  18   Q.  Can you tell me whether or not there is anyone at Warner

  19   Brothers who has any information about the significance of the

  20   January break of a 40 bit encryption code to DVD and CSS?

  21            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the relevance of

  22   that question.

  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  24            Look, Mr. Garbus, you have access to whatever experts

  25   you want in the area of encryption, and if you have some




520



   1   evidence to call on this, call it.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  Let me tell you what I don't have.  I

   3   don't have the documents.

   4            THE COURT:  You don't know if there are documents.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  That's true, and I never had the

   6   chance --

   7            THE COURT:  And, furthermore, I don't know that you

   8   don't have whatever documents that there are.

   9            We have already I believe once this morning had an

  10   incident -- or yesterday -- in which you claimed that you

  11   didn't have the documents, and it was proved you did.  I

  12   believe it had to do with the drafts of the documents that I

  13   believe Mr. Schumann was questioned about yesterday, or maybe

  14   this witness.  And after the whole Sturm und Drang that you

  15   didn't have the documents, it turned out they had been

  16   produced to you.

  17            Now, I am not faulting you.  I know trial lawyers are

  18   busy people and there are lots of documents, but I just can't

  19   accept as a given these assertions like that.

  20   Q.  Let me show you a document from Warner Home Video

  21   addressed to you.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

  23            THE COURT:  Yes.

  24   Q.  Document SF, have you ever seen that document before?

  25   It's from you.




521



   1   A.  Yes.

   2   Q.  Addressing your attention now to the ninth page, which is

   3   designated "WB01462."  And the fist sentence under 2.2.2.  Do

   4   you see that sentence?

   5   A.  Yes.

   6   Q.  Who is Merdan?

   7   A.  I believe Merdan was an outside technology consulting firm

   8   that some of the motion picture companies, not including mine,

   9   had do an analysis of CSS, retained to do an analysis of CSS.

  10   Q.  Now, in addition to Merdan, was Macrovision also at some

  11   time asked to do an analysis of DeCSS?

  12   A.  I don't remember that.

  13   Q.  Do you know who Macrovision is?

  14   A.  Yes, I do.

  15   Q.  Who are they?

  16   A.  They make analog protection, analog copy protection, and

  17   they participated a lot in the Copy Protection Technical

  18   Working Group.

  19   Q.  And is Macrovision utilized on DVDs?

  20   A.  Yes, it is.

  21   Q.  How?

  22   A.  It's used to protect analog content through two systems,

  23   one called Automatic Gain Control, AGC, and something called

  24   color burst, I believe.

  25   Q.  Have you ever seen a Macrovision report dated November 15




522



   1   saying that the encryption system is weak, useless and,

   2   however, will not be of any use to hackers in making illegal

   3   copies?

   4            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, is that a quote from the

   5   article?

   6            THE COURT:  I don't know what it is.

   7            MR. GOLD:  I object to the form of the question.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.

   9   Q.  Looking at 2.2.2, it says the content scrambling scheme is

  10   relatively unsophisticated.  And this was furnished to Warner

  11   Home Video back in April 30, 1997, and it goes from you to

  12   Mr. Cookson.

  13            Did you and Mr. Cookson have any discussion about

  14   that sentence?

  15   A.  I can't recall whether we discussed this particular

  16   sentence.

  17   Q.  Did you have any discussion with him about the weakness of

  18   CSS?

  19            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, clearly this goes to

  20   effectiveness, and I think that you blocked that area of

  21   inquiry, that you ruled on that area of inquiry yesterday.

  22            THE COURT:  What about that, Mr. Garbus?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  If you want, I will get away from it.  I

  24   think the issue --

  25            THE COURT:  That's not the point, Mr. Garbus.  The




523



   1   point is to respond to the objection.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I think the objection is incorrect.  I

   3   think it's relevant whether or not the movie studios knew back

   4   in April of 1997 that DeCSS was unsophisticated and could be

   5   easily broken.

   6            THE COURT:  It's relevant for what purpose?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Pardon me, I said DeCSS.  I think it's

   8   relevant in this case to show that they knew that this CSS

   9   could not control access to the product that they had.

  10            THE COURT:  Objection sustained.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  It also goes to the question I think of

  12   harm, namely if we show that they knew in 1997 that this

  13   encryption system was to be what I understand it, then if they

  14   suffered harm knowing that, then I think that's relevant to

  15   the question of the harm that they suffered.

  16            THE COURT:  So, in other words, if somebody put a

  17   crummy lock on their door and a burglar goes through it, there

  18   is no crime.  Is that your point?

  19            MR. GARBUS:  That's not what I'm saying.

  20            THE COURT:  Okay.  Objection sustained.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Not what I'm saying.  A burglar is not

  22   dealing with the DMCA or copyright law.

  23            THE COURT:  No, the burglar is dealing with a penal

  24   law that says in substance you can't circumvent controls that

  25   limit access to your apartment, Mr. Garbus.




524



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Shall I then stop asking questions?

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I'm ruling on them one at a

   3   time.

   4   Q.  Directing your attention to the conclusions, let me read

   5   the conclusions to you.

   6            THE COURT:  She can read them herself.

   7   Q.  Read the conclusions under 4 and then afterwards the

   8   recommendations.

   9            Did you have any discussion with Mr. Cookson about

  10   those conclusions or recommendations?

  11   A.  I had a discussion --

  12            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  13            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  14   Q.  Do you know if any changes were ever made in the CSS

  15   system after you received these recommendations and

  16   conclusions from Merdan?

  17            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I think we are on the same

  18   subject.

  19            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  20   Q.  I show you Defendants' Exhibit BX.

  21            THE COURT:  How much longer do you expect to be with

  22   the witness?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I think a little while.  I think that it

  24   may well be that -- well, I think a little while.

  25            THE COURT:  Can you define "a little while," Mr.




525



   1   Garbus?  At five to 12 you told me a minute or two.  It's now

   2   almost 12:30.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I think beyond lunch.

   4            Your Honor, I move into evidence the Warner Home

   5   Video document dated April 30, 1997.

   6            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to that on the

   7   grounds of --

   8            THE COURT:  Which exhibit, Mr. Garbus?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  SF.

  10            THE COURT:  Do you include within your offer the

  11   attachments?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  14            MR. GOLD:  I object on relevance grounds and on

  15   hearsay grounds.

  16            THE COURT:  Objection sustained as to both.

  17            The hearsay ruling applies to pages WB01637 through

  18   01644, and absent a showing that Ms. Zwilling of page 01636 is

  19   a Warner employee, it extends to that as well.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, you are ahead of me as

  21   usual.  I don't see -- oh, I see.  Excuse me.

  22   Q.  I show you --

  23            MR. SIMS:  I'm sorry.  We don't have the document.

  24   DX?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  BX.




526



   1            THE COURT:  B as in boy.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

   3            THE COURT:  Yes.

   4   Q.  Does the one you have, Ms. King, have my scribblings on

   5   it?

   6            THE COURT:  No, that's the one you gave me.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Let me give you a clean copy.

   8   Q.  Do you recall, Ms. King, that this document was shown to

   9   you at your deposition and that it was a memo to you?  Do you

  10   see your name on the third line of the document?

  11   A.  Yes, but I don't remember this from the deposition.  I

  12   thought it was a different article.

  13   Q.  It was marked at your deposition as K8 for identification.

  14   Do you remember seeing it?  Perhaps Mr. Gold and I can

  15   stipulate.

  16            THE COURT:  I don't see what the relevance of that

  17   particular point is.  Why don't you just ask your next

  18   question.

  19            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, this says it was marked on

  20   July 10, and I don't think there was a deposition on July 10.

  21            THE COURT:  I don't care.  I don't care.  I assume

  22   Mr. Garbus has questions to ask her about the document other

  23   than who scribbled what on it in early July.

  24   Q.  Did you know that the people who were creating Linux --

  25   pardon me -- the people who were creating DeCSS were Linux




527



   1   programmers?

   2            MR. GOLD:  Can I have that question read back?

   3            (Record read)

   4            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object.  There is no

   5   foundation for that.

   6            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.  Do you want to

   7   rephrase it, counsel?

   8   Q.  Were you ever told or did you ever see a document that

   9   said that Linux programmers were working on DeCSS in order to

  10   create the DeCSS so that they could use DVDs on their

  11   machines?

  12            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object on the grounds of

  13   relevance.

  14            THE COURT:  The question of whether the witness was

  15   told that by anyone I think is not relevant unless it was

  16   somebody at Time Warner.

  17   Q.  Let me ask you if you were asked and answered the

  18   following question at your deposition at page 228.

  19            THE COURT:  Just read it, please, Mr. Garbus.

  20   Q.  It's line 8.

  21         "Q.  Before you spend a long time reading it, let me

  22   just ask you, have you seen this before?

  23         "A.  Yes, I believe I have."

  24            Does that refresh your recollection as to whether or

  25   not --




528



   1   A.  I would have to look at the deposition, because I just

   2   don't remember this particular article.

   3   Q.  Well, I'm reading to you.

   4   A.  From the deposition, I understand that.  But is that what

   5   I was reading, this article?

   6   Q.  Yes.

   7   A.  Okay.

   8   Q.  Now, where did you get this article from?

   9   A.  Well, obviously -- I got it --

  10            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, is there anything in the

  11   record about this witness getting this article?  I don't think

  12   so.

  13            THE COURT:  Well, it's addressed to her among others.

  14            THE WITNESS:  But I don't know that I got it.  I just

  15   don't know if they showed this to me at deposition.  Lewis

  16   Osterover showed this to me.

  17   Q.  Who is see?

  18   A.  He is our senior president of new media at Warner Home

  19   Video.

  20   Q.  Did you and Mr. Ostrover have any conversation about this

  21   article?

  22   A.  No.

  23   Q.  Is there any comment on the top of this document from

  24   Mr. Ostrover to you about the article?

  25   A.  There is a comment to all of us from him.




529



   1   Q.  And what does that say?

   2   A.  "This is a relatively rational take.  See particularly the

   3   last four paragraphs."

   4   Q.  Do you recall looking at the last four paragraphs?

   5   A.  I read a lot of articles when CSS was first hacked, so I

   6   probably read this as well.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I can belabor the witness,

   8   but rather than do that, and to save time, this is an adoption

   9   by a Warner Brothers employee of his interpretation of the

  10   material of the article.  I move it into evidence.

  11            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object on the grounds of

  12   hearsay.  That something is rational doesn't make it true or

  13   false.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I offer it for what it's worth, for what

  15   it says and for his interpretation.

  16            MR. GOLD:  Hearsay, your Honor.

  17            THE COURT:  Given the limited nature of Mr. Gold's

  18   objection, I am going to receive the entire document.  The

  19   portion that says "Here is a relatively rational take, see

  20   particularly the last four paragraphs," is received without

  21   restriction.  The portion that consists of a retyping or a

  22   copy of what appears to have been a newspaper or other media

  23   report is received for the fact that it was said and for

  24   whatever inference ought to be drawn from this statement,

  25   particularly the last four paragraphs are a rational take.  In




530



   1   other words, the media report is not received for its truth

   2   but it is received to shed light on what Mr. Ostrover meant.

   3            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I also would like to object to

   4   it on the grounds that it relates to the robustness.

   5            THE COURT:  What about that, Mr. Garbus?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I'm sorry.

   7            THE COURT:  He is now objecting on grounds of

   8   relevance.  Do you have anything new to say on that?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Sure.  The sentences, I would have to

  10   read the sentences aloud to show why I think it's relevant.

  11   It would be the first sentence.  It talks about -- the article

  12   talks about who made DeCSS, which group made it.  It talks

  13   about why it took so long to DeCSS, because people have known

  14   about for so long.  It talks about the potential ramifications

  15   of the DVD industry and it says the impact probably -- I don't

  16   want to read it.  I think it's obvious.

  17            THE COURT:  I am going to receive it on the limited

  18   basis I indicated.  To the extent it goes to the robustness

  19   issue, you know my view.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  21            (Defendants' Exhibit BX received in evidence)

  22            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

  23            THE COURT:  Yes.

  24   Q.  I show you Defendants' Exhibit AUA.  I don't know if it's

  25   defendants.




531



   1            THE COURT:  What's the question?

   2   Q.  Have you ever seen this document before?

   3   A.  No, to the best of my knowledge, no.

   4   Q.  Do you recall meetings within Warner Brothers saying that

   5   a 40 bit encryption system is not the best we can do at this

   6   time?

   7   A.  No, I remember meetings where I heard from the computer

   8   industry and the consumer electronics industry that 40 bit

   9   encryption was the only one allowed to be exported under the

  10   U.S. export laws.

  11   Q.  Did anybody tell you that you could not apply for a

  12   license to get permission for a 56, a 58, a 65 encryption key?

  13   A.  I don't remember.

  14            MR. GOLD:  I object to this line on the grounds of

  15   relevance, which it is still in robustness and effectiveness.

  16            THE COURT:  Is that right, Mr. Garbus?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think so.  It seems to me what

  18   this shows is that -- and it happens to be the law, and I am

  19   prepared to go up there to talk about it -- do you want me to

  20   continue?

  21            THE COURT:  Yes, Mr. Garbus, continue.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Oh, excuse me.

  23   Q.  Now, you are a lawyer, Ms. King.  Isn't it a fact --

  24            THE COURT:  No, I wanted you to continue on the

  25   objection.  Mr. Gold objected.  He said it goes to the




532



   1   robustness issue.  I asked you what your response was, and I

   2   don't know what your response is.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  It goes to the fact that they knew in

   4   '97 that the 40 bit encryption system was weak.  They knew

   5   that.  They could have gone to the government to get a

   6   license, easily obtainable, so that they could have built a

   7   56, 58 encryption system.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   9   Q.  Now, tell me when you had this conversation about a 40 bit

  10   encryption being as large as you could have before you went

  11   and sought an export license?

  12            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the relevance.

  13            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  14   Q.  Ms. King, let me show you --

  15            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

  16            THE COURT:  Yes.

  17   Q.  -- Exhibit ADT.  I direct your attention to the bottom

  18   right-hand corner, Fox.  Is Fox one of the people who made

  19   motion pictures?

  20   A.  Well, 20th Century Fox is.

  21   Q.  Have you ever seen any report that was given to Fox that

  22   points out that the CSS standard was totally inadequate for

  23   protection?

  24            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object on relevance grounds.

  25            THE COURT:  Sustained.




533



   1   Q.  Is it your testimony, Ms. King, that you never heard in

   2   1997 anyone within the motion picture industry say that the

   3   CSS system was inadequate for protection?

   4            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, same objection.

   5            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, if we could take our lunch

   7   break, I think I might be able to finish up after lunch in

   8   about ten minutes.

   9            THE COURT:  Okay.  2 o'clock.

  10            (Luncheon recess)

  11            (Continued on next page)

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




534



   1            THE COURT:  Before we start, is Mr. Young in the

   2   courtroom?

   3            I have had a request from a John Young at Cryptome

   4   for an approval of a live feed of proceedings from the court

   5   reporter who's doing the realtime for the purpose of receiving

   6   the transcript as it's generated to post on the Internet.

   7            I wanted to inform him, and if anybody is talking to

   8   him, you can tell him that the matter is under consideration,

   9   but it involves a whole series of complex issues that involve

  10   the court reporters' rights for being compensated for their

  11   work, the fact that the realtime transcript in this case,

  12   because of the technical nature of much of the time leaves a

  13   great deal to be desired, inasmuch as neither party has yet

  14   provided the court reporter with a glossary, at least so I

  15   have been told in the last five minutes, so the draft

  16   transcript is not what it would be if that had occurred.

  17            And thirdly, I need technical advice on the extent to

  18   which if at all connecting any outside computer by direct

  19   cable to the court reporters' equipment potentially gives

  20   access to my own equipment.

  21            And, lastly, there are U.S. judicial conference rules

  22   that prohibit electronic connections between computers that

  23   are on the Judiciary's network and anybody outside the

  24   judiciary and mine is on the judiciary's network.

  25            I will look into these matters, but it isn't going to




535



   1   happen in a matter of hours.

   2            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, just -- we did provide a

   3   glossary yesterday morning to the male court reporter, and

   4   we'll try to find other copies.

   5            THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. Garbus, you may proceed.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  May we approach the bench?

   7            THE COURT:  Yes.

   8            (At the sidebar)

   9            MR. GARBUS:  This came up in a way shortly before

  10   lunch and maybe I can just get the Court's guidance on this.

  11            I see the statute here and then I see the licensing

  12   arrangements here.  And I see what the licensing arrangements

  13   do and the rights that they allegedly give or don't give.

  14            I don't see the DMCA and the licensing arrangements

  15   as one, seeing them as two separate things.  I see the DMCA as

  16   a boarder in the licensing arrangements and one of the things

  17   that the witness testified to was that the licensing

  18   arrangements cuts down on the rights that certain people would

  19   otherwise have.

  20            I would like to understand that further.  I think it

  21   has legal significance and I was trying to pose questions to

  22   the witness at the end of the morning that basically deal with

  23   this.  Now, I don't want to do that, if you feel that that's

  24   not an area that I should pursue.

  25            For example, I would ask a question:  If I can build




536



   1   a DVD player physically capable of playing a Warner Brother's

   2   disk which I have purchased without signing the license with

   3   DVD-CCA, is it Warner's policy or position that I am permitted

   4   to play it?

   5            She answered before, I think, that anything that you

   6   buy from Warner Brothers and can play on any disk on any

   7   hardware player.

   8            Now, if that's so, then is it is Warner brother's

   9   position that you can even play it on a player which does not

  10   have a license from the DVD-CCA.  In other words, I'm trying

  11   to deal with the question of the relationship between the

  12   licensing statute and the DMCA to see exactly who is

  13   prohibiting what is happening here.  I think one of the words

  14   that you've been focusing on appropriately is "authorized" and

  15   "unauthorized."

  16            THE COURT:  I don't think I have focused on that in

  17   the course of the trial so far at all.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  O.K.  I guess it seems to me that as I

  19   understand the licensing structure here, it is the licensing

  20   structure that authorizes or doesn't authorize, it brings

  21   about this lawsuit.

  22            As I understand it, though I'm not clear, I think the

  23   plaintiffs are suing pursuant to their licensing arrangements

  24   against this defendant and the question is whether or not

  25   because those are the rights, I presume, that they have.




537



   1            The thing that's in issue here is the CSS.  And the

   2   question is, I asked the witness, is this a patent or a

   3   copyright?  I'm not exactly -- I think she wasn't sure.  If

   4   it's a patent, it's been published, so there's nothing unusual

   5   about knowing the structure of CSS.

   6            I'm just raising a lot of questions that should

   7   become apparent as a result of this morning's questioning.

   8   Having said that, let's all go home.

   9            THE COURT:  Well, I will vote for that.  I don't know

  10   what the question is, Mr. Garbus.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Here's the question:  If I can build a

  12   DVD player physically capable of playing a Warner Brother's

  13   disk, which I've lawfully purchased without signing the

  14   license with DVD-CCA, is it Warner's position/policy that I am

  15   permitted to play it?

  16            THE COURT:  And Mr. Gold, if he asked that

  17   question --

  18            MR. GOLD:  I would object.  I would object to the

  19   relevancy of it.

  20            THE COURT:  And I will sustain the objection.

  21            So, you can ask it, if you want and I will sustain

  22   the objection.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I'm certainly not going to ask it.

  24            Let me go through another whole bunch of questions.

  25            THE COURT:  Let's not do that.  I'm not here to give




538



   1   an advisory opinion about what happens.  If you want to ask

   2   the witness questions, ask the witness questions, and let's

   3   get it done with.

   4            You promised me almost two hours ago you had a minute

   5   to go.  I realize a lot of that has been lunch.

   6            (In open court)

   7            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Garbus.

   8   BY MR. GARBUS:

   9   Q.  One thing I wasn't clear with respect to CSS.  I asked you

  10   whether it was a patent or a copyright.  Do you recall what it

  11   is?

  12   A.  No, it may be both.  I don't know.

  13   Q.  If it's a patent, it will be published, is that right?

  14            THE COURT:  Please, Mr. Garbus, this isn't a patent

  15   lawyer.  The Patent Code of the United States provides for

  16   what it has to be.

  17   Q.  To your knowledge, based on your experience at Warner

  18   Brothers, what is it that requires a consumer to only view a

  19   DVD on a player licensed by DVD-CCA?

  20            MR. GOLD:  I object, your Honor, on relevance

  21   grounds.

  22            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  23   Q.  To your knowledge, if a consumer sees a piece of hardware

  24   that plays a DVD, how is the consumer to tell whether that's

  25   an authorized player or not?




539



   1   A.  I don't know what the word "authorized" means.

   2   Q.  The statute uses the word "authorized."  That's what I'm

   3   trying to find out.

   4            THE COURT:  Maybe you ought to read the statute again

   5   and see in what connection it uses it because I don't think

   6   it's in this one.

   7   Q.  Do you know what the term "compliant equipment" means?

   8   A.  I don't think there is a standard definition for

   9   "compliant equipment."

  10   Q.  Tell me your understanding of it.

  11   A.  I think in the context of the CSS licensing, it would be

  12   equipment that has taken a license that is compliant with the

  13   license terms.

  14   Q.  So, a compliant piece of equipment under the statute would

  15   be one that would be authorized by the DVD-CCA, is that right?

  16            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object.

  17            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me for a moment.

  19            (Pause)

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I see the word "authority"

  21   in the statute, and I said "authorization," but the statute,

  22   as I see it at Section A, and I'm prepared to go to the bench

  23   for this, if it's necessary.

  24            THE COURT:  Which subpart of A?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  It says, "To circumvent the




540



   1   technological measure."

   2            THE COURT:  Which subpart of A?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  (a)(1), I think; (2)(a) -- (3)(a).

   4            THE COURT:  (3)(a)?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

   6            THE COURT:  12(a)(3)(a)?  There is none.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  1201(a); walking my way through this is

   8   very difficult.

   9            THE COURT:  I know it's not an easy statute.  It

  10   takes some attention.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  1201(a).

  12            THE COURT:  Are you talking about (a)(3)(b)?

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I'm talking about -- yes, (3)(a) and

  14   (b).  Let me show you what I'm referring to.

  15            THE COURT:  I can read (a)(3)(a) and (b).  I have it

  16   in front of me.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  It starts "to circumvent."

  18            THE COURT:  Yes.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  And then (b) talks about without the

  20   authority.

  21            THE COURT:  Yes.  Do you have a question?

  22   BY MR. GARBUS:

  23   Q.  So, there is an authorization factored in the statute, and

  24   I'm trying to determine with respect to that authorization,

  25   the extent to which it is granted or not granted and the




541



   1   relationship between the statute and this licensing structure.

   2            THE COURT:  Well, you read the statute.  You read the

   3   license.  That's what you have.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Except that the statute and the license

   5   are not coextensive.

   6            THE COURT:  So, you compare the two and you analyze

   7   the respects in which they differ and you make your argument

   8   about what the legal effect of that is.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  And that's what I'm trying to ask

  10   questions about.

  11            THE COURT:  I know.  But it's a legal issue.

  12            What's the question?

  13   BY MR. GARBUS:

  14   Q.  Do you have knowledge of what Warner's position is with

  15   respect to these licenses about what the authority a buyer of

  16   a DVD has with respect to the use of that DVD?

  17            MR GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  19            What you are obviously trying to get at, Mr. Garbus,

  20   is whether Warner or any of the other studios has authorized

  21   consumer purchases of their DVDs to circumvent the copy

  22   protection of CSS.

  23            Now, if you want to ask that question, why don't you

  24   ask it.

  25   BY MR. GARBUS:




542



   1   Q.  I'll ask that question of the witness.

   2   A.  No.

   3            THE COURT:  Now, maybe we can move on.

   4   Q.  So, as you understand it -- and this is the last question

   5   and then I'm through for the day with respect to this

   6   witness -- a purchaser of a DVD cannot make a copy of a DVD

   7   for his own personal use or to lend -- is that right?

   8   A.  That's right.

   9   Q.  And the purchaser of a DVD cannot lend the copy of the DVD

  10   to a friend who does not have an authorized, licensed player?

  11            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, it's beginning to sound like --

  12   he's asking for a legal opinion, I think.

  13            THE COURT:  Well, I don't even see what the relevance

  14   of the question is.  Can't lend it?  I mean, is there really

  15   some suggestion that there's an issue in this case as to

  16   whether somebody who owns a DVD can lend it to somebody else

  17   without knowing whether they have a player?

  18            Suppose they lend it to somebody who didn't have

  19   electricity?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  To play it.  I thought the question was

  21   to play it on a player that does not have a license from the

  22   DVD-CCA.

  23            THE COURT:  Well, that wasn't the question.  Do you

  24   want to take another stab at the question?

  25   BY MR. GARBUS:




543



   1   Q.  Is it Warner's position that the purchaser of a DVD cannot

   2   lend the DVD to a person who has an unauthorized player so

   3   that the person who has that unauthorized player can watch the

   4   DVD?

   5            MR GOLD:  I object, your Honor.

   6            THE COURT:  Look, I'm going to allow the answer to

   7   this question just to be done with it; all right.

   8            Bear with everybody, Mr. Gold.

   9   A.  Someone who owns a DVD disk can lend it to whoever they

  10   want, but the disks are only authorized to be played on

  11   compliant players.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  13            THE COURT:  O.K.  Thank you, Mr. Garbus.

  14            Mr. Gold?

  15            MR GOLD:  I do have several questions for the

  16   witness, your Honor.

  17   REDIRECT EXAMINATION

  18   BY MR GOLD:

  19   Q.  Ms. King, would any upgrade in the security system of the

  20   DVD provide protection for the films that have already been

  21   released in CSS format?

  22   A.  From what I understand, they would not.

  23   Q.  Now, turning, if I may, do you still have Exhibit RK, the

  24   second page?

  25   A.  Exhibit?




544



   1            THE COURT:  You mean BK?

   2            MR GOLD:  Mine says "RK."

   3            THE COURT:  RK; thank you.

   4   A.  I have it.

   5   Q.  You have it, Ma'am?

   6   A.  Yes, I do.

   7   Q.  In January of the year 2000, did you agree with the view

   8   expressed from the article, the one about the DV code crack?

   9   A.  I certainly didn't.

  10   Q.  Specifically, if I can, I want to refer you to the part of

  11   that paragraph which relates to economic incentive.  Did you

  12   agree with the view expressed about economic incentive?

  13   A.  No, I didn't agree, however --

  14   Q.  Why not?

  15   A.  Well, I didn't agree because there is an economic

  16   incentive to hack the product.  Certainly people that want to

  17   make money off of pirating our product would be very happy to

  18   do so and have done so ever since we started releasing it.

  19   Q.  Did you understand in January of 2000, despite what you've

  20   just said, that there was a good business reason for Mr.

  21   Cardwell to have expressed the view contained in that

  22   paragraph?

  23   A.  Yes, I do.  I believe I understand why he said this.

  24   Q.  And why is that?

  25   A.  Well, he was at the consumer electronics show.




545



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I object to her understanding.

   2            THE COURT:  Sustained.  Sustained.

   3   Q.  Did you know whether or not at Warner's in January of the

   4   year 2000, this January, that there was a concern among

   5   executives that people were panicking unnecessarily about the

   6   crack of BSD?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the form of the question.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   9   Q.  Did you ever engage in any discussion with executives

  10   where you expressed a view that it would be good for Warner's

  11   to get some control over what was happening in the market as a

  12   result of this crack of CSS?

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the form of the question.

  14   (A) it's leading, and it assumes facts not in evidence.

  15            THE COURT:  Rephrase it.

  16   Q.  Do you believe in January of 2000 that your public,

  17   Warner's public, was jittery about the crack of the BSD could

  18   lose faith in the --

  19            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the form of the question.

  20            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  If the witness hasn't been told thus far

  22   what to answer --

  23            THE COURT:  That was unnecessary.

  24            Anything else, Mr. Gold?

  25            MR GOLD:  Yes.




546



   1   Q.  What is your present judgment, Ms. King, about the

   2   incentives to use DeCSS to copy and transmit Warner DVDs?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Object to the question.

   4            THE COURT:  On what ground?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  That he's told him what to testify to

   6   already.

   7            THE COURT:  This will be a very short trial if we

   8   exclude the witnesses called by both parties on the theory

   9   that each lawyer has told them what to say.

  10            Overruled.

  11            THE WITNESS:  Can you repeat the question, please?

  12            THE COURT:  I think we could get rid of all trials in

  13   America on that ground.

  14            MR. GOLD:  When I used that statement at lunch in a

  15   different context, my listener said, well, will that be a bad

  16   thing?

  17            THE COURT:  Don't answer that, Ms. King.

  18            MR. GOLD:  I said, yes.

  19            THE COURT:  Come on.  Is there another question?

  20   BY MR. GOLD:

  21   Q.  What is your present judgment, Ms. King, about the

  22   incentives to use DeCSS to copy Warner DVDs?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I'll object to it, that there's been no

  24   proof that DeCSS is being used to transmit any DVDs.

  25            THE COURT:  Overruled.




547



   1   A.  We have highly-desirable product.  People want to view our

   2   product.  They want to view our new product.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.  May I interrupt?

   4            Was the question "do you believe" or "what do other

   5   people think"?

   6            THE COURT:  The question was what her present

   7   judgment was about whether incentives existed.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  Is that based on her belief or her view

   9   as an expert?

  10            THE COURT:  I don't know.  I didn't ask the question.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question on the grounds

  12   of a lack of foundation.

  13            THE COURT:  Do you want to address that, Counsel?

  14   BY MR. GOLD:

  15   Q.  Was it part of your job to form judgments about anything

  16   that related to the product of Warner Brothers home video?

  17   A.  I do that all the time.

  18   Q.  And did you form judgments about the continued viability

  19   of CSS and the use of DeCSS in the United States ever since

  20   you heard about the DeCSS crack?

  21   A.  We are constantly evaluating the situation.

  22   Q.  Can you tell us what your present judgment is about the

  23   incentives to use DeCSS to copy and transmit Warner's DVDs?

  24   A.  The studios have highly-desirable product.  We not only

  25   have professional pirates that steal our product and transmit




548



   1   it to others for a commercial gain, but we have people that

   2   want to take it just because they like to view it.  It's

   3   highly-desirable product, not just mine.  I'm not just

   4   speaking for my studio.

   5            If one of the things we found when we started taking

   6   action against Internet Service Providers was if they knew

   7   that this was illegal or thought it was illegal when we

   8   started saying cease and desist from posting DeCSS, they took

   9   it down.  We saw that happen.

  10            It's very important that there isn't perception that

  11   you can just take the product and also that we don't lose

  12   control of the distribution of our product in the future.  So,

  13   the incentives are real both for profit and not for profit.

  14   Q.  Do you know where Mr. Cardwell was when he was speaking to

  15   the press as reflected in this article?

  16   A.  Yes, I do.

  17   Q.  Where?

  18   A.  He was in lace Vegas at the consumer electronics show.

  19   Q.  Do you know the purpose of -- do you know why Warner sends

  20   people to the consumer electronics show?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

  22            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  23   Q.  What is the purpose of the consumer electronics show?

  24   A.  At the consumer electronics show, consumer electronics

  25   companies like, you know, Sony, Toshiba, RCA present their new




549



   1   products and their new product lines.

   2   Q.  Prior to the consumer electronics show in 1990, did Warner

   3   executives make any decision with respect to what they wanted

   4   to accomplish at that show?

   5   A.  Yes.

   6   Q.  What was that decision?

   7            THE COURT:  We are talking about 1990.  What's that

   8   got to do with anything?

   9            MR GOLD:  2000.  I don't know how that happened.

  10   It's January of 2000.

  11   A.  We had been attending --

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I think I would object to this on the

  13   grounds that it's hearsay.

  14            THE COURT:  I'm going to sustain the objection on the

  15   ground that enough already, Mr. Gold.

  16            MR GOLD:  I know what that means.  Thank you, your

  17   Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  You're welcome.

  19            Mr. Garbus, any recross?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Very, very brief.

  21   RECROSS-EXAMINATION

  22   BY MR. GARBUS:

  23   Q.  Isn't it a fact that since the date you first filed or the

  24   first lawsuit was filed in January in this case and the

  25   lawsuit that was filed in California, that there are an




550



   1   increased number of postings of DeCSS on the Net?

   2   A.  I don't know.

   3   Q.  As a practical matter, hasn't the fact that these lawsuits

   4   have started brought to the public's attention the fact that

   5   there's DeCSS on the Net with the result that more people are

   6   mirroring it and more people are downloading it?

   7   A.  I don't know.

   8   Q.  Isn't it a fact that if the industry wanted to protect

   9   itself from the spread of DeCSS, a public lawsuit rather than

  10   attempting to contact individual service providers was exactly

  11   the wrong thing to do?

  12   A.  We did both.

  13   Q.  So, when you went to these ISPs, did you ever ask -- well,

  14   we've been through that.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  I have no further questions.

  16            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  17            Mr. Gold?

  18            MR GOLD:  No further questions.

  19            THE COURT:  The witness is excused.

  20            Thank you, Ms. King.

  21            THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

  22            (Witness excused)

  23            THE COURT:  Next witness, Mr. Gold?

  24            MR GOLD:  Yes, may I have a minute and a half just to

  25   go get him?




551



   1            (Pause)

   2            THE COURT:  Who is your next witness, Mr. Gold?

   3            MR GOLD:  Professor Franklin Fisher.

   4    FRANKLIN M. FISHER,

   5        called as a witness by the plaintiff

   6        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

   7            THE CLERK:  State your name.

   8            THE WITNESS:  Franklin M. Fisher.

   9            THE COURT:  Proceed, counsel.

  10            THE WITNESS:  Can I get rid of this stuff?

  11            THE COURT:  There's an enormous pile of paper up

  12   here.

  13            Go ahead.

  14   Q.  What is your occupation?

  15   A.  I'm the Jean Berkowitz Carlton and Dennis William Carlton

  16   professor of Economics at MIT.

  17   Q.  And how long have you been teaching at MIT, sir?

  18   A.  40 years.

  19   Q.  Do you hold any other professional positions?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  And what are they?

  22   A.  I'm a member of the board of the National Bureau of

  23   Economic Research.  I'm the chairman of the board of Charles

  24   River Associates, which is an economics consulting firm, and I

  25   have been, still am, I have been for about the last eight




552



   1   years the chair of the Middle East Water Project, which is a

   2   project of Dutch, American, Palestinian, Israeli, Jordanian

   3   scholars working on the economics of water in the Middle East.

   4   Q.  Which degrees did you receive?  In what institutions did

   5   you receive them from?

   6   A.  I received the B.A. summa cum laude in 1956, the M.A. in

   7   1957, the Ph.D. in 1960, all in economics and all from

   8   Harvard.

   9   Q.  Have you received any scholarships or other professional

  10   honors?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  Please name a few of the outstanding ones.

  13   A.  O.K.  A long time ago, now I received the John Bates Clark

  14   award of the American Economic Association, which is given

  15   every other year essentially to the most-promising economists

  16   under the age of 40.

  17            I was the president in 1979 of the Econometrics

  18   Society, which is the most prominent professional organization

  19   specializing in the use of quantitative methods and

  20   mathematics in economics.

  21            I'm a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and

  22   Sciences.  I was once a junior Fellow of the society of

  23   Fellows at Harvard.  Let's see.  I've held Ford Foundation

  24   faculty scholarship, a National Science Foundation faculty

  25   team fellowship and a Guggenheim fellowship.




553



   1   Q.  Have you -- what are your fields of specialization in

   2   economics?

   3   A.  Well, for a long time, my principal field was

   4   econometrics, which in this connection, it's the application

   5   of statistical methods to economics, but I wouldn't say I left

   6   that field, but that stopped being my principal field of

   7   specialization some time ago.

   8            Basically, I am a microeconomist, that is, as opposed

   9   to macroeconomists, who are supposed to know about things like

  10   things and unemployment and inflation.  Microeconomists study

  11   the way consumers behave, the way firms behave, the way the

  12   price system works, the allocation of resources, the way

  13   markets behave, and of various forms.

  14            Within that, I have worked on various aspects of

  15   price theory, including price indices and the general study of

  16   how a competitive price system works and on industrial

  17   organization which is more applied subject and in my case that

  18   is involved working very heavily in the antitrust area.

  19   Q.  Have you published, sir?

  20   A.  Yes, I am the author of approximately 16 books and

  21   something substantially over 100 articles.

  22   Q.  Have you ever testified in court before as an expert?

  23   A.  Yes, I've testified quite extensively over the last 30

  24   years.  Most recently, I was the government's principal

  25   economic witness in the Microsoft case.




554



   1   Q.  Were you retained by the Proskauer, Rose firm appearing

   2   for the plaintiffs -- appearing for the movie studio

   3   plaintiffs in this case?

   4   A.  Yes, I was.

   5   Q.  And what were you retained to do, sir?

   6   A.  Well, in general terms, I was retained to give an opinion

   7   about what economic analysis had to say about various aspects

   8   of the case.

   9            More specifically, I was asked to read and comment on

  10   various declarations of experts of the defendants from the

  11   point of view of economic analysis, and more important, I was

  12   asked the question of whether -- to opine on the question of

  13   whether on the assumption that no copies were yet being made

  14   using DeCSS, no movie copies, whether it was the case that the

  15   movie companies had nevertheless already been injured.

  16   Q.  Could you please tell the Court the particular work and

  17   scholarship that you relied on in giving the opinions you gave

  18   in your declaration and are about to give in court today?

  19   A.  Well, on the one hand, I've quite heavily relied on some

  20   of the very basic tools of economic analysis.  A lot of what I

  21   have to say is not really very difficult or complicated

  22   material and it relies heavily on issues involved in the

  23   theory of the consumer, a subject that I have written on and

  24   teach every year in several courses about.

  25            In addition, I have over the course of the last




555



   1   approximately 28 years been involved in a number of cases and

   2   I've written some involving movies and movie distribution,

   3   mostly perhaps entirely related primarily to movies and the

   4   television industry.

   5   Q.  Professor, I'd like to give you several assumptions and

   6   have you accept those assumptions, and then I am going to ask

   7   you a question.  I'm going to ask you to assume -- oh, before

   8   I start that.

   9            Did you read any of the papers in this case?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  Which ones?

  12   A.  Well, I read various of the declarations of defendant's

  13   experts and then I've read some of the pleadings.  I've read

  14   his Honor's decision on the preliminary injunction matter and

  15   I read the complaint.  I read various of the motions.  I read

  16   the briefs on the motions surrounding that, I don't remember

  17   exactly.

  18   Q.  Now, I'd like to put several assumptions in front of you.

  19   Assume that DeCSS technology can be used to circumvent the

  20   access and copy protection contained on DVD movies.  Then

  21   assume that as a result, the movies could be decrypted and

  22   copied.

  23            Assume the movies could be transmitted over the

  24   Internet, but transmission lines and hard drive capacities are

  25   not quite advanced enough to make it convenient for a large




556



   1   number of computer owners to obtain the movies.

   2            Assume Internet speeds and storage capacities are

   3   expected to increase in the near future to the point that such

   4   transmissions could be widely achieved.

   5            And lastly, assume that no material amount of copying

   6   or transmission has yet taken place.

   7            Do you understand those assumptions?

   8   A.  Yes, I do.

   9   Q.  Given those assumptions, do you have an opinion as to

  10   whether the availability of DeCSS would produce harm?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I would object to the question.

  12            I recognize that an expert witness is allowed to

  13   testify on the basis of assumption, but I think that the

  14   assumptions have to be more precise than the assumptions that

  15   were given to this witness.

  16            For example, words like "near future" and then the

  17   whole question of generalizations of Internet capacity.  I

  18   think that the question is bad as to form in not being precise

  19   about the assumptions and it being so generalized as to the

  20   assumptions as to render any answer meaningless.

  21            THE COURT:  It goes to weight and it's a matter for

  22   cross-examination.  Overruled.

  23            You may answer.

  24   A.  I'm sorry.  Could you read back just what the last bit of

  25   the question was?  I lost it.




557



   1   Q.  Given those assumptions, do you have an opinion as to

   2   whether the availability of DeCSS would produce harm?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  And what is that opinion?

   5   A.  It's my quite strong belief that the answer to that is

   6   "yes" and that that harm would begin before copies were

   7   actually made.

   8   Q.  And what is the basis for that conclusion, sir?

   9   A.  Well, the movie companies as the proprietors of the

  10   intellectual property involved here plan in various ways how

  11   to exploit that property and those plans are forward looking

  12   and I could describe them in somewhat more detail, if you

  13   wish.

  14   Q.  Please do.

  15   A.  O.K.  Movie companies plan quite carefully about the

  16   release of their movies.  They release them in various windows

  17   of distribution, first to theater, then to airlines, then to

  18   hotels and premium cable, then to DVDs and videotapes, then to

  19   network television, then to basic cable and television

  20   stations, and this set of windows, as they are called, are

  21   organized, timed, produced so as to extract in the movie

  22   company's opinion the maximum profit from the movies.

  23            Now, in planning to do that and in considering what

  24   investments to make as to movies, the movie companies under

  25   the assumptions you've given me will have to take into account




558



   1   the quite likely expectation that there will be negligible,

   2   probably a substantial number of free, unlicensed copies of

   3   DVDs in circulation, if they release movies in DVDs, and

   4   they'll have to think about what to do about that.

   5            Either they'll have to let that happen, plan to let

   6   that happen, or they will have to not release movies as DVDs.

   7   In any event, their plans for the release of movies that they

   8   are now making or will make in the near future will be

   9   changed.  They won't get as much revenue as they would have

  10   done.  It will not be as profitable for them to invest in

  11   movies.

  12            That will change, to some extent, the inputs they

  13   choose to put into movies.  It will have changed the decision

  14   in marginal cases as to whether to accept a movie.  It may in

  15   some cases -- it will generally force them to take actions

  16   which while profit maximizing in the presence of the new

  17   constraints that the prospect of unlicensed copies would not

  18   have been profit maximizing without it and in that respect, it

  19   will change what they do.  It will reduce their expected

  20   profits.  It exposes them to risk.  That's a harm.

  21   Q.  Now, I'd like to change several of those assumptions.

  22   Assume now that copying has taken place and that unauthorized

  23   high-quality reproductions of copyrighted DVDs are available

  24   on the Internet for free.

  25            Do you have any opinion on whether the availability




559



   1   of such reproductions would cause harm to the owners of the

   2   copyright in those films?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I would object to the question on the

   4   grounds that when this witness was deposed back on July 6,

   5   2000, and he was asked what he was going to testify to, he

   6   talked about testifying on the assumptions that there was no

   7   copying.

   8            And I would object to any testimony that implies any

   9   kind of copying.

  10            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  11            MR GOLD:  The witness in that deposition, as I

  12   remember, was asked many questions about the harm that would

  13   ensue from the complaint of the acts contained in the

  14   complaint in this action, and he answered them.  And I think

  15   that this hypothetical is relative, not to all, but to many of

  16   the questions and answers in that deposition.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I object.  That's not what this witness'

  18   proposed expert testimony was going to be.

  19            THE COURT:  Was there ever a Rule 26 statement served

  20   with respect to the experts in this case?

  21            MR GOLD:  There was a declaration.  The way this case

  22   has run, everybody has put in an affidavit from their expert.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  That's not entirely so.  We have served

  24   with respect to Mr. Fisher, an affidavit in the case.  We have

  25   received from other witnesses, including our own




560



   1   declarations -- they're supposed to conform.  We've never

   2   received any document from Mr. Fisher, other than the

   3   affidavit he submitted on the motions.

   4            So, there has been no document submitted by

   5   Mr. Fisher.  All we have is his deposition testimony which was

   6   based on conversations he had with Mr. Hart which dealt with

   7   his testimony on the basis that there was no copying.

   8            THE COURT:  What part of the deposition are you

   9   relying on, Mr. Garbus?  Do you have the page?

  10            And someone please give me a copy.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  He says at page 9 --

  12            THE COURT:  I will read it for myself.  I would just

  13   like to see it.

  14            So, it's page 9, Mr. Garbus?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Page 9, line -- the very top of the

  16   answer.

  17            MR GOLD:  The declaration of Franklin Fisher I have

  18   is in six pages or five and a quarter.

  19            THE COURT:  Just let me do one thing at a time, Mr.

  20   Gold, please.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  And then, again, at page 17, he's

  22   answering at line 13, we went again over my position on the

  23   question of damage, if there was not copying.

  24            THE COURT:  Page 17?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.  It's the long answer.




561



   1            THE COURT:  And what about the part on page 11 where

   2   the examiner for the defendant, whoever that may have been

   3   said:

   4            "Q.    And that's the basis of your testimony here

   5   today basically on the assumptions that there is no copying?"

   6            And the witness answered:  "I don't think the basis

   7   of my testimony -- I am prepared to testify either on the

   8   assumption that there is copying or on the assumptions that

   9   there isn't, but I don't know for a fact whether there is or

  10   is not."

  11            What about that?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I think that what he said was that he

  13   was going to testify on the basis of no copying.  I recognize

  14   how the answer that he gave me affects that.  But he was

  15   specifically offered, as it says at page 9 and page 17, on the

  16   grounds of no copying had taken place.

  17            (Continued on next page)

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




562



   1            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, in addition to the portion of

   2   the deposition transcript you've read, page 56 of his

   3   declaration says, at paragraph 11, "I'm less in serious

   4   disagreement with professor Kurlantzick if it is his opinion

   5   that the availability of an authorized product for free on the

   6   Internet will not have a substantial market impact upon those

   7   companies which are in the business of producing and

   8   distributing feature films."

   9            THE COURT:  The objection is overruled.  The defense

  10   was clearly on notice.

  11   Q.  Professor Fisher, the question is:  Assume now that

  12   copying has taken place and that unauthorized time quality

  13   reproductions of copyrighted films are available on the

  14   Internet for free.  Do you have any opinion on whether the

  15   availability of such reproductions would cause harm to the

  16   owners of the copyright in those films?

  17   A.  Indeed I do.

  18   Q.  And what is that opinion, sir?

  19   A.  I think it would cause harm in several ways.  The most

  20   obvious way has to do with the sale of DVDs.  We are talking

  21   about a situation in which unlicensed copies are available

  22   free.  People who would otherwise have bought DVDs at fairly

  23   high prices, in the roughly $25, a little less, will now have

  24   the option of getting those same things or essentially the

  25   same things at zero.  It's not difficult to figure out that




563



   1   people would prefer to buy at zero rather than buy at a higher

   2   price.  The result of that would be that revenues from the

   3   sale of the DVDs to the movie companies will go way down, they

   4   will have to either cut the prices of DVDs very substantially

   5   or not sell DVDs at all.  That's apart from the DVDs that have

   6   already been made and can no longer, as it were, be withheld.

   7   There will be other effects as well.

   8   Q.  What would that be, sir?

   9   A.  People who would otherwise have bought or rented

  10   videotapes will now have the option of instead acquiring

  11   movies at essentially a zero after they -- some of them will

  12   of course have to acquire a DVD player.  Given that option,

  13   one would expect sales and rentals of movies, videotapes of

  14   movies also to decrease.

  15            In addition, there will be some more effects.  As I

  16   mentioned before, movies are released through a series of

  17   windows, and those windows are staggered in time quite

  18   deliberately.  If copying becomes widespread, and unlicensed

  19   free copies of movies circulate a good deal, then by the time

  20   the movies are released to ordinary network television and

  21   then further there are likely to be more people who have seen

  22   them, and seen them incidentally for free, which is why there

  23   will be more people, that would make the audience for those

  24   movies on network television lower than it would otherwise

  25   have been and make the movies less valuable to the networks




564



   1   and then again to the later uses, and that in turn will reduce

   2   what networks and other television broadcasters or cable

   3   casters are willing to pay for movie rights.

   4            There may in addition be an effect, as it were,

   5   earlier in time than that.  That has to do with the following:

   6            People deciding to go to the movie theater or to

   7   watch movies on premium cable or on Pay-Per-View now have to

   8   make the decision should we pay the price to go to the movie

   9   theater or should we pay the price either to subscribe to a

  10   premium service or to watch Pay-Per-View, and they do that

  11   presumably because -- aside from the fact they might like the

  12   experience of going to the movie theaters -- they are choosing

  13   doing that now or waiting for a later release when the movie

  14   becomes available on videotape or on DVD, and then still later

  15   on free television.

  16            At present, without copies, they are making that

  17   decision based on the fact that in order to get the movie when

  18   it is released on DVD or videotapes, you have to pay something

  19   for it.  In the circumstance of free copying, free unlicensed

  20   copying of DVDs, they are going to have that decision maybe

  21   somewhat altered.  Instead of saying, well, I go to the movies

  22   now or I can wait, but if I wait I'll either have to wait a

  23   long time or I'll have to pay something, they will be saying,

  24   well, I can go to the movies now and pay or I can wait, but if

  25   I wait the movie will be available free and rather earlier




565



   1   than it used to be.  And that will tend to shift decisions

   2   somewhat at least in favor of waiting.  That will make movies

   3   less valuable for premium cable, it will make movies less

   4   valuable for theatrical exhibition, although I don't think the

   5   effect I'm talking about now -- of course, I don't think

   6   that's the largest effect.  This one is somewhat indirect.

   7            I might also mention that effect will take some time

   8   to work itself out simply because premium cable companies tend

   9   to contract for and pay for movies before they are even

  10   produced.

  11   Q.  Professor Fisher, would your opinion that the availability

  12   of free unauthorized copies of film on the Internet would have

  13   a negative effect on sales, licensing and distribution, hold

  14   if the free copies were of a lesser quality than the

  15   authorized copies?

  16   A.  Yes, it would.  Let me explain.  On the one hand,

  17   obviously in some limited case it can't hold.  If the copies

  18   were so bad that they were unwatchable, then there might as

  19   well not be any copies at all.  Now we are talking -- I assume

  20   we are not talking about that.  I assume we are talking about

  21   some degradation in quality relative to the original DVD, less

  22   than that.

  23            There is large literature, maybe only medium-sized

  24   literature, in economics about how one adjusts prices for

  25   quality and about the tradeoff of quality changes in prices.




566



   1   I have contributed somewhat to it, but I'm certainly not the

   2   primary person.  And I think it is well established and not

   3   difficult to understand that you can think of a "good at a

   4   given price with lower quality" as equivalent to a "good with

   5   higher quality at a lower price."  Or put it differently, a

   6   degradation in quality is like an increase in price.

   7            People instead of paying in money pay in what

   8   economists call utility for the degradation in quality.

   9   Therefore, I think the right way to think about this is that a

  10   lower quality copy available free would be the equivalent not

  11   of having the original at a zero price but of having the

  12   original at perhaps only a very low price, and while that

  13   might tend to moderate the effect a bit, it certainly wouldn't

  14   change them in substance.

  15   Q.  Professor Fisher, you have mentioned that movies are timed

  16   and released to different segments of the market at different

  17   times.  Why is that?

  18   A.  It's because the willingness of people to pay to see

  19   movies differs depending on how long the movie has been out,

  20   the circumstances in which it has been out, how much it has

  21   been exposed and so forth.  People who will pay to see a movie

  22   in the theater on first release are paying fairly high ticket

  23   prices.  That wouldn't be true -- in other words, they

  24   wouldn't pay the same high ticket prices if the movie had

  25   already been visible to them in lots of other forms, except




567



   1   for rather special movies.  I know people go to see Gone With

   2   The Wind every time it comes around, but that's at least an

   3   unusual case.

   4            Now, the movie companies take advantage of this by

   5   offering licenses to their property at different times and at

   6   different prices, in different modes of exhibition, to try to

   7   capture revenues from the people who are willing to pay a high

   8   price and then capture other revenues that come directly or

   9   indirectly from people who aren't willing to pay that price

  10   but are interested in seeing the movie later on and so on.

  11   Q.  Will the DeCSS hack of DVDs cause or have any impact on

  12   the studio's right to determine when and in what format the

  13   film should be distributed?

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Object to the form of the question.

  15            (Record read)

  16            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.

  17   Q.  Do you have an understanding as to whether the studios now

  18   carefully time their distribution?

  19   A.  They absolutely do.

  20   Q.  And how will the circulation or the availability of free

  21   decrypted DVDs via the Internet affect the studio's decisions

  22   about timing of release in different segments of the market?

  23   A.  Well, as I've already said, once the movie gets copied on

  24   DVD its value in later uses goes down, because people can

  25   watch it for free, and one presumes that many will.




568



   1            The prospect that the movie will be copied on DVD

   2   also reduces the extent to which people will pay in theaters.

   3   I don't know quite which way this will go, but I think that

   4   would mean either an adjustment in prices in the various forms

   5   of release or an accelerated release schedule, less time in

   6   movies, possibly earlier exhibition on free television, less

   7   time in premium television.  I don't know, but it will change

   8   that rather crucial set of decisions.

   9   Q.  Do you know whether the movie studios are currently

  10   distributing movies via the Internet?

  11   A.  I do not know for sure that they are actually doing that.

  12   Q.  Let's assume that the studios are now considering entering

  13   the market for Internet-distributed motion picture content.

  14   Using that assumption, what would be your opinion as a matter

  15   of economic analysis as to whether that market would or

  16   wouldn't be harmed by the free availability of copyrighted

  17   motion picture content on the Internet?

  18   A.  Look, that's an easy one.  If there is widespread copying

  19   and distribution of copies of movies once they go on DVDs, and

  20   if the movie companies continue to issue DVDs, the movie

  21   company's ability to extract payment for distributing

  22   themselves movies on the Internet is going to be highly

  23   reduced, they are going to be competing, as it were, with free

  24   copies of themselves.

  25   Q.  In your opinion would purchasing behavior be affected over




569



   1   time by the no-cost availability of movies on the Internet?

   2   A.  Yes, I do think so.  Once things become available for

   3   free, particularly, I don't think exclusively, but

   4   particularly on the Internet, people come to expect that they

   5   will continue to be available for free.  It won't be a novelty

   6   after a while.  People will regard this as a regular way to

   7   obtain movies.  They will plan for it, as it were, in

   8   considering whether to go to theaters or whether to buy

   9   licensed copies.

  10   Q.  In your opinion, would the availability of free

  11   unauthorized copies of films likely stimulate interest in

  12   films, causing an increase in sales?

  13   A.  Well, you have to be careful.  It depends what you mean by

  14   sales.  If you mean by sales will it cause more people to

  15   watch movies overall, the answer is it might.  But if you mean

  16   by sales will it increase the revenues of movie companies, the

  17   answer is of course it won't increase the revenues of movie

  18   companies.  There will be people who watch movies for free,

  19   who would not have watched them when they had to pay.  That

  20   taken alone would be an increase in viewership but it surely

  21   wouldn't be an increase in revenue.

  22            There will also be people who watch the movies for

  23   free that they would otherwise have paid to watch.  Directly

  24   or indirectly, that will certainly be a decrease in revenue.

  25   Q.  Dr. Einhorn in his deposition transcript took the position




570



   1   that the availability of free unauthorized DVD movies on the

   2   Internet could lead more consumers to buy DVD players, which

   3   in turn could lead those same consumers to buy more authorized

   4   DVD movies, which would result in a net gain or at least no

   5   net loss to the movie industry.

   6            What is your opinion concerning that position?

   7   A.  I think a polite word is fantasy.  Look, I should have

   8   mentioned this in connection with my previous answer as well,

   9   there is a presumption that I hold and I think any reasonable

  10   person holds:  The movie companies understand their own

  11   business.

  12            I would start out by saying I suppose they understand

  13   it better than Dr. Einhorn does and better than I do.  And if

  14   the movie companies really thought that was true, the movie

  15   companies would be encouraging in the first instance perhaps

  16   unauthorized copies -- which they're certainly not doing --

  17   and in the second they would be promoting the distribution of

  18   DVD players.  Now they may decide to do that.  If they do

  19   that, they will do it in ways that they consider brings them

  20   the most benefit.  But I think it escapes belief to suppose

  21   that unauthorized copying is going to lead to increased

  22   profits for the movie companies.

  23            People who use the DVD players acquire those DVD

  24   players and in this circumstance are acquiring them precisely

  25   to watch free copies.  They are not going to acquire them




571



   1   because they want to pay a lot of money to watch the

   2   originals.  That doesn't make any sense.

   3   Q.  Do you have any knowledge about the markets for computer

   4   operating systems?

   5   A.  Oh, more than you want to know.

   6   Q.  In paragraph 11 of his declaration, Dr. Einhorn states,

   7   "If priced in open sourced fashion, a LiViD player will be

   8   made freely available to home PCs using any operating system.

   9   This could maximize the base of enabled users and promote the

  10   sales of DVDs far beyond any other event."  Do you agree with

  11   that statement?

  12   A.  I do not.

  13   Q.  Why not?

  14   A.  Well, a LiViD player is a DVD player for Linux.  Now,

  15   there are a couple of things to say about this.  One is Linux

  16   is and I think for the foreseeable future surely will be a

  17   system which is used by a relatively small minority, an

  18   operating system used by a relatively small minority of

  19   computer users.  I'm talking about individuals and desktop

  20   computer users, not servers, and I think there are good

  21   reasons for that.

  22            Secondly, you have to realize that LiViD players

  23   would not be a net gain in viewership or a very large net gain

  24   in viewership in any event.  Operating systems don't view

  25   movies.  People view movies.  Well, I know some peculiar




572



   1   people and I am related to some of them.  I want to make clear

   2   I'm not criticizing any general set, but people typically

   3   don't buy DVD players so that they can play them on a

   4   particular operating system, except if they are interested

   5   directly in the technology.  People buy DVD players because

   6   they want to watch movies.

   7            Now, it happens that almost everybody -- I don't

   8   think it's everybody, but it's very widespread -- almost

   9   everybody who has a computer who will run Linux, has a

  10   computer that will run Windows, and therefore those same

  11   people are able to watch DVD movies without having a LiViD

  12   player.  They just don't have to watch them on Linux.

  13            I should also mention -- perhaps I already did --

  14   that if it were true that the availability of LiViD players

  15   was going to mean a great increase in sales for the movie

  16   companies, I mean dollar sales, then the movie companies would

  17   be promoting it, and they indeed may be promoting the creation

  18   and sales of LiViD players but of course they would be doing

  19   it under conditions of licensing involving the exploitation

  20   for money of their intellectual property instead of the giving

  21   away of it free.

  22   Q.  Turning to Dr. Einhorn again.  In paragraph 12 of his

  23   declaration he states as follows, "Efforts that hinder the

  24   development of open source operating systems play into the

  25   hands of Microsoft, which illegally restricts competitive




573



   1   access to its closed operating platform."

   2            Do you agree with that conclusion?

   3   A.  No.

   4   Q.  Why not?

   5   A.  Well, in the first place it is not true that the findings

   6   in the Microsoft case are that Microsoft illegally restricts

   7   access to its closed platform.  There are of course extensive

   8   findings that Microsoft did commit illegal acts, but those

   9   aren't it.

  10            Secondly, it's true that Microsoft's monopoly power,

  11   now found to have been illegal, is protected by something

  12   called in the Microsoft case the applications barriered entry,

  13   which I won't go into in detail unless somebody wants me to.

  14   This has to do with a natural phenomenon in which many, many,

  15   many more applications are written for Windows than for

  16   anything else.  Linux suffers in its competition with

  17   Microsoft from the disadvantages of the applications barriered

  18   entry.  Indeed, one of the commercial purveyors of Linux had

  19   to pay software developers to write word processing programs

  20   for Linux, programs of the sort that get written for free for

  21   Windows.  Okay.

  22            Now, I don't believe it's true that -- I hope I'm

  23   wrong -- I don't believe it's true that Linux is going to

  24   succeed in becoming an all-out competitor to Microsoft.  That

  25   will depend in large part on what remedies there finally are




574



   1   in the Microsoft case.  And remedies in that case are a very

   2   complicated matter.  And I certainly don't believe that the

   3   availability of LiViD players is going to be of giant help in

   4   that.  It will be of some help.

   5            Every application that's written for Linux makes

   6   Linux a more interesting system, but it strikes me as simply

   7   bizarre to suppose that one ought to permit unlicensed copying

   8   in the hopes that this will provide an answer to the problems

   9   in Microsoft.  You might as well take that to extremes and

  10   observe that if one were to cancel all copyright of its

  11   software, that would take care of quite nicely a good deal of

  12   the Microsoft problem, but it doesn't sound like a remedy

  13   that, how shall I put it, is set up to fit the problem.

  14   Q.  Do you recall that the first economic expert opinion that

  15   you read of defendants' expert was that of a professor

  16   Kurlantzick, a law professor at University of Connecticut?

  17   A.  I do.

  18   Q.  The defendants have chosen not to call him to the stand.

  19            THE COURT:  The problem, Dr. Fisher, is you are about

  20   two inches too close to the microphone and it swallows some of

  21   your words.

  22            THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.

  23   Q.  In professor Kurlantzick's declaration --

  24            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, he is not going to testify, is

  25   that right?




575



   1            MR. GOLD:  We are told he is not.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  He is not.

   3            THE COURT:  Is the substantial equivalent of whatever

   4   he said in his declaration going to be offered by the

   5   defendants?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  It will be.

   7            THE COURT:  It will be.  All right, go ahead.

   8   Q.  In that declaration Professor Kurlantzick states --

   9            MR. GARBUS:  He is not listed as a witness.  I don't

  10   know if the Court would then receive his affidavit.  If the

  11   Court would not receive his affidavit, then the question is

  12   improper.  In other words, we knew he was not going to testify

  13   so we had not anticipated putting his affidavit in, so I think

  14   the more precise answer to your question will be that he will

  15   not be a witness and, therefore, his affidavit would not be

  16   admissible.

  17            THE COURT:  And I understood all that.  The next

  18   question was whether through somebody else you will offer the

  19   substantial equivalent of what you offered previously.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  21            THE COURT:  You will.  So, I will let the witness go

  22   ahead and answer it, but in the first place we will take a 15

  23   minute break for the afternoon, and I will ask Anna to speak

  24   to Mr. Young to tell him what I said before about his request.

  25            (Recess)




576



   1            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, there was to be a witness

   2   named Eric Burns, but the parties have just now worked out a

   3   stipulation, and we will be designating portions of his

   4   deposition.  He would like to come into the room and watch.

   5            THE COURT:  Any problem?

   6            MR. ATLAS:  No problem.

   7            THE COURT:  Bring him in.  Okay, Mr. Gold.

   8   DIRECT EXAMINATION Continued

   9   BY MR. GOLD:

  10   Q.  Professor Fisher, we go back to the declaration of

  11   Professor Kurlantzick, and within paragraph 3 he stated as

  12   follows:

  13            "A common error in assessing the financial effects of

  14   unauthorized reproduction is the positing of a one-to-one

  15   ratio between acts of copying and displaced sales.  That is,

  16   the assumption is that each pirate sale and instance of home

  17   recording of music, for example, represents a lost sale by the

  18   original record company.  But that assumption is erroneous and

  19   contrary to accepted microeconomic principles.  If it costs a

  20   person less to reproduce a recording than it does to purchase

  21   on the original, it does not follow that a person who home

  22   records will necessarily purchase the record if the home

  23   recording option is available.  The willingness to pay $2 for

  24   a product, whether a quart of orange juice or a musical tape

  25   does not necessarily indicate a willingness to pay $6 for that




577



   1   product."

   2            Do you agree with that conclusion?

   3   A.  Well, I do and I don't.

   4   Q.  Could you explain, sir.

   5   A.  Okay.  I don't know whether it's a common error to posit a

   6   one-for-one ratio.  I haven't seen it.  In any case it's not

   7   my error.  My conclusions certainly don't depend on that.

   8            It is perfectly true economic analysis, and common

   9   sense suggests it, that if there are copies available for free

  10   whereas before there were only originals available at a price

  11   of 20 some dollars, that some of the people who take the

  12   copies for free would not have paid the 20 some dollars in any

  13   event.

  14            But the important fact is that economic analysis also

  15   assures us that a number of people who paid $20 previously

  16   will now take the copies for free.  Before there was one store

  17   to which they could go and buy things for $20 and it was that

  18   or nothing, and some people went in and some people didn't.

  19   Now there are two stores, one offering for $20 and one

  20   offering substantially the same thing for zero.  It doesn't

  21   take much to figure out that among the people who go into the

  22   zero priced store are going to be people who would have gone

  23   into the $20 store.

  24            MR. GOLD:  Thank you.  I have no further questions,

  25   your Honor.




578



   1            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Gold.  Mr. Garbus.

   2   CROSS-EXAMINATION

   3   BY MR. GARBUS:

   4   Q.  Professor Fisher, how much are you being paid for your

   5   time here today?

   6   A.  I'm being paid my current standard commercial rate, which

   7   is $900 an hour.

   8   Q.  And how many hours have you thus far spent on this case?

   9   A.  Up to today, approximately 16.

  10   Q.  Now, is it fair to say that during the first half of the

  11   year you made approximately $300,000 as a result of testifying

  12   in cases?

  13   A.  No, I believe I told you at deposition that with some

  14   uncertainty I thought I made about $300,000 in connection with

  15   cases involved in litigation, not in testifying in them

  16   necessarily.

  17   Q.  How much did you make last year in connection with

  18   testifying?  Do you recall your estimate of $600,000?

  19   A.  I don't.  I do recall my estimate.  I have no reason to

  20   think it was either righter or wronger than I told you then.

  21   It's roughly right.

  22   Q.  $600,000 last year?

  23   A.  In connection with litigation, not necessarily in

  24   connection with testifying.

  25   Q.  And in the previous five years, your average also was




579



   1   $600,000, was it not, in connection with your work in

   2   litigation?

   3   A.  Again, I think that's what I told you at deposition.  I

   4   don't mean to change it now.  I wasn't certain then, I'm not

   5   particularly certain now, but it's roughly of that order of

   6   magnitude.

   7   Q.  And are you involved with a company called Charles River

   8   Associates?

   9   A.  I am indeed.

  10   Q.  And did that company earn last year approximately $35

  11   million for its work in preparation for litigation and

  12   servicing lawyers?

  13   A.  In connection with litigation.  That's got to be roughly

  14   right.

  15   Q.  Are you a shareholder in that corporation?

  16   A.  I am.

  17   Q.  Are you a chairman of the board in that corporation?

  18   A.  Yes, I am.

  19   Q.  Have there been any cases in which you have testified

  20   where the court has totally disregarded your testimony?

  21   A.  There have been --

  22   Q.  Just answer yes or no.

  23   A.  Totally disregard?

  24   Q.  Yes.

  25   A.  No.




580



   1   Q.  Disregarded much of your testimony?

   2   A.  If you want simply a yes or no answer, I think the answer

   3   is no.  I think the answer may be becoming somewhat

   4   misleading.

   5   Q.  At your deposition, reading now at page 38 -- start at

   6   page 37.  Do you recall these questions and answers?  And I am

   7   just reading some preliminary questions:

   8         "Q.  These are cases in which you are quoted or cited.

   9   And could you tell me which one of the two."  Then there is an

  10   objection by Mr. Hart --

  11         "A.  Well, I believe all the cases I described now are

  12   cases I testified in; and so the opinion says something about

  13   me.  No, I don't remember beyond that.  I do remember some of

  14   them.  Both Polaroid v. Kodak and CBS v. ASCAP discussed my

  15   testimony specifically -- not favorably on the whole; and the

  16   others I don't remember.

  17         "Q.  When you say 'not favorably,' can you be more

  18   specific?

  19         "A.  Sure.  Well, I can't be -- I mean, I can be more

  20   specific, but I can't group the two of them.  So I will need

  21   to describe each one of them separately.  In CBS v. ASCAP,

  22   1973, I testified at considerable length for CBS.  And in part

  23   the judge's findings of fact turned on the question of whether

  24   ASCAP members -- if CBS dropped its so-called blanket

  25   license -- would have lined up to do business with CBS.  It




581



   1   was my view they would not for reasons I am happy to go into,

   2   but probably that would take us too far afield.

   3            "Cross-examination of me was really quite successful.

   4   It consisted very largely of ASCAP's lawyer asking me if I

   5   ever talked to a songwriter; and I observed that I had not,

   6   partly because they were, in fact, the defendants, in effect;

   7   and the judge made much of this and disregarded much of my

   8   testimony on the grounds that I had never talked to a

   9   songwriter.

  10            "In Polaroid v. Kodak I was a damage witness, and I

  11   put forward a quite elaborate model of damages for Polaroid,

  12   which I still think was quite correct.  The judge in that case

  13   essentially -- I think what happened there was he

  14   essentially -- he found for Polaroid, by the way, and quite a

  15   big award, but he decided what he thought the award should be;

  16   and in order to get there, had to disregarded the testimony of

  17   every expert, including me; and he thereupon went out and

  18   disregarded the testimony of every expert, including me; and

  19   he said so, both sides."

  20            Then you continue somewhat.

  21            Did you give that answer to that question?

  22   A.  Sure I did.  And I was thinking of those answers when I

  23   told you that just saying yes or no would be misleading.

  24   Q.  Now, how many other cases are you involved in at the

  25   present moment?




582



   1   A.  Somewhere between ten and 12.  That includes all cases

   2   that I'm no longer involved in and that I don't know are dead,

   3   but some of those would be cases on which no work has been

   4   done for a couple of years.

   5   Q.  You and I discussed at some length -- by the way, have you

   6   done any studies since your deposition of July 6, 2000?

   7   A.  In this case?

   8   Q.  Yes.

   9   A.  No.

  10   Q.  Have you prepared any studies at all of your own of any

  11   analysis of the movie industry for the purpose of your

  12   testimony in this case?

  13   A.  No.

  14   Q.  Do you know the number of DVDs that were sold, let's say,

  15   in the year 1999?

  16   A.  I do not.

  17   Q.  Do you know the number of DVDs that were sold, that are

  18   expected to be sold in the year 2000?

  19   A.  I do not.

  20   Q.  Do you have any idea of any of the DVDs that were sold in

  21   the last five years or anticipated being sold in the next five

  22   years?

  23   A.  I do not.  That's why I said -- that's why I was asked to

  24   and I said I would testify on the basis of assumptions.  I

  25   haven't made any separate fact studies.




583



   1   Q.  Now, when you say you haven't made any fact studies, tell

   2   me about these 16 hours.  Did you speak to anybody at the

   3   studios?

   4   A.  Other than counsel, no.

   5   Q.  Did you call anybody at the MPAA for any information about

   6   sales, piracy, loss of sales due to piracy, or different ways

   7   in which piracy is accomplished?

   8   A.  No.

   9   Q.  Did you call anybody at any of the studios to learn any

  10   facts for either the last five years or the projected five

  11   years concerning sales, loss of sales, piracy, the

  12   relationship between piracy and cost?

  13            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I am going to object.  It was

  14   very clear from Mr. Fisher's direct testimony exactly what he

  15   relied upon and, therefore, exactly what he didn't.

  16            THE COURT:  I know.  Look, I don't know why we have

  17   the witness in the first place.  You have basically called the

  18   equivalent of the world's leading expert on physical chemistry

  19   to testify that under the laws of physics and chemistry if you

  20   drive an ice pick into an inflated automobile tire the air

  21   will come out, and the cross-examination is designed to prove

  22   that that opinion did not involve looking at anybody driving

  23   an ice pick into the tire.

  24            I understand that.  This is all wonderful.  I mean I

  25   don't know that we needed an expert witness to say that all




584



   1   things being equal if you give the stuff away for free some

   2   number of people who previously paid for it maybe won't pay

   3   for it in the future.

   4            MR. GOLD:  As always I think your Honor has much to

   5   say on the subject that is truthful and right, but I wish very

   6   much that the motion on damages and the in limine motions were

   7   granted, because I thought we could dispose of any foreseeable

   8   factual issue in less than a day and a half.  And I tried.

   9            THE COURT:  I still have my reservations about

  10   whether there are very many factual issues in this case.

  11            MR. GOLD:  Well, you know our position, but I felt

  12   that put us in somewhat of a bind.  People wanted assurances.

  13            THE COURT:  I am no more complaining about you

  14   calling the witness than I am complaining about Mr. Garbus

  15   asking these questions.  You are both doing what you think you

  16   have to do.  If either one of you thinks it is moving me in

  17   either direction, I invite you to think about the car tire and

  18   the ice pick.

  19            MR. GOLD:  We did try to do it in less than 40

  20   minutes, which is in my experience the usual.

  21            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Garbus.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I'm trying to think about the tire and

  23   the ice pick.

  24            THE COURT:  Good.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Can I have five minutes to think about




585



   1   the tire and the ice pick?

   2            THE COURT:  No, just do the cross-examination.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Okay.

   4            THE COURT:  That's not intended in any way to cast

   5   any aspersions on the witness who is just here doing what he

   6   was asked to do.

   7            THE WITNESS:  Your Honor, I have never before been

   8   called the world's greatest expert on physical chemistry.

   9            THE COURT:  I didn't call you that either.

  10   BY MR. GARBUS:

  11   Q.  So your testimony of 16 hours at $900, that costs the

  12   plaintiff about 13 or $14,000 if my addition is correct?

  13            THE COURT:  Do you need a Ph.D. for that, Mr. Garbus,

  14   to multiply 16 times nine?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  I went to the High School of Science and

  16   I was bad in math.

  17            THE COURT:  You are up to it, Mr. Garbus.  Next

  18   question.

  19   Q.  Who contacted you about this case?

  20   A.  I was first contacted by Mark Litvak who is an attorney

  21   for the Motion Picture Association.

  22   Q.  Isn't it a fact, by the way -- do you know anything about

  23   the growth of Linux in the United States?

  24   A.  I know some things about it, yes.

  25   Q.  Isn't it growing at roughly 30 percent a year?




586



   1   A.  On desktops?

   2   Q.  Yes.

   3   A.  That would exceed the numbers I've seen.

   4   Q.  And with respect to their entire sales of desktops and

   5   word processors, can you tell me?

   6   A.  It's not desktops and word processors.  It's desktops and

   7   servers.  Servers are growing fast.  I don't know what the

   8   rate is, but they are very successful on servers.

   9   Q.  Have you seen articles recently about China and the Linux

  10   system?

  11   A.  I'm aware very recently of an article that said that China

  12   has decided to adopt Linux.

  13   Q.  A lot of people in China?

  14   A.  There are a lot of people in China.  Most of them I

  15   shouldn't think buy $25 DVDs.

  16   Q.  Do you know how many Linux systems right now are being

  17   sold in China?

  18   A.  I do not.

  19   Q.  Do you know of any other country that is backing any other

  20   operating system?

  21   A.  No, I don't.

  22   Q.  Professor Fisher, do you recall testifying in your

  23   deposition about the circumstances of your affidavit?

  24   A.  Yes, I do.

  25   Q.  And you remember you said you signed the affidavit in a




587



   1   hurry?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  Now, can you tell the Court why you signed the affidavit

   4   in a hurry?

   5   A.  Because it was due.

   6   Q.  When did they call you to become an expert in this case?

   7   A.  About a week before it was due, I think, a week to ten

   8   days.

   9   Q.  And who called you?

  10   A.  Mr. Litvak in the first instance, and then Mr. Litvak and

  11   Mr. Hart, and I'm not quite sure whether Mr. Hart was on the

  12   first conversation, but if not he was on almost immediately.

  13   Q.  And do you recall testifying that prior to the time you

  14   signed the affidavit you had spent a total of three hours on

  15   the case?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  So, you gave an opinion in an affidavit for this case

  18   based on three hours.  What did you do in those three hours to

  19   help form an opinion in this case?

  20   A.  I thought --

  21   Q.  You thought a lot.

  22   A.  I'm not finished.

  23   Q.  Excuse me.

  24   A.  When I would like you to finish my sentences, I'll ask

  25   you.  I thought about what economic analysis had to say, and




588



   1   that wasn't really very difficult.  I did some writing of

   2   portions of the affidavit along those lines.  I read the

   3   declarations of defendants' experts and decided quite quickly

   4   that there wasn't any need, they weren't very long and most of

   5   them weren't about economics anyway, and what they had to say

   6   about economics was easy to discuss, and I said what I thought

   7   about that.  This wasn't exactly a difficult task.

   8   Q.  Did you tell Mr. Hart that an economist wasn't needed to

   9   testify in this case?

  10   A.  My first reaction to Mr. Litvak actually, or Mr. Litvak

  11   and Mr. Hart, the way they posed the question, which wasn't

  12   quite the way I came to think about it, which is it didn't

  13   quite have to did with economics, but then when I checked with

  14   my company Charles River Associates for conflicts and I

  15   thought some more about this, and I thought that wasn't true,

  16   that economists do in fact have something to say about this.

  17   Q.  I don't want to be repetitive, but let me just ask you one

  18   question.  In those three hours did you look at any one

  19   statistic coming out of the movie industry?

  20   A.  No.

  21   Q.  Now, have you ever seen Mr. Kurlantzick's testimony which

  22   is cited by the Ninth Circuit in the Rio case?

  23   A.  I have not.

  24   Q.  Has your testimony with your name on it specifically ever

  25   been cited in any case, in all the cases you have testified




589



   1   to?

   2   A.  Well, you just --

   3   Q.  Your name.

   4   A.  You just pointed out it has been cited twice.

   5   Q.  Favorably.

   6   A.  I don't recall that it -- my testimony, as opposed to some

   7   other things I've written -- have been cited favorably,

   8   although in at least one rather important case and also in

   9   others the court's opinions have tracked the testimony fairly

  10   closely.

  11   Q.  Let me ask you the question again.  Has your name ever

  12   been cited with respect to any testimony that you have ever

  13   given in any case over the last 20 years?

  14   A.  Favorably?

  15   Q.  Yes.

  16   A.  I do not recall specific citation of my name, no.

  17   Q.  Is the answer no?

  18   A.  I think I've told you twice now.

  19   Q.  Now, when you had this conversation about whether any

  20   copying had taken place, who was it who said to you we might

  21   want you to testify on the basis that no copying had taken

  22   place?

  23   A.  Mr. Litvak, but I don't think he said -- I'm sorry.

  24   Q.  Tell me what he said.  I don't want to misstate it.

  25   A.  I don't think we discussed specifically whether copying




590



   1   had taken place.  I think the question that was posed to me

   2   was if I assumed that no copying had yet taken place, would it

   3   still be the case that there was harm.

   4   Q.  Did you ask him if they had any proof of any copying?

   5   A.  No, I wasn't asked that.

   6   Q.  So, you get the call.  By the way, who did the first draft

   7   of this affidavit?

   8   A.  Mr. Hart did the first draft after substantial

   9   conversation with me.

  10   Q.  So, let me see if I understand what happens in this three

  11   hours from the time you first get called until the time this

  12   affidavit is created, which is a six page affidavit.  Tell me

  13   how it works.

  14   A.  Okay.

  15   Q.  By then do you have the documents in the case?

  16   A.  By when?

  17   Q.  At the time that you are drafting your first affidavit.

  18            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I'm not sure -- I think that's

  19   a misstatement of the testimony.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Let me ask it again.

  21            THE COURT:  I think it is.

  22   Q.  Tell me what happens during those three hours from the

  23   time you are retained until the time the affidavit is created.

  24   A.  I had a preliminary conversation with Mr. Litvak, and then

  25   with Mr. Litvak and Mr. Hart, about what economics might




591



   1   apply.

   2   Q.  By the way, do you have time sheets?

   3   A.  If you mean do I have records?  I do have records of how

   4   much time was spent on particular days.  I do not have records

   5   of what was done during that time.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  We had asked for those records.  I don't

   7   know, because Mr. Hernstadt is not here, whether or not they

   8   were produced.  Mr. Gold?

   9            MR. GOLD:  No. It might be one of my overnight

  10   assignments to prove the things you have in your file.

  11            THE COURT:  Oh, Mr. Gold, enough already, really,

  12   from both sides and from the witness.  I'm referring to the

  13   comment about finishing sentences.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, may I approach the bench?

  15            THE COURT:  Yes.

  16   Q.  I give you Defendants' Exhibit AYX.  It has some

  17   scribbling at the top which has nothing to do with the

  18   exhibit.  I don't know if the original has scribbling or not.

  19   I recognize the scribbling is my handwriting which is totally

  20   unrelated to it.

  21            Mr. Fisher, you testified in the Microsoft case as an

  22   antitrust expert?

  23   A.  Yes.

  24   Q.  Were you asked in this case to testify in the antitrust

  25   areas?




592



   1   A.  No.

   2   Q.  Take a look at your affidavit.  How many years did you

   3   teach at MIT?

   4   A.  40.

   5   Q.  And look at the number on the third paragraph of the first

   6   page of the affidavit.  What is that number?

   7   A.  3.

   8   Q.  What number generally follows after 3?

   9   A.  4.

  10   Q.  What is the number of the next paragraph?

  11   A.  Unfortunately there has been a glitch and it says 2.

  12   There is a repetition of the numbers 2 and 3.

  13   Q.  Now, when you say unfortunately there is a glitch, did you

  14   read this affidavit before you signed it?

  15   A.  Of course I read it.

  16   Q.  Now, look at the indentation at pages 5 and 6.  It's a

  17   different indentation, is it not, than the other pages in the

  18   affidavit.

  19   A.  It is.

  20   Q.  And were these documents signed on separate papers?

  21   Pardon me.  Were these affidavits --

  22            THE COURT:  There is only one affidavit.

  23   Q.  Was this affidavit sent to you in several pieces?

  24   A.  No, I had the whole affidavit when I signed it.

  25   Q.  Are you aware of the -- do you know Mr. David Boies?




593



   1   A.  I do.

   2   Q.  Have you seen any of the reports or studies that have been

   3   filed in the Napster case?

   4   A.  I have not.

   5   Q.  Are you aware of any studies that have been filed by the

   6   Digital Media Association with respect to the effect of

   7   illegal copying of either movies or audio on sales?

   8   A.  No.

   9   Q.  Do you know of the report of Professor Fayder that has

  10   been filed in the Napster case concerning the relationship

  11   between sales and piracy?

  12   A.  I do not.

  13   Q.  Do you know of the report filed by the Annenberg Center at

  14   the University of Southern California on the relationship

  15   between piracy and increased sales?

  16   A.  In the Napster case?

  17   Q.  Yes.

  18   A.  I don't.  I've already told you I don't know of any of the

  19   reports.

  20   Q.  Putting those reports aside, prior to coming here today

  21   have you looked at any report ever created relating

  22   specifically to the movie industry and the effect of illegal

  23   copying and sales?

  24   A.  No.

  25   Q.  You mentioned all the books you have written and all the




594



   1   articles you have written, is that right?

   2   A.  By number.

   3   Q.  Have you ever written a book specifically dealing with the

   4   relationship between piracy or illegal copying in the movie

   5   industry and sales?

   6   A.  No.

   7   Q.  And would your answer be the same if I asked you with

   8   respect to have you ever written an article specifically

   9   dealing with the effects of piracy or copying and sales?

  10   A.  Yes, my answer would be the same.

  11   Q.  Now, do you know that Professor Kurlantzick who you spoke

  12   about before had testified in the Rio case in California?

  13   A.  No.

  14   Q.  Did you know that both the trial court and the Ninth

  15   Circuit had cited the exact same testimony that you have just

  16   been asked about by Mr. Gold?

  17            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form at least.

  19   Q.  Do you know who Professor Kurlantzick is?

  20   A.  Only from reading his declaration in this case.

  21   Q.  Did you ever make any attempt to find out anything about

  22   his background?

  23   A.  No.

  24   Q.  To your knowledge, has he ever testified in any cases

  25   involving the relationship between copying and sales in the




595



   1   record history?

   2   A.  I don't know.

   3   Q.  Now, have you ever heard of Professor Einhorn?

   4   A.  No, never.

   5   Q.  Have you ever read any articles that Professor Kurlantzick

   6   has written about the relationship between piracy or illegal

   7   copying and sales?

   8   A.  No.

   9            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor, no foundation.

  10            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  11   Q.  Do you know if he has?

  12   A.  No.

  13   Q.  Do you know if Professor Einhorn has ever written any

  14   articles about the relationship between sales and illegal

  15   copying?

  16   A.  No.

  17   Q.  Do you know who Barbara Simon is?

  18   A.  I read her declaration, and while I forget at the moment

  19   what her position is, my recollection is she is with a

  20   nonprofit group.

  21   Q.  Now, do you know who Professor Abelson is at Princeton --

  22   pardon me -- at MIT?

  23            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to this line.

  24   Abelson is a computer assistant professor at Princeton, and we

  25   could go through --




596



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I withdraw it.

   2   Q.  You were asked in your assumption to make certain

   3   assumptions about Internet speeds.  Have you ever written any

   4   articles specifically related to the sending of movies over

   5   the Internet?

   6   A.  No.

   7   Q.  Have you ever seen a DVD movie, period?

   8   A.  No.

   9   Q.  Have you ever seen or has anyone ever asked you to see a

  10   movie that was allegedly transmitted that had been deencrypted

  11   through DeCSS?

  12   A.  No.

  13   Q.  Is there any way that you can have a position on the

  14   difference in the quality between two things that you haven't

  15   seen?

  16            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I object to the question.

  17            THE COURT:  Sustained.  He didn't offer any opinion

  18   on that subject.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I don't think I'll be too

  20   long.

  21   Q.  Do you know what an individual demand curve is?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  Do you know what a market demand curve is?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  Did you try and prepare any of those curves prior to your




597



   1   testimony here today concerning the movie industry or any

   2   individual buyer of DVDs?

   3   A.  I thought about the properties of those curves, but I

   4   certainly didn't try empirically to estimate.

   5   Q.  Now isn't it true that at a zero price there are many

   6   people who will get a DVD where they would not pay 10, 12 or

   7   $15 for it, and that it therefore doesn't affect their

   8   particular buying of the product?

   9   A.  A, yes, it is certainly true that there would be some such

  10   people.  I don't know how many.  B, yes, it is true that it

  11   doesn't affect people buying the product on DVDs, although it

  12   might affect the question of whether they are interested in

  13   watching it in other windows of release.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  This will just be the last question I

  15   think, although I'm not sure.

  16   Q.  I presume no one ever told you that there was one single

  17   sale that's been lost thus far as a result of DeCSS.

  18   A.  Sir, is it a question whether somebody ever told me that?

  19   Q.  Yes.

  20   A.  No, nobody ever told me that.

  21   Q.  Did you ask anyone at the Proskauer firm before you

  22   testified here today whether or not you could see any studies

  23   or any statistics that the movie industry had put together

  24   concerning illegal copying and sales?

  25            MR. GOLD:  I object, your Honor.  It lacks




598



   1   foundation.

   2            THE COURT:  Overruled.  Answer if you can, please.

   3   A.  No, I didn't.  I saw no need for that.

   4   Q.  Now, with respect to the first affidavit, how was the

   5   affidavit signed?  In person?  In fax?

   6   A.  I signed it -- first of all there is only one.

   7   Q.  Yes.

   8   A.  I signed it in person, I sent a faxed copy to Mr. Hart,

   9   and then I sent by I think it's express mail the entire

  10   affidavit and the original signature of Mr. Hart.

  11   Q.  So that was three hours.  And you say you have worked a

  12   total of I think 16 hours?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  Tell me where the other 16 hours come from?

  15   A.  Well, I good deal.

  16            MR. GOLD:  The mathematics are wrong.

  17   Q.  Where did the other 13 hours come from?

  18   A.  Well, I spent a good many of them with you at the

  19   deposition.

  20   Q.  It was a pleasure.

  21   A.  It was for me.  And I spent some time in preparation for

  22   that deposition.

  23   Q.  How much time did you spend in preparation for the

  24   deposition?

  25   A.  A couple hours.  The question -- I'm sorry.




599



   1   Q.  Pardon me.  That's with Mr. Hart and Mr. Proskauer?

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Proskauer hasn't been with us for a

   3   long time.

   4   Q.  That's with Mr. Hart?

   5            THE COURT:  I thought we were getting into a new area

   6   of expertise.

   7   A.  Yes, it was with Mr. Hart.

   8   Q.  So that was how long?  Two hours for the deposition?

   9   A.  Yes, there was some travel time to get to the deposition

  10   and back.

  11   Q.  You came down from Cape Cod?

  12   A.  We like to think of it as up, but, yes.

  13   Q.  So you charged them for the time that it took you to come

  14   down from Cape Cod for your deposition, is that right?

  15   A.  Yes.

  16   Q.  And then you were prepared for your testimony here.

  17   A.  Yes.

  18   Q.  And how long did that take?

  19   A.  I had several conversations in the last couple of days,

  20   and I would say in total those took about two or three hours,

  21   maybe less, about two hours.  That was before today.

  22   Q.  Did you at any time call any other economists who had ever

  23   done any research either in the movie industry or the record

  24   industry?

  25   A.  No.




600



   1   Q.  Did you at any time buy a book that deals with sales in

   2   the movie industry?

   3            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, that lacks foundation.  I'm

   4   not sure there is --

   5            THE COURT:  Sustained.  Sustained.

   6   Q.  Do you know of any books that deal with the question of

   7   sales in the movie industry?

   8   A.  In the sense you mean, no, I don't.

   9   Q.  Did you go to the MPAA site at any time?  By the way, do

  10   you go on the Internet?

  11   A.  From time to time.

  12   Q.  And do you know about Internet speeds?

  13   A.  I'm sorry.  "From time to time" makes it sound as though

  14   it's infrequent.  It's not infrequent.

  15   Q.  And do you know what Internet speeds are let's say with

  16   respect to whatever your computer connection is?

  17   A.  I know generally.  I don't know that I know very

  18   precisely.  Between my wife and me we have about four

  19   computers that we use for this purpose, so they are at

  20   different speeds.

  21   Q.  You are not an expert though, are you, on Internet speeds

  22   on computers or within universities.

  23   A.  Well, I know some things about them, and some of those

  24   things I know from the Microsoft case, but, no, I would not

  25   consider myself to be a specific expert on that subject.




601



   1   Q.  Thank you.  Have you ever testified in a case involving --

   2   and I'm not talking about copyright -- in a case involving

   3   illegal copying of movies, videos, cassettes or DVDs?

   4   A.  No.

   5   Q.  Have you ever testified in a case involving fair use

   6   issues?

   7   A.  I don't think so.

   8   Q.  Have you ever read any academic study -- pardon me -- are

   9   there any academic studies that you know of concerning the

  10   relationship between illegal copying and price?

  11   A.  I shouldn't think so.

  12   Q.  In any event, you haven't read any that you know of?

  13   A.  No, I do know of some issues in the Microsoft case

  14   relating to illegal copying and price, but those aren't

  15   academic studies.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.  Can I hear that again?

  17            (Record read)

  18   Q.  Did you look for any academic studies at any time prior to

  19   the time you came here to testify concerning the relationship

  20   between illegal copying and price?

  21            MR. GOLD:  I think that lacks foundation, your Honor.

  22            THE COURT:  I think we have pretty much exhausted

  23   this line of inquiry, Mr. Garbus.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I will just be very brief and just ask a

  25   few other questions.




602



   1   Q.  One of the cases you are testifying in is the Walmart

   2   case, is that right?

   3   A.  Let me be precise.  I have given a deposition in the

   4   Walmart case.  Against Visa and Mastercard, a class action

   5   case, I expect to testify.

   6   Q.  And in that case the fee was $800 an hour?

   7   A.  Yes, that was my regular fee for cases up until about nine

   8   months ago.

   9   Q.  Have you -- withdrawn.  I think this will be the last.

  10            (Continued on next page)

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




603



   1   Q.  By the way, do you know what a blank DVD disk costs?

   2   A.  We had some discussion of that at my deposition, other

   3   than the information exchanged there, I do not know.

   4   Q.  Do you know what a regular DVD costs that's not blank?

   5   A.  I'm told that it could cost roughly $25.

   6   Q.  Have you ever bought one?

   7   A.  No.

   8   Q.  Did you ever look at any of the license agreements in this

   9   case -- withdrawn.

  10            Were you shown any documents in this case other than

  11   the affidavits you've previously referred to?

  12            THE COURT:  Asked and answered.

  13            He described in detail earlier what he looked at.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I have no further questions.

  15            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I just want to be clear about

  16   something.  Am I to understand from you that the Court, the

  17   Ninth Circuit and the District Court in the case to which you

  18   referred, which I think was the R-I-A-A.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  R-I-O.

  20            THE COURT:  Pardon?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  R-I-O.  I call it the Rio case.  I think

  22   Rio may just have been a party --

  23            MR GOLD:  I think it's the Diamond Media case.

  24            THE COURT:  Diamond Media?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.




604



   1            THE COURT:  Now, am I to understand that it's your

   2   position that the District Court and the Court of Appeals'

   3   opinions relied on Professor Kurlantzick's express testimony

   4   in this?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I think the Court today, I think that

   6   the Court of Appeals quoted him, but I don't remember about

   7   the trial court.

   8            THE COURT:  I would appreciate if you would cite that

   9   to me because I have just been looking on Westlaw and what I

  10   find that the Court of Appeals says there is a dispute about

  11   the effect of illegal copying on sales and it cites

  12   Kurlantzick as on one side of dispute and the record industry

  13   association on the other.  And it doesn't adopt any view of

  14   the dispute.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  16            THE COURT:  Well, if that's what it means to say,

  17   they adopted his view, I guess we have learned something, but

  18   if there is something else to which you are referring, I would

  19   like to know about it.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I think I was just referring to that

  21   case and I guess my -- in any event, the case says what it

  22   says.

  23            THE COURT:  It says what it says  O.K., thank you.

  24            Anything else for this witness, Mr. Gold?

  25            MR GOLD:  No.




605



   1            MR. GARBUS:  You are very computer proficient.

   2            THE COURT:  Thank you.

   3            THE WITNESS:  Thank you, your Honor.  I apologize for

   4   the earlier comment.

   5            THE COURT:  Relax.  Everybody has got to relax.

   6            (Witness excused)

   7            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, what's next?  Or I will tell

   8   you what, since I have another conference at 4:30, let's talk

   9   about scheduling and not call another witness now.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  May we approach the bench on scheduling?

  11            THE COURT:  Let me just find out if I really have a

  12   4:30.

  13            Let's talk about scheduling now.  I do have a 4:30.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Do you want to do it from here?

  15            THE COURT:  We can do it from here.

  16            What have you got left, Mr. Gold?

  17            MR GOLD:  I think only one witness.  I'd have to

  18   check.  If it isn't one, it's two.

  19            THE COURT:  If it isn't one it's?

  20            MR GOLD:  It's two.  And I can find out in a minute,

  21   if you want me to.

  22            THE COURT:  Well, can't Mr. Cooper find out while you

  23   are here dealing with this?

  24            Mr. Cooper, go find out whether you have one witness

  25   left or two; O.K.?.




606



   1            MR. COOPER:  Yes, your Honor.

   2            THE COURT:  Who is the one you are sure about?

   3            MR GOLD:  McHale.

   4            THE COURT:  And who is the one you are not sure

   5   about?

   6            MR. GOLD:  The one, I'm not not sure about, I'm

   7   really not sure about.  I haven't had much to do with it.  I

   8   need to check with other people.  I'm not withholding

   9   anything.

  10            THE COURT:  Then what have we got from you, Mr.

  11   Garbus?

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I was told this was three or four days.

  13            THE COURT:  Well, tomorrow is the fourth day.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Right.  I think we could put on people

  15   Friday morning.

  16            THE COURT:  Tomorrow, whenever the plaintiff is done

  17   tomorrow, I mean I had a conference with you folks and I

  18   alerted you that that was the rule.  We are not just going to

  19   kill a half a day because somebody is not ready to proceed.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I don't know -- I don't know that -- I

  21   would make an attempt to do it.  I don't know as I stand here

  22   now, but I will certainly go out and make a call.

  23            THE COURT:  Well, I assume your client is going to

  24   testify and he is sitting right here now.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Don't make that assumption.




607



   1            THE COURT:  Well, I suggest unless you are clear that

   2   Mr. Gold is going to fill the day tomorrow --

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I'm not clear.  We were supposed to be

   4   told each day what they were going to do tomorrow.

   5            MR GOLD:  Here we are.

   6            THE COURT:  Here we are.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I was supposed to be told at 10 in the

   8   morning what they were going to be doing tomorrow.  I was

   9   never told that.  I did not know they were going to finish

  10   tomorrow.

  11            THE COURT:  Look, I have known since the first day of

  12   the trial that they expected to finish tomorrow.  Indeed I

  13   think I have known it since the pretrial on July 12th.  You

  14   could check, but I have certainly known they expected to be

  15   done on Thursday.

  16            But what do we have, one witness or two?

  17            MR GOLD:  We have one witness and the second witness

  18   we hope we are working out an arrangement.  It's the young man

  19   from Washington who will talk about his exhibits on his

  20   initial affidavits in the preliminary injunction motion.  I

  21   can't imagine --

  22            THE COURT:  Does he have a name?

  23            MR GOLD:  Bruce Boyden; B-O-Y-D-E-N.

  24            THE COURT:  Putting aside for the moment whether we

  25   get started on the defense case tomorrow, what is the defense




608



   1   case?  We now know what the plaintiff's case is, Mr. Garbus.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think it should take more than

   3   four days and I think perhaps less.  I think the direct

   4   examination should be relatively short.  So, I think, assuming

   5   that there is a -- I think we probably are going to produce

   6   about nine or ten witnesses.  I think they're short witnesses.

   7   And I think that they're the witnesses who we've identified

   8   and these are witnesses who have been deposed.  So, I think

   9   they can be short.

  10            THE COURT:  All right.

  11            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, tomorrow morning I think that,

  12   I'm assuming we'll work out this, but with respect to Boyden,

  13   we might have on direct, one, one hour and a quarter, and then

  14   it should be the end of our case.

  15            THE COURT:  All right.  Make sure we do everything

  16   possible to have testimony here tomorrow, Mr. Garbus.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I shall.

  18            THE COURT:  Because I will not be very charitable.

  19            MR. GOLD:  Can I know the other side of that, your

  20   Honor?  I'd like to know who they're putting on tomorrow.

  21            THE COURT:  What's your plan, Mr. Garbus?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I'll make some phone calls and I'll

  23   advise Mr. Gold by, I hope, 7 o'clock tonight.

  24            THE COURT:  All right.

  25            Now, is it going to be your expectation or desire to




609



   1   brief this at the end of the trial?  Is that what you are

   2   going to want to do?

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Whatever the Court wants.

   4            THE COURT:  I'm asking what you want and then I will

   5   decide.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Mr. Gold?

   7            MR. GOLD:  We would like to brief it.  I have no idea

   8   whether Mr. Garbus would like to brief it.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  I'll do whatever Mr. Gold wants to do.

  10   I'm very agreeable.

  11            THE COURT:  I have commented before on how agreeable

  12   you have both been in this case.

  13            MR. GOLD:  I'll remain silent, and I expect to get

  14   credit for it.

  15            THE COURT:  Sufficient unto the day.

  16            I will see you tomorrow morning at 9:00 o'clock.  And

  17   I warn you both that if this thing begins to run beyond the

  18   expectations I have heard about how long it's going to be, we

  19   are going to lengthen the court day.

  20            MR. ATLAS:  One other thing, tomorrow morning,

  21   Mr. Johansen, I believe, will go first pursuant to what we

  22   discussed yesterday at sidebar.

  23            THE COURT:  All right.  So, now you know No. 1, Mr.

  24   Gold.

  25            MR GOLD:  And all I need is No. 2.




610



   1            Thank you, your Honor.

   2            (Proceedings adjourned to July 20, 2000, at 9

   3   o'clock)

   4

   5

   6

   7

   8

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




611



   1                        INDEX OF EXAMINATION

   2   Witness                    D      X      RD     RX

   3   MARSHA KING..............416    424

   4                                   468     543     549

   5   FRANKLIN M. FISHER.......551    578

   6

   7                         DEFENDANT EXHIBITS

   8   Exhibit No.                                 Received

   9    RK ..........................................467

  10    BX ..........................................530

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25


Transcript of Trial - Day 4, MPAA v. 2600 (NY; July 20, 2000)

Transcript of Trial - Day 4, MPAA v. 2600

NY; July 20, 2000

Transcript courtesy of the Electronic Frontier Foundation

See related files:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video (EFF Archive)
http://jya.com/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS (Cryptome Archive)
http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs (2600 Archive)
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/ (Harvard DVD OpenLaw Project)


                                                             



612



   1   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
       SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
   2   ------------------------------x

   3   UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.,
       et al,
   4
                      Plaintiffs,
   5
                  v.                           00 Civ. 277 (LAK)
   6
       SHAWN C. REIMERDES, et al,
   7
                      Defendants.
   8
       ------------------------------x
   9
                                               July 20, 2000
  10                                           9:00 a.m.

  11   Before:

  12                       HON. LEWIS A. KAPLAN,

  13                                           District Judge

  14                            APPEARANCES

  15   PROSKAUER, ROSE, L.L.P.
            Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  16   BY:  LEON P. GOLD
            CHARLES S. SIMS
  17        SCOTT P. COOPER

  18   FRANKFURT, GARBUS, KLEIN & SELZ
            Attorneys for Defendants
  19   BY:  MARTIN GARBUS
            ERNEST HERNSTADT
  20        DAVID ATLAS

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




613



   1            (In open court)

   2            MR. GARBUS:  May we approach the bench?

   3            THE COURT:  Yes, you and Mr. Gold may approach the

   4   bench.

   5            (At the sidebar)

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I got the Court's opinion yesterday when

   7   I got back to my office, and we will try and deal with it in

   8   some way.  I do want to point out that as I read the

   9   transcript, I was asked to stop going into an area that I

  10   thought was relevant to the lawsuit because the Court felt

  11   that I was getting into a recusal issue.  The Court then asked

  12   the question that was specifically related to the recusal

  13   issue.  I think it's very difficult to try a case while this

  14   is going on.

  15            THE COURT:  I hear what you said, and what you've

  16   said is, regrettably, absolutely false.  And the transcript so

  17   reflects.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Secondly --

  19            THE COURT:  I did not stop you from going into

  20   anything.  I raised a concern about whether you were doing it

  21   for a different purpose.  I said that.  You then said you

  22   weren't and therefore you would leave the subject.  I said,

  23   look, if you want to press it, it raises another issue and I

  24   will deal with it.  You then elected to stop.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.  With respect to the issue of




614



   1   the press, the Court has already indicated in its previous

   2   decisions some concern.  I had 12 calls from the press

   3   yesterday.  I spoke to nobody.  I do not fault Mr. Gold at

   4   all.  I do understand, and I could be totally wrong, and I am

   5   not making criticism of any kind, that members of the

   6   Proskauer firm have spoken to the press.  If I'm wrong, then

   7   I'm wrong.

   8            MR. GOLD:  I didn't hear what you said.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  That members of the Proskauer firm have

  10   been speaking to the press, and I find nothing wrong with it,

  11   I'm not even asking about it.

  12            Are you saying --

  13            THE COURT:  Stop it, Mr. Gold.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  All I'm saying is if there is to be a

  15   bar, or if there is to be any significance given to any

  16   discussion by any member of the defense team or the

  17   defendants -- I have also seen Mr. Valenti's statements and

  18   statements by the MPAA -- then if the Court wishes to impose a

  19   press bar on everybody, I will not object to it.

  20            THE COURT:  Are you asking for it?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Absolutely not.  But I don't want to be

  22   the only one feeling the pressure of that restriction.

  23            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, any pressure you are feeling

  24   in this regard is internally generated.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.




615



   1            THE COURT:  I have imposed no bar, no one has asked

   2   me to impose a bar, and so that the record is abundantly

   3   clear, yesterday when you made a statement to the effect that

   4   you had not been making certain sorts of out of court

   5   statements or would not, or something to that effect, there

   6   was comment on the fact that you were speaking only for

   7   yourself.

   8            MR. GARBUS:  Absolutely.

   9            THE COURT:  And you made clear that you were speaking

  10   only for yourself.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  Absolutely.

  12            THE COURT:  And you know we are not, all of us,

  13   totally in a vacuum.  It is perfectly obvious that others at

  14   your table, or at least one other that I can identify, is

  15   speaking to the press with immense regularity.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Do you care to mention the extent to

  17   which the other side is speaking to the press through press

  18   releases and distributing information as well?

  19            THE COURT:  I have absolutely no idea.  I suppose you

  20   are both talking to the press a lot.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I am not.

  22            THE COURT:  Those are generic you's.  Both sides are

  23   obviously talking to the press.

  24            (In open court)

  25            Do you have a witness, Mr. Gold?




616



   1            MR. GOLD:  Yes, we do, your Honor.

   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  I think we have agreed to do Mr.

   3   Johansen first.

   4            THE COURT:  We will take Mr. Johansen out of order.

   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, your Honor.

   6            The defendants call Jon Johansen.

   7    JON JOHANSEN,

   8         called as a witness by the Defendants,

   9         having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

  10   DIRECT EXAMINATION

  11   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

  12   Q.  Good morning, Mr. Johansen.

  13   A.  Good morning.

  14   Q.  Where do you live?

  15   A.  I live in Larvik, Norway.

  16   Q.  How old are you, sir?

  17   A.  I will be 17 in November.

  18   Q.  What is your educational background?

  19   A.  High school.

  20   Q.  Do you work now?

  21   A.  Yes, I do.

  22   Q.  Where do you work?

  23   A.  I work for WAP Factory in Oslo.

  24   Q.  What do you do for them?

  25   A.  I work in interactive TV.




617



   1   Q.  What does WAP Factory do?

   2   A.  We work with WAP, the Wireless Application Protocol, and

   3   interactive TV.

   4   Q.  Does it produce programs?

   5   A.  We -- yes, but not for the general public.

   6   Q.  Thank you.  What program languages do you use?

   7   A.  I use C, C++, Assembler and JAVA.

   8   Q.  And what operating systems do you use?

   9   A.  I use GNU/Linux, FreeBSD and Windows NT.

  10   Q.  How many computers do you have at home?

  11   A.  I have three computers.

  12   Q.  And what are the operating systems on those computers?

  13   A.  One has GNU/Linux, one has FreeBSD and one has GNU/Linux

  14   and Windows NT.

  15   Q.  What do you use those machines for?

  16   A.  The Linux only machine is used as a router, which I use to

  17   connect to the Internet, and the FreeBSD machine is used as a

  18   file print server and the new Linux and Windows NT machine is

  19   my desktop machine.

  20   Q.  How long have you used Linux programs?

  21   A.  I used Linux for about three years.

  22   Q.  What is your primary operating system that you use?

  23   A.  That would be Linux.

  24   Q.  When did you first -- do you know what a DVD is?

  25   A.  Yes, I do.




618



   1   Q.  When did you first see a DVD?

   2   A.  I first saw a DVD in 1997.

   3   Q.  Okay.  As of October 1999 did you own any DVDs?

   4   A.  Yes, I did.

   5   Q.  How many?

   6   A.  About 15.

   7   Q.  How many do you have today?

   8   A.  Today I have about 40 DVDs.

   9   Q.  Okay.  Did you buy them?

  10   A.  Yes, I did.

  11   Q.  How much does a DVD cost in Norway?

  12   A.  Region 2 DVDs for the European market are about 20 to $30,

  13   but they lack -- they usually lack all the extra features that

  14   are on the region 1 U.S. DVDs, so I buy imported U.S. DVDs,

  15   which are about 40 to $50.

  16   Q.  Can you play an imported U.S. DVD in Norway?

  17            MR. SIMS:  Object to this whole line as irrelevant,

  18   your Honor.

  19            THE COURT:  Sustained.  No, I'm not sure.  Overruled.

  20   I will let it go a while.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, your Honor.

  22   A.  Can you please repeat?

  23            (Record read)

  24   A.  When a DVD comes from the factory it will only play the

  25   European region, which is 2, but almost all DVD players in




619



   1   Norway are modified to play DVDs from the whole world.

   2   Q.  Who modifies the DVD players?

   3   A.  The stores usually have a person who they send the DVD

   4   players to to have them modified before they sell them.

   5   Q.  Do you have DVD a player in your home?

   6   A.  Yes, I do.

   7   Q.  How many?

   8   A.  I have a set up DVD player for my TV and I have a DVD

   9   player on my computer.

  10   Q.  On which computer do you have the DVD player?

  11   A.  That would be Linux.

  12   Q.  Do you know a program called DeCSS?

  13   A.  Yes, I do.

  14   Q.  What is it?

  15   A.  It is a program which decrypts DVD movies and stores them

  16   on your hard drive.

  17   Q.  Does DeCSS do anything else?

  18   A.  No, it does not.

  19   Q.  Who wrote DeCSS?

  20   A.  I and two other people wrote DeCSS.

  21   Q.  How did this come about?

  22   A.  In September, October, 1999 I met a person on the Internet

  23   and he was also a Linux user.  We decided to investigate and

  24   find out how we could make a DVD player for Linux.

  25   Q.  Why did you want to do that?




620



   1   A.  Well, at the time I had a dedicated Windows machine, which

   2   I used only for DVD playback, and if I could get a Linux

   3   player I wouldn't have to have a machine just for DVDs.

   4   Q.  Okay.  So what did you do?

   5   A.  Well --

   6            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, object on relevance to this

   7   whole line.

   8            THE COURT:  Tell me why.

   9            MR. SIMS:  Excuse me?

  10            THE COURT:  Tell me why.

  11            MR. SIMS:  Because the issue in the case has nothing

  12   to do with why this person created an executable for DeCSS.

  13   It has to do with what its function is and what Mr. Corley has

  14   done.

  15            THE COURT:  I am going to hear the evidence, within

  16   reasonable time limits, for what it's worth.  Go ahead.  I

  17   mean the man is here from Norway, I might as well hear him.

  18            MR. HERNSTADT:  Do you want to hear the purpose of

  19   the evidence or would you rather hear the evidence?

  20            THE COURT:  You are going to get the evidence in and

  21   I will hear the argument later, unless we come to a point

  22   where I think you have taken too much time and then you can

  23   try to explain to me why we should take more.

  24   Q.  Mr. Johansen, what did you do next towards making DeCSS?

  25   A.  We agreed that the person who I met would reverse engineer




621



   1   a DVD player in order to obtain the CSS algorithm and keys.

   2   Q.  Who was this person that you met on the Internet?

   3   A.  A person from Germany.  I don't know his identity.

   4   Q.  Okay.  What happened next?

   5   A.  About three days later when I was on line again, he

   6   messaged me and told me that he had found the CSS algorithm.

   7   He also sent the algorithm to me with the CSS authentication

   8   source which are written by Eric Fawcus earlier.  He also sent

   9   me information on where inside the player he had found the

  10   algorithm, and he also sent me a single player key.

  11   Q.  Why did he send you the information on how he found the

  12   algorithm?

  13            MR. SIMS:  Objection.

  14            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  15   Q.  What did you do next?

  16   A.  Well, he had told me where inside the player he had found

  17   the algorithm, so I disassembled the DVD player myself to see

  18   where he had found it.

  19   Q.  Was this a software DVD player?

  20   A.  Yes, this was a software DVD player, the Xing DVD player.

  21   Q.  What did you do next?

  22   A.  Well, at the time -- the UDF is a file system which is

  23   used on DVDs, and at the time Linux did not have the proper

  24   support.  It was currently in double opt.  It was being double

  25   opted so I could not get it to work, so in order to test the




622



   1   decryption, if the decryption algorithm found worked, I

   2   created a Window executable which would use the CSS algorithm

   3   to decrypt the CSS content.

   4   Q.  You said you got the CSS authentication program from Derek

   5   Fawcus?

   6   A.  Yes, I believe the CSS authentication had been posted

   7   anonymously in Assembler language on the Internet, and Derek

   8   Fawcus had picked that up and rewritten it in C language and

   9   posted it on his website.

  10   Q.  How do you know that it was Derek Fawcus?

  11   A.  He told me.

  12            MR. SIMS:  Judge, move to strike.  Hearsay.

  13            THE COURT:  Strike what Mr. Fawcus told him.

  14   Q.  Were there any other indications that Mr. Fawcus might

  15   have been connected to the program?

  16   A.  The CSS-authentication?

  17   Q.  Yes.

  18   A.  Well, it was posted on his website so I presume he put it

  19   there.

  20   Q.  All right.  Tell us what happened next.

  21   A.  Well, after I had created the DeCSS executable, I posted

  22   it on my website, I made an announcement on the LiViD mailing

  23   list.  I posted a link to my website.

  24   Q.  Why did you make an announcement on the LiViD mailing

  25   list?




623



   1   A.  Well, I wanted them to know that we had successfully

   2   reverse-engineered a DVD player and obtained the algorithm we

   3   needed to make a DVD player.

   4   Q.  Why did you want the LiViD mailing list to know that?

   5   A.  That's what LiViD is about, it's about making a DVD player

   6   for Linux.

   7   Q.  Were you able to play DVDs on a Linux machine using DeCSS?

   8   A.  Well, yes.  After I had decrypted a movie, I used the NIST

   9   MP-2 player to successfully play a DVD.  I wouldn't have

  10   access to the DVD features but I could play the actual movie.

  11   Q.  Have you looked at any other programs that do

  12   substantially the same thing as DeCSS?

  13   A.  Yes, I have.  Before I created DeCSS, I had analyzed a

  14   program called DVD Rip, which I had found on the Internet.

  15   Q.  Why did you need to make DeCSS if you had found a program

  16   that did essentially the same thing?

  17   A.  Well, DVD Rip, it takes a decrypted DVD movie from memory

  18   and stores it on your hard drive.  It did not come in source,

  19   and in order to make a DVD player we would need to have

  20   source, and the DVD republication didn't contain the CSS

  21   algorithm and it was dependent on a DVD player for Windows.

  22   Q.  Did the DVD Ripped program decrypt DVDs?

  23   A.  No, it actually stole, if you would like to use that term,

  24   the DVD movie from memory after it had been decrypted by the

  25   Xing DVD player and then you save that stream on your hard




624



   1   drive.

   2   Q.  Were the files created by DVD Rip and DeCSS the same?

   3   A.  Not exactly, but the files created could easily be

   4   compressed using another compressed algorithm.

   5   Q.  And did DVD Rip, the file created by DVD Rip, was the

   6   audio and video together or separate?

   7   A.  They were together.

   8   Q.  And how about with DeCSS?

   9   A.  Well, they are still together with DeCSS as well.

  10   Q.  Okay.  Is there anything -- I'll move on.  What happened

  11   to you after --

  12            THE COURT:  Let me get clarification of that.  With

  13   DeCSS was there any need, is there any need to synchronize the

  14   audio files with the video files in order to see the movie in

  15   the form you would normally see a movie?

  16            THE WITNESS:  Well, if you make a DivX, is that what

  17   you mean?  Or if you want to play the DVD movie after it has

  18   been decrypted?

  19            THE COURT:  Either way.

  20            THE WITNESS:  After we decrypt a movie with DeCSS,

  21   you can simply play it in your DVD player.  You don't need to

  22   do anything.

  23            THE COURT:  What if you then want to compress it and

  24   transfer the compressed file to someone?

  25            THE WITNESS:  Well, that you would need -- I haven't




625



   1   actually performed that procedure, but I believe there are

   2   steps needed to resynchronize the video and audio.

   3            THE COURT:  What is the basis for your belief in that

   4   regard?

   5            THE WITNESS:  I have read several articles on the

   6   Internet that describe those procedures.

   7            THE COURT:  All right.  Go ahead.

   8   Q.  If you use DVD Rip to decrypt or to get a decrypted DVD

   9   file, is there a need to synchronize the audio and visual if

  10   you are going to compress it thereafter?

  11   A.  Well, I haven't performed that procedure myself, but I

  12   believe there would be.

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Johansen, if you would sit back about

  14   another six inches, the audio will be a lot clearer.

  15            MR. SIMS:  Move to strike.  No foundation to the last

  16   part of that.

  17            THE COURT:  I will take it for what it's worth.  If

  18   he hasn't done it, he hasn't done it.

  19   Q.  After you posted the link to the DeCSS program on the

  20   LiViD site, what happened then?

  21   A.  Well, I had some small increase in visitors, not much.

  22   After the press started releasing articles and linked it to my

  23   site, I received a substantial increase in visitors.

  24   Q.  Was anyone on the LiViD site critical of you posting a

  25   link to CSS?




626



   1   A.  Yes, there was at least one person who felt that we should

   2   have released the source with the Xing key at the same time we

   3   released the executable.

   4   Q.  Did you release the source at the same time?

   5   A.  No, we did not.

   6   Q.  Why didn't you?

   7   A.  Because the source we had contained the Xing player key.

   8   If we were to release that source, the Xing would be harmed,

   9   the player key would be revoked and no new DVD movies would

  10   work with the Xing DVD player or the player we would have

  11   created.

  12   Q.  Did you intend never to release the source?

  13   A.  Before we created DeCSS we sent the source to Derek

  14   Fawcus.  He was supposed to rewrite the source without the

  15   need for the Xing player key and then release that onto the

  16   Internet.

  17   Q.  Did any event occur to you personally as a result of your

  18   writing DeCSS?

  19            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  Irrelevant.

  20            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  21   Q.  What happened next?

  22            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  Irrelevant.

  23            THE COURT:  Well, look, we all know the story, don't

  24   we?  What's the harm?  Go ahead.

  25   A.  Well, in January, on January 25, I had to go to the local




627



   1   prosecutor's office because of charges filed by the MPAA in

   2   Norway, and in February I received an award, a national

   3   student award which is awarded to students who are in high

   4   school and have achieved excellent grades and also achieved

   5   something outside of school in culture, sports, art.

   6   Q.  Why did you receive that award?

   7   A.  I believe I received the prize because of my part in the

   8   writing DeCSS.

   9   Q.  Did you get a prize?

  10   A.  Yes, I did.

  11   Q.  Did you get any money?

  12   A.  I received about $2,000.

  13   Q.  What did you do with the money?

  14   A.  I used $1200 and bought a high-end Sony DVD player for my

  15   TV.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Mr. Johansen.

  17            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims.  Thank you, Mr. Hernstadt.

  18   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  19   BY MR. SIMS:

  20   Q.  Good morning, Mr. Johansen.

  21   A.  Good morning.

  22   Q.  Now, you understood when you created DeCSS executable that

  23   DVD movies were encrypted using the CSS encryption algorithm,

  24   correct?

  25   A.  Yes, I did.




628



   1   Q.  And you first learned of CSS in about June or July of

   2   1999?

   3   A.  Yes, I did.

   4   Q.  You understood that CSS required three sets of keys to

   5   play back a DVD?

   6   A.  Yes.

   7   Q.  And you understood that certain of those keys were

   8   themselves encrypted?

   9   A.  Well, I believe I understood that the CSS license requires

  10   anyone who makes a DVD player to encrypt their algorithm and

  11   key inside the DVD player.

  12   Q.  The program you created, DeCSS, that you posted, is a

  13   Windows program, correct?

  14   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  15   Q.  And you came up with the name DeCSS?

  16   A.  Yes, I did.

  17   Q.  What does the De in DeCSS stand for?

  18   A.  It stands for decrypt.

  19   Q.  DeCSS has no playback functionality, is that correct?

  20   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  21   Q.  Once a decrypttive VOB file is copied to the user's hard

  22   drive, he can do anything with that file that he can do with

  23   any other computer file?

  24   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  25   Q.  He can copy it again?




629



   1   A.  Yes, that's correct.

   2   Q.  Compress it?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  He can copy it to a VCD?  I'm sorry.  He can copy it to a

   5   video compact disk?

   6   A.  Well, not in its original decrypted form.  The size is too

   7   high.

   8   Q.  But if he compresses it, it can be copied to a video

   9   compact disk?

  10   A.  Yes, if he uses sufficient compression.

  11   Q.  And to a CD-ROM?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  And it can be uploaded on to the Internet -- it could be

  14   uploaded to the Internet, correct?

  15   A.  Yes, just as any other file.

  16   Q.  Now, am I correct that someone in a chat room advised you

  17   two months ago that he or she had downloaded a decrypted

  18   DivX'd DVD movie from the Internet?

  19   A.  No, I believe someone told me that they had downloaded a

  20   movie.  They didn't tell me what form it was or which movie it

  21   was.

  22   Q.  They didn't tell you that it was DivX'd?

  23   A.  No, they did not.

  24   Q.  What was the chat room, by the way, where you had that

  25   communication?




630



   1   A.  That would be #PC DVD.

   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  I object and move to strike the last

   3   several questions and answer on the grounds of hearsay.

   4            THE COURT:  I'm not going to take it for the truth.

   5   Q.  Now, Mr. Johansen, did you testify last night that you

   6   were told by this person that he had downloaded a DivX'd

   7   movie?

   8   A.  No, I believe I told last night that he had told me that

   9   he had downloaded a movie.  He didn't say which kind of movie

  10   it was.

  11            MR. SIMS:  I don't quite remember the approach you

  12   want, but that testimony appears on page 10 of the --

  13            THE COURT:  I don't have it.  Just read it.  Give the

  14   page and line number and just read it.  If there is a dispute

  15   over the accuracy of the reading or of the transcript, we'll

  16   deal with it.

  17            MR. SIMS:  Page ten, line 3.

  18         "Q.  Okay.  What has that person told you?"

  19   A.  I believe he told me he had downloaded a movie from the

  20   Internet.

  21            THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  There is no reason you would

  22   be any more familiar with U.S. courtroom procedure than I

  23   might be with Norwegian.  At this moment counsel is going to

  24   read from the transcript of what you said last night.  When he

  25   says "question," what that indicates is that he is about to




631



   1   read what you said last night and we will let you know when

   2   you are to answer again.

   3            THE WITNESS:  Okay.

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  I can see that it's hearsay.

   5            THE COURT:  Well, now it goes to credibility.  Go

   6   ahead.

   7   BY MR. SIMS:

   8   Q.  The transcript says:

   9         "Q.  Okay.  And what has that person told you?"  And the

  10   reporter wrote down the following answer:

  11         "A.  He told me that he had downloaded a DivX movie."

  12            Is that correct?

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims, your question is unclear.  If

  14   you are asking him if it's correct that that's what the

  15   transcript says, we don't need that testimony.  If you are

  16   asking him whether what he said last night is true, that's an

  17   appropriate question.

  18            MR. SIMS:  That's an appropriate question?

  19            THE COURT:  Yes.  Mr. Hernstadt?

  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, actually the first

  21   question is not entirely inappropriate.  This is not a final

  22   transcript.

  23            THE COURT:  Are you disputing its accuracy in this

  24   regard?  Do we have to bring the court reporter in to testify

  25   as to the accuracy of the transcript?




632



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  No, sir.

   2            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Sims.

   3   Q.  Is it true that you were told by this person that he had

   4   downloaded a DivX'd movie?

   5   A.  No, it is not.

   6   Q.  And did you testify last night that he did tell you that?

   7   A.  No, I believe I testified that he had said he had

   8   downloaded a movie, not which kind.

   9   Q.  Now, this conversation you had, what was the name of the

  10   chat room again?

  11   A.  Pound PC DVD.

  12   Q.  Is that the precise chat room where you had announced your

  13   creation of the Windows DeCSS utility?

  14   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  15   Q.  And how many months after you made that announcement in

  16   that chat room did you have this conversation with this

  17   person?

  18   A.  Excuse me?  Could you please repeat?

  19   Q.  Yes.  How long was it after you had made the announcement

  20   about the Windows DeCSS utility did you have this conversation

  21   with this person in which the person told you that they had

  22   downloaded a movie from the Internet?

  23            MR. HERNSTADT:  Object to the form.

  24            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  25   A.  I don't recall, but I believe it was about a month.




633



   1   Q.  And am I correct that the Pound PC DVD chat room is not

   2   limited to Linux users?

   3   A.  The Pound PC DVD channel is open for all users of PCs and

   4   DVDs.

   5   Q.  Thank you very much.  Now, you testified on direct that a

   6   German person, I think, had reverse-engineered the Xing DVD

   7   player, is that correct?

   8   A.  Yes, that is correct.

   9   Q.  And that person goes by the nick Ham?

  10   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  11   Q.  And it's Ham who wrote the source code that performed the

  12   authentication function in DeCSS, is that correct?

  13   A.  No, that is not correct.  He did not write the

  14   authentication code.  He wrote the decryption code.

  15   Q.  He wrote the encryption code?

  16   A.  Decryption code.

  17   Q.  Decryption.

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  Ham is a member of Masters of Reverse Engineering or MORE?

  20   A.  That's correct.

  21   Q.  And are you also a member of MORE?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  There are other members in Germany and Holland, is that

  24   correct?

  25   A.  Well, the third member is in the Netherlands.




634



   1   Q.  And it was Ham's reverse engineering of the Xing DVD

   2   player that revealed the CSS encryption algorithm, am I right?

   3   A.  Yes, that's correct.

   4   Q.  Reverse engineering by Ham took place in or about

   5   September 1999?

   6   A.  Yes, I believe it was late in September of 1999.

   7   Q.  And you testified that it was this revelation of the CSS

   8   encryption algorithm and not any weakness in the CSS cipher

   9   that allowed MORE to create DeCSS, is that correct?

  10   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  11   Q.  You obtained the decryption portions of the DeCSS source

  12   code from Ham, correct?

  13   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  14   Q.  You then compiled the source code and created the

  15   executable?

  16   A.  Well, in the form I received it, it was not compatible.

  17   Q.  Well, you testified the operation of DeCSS on a Windows

  18   machine initially, correct?

  19   A.  Actually, I tested it under -- it was under Windows.

  20   Q.  And in performing your tests on DeCSS, which DVDs did you

  21   decrypt?

  22   A.  Well, I don't recall which DVD I tried first, but the

  23   second DVD I tried was the Matrix.

  24   Q.  And how many times did you decrypt DVDs?

  25   A.  Well, each time I watch a movie I decrypt a DVD.  I don't




635



   1   recall how many times I watched the DVD movie on my computer.

   2   Q.  When you posted the Microsoft Windows executable version

   3   of DeCSS, you had no knowledge that the program would run

   4   under Linux, correct?

   5   A.  No, that's not correct.

   6   Q.  Had you run it under Linux at that time?

   7   A.  No, I had not, but in theory it should work using an

   8   application called wine, W-I-N-E.

   9   Q.  When you posted the DeCSS executable on your web page, you

  10   did not post the source code, correct?

  11   A.  That is correct.

  12   Q.  You testified a moment ago that you thought it would work

  13   under wine, is that correct?

  14   A.  That is correct.

  15   Q.  Have you ever actually tried that?

  16   A.  No, I have not.

  17            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, would you have a seat,

  18   please.

  19   Q.  Now, you first posted the DeCSS executable utility where?

  20   A.  I posted it on my website.

  21   Q.  And after that, you announced that it was available on

  22   your website in two different forums or two different places,

  23   correct?

  24   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  25   Q.  And what were those two places?




636



   1   A.  LiViD mailing list and the Pound PC DVD IRC chat room.

   2   Q.  Which did you do first?

   3   A.  That would be the Pound PC DVD chat room.

   4   Q.  Am I correct that when you posted the announcement to the

   5   LiViD mailing list that you just testified about, that was the

   6   very first time you had ever posted anything or sent any

   7   message to the LiViD mailing list?

   8   A.  Yes, that is correct.

   9   Q.  And did your announcement say anything about which

  10   operating systems it had been tested on?

  11   A.  Yes, I believe it did.

  12   Q.  And which operating systems did it identify?

  13   A.  I believe the message said it had been tested on Windows

  14   95, 98 and Windows NT.

  15   Q.  Any others?

  16   A.  I believe Windows 2000 was mentioned, but I don't recall

  17   if it had been tested on that or not.

  18   Q.  And were there any other operating systems you identified

  19   as having tested it under?

  20   A.  No, I don't.

  21   Q.  So they were only Windows operating systems.

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  Now, you testified last night that your web page was a

  24   support page or Sigma Designs hardware-based DVD player, am I

  25   correct?




637



   1   A.  Yes, that is correct.

   2   Q.  What is Sigma Designs?

   3   A.  Sigma Designs is a company in California which has several

   4   years of experience in MPEG.

   5   Q.  To your knowledge, do they manufacture a CSS-licensed DVD

   6   player that runs under Microsoft Windows?

   7   A.  Yes, they do.

   8   Q.  What is it called?

   9   A.  It's called Hollywood Plus.

  10   Q.  Hollywood Plus.

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  And you are also aware that Sigma Design has announced

  13   plans to release a Linux-based DVD player?

  14   A.  Yes, I am.

  15   Q.  Do you understand that Sigma Designs has a license from

  16   the DVD-CCA to do that?

  17   A.  Well, I would assume they have or else they wouldn't be

  18   making it.

  19   Q.  And have you provided some assistance to the French

  20   programmer for Sigma Designs who is working on that Linux DVD

  21   player, correct?

  22   A.  Not direct assistance, but I have e-mailed him.

  23   Q.  You have?

  24   A.  E-mailed him.

  25   Q.  And have you provided any technical information to him?




638



   1   A.  No, I have not.

   2   Q.  Before you posted the DeCSS executable onto your web page

   3   and made the announcement that you testified about, have you

   4   ever had any communications with the defendant in this lawsuit

   5   Eric Corley?

   6   A.  No, I have not.

   7   Q.  You never communicated with him at all until after this

   8   lawsuit was filed, correct?

   9   A.  Yes, I believe that's correct.

  10   Q.  And you never saw Mr. Corley post a message to the LiViD

  11   mailing list prior to that time, correct?

  12   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  13   Q.  In fact to your knowledge -- strike that.

  14            Do you have any knowledge that Mr. Corley has ever

  15   been a member of the LiViD group?

  16   A.  No, he has not.

  17   Q.  Now, at the time you posted your message onto the LiViD

  18   mailing list that you mentioned, you did not have the DeCSS

  19   source code on your page, correct?

  20   A.  That is correct.

  21   Q.  And am I correct that some members of the LiViD group

  22   expressed anger at you for not providing the source code with

  23   the utility?

  24   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  25   Q.  What is a flame war?




639



   1   A.  A flame war is when two or several people engage in a

   2   discussion which gets out of hand.

   3   Q.  Am I correct that you got involved in a flame war with at

   4   least one member of the LiViD group over the fact that you

   5   didn't post the DeCSS source code?

   6   A.  I did get involved in a flame war, but I am not aware if

   7   he was a member of the LiViD group or not.

   8   Q.  Where did the communication you had with respect to this

   9   take place?

  10   A.  Some of it took place on the LiViD mailing list and some

  11   of it was sent directly.

  12   Q.  And it began on the LiViD mailing list?

  13   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  14   Q.  Now, Mr. Fawcus created the css-auth source code that you

  15   used in creating the utility, correct?

  16   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  17   Q.  And the dispute centered around the fact that the German

  18   member of MORE, Ham, had used Mr. Fawcus's code but had

  19   removed Fawcus's name and copy left notification, is that

  20   correct?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  What is copy left, as you understand it?

  23   A.  Copy left is when you use basically a copyright that gives

  24   the user freedoms instead of taking them away.

  25   Q.  And the dispute centered around someone's complaint that




640



   1   MORE was not playing by the -- I'm sorry.  What is GPL?

   2   A.  GPL is a copy left license provided by the Free Software

   3   Foundation.

   4   Q.  Was MORE's failure to credit Mr. Fawcus a violation of the

   5   GPL license, as you understood it?

   6   A.  Yes, I believe so.

   7   Q.  In a nutshell, MORE was not playing by the GPL rules that

   8   the LiViD group normally plays by, correct?

   9   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  10   Q.  And it was your understanding that Mr. Fawcus could sue

  11   you for that, correct?

  12   A.  Well, yes, that is correct.

  13   Q.  And you eventually settled your difference with

  14   Mr. Fawcus?

  15   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  16   Q.  You got a special license from him to use his source code

  17   without credit, correct?

  18   A.  Well, he agreed that we didn't have to do anything to

  19   provide new copies of the source with the original header.

  20   Q.  And your reason for doing that was to avoid making DeCSS's

  21   source code fully open source.

  22   A.  That's not correct.  It was already an open source at that

  23   time.

  24   Q.  Am I correct that you didn't want it to be open source so

  25   that you could keep the secrecy of the Xing key?




641



   1   A.  Yes, that is correct.

   2   Q.  The Linux community, as you understand it, believes in

   3   free source code, open source code, correct?

   4   A.  Yes, that is correct.

   5   Q.  And MORE didn't make DeCSS available with open source code

   6   to the entire Linux community when it posted the utility,

   7   correct?

   8   A.  Yes, that is correct.

   9   Q.  When you announced to the LiViD mailing list in October

  10   that DeCSS.exe was available on your web page, you said that

  11   it works with the Matrix, DoD Speed Ripper doesn't, correct?

  12   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  13   Q.  It's your belief, I take it, that DeCSS is superior to

  14   Speed Ripper?

  15   A.  Excuse me.  Can you please repeat.

  16   Q.  Do you believe that DeCSS is superior to Speed Ripper?

  17   A.  Not directly superior, but it does decrypt some movies

  18   that the Speed Ripper did not decrypt at that time.

  19            MR. SIMS:  I have no more questions.  Thank you.

  20            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.

  22   REDIRECT EXAMINATION

  23   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

  24   Q.  You were asked if you had used DeCSS to decrypt a DVD.

  25   Have you ever used a decrypted file from a DVD to make a DivX?




642



   1   A.  No, I have not.

   2   Q.  Have you ever placed a decrypted DVD on the Internet,

   3   transmitted it in some way?

   4   A.  No, I have not.

   5   Q.  Have you ever made it available on the Internet for

   6   someone to download?

   7   A.  No.

   8   Q.  Have you ever sold a decrypted DVD in any form?

   9   A.  No, I have not.

  10   Q.  Have you ever traded a decrypted DVD with anyone?

  11   A.  No, I have not.

  12   Q.  Have you ever downloaded a DivX movie?

  13   A.  No.

  14   Q.  Have you ever made a DivX movie available for uploading?

  15   A.  No, I have not.

  16   Q.  Have you ever made a DivX movie available for someone else

  17   to download from your website?

  18   A.  No, I have not.

  19   Q.  Have you ever used DeCSS for anything other than viewing

  20   DVDs that you purchased?

  21   A.  No, I have not.

  22   Q.  You mentioned the Sigma Designs player.  Is that a

  23   software player?

  24   A.  Well, it's a soft -- it's hardware-based.  It comes with a

  25   piece of hardware but you also need the player that comes with




643



   1   it, a piece of software.

   2   Q.  Does that mean you have to buy two pieces?

   3   A.  The product contains two pieces.

   4   Q.  You testified that you did not release the source code on

   5   the DeCSS executable when you made the program a available on

   6   your website.

   7   A.  Yes, that is correct.

   8   Q.  Did you make the source code available to Derek Fawcus?

   9   A.  Yes, that is correct.

  10   Q.  And did Derek Fawcus write that source code -- rewrite the

  11   source code?

  12   A.  Yes, I believe he did.

  13   Q.  What operating system did he rewrite it for?

  14   A.  He wrote it for Linux.

  15   Q.  Why did you not want to release the source code for DeCSS?

  16   A.  Because the DeCSS source code contained the Xing player

  17   key.  If we were to release that source, the Xing key would be

  18   revoked, Xing would probably have their license revoked, and

  19   new DVDs which would be released later would not work with

  20   Xing's player nor the player we would have created.

  21   Q.  You said that the German member of MORE found the CSS

  22   algorithm by reverse-engineering the software.  Did he say to

  23   you whether it was difficult to do?

  24   A.  No, he said it was not difficult.

  25   Q.  Okay.  You said that you did the same thing based on what




644



   1   he informed you about how he had done it?

   2   A.  Yes, I did.

   3   Q.  Did you find it difficult to do?

   4   A.  No.

   5            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  Irrelevant.

   6            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   7   Q.  How long did it take you to find the algorithm?

   8            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  Irrelevant.

   9            THE COURT:  Why is it relevant, Mr. Hernstadt?

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Well, Mr. Sims brought it out on

  11   cross-examination, and I am merely trying to clarify the

  12   record with respect to the reverse-engineering process.

  13            THE COURT:  Did you raise it, Mr. Sims?

  14            MR. SIMS:  Certainly not in terms of effectiveness,

  15   which is where we're going now.

  16            THE COURT:  Did you raise it, whether it was

  17   subjectively in terms of effectiveness or not?

  18            MR. SIMS:  I don't think I did.

  19            THE COURT:  Let me look at my notes then.

  20            MR. SIMS:  I did ask questions about the obfuscation

  21   about the Xing key, but ...

  22            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt, I don't see it quickly.  I

  23   mean, is there something that you remember that will prompt my

  24   memory?

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  I believe it was something about that




645



   1   the key was hidden.  I don't recall exactly what it is.  I

   2   just had it in my note.

   3            THE COURT:  It will take less time to hear it then.

   4   Overruled.

   5            THE WITNESS:  Can you please repeat the question?

   6            THE COURT:  Did you find it difficult to do, was the

   7   question.

   8            THE WITNESS:  No, I did not.

   9   Q.  You discussed a dispute with Derek Fawcus about taking his

  10   name off the source code that he had provided.  Were you aware

  11   of that?

  12   A.  No, I was not aware of that.

  13   Q.  When did you find out that his name had been taken off the

  14   source code?

  15   A.  I found that out when he posted a message to the LiViD

  16   mailing list saying that one of the files we had in our source

  17   was actually his, but it did not contain the GPL header on his

  18   name.

  19   Q.  What did you do when you read that posting to the LiViD

  20   list?

  21   A.  I e-mailed him and tried to sort out a solution.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Mr. Johansen.  I

  23   have nothing further.

  24            MR. SIMS:  Nothing more, your Honor.

  25            THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. Johansen, thank you very




646



   1   much.

   2            Mr. Gold?

   3            MR. GOLD:  I'm going to call Mikhail Reider to the

   4   stand.

   5            THE COURT:  Is Mr. Young back there?  We are working

   6   on your request, but in the interim I can tell you that you

   7   are able to buy from the court reporters a floppy that has the

   8   day's proceedings by about 7 o'clock every night.

   9            MR. COOPER:  Good morning.  Your Honor, plaintiffs

  10   call Mikhail Reider.

  11    MIKHAIL REIDER,

  12        called as a witness by the Plaintiffs,

  13        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

  14            MR. GARBUS:  May I just ask one thing?  There is some

  15   question about whether or not the plaintiffs will rest after

  16   this witness or call another witness.  Could we know that so

  17   we can decide how to arrange our witnesses?

  18            THE COURT:  That's a reasonable request.

  19            Mr. Gold?

  20            MR. SIMS:  I don't know the answer to that.  The

  21   short answer is if we have completed a stipulation, and we

  22   sent our work over to Mr. Hernstadt -- let me go find out.

  23            THE COURT:  I take it the answer is in your hands at

  24   the moment, Mr. Garbus.

  25            MR. SIMS:  I don't believe it will be necessary,




647



   1   but --

   2            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, this will be our last witness

   3   and we will rest after she leaves the stand.

   4            THE COURT:  Whether or not you get the stipulation?

   5            MR. GOLD:  Yes.

   6            THE COURT:  Okay.  You have your answer, Mr. Garbus.

   7            Proceed, Mr. Cooper.

   8            MR. COOPER:  Thank you, your Honor.

   9   DIRECT EXAMINATION

  10   BY MR. COOPER:

  11   Q.  Good morning, Ms. Reider.

  12   Q.  Who is your employer?

  13   A.  The Motion Picture Association.

  14   Q.  What is your current job position?

  15   A.  I am manager of worldwide Internet antipiracy operations.

  16   Q.  What is your education background?

  17   A.  I have an undergraduate Bachelors in international

  18   relations taken from the California State University of

  19   Northridge, and an M Phil. in international conflict

  20   resolution from the University of Dublin, Trinity College.

  21   Q.  What is your employment background?

  22   A.  From 1985 through '89 I was with the Rand Corporation, a

  23   governmental think tank as a research assistant.  Subsequent

  24   to that, I took my M Phil. and joined the banking interest

  25   Great Western Financial Corporation as a legislative and




648



   1   regulatory analyst.  After that, I joined the Department of

   2   Justice Drug Enforcement Administration as an intelligence

   3   research specialist.

   4   Q.  When were you with the Department of Justice for the DEA?

   5   A.  From 1992 through '95.

   6   Q.  And what did you do with the DEA?

   7   A.  As an intelligence research specialist I collected and

   8   analyzed intelligence as it related to federal narcotics

   9   trafficking investigations.

  10   Q.  And after the Department of Justice, what did you do next?

  11   A.  I was briefly with the United States State Department

  12   Peace Corps in Thailand.

  13   Q.  And how long were you with the Peace Corps in Thailand?

  14   A.  Five to six month.

  15   Q.  And after you returned to the United States, what was your

  16   next position?

  17   A.  Again with the U.S. Department of Justice, this time in

  18   the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

  19   Q.  What did you do for the F.B.I.?

  20   A.  Intelligence research specialist.

  21   Q.  And that was during what period?

  22   A.  1995 through '97.

  23   Q.  After your position with the F.B.I., what was your next

  24   position?

  25   A.  I joined the California State Bar Association as an




649



   1   investigator.

   2   Q.  And how long were you with the California State Bar?

   3   A.  Only eight months.

   4   Q.  Why was that?

   5   A.  The Governor of California vetoed the fee bill which

   6   funded the state bar.

   7   Q.  Okay.  And after that you took a position with?

   8   A.  The Motion Picture Association.

   9   Q.  I see.  And your position with the MPAA began when?

  10   A.  In spring of 1998.

  11   Q.  Okay.  Did you use computers in connection with the job

  12   positions you just described?

  13   A.  Yes.  Yes, through all of the jobs.

  14   Q.  In what ways?

  15   A.  Both in research on the Internet and specialized data

  16   bases, as well as using proprietary software programs for

  17   analyzing large volumes of electronic data.

  18   Q.  Do you have any specialized training in Internet

  19   investigations?

  20   A.  Yes, I do.

  21   Q.  What is that training?

  22   A.  Both through the Department of Justice through

  23   intelligence schools and also through HTCIA.

  24   Q.  What is HTCIA?

  25   A.  The High Technology Crime Investigators Association.  It's




650



   1   a worldwide body comprised of state, local, federal law

   2   enforcement from around the world as well as private industry

   3   security officials who are dedicated to fighting cyber crime.

   4   Q.  Do you have any computer program experience?

   5   A.  Yes, I do.

   6   Q.  How extensive is that?

   7   A.  It's limited.  UNIX, BASIC, does.

   8   Q.  Was that also received in the course of your various prior

   9   employments?

  10   A.  Yes, it was.

  11   Q.  What are your current job responsibilities at the MPAA?

  12   A.  I oversee all Internet investigations around the world and

  13   coordinate between our worldwide offices.

  14   Q.  Since the beginning of your employment by the MPAA in 1998

  15   has the MPAA been monitoring the Internet for infringement

  16   activity?

  17   A.  Yes, actively.

  18   Q.  Can you generally describe what has been done?

  19   A.  Well, we monitor and search routinely website, FTP sites,

  20   FSUs, file swapping utilities, IRC, the Internet relay chat

  21   channels, news groups or Usenet.

  22   Q.  Could you briefly describe what file swapping utilities

  23   are?

  24   A.  They are basically glorified FTPs.  They allow individuals

  25   to directly transfer files between one another, music or




651



   1   movies.

   2   Q.  Can you give me the name of any file swapping utility that

   3   you are currently monitoring?

   4   A.  Sure.  IMESL, Gooey, Hotline, ScourNet, FileShare,

   5   FileSwap, Freenet.

   6   Q.  Is Napster also a file sharing utility?

   7   A.  Napster also is an FSU.

   8   Q.  Would you just tell us what Internet relay chats are?

   9   A.  It's basically the CB radio of the Internet.  It was

  10   created in the mid to late 80s.  It allows people to talk in

  11   real time on line to one another no matter where they are, or

  12   near real time.  They have a number of networks and within

  13   that channels.

  14            Channels are created by any user whenever they feel

  15   like it, so channels can go up and go down in a matter of

  16   minutes or hours, or channels can be kept alive for years if

  17   the operators of that channel so deem.

  18   Q.  Once these channels are set up, are they all accessible to

  19   the public?

  20   A.  No, some of them are members only.

  21   Q.  How often does the MPAA monitor the Internet?

  22   A.  Daily.

  23   Q.  And how do you identify sites to monitor?

  24   A.  It's a combination of factors.  Our member companies will

  25   send up sites they wish us to monitor.  The public will call




652



   1   or write in to us with sites as well as through our own

   2   intelligence gathering and investigations we have sites that

   3   routinely lead us to other plays that harbor piracy on line.

   4   Q.  Have the MPAA come aware of any instances of member

   5   companys' DVDs being decrypted and made available in any form

   6   on the Internet prior to October 1999?

   7   A.  No.

   8   Q.  When was the first time you heard of the existence of a

   9   utility that defeated CSS and decrypted the content of one of

  10   the studio's DVDs?

  11   A.  Early to mid-October of 1999.

  12   Q.  What was that utility?

  13   A.  DeCSS.

  14   Q.  What was the source of the original information you

  15   received in the existence of DeCSS?

  16   A.  I found it on a news posting on Slashdot.

  17   Q.  What did you do about the information regarding the

  18   existence of DeCSS?

  19   A.  I followed their links and ultimately downloaded a copy of

  20   DeCSS.

  21   Q.  And did you test it to see if it worked?

  22   A.  Yes, I did.

  23   Q.  Did it?

  24   A.  Yes, horrifyingly simple to use.

  25   Q.  How long did it take you to download DeCSS?




653



   1   A.  A matter of minutes.

   2   Q.  And how long did it take you to decrypt a DVD using DeCSS?

   3   A.  Approximately five minute.

   4   Q.  What operating system were you using?

   5   A.  Windows.

   6   Q.  Was DeCSS a Windows program?

   7   A.  Yes, it was.

   8   Q.  What did you do next?

   9   A.  I notified our legal department and Ken Jacobson, who is

  10   my direct supervisor, and began to request the issuance of

  11   cease and desist letters.  Ultimately we filed this lawsuit.

  12   Q.  Now, have you ever heard of a program called DiVX?

  13   A.  Yes, I have.

  14   Q.  And when did you first become aware of that program?

  15   A.  Late February, early March of 2000.

  16   Q.  Did you download it?

  17   A.  Yes, I did.

  18   Q.  And did you examine it?

  19   A.  Yes, I did.

  20   Q.  What is it?

  21   A.  It's a codec or compression, decompression algorithm that

  22   allows one to take the rather substantial files from the DVD

  23   and highly compress them to make it easy for distribution or

  24   manipulation.

  25   Q.  Did there come a time when the MPAA became aware of the




654



   1   availability of decrypted DVDs on the Internet?

   2   A.  Yes, we did.

   3   Q.  When was that for the first time?

   4   A.  Late April, early May of 2000.

   5   Q.  How did you become aware of that?

   6   A.  Through our routine monitoring some of the pirate sites we

   7   routinely look at, we began to see evidence of these decrypted

   8   DVDs.

   9   Q.  How many titles initially did you see being available?

  10   A.  A handful.

  11   Q.  How many sites?

  12   A.  I'm sorry?

  13   Q.  How many sites initially?

  14   A.  Again, a handful.

  15   Q.  Since late April or early May, has the MPAA become aware

  16   of any increase in the availability of encrypted DVDs?

  17   A.  Absolutely.  The number has certainly surged upward.

  18   Q.  On what types of sites have you seen these DVDs being

  19   available?

  20   A.  It runs the gamut from website to FTP sites, offering on

  21   IRC channels, FSUs.

  22   Q.  Do all of the sites offer decrypted DVDs for download or

  23   hard goods through barter or sale?

  24   A.  No, not all of them.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  I would object unless we have the




655



   1   windows or the pictures of the site that she is referring to.

   2   Other than that, it's hearsay.

   3            THE COURT:  What do you say, Mr. Cooper?

   4            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, the windows or site, if you

   5   will, are on the Internet and are constantly changing.  I

   6   don't believe that there are any screen shots other than those

   7   we have produced in the discovery.  We have produced some of

   8   those, and we are eliciting general testimony regarding this

   9   witness's experience and activity in connection with what the

  10   MPAA knew about these activities and when.  And for that

  11   purpose I think it's competent.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I will object to any testimony that's

  13   not related to particular screen shots.  Any testimony that

  14   she wants to talk about that has screen shots related to it or

  15   marked in as exhibits, I would have no objection to.

  16            THE COURT:  Is it your position, Mr. Garbus, that the

  17   plaintiffs in this case and the MPAA knew and did nothing

  18   about cracks of CSS for a long time?  Haven't you been singing

  19   that refrain?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  21            THE COURT:  And that's not a pejorative comment, but

  22   since the opening of the trial?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  24            THE COURT:  Why isn't it relevant to that?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Anything is relevant if there is




656



   1   admissible evidence with respect to it.

   2            THE COURT:  It's state of mind.  It's offered not for

   3   the purpose of the truth.  It's offered for the purpose of

   4   state of mind.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I object to it.  I think it's offered --

   6            THE COURT:  Why isn't it relevant to state of mind?

   7   Is state of mind relevant, in your estimation?

   8            MR. GARBUS:  I think the state of mind is not

   9   relevant.  I think what's relevant is what the truth is.

  10            THE COURT:  Mr. Cooper, what do you say to that?

  11            MR. COOPER:  Well, we agree that state of mind is not

  12   relevant, although we are trying to respond to what we

  13   understood the defendants' position was.  This information is

  14   being offered as testimony of what Ms. Reider saw in

  15   connection with her activity for the MPAA.  It's competent

  16   testimony with respect to that.

  17            Whatever Mr. Garbus might want to ask her regarding

  18   what an individual site may have said, I think the issue is

  19   what the MPAA was doing in connection with its investigations

  20   in response to Mr. Garbus's prior positions that it wasn't

  21   doing enough.

  22            THE COURT:  Look.  Haven't the plaintiff's taken the

  23   position -- I mean, isn't this a precise turnabout?  Mr.

  24   Garbus spent a couple of days trying to establish that this

  25   CSS system had been cracked a long time ago, the studios knew




657



   1   it, they didn't protect themselves, and you folks constantly

   2   objected that none of that was relevant on the ground that the

   3   effectiveness or robustness of your security system was not

   4   material here, and I sustained those objections.  Right?

   5            MR. COOPER:  Yes, your Honor.

   6            THE COURT:  All right.  So now comes turnabout.  You

   7   want an answer on all of that, and I previously ruled it out

   8   when he tried to put it in.  Why shouldn't I do the same thing

   9   for the same reason when you try to put it in?

  10            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, what you are suggesting

  11   about the proper scope of the issues that are reasonably and

  12   in material dispute in this case, we agree with.  The question

  13   here is a little different than the one you earlier ruled

  14   upon.

  15            THE COURT:  Tell me how it's different.

  16            MR. COOPER:  The earlier question went to the

  17   efficacy of CSS as a security system.

  18            THE COURT:  Right.

  19            MR. COOPER:  This I believe addresses Mr. Garbus's

  20   second point, which we also believe is irrelevant, and that is

  21   that the MPAA, once the circumvention device became known, did

  22   too little or otherwise failed to react to the threat imposed

  23   by DeCSS quickly enough.  And while I believe that that is

  24   also irrelevant, we are attempting to respond to that to the

  25   extent the Court is interested in the issue.




658



   1            THE COURT:  Well, let's find out.  Mr. Garbus, what

   2   Mr. Cooper describes as your second point, are you in fact

   3   making that argument, that is to say, that the MPAA was too

   4   slow getting here?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  What she is testifying to, as I

   6   understand it, is that --

   7            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I will let you say what you

   8   want to say, but I really would like an answer to the question

   9   first.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Can I hear the question again.

  11            (Record read)

  12            THE COURT:  Are you making that argument?

  13            MR. GARBUS:  The answer is yes.

  14            THE COURT:  Overruled.  I am not taking it for the

  15   truth.  I am taking it on the issue of whether the MPAA's

  16   right to relief, if it has any, is in any way affected by

  17   undue delay in getting to the courthouse.

  18            Go ahead, Mr. Cooper.

  19   BY MR. COOPER:

  20   Q.  Do all of the sites you have just described offer

  21   decrypted DVDs for download or hard goods through barter or

  22   sale?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  Let me see if can I make it clear.  Our

  24   point is --

  25            I'm prepared to do this at the sidebar.




659



   1            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Garbus.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  It's our point that once they knew about

   3   DeCSS, two things happened.  One is they did nothing about it;

   4   two, that prior to the time that they knew about DeCSS, they

   5   knew about other utilities that ripped DVDs, and as I

   6   understand what her testimony is, it is that she saw sites

   7   that said it's from the DVD.  These are not sites that say, as

   8   I understand her testimony, it's from a DVD that's deencrypted

   9   through DeCSS.  So just let me parse out our position a little

  10   more precisely, if I can.  Again, I am prepared to do it at

  11   the sidebar unless the Court is comfortable.

  12            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, you can stop repeating that.

  13   If I find I need a sidebar, I will let you know.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  15            It is our position that last year they knew about a

  16   number of procedures that could be utilized with respect to

  17   DVD movies, that the only procedure that in any way related to

  18   Linux or, if you want to call it a competitive technology, was

  19   DeCSS.  What they did is they did not go after any of the

  20   technologies, they only went after DeCSS.  So the delay deals

  21   with their knowledge prior to DeCSS that there were other

  22   rippers and other utilities and their failure to do that.  At

  23   least that's our position.

  24            THE COURT:  My ruling is the same.  Go ahead,

  25   Mr. Cooper.




660



   1            I'm not taking it for the truth.  I'm taking it as I

   2   indicated.

   3            MR. COOPER:  Would you read back the pending

   4   question, please?

   5            (Record read)

   6            THE COURT:  That is, the truth of anything that was

   7   on the websites.

   8   A.  No, not all of the sites.  Some of them point in the

   9   direction of where to locate them but they don't actually

  10   offer distribution themselves.

  11   Q.  And has the MPAA followed those pointers from one site to

  12   another?

  13   A.  Yes, we have.

  14   Q.  And approximately how many of these site have you become

  15   aware of in the last two and a half months?

  16            THE COURT:  Be specific about what sites you are

  17   talking about.  So far we have ones that offer to barter and

  18   sell and you've got ones that point.

  19   Q.  Can you distinguish between the ones that offer for

  20   barter, sale or download on one hand and the ones that point?

  21   A.  Yeah.  Approximately over 40 sites.

  22   Q.  Of which type?

  23   A.  Those which offer for barter or sale, distribution as

  24   opposed to just pointing in the direction.

  25   Q.  What is the MPAA currently doing about these sites?




661



   1   A.  We have ongoing investigations.

   2   Q.  And can you, without going into the investigative details

   3   of any of those investigations, tell me anything about them?

   4   A.  We have investigations currently active with federal law

   5   enforcement here in the U.S. and worldwide.

   6   Q.  Which U.S. agencies?

   7   A.  U.S. Customs, Secret Service and F.B.I.

   8   Q.  Do you have information regarding any connection between

   9   the recent availability on the Internet of decrypted DVDs and

  10   the utility DeCSS?

  11   A.  Absolutely.

  12   Q.  What is that information?

  13   A.  Well, prior to the appearance of DeCSS we had seen no

  14   decrypted DVDs anywhere on the Internet, and thereafter we

  15   watched DeCSS proliferate alarmingly.  It was simple to use.

  16   We saw decrypted DVDs appear for sale and distribution not

  17   long thereafter.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question.  She was asked

  19   what information she had and then she responded with

  20   speculation.

  21            THE COURT:  Where was the objection before she

  22   answered, Mr. Garbus?

  23            MR. GARBUS:  It was only after she answered that it

  24   was clear.

  25            THE COURT:  You know better than that, with all due




662



   1   respect, but I think part of this testimony --

   2            MR. GARBUS:  Look at the answer.  See where the

   3   answer comes in.

   4            THE COURT:  Part of this answer has no foundation, at

   5   least to the extent it's offered for the truth.  The portion

   6   in which the witness said that prior to the appearance of

   7   DeCSS they had seen no decrypted DVDs anywhere on the

   8   Internet, I think that is perfectly admissible.  It relates to

   9   her personal knowledge.

  10            The part of the answer that speaks of watching it

  11   proliferate at an alarming rate I take to be that she saw lots

  12   of sites on the Internet offering movies, but I have heard no

  13   evidence based on personal knowledge that what was on the

  14   Internet, that is to say, offers to sell or barter or

  15   whatever, are properly considered for the truth of those

  16   statements.

  17            The part of the answer that says we saw decrypted

  18   DVDs appear for sale and distribution not long thereafter, I

  19   guess I need to hear more about in order to find out on what

  20   basis the witness is telling me that.

  21            MR. COOPER:  Just to understand that last point, I

  22   believe the witness testified that DeCSS was first on the

  23   Internet in October and that the first appearance --

  24            THE COURT:  Here is your problem, Mr. Cooper.  Your

  25   problem is whatever was said a few minutes ago that you are




663



   1   trying to prove, that in fact since October there are lots of

   2   movies being bought and sold over the Internet that were

   3   decrypted through DeCSS, you are trying to prove it by saying

   4   that there were none before October.  Then DeCSS appeared, all

   5   of which I think is relatively -- at least the second point is

   6   uncontroversial.  And the first point is evidence to support

   7   your position, although it's disputed.

   8            The third point depends on the truth of whatever was

   9   on the Internet.  That is to say, if the witness saw 40

  10   website offerings to sell DVD movies, you would like me to

  11   conclude that in fact those websites were, as they said on the

  12   Internet, offering to distribute decrypted movies, that is,

  13   they would perform as they indicated they would perform; and

  14   then you are asking me further to draw the inference from the

  15   timing that whatever they were selling or offering to sell

  16   came from the DeCSS.

  17            Now, the link you are having a problem with here is

  18   that I think Mr. Garbus's objection is that it would be

  19   inappropriate for me to assume that simply because you see on

  20   the Internet a page that says "come get your copy of the

  21   Matrix from us" means that in fact if somebody went to that

  22   site a decrypted copy of the Matrix would be forthcoming.

  23   That is essentially your argument, right, Mr. Garbus?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, or that there is any reason to

  25   believe that it comes from DeCSS or any other source.




664



   1            THE COURT:  Well, I understand that point as well,

   2   but they are asking me to infer that from the timing.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, your Honor, you stated our

   4   position.

   5            THE COURT:  Okay.  Now, he is making what I take to

   6   be essentially a hearsay and/or a competence argument,

   7   probably more hearsay than competence, about my considering,

   8   or the purpose for which I consider Ms. Reider's testimony

   9   about what is available on the Internet.

  10            The situation would be the same if we were trying a

  11   trademark case and you were trying to prove the availability

  12   in the marketplace of counterfeit Levi jeans from newspaper

  13   articles that indicated that somebody was offering counterfeit

  14   Levi jeans.  Now, there is perhaps a legal issue that you may

  15   want to brief, both of you, as to whether that's appropriate

  16   evidence, but I think that analogy is exactly what we're

  17   talking about.  Right, Mr. Garbus?

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, sir.

  19            MR. COOPER:  That's Mr. Garbus's analogy, your Honor.

  20   We don't believe --

  21            THE COURT:  No, that was my analogy.

  22            MR. COOPER:  We don't believe that's the correct

  23   analogy in this case.  This is not a case in which we are

  24   pursuing for the relief sought in this case, the relief that

  25   would be sought in a case in which the bootleg --




665



   1            THE COURT:  No, of course you're not.  But the whole

   2   purpose of this line of testimony, putting aside responding to

   3   this sort of quasi laches argument, is to persuade me that

   4   this is a real problem.  And whether it's a real problem

   5   depends, at least in part, on whether it's out there in the

   6   marketplace.  And the way those kinds of issues are usually

   7   handled in a trademark case is that the investigator comes in

   8   and says that I went to the store on Fordham Road and I bought

   9   these six pairs of counterfeit jeans and here they are, and a

  10   witness shows up from Levis and says we didn't make them,

  11   they're counterfeit.

  12            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, this goes to the question of

  13   the appropriateness of relief and the question of a reasonable

  14   apprehension of harm in the absence of that relief.

  15            We are not attempting to prove here or indeed seek

  16   the relief associated with copyright infringement per se.  We

  17   are not attempting to adduce the kinds of hard evidence that

  18   would be necessary for a case that involved those issues.

  19   What we are doing is attempting to provide to you our

  20   reasonable apprehension that in the absence of the release

  21   sought we will be harmed.

  22            THE COURT:  Well, you know, I hear the words but I'm

  23   not sure I understand the symphony, to mix my metaphors very

  24   badly.  I really am not.

  25            Look, I will hear the testimony, Mr. Garbus, but you




666



   1   clearly know I understand the point, and if you want to brief,

   2   either or both sides, the issue of what I'm supposed to

   3   consider, that aspect of the testimony we have just narrowly

   4   focused on, the witness's testimony about what's available

   5   over the net, you are welcome to brief it.  And in order to

   6   decide this case, if I find I have to decide it, I'll decide

   7   it.  For now I'll hear the evidence.

   8            MR. COOPER:  Thank you, your Honor.  Let me just

   9   conclude with this witness then, your Honor, based on what you

  10   have said, with two areas of questions.

  11   BY MR. COOPER:

  12   Q.  First, I believe that we left off with this question of

  13   the connection between DeCSS and the decryption of movies.

  14            Have you seen any direct connection between DeCSS and

  15   the decrypted DVDs on the Internet in your investigation?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  I object on the grounds of lack of

  17   foundation.

  18            THE COURT:  Let me just go back to one or two more

  19   thoughts that just occurred to me about the last question

  20   before you go on, Mr. Cooper.

  21            Among the things that you ought to consider, if you

  22   are going to brief this point, and then I will consider

  23   whether you brief it or not, are these:

  24            First of all, I suppose it might be argued that when

  25   somebody posts on the Internet saying, "Come to me, I'll sell




667



   1   you a copy of the Matrix," that is a statement of a state of

   2   mind, or a present intention or something like that from which

   3   one is entitled to infer conduct.  I'm not sure about that,

   4   but that's why I put it on the table.

   5            Secondly, maybe this notion of a verbal act as it

   6   relates to the hearsay rule is implicated.

   7            I'm really not sure about either one of those points,

   8   but I want to let you know I'm thinking about them so you can

   9   respond in due course.

  10            Okay, Mr. Cooper.

  11            MR. COOPER:  Thank you, your Honor.

  12   BY MR. COOPER:

  13   Q.  Do you have the question in mind, Ms. Reider?

  14   A.  Could you repeat it, please?

  15   Q.  Let me restate it.

  16            Has there been in your investigation any direct

  17   connection in the information that you have seen between DeCSS

  18   and the decryption of the movies on the Internet?

  19   A.  Yes, there have been.

  20   Q.  What is that information?

  21   A.  I have seen sites where they suggest the use --

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I assume I have a continuing objection.

  23            THE COURT:  Look, I think you should make your

  24   objections, but if it's the same objection, if you would be so

  25   kind as to say "the same objection," then I will simply know




668



   1   it's the same thing, we don't have to pause, I will take it

   2   subject to what I just indicated.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  I think I will say the same thing.

   4            THE COURT:  Okay.  Same ruling.  If it's something

   5   new, let me know it's something new.

   6            Go ahead, folks.

   7            THE WITNESS:  May I continue?

   8            I have seen sites that have suggested the use of

   9   DeCSS in order to then use the DivX codec against DVDs that

  10   also offer DivX-made movies on their sites.

  11   Q.  Ms. Reider, given the wide proliferation of DeCSS on the

  12   Internet, what help would the issuance of a permanent

  13   injunction in this action do in your enforcement activity for

  14   a number of companies?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

  16            THE COURT:  Well, I am going to take that answer as

  17   well.  Let it be added to my list of things that counsel

  18   should consider with respect to the stuff of the Internet,

  19   Rule 803(17) and how it applies in the electronic age.  Rule

  20   803(17).

  21            Okay.  Ms. Reider, I realize I'm stepping on your

  22   lines constantly here this morning.  Do you need the question

  23   read back?

  24   A.  Yes, please.

  25            (Record read)




669



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, it seems to me, unless I'm

   2   missing the point, that this sounds like a legal conclusion.

   3            THE COURT:  I don't think it's a legal conclusion.  I

   4   mean, that's kind of like asking somebody who lives downstream

   5   of a damn that's about to be destroyed what effect a permanent

   6   or preliminary injunction against tearing down the damn would

   7   have on his property.  The answer is a perfectly practical one

   8   about preventing the river from flowing across the property.

   9   I think that's what the question asks for.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Okay.  I have stated my position.

  11            THE COURT:  I understand.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I'm not moved by the analogy between a

  13   damn and a flowing river.

  14            THE COURT:  I know.  I have given you lots of

  15   analogies to think about in this case.

  16            Go ahead, Mr. Cooper.

  17   A.  It would send a very strong message to both those that

  18   would engage in illegal behavior and to law enforcement to

  19   enforce it.  It will make my job certainly, hopefully, easier

  20   in terms of enforcing the right of our member companies for

  21   the safety and security of their intellectual property.

  22   Q.  Let me ask you the same question with respect to the

  23   effect, if the Court does not issue a permanent injunction,

  24   what effect will that have on your activity to enforce the

  25   interests of the member companies?




670



   1            THE COURT:  Believe me, that's not a useful question

   2   either.  There is another component that needs to be in that

   3   question for it even to be relevant.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Can we ask how upset she would be if you

   5   deny the injunction?

   6            THE COURT:  We will have you testify about how upset

   7   you will be if I grant it.

   8            MR. COOPER:  You mean if the Court concludes that

   9   there is a violation here that determines not to issue the

  10   injunction?

  11            THE COURT:  I don't know what the point of all this

  12   is.  Obviously the case isn't over, and if there is more

  13   evidence that sheds light on the subject, I will certainly

  14   consider it, but it seems to me that there is a reasonably

  15   strong case to be made for the proposition that the barn is

  16   unlocked and this horse is out.

  17            Now, it seems to me also that what the MPAA wants is

  18   a legal determination that unlocking this barn was illegal,

  19   and so the next guy who considers unlocking another barn is

  20   going to have something serious to think about.  I suspect you

  21   are also asking me to issue an injunction against the guy who

  22   unlocked this barn not to unlock it again even though there is

  23   no horse in it.  So, you know, I don't know that this witness

  24   has any light to shed on that subject.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  I must say I'm now finding your




671



   1   analogies much more to my liking.

   2            MR. COOPER:  If I may, let me just say that our

   3   position is obviously that the analogy that you referred to is

   4   not apt, as Mr. Garbus has pointed out in his prior responses.

   5   I recognize now is not the time to argue that issue.  And

   6   under the circumstances, if the witness's testimony about her

   7   own experiential ability to deal with this issue and what aid

   8   the Court's injunction might have in her enforcement

   9   activities is not something that the Court is interested in

  10   receiving at this time, then I would say that our --

  11            THE COURT:  That was not my point.  This whole little

  12   discussion got started because you asked her what the effect

  13   of my not issuing an injunction would be, and I assume that I

  14   am going to hear a tale of woe, obviously just like I've heard

  15   a tale of woe on the other side if I do issue the injunction.

  16            But the critical ingredient is that the witness has

  17   just told me that what this is all about is to send a message.

  18   And there are various ways to send messages if indeed the

  19   message is one you are entitled to have sent.  And the

  20   concerns I expressed yesterday and today on this subject have

  21   addressed the form of any message to which you might be

  22   entitled.  That's what that was addressed to.

  23            So, when you leave out of your question to the

  24   witness about an injunction the fact that if you are entitled

  25   to prevail, you might get relief short of an injunction, it




672



   1   seems to me it's just a waste of everybody's time, with all

   2   due respect, counsel.

   3            You can ask the question with both components if you

   4   want.

   5   Q.  Ms. Reider, in the event that the Court determines that

   6   the plaintiffs are entitled to some relief, and the Court

   7   determines that the relief would not include a permanent

   8   injunction, would that have an impact on your ability to

   9   enforce the interests of the member companies?

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Same objection.

  11            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  12   A.  Yes, it will have a huge impact.

  13   Q.  What is that impact?

  14   A.  There won't be any teeth, if you will, in it.  We will

  15   have no way to enforce that injunction.

  16   Q.  In the absence of an injunction?

  17   A.  In the absence.

  18            THE COURT:  If there is no injunction, there is

  19   obviously no injunction to enforce, Ms. Reider.

  20   Q.  The question is what impact would the absence of the

  21   injunction have in connection with your attempt to enforce the

  22   member company's rights?

  23   A.  It will have a huge impact.

  24   Q.  In what way?

  25            MR. GARBUS:  I have a continuing objection.




673



   1            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   2   A.  We would have no ability to stop this.  It would grant a

   3   license to anyone in the world to do what they would with our

   4   intellectual property, not just in this respect but in future

   5   events.

   6            THE COURT:  I won't say what I was just about to say,

   7   but, look, Ms. Reider, let's get down to the facts of this

   8   case as opposed to the rhetoric.

   9            If I understand it correctly, DeCSS is everywhere on

  10   the Internet.  I realize that's a hyperbolic statement, but

  11   it's all over the play, right?

  12            THE WITNESS:  It's prevalent, yes.

  13            THE COURT:  Now, if I issue an injunction that says

  14   that Mr. Corley can't put it on his website, how does that

  15   affect DeCSS being everywhere else?

  16            THE WITNESS:  It affects it in that we can get

  17   enforcement of other sites that are offering it, refusing to

  18   take it down.

  19            THE COURT:  Because of what?

  20            THE WITNESS:  Because there is precedent.

  21            THE COURT:  Suppose the result were -- and I am not

  22   saying it will be -- but just hypothetically suppose the

  23   result were that the judgment recited that there was clearly a

  24   controversy between the plaintiffs and this defendant as to

  25   the legality under the DMCA of posting this utility, that the




674



   1   controversy is persisting, that the posting of this utility

   2   violates the Act, that you are entitled to a judicial

   3   declaration of whether the conduct is lawful or not and the

   4   court declares it is unlawful, the question of whether to

   5   issue an injunction, invoke the discretionary power of the

   6   court, courts have said for 300 years, at least that courts of

   7   equity ought not to use the equitable power of injunction to

   8   try to accomplish the impossible or to perform something which

   9   is entirely futile, and therefore, in the exercise of

  10   discretion, given the broad prevalence of this particular

  11   utility, this time the court declines to issue the injunction

  12   because it would do no practical good.

  13            Now, it seems to me that perhaps there is an argument

  14   in those circumstances that when you go to somebody and say,

  15   look, it's on your website but it is in fact illegal, you've

  16   got something to talk about, and it certainly sends a message

  17   to the next guy with the next version of DeCSS that it's a

  18   whole new ball game.  Now, I don't understand your argument

  19   given that set of hypotheses.

  20            MR. GOLD:  May I address the Court for a second, your

  21   Honor?

  22            THE COURT:  No.  I'm obviously going to hear

  23   everybody on this at great length, all the lawyers, before

  24   this is all over, but Ms. Reider is if not the chief, one of

  25   the top enforcement people for the industry.  She is offered




675



   1   as a witness about what the practical significance of

   2   different kinds of relief in this case might be, and before I

   3   hear the lawyers' argument, I would like to hear what the

   4   person in charge of performing the function has to say about

   5   that.  That's why you brought her here, as I understand it.

   6            So, Ms. Reider, you know, I would like you to answer

   7   that.  One of the great things about a nonjury trial is the

   8   judge gets to ask questions that are bothering him.

   9            THE WITNESS:  Well, your Honor, in our experience

  10   thus far, trying to get prosecution at least on the criminal

  11   side of things for failure to comply under existing law, it's

  12   very difficult without being able to show damages or qualify

  13   that damage, quantify it.  If you just tell people, gee, you

  14   shouldn't do that, but there is no penalty for having done

  15   that --

  16            THE COURT:  But, look, this is a criminal statute.

  17   This is not a criminal case, but it's a criminal statute, it

  18   says any person who violates Section 1201 or 1202 willfully

  19   and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial

  20   gain can go to jail perhaps for as long as ten years.

  21            Now, if the United States courts determine that

  22   posting a utility like this is a crime and you hand a copy of

  23   that decision to the person who is posting it, don't you think

  24   there is some evidence maybe that if it doesn't come down off

  25   the website it is a willful violation?




676



   1            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, is that a question posed to

   2   Ms. Reider from a factual standpoint?

   3            THE COURT:  Yes.  She is making an argument that

   4   without an injunction there is no effective remedy, and I want

   5   to hear why.

   6            THE WITNESS:  Do you think I could get an AUSA or a

   7   DA to take that case and enforce it?

   8            THE COURT:  It beats me.  I mean, they haven't

   9   indicted anybody in this case as far as I know.

  10            Okay.  Mr. Cooper, go ahead.

  11            MR. COOPER:  Nothing further of this witness, your

  12   Honor.

  13            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Mr. Garbus?

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Just one question.

  15   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  16   BY MR. GARBUS:

  17   Q.  Did you say you hadn't seen a movie on the Internet until

  18   this year?

  19   A.  Can you repeat your question?

  20   Q.  When for the first time did you see a movie on the

  21   Internet?

  22            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor.  It misstates the

  23   testimony.

  24            THE COURT:  Well, it didn't purport to state any

  25   testimony, so it can't misstate it.




677



   1   A.  Can you clarify, Mr. Garbus?

   2   Q.  When for the first time did you see a movie on the

   3   Internet?

   4   A.  What type of movie, Mr. Garbus?  I'm not clear on what

   5   you're asking.

   6            THE COURT:  The question is very ambiguous.

   7   Q.  Any kind of movie on the Internet.

   8            THE COURT:  What do you mean, watched the movie?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  10   A.  Any kind of movie?

  11   Q.  Yes.

  12   A.  A couple of years ago.

  13   Q.  In 1998.

  14   A.  That's correct.

  15   Q.  And since 1998 how many movies did you watch on the

  16   Internet?

  17   A.  I don't know.

  18   Q.  Were these movies that you bought to play on the Internet?

  19   A.  Can you play a movie on the Internet, Mr. Garbus?

  20   Q.  On your personal computer.

  21   A.  No, this is in the capacity of my job.

  22   Q.  Now, did you at any time learn -- let me go back to the

  23   beginning of the process.  As I understand it, you were given

  24   at some point in time these LiViD documents which we have

  25   referred to as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 9.




678



   1   A.  I need to see the documents that you are referring to.

   2            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, I believe this is beyond the

   3   scope of the direct.

   4            THE COURT:  Let me see where it's going.

   5   Q.  Do you remember when you looked at the LiViD group of

   6   documents -- withdrawn.

   7            At some point in time did either Mr. Jacobsen or

   8   Litvak give you a group of documents which were downloaded

   9   from the LiViD site?

  10   A.  No, they did not.

  11   Q.  Did you at any time go on the net to find any LiViD

  12   documents?

  13   A.  Yes, I did.

  14   Q.  When was that?

  15   A.  As I recall, October or November of '99.

  16   Q.  And at whose direction was that done?

  17   A.  Under my own direction.  I'm the supervisor of antipiracy.

  18   Q.  By the way, are you a lawyer?

  19   A.  No, I'm not.

  20   Q.  Now, what did you do after you downloaded those documents?

  21   A.  I reviewed them and turned them over to legal.

  22   Q.  And who was that?

  23   A.  Our legal department, Mark Litvak.

  24   Q.  To the best of your memory, was Mr. Goldstein or 2600.com

  25   mentioned in any of those LiViD documents?




679



   1            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor.  Hearsay and

   2   plainly beyond the scope of direct.

   3            THE COURT:  The hearsay objection is just wrong.  Why

   4   isn't it beyond the scope, Mr. Garbus?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I'm trying to find out what she did.

   6   She winds up saying she has a lot of information.  I'm trying

   7   to find out the basis for that information.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   9   A.  Can you repeat question, please?

  10            THE COURT:  I sustained the objection.

  11            THE WITNESS:  Sorry.

  12   Q.  Do you know what a DOD Speed Ripper is?

  13   A.  Yes, I do.

  14   Q.  Let me show you a document UP.

  15            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, we object to the

  16   introduction of this document.

  17            THE COURT:  It hasn't been offered yet.

  18            MR. COOPER:  It's attorney/client privilege, your

  19   Honor.

  20            THE COURT:  Well, somebody should give me a copy of

  21   the document.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  This is one of the --

  23            THE COURT:  Just give me a minute, please.

  24            (Pause)

  25            THE COURT:  Pose your question and I will ask the




680



   1   witness not to answer until I have had an opportunity to hear

   2   an objection, and please pose the question in a way that

   3   doesn't disclose the content of the document, Mr. Garbus.

   4   BY MR. GARBUS:

   5   Q.  Did you learn at some time in December of the existence of

   6   a utility called DOD Speed Ripper?

   7            THE COURT:  Answer the question, please.

   8   A.  I don't recall.

   9   Q.  Let me show you this document and see if it refreshes your

  10   recollection.

  11            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

  12            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, are you ruling on the

  13   privilege issue?

  14            THE COURT:  So far there is nothing that, in my view,

  15   implicates a privilege.  She is being shown a document for the

  16   purpose of refreshing her recollection as to her state of mind

  17   in December.

  18            MR. COOPER:  It's the use of the document which is an

  19   attorney/client communication, to which we object.

  20            THE COURT:  I understand.  You said that in the first

  21   place.

  22            MR. COOPER:  I understand that.  The question is

  23   whether they are entitled to use a document which is an

  24   attorney/client communication.

  25            THE COURT:  I understand your point.  To that extent,




681



   1   I'm offering your point.

   2            MR. COOPER:  Thank you, your Honor.

   3            THE COURT:  What's the question, Mr. Garbus?

   4   Q.  Does it refresh your recollection that you were told back

   5   in December of 1999 about the DOD Speed Ripper?

   6   A.  No, it does not.

   7   Q.  Did you ever see that document before?

   8   A.  I don't recall it.

   9   Q.  Do you see your name on it?

  10   A.  I do see me copied, but the date of the missive was during

  11   a time I was not in the office.

  12   Q.  Did you ever see that document at any time?

  13   A.  I don't recall.

  14   Q.  When for the first time, if ever, did you hear the term

  15   "DOD Speed Ripper"?

  16   A.  I don't recall the exact date.

  17   Q.  Was it in 1999?

  18   A.  I don't recall the date, sir.

  19   Q.  Did you ever go to a site to see what a DOD Speed Ripper

  20   was?

  21   A.  I have looked at it, yes.

  22   Q.  And tell me when you went to that site for the first time.

  23   A.  I don't recall the date.

  24   Q.  Was it in December of 1999?

  25   A.  I don't recall the date, sir.




682



   1   Q.  Any time in the last eight month?

   2   A.  I don't recall the date, sir.

   3   Q.  Now, you said before that you worked together with the

   4   F.B.I., the U.S. Customs and who else?

   5   A.  That I worked for?

   6   Q.  The MPAA works together in its antipiracy investigations,

   7   you said before, with the F.B.I., U.S. Customs and who else?

   8   A.  Secret Service.

   9   Q.  Has anybody ever shown you a document that indicates one

  10   particular film was taken off the Internet that had been

  11   deencrypted through DeCSS?

  12            THE COURT:  Didn't you have a stipulation the object

  13   of which was to avoid this litany with every witness?

  14            MR. GARBUS:  Well, I think we are trying now to get

  15   into what her investigation was.  She is coming to certain

  16   conclusions, and you have permitted, subject to the

  17   qualifications that you have made, her testifying about

  18   information.  I am prepared to accept that when she speculates

  19   that the stuff that's on the Internet, whatever it is that she

  20   sees, that she doesn't know the source of anything that's on

  21   the Internet, namely, whether it comes from DeCSS, DOD Ripper.

  22            THE COURT:  So I understand your point.  Let's make

  23   this simple.  You're saying, Ms. Reider, that you have seen

  24   various films, decrypted films offered on the Internet, right?

  25            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.




683



   1            THE COURT:  Do you have any way of saying whether any

   2   particular one of the ones you have seen offered was decrypted

   3   by DeCSS as opposed to some other technology apart from

   4   whatever inference you draw from the timing?

   5            THE WITNESS:  No, my investigations are still

   6   ongoing.

   7            THE COURT:  Okay.  You have your "no," Mr. Garbus.

   8   Let's go.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.  You asked the question

  10   better than I could have.

  11   Q.  Now, you also indicated that there were various -- did you

  12   ever look to see whether or not 2600.com sells any pirated

  13   copies of DVDs?

  14            THE COURT:  I take it there is no such contention in

  15   this case, right, Mr. Cooper?

  16            MR. COOPER:  That's correct, your Honor.

  17            THE COURT:  Okay.  Next.

  18   Q.  And there is no contention that they barter, sell it or

  19   point to anybody who does sell it?

  20            THE COURT:  Mr. Cooper?

  21            MR. COOPER:  If the "it" is decrypted DVDs, yes, your

  22   Honor.

  23            THE COURT:  Okay.

  24   Q.  Do you know what a Speed Ripper is, by the way?

  25   A.  I know what it alleges to be.




684



   1   Q.  What does it allege to be?

   2   A.  It alleges to decrypt DVDs.  It's a DeCSS clone.

   3   Q.  DeCSS clone?

   4   A.  Um-hum.

   5   Q.  Do you know if DOD Speed Ripper was available before

   6   DeCSS?

   7   A.  Not to my knowledge.

   8   Q.  What is the basis of that?  When for the first time did

   9   you know that Speed Ripper was available?

  10            MR. COOPER:  Asked and answered, your Honor.

  11            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  12   A.  I don't recall the date.

  13            THE COURT:  Okay.  We will take our morning break.

  14   15 minutes.

  15            (Recess)

  16            THE COURT:  You may proceed.

  17   BY MR. GARBUS:

  18   Q.  You said that, as I understand it, once you learned --

  19   when did you learn of DeCSS for the first time?

  20   A.  Early to mid-October of '99.

  21   Q.  What did you then do after you learned it?

  22   A.  I pursued an investigation and downloaded it and then

  23   notified our legal team.

  24   Q.  Now, have you ever used a DoDs Ripper?

  25   A.  Not all the way through.




685



   1   Q.  Tell me what you have done with it.

   2   A.  I have downloaded it and I have extracted a single VOB

   3   file with it.

   4   Q.  And have you ever used a DOD Ripper?

   5            MR. COOPER:  Ambiguous.

   6            THE COURT:  What is the ambiguity?

   7            MR. COOPER:  I think it's the same question he asked

   8   before.

   9            THE COURT:  Is there a different --

  10   Q.  Do you know of anything separately called the DOD Ripper

  11   rather than a DoDs Ripper?

  12   A.  No, I don't.

  13   Q.  How about Power Ripper?

  14   A.  I have heard of it.

  15   Q.  Have you ever utilized it?

  16   A.  No, I have not.

  17   Q.  Have you ever heard of DOD Speed Ripper?

  18   A.  I was under the impression that is what we were speaking

  19   about.

  20   Q.  In other words, to you, Power Ripper and DOD Speed Ripper

  21   are the same thing?

  22   A.  No, your earlier question regarding DoDs Ripper was my --

  23   Q.  Excuse me a minute.  Go ahead.

  24   A.  It was my impression we were discussing the DOD Speed

  25   Ripper.




686



   1   Q.  Have you ever tried css-auth?

   2   A.  Yes, I have.

   3   Q.  And what have you done with it?

   4   A.  Just looked at the code.

   5   Q.  Have you ever tried css-cat?

   6   A.  Only looked at the code.

   7   Q.  Have you ever seen the end product, in other words, a

   8   movie that is made, that has been started with the process of

   9   a DOD Ripper, Power Ripper, Speed Ripper, css-auth or css-cat?

  10   A.  You want me to break those down?

  11   Q.  Sure.

  12   A.  I have seen the end product of movies that have been

  13   decrypted.

  14   Q.  And have you ever issued a report, have you ever compiled

  15   a report about any of your work with respect to these

  16   utilities and the movies that have then been downloaded?

  17   A.  Not that I recall.

  18   Q.  With respect to your investigation of DeCSS, have you ever

  19   prepared a report of that investigation?

  20   A.  I'm sorry.  Can you repeat the question?

  21   Q.  With respect to any work that you did on DeCSS, Did you

  22   ever prepare a report for the MPAA in any investigation you

  23   did?

  24   A.  Not that I recall.

  25   Q.  Did anyone at the F.B.I. or U.S. Customs or the Secret




687



   1   Service or the MPAA ever ask you to prepare any report about

   2   any investigation you made concerning DeCSS?

   3   A.  I wouldn't be at liberty to tell you if any of those

   4   federal agencies requested such a report.

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I would like to know if this

   6   woman has ever prepared a report relating to DeCSS.

   7            THE COURT:  You can answer yes or no at least.

   8            THE WITNESS:  Not that I recall.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  We got past that pretty quickly.

  10   Q.  Now, Ms. Reider, you've talked about you being the chief

  11   investigator at the MPAA to determine the piracy consequences

  12   of DeCSS, is that right?

  13   A.  That is not my only function.

  14   Q.  Is that one of your functions?

  15   A.  That's one of many, yes.

  16   Q.  And you're telling me that you never prepared a report for

  17   the MPAA concerning your investigation of DeCSS, is that

  18   right?

  19   A.  Not that I recall.

  20   Q.  When you say not that you recall, just sit back for a

  21   moment, take your time.  Did you prepare such a report or did

  22   you not?

  23            MR. COOPER:  Argumentative.

  24            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  25   A.  Not that I recall.




688



   1   Q.  Is there any document that I might conceivably show you

   2   that would help you remember whether you prepared such a

   3   report?

   4   A.  Well, if I knew that -- I don't know what you're asking.

   5   Q.  Is there any document that I could show you, or that

   6   anybody in the world could show you, that could refresh your

   7   recollection as to whether or not you ever prepared a report

   8   for the MPAA concerning DeCSS?

   9            MR. COOPER:  Argumentative.  Calls for speculation.

  10            THE COURT:  I'm going to allow it one more time.  You

  11   would think you were trying a medical malpractice case.  Once

  12   more.

  13   A.  I don't know.

  14   Q.  Did you ever produce a memo -- forget about the word

  15   report -- for the MPAA or any other governmental agency

  16   concerning DeCSS, the proliferation of it, the use of it, or

  17   the consequences of the films that it would produce after that

  18   DeCSS application was DivX'd?

  19   A.  I don't recall.

  20            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, you took her deposition,

  21   right?

  22            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  23            THE COURT:  And I know that at least one whole box of

  24   documents from her file was given to me for in camera

  25   inspection on a claim of privilege that were subsequently




689



   1   turned over to you.

   2            Now, this is not the time to be either doing

   3   discovery or whatever else this is.  If you have a document,

   4   let's go to it.  If you don't have a document, ask something

   5   else.

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I understand --

   7            Shall we approach the bench?

   8            THE COURT:  No.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  -- that there is no such document, that

  10   she never prepared a report for the MPAA.  Now, we have been

  11   through a series of discussions where we have asked them to

  12   produce lists of documents that we were promised that we have

  13   never gotten.  I can go through that now, but I don't think

  14   it's an appropriate time.

  15            THE COURT:  Neither do I.  So, you're complaining

  16   they didn't give you the document that she says doesn't exist.

  17   Is that the net of the complaint?

  18            MR. GARBUS:  No.  Let me just go on.

  19   Q.  I'd like to learn something about what your investigation

  20   consisted of.  After you gave the Linux document to someone at

  21   the MPAA in October or November, what did you then do in the

  22   course of your investigation?

  23   A.  I'm sorry.  Which Linux documents are you referring to?

  24   Q.  Did you testify that you downloaded some documents in

  25   October, November and December from the LiViD group?




690



   1   A.  I don't know.  They would have to read it back to me.

   2   Q.  Did you download -- let's start at the beginning.  Did you

   3   at any time download any documents from the LiViD group in

   4   1999?

   5            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, Mr. Garbus already elicited

   6   testimony about what the witness downloaded and I think you

   7   then sustained the objection with respect to this questioning

   8   regarding the LiViD group and the documents downloaded with

   9   respect to it.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I would like to get into

  11   what her investigation consisted of.  She has come in here

  12   allegedly as a witness to give information about that

  13   investigation.

  14            THE COURT:  One question at a time.  You already

  15   asked her -- you first started off from the mistaken premise

  16   that Mr. Jacobsen or Litvak gave her documents from the LiViD

  17   site.  She said, no, that hadn't happened.  You then asked her

  18   whether she went onto the site, and she testified she went

  19   onto the net and found LiViD documents in October or November,

  20   that she downloaded, reviewed them and turned them over to

  21   legal, specifically to Mark Litvak.  Now, I don't know why we

  22   have to do it all over again.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  Because she said she didn't remember

  24   that.

  25            THE COURT:  No, she didn't.




691



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Let me go on, if I can.

   2   Q.  After you turned these documents over to Mr. Litvak, then

   3   what happened?

   4            MR. COOPER:  Ambiguous.

   5            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   6   A.  Then what happened in respect to what?

   7   Q.  Your investigation.  Everything is directed now towards

   8   your investigation.  What did do you with respect to your

   9   investigation after you turned these documents over to

  10   Mr. Litvak?

  11   A.  I continued to look for evidence of piracy.

  12   Q.  Tell me what you did.

  13   A.  In respect to what, sir?

  14   Q.  DeCSS.

  15   A.  I continued to look for sites offering DeCSS and to

  16   request the issuance of cease and desist letters.

  17   Q.  And were you also looking for sites relevant to DOD Ripper

  18   or Power Ripper or Speed Ripper?

  19   A.  Our investigations are ongoing.

  20   Q.  Were you, at that time that you were looking for DeCSS

  21   sites, also looking at sites for DOD Speed Ripper, Power

  22   Ripper -- and Power Ripper?  Excuse me.

  23   A.  I don't recall a time frame.

  24   Q.  When did you start looking at DeCSS sites?

  25   A.  Early to mid-October of '99.




692



   1   Q.  And can you tell me to the best of your recollection

   2   whether that was before or after you were looking at sites for

   3   DOD Ripper, if in fact you were?

   4            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor.  I think it has

   5   been asked and answered repeatedly and it's plainly beyond the

   6   scope of direct.

   7            THE COURT:  It's certainly sustained as to form.

   8   Let's start with that.  Try another question.

   9   Q.  After you started looking at the DeCSS site, did you make

  10   any notes of any site you saw?

  11   A.  Can you clarify "make notes"?

  12   Q.  Did you write anything down on a piece of paper?

  13   A.  I imagine we downloaded those sites that we found.

  14   Q.  And do you recall now which sites that you found?

  15   A.  Not specifically.

  16            THE COURT:  Isn't that precisely the carton of

  17   document that was submitted to my chambers that was then

  18   turned over to you, Mr. Garbus, like maybe 5,000 pages of it?

  19            MR. GARBUS:  I don't know if that was all the

  20   documents.  What Mr. Schumann testified was that he had gotten

  21   a part of the documents.  I'm trying to find out now what the

  22   documents were that she downloaded.

  23            Can we approach the bench?

  24            THE COURT:  No.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  Let me tell you where I would like to




693



   1   go, and if there is an issue about it, I just don't want to go

   2   there.

   3            I think I'm entitled to know -- she is the only

   4   witness for the MPAA thus far produced.  I understand she is

   5   their last witness.  We have been told about this awesome

   6   threat of DeCSS, and I would like to find out what the MPA has

   7   done since they first learned about it, and I would like to

   8   find out during the course of this investigation or this

   9   discussion with her what she has done, because she is the head

  10   of piracy, with respect to the other utilities that allegedly

  11   cause piracy, and whether or not she or anyone can tell

  12   basically, if something is on the screen, which utility it

  13   comes from --

  14            THE COURT:  You already got that stipulation, didn't

  15   you, early this morning?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  The last part I have.

  17            THE COURT:  Right.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Now I would like to go to the

  19   investigation.  What I have said before is if they were

  20   serious at all about DeCSS, that there were many, many ways

  21   that they could have learned in October, November exactly who

  22   had DeCSS, what was being done with respect to it, and I think

  23   what they would have concluded, at least I would have

  24   concluded, is that it was being used for the Linux machine and

  25   that these other utilities may be appropriate "illegal copying




694



   1   or piracy tools," but DeCSS, for precisely the reasons that

   2   Mr. Shamos testified, is not.

   3            Now, whether or not your Honor feels that makes DeCSS

   4   still prohibitable by the statute is something for an

   5   appropriate time, but it seems to me I'm entitled to go

   6   through that with this witness.

   7            THE COURT:  What is on the table are questions

   8   nit-picking about documents that you know full well were

   9   produced to you, piles of them.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Let me tell you some of the documents we

  11   did not get.  Shall we go through that now?

  12            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, no.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  May I ask my question?

  14            THE COURT:  You can ask a new question.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

  16   Q.  Now, when you say you were monitoring sites for DeCSS in

  17   November of '99 --

  18            THE COURT:  By the way, if we do get to that subject,

  19   I'm still waiting for the affidavit about your client's hard

  20   drive.  Just keep that in mind.  Let's go on.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  May I have the last question asked

  22   repeated to me?

  23            (Record read)

  24   Q.  Did you ever tell anybody from October until today that

  25   you had ever seen a pirated copy of a digital movie, a




695



   1   specific movie?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  And did you ever tell anybody, or write a report, or

   4   furnish a document indicating that it related in any way to

   5   DeCSS?

   6   A.  As I stated before, I don't recall any report on DeCSS.

   7   Q.  Putting aside report, any e-mails?

   8   A.  I don't recall specifics.

   9   Q.  What has been your training as an investigator?  You

  10   worked for the F.B.I. for a period of time?

  11   A.  That's correct.

  12   Q.  Were you trained there as an investigator?

  13   A.  That's correct.

  14   Q.  And did the F.B.I. have some practice with respect to

  15   making reports?

  16   A.  Yes, they do.

  17   Q.  Tell me what that practice was.

  18            MR. COOPER:  Relevancy, your Honor.

  19            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  20   Q.  Did the training include --

  21            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  22   Q.  You indicated that -- let me ask this.  When you say you

  23   are monitoring websites, did you ever call any website in

  24   order to determine the name, address or identification of any

  25   individual who had been allegedly selling movies on any of




696



   1   these file sharing sites?

   2   A.  Excuse me.  You'll need to clarify your question.  You

   3   have asked about websites and FSUs all in the same sentence.

   4   Q.  Did you ever call anybody as part of your investigation,

   5   or to your knowledge, if it's not confidential, the F.B.I.,

   6   Secret Service, U.S. Customs?

   7            THE COURT:  The question is lost with the digression.

   8   Start the question again.

   9   Q.  Did you ever call anybody at anybody website that had file

  10   sharing to determine where the films came from?

  11   A.  Do you mean did I telephone anyone?

  12   Q.  Yes.

  13   A.  Not personally.

  14   Q.  Did you ever make any investigation with respect to any of

  15   those file sharing sites as to where the films came from?

  16   A.  Yes, we routinely investigate.

  17   Q.  And what did that investigation indicate?

  18            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor.  It's not only

  19   confidential, ongoing investigations.  Much of the information

  20   she has on this subject is privileged and it is plainly beyond

  21   the scope.

  22            THE COURT:  Well, you better come to sidebar.  Mr.

  23   Garbus and Mr. Cooper.

  24            (At the sidebar)

  25            THE COURT:  Let's deal with scope first.  Mr. Garbus,




697



   1   why is it within the scope?

   2            MR. GARBUS:  My position is that they know that DeCSS

   3   is not a pirating tool.  My information.  And I believe that

   4   they may have made an attempt to determine that and may have

   5   concluded what I have just said is so.  Whether or not that

   6   goes to your ultimate question about whether or not the DeCSS

   7   is an appropriate or inappropriate circumvention is something

   8   else.  But it seems to me what I am entitled to know is this.

   9            There are ten different utilities that with respect

  10   to, let's say, the nine others, as I understand it, they did

  11   no investigation, and that basically what you are dealing with

  12   is an attempt to take a product away from, let's say, the

  13   Linux source group, and that I think that what the MPA was

  14   doing was basically protecting the licensing arrangement and

  15   that this entire investigation had little and nothing to do

  16   with piracy.  And I think they are aware of the fact that the

  17   stuff that's up on the Internet is not DeCSS material.  Not

  18   only the negative of it, but that they know that it's not.

  19            THE COURT:  So that's why it's within the scope of

  20   the direct, is that right?

  21            MR. GARBUS:  If you want, I will make her my witness

  22   at an appropriate time, keep her in court and I'll make her my

  23   witness.

  24            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, my principal concern -- I

  25   don't think it's necessary --




698



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think it's within the scope of

   2   the direct based on the conclusions that they drew.  She is

   3   the chief investigator.  They put her on the stand.  She comes

   4   to assert conclusions.  I think the facts contradict her

   5   conclusions.

   6            THE COURT:  What conclusion?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Well, I must tell you every one of the

   8   conclusions is that DeCSS is a contributing factor or is one

   9   of the reasons they are very concerned.  One of the critical

  10   parts of her testimony, as I understand it, is the spiking or

  11   the enormous increase in material on the net since DeCSS first

  12   comes about.

  13            THE COURT:  Um-hum.

  14            MR. GARBUS:  And I think the truth of it is you have

  15   nine other utilities that lead to that spiking, and the one

  16   utility that does not is DeCSS because it has a different

  17   function.

  18            THE COURT:  You are certainly entitled to ask her

  19   about the question of whether these other utilities could have

  20   led to the spike.  There is no question about that.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  Okay.  And I want to know.

  22            THE COURT:  But I don't think that's what you have

  23   been asking her.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I have been trying to get the background

  25   for it.  I have been trying to find out her investigation.  If




699



   1   you are asking me to ask a conclusory question, I'm prepared

   2   to do that.  I wanted to know what her investigation

   3   indicated.  It seems to me I'm entitled to do that.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Cooper?

   5            MR. COOPER:  Our concern, your Honor, is that the

   6   question that I think Mr. Garbus last asked her has the

   7   potential for eliciting information regarding the specifics of

   8   investigations of other potential actions and ongoing

   9   investigations in cooperation with law enforcement.

  10            I will say, for instance, that the MPAA member

  11   companies are among the plaintiffs in an action filed today

  12   against ScourNet, and to the extent that Mr. Garbus's question

  13   is potentially going to elicit privileged information

  14   regarding the investigation leading up to that action, I

  15   believe we are entitled to protection from having to answer

  16   that question under a variety of privileges.

  17            I don't think it's necessary for Mr. Garbus's right

  18   to question the witness on any relevant information she might

  19   have, but I am concerned that it's privileged information and

  20   information regarding ongoing investigations not be divulged

  21   in connection with such a response.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I am here to represent a client.  My

  23   understanding is that, of all of the utilities, the one that

  24   is not being used for piracy is DeCSS because of the amount of

  25   time it takes to do a variety of things.  What is being used




700



   1   for piracy are these other utilities, that the investigation

   2   into DeCSS is solely related to the fact that there is a

   3   competitive machine out there called Linux.  That's what I'm

   4   trying to get to.

   5            If we can do all that with a stipulation, if we can

   6   do all that -- not the last part about Linux -- but if we can

   7   do it with a stipulation, I will try to craft one and I would

   8   try and ask it in one question, but I was trying to get into

   9   the investigation concerning it.

  10            MR. COOPER:  I don't even know how to respond to

  11   that.  The only information we have on any of those assertions

  12   are from Mr. Garbus's mouth.  This witness isn't able to

  13   testify to that factual information because it's simply

  14   nonexistent.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  She is the chief investigator.  She may

  16   contradict everything I said.  She may say everything I just

  17   said is wrong.

  18            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Garbus is entitled to

  19   cross-examine her on the subject of whether this spike in the

  20   apparent availability of pirated movies on the Internet after

  21   October or November is attributable to the appearance of

  22   DeCSS.  I think there are other ways of doing it.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  I could ask her one question.

  24            THE COURT:  We will take it one question at a time.

  25   There are other ways of doing it.  Let's try.




701



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Judge, you are an experienced trial

   2   lawyer.  If you can think of a better way for me to formulate

   3   a question so we don't have a problem, I will do it.

   4            THE COURT:  I'm not getting your rate anymore to

   5   formulate the questions, Mr. Garbus.

   6            (In open court)

   7            MR. GARBUS:  You may be exagerating.

   8            THE COURT:  I don't think so.

   9            MR. GARBUS:  May I have the last question, please?

  10            (Record read)

  11            THE COURT:  I am going to sustain the objection to

  12   that question, because it's much too broad in the

  13   circumstances, and it does implicate privileges.  It

  14   implicates legitimate confidentiality concerns beyond

  15   privileges, but there is some appropriate area here that I

  16   have indicated at the sidebar, and counsel can pursue it.

  17            New question.

  18   BY MR. GARBUS:

  19   Q.  Have you ever seen any documents that indicate whether or

  20   not all of the films that are on these file sharing programs

  21   do or do not come from Power Ripper?

  22   A.  No.

  23   Q.  Have you ever seen any documents --

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Judge, if you have a better way of

  25   formulating the question, I will take it.




702



   1            THE COURT:  As I said to you, I'm not getting paid

   2   the rate you are getting for formulating questions.  Once upon

   3   a time I was, but not anymore.  That's your job.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Did we get an answer?

   5            THE COURT:  There is not a question.

   6   Q.  Can you tell by looking at any of the file sharing

   7   programs what percentage of the films that are described on

   8   those file sharing programs come from any particular utility?

   9   A.  You want to know what compression was used on them or --

  10            THE COURT:  Let's try to make this simpler.  I can't

  11   resist, Mr. Garbus.  I'm sorry.  Think of it as pro bono.

  12            I understood from a previous witness that when you

  13   see a film listed on a website or an FSU that has been

  14   decrypted and is available for sale or exchange, that you

  15   can't tell from the listing itself what mode of decrypting the

  16   film was used.  Is that consistent with your understanding?

  17            THE WITNESS:  Yes, it is.

  18            THE COURT:  All right.  Are there other ways that you

  19   can ascertain by what means a film offered on the Internet or

  20   an FSU for exchange or sale has been decrypted?

  21            THE WITNESS:  I don't know.

  22            THE COURT:  Back to you, Mr. Garbus.

  23   Q.  Who would know at the MPAA, if anybody?

  24   A.  I don't know.

  25   Q.  Do you know who Brad Hunt is?




703



   1   A.  Yes, I do.

   2   Q.  What is his job?

   3   A.  He is our chief technology officer.

   4   Q.  Have you ever had any discussions with him about the two

   5   questions that the judge has asked you?

   6   A.  No, I have not.

   7   Q.  And who is Rick Hirsch?

   8   A.  He is the head of antipiracy for the IDSA.

   9   Q.  To your knowledge, does anyone at the MPAA have the

  10   answers to the two questions that the judge posed?

  11   A.  I don't know.

  12   Q.  To your knowledge, does anybody in law enforcement have

  13   the answers to the two questions the judge has posed?

  14   A.  I don't know.

  15            THE COURT:  Has anybody on the Cincinnati Reds?  Come

  16   on.  Don't you think there is an easier way to do this, Mr.

  17   Garbus?

  18            MR. GARBUS:  You tell me.  Your questions are not

  19   objectionable.  Mine can be.  Go ahead if your Honor wants to

  20   formulate the question.

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims has offered.

  22            MR. SIMS:  I will pose the question if you want, your

  23   Honor.

  24            THE COURT:  It's Mr. Garbus's examination.

  25   Q.  Now, we have heard about a surge in Internet piracy, is




704



   1   that right, over the last six months?

   2   A.  In respect to decrypted DVDs.

   3   Q.  Right.  Can you tell whether or not that surge comes as a

   4   result of the utility Power Ripper or DeCSS or DOD Ripper or

   5   any other utility?

   6   A.  Not definitively.

   7   Q.  Has anyone at the MPAA ever made any investigation to

   8   determine what the utility is or was being used to create that

   9   surge?

  10   A.  I don't know.

  11   Q.  Have you ever made any investigation to determine which

  12   utility leads to that surge?

  13   A.  As I stated before, it's an ongoing investigation.

  14            THE COURT:  Maybe we can get at it a little bit

  15   better this way.  If you were to download the file of a

  16   decrypted movie obtained over the Internet or through an FSU,

  17   are you aware of any means by which you can examine the code

  18   and the data file of the download and determine through that

  19   examination how the movie was decrypted?

  20            THE WITNESS:  I don't have that answer yet.

  21            THE COURT:  You don't have it yet.

  22            THE WITNESS:  No.

  23            THE COURT:  I take it the answer is that you hope to

  24   find out some day, but you don't know it now, is that correct?

  25            THE WITNESS:  I hope to find out soon, yes.




705



   1            THE COURT:  All right.

   2   Q.  So, as of now, nobody knows the answer to my question?

   3            THE COURT:  As of now, Ms. Reider doesn't know the

   4   answer.

   5            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

   6   Q.  As of now, do you know if anybody in the MPAA knows the

   7   answer?

   8   A.  I don't know.

   9   Q.  To your knowledge does anyone in law enforcement know the

  10   answer?

  11   A.  I don't know.

  12   Q.  Now, has anyone ever said to you --

  13            THE COURT:  Let me ask another question, because I

  14   think it may short-cut this a lot.  Would I be correct in

  15   assuming, Ms. Reider, that there are other investigative

  16   techniques that you have and are pursuing in an effort to find

  17   out by what means any movies that may be offered on the

  18   Internet were decrypted, out of conventional law enforcement

  19   type techniques?

  20            THE WITNESS:  That's correct, your Honor.

  21            THE COURT:  Okay.  Let's go.

  22   Q.  What are those techniques, and what is it that you're

  23   doing?

  24   A.  We regularly try to determine the source, the author's

  25   identity, location.




706



   1            MR. GARBUS:  Can I hear the answer again?

   2            (Record read)

   3   Q.  During that course of investigation, have you ever

   4   determined that DeCSS was ever used to send a film over the

   5   Internet?

   6            THE COURT:  Well, on that you already have your

   7   stipulation, Mr. Garbus.  They have no direct evidence that

   8   that ever occurred.  They are asking you to infer it from

   9   other things.

  10   Q.  Have you ever tried to determine whether or not any --

  11   from your investigation -- any of the films on the file

  12   sharing programs came from DeCSS?

  13            MR. COOPER:  Asked and answered, your Honor.

  14            THE COURT:  Yes, I think it was.

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, can I have five minutes?

  16   Could I just have a five-minute break?

  17            THE COURT:  Yes, sure.

  18            (Recess)

  19   BY MR. GARBUS:

  20   Q.  During the course of your investigation, when you have

  21   gone to these file sharing sites, have you ever learned that

  22   the information posted on the site is false, namely, that they

  23   don't have the movies that they say they have?

  24   A.  On occasion the download does not come through.

  25   Q.  And when you say "on occasion the download does not come




707



   1   through," what does that mean?

   2   A.  There is some sort of error in the transfer.

   3   Q.  Do you know whether the film is on the site or it's just a

   4   dud, that they say they have a film?

   5   A.  I don't know.

   6   Q.  Do you have any reports or records concerning the number

   7   of duds on these file sharing sites?

   8   A.  Not to my knowledge.

   9   Q.  To your knowledge, does any law enforcement agency have

  10   any information concerning the duds on these file sharing

  11   sites?

  12   A.  I don't know.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me, your Honor.  We are just

  14   trying to go through all these document now.  It's a little

  15   rough.

  16   Q.  This is document CO, which also has attached to it --

  17   well, let me show you this first.  I show you Defendants'

  18   Exhibit AT?

  19            MR. GARBUS:  May I approach the bench?

  20            THE COURT:  Yes.

  21   Q.  And I ask you whether or not you have ever seen this

  22   document before.  Have you ever seen that document before?

  23   A.  You showed it to me at the deposition.

  24   Q.  Prior to the deposition had you ever seen it before?

  25   A.  Not that I recall.




708



   1   Q.  Let me show you a document entitled CO.

   2            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, this is a privileged

   3   document.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Knight is who?

   5            MR. COOPER:  Mr. Knight is one of the attorneys, a

   6   former regional director for the MPAA.

   7            Mr. Litvak, as you know, is counsel for the MPAA.

   8   And, your Honor, I believe that this goes to efficacy and is

   9   not properly within the scope of direct.

  10            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

  11            MR. GARBUS:  As I said, I'm prepared to make this

  12   witness -- rather than get into scope or not scope at some

  13   point -- I'm willing to make her my witness as a hostile

  14   witness.

  15            THE COURT:  And what about the rest?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Can I hear the rest again?

  17            THE COURT:  Privilege, relevance.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  This is the Macrovision report.

  19            THE COURT:  Please do not describe what it is.  There

  20   is a privilege claim.

  21            MR. GARBUS:  I don't see why it's privileged.

  22            THE COURT:  You don't see it.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  It's a public document.

  24            THE COURT:  CO is a memorandum from Mr. Hunt to Mr.

  25   Knight, who was just identified as an attorney.  We are




709



   1   laboring under some difficulty here, and I appreciate that

   2   that affects everyone, because in an effort to get this case

   3   to trial, you have seen probably 95 percent of the plaintiff's

   4   privileged documents on a "no waiver" basis with the

   5   understanding that admissibility would be determined at trial.

   6   In other circumstances, a determination would have been made

   7   as to privilege, and if it was determined to have been

   8   privileged, you never would have seen the document in the

   9   first play.  So please don't announce its contents while we

  10   are discussing whether there is a proper privilege claim.

  11            Now, would you address the privilege claim and the

  12   relevance argument.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  With respect to relevance, it refers to

  14   the document, which I don't perceive to be privilege.

  15            THE COURT:  No, AT is not.  But by saying this refers

  16   to it, you, of course, have already disclosed part of the

  17   content of CO.  But let's go on.

  18            MR. GARBUS:  Judge, shall we do this at the bench?

  19            THE COURT:  I think you are fully capable of

  20   discussing the relevance and the privilege issues without

  21   discussing the contents.

  22            MR. GARBUS:  I would like to ask her whether looking

  23   at that document, to which there is an objection with respect

  24   to privilege, refreshes her recollection as to whether she saw

  25   a document that was not privileged.




710



   1            THE COURT:  For that limited purpose, you may show

   2   her CO.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.

   4            THE WITNESS:  He already has.

   5            THE COURT:  You have already seen it, Ms. Reider?

   6            THE WITNESS:  He just gave it to me.

   7            THE COURT:  He just gave it to you.  All right.  Ask

   8   her the question.

   9   Q.  Does reading that document refresh your recollection as to

  10   whether or not you saw a document entitled "Macrovision"?

  11   A.  No, it does not.

  12   Q.  Did you ever have any discussion with anyone at the MPAA

  13   concerning any Macrovision analysis of the DVD CSS hack.

  14   A.  Not that I recall.

  15   Q.  Were you told by anyone at the MPAA that Macrovision had

  16   determined that the DeCSS hack has no commercial significance?

  17   A.  I don't recall.

  18   Q.  Were you ever told by anybody at the MPAA -- by the way,

  19   do you know who Macrovision is?

  20   A.  Vaguely.

  21   Q.  Tell me who they are.

  22   A.  They are a company that provides content protection for

  23   videotape.

  24   Q.  Were you ever told by anyone at the MPAA either that a

  25   Merdan report or a Macrovision record had determined that the




711



   1   DeCSS hack has proven to be more difficult and complicated to

   2   use than the average consumer is willing to put up with?

   3   A.  No.

   4   Q.  Did you have any conversations with anyone at the MPAA

   5   concerning the differences in the use of the DeCSS utility and

   6   the other utilities we have talked about, the DOD Ripper, the

   7   Power Ripper, the Speed Ripper, with respect to their

   8   efficacy, with respect to illegal copying?

   9   A.  Can you read back that whole question, please?

  10            (Record read)

  11   A.  Not that I recall.

  12   Q.  Did anyone at the MPAA ever tell you that DeCSS was not

  13   consumer or user friendly and would not pose a problem with

  14   respect to illegal copying?

  15   A.  Not that I recall.

  16   Q.  Did anybody tell you the contrary?

  17   A.  I don't recall.

  18   Q.  Did you ever see any MPAA report that said that DeCSS is

  19   not a utility that is appropriate for piracy or copying?

  20   A.  Not that I recall.

  21   Q.  Do you know if the MPAA ever made a determination that

  22   DeCSS is not a copying or pirating utility?

  23   A.  Not that I recall.

  24   Q.  Did they ever come up with any contrary conclusion?

  25   A.  I don't know.




712



   1   Q.  When for the first time did you learn about Linux?

   2            MR. COOPER:  It assumes facts not in evidence, but

   3   it's beyond the scope.

   4            THE COURT:  Sustained as -- pardon me?

   5            MR. COOPER:  And irrelevant.

   6            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.  Rephrase it.

   7   Q.  You previously talked about downloading material from the

   8   LiViD group site.  Is that right?

   9   A.  That's correct.

  10   Q.  Prior to that time, had you ever heard of Linux?

  11   A.  As an operating system?

  12   Q.  Yes.

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  When did you hear about it for the first time?

  15   A.  I don't recall the date.

  16   Q.  Was it in 1999?

  17   A.  I don't recall the date.

  18   Q.  Did anyone at the MPAA ever tell you about Linux or did

  19   you learn it on your own?

  20            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, relevancy.  I recognize that

  21   Mr. Garbus is entitled to cross-examine the witness on proper

  22   matters, but I get the impression we are engaged in a

  23   filibuster.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Engaged in what?

  25            THE COURT:  A filibuster is what he said.




713



   1            Overruled for the moment.

   2   A.  I don't recall.

   3   Q.  When for the first time did you ever hear the term "LiViD

   4   group"?

   5   A.  I don't recall having heard that specific title.

   6   Q.  How did you know to go to the LiViD website, download the

   7   material you downloaded in October and November?

   8   A.  I'm an investigator.  I followed a trail there.

   9   Q.  Tell me what the trail was.

  10   A.  I read about it on Slashdot.

  11   Q.  And, by the way, do you know or anyone at the MPAA have

  12   any reason to believe that 2600.com has anything to do with

  13   the surge in Internet piracy?

  14            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, to the extent that Mr.

  15   Garbus is asking the witness of her knowledge from attorneys

  16   in connection with this lawsuit, it would be privileged.

  17            THE COURT:  I just don't even begin to see the

  18   relevance of it.

  19   Q.  Take aside the question --

  20            MR. GARBUS:  Unless you are ruling on relevancy.

  21            THE COURT:  I am ruling on relevance.  There has been

  22   no clam here.  They don't have to establish what you are

  23   suggesting you were provided.

  24            MR. GARBUS:  It certainly goes to the question of

  25   damage, doesn't it?




714



   1            THE COURT:  There is no damage claim in this case,

   2   whatever you say in your papers.  They amended their complaint

   3   to delete it.

   4   Q.  Other than DeCSS, do you know what other ways there are to

   5   copy DVDs?

   6   A.  Only what I have read.

   7   Q.  And what is it that you've read?

   8   A.  The drink or die Speed Ripper claims.

   9   Q.  Tell me what that is.

  10   A.  With all due respect, sir, you have been asking me about

  11   the DOD Speed Ripper.

  12   Q.  So that's the only thing that you know of that is used to

  13   decrypt DVDs other than DeCSS, is that right?

  14   A.  To my knowledge.

  15   Q.  Has anyone ever told you that any of these other utilities

  16   that we have talked about can be used to decrypt DVDs?

  17            MR. COOPER:  Ambiguous, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  I don't think so.

  19            THE WITNESS:  Could you read the question back,

  20   please?

  21            (Record read)

  22   A.  Not that I recall.

  23   Q.  In response to Mr. Cooper's question before, you stated

  24   that you tested DeCSS.  Do you remember that?

  25   A.  That's correct.




715



   1   Q.  You didn't mention whether you were alone or with other

   2   people.  Were you alone?

   3   A.  No.

   4   Q.  Who was with you?

   5   A.  To the best of my recollection, Brad Hunt, Rick Hirsch and

   6   Richard Kroon.

   7   Q.  And you have identified Brad Hunt as the chief.  Rather

   8   than go through it again, tell me who those three people are.

   9   A.  Brad Hunt is our chief technology officer, Rick Hirsch at

  10   the time was director of worldwide antipiracy, and Richard

  11   Kroon is a manager in our MIS department.

  12   Q.  What is Brad Hunt's background, to the extent you know it?

  13   A.  I don't know.

  14   Q.  Who did the actual downloading?

  15   A.  I did.

  16   Q.  And were you doing it under their supervision?

  17   A.  No, I was not.

  18   Q.  Did you then, after you downloaded it, watch a movie?

  19   A.  We decrypted a DVD.

  20   Q.  Which one?

  21   A.  As I recall, it was a Star Trek movie.

  22   Q.  Did you watch the movie?

  23   A.  We watched segments of it.

  24   Q.  How much?

  25   A.  In total, approximately five minutes.




716



   1   Q.  Is it fair to say that there is no report or memo

   2   concerning that?

   3   A.  I can't speak for others.

   4   Q.  Did you ever make a report or memo concerning that?

   5   A.  Not that I recall.

   6   Q.  You said before that you hoped to have an answer soon

   7   about whether a movie file reveals the decryption technique.

   8   Who have you asked for this answer?

   9   A.  I have not yet asked anyone.

  10   Q.  You hope to have an answer soon, you haven't asked

  11   anybody.  Can you tell me whether or not anyone to your

  12   knowledge is studying whether or not a movie file can

  13   reveal -- that's been downloaded -- can reveal the decryption

  14   technique?

  15   A.  I don't know.

  16   Q.  When do you hope to get an answer to the question you

  17   didn't ask?

  18            THE COURT:  You think that's a proper question, Mr.

  19   Garbus?

  20   Q.  When do you hope to learn when there will be information

  21   about whether a movie file reveals a decryption technique?

  22            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor.

  23            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  24   A.  In the near future.

  25   Q.  Is the near future sometime this year or next year?




717



   1   A.  I would say that was subjective as to what you would

   2   qualify "near."

   3   Q.  You used the word.  What do you mean by that?

   4   A.  Hopefully within the year.

   5   Q.  Now, do you know of any techniques that are being

   6   developed by the movie studios or the MPAA to stop the

   7   transmission of unauthorized movies over the Internet?

   8   A.  I have no specific knowledge.

   9   Q.  Does the word "digital transmission" mean anything to you?

  10            MR. COOPER:  Relevancy and scope, your Honor.

  11            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  12   Q.  By the way, do you in the course of your investigation use

  13   informants?

  14   A.  Yes, I do.

  15   Q.  And are these informants used to determine facts for your

  16   investigation?

  17   A.  They contribute intelligence.

  18   Q.  And has any of the intelligence that has been contributed

  19   indicated to you that DeCSS is used in any way for any illegal

  20   copying?

  21   A.  Yes, it does.

  22   Q.  Where is that found, that intelligence?

  23            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor --

  24   Q.  Is that in any documents?

  25            THE COURT:  What is it, Mr. Cooper?




718



   1            MR. COOPER:  We had an understanding with respect to

   2   the specifics of investigations and, in particular, the

   3   informants, at least I understood we did with opposing

   4   counsel.  I am just wanting to make sure that that last

   5   question is limited to whether the witness has copies of

   6   informing as opposed to what the details of the investigation

   7   are.

   8   Q.  Let me make it clear, I am not interested in any

   9   informants's names and I don't want to you give me any

  10   informants's names.

  11            Have you ever soon a document from an informant -- by

  12   the way, how many informants do you use in the New York

  13   office?

  14   A.  In the New York office?

  15   Q.  Yes.

  16   A.  There are no informants in the New York office.

  17   Q.  How about Washington?

  18   A.  Informants in the Washington office?

  19   Q.  How many informants does the MPAA have in the United

  20   States?

  21   A.  I don't know.

  22   Q.  How many informants does the MPAA have in Encino,

  23   California?

  24   A.  Zero in Encino, California.

  25   Q.  Where are the informants located?  I don't want to know




719



   1   cities, just general areas.

   2   A.  They are around the world.

   3   Q.  Have any of these informants ever given you a written

   4   document that shows that a DeCSS film was ever on the Internet

   5   or was ever sold or copied?

   6   A.  Not specifically.

   7   Q.  How much money does the MPAA spend each year in its piracy

   8   efforts?

   9   A.  I don't know.

  10   Q.  How many people -- by the way, where are you located?

  11   A.  Encino.

  12   Q.  And how many people are there in your office?

  13   A.  Approximately 120 or so.

  14   Q.  And how many of those people do you supervise?

  15   A.  Directly?

  16   Q.  Yes.

  17   A.  Four or five.

  18   Q.  How many people do you supervise indirectly?

  19   A.  It depends on the investigation.

  20   Q.  With respect to the DeCSS investigation.

  21   A.  It depends on which site offering DeCSS.

  22   Q.  Is there any investigation that the MPAA is making of

  23   2600.com?

  24   A.  To the extent we filed this lawsuit.

  25   Q.  Other than that?




720



   1            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, I believe the witness's

   2   testimony has been that after a certain point in her

   3   investigation she turned it over to legal and this lawsuit

   4   resulted.  He is asking outside of this lawsuit?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  I will now go before the lawsuit.

   6   Q.  Prior to January 13, was there an investigation of

   7   2600.com?

   8   A.  Under the direction of the legal department.

   9   Q.  And do you know when that investigation began?

  10   A.  I can't give you an exact date.

  11   Q.  Now, you say, as I understood it -- where did you get

  12   DeCSS from in the first instance?

  13   A.  I don't recall.

  14   Q.  Did you say you got it off Slashdot?

  15   A.  No, I did not.

  16   Q.  Do you know why 2600.com was the only person sued in this

  17   lawsuit?  Is there anything that you know, as a result of any

  18   conversations you had prior to January 13, why Mr. Goldstein

  19   and 2600.com, along with the other two defendants, were being

  20   made the subject of this suit?

  21            MR. COOPER:  To the extent the witness has any

  22   information on this subject, it is plainly privileged.

  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  24   Q.  What is the budget of your department?

  25   A.  I don't know.




721



   1   Q.  What is the budget of the antipiracy department of the

   2   MPAA?

   3   A.  I don't know.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I have let you go on for a

   5   long period of time because it is now reasonably clear to me

   6   that the object of this morning's exercise, in at least some

   7   part, is simply to fill up hours that you want to fill up.

   8   That's my perception of it anyway.  We have gotten down nearly

   9   to the color of the carpet in the office and what brand of

  10   coffee is in the coffee machine.  I don't see the relevance of

  11   any of it.  If there is any, I would like to hear it now.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I would like to know -- I think it's

  13   relevant.  The MPAA has made allegations about DeCSS as a

  14   piracy tool.  As I understand it, DeCSS is used primarily for

  15   the Linux machine; that with respect to piracy or illegal

  16   copying, that it is the other utilities that are used, and

  17   that the reason that DeCSS is the subject of this lawsuit is

  18   not so much related to piracy but it related to the use by

  19   Linux and other open source people of DeCSS which allows it to

  20   play DVDs.

  21            In other words, the argument that we have been making

  22   since the beginning of this case is that this is not a piracy

  23   case, this is not an illegal copying case.  Rather, this is a

  24   monopoly case where the DVD licensees control who shall play

  25   DVD hardware.




722



   1            THE COURT:  And would you point to the pleading that

   2   you have filed that makes this a monopoly case, Mr. Garbus.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  My memory is it's in the answer.  I

   4   don't have the answer before me.

   5            THE COURT:  Yes.  Well, I have looked at it since

   6   yesterday, and it is not there.  What you allege in the answer

   7   is that Congress's enactment of the DMCA and the application

   8   of that statute, presumably by the courts of this country,

   9   violates the antitrust laws.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  If --

  11            THE COURT:  Excuse me.  That is the only antitrust

  12   allegation you have made in any pleading in this case.  Now, I

  13   suspect that you know, but in any case, I will say, that it is

  14   impossible as a matter of law for the Congress of the United

  15   States, by enacting a statute, or for a court of the United

  16   States, by applying it, to violate the antitrust laws.

  17            If there were an inconsistency between the DMCA and

  18   the antitrust law, standard principles of law that have been

  19   established in this country for 200 years, require the result

  20   that because the Sherman Act was enacted in 1890, the Clayton

  21   Act in 1914 and the Robinson-Patman Act in 1936, and the DMCA

  22   in 1998, that the antitrust laws, to whatever extent they may

  23   be inconsistent with the DMCA, are repealed.

  24            Now, I don't see any inconsistency, and if there

  25   were, it's not an issue in this lawsuit and let's just get on




723



   1   with this lawsuit.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think it's an appropriate

   3   response at this time.  We have submitted briefs to you on

   4   that question.  I don't believe that the DMC --

   5            THE COURT:  What brief is that, Mr. Garbus?  Could

   6   you bring my attention to it, please?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.  We have a brief where we talk

   8   about Sega, Betamax and the Connectix case.  I think it's the

   9   reply brief, and it's my memory that in that brief we talk

  10   about the holdings in those three cases, and we discuss the

  11   issue of whether or not the DMCA has in effect overruled those

  12   three case.

  13            It is our view that it has not.  And in each of those

  14   three cases, as I interpret the cases, they had arguments

  15   about fair use, but they also had arguments under general

  16   copyright discussion about monopoly, and we have cited those

  17   cases in our brief and that has been part of our argument.

  18            THE COURT:  I stand fully by everything I said.

  19   Let's move on.  And if there is any relevance to this line of

  20   examination, I still haven't heard it, and it is now 12:25,

  21   and I am warning you now that your time with this witness is

  22   running out.  And if you don't get to something relevant, I

  23   will simply terminate the examination after fair warning.  You

  24   have had part of that warning now.

  25            MR. GARBUS:  I will stop examining this witness.




724



   1            THE COURT:  I have not terminated your examination.

   2   If you wish to stop now, that's your choice.

   3            Do you wish to stop now?

   4            MR. GARBUS:  I will ask two or three questions.

   5   BY MR. GARBUS:

   6   Q.  When you tested DeCSS, did you apply DivX?

   7   A.  No.

   8   Q.  Have you ever applied DivX?

   9   A.  No, I have not.

  10   Q.  Do you know what DivX is?

  11   A.  Yes, I do.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.  I have no further questions

  13   at this time.

  14            THE COURT:  Are you through with the witness, Mr.

  15   Garbus?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Yes, I am.

  17            THE COURT:  Is there any redirect?

  18            MR. COOPER:  No, your Honor.

  19            THE COURT:  The witness is excused.

  20            (Witness excused)

  21            THE COURT:  Your next witness, Mr. Gold?

  22            MR. GOLD:  As I said before, this was our last

  23   witness.  However, there are some disputes about documents

  24   still, we hoped, would have been resolved last night, but I'm

  25   told they weren't.  So prior to the resolution of those




725



   1   document issues, which we would like to put in on our case, we

   2   are not finished with the complaint, we are prepared to

   3   address them.

   4            MR. SIMS:  I have an informal agreement with

   5   Mr. Hernstadt and Mr. Atlas that, subject to your Honor's

   6   permission, we have given them last night a list of the

   7   exhibits, a subset of those we had marked, that we would like

   8   to move in.  They can't get to their objections until either

   9   tomorrow or, they said this morning, more likely Monday.

  10            So I think what Mr. Gold is saying is that we would

  11   like to close subject to the offering of that evidence.  I

  12   believe that they will agree to much of it and then that will

  13   narrow the amount of argument over the remaining arguments

  14   that would be made at the time that we offer that evidence.

  15            THE COURT:  Is that satisfactory, Mr. Garbus?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  I have to speak to Mr. Hernstadt.  I was

  17   not part of these conversations.

  18            MR. ATLAS:  We were provided by Mr. Sims with their

  19   exhibit list this morning.  I have gone through and taken some

  20   notes.  I have narrowed down the issues.  I would agree that

  21   you should keep their eyes open.  To the limited extent that

  22   they will submit certain exhibits and certain deposition

  23   designations, that's fine with us.  We will try and work those

  24   issues out tomorrow and over the weekend.

  25            THE COURT:  Okay.  Plaintiff rests subject to




726



   1   deposition excerpts and exhibits.

   2            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

   3            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus?

   4            MR. GARBUS:  We would be prepared to put on a witness

   5   after lunch.

   6            THE COURT:  2 o'clock.

   7            (Luncheon recess)

   8            (Continued on next page)

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




727



   1                 A F T E R N O O N   S E S S I O N

   2                             2:00 p.m.

   3            THE COURT:  We are missing somebody.  I guess not.

   4            Counsel, I gather you filed a motion in the Court of

   5   Appeals yesterday to stay the trial on the ground that I

   6   should not sit.  Does anybody know what the status of that is?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  It has been denied.

   8            THE COURT:  It has been denied.  All right.  Call

   9   your first witness.

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Defendants call Edward Felten.

  11            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, may I make a motion with

  12   respect to this witness?

  13            THE COURT:  Yes.

  14            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, it would appear that

  15   Mr. Felten is a distinguished professor of computer sciences

  16   at Princeton and he has submitted one and a half page

  17   declaration, six lines of which talk about what he is going to

  18   testify about.

  19            I would rather hand this up to you so you could see

  20   the six lines for yourself.

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Felten, why don't you have a seat for

  22   a second anywhere you like.

  23            MR. GOLD:  May I approach, your Honor?

  24            THE COURT:  Yes.

  25            MR. GOLD:  This is the declaration.  I'm referring to




728



   1   page 2.

   2            THE COURT:  Okay.  I have read it.

   3            MR. GOLD:  This is one of several cryptographers who

   4   have submitted affidavits and the subject listed here I

   5   respectfully submit, and as we set forth in our motion in

   6   limine, have nothing to do with the charges we have made

   7   against the defendant.

   8            THE COURT:  The very first item, the function

   9   similarities and/or differences between source and object

  10   code, I take it that that really is a foundation of the whole

  11   case, right?  I mean unless you know that, you don't know

  12   anything about this case.

  13            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes, your Honor.

  14            MR. GOLD:  The second, third and fourth, your Honor?

  15            THE COURT:  Well, let me hear from Mr. Hernstadt.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  About the relevance of this witness,

  17   your Honor?

  18            THE COURT:  The relevance of items 2, 3 and 4 on this

  19   statement.

  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  The relevance of items 2, 3 and 4 go

  21   into two parts of our case, one is the First Amendment

  22   argument that we make.  All of this is testing, all of the

  23   research that comes out of this testing is stuff that is

  24   material that is published and discussed and part of a

  25   discourse.  DeCSS is an example of the type of program that




729



   1   fits into the categories as set forth here.

   2            THE COURT:  That fits into?

   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  The categories that are set forth

   4   here, 2, 3, 4.  If a law is passed that permit the silencing

   5   of discussion about a program because it does one thing, if

   6   it's speech, then the First Amendment is violated.  That's an

   7   argument we have made.  I think in order to understand that,

   8   it is important that you understand the nature of the

   9   research, the nature of the interaction, the accelerated

  10   sessions.  It's not just publications.  It is a more

  11   complicated interaction.  And also, the benefit to the public

  12   of the discourse, of the open public discourse.

  13            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, one of the exhibits we were

  14   handed during lunch, that I assume they gave us because they

  15   were going to try to present in court, is a letter that a

  16   bunch of scholars presented to Congress before they passed the

  17   statute.  I think the defendants are mistaking this for a

  18   legislative body.  They don't like the statute --

  19            THE COURT:  We know they don't like the statute.

  20            MR. GOLD:  Well, that's what 2, 3 and 4 --

  21            THE COURT:  I never met a defendant that liked the

  22   statute under which they were being sued.  Most drug dealers

  23   have a problem with the narcotics laws.  I didn't mean to

  24   compare these people to drug dealers by any stretch.  Perish

  25   the thought.  Just to illustrate the point.  Most corporations




730



   1   don't like the antitrust laws.  Do you like that better?

   2            MR. GOLD:  If we get into 2, 3 and 4, you will be

   3   into a lot of things I think you'll find have no relevance at

   4   all.

   5            THE COURT:  Well, look, I'm prepared to be educated

   6   to a point, and if I find that it's relevant and useful, I

   7   will hear more.  If the only objection here is relevance, I am

   8   prepared to go a little bit of a way to find out whether I

   9   think there is really something to it.

  10            MR. GOLD:  It's relevance, and it's the fact that

  11   under the statute, on the face of the statute as we have set

  12   forth, your Honor, there can be no cryptographic research

  13   exception for these defendants.

  14            THE COURT:  No, but it is fair to say that in my

  15   preliminary injunction ruling on the basis of no record at all

  16   other than what you have told me, I came to the conclusion all

  17   by myself that given the assumption that code has some

  18   expressive content, there needs to be at some point

  19   potentially a balancing with respect to constraining the

  20   publication, because any constraint on the publication, given

  21   the assumption, involves a First Amendment value.

  22            Now, I think, therefore, that I need to hear

  23   potentially evidence of this character in order to come to an

  24   informed judgment about how to balance, instead of being in

  25   the position that I found myself in in January, through no




731



   1   fault of the plaintiffs, of basically having on the one side

   2   your contention that this program did nothing but rip off your

   3   product and the defendants' position that it didn't matter,

   4   the First Amendment was a complete obstacle.

   5            MR. GOLD:  In terms of the sole purpose of the

   6   product, the defense has admitted that the sole purpose was to

   7   serve DeCSS.

   8            THE COURT:  I understand that, but there are other

   9   issues here, and I am going to allow the witness to testify.

  10   I'm not sure until I hear it how much of what he has to say is

  11   useful, but I'm certainly going to start listening.

  12            MR. GOLD:  Thank you.

  13            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, just to make the record

  14   clear, we have never submitted that the sole purpose is to

  15   circumvent.  We have submitted evidence that one of its

  16   purposes is to decrypt.  But that's not the same thing as

  17   circumvent.

  18            THE COURT:  I know.  You are a good lawyer,

  19   Mr. Hernstadt.

  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, sir.

  21            THE COURT:  It certainly doesn't serve the purpose of

  22   allowing people to play Space Invaders.  Okay.  Let's go with

  23   the witness.

  24    EDWARD FELTEN,

  25        called as a witness by the Defendant,




732



   1        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

   2   DIRECT EXAMINATION

   3   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

   4   Q.  Good afternoon, Professor Felten.  Could you tell us what

   5   your education in the area of computer science is?

   6   A.  Sure.  My education in general, I received a bachelors

   7   degree from CalTech in 1985 and in 1991, a masters degree, in

   8   1993, a Ph.D. in computer science, both of those at the

   9   University of Washington.

  10   Q.  And in the course of your studies, were you awarded any

  11   honors?

  12   A.  Yes.  My graduation from CalTech was a graduation with

  13   honors, and I received an award for the -- for outstanding

  14   research outside the classroom at CalTech, and when I was in

  15   graduate school, I received an AT&T graduate fellowship and

  16   also a Mercury 7 fellowship.

  17   Q.  What was the AT&T graduate fellowship?

  18   A.  This is a merit-based fellowship awarded by AT&T to a few

  19   computer science students at top schools, and it is basically

  20   a full ride through graduate school.

  21   Q.  After you completed graduate school, where did you go?

  22   A.  I joined the faculty at Princeton.

  23   Q.  Where are you teaching now?

  24   A.  Still at Princeton, the computer science department.

  25   Q.  What is your present position?




733



   1   A.  I'm an associate professor of computer science.

   2   Q.  What courses are you teaching?

   3   A.  The courses I have taught in the last few years include

   4   introduction to information security, a course on computer

   5   networks and distributing computing, and some special topics

   6   courses related to computer security and some other topics.

   7   Q.  Do you know what DeCSS is?

   8   A.  Yes.

   9   Q.  Do you teach, use DeCSS in any of your classes?

  10   A.  Yes, I used it in my introduction to information security

  11   course this last spring.

  12   Q.  What are your primary areas of research?

  13   A.  I do research in a number of areas.  The main one is

  14   computer security.  I also do research related to operating

  15   systems, to Internet software and some research related to

  16   computer networks.

  17   Q.  Have you been given any honors or awards in connection

  18   with your research?

  19   A.  Yes.  These include some fellowships, a Sloan fellowship,

  20   a National Young Investigator Award from the National Science

  21   Foundation, and also some "Best Paper" awards at conferences.

  22   For example, at the symposium on operating system principles

  23   in 1997, which is the most prestigious conference in operating

  24   systems which meets every two years, I received the "Best

  25   Paper" award at that in 1997, so that indicates -- that is




734



   1   said to indicate that I had written one of the two or three

   2   best papers in the area of operating area research in that

   3   area.

   4   Q.  Have you authored or coauthored a number of publications?

   5   A.  Yes.  At least 50 articles in the scholarly -- at least 50

   6   scholarly publications in the form of articles plus two books

   7   and some magazine articles.

   8            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, may I approach the

   9   witness?

  10            THE COURT:  Yes.

  11   Q.  Professor Felten, I have handed you Exhibit I believe BBP?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  Could you identify that?

  14   A.  This is a declaration that I filed earlier in this case

  15   and attached to it is a copy of my CV.

  16   Q.  Does your CV list your publications and articles?

  17   A.  Yes, it does.

  18            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, rather than spending more

  19   time with that, I would move this into evidence.

  20            MR. COOPER:  No objection, your Honor.

  21            THE COURT:  Are you including within the offer the

  22   attached paper on Protocol Failure Analysis in Applied

  23   Cryptography Curriculum?

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes, your Honor.

  25            THE COURT:  Mr. Cooper?




735



   1            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, I'm not familiar with that

   2   article as having been part of the declaration.  Certainly I

   3   don't have a copy in what I have here from Dr. Felton's --

   4            THE COURT:  I will receive that part of the exhibit

   5   which consists of the declaration itself and the attached CV

   6   but not at this point the article.

   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  Very good, your Honor.  Actually I

   8   don't have it either.

   9            MR. COOPER:  I don't believe it was attached.

  10            THE COURT:  It sure is, stapled to the one

  11   Mr. Hernstadt just handed me.

  12            MR. COOPER:  We have never seen it, your Honor, to

  13   the best of our knowledge.

  14            THE COURT:  That just happened.  Let's go.

  15            (Defendant's Exhibit BBP received in evidence)

  16   Q.  Do you do any other work outside of teaching and research?

  17   A.  I do consulting for a number of companies and others.

  18   Some of that consulting is technical consulting, advising

  19   companies, particularly in the security field.  I serve on

  20   technical advisory boards for six or seven companies, most of

  21   them start-ups in the security area, and I also do some

  22   consulting related to litigation.

  23   Q.  Have you ever testified in a case in connection with your

  24   consulting?

  25   A.  Yes, I testified twice in the Microsoft antitrust case in




736



   1   front of Judge Jackson, and in that case, I also was deposed

   2   twice and filed two declarations.

   3   Q.  And did the court take your testimony as an expert?

   4   A.  Yes.  The Department of Justice designated me as an expert

   5   and Microsoft did not object, so the judge accepted my

   6   testimony on that basis.

   7   Q.  What were the subject matters of your testimony in that

   8   case?

   9   A.  I testified in general about operating systems, web

  10   browsers and Internet software.  I testified specifically

  11   about the Microsoft products that were at issue in that case,

  12   Windows 95, Windows 98 and Internet Explorer, the relationship

  13   among them.  I testified about general issues relating to the

  14   design of software and how software could have been designed

  15   in ways other than what Microsoft did and a few other topics.

  16            I should also add that I also testified about the

  17   security implications of what Microsoft had done in the design

  18   of their products.

  19   Q.  In case anyone in the room doesn't know, what was the

  20   result of that case?

  21   A.  The --

  22            MR. COOPER:  Relevancy, your Honor.

  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  24   Q.  Are you familiar with the Linux operating system?

  25   A.  Yes.




737



   1            THE COURT:  Before we get to that, I want to ask the

   2   witness one question.

   3            I had another lawsuit at some point in which I

   4   thought about but ultimately did not appoint a court expert in

   5   a computer science area, and I remember that somebody referred

   6   me to somebody at Princeton.  I never engaged any "expert."

   7   Was that you?

   8            THE WITNESS:  I don't recall ever being contacted.

   9            THE COURT:  I don't remember the name either.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  It was another one of our experts.

  11            THE COURT:  Okay.

  12   Q.  Do you use the Linux operating system?

  13            THE COURT:  Who was it, Mr. Garbus?

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I think it is Larry Peterson.

  15            THE COURT:  I don't remember the name.

  16            MR. GARBUS:  I don't think you and he ever spoke.

  17            THE COURT:  I think that's probably right.  I think

  18   there may have been an e-mail or two.

  19            Go ahead.

  20   Q.  Do you use the Linux operating system?

  21   A.  Yes, I do on a regular basis.  I have one in my home, in

  22   my office, and I have at least two in the lab that my research

  23   group uses.

  24   Q.  And do you also have a Windows computer?

  25   A.  Yes, I also have Windows computers in each of those places




738



   1   as well.

   2   Q.  Is one of those two operating systems your preferred

   3   operating system?

   4   A.  I think it depends what your purpose is.  I think that in

   5   general, Linux is faster, more stable and more flexible than

   6   Windows, and so if that's what I'm after, then that's the

   7   system of choice.

   8            The big advantage of Windows is that it has support

   9   for a lot more applications, and if you need one of those

  10   applications that's not available on Linux, then I would

  11   choose Windows for that reason.  I think that if both

  12   operating systems had equivalent sets of applications, I would

  13   choose Linux.

  14   Q.  What programming languages do you use in your work?

  15   A.  A number of them.  Like most computer scientists, I use

  16   whatever language fits the job, and so this would include

  17   languages like C, C++, Java, Pearl, NL and a number of others.

  18   Q.  And is there a connection between programming languages

  19   and what has been referred to as case, source code and object

  20   code?

  21   A.  Sure.  Source code, I think of it as a general term

  22   referring to certain kinds of computer languages.  The form in

  23   which the person typically writes the code directly is often

  24   referred to as source code, so think of source code as being

  25   one kind of computer language.




739



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, the defense would offer

   2   Professor Felten as an expert.

   3            THE COURT:  Just as I told the other side, it's not

   4   necessary.  If there is an objection to an opinion he offers,

   5   we will deal with it then.

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  Very good.  Thank you, your Honor.

   7   Q.  You said earlier that one of your primary areas of

   8   research is security.

   9            THE COURT:  Does that mean you're leaving source code

  10   and object code?

  11            MR. HERNSTADT:  No.  I'm coming back.

  12   Q.  What is your main focus of scholarship and teaching in the

  13   area of security?

  14   A.  I, in my research group, do two things that I think

  15   distinguish us from -- there are two ways in which we try to

  16   distinguish our work.  One is in focusing on the security of

  17   widely used software, software that is deployed on a lot of

  18   people's computers and that a lot of people are relying on.

  19   The other is in trying to take a sort of holistic approach, to

  20   consider the whole picture of what is involved in security at

  21   a system level as opposed to focusing on the microlevel on

  22   particular components.

  23   Q.  Does this research involve any reverse engineering?

  24   A.  Yes, we use reverse engineering quite a bit.  One of the

  25   things that we do is do detailed security studies of products




740



   1   that are deployed in the field, and in doing that, one needs

   2   to understand how the product works, what it does, whether the

   3   things that the manual says are actually true, and so on.  To

   4   do that, you need to examine the software while it is running

   5   in a sort of bit-by-bit fashion, and that is reverse

   6   engineering.

   7   Q.  Does it involve encryption research as well?

   8   A.  Yes, many of the systems that we study involve encryption

   9   and do encryption, so encryption is part of that holistic

  10   picture that I talked about.

  11   Q.  You described taking apart programs, looking at programs

  12   very precisely.  Is that what is known as hacking?

  13   A.  We, the term "hacking" has been used in a lot of different

  14   ways.  Back when I started out in computer science, the term

  15   "hacking" would have been almost universally applied to that.

  16   In other words, hacking at one time was a term that was used

  17   just to refer to playing around with computer systems, trying

  18   to get them to do things, sort of analogous to tinkering if

  19   you will.  A person who was particularly good at that would be

  20   called a hacker.

  21            Then at some point in time, people who used computers

  22   for criminal purposes started to call themselves hackers,

  23   tried to apply that complimentary word to themselves, and the

  24   press picked it up and now you hear the word used especially

  25   in the public and the press in a negative way.  So when I hear




741



   1   someone use that word, I really have to look at the context to

   2   see what they mean.

   3   Q.  Could you give us an example of a security research

   4   project -- before you get to that, before when you were

   5   talking about the work you were doing you used the word "we."

   6   What did the "we" refer to?

   7   A.  We refers to a research group which consists of myself and

   8   at various times a number of graduate students, perhaps some

   9   undergraduate students, sometimes faculty colleagues get

  10   involved.  So what it means is really a group of people headed

  11   by me.

  12   Q.  Could you give an example of a security research project

  13   that you have worked on?

  14   A.  Sure.  One project that we spent a number of years on

  15   is -- started out with a study of the security of JAVA.  Java

  16   is a programming language and a system which was deployed by

  17   itself and also in conjunction with web browsers, and because

  18   of technical reasons, which I'll skip -- unless you really

  19   want to hear them -- the security of Java was important for

  20   the overall security of web browsers and, hence, the security

  21   of people browsing the web, and so we started out in this

  22   project by doing a detailed study of Java to try to understand

  23   whether it provided the security guarantees that the vendors

  24   of Java systems said it did and, if not, why not.  And then we

  25   moved on from there to deal with the implications of what we




742



   1   had found.

   2   Q.  Which vendor's version of Java did you look at first?

   3   A.  We started out looking at the version from Sun

   4   Microsystems because at the time we started, that was by far

   5   the most popular version.  Later on Netscape came out with

   6   their own version of Java and we began to study that and

   7   Microsoft came out with their own version and we began to

   8   study that.  For most of the project, we were looking at all

   9   three implementations because those formed by far the bulk of

  10   the systems that were actually deployed.

  11   Q.  Do researchers request the permission of a vendor in

  12   advance before they start looking at a program?

  13   A.  No.  We did not feel that we needed permission from anyone

  14   to do what we were doing, and certainly we were happy to talk

  15   to the vendors about what we were doing if they wanted to

  16   engage us in a dialog, but we did not feel we needed their

  17   permission to do it.

  18   Q.  Did your research reveal vulnerability in the various

  19   implementations of Java?

  20   A.  Yes, quite a few.  Over the course of about two to three

  21   years, we found roughly a dozen of what I would consider

  22   serious security vulnerabilities in various versions of Java.

  23   Q.  What did you do with the results you found?

  24   A.  We do a number of things.  We discuss and publish the

  25   results publicly.  We discuss these results with the vendors




743



   1   in order to help the vendors improve their products.  We --

   2   and we use them to feed into and motivate our research in the

   3   future, and I also use them in teaching.

   4   Q.  Where are the results published?

   5   A.  They are published in a number of places and in a number

   6   of different ways.  Because there are a number of audiences

   7   who we would like to reach and who I think are interested in

   8   hearing about this, ranging from the public, the average user

   9   of this technology, on up to the sort of very advanced

  10   research community, so we use the method that in each case

  11   makes sense for talking to that constituency.

  12            For the research community, we will publish papers in

  13   journals and so on, give talks at conferences.  For the

  14   public, we will put articles on your website, talk to the

  15   press, whatever we think will help convey the information we

  16   have learned to the people who need to know it.

  17   Q.  When you describe the vulnerabilities, do you do so in a

  18   specific way, detailing what is wrong with the program?

  19   A.  Yes, we think it is important that the information about

  20   the vulnerabilities is available to people who have an

  21   interest in knowing about it.  We think the public benefits

  22   from that kind of discussion in a number of ways, and so in

  23   each situation, we are as specific as we think we need to be

  24   in order to fully inform the public in the research community.

  25   Q.  Do you include code sometimes when you release the




744



   1   results?

   2   A.  Sometimes.  Sometimes we do.  It depends really on the

   3   circumstances.  It depends on what we think is necessary and

   4   appropriate in order to communicate our results.

   5   Q.  Now, looking at the Java project, did you disclose to the

   6   vendors whose products you looked at the result you found

   7   before you published them to the general public?

   8   A.  Well, we tried in every case.  We were not always able to

   9   establish a communication with the vendor that was useful.  In

  10   at least one instance, we tried to reach the vendor, tried to

  11   communicate to the vendor.  What we found was we couldn't get

  12   through the public relations protective screen that they put

  13   up in front of their engineers.  In other instances, we did

  14   disclose to the vendor because we thought under the

  15   circumstances that was the -- that was an effective way to

  16   proceed in order to serve the public interest.  But we always

  17   disclosed the results of our research to the public very

  18   promptly.

  19   Q.  Why do you do that?

  20   A.  Well, we think we have a responsibility to do it.  Early

  21   on in the process of our discovering these vulnerabilities and

  22   dealing with them, I was concerned about what was the right

  23   way to behave, what was the -- what was the ethical thing to

  24   do in this situation.  And so I went and I spoke to an

  25   ethicist at the university, a philosopher who studies ethics,




745



   1   and I had lunch with her a few times and tried to sort through

   2   what was the right thing to do in these type of situations.

   3            The one message I took away from that was our prime

   4   responsibility ethically in this situation was to the public,

   5   to make sure that the public had the information they needed

   6   in order to make good decisions about what to do.  And so my

   7   belief for a number of reasons is that the public is served by

   8   the disclosure of this information to all of the community

   9   that I talked to, ranging from the public itself down to

  10   researchers.

  11   Q.  Okay.  What other benefits are there from publishing the

  12   result of your research?

  13   A.  I think there are a bunch of benefits that accrue to the

  14   public as a result of this.  First of all, there are the more

  15   direct benefits.  The public, after all -- first, the public,

  16   after all, is using these systems, and they -- and the public

  17   is making decisions about whether to use a particular

  18   technology, and I think the public benefits from making those

  19   decisions based on accurate information.

  20            That is, if someone is deciding whether to deploy --

  21   whether to install a Java virtual machine on their computer,

  22   they would benefit from knowing about the security of it.  If

  23   someone is deciding whether to buy a DVD player, they would

  24   benefit from knowing about the security of the -- about the

  25   strength of the security mechanisms installed in it.




746



   1            For example, if I know that the DVD players have weak

   2   security in them, I might decide that maybe I don't want to

   3   buy a DVD player now, maybe some new technology with better

   4   security is going to come along in a year and I will have to

   5   throw my DVD player away.

   6            So knowing about the security, knowing about whether

   7   the security representations made by the vendors of these

   8   systems is accurate, and knowing about what are the risks of

   9   deploying a particular product, and understanding how things

  10   are likely to play out in the future, all help the public.

  11   And that comes from having accurate information about the

  12   security level of the product that they are using.

  13            That principle really applies to anyone who is

  14   thinking about investing in a technology in any way.  So it

  15   might be the member of the public who is thinking about buying

  16   something which is going to use that technology.  It might be

  17   someone who is thinking of releasing content in the DVD

  18   format.  It might be someone who is making a movie in the case

  19   of DVDs, understanding what they are doing when they sign away

  20   to someone the right to make DVDs with their work on it.  It

  21   might be someone who is thinking of going into a partnership

  22   with a company who is using a particular technology.  All of

  23   these people can make better decisions and more informed

  24   decisions if they actually know what are the implications of

  25   the decisions they are making.




747



   1            An additional benefit to the public along the same

   2   lines is that over time, the public learns which products tend

   3   to have problems, which companies tend to release products

   4   that have problems, and they tend to develop a sense of which

   5   kinds of technology are likely to have good security and which

   6   are not, and that in the long run helps people understand what

   7   to do.  If they can see the next security problem coming, then

   8   they can also make better decisions.

   9   Q.  Do you use the results you publish in teaching?

  10   A.  Yes.  I believe rather strongly that in teaching students

  11   about computer security, how -- to design secure systems, you

  12   have to understand how systems really fail in practice, and I

  13   think there is a good analogy here to the engineering of

  14   buildings to stand up to earthquakes.  If you are going to

  15   design a building that can stand up to an earthquake and not

  16   fall down, or you want to teach someone to do that, you have

  17   to understand how buildings actually fall down in earthquakes,

  18   which parts break and why, which of the engineering practices

  19   in building the buildings tend to lead to strong buildings and

  20   which don't.  You have to look at that experience because

  21   that's the only way you can keep your education, your

  22   understanding from drifting off into theoretical irrelevance.

  23   You need to understand how things actually break in practice

  24   so you can avoid it in the future.

  25   Q.  Now, in publishing your results, have you ever published




748



   1   code for a program that would exploit the vulnerabilities you

   2   have discovered in your research?

   3   A.  Well, I make a distinction here between publishing code

   4   that demonstrates the existence of a vulnerability and

   5   publishing code that actually lets you harm someone.  That is,

   6   if you can demonstrate that a vulnerability exists, that that

   7   system does not do what the people selling it say it does,

   8   then that is a public good.  And if you can do that without

   9   providing all of the steps that someone needs to actually hurt

  10   someone, then so much the better.  So there is an important

  11   distinction here.  We do and have published code that

  12   demonstrate the existence of vulnerabilities, but we have not

  13   published code that takes all the steps necessary to harm

  14   someone.

  15   Q.  Now, you mentioned before that you know what DeCSS is.

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  Could you tell us, what is DeCSS?

  18   A.  The DeCSS is a program that allows material on a DVD

  19   encrypted with the CSS system to be decrypted essentially.

  20   Q.  When did you learn about DeCSS?

  21   A.  I learned about DeCSS -- I don't recall the exact date --

  22   I would estimate it was maybe in January roughly.  And I

  23   learned about it from reading reports in the press and also

  24   from seeing Frank Stevenson's paper about it.

  25   Q.  Did you examine DeCSS to understand what it did?




749



   1   A.  Yes.  At the time I got a copy of Frank Stevenson's paper,

   2   I got a copy of DeCSS, I read them both side by side to

   3   understand what was going on, to verify for myself that what

   4   Mr. Stevenson had said and what was reported in the press was

   5   generally accurate.

   6            What Mr. Stevenson said was precisely accurate.  What

   7   was said in the press was generally accurate.  Just to

   8   understand what was going on, it was another one of those

   9   examples I talked about, about how systems fail.

  10   Q.  When you refer to Mr. Stevenson's paper, are you talking

  11   about Frank Stevenson's cryptoanalysis of the CSS algorithm?

  12   A.  Yes, that's what I meant.

  13   Q.  Did you learn anything about CSS upon examining DeCSS and

  14   Mr. Stevenson's paper?

  15   A.  Yes, I learned a number of things about it.  First of all,

  16   I learned about how it worked, but I also learned about the

  17   level of -- relative level of security that it offered.  I

  18   learned about what mistakes the people designing it had made,

  19   and that let me move on and think about the implications of

  20   those mistakes.

  21   Q.  Did you identify any particular flaws?

  22   A.  Sure.

  23            MR. COOPER:  Relevancy, your Honor.

  24            THE COURT:  No, I understand the relevance.

  25   Overruled.  This does not go -- at least I'm not taking it on




750



   1   the issue of robustness.  Go ahead.

   2   A.  Okay.  There are a number of mistakes that the designers

   3   of CSS made, starting out with designing their own

   4   cryptosystem, instead of using a standard well-established one

   5   that was known to be strong.  That is a common beginner's

   6   mistake and something that I advise my students against.

   7            Beyond designing their own cipher, using a 40-bit key

   8   is also a very significant mistake.  It allows the system to

   9   be broken by a brute force attack.  In addition to that, there

  10   was a third, more technical error that the designers made that

  11   Frank Stevenson describes in his paper.  That allows the keys

  12   to be extracted with considerably less work even than a brute

  13   force search.

  14   Q.  Based on your experience, would you describe CSS as a

  15   security system?

  16   A.  Yes, it's a security system in the sense that I use the

  17   term.  I use the term broadly meaning that it's any kind of

  18   system that's intended to control or restrict the use of

  19   anything, so in that sense, it is a security system.

  20   Q.  What does CSS protect?

  21   A.  What it does or what it was intended to do is to -- it was

  22   really two things.  First of all, it was designed to prevent a

  23   CSS-encoded DVD from being played in any player which did not

  24   have the CSS algorithm in it.  Second, it has the effect of

  25   preventing any use other than playing of the material on the




751



   1   DVD.

   2   Q.  Did it have any -- was it designed or intended to protect

   3   the material in the DVD from being copied?

   4   A.  It did not -- it certainly did not, nor could it have

   5   prevented the encrypted content from being copied to somewhere

   6   else to our disk, to another DVD.

   7            THE COURT:  Could you sit back about five more inches

   8   from the microphone, because whether you get too close, it

   9   reverberates.

  10            THE WITNESS:  Sure.

  11            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  12   Q.  You mentioned before that it prevents a person from having

  13   access to the material on the disk.  Why would a person who

  14   has purchased a DVD want to have access to the material on the

  15   disk?

  16            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor.  It's not

  17   relevant.

  18            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, I think this goes to the

  20   various exemptions and other noninfringing uses.

  21            THE COURT:  Maybe it does, but this gentleman is an

  22   expert on computer science, not an expert on why somebody else

  23   might want to have access to a DVD file.

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  Very good.  May I approach the

  25   witness?




752



   1            THE COURT:  You may.

   2   Q.  Professor Felten, I am giving you Exhibit BBS which is the

   3   declaration of Professor Appel.  I would ask you to turn to

   4   Exhibit B at the very back.  Is that an article that you

   5   coauthored with Professor Appel?

   6   A.  Yes, it is, it's an article the two of us coauthored which

   7   we submitted to the copyright office in response to a request

   8   for comments related to the copyright office's opinion

   9   regarding the DMCA, and also a slightly modified version of

  10   this will appear -- I should say this, along with a little bit

  11   of explanatory material explaining what the DMCA is and so on,

  12   will appear in the Communications of the ACM Magazine in the

  13   September issue.

  14   Q.  What is that magazine?

  15   A.  Communications of the ACM is sort of the flagship magazine

  16   of the ACM which is the primary professional society for

  17   computer scientists.  Every member of the ACM gets the

  18   magazine.

  19   Q.  What does ACM stand for?

  20   A.  Association for Computing Machinery.

  21   Q.  What do you discuss in this article?

  22   A.  The article discusses the -- the article discusses a

  23   number of reasons why scholars in various disciplines,

  24   including computer science, would want to, and in fact need to

  25   in order to do research, have access to the raw bits, the raw




753



   1   text, if you will, of a copyrighted work in order to do

   2   various kinds of scholarship that do not infringe copyright.

   3            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, if I may.  If this testimony

   4   is going to proceed in this direction, it seems to me that

   5   it's outside of the scope of the expertise for which this

   6   witness is offered.  It seems to me to address the drafting of

   7   the DMCA and the desire to have access to material protected

   8   by encryption rather than to the science of cryptography.

   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  I think this article addresses the

  10   scholarly uses to which he would put a program like DeCSS, and

  11   in all of its permutations, the research that he discussed

  12   earlier as well as the need for access to materials, in order

  13   to conduct research.  I also -- it goes to an argument that we

  14   have made and will continue to make that fair use is exempted

  15   and protected activity by the DMCA.

  16            THE COURT:  The question of whether fair use is

  17   exempted by the DMCA requires the reading of the words

  18   Congress put on the piece of paper.  It's not a matter for

  19   each side to bring in witnesses to testify as to their beliefs

  20   on the subject.  So to that extent, I don't think it's a

  21   appropriate.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  If I may, I'm not presenting

  23   Professor Felten to discuss his beliefs, but, rather, examples

  24   of the types of activities that he would and has in his

  25   professional life undertaken.




754



   1            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, it's not any of the four

   2   topics for which this witness has been identified and it's

   3   plainly outside of the scope for which he has been offered.

   4            THE COURT:  Well, what about that, counsel?

   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, this is within the scope

   6   of his discussion of the relationship between -- excuse me --

   7   of scholarship, the importance of disseminating and making

   8   available information concerning the subject of such tests and

   9   methodology and results of testing.  I think that this is

  10   addressing the needs of scholarship in perhaps a broader sense

  11   but it is certainly within the scope of what he was to talk

  12   about.  The harm of scholarship that would result from not

  13   being able to undertake certain practices I think is part of

  14   the methodology of scholarship.

  15            MR. COOPER:  I don't think that's a fair

  16   characterization of what he is being asked to testify about.

  17   We accept that he is an appropriate witness to testify about

  18   issues with respect to publishing security analyses and so on,

  19   but I think this questioning goes to entirely different

  20   subjects, none of which go to the question of whether the

  21   defendants in this case have any potential fair use defense.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, I am prepared to move

  23   into evidence or request to move into evidence Exhibit B of

  24   the Appel declaration and allow you to make your own

  25   assessment of how it fit into this.




755



   1            THE COURT:  I think that's the appropriate course.

   2            I take it, Professor Felten, that what you said in

   3   Exhibit B to Defendants' Exhibit BBS in fact represents your

   4   genuinely held views, correct?

   5            THE WITNESS:  Yes, it does.

   6            THE COURT:  All right.  Well I'm going to receive it

   7   for whatever it's worth, but, Mr. Hernstadt --

   8            MR. HERNSTADT:  I'm going to move on.

   9            THE COURT:  Let me finish making the point.  So what

  10   is received is just Exhibit B to Defendants' Exhibit BBS.

  11            (Defendant's Exhibit B to Exhibit BBS received in

  12   evidence)

  13            MR. HERNSTADT:  I would request that we separate it

  14   and put it in as BBS-1.

  15            THE COURT:  Let's deal with that later.  I would like

  16   to finish what I'm trying to say to you.

  17            I think it is probably self-evident, or if not, close

  18   to self-evident that scholars could make use of some materials

  19   that might appear in digital form -- and I don't limit myself

  20   to motion pictures -- if they were free to circumvent whatever

  21   technological protections there might be that stand between

  22   them and the digital form of the material.

  23            You now have this witness's view that that is so, and

  24   you have his article.  I don't think you have to beat a dead

  25   horse on that point.  You know, it goes or doesn't go wherever




756



   1   you want it to go, and eight or nine more witnesses on the

   2   same point -- and I don't know whether that's what your plan

   3   is -- would be a little bit cumulative.  Okay?

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  All right.

   6   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

   7   Q.  Professor Felten, let me move on.  Professor Felten, based

   8   on your experience and expertise in the area of security

   9   research, do you have an opinion as to whether the disclosure

  10   of the DeCSS program was good?

  11            THE COURT:  Sustained.  Good?

  12   Q.  Whether there is a value, a public value to the disclosure

  13   of the DeCSS program?

  14            THE COURT:  Sustained.  I have a lot of respect,

  15   based on what I've read of his CV and what I have seen here,

  16   for Professor Felten.  But the last time I've looked he is not

  17   an expert on what the public values are and whether they are

  18   expert or not, the people who make those judgments in this

  19   society are called Congressmen and Senators.

  20   Q.  Professor Felten, do you have an opinion as to the impact

  21   of the disclosure -- the impact on the CSS of the disclosure

  22   of the DeCSS's program?

  23            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, it's vague and I believe, if

  24   I understand it, beyond the scope of the expertise of this

  25   witness.




757



   1            THE COURT:  Look, Dr. Felten, would I be right in

   2   assuming that in your judgment, the disclosure of DeCSS code

   3   has been of some value to you and in your opinion others who

   4   follow the same line of work as you do from a scholarly point

   5   of view?

   6            THE WITNESS:  Yes, I think it has meaning in my

   7   research and in my teaching.

   8            THE COURT:  Is that what you wanted, Mr. Hernstadt?

   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes.

  10   Q.  Could you explain how it has helped you?

  11   A.  Sure, I talked about in general about the benefits to

  12   research that come from a discussion of real system failures

  13   and why they fail and so on, and all of that holds true for

  14   DeCSS.  I think it's a very instructive example for

  15   researchers.  It's a benchmark against which we can hold up

  16   research which claims to improve practices or to improve

  17   designs.  We can ask would this new method really have

  18   prevented this kind of problem.  It has been useful to me in

  19   teaching.  I have used it as an exam in my course, for

  20   example, as one thing students can study where they can see a

  21   real failure and think about why and how it happened and think

  22   about what they might do differently.

  23   Q.  Turning back to source code and object code, Professor

  24   Felten, what is source code?

  25   A.  I think of source code and object code as being sort of




758



   1   two ends of a spectrum.  There are lot of different languages

   2   in which you can express computer programs, and there are

   3   different styles of languages and computer scientists argue

   4   endlessly about which ones are better.  There are also

   5   different levels of programming, like one talks about high

   6   level or low level.

   7            Generally high level is referring to things which are

   8   closer to the level at which people tend to write programs.

   9   Low level means closer to the level at which computers execute

  10   them.  But I don't think there is a clean distinction

  11   necessarily between source code and object code.  It's kind of

  12   a continuum on which all of the different forms of computer

  13   languages can be placed.

  14            THE COURT:  Can I try it this way?  This isn't the

  15   first computer case I have ever dealt with, and the

  16   understanding that I have always had runs something along

  17   these lines, and I would like you to tell me to what extent it

  18   is right and to what extent it is wrong.

  19            My first proposition, computers operate in a binary

  20   environment; that is, everything is a one or a zero, right?

  21            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

  22            THE COURT:  That derives from the fact that various

  23   bit of silicon in the computer either have a positive

  24   electrical charge or a negative electrical charge, am I right?

  25            THE WITNESS:  Yes.




759



   1            THE COURT:  So in order for a computer to understand

   2   any instructions or data that a human being wishes to enter

   3   into a computer, it must be received by the computer in the

   4   form of a string of positive or negative charges or to put in

   5   common parlance, ones or zeros, right?

   6            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

   7            THE COURT:  Object code consists of that

   8   machine-readable sequence of yes/no, one/zero impulses, true?

   9            THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's the strict definition of

  10   object code.

  11            THE COURT:  Okay.  Now people have a hard time

  12   understanding strings of ones and zeros in potentially almost

  13   infinite length.  So source code is a language, whichever

  14   particular one it may be, that is less abstract and easier for

  15   human beings to understand than a string of ones and zeros,

  16   correct?

  17            THE WITNESS:  Yes, generally.

  18            THE COURT:  Okay.  And whether through the process

  19   known as compilation or through some other process, whatever a

  20   programmer writes in source code gets transformed for the

  21   computer to operate upon into object code, i.e. the string of

  22   ones and zeros or positive and negative charge, true?

  23            THE WITNESS:  That transformation does happen but it

  24   doesn't always happen in one step.  There are sometimes

  25   intermediate steps, intermediate languages, for example.




760



   1            THE COURT:  When you spoke of a continuum, there are

   2   computer languages that involve modes of expression or

   3   conveying information or instructions that are at one end of

   4   the spectrum close to English or some other spoken or written

   5   human language, and other types of languages that are much

   6   farther away from spoken and written language and much closer

   7   to but not quite get at the machine readable binary format?

   8            THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's the distinction between

   9   high level and low level.

  10            THE COURT:  Okay.  Let's go, Mr. Hernstadt.

  11   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

  12   Q.  Okay.  Judge Kaplan identified source code as less

  13   abstract than object code.  Is it in fact less abstract?

  14   A.  That's a hard question.  I would say they are abstract in

  15   different ways.  There are certainly some things which you can

  16   learn more fruit any from source code.  I talked about high

  17   level and low level.  There are sort of high level ideas about

  18   how the program is structured in general, sort of the

  19   architecture of it which you can generally get more easily

  20   from source code.  But there are other things which you can

  21   learn more easily from object code.

  22   Q.  Can you read object code?

  23   A.  Yes, it's not as easy -- it's not the easiest language to

  24   read certainly.  We teach students to read it and write it as

  25   part of their education.




761



   1   Q.  Are there parts of your research where you rely on your

   2   ability to read object code to get the information you need?

   3   A.  Yes.  I should add that we do things other than read

   4   object code.  We also execute it and you can learn a lot by

   5   doing that.

   6   Q.  You talked about the different programming languages.  Is

   7   there -- is source code and object code, are they also types

   8   of languages?

   9   A.  Well, object code in the sense of the thing that the

  10   computer directly executes it.  For types of microprocessors

  11   there is a single language.  There are many different

  12   languages that you would classify as source code or sort of

  13   intermediate things.  There is a huge variety of languages.

  14   Q.  What did you mean when you discussed source code and

  15   object code being on a continuum?

  16   A.  What I meant is that different levels -- different

  17   languages might, you might write programs that might be at

  18   different levels.  Some are easier to read and write, some are

  19   closer to what the machine executes, and that in the creation

  20   of programs, you sometimes work with languages that are at a

  21   sort of intermediate level.  You might translate a program

  22   from the language in which you wrote it into some other

  23   language, then read and modify it in that intermediate

  24   language, and then translate it again into the final object

  25   code.  So it's not -- it's not a binary distinction between




762



   1   source code and object code.  It's not just it's this or that.

   2   There are in between stages, in-between levels of expression.

   3   Q.  And based on your experience with source code and object

   4   code, is it your opinion that object code is expressive?

   5   A.  Certainly.

   6            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, in a legal sense, he plainly

   7   doesn't have that experience.

   8            THE COURT:  I don't take it in the legal sense.  I

   9   obviously want to hear what he means by that.

  10   A.  So the way I interpret the question is can one computer

  11   scientist communicate to the other by the medium of object

  12   code.  I think certainly the answer is yes.  You can learn a

  13   lot from reading and analyzing and executing object code if

  14   you know how to do it, and so can you learn about what the

  15   author of the code, what the person who made that code

  16   intended the program to do, you can learn about how the

  17   program was constructed, you can learn about aesthetic and

  18   engineering decisions that the person made, and from all of

  19   that, you can learn things that the person who created the

  20   program put in there.

  21            THE COURT:  Dr. Felten, let me ask you this:  Can one

  22   locksmith communicate information about a lock to another by

  23   providing a key to the lock?

  24            THE WITNESS:  I think you could -- I think in that

  25   instance, you could get some information about the lock from




763



   1   the key, less information than you could get by taking apart

   2   the lock.

   3            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, in fact I'm done.  Thank

   5   you very much, Professor Felten.

   6            THE COURT:  Let's take our afternoon break.  3:15.

   7            (Recess)

   8            THE COURT:  Okay.  Mr. Cooper.

   9   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  10   BY MR. COOPER:

  11   Q.  Professor Felten, now you testified that your practice in

  12   the security analyses in which you have been involved has been

  13   to publish an initial report regarding the flaws you

  14   discovered and followed later by a more scholarly report,

  15   correct?

  16   A.  That's right, yes.

  17   Q.  And on occasion, you have included in your initial reports

  18   portions of source code to the extent necessary to explain

  19   your analysis, correct?

  20   A.  That's right.  That's part of informing the public, as I

  21   described before.  Sometimes in order to do that, you have to

  22   publish code, and so that people can look at what you've done

  23   so that they can evaluate whether what you are saying is true,

  24   and so that they can understand the implications of the flaw

  25   that you found.




764



   1   Q.  Am I correct that you have been personally involved in

   2   approximately 12 analyses where you discovered a flaw in an

   3   encryption or security system?

   4   A.  About 12 flaws, yes.

   5   Q.  Okay.  And of the reports you published with respect to

   6   those 12, you found it appropriate to include portions of

   7   source code in your initial reports on three of those, is that

   8   correct?

   9   A.  Yes, approximately three.  Those were the cases where we

  10   thought it was appropriate, where what we needed to

  11   communicate was best communicated in the form of code.

  12   Q.  And in every one of those instances, you were able to

  13   publicly and professionally discuss and demonstrate the flaws

  14   without providing people with the tools to take advantage of

  15   those flaws, correct?

  16   A.  Without providing people with all of the tools, yes.

  17   Without providing people, as I said, with all of the tools for

  18   actually harming someone.  That's not to say that we did not

  19   provide code to demonstrate the existence of security flaws,

  20   which we did.  I also should point out that we are talking now

  21   about the initial disclosure.  Later we did scholarly

  22   publications and other kinds of publications and those more

  23   often included code and more detailed discussion of the flaws.

  24   Q.  Professor, you have never included the entirety of the

  25   source code of the exploitation of a flaw in any of your




765



   1   publications, have you?

   2   A.  Exploitation in the sense of allowing someone to be

   3   harmed, no; but demonstration, yes.

   4   Q.  But you have never included in any of your publications

   5   the entirety of the source code in the exploitation outlined

   6   to defeat the security system you were discussing, isn't that

   7   correct?

   8   A.  I think I explained it as well as I could in my previous

   9   answer.

  10   Q.  But you are not answering my question, which is you have

  11   never had occasion in any of the analyses in which you have

  12   been engaged to publish the entirety of the source code which

  13   represented the exploitation of the flaw you were studying,

  14   isn't that correct, sir?

  15            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection.

  16            THE COURT:  Sustained.  I think there is a problem

  17   with the question.

  18   Q.  Do you know what an exploitation is in the encryption and

  19   cryptology area?

  20   A.  It's a term I've heard.  I don't understand a precise

  21   definition of it.

  22   Q.  Do you have your own definition of that term?

  23   A.  It's sometimes used to refer to a demonstration.

  24   Sometimes it's used to refer to what I'll call a fully

  25   damaging piece of code.




766



   1   Q.  Okay.  So let's use it in the latter instance, a fully

   2   damaging piece of code.  You would agree, would you not, that

   3   in either source or object code form a utility that was

   4   designed to actually exploit a discovered flaw in a security

   5   system would fall into that latter category?

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection to the form of the

   7   question.

   8            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   9   A.  Something that was designed to actually say reformat

  10   someone's hard disk or to actually infringe someone's

  11   copyright, no, I have never actually -- I would put either of

  12   those in the latter category and I've never released that kind

  13   of code.

  14   Q.  Okay.  In source or object form, correct?

  15   A.  In source or object form, I've never released code which

  16   allows someone to take all the steps needed to harm someone.

  17   Q.  In fact, in all of the instances in which you were

  18   involved in encryption analysis, you deliberately avoided

  19   providing people with the tools necessary to break the system

  20   you were studying, correct?

  21   A.  Yes.  I made -- in all these instances, I made a

  22   deliberate decision not to provide all of the steps to harm

  23   someone.  To connect this to DeCSS, my understanding of DeCSS

  24   is that it is more in the line of a demonstration as I've used

  25   the term.  It does not distribute code which has been -- which




767



   1   has been -- I'm sorry -- not code -- it does not distribute

   2   content that has been taken from a DVD.

   3   Q.  No, it defeats the encryption on the CSS system and that's

   4   all it does, isn't that true, Professor?

   5   A.  What it does is it allows material to be decrypted, and

   6   I'm obviously not here to talk about whether that's legal.

   7   But in a sense that I understand the distinction between

   8   demonstration and exploitation as you defined it, I think it

   9   falls in the demonstration area, because it does not copy and

  10   distribute copyrighted material.

  11   Q.  No, it circumvents the certain security system that's

  12   intended to protect that material, doesn't it?

  13            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection.

  14            THE COURT:  Sustained.  It's argumentative.

  15   Q.  Professor, in your view, the distribution of a fully

  16   functional set of code that allows one to break a security

  17   system is unethical, correct?

  18   A.  I think it depends on the circumstances.  As I said

  19   before, you have to look at the circumstances and understand

  20   what it is necessary to communicate in order to inform the

  21   public, in order to inform the research community, and I can

  22   imagine situations in which the only way to do that was to

  23   distribute code which was a full exploitation in the sense

  24   that you determined, and then I think you'd have to face a

  25   sort of balancing decision.  So I can't say that it would




768



   1   always be unethical in my view to do that.

   2   Q.  Didn't you testify at your deposition to the effect that

   3   you never provide a tool which lets someone take all of the

   4   steps in breaking into someone's computer and doing damage as

   5   a result?

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  Can we have a page and line?

   7            THE COURT:  Come on, Mr. Cooper, follow the rules.

   8            MR. COOPER:  I'm referring to Exhibit AZL, page 69,

   9   line 15 through 18.

  10            THE COURT:  Read it.

  11            "Q.    We did not provide, we never provided a tool

  12   which let someone, which gave someone all of the steps of

  13   breaking into someone's computer and doing damage."

  14   A.  Could you repeat the question about that passage, please.

  15            "Q.   But in all of the 12 instances where you were

  16   the discoverer of the flaw and you were involved in one way or

  17   another in the ultimate public disclosure of that flaw, in no

  18   instance did you find it necessary to provide people with the

  19   tool to take advantage of the flaw in order to describe it,

  20   discuss it, illustrate it or analyze it, right?"

  21            You did testify in that fashion, didn't you,

  22   Professor?

  23            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection.

  24            THE COURT:  I don't get it, Mr. Cooper.  What you

  25   just read, if I understood it, it was a question, and




769



   1   witnesses don't usually testify by asking questions.

   2            MR. COOPER:  His answer, if I may repeat the answer:

   3   "We did not provide, we never provided a tool which let

   4   someone, which gave someone all of the steps of breaking into

   5   someone's computer and doing damage."

   6            THE COURT:  Answer?

   7            MR. COOPER:  That was the answer.

   8            THE COURT:  That was the answer.  Okay.  Got it.

   9   Q.  Next question:

  10         "Q.  And you, you deliberately avoided doing that, isn't

  11   that true?

  12         "A.  That's correct."

  13            THE COURT:  Next question, counselor.

  14   Q.  You were also able to teach and discuss security flaws in

  15   your classroom with your students regarding CSS without at any

  16   time operating DeCSS as an executable utility, isn't that

  17   correct?

  18   A.  Yes.  In order to do the teaching that I did in that

  19   course, I did not execute DeCSS as an executable utility.

  20   Again that's not to say that in general one would never need

  21   to execute something in order to teach about it, but given

  22   what I decided to teach those students in that limited time

  23   about, I did not need to do that.

  24   Q.  It wasn't necessary for you to use the executable utility

  25   in order to discuss what you chose to discuss regarding those




770



   1   flaws, correct?

   2   A.  I didn't use the software in the classroom in the sense of

   3   executing it.  What I did was I got DeCSS and I got Frank

   4   Stevenson's paper, I read them myself, I understood the

   5   situation, and based on my access to those materials and my

   6   understanding, I was able to teach the students about CSS and

   7   DeCSS.

   8            I informed the students that this code was available

   9   on the network and I informed them that if they wanted to

  10   study it, they could study it.  I don't know what they did as

  11   a result of that.  Certainly, as with everything in my course,

  12   it was obviously not okay for the students to infringe

  13   copyright, but I would not be at all surprised if some of the

  14   students chose to do that kind of investigation themselves

  15   based on my telling them that the code was available.

  16   Q.  Now, it's possible for you in your work to communicate

  17   with other interested parties in your field regarding subjects

  18   that you are researching and to maintain an ongoing dialog

  19   with those parties through other means than posting material

  20   to the public Internet, isn't that correct?

  21   A.  It is true that once I know about someone and once we have

  22   established a sort of relationship, I can communicate with

  23   them by e-mail.  But as I discussed before, it's not the case

  24   that there is a small community of people, all of whom know

  25   each other, who are interested in this material and who are




771



   1   doing research on it the way that the people working in this

   2   field discover each other is to read each other's

   3   publications.  That's the way science works.  You publish

   4   openly and many people who you know read what you publish.

   5   Some people you don't know read it.  The only way to reach

   6   that audience, the only way to find those other people out

   7   there working on that topic is to publish in such a way that

   8   they can read it.

   9            And can I certainly tell you that I read my

  10   colleagues', at other universities and companies, I read their

  11   website to learn what they're up to.

  12   Q.  And if you have a particular interest in any of the areas

  13   in which they are involved, you communicate with them directly

  14   to get further information, correct?

  15   A.  In general, yes, but I don't know that it would be

  16   fruitful to ask someone about something until I have seen what

  17   is on their website.

  18            And I should add I may be in an unusual position.  If

  19   this is a person I know and I send them some question, some

  20   comment on their research, they are likely to take it

  21   seriously, read it, and give me an answer.  But if it's

  22   someone who doesn't know me, they are going to -- they are

  23   going to -- if it's someone who doesn't know me, and I want to

  24   comment on their work, they are not necessarily going to be

  25   willing to spend an afternoon on the phone with me explaining




772



   1   their work.  The reason that stuff is put out there on the web

   2   is to be read.  It's to be read by a lot of people, and I

   3   frankly don't want to have to explain to everyone who asks

   4   over the phone or by e-mail all of the details of the research

   5   that I've done.  It's not efficient.  It doesn't make sense.

   6            MR. COOPER:  I don't have any further questions at

   7   this point, your Honor.

   8            THE COURT:  All right.  I have one, I guess two.

   9            You've got networks at Princeton?

  10            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

  11            THE COURT:  You've got networks for the faculty in

  12   the academic buildings, and then is there a separate one for

  13   the dormitories?

  14            THE WITNESS:  Yes, there is are networks in the

  15   dorms.

  16            THE COURT:  What are the speeds?

  17            THE WITNESS:  The dorm networks are generally ten

  18   megabits per second to each desktop.  In the computer science

  19   department, I can speak to what our network is for the

  20   researchers.  We generally have within the building 100

  21   megabit per second links.  Of course there are links between

  22   the buildings and links between the university and the outside

  23   world which have to be shared among all those people.  So, for

  24   example, in the computer science building from point A to

  25   point B in the building we might have 10 megabits per second




773



   1   on a really good day, but there is a link going from the

   2   computer science department to the outside world which has to

   3   be shared with everybody else in the building.

   4            THE COURT:  What is the speed of that?

   5            THE WITNESS:  I don't recall.  I better not guess.

   6            THE COURT:  Okay.

   7            THE WITNESS:  If that's helpful, my colleague,

   8   Professor Peterson is going to testify later.  He knows all

   9   this stuff much better than I do.

  10            THE COURT:  You were last at the University of

  11   Washington how long ago?

  12            THE WITNESS:  1993.

  13            THE COURT:  I guess any questions about the speed of

  14   their network seven years ago is kind of like asking about

  15   dinosaurs, right?

  16            THE WITNESS:  Well, seven years ago what we had in

  17   our research building was 10 megabits per second inside the

  18   building.

  19            THE COURT:  You are familiar with speeds at any other

  20   universities in the last year per se?

  21            THE WITNESS:  Not particularly any other university.

  22   I know generally what the technologies that are used, but I

  23   can't speak to any specifically to any other university.

  24            THE COURT:  Generally.

  25            THE WITNESS:  Generally the technology within a




774



   1   building is going to be either 10 megabits per second or 100

   2   megabits per second on the ethernet.  That's the most commonly

   3   used technology.

   4            THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.

   5            Any further examination Mr. Hernstadt?

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  No, your Honor, thank you very much.

   7            THE COURT:  Okay.  The witness is excused.  Thank

   8   you.

   9            THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

  10            (Witness excused)

  11            THE COURT:  Next witness, please.

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  Our next witness is Mr. Goldstein.

  13    ERIC CORLEY,

  14        a defendant herein, having been duly sworn,

  15        testified as follows:

  16            DEPUTY CLERK:  Please state your name for the record.

  17            THE WITNESS:  My pen name is Emanuel Goldstein.

  18            My given name is Eric Corley.

  19            THE COURT:  What is it?

  20            THE WITNESS:  My pen name, writing name.

  21            THE COURT:  So the record is going to reflect, Steve,

  22   that the witness's name is Eric Corley, which is the name he

  23   is captioned under.

  24   DIRECT EXAMINATION

  25   BY MR. GARBUS:




775



   1   Q.  Mr. Corley, tell me something about your background.

   2   A.  I'm an English major.  I graduated from the State

   3   University of New York in 1982.  I have worked --

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.  Can we have a small bench

   5   conference just for a moment?

   6            THE COURT:  Yes.  You and Mr. Gold.  Is this your

   7   witness, Mr. Gold?

   8            MR. GOLD:  Yes, sir.

   9            (At the sidebar)

  10            MR. GARBUS:  Mr. Corley has, as I understand it, an

  11   arrest when he was a child as a juvenile which was dismissed,

  12   an ACD case, I have never been able to find the file of it.

  13   He testified to it at some length because I permitted it at

  14   deposition, but I would make a motion that that be excluded at

  15   this time.  I don't know whether Mr. Gold intended to get into

  16   it or not.

  17            MR. GOLD:  In the deposition there was testimony

  18   about -- I think it was an indictment, was it not?  I think

  19   so.

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I don't know what it was.

  21            MR. GOLD:  I did not get the impression that he was a

  22   youthful offender or he was below 18, but the nature of the

  23   offense I think is one that reflects --

  24            THE COURT:  Let me just find out something.  Do you

  25   propose to use this?




776



   1            MR. GOLD:  On cross, yes, but there was a

   2   confidentiality agreement and I --

   3            THE COURT:  What in particular do you propose to use

   4   on cross?  Was there a conviction?

   5            MR. GARBUS:  Do you have a record of a conviction?

   6            MR. GOLD:  I think there was a plea, wasn't there?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  As I understand it, he was treated as a

   8   youthful offender and it was an ACD, it was an adjournment in

   9   contemplation of dismissal and there is no criminal record.

  10            THE COURT:  Is there a conviction?

  11            MR. GOLD:  I think there was a plea, your Honor, and

  12   I would have to check the transcript.  If you give me two

  13   minutes.  But it was for breaking into a company computer

  14   system, and I think it has relevance.

  15            THE COURT:  How long ago is it?

  16            MR. GOLD:  I don't remember.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  It was back -- he was I think about in

  18   his early 20s.

  19            THE COURT:  How old is he now?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I think he is in his mid 40s.  I don't

  21   remember exactly.  I would have to ask him.

  22            THE COURT:  He is obviously going to be on the stand

  23   more than the next hour, right?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  I think so.

  25            THE COURT:  Well, you guys figure out what the facts




777



   1   are tonight. Rule 609 governs this as to the conviction, and

   2   if memory serves, Rule 608 deals with the prior bad act issue.

   3   This is not terra incognita.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Can I hear the last question, please.

   5            (Record read)

   6   A.  I will just take it from the top.  I graduated from the

   7   State University of New York at Stonybrook 1982 with a

   8   Bachelors of Arts in English.  I have worked in various

   9   newspapers, including campus newspapers, community newspapers.

  10   I have written numerous opinion pieces and other such articles

  11   for newspapers such as Newsday, and since 1984, I have been

  12   publishing 2600 Magazine.  I have worked in radio since going

  13   to the State University of Stonybrook since 1977, and I

  14   currently work for WBAI in New York.

  15   Q.  How old are you?

  16   A.  I'm 40.

  17   Q.  Did you work for the Stonybrook Press?

  18   A.  Yes, that was one of the newspapers I worked for, one of

  19   the campus newspapers.

  20   Q.  And have you ever been a broadcast journalist on WUSB?

  21   A.  Yes, WUSB is the university station at the State

  22   University at Stonybrook.

  23   Q.  And how long have you been publishing the Hacker

  24   Quarterly?

  25   A.  Since 1984, which I guess is 16 years.




778



   1   Q.  And do you know approximately the circulation of that?

   2   A.  Presently, including newsstands and subscribers together,

   3   I would say probably about 60 to 65,000.

   4   Q.  And do you have any sense of who your readers are?

   5   A.  From meeting them at various gatherings, 2600 meetings,

   6   conferences, I would say they are all kinds of different

   7   people from 12 year olds to CIA agents, to foreign

   8   intelligence to corporate executives, all kinds of people seem

   9   to be fascinated with this.

  10   Q.  Now, did you serve as the music director for WUSB?

  11   A.  Yes, in 1980 to '81 school year, I was music director.

  12   The year after that, I was program director of the radio

  13   station.

  14   Q.  And in 1984, did you organize a Convention of alternative

  15   presidential candidates in Stonybrook?

  16   A.  That's correct.  We invited everybody who had registered

  17   to run for president to gather in one place at the same time.

  18   There were something like 219 candidates and about two dozen

  19   of them accepted.

  20   Q.  Did you ever write a play?

  21   A.  I have written -- among the things that were publicly, no.

  22   I have written a lot of things that haven't been released.

  23   But the one major thing that was publicly released was a radio

  24   play called Shadow of Long Island.

  25   Q.  What did it deal with?




779



   1   A.  It was kind of an H.G. Wells type of a thing where in

   2   realtime, people dealt with the effects of an accident at a

   3   nuclear power plant and since at the time, I believe it was

   4   1985, that was a big controversy on Long Island, it was

   5   something that got a lot of attention, a lot of interest.

   6   Q.  And with respect to the Hacker Quarterly, why did you

   7   create it?

   8   A.  Well, I saw the need for information to be spread beyond

   9   computer nerds, people who are just simply calling into

  10   bulletin boards.  Back in 1984, which is when the magazine

  11   actually started, in order to take part in this kind of a

  12   thing, you would have to call what is known as a BBS system,

  13   and they could only handle one caller at a time which means

  14   many times you would spend the better part of a day just

  15   waiting for a busy signal to go away.  You would have to keep

  16   trying.  There was no repeat dialing function.  You would have

  17   to keep dialing over and over again, and the speed was very

  18   slow, something like 300 baud.

  19            So I thought it would be nice, because these people

  20   had so much to say, if there is way a forum for them to say it

  21   and actually read it on paper, and since nobody else was doing

  22   that, I figured why not.

  23   Q.  And has the Hacker Quarterly been quoted or featured in

  24   any other newspapers?

  25   A.  Yes, we have been quoted quite a bit.




780



   1   Q.  Where?

   2   A.  I couldn't even begin to tell you all the places.  Every

   3   major newspaper and magazine I could think of, Time, Newsweek,

   4   the New York Times, Wall Street Journal.  I'm sure we are in

   5   quite a few this week.  We are always being quoted for our

   6   opinion on various things that are happening in the world of

   7   technology, whether it be things like the Melissa Virus, a

   8   case like this, a conference like we've just had.  There is

   9   always something going on in the world of technology, and our

  10   view seems to be something that's of interest.

  11   Q.  You say a conference you just had.  Can you tell me what

  12   that was?

  13   A.  We just had a conference this past weekend uptown at the

  14   Hotel Pennsylvania where we had people gathering from all over

  15   the planet to talk about the newest technological issues an

  16   just basically to trade information, learn, and I think it was

  17   a big success, we had something like 2300 people show up.

  18   Q.  This was run which by the hackers?  This was sponsored by

  19   2600 --

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  Have you also been on a major broadcast and cable network?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  Do you remember which ones?

  24   A.  All of them I think.  Basically I was on Good Morning

  25   America, Nightline, CBS Morning News, Charlie Rose.  I can




781



   1   keep going on with lists, but I think most of them I seem to

   2   have been on at one point or another.

   3   Q.  Do you recall what the Washington Post, back in February

   4   of 2000, said about you after were you sued in this case?

   5   A.  I think they referred to us as, I might be confusing it

   6   with another story, but I think they referred to us as the

   7   hacker's bible or something, along those lines.

   8            THE COURT:  I hope we are not going to get into an

   9   assortment of what various people have said about the

  10   defendant, since he has been sued in this case.

  11            MR. GARBUS:  We are past it.  I don't think so.

  12   Q.  And how long have you been at BAI?

  13   A.  I first walked into WBAI in 1988 and I haven't left since.

  14   Q.  When you were on these various television shows, Charlie

  15   Rose and cable, what was the subject of your discussion?

  16   A.  Like with the newspaper articles, different things

  17   depending on what was happening in the news that particular

  18   time, such as the Michelangelo Virus which was in the early

  19   90s, or some panic over some possible security hole in a

  20   computer system, or even something like an area code change

  21   can, for some reason -- people come to us for explanations on

  22   things like that.  So depending on what was in the news at

  23   that time, we get calls virtually every day from media people

  24   wanting us to comment on one thing or another, and depending

  25   on my schedule, I try to answer as best I can.




782



   1   Q.  Is it fair to say that you are called on those shows as an

   2   expert in the computer area and the technology areas?

   3   A.  That's what they call me.  I don't consider myself a

   4   computer expert.  I consider myself a journalist.  But they --

   5   I've never taken a computer course or anything like that. I

   6   majored in English, so I answer the questions as best I can,

   7   but there are people with infinite amounts of knowledge in the

   8   technical field beyond what I could imagine.

   9   Q.  When you posted DeCSS, did you know whether it would work

  10   or not?

  11   A.  No, I had no idea if it would work.  The reason we posted

  12   the source code and the accompanying story is because it was

  13   already a story.  I believe it had already been out a month at

  14   that point, and we saw this and the reaction to it, people

  15   having their websites shut down, their pro Internet service

  16   providers being threatened, their schools being threatened, we

  17   saw that as a fascinating story, and we printed that story, we

  18   printed what the story was about, which was our source, our

  19   primary source, here is what they are talking about, here is

  20   the source code.

  21            Honestly, if someone had given me 20 random numbers

  22   and said this is the program, we would have printed the 20

  23   random numbers, if that's what everybody was talking about.  I

  24   have no knowledge if the program worked or not, but that

  25   wasn't the story.  The story was the reaction it was causing.




783



   1   Q.  And as of today, do you know whether DeCSS works?

   2   A.  I have heard conflicting things, even in this courtroom.

   3   I don't know anybody myself who has gotten it to work, and I

   4   don't know very many people who have even tried to get it to

   5   work.  I believe it can work if you spend a lot of time on it,

   6   but I'm sure there are much easier ways to accomplish bad

   7   things, if that's what you're trying to do.

   8            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I move to strike the answer.

   9   It was full of speculation and he is not an expert witness as

  10   he admits.

  11            THE COURT:  Strike everything after "I've heard

  12   conflicting things."

  13   Q.  Now, have you ever sold a copy of a DVD disk that has been

  14   de-encrypted through DeCSS?

  15   A.  No.

  16   Q.  Have you ever sent out a movie on the Internet as a result

  17   of your having used DeCSS?

  18   A.  No.

  19   Q.  Now, you talked about working on WBAI.  How long have you

  20   been there?

  21   A.  Since 1988.

  22   Q.  And is the name of that program "Off the Hook?"

  23   A.  I started doing the program later that year in 1988 as a

  24   special broadcast.  It became a series in 1991, I believe.  I

  25   have also worked in the news department and as an engineer




784



   1   over there.

   2   Q.  What does that program deal with?

   3   A.  It pretty much deals with similar things that the magazine

   4   deals with, new developments in technology, security holes,

   5   Orwellian aspects of today's society, people's privacy being

   6   abused from all different angles.  And what I like to do with

   7   the program is reach people who have absolutely no background

   8   in technology as opposed to the magazine.  When I go on the

   9   radio, anybody could be listening, and I find that many people

  10   find it very fascinating to be hearing our perspective, and we

  11   believe in explaining things to whoever will listen.  So

  12   people call into the radio show, we explain exactly what we're

  13   talking about, sometimes they feel moved to come to one of our

  14   meetings, which are once a month, and we make friends that

  15   way.  We explain how technology works from our perspective.

  16            THE COURT:  When you say you worked at WBAI as an

  17   engineer, did you work there as a broadcast engineer who ran a

  18   panel or some sort or some other kind of engineer?

  19            THE WITNESS:  A broadcast engineer, someone who

  20   actually controls the board in the control room.

  21            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Go ahead, Mr. Garbus.

  22   Q.  Now, have you participated in any panel discussions on

  23   computers and the Internet-related issues?

  24   A.  Yes, numerous ones over the years.

  25   Q.  Tell me some of them.




785



   1   A.  There are the annual computer freedom and privacy

   2   conferences.  There was one I believe called Open Source

   3   Solutions in Washington D.C.  There was -- I don't recall the

   4   names of the ones overseas that I attended.  I know there was

   5   one in Amsterdam and a couple of them in London as well.

   6   Q.  Have you also been on NPR, All Things Considered and World

   7   News Now?

   8   A.  Yes, I have.

   9   Q.  Have you ever lectured at any university?

  10   A.  I have been a guest, a guest lecturer for various classes

  11   at New York University, Seton Hall, the State University of

  12   New York at Stonybrook.

  13   Q.  Have you ever testified before any committee of the House

  14   of Representatives?

  15   A.  Yes, I testified before the house committee on technology

  16   and finance, I believe, and that was in the early to mid 90s.

  17   I don't have an exact date.

  18   Q.  Other than the conference you just mentioned before, have

  19   you organized any other conferences?

  20   A.  Yes, that was our third conference.  The first one was in

  21   1994.  The second one was in 1997.

  22   Q.  And can you tell me the title of the first one?

  23   A.  The title of the first one was called HOPE.  That stood

  24   for Hackers On Planet Earth, and we had -- it was the first

  25   time ever that this country actually a conference like that




786



   1   had been organized.  I had drawn inspiration from some of the

   2   conferences I had seen in Europe where people gathered

   3   together and exchanged ideas in a free and open manner and

   4   learned from each other and were guided in positive ways, at

   5   least in my view, and in 1994, I thought it was a great

   6   success as far as that went, and then it takes time to

   7   organize these thing so we only do it every three years.

   8   Q.  And what was the second one?

   9   A.  The second one was a sequel to HOPE and we called it

  10   Beyond HOPE and basically it was a continuation, the same kind

  11   of a thing.  We like to stress international cooperation.  We

  12   have people come over from different parts of the world and

  13   tell us what is your phone system like, what do you dial to

  14   make things work and connect to various things, how does your

  15   billing system work, do they -- in what ways does the phone

  16   company do evil things to you, you know, various things like

  17   that as far as technology and privacy invasion and things that

  18   we find ordinary people are concerned with increasingly today.

  19   So, we just basically get these people together, trade

  20   information, invite the public.

  21   Q.  And the sponsors of both of these conferences and the

  22   third conference was 2600?

  23   A.  Yes, that's right.

  24   Q.  Where did you get 2600 from?

  25   A.  2600 was a frequency that was used a long time ago back in




787



   1   the 1960s and basically anyone who would transmit a 2600 hertz

   2   tone over a long distance trunk connection would find

   3   themselves put into what is known as operator mode where they

   4   could then explore the entire phone system, and basically

   5   route themselves to operators, to all kinds of mysterious

   6   things that were out there.  It doesn't work anymore, but it's

   7   kind of a mystical thing from the past that people still talk

   8   about.

   9   Q.  And your pen name, Emanuel Goldstein, where does that come

  10   from?

  11   A.  Emanuel Goldstein was a character in 1984, the book by

  12   George Orwell.  He was supposedly the leader of the

  13   underground, and it was kind of a cool name to take back in

  14   the mid 80s, although I should point out in the end of the

  15   book, it turned out he is actually a figment of the government

  16   and he is entrapping everybody.  That's another story.

  17   Q.  Did you take the name before you finished the book or

  18   after you finished the book?

  19   A.  Actually I read the book about four times when I took the

  20   name.

  21   Q.  Now, tell me some of the people who have spoken at the

  22   conferences that you have organized?

  23   A.  We have had people like ex-CIA Agent Robert Steele,

  24   cryptologist Bruce Snyder.  At the most recent conference, we

  25   had Jon Johansen who is here from Norway.  We have had many,




788



   1   many people.  My mind is kind of drawing a blank when I try to

   2   call them all up, but we have had journalists, people from

   3   major television networks talk about how they cover stories

   4   and how they might get misperceptions about what hackers are

   5   all about.

   6            And we try and bring these people together, whether

   7   they are representatives of the government, people from

   8   different countries, 12-year-old kids who are just learning

   9   something, we try to bring them all together in the same room

  10   so they can share information and bring something out of that,

  11   and we find that many relationships are forged from this that

  12   last for very long time.

  13   Q.  You mentioned Bruce Snyder.  Can you tell me who he is?

  14   A.  He is an encryption expert.  He has written several books.

  15   Unfortunately he wasn't at the most recent conference.  He was

  16   here in 1997.  And I understand his knowledge could fill a

  17   room as far as what encryption is all about.

  18   Q.  Have you seen his affidavit in this case?

  19            THE COURT:  At what level of compression?

  20            THE WITNESS:  Any level I think.

  21   A.  He is one of those people that I'm in awe of, and many of

  22   the people who come to the conferences are like gods to me.

  23   They are people that just have so much knowledge and have done

  24   so much, and I'm just -- I'm honored that they come to my

  25   conference and share their information.




789



   1            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I think we would save time if

   2   we didn't just have testimonials to one's witnesses.  I can

   3   imagine the rebuttal case.

   4   Q.  Now, have you also written freelance pieces for magazines?

   5   A.  Yes, I have written pieces occasionally for local

   6   newspapers, the New York Times, Newsday, and a couple of

   7   foreign magazines as well.  I wrote something for a Japanese

   8   magazine a few years ago, something for magazines in England

   9   and Holland, I believe as well.

  10   Q.  Now, do you in your magazine tell your readers about the

  11   acts that -- the Hackers Act and the consequences of those

  12   acts?

  13   A.  I'm sorry.  I don't understand the question.

  14   Q.  In other words, in the Hacker Quarterly, do you tell your

  15   readers the kinds of things they should and shouldn't do?

  16   A.  Well, we try not to be too moralistic.  What we mostly do

  17   is print information.  We have an editorial at the beginning

  18   of every issue where we expound on various thoughts, which is

  19   something that I write, and also in the replies to letters in

  20   the magazine, which is also printed every issue.  If we give

  21   any kind of moral guidance or judgment, that's where it is,

  22   but in the actual articles themselves, it is more or less a

  23   compilation of material that is already out there, and we kind

  24   of present it to the people to show them this is what people

  25   are saying, this is the information that's out there, this is




790



   1   how systems supposedly work or don't work.  And people write

   2   in with corrections, they write in with additions, and we have

   3   a dialog going based on that.

   4   Q.  Now does the name Mark Trapenhagen mean anything to you?

   5   A.  Not offhand.

   6   Q.  When did you start to put up the website?

   7   A.  Our website I believe first went up in 1995.

   8   Q.  Tell me about that.  Why did you put it up?

   9   A.  Well, back in 1995, websites were just pretty much

  10   starting to become popular, and we figured, you know, we are a

  11   computer magazine, we really should be doing this.  We had

  12   just had our first conference the year before, so we had

  13   enough money lying around so we could buy a machine and put it

  14   up on the net.  It was an extremely slow connection, but we

  15   realized quickly that a lot of people came to our site to see

  16   what we had to say.  So we did our best to make it

  17   interesting.

  18   Q.  Now, can you tell me at the present time how many hits

  19   that site receives, how many unique visits?

  20   A.  Well, I can only estimate because we haven't kept logs

  21   since last summer on that kind of a thing.  We have what is

  22   known as a counter on the front page and what we would do is

  23   run statistics on it once a week, and that would take such

  24   massive amount of memory that it would wind up crashing the

  25   machine every Sunday night at midnight.




791



   1            So we figured it wasn't that important to know

   2   exactly how many people were hitting us.  We had a general

   3   sense that we had something on the order of 10,000 unique hits

   4   a day.  That means 10,000 different visitors coming to our

   5   site, maybe seeing a few different pages but only being

   6   counted once.

   7   Q.  Now at some point in time, there was an order entered by

   8   this Court that you take down the DeCSS code.  Do you recall

   9   that?

  10   A.  Yes, I do.

  11   Q.  Prior to that time, did you print source and object code?

  12   A.  Of the DeCSS?

  13   Q.  Yes.

  14   A.  Yes.

  15   Q.  And when the Court ordered you to take it down, did you

  16   take it down?

  17   A.  Yes, we did.

  18   Q.  And after you took it down, did you continue to have links

  19   to other site?

  20   A.  Yes, the links remained up.

  21   Q.  And did you increase -- were the number of links increased

  22   after the court order?

  23   A.  We had a large number of people submit new links and we

  24   tried to keep up with it, but after a while it just became too

  25   much and we just kind of left it in whatever state it was in




792



   1   at that time.

   2   Q.  Whether you say submit new links, what do you mean by

   3   that?

   4   A.  Well, we had a facility for people to tell us if they knew

   5   other sites or if they were running a site and they wanted to

   6   be included on the list, we had that on our main page, and

   7   people were submitting that from the very beginning, ever

   8   since it first went on line I think back in November or

   9   December, and after we took the material off of our website,

  10   it increased 20-fold at least and we just didn't have the

  11   resources to continuously update things like that, and we felt

  12   pretty much if people wanted to find DeCSS, they could easily

  13   do it.  It wasn't an issue anymore.

  14   Q.  Now, by the way, do you own some domain names?

  15   A.  I own quite a few domain names, yes.

  16   Q.  What are some of those names?

  17   A.  Well, gee, all the 2600 possibilities, .net, .org, .com.

  18   I also own the WUSB site.  I maintain their web page.  And

  19   there are also some rather humorous ones with some nasty

  20   language in it, and I should explain why that is.  NSI is the

  21   registrar, Network Solutions Incorporated and up until last

  22   summer, they were the only registrar in this country.  You had

  23   to submit your domain names through them.  They had a policy

  24   on language.  They wouldn't allow certain words to be used as

  25   domain names and some people objected to that, they thought it




793



   1   was a form of censorship, but what was interesting was late

   2   last summer, all of a sudden, there were new registrars.  It

   3   was opened up to all different companies, and many of those

   4   company allowed you to register whatever name you wanted to.

   5   So there was kind of a race for about two days, people

   6   registering every possible four-letter word they could think

   7   of, and I admit I was part of that race, because I basically

   8   thought it was kind of interesting.  But we never tied it into

   9   the magazine in any way.  That was more a personal hobby for

  10   me.

  11   Q.  Can you give us some of the domain names, because they

  12   will ask you on cross, we may as well get rid of it now.  Go

  13   ahead.

  14   A.  Well, gee, many of these I haven't even looked at in

  15   several months, but I know fuckingmorons.com is one of them.

  16   We put some -- before the names of various famous

  17   corporations, I think Microsoft might have been one of them,

  18   but I'm not sure, somebody beat us to that one, there were a

  19   few others.  I really have to look at the list because I don't

  20   want to misspeak and say somebody else's name is mine, but

  21   there are quite a few.  There were maybe a dozen or so.

  22   Q.  Now, let me show you, if I can, documents marked as

  23   Plaintiffs' Exhibits 113, 114, 115, 116, this looks like 1.11,

  24   1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 1.7, 1.5, 1.3 and 1.12.  I don't

  25   think that there are other copies around.  Are there?  I think




794



   1   these are the only copies.

   2            And I would ask you to just briefly go through the

   3   magazines, look at the green tags and tell me what those

   4   relate to.

   5            THE COURT:  Are you offering them in evidence?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  I would, your Honor, yes.

   7            MR. GOLD:  I have no objection.

   8            THE COURT:  They are not offered for the truth, I

   9   take it.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  They are offered -- right.

  11            THE COURT:  They are offered as examples of the

  12   magazine.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  14            THE COURT:  They are received on that basis.

  15            (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 113, 114, 115, 116, 1.11, 1.1,

  16   1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 1.7, 1.5, 1.3 and 1.12 received in

  17   evidence)

  18   A.  Do you want me to go through all of these?

  19   Q.  Just briefly go through where the green stamps are.  Those

  20   are the places where you discuss things at your deposition.

  21   By the way, are real names or true names used in the magazine?

  22   A.  That's entirely up to the author.  If the author want to

  23   submit their real name, we will print their real name.  If

  24   they want to submit an alias of some sort, we will print that.

  25   It's not our decision to make.  It's entirely up to them.




795



   1   Q.  Whether they submit letters to you and articles, is that

   2   the same thing?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  Do you in any way check out the accuracy of the

   5   information?

   6   A.  Only to the point of if they are talking about a

   7   particular operating system, does that operating system exist,

   8   is the theory that they are expounding somewhat sound.  It's

   9   impossible with our staff to test out every single theory we

  10   get, which is why a lot of what is printed is theoretical in

  11   nature.  It's something that this is how I believe the system

  12   works and we present it.  Invariably, we get people writing

  13   back saying, no, this is really how the system works and then

  14   we have a dialog going on different theories as to operating

  15   systems, computer networks, telephone systems, whatnot.

  16   Q.  When you say -- who is the 2600 staff -- by the way, you

  17   are located out in Long Island?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  Who is the staff out there?

  20   A.  Well, we actually -- I am the editor and publisher.

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Corley, can you back away from the

  22   mike a couple inches.  Thank you.

  23   A.  I am the editor and publisher.  I have an office manager,

  24   and I have someone who works on technical things on the system

  25   occasionally.




796



   1   Q.  Is it fair to say this is basically a one-man operation?

   2   A.  I wouldn't say it's entirely a one-man operation, but me

   3   being in the city actually has made it slow down to a trickle,

   4   so I'm definitely the person that does things out there, and

   5   everything else kind of is part of that in one degree or

   6   another.

   7   Q.  And are you one of the people who write the materials that

   8   goes up on the website?

   9   A.  The website, yes.  I write some of the material that goes

  10   up on there.

  11   Q.  Tell us just now by looking at the green tabs some of the

  12   stories that are in the Hacker Quarterly?

  13   A.  There is a story called Cellular Interception Techniques

  14   which basically goes into how cellular telephones work, how

  15   cellular calls can be intercepted.  It goes into the

  16   Electronic Communications Privacy Act which makes such

  17   interception illegal.  It goes into how anyone with a

  18   television set from the 1970s can use that television set to

  19   intercept cellular phone calls.  It's not exactly an advocacy

  20   piece in any way.  It's very technical in nature, and I think

  21   you come out of this with an understanding of the law and the

  22   understanding of the technology and an understanding of the

  23   risk if you choose to use this particular type of cellular

  24   phone.  This is from 1995.  It's not used very frequently

  25   anymore.  I like to think maybe this had something to do with




797



   1   it, because the way cellular phone calls had been made in the

   2   past was extremely insecure, and there wasn't enough being

   3   done to protect people's privacy.

   4   Q.  And by the way, with respect to companies or utilities

   5   that you have written about, have officers from those

   6   companies ever contacted you concerning the materials that

   7   have been written?

   8   A.  Well, I would have to say I've gotten more personal

   9   contact such as at conferences and meetings with people who

  10   say they love our magazine and they read it to find out all

  11   the latest possible problems with their systems.  Occasionally

  12   we get people that threaten us and say you can't print this,

  13   but upon challenging them, they have always backed down.

  14   Q.  And have any corporate executives ever told you that they

  15   read your magazine for the first time and found out about

  16   flaws in their product?

  17   A.  Yes, but also a lot of network engineers and they are the

  18   ones who actually make the changes.

  19   Q.  Go ahead, continue.

  20   A.  I'm not sure if this is the article you wanted me to read.

  21   It's entitled Imaginary Friends, and I'm not really sure -- is

  22   this from 1996?

  23            THE COURT:  It's very high tech.

  24            THE WITNESS:  Yeah.

  25   A.  I think this is going into how to tell the phone company a




798



   1   different name to list on your account.  Basically this is for

   2   people who are paranoid about being on any kind of a list, and

   3   this is a way that you can make up a fake name, not for

   4   purposes of fraud but for purposes of privacy, so that when

   5   people call you on the phone, they ask for the fake name and

   6   you know because they do that that they are looking at a list

   7   of names and they are not really trying to call you.  So this

   8   article goes into how TRW compiles information, what the phone

   9   company does when they open up an account for you, how to have

  10   an unlisted phone number be really unlisted so your name isn't

  11   on any list anywhere.

  12   Q.  Did you write either of these two articles?

  13   A.  No, I didn't.  If I wrote them, I would remember them, but

  14   I just remember them vaguely.

  15   Q.  Is it fair to say that the magazine is basically an

  16   anthology of articles that you received?

  17   A.  Yes, I was looking for that word before.  Anthology is

  18   probably the best way.  Probably the Readers Digest of the

  19   hacker's world.  We don't say that everything that is in these

  20   articles is 100 percent correct.  We have guidelines for the

  21   articles, such as we don't print articles that espouse

  22   destruction or immature acts or just various bad things.

  23            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I am having a lot of trouble

  24   finding out what question the witness is answering in most of

  25   these.  There are long speeches going on.  I was wondering if




799



   1   the Court would request that the witness answer the question

   2   that was asked.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  Let me see if we can help.

   4   Q.  Have you described the article that -- are we still on the

   5   same article?

   6   A.  I had put that one down, but can I go back to it more in a

   7   moment.

   8   Q.  Let's go to the next article.  Tell me what the next

   9   article deals with?

  10   A.  Snooping Via MS Mail.  This is from 1996 as well.  I

  11   believe what this does, this describes a product known as MS

  12   Mail which various companies use, and how people's mail can be

  13   intercepted on that and spied upon.  And this is an example of

  14   an article that can be used in two ways.  We print the

  15   information.  It can be used in a good way; that is, users can

  16   learn about privacy, they can figure out ways to prevent them

  17   from happening.  Or it can be used in a bad way, someone can

  18   take this an actually start spying on people.

  19            We don't have a big moral discussion about what is

  20   going to happen with the information we print, because the

  21   information is already out there.  As I said, we are more or

  22   less an anthology of what is being distributed and we like to

  23   think that by printing this information, we wake people up.

  24   Q.  Let's go to the next article.

  25   A.  This is similar to one before, Tips on Generating Fake ID.




800



   1   This more or less goes a little bit outside the boundaries of

   2   what we usually talk about because it's not really related to

   3   computers or telephones, but it does have relevance in that it

   4   talks about how people fool the system, how people get around

   5   restrictions, and the article is written in kind of an

   6   interesting tone.

   7            It starts off, so you want to get drunk this weekend

   8   or buy some cigarettes, etc., like that.  This kind of is on

   9   the boundary of what we print, the guidelines I mentioned.  I

  10   saw this as rather humorous, as a person being somewhat

  11   sarcastic because, yeah, the only thing can you possibly do

  12   with fake ID is buy cigarettes and get drunk.  But I also saw

  13   a lot of really good technical information here, websites that

  14   are referenced, and if you are looking for somebody who is

  15   doing this, this article will tell you what they're up to and

  16   how it works.  And I think it's something that is widespread

  17   enough that you can't just ignore it and pretend it's not out

  18   there.  So that's the reason we printed that.

  19   Q.  Go to the next one.

  20   A.  This is more recent, so I should remember this one.  Okay.

  21   This is an editorial entitled, The Next Chapter from our

  22   Spring 2000 issue.  This basically deals a lot with the MPAA

  23   case.  I'm not exactly sure if you want me to read the entire

  24   thing.  It's rather large.

  25   Q.  Just tell me what it's about.




801



   1   A.  It's an editorial that I wrote and it kind of brings

   2   together various issues that were going on at the time,

   3   including the case of Kevin Mitnick who was a computer hacker

   4   who was in prison for five years.  That has drawn to a close

   5   at almost the exact same time as this case has started.

   6            We also touch upon various other laws that are being

   7   passed that we see as being a bad thing, such as California's

   8   three strikes laws which allows people who have committed

   9   three crimes, even if they are not violent crimes, to be

  10   imprisoned for life.  So the piece is kind of more of an

  11   editorial which covers it all and ties it together in a nice,

  12   neat little package.

  13   Q.  Turn to the cover of the magazine.

  14   A.  Oh, yes, this is our kind of spoof cover of the MPAA

  15   screen.

  16   Q.  Do you sell T-shirts?

  17   A.  Yes, we have T-shirts that are similar to this.  In fact,

  18   we used them to raise money for the defense, and we don't mean

  19   any offense by it, it's just kind of a political cartoon that

  20   we came up with, and I think most people see the humor in it.

  21   Q.  Can we go to the next one.

  22   A.  I think there is another one in the same issue.

  23            THE COURT:  How many more, Mr. Garbus?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Do you want Mr. Goldstein to hand it to

  25   the Court so the Court can see it after he has been describing




802



   1   it?

   2            THE COURT:  When he is all done, the clerk will take

   3   them.

   4            MR. GARBUS:  Go ahead.

   5            THE COURT:  How many more, Mr. Garbus?

   6            MR. GARBUS:  About half a dozen.  These are the ones

   7   that he was cross-examined on in the deposition, so we are

   8   going to deal with it now.

   9   A.  I'm not sure if there is a green tag here, but these are

  10   two articles.  It's either AT&T's Gaping Hole or a Cellular

  11   Network Detailed.  I'm going to guess it's Gaping Hole, where

  12   basically someone outlines a glitch in AT&T wireless service

  13   that allows a user to receive free phone service.  I remember

  14   this particular article was something that the article -- that

  15   the person had notified AT&T about and nothing had happened,

  16   and the result was they sent us this article with the details

  17   of exactly how it worked.  And I understand that it doesn't

  18   work anymore, so I think that speaks for itself.

  19   Q.  By the way, if the Court orders you to take down the links

  20   to other sites, would you do that?

  21   A.  Absolutely, if the Court orders it, yes.

  22   Q.  Were you in Court, by the way, when the Court said it

  23   would consider linking at a different time?  Did you read the

  24   transcript?

  25   A.  I read the transcript.  I don't believe I was in court




803



   1   that day.

   2            This article is called How Domains Are Stolen, and

   3   this is of particular interest to anyone who operates a

   4   website.  It's possible for people to go and hijack your site.

   5   In fact, it happened to us only two weeks ago where someone

   6   took advantage of a security hole in Network Solutions and

   7   took our domain name, 2600.com and registered it to a site

   8   somewhere overseas, and that would have been a real pain to

   9   deal with to get back if we hadn't caught it.  This article

  10   gives one method of how such things are possible, and I would

  11   like to think that this article coming out will wake up the

  12   people at NSI so that it doesn't happen anymore.

  13   Q.  By the way --

  14            THE COURT:  Excuse me, Mr. Garbus.  You do

  15   understand, do you not, that this is the time when the Court

  16   is considering the linking issue, this trial?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I understand that.

  18            THE COURT:  Okay.  It wasn't clear from the way you

  19   made your comment.

  20   Q.  Go ahead.

  21   A.  This is another article on cellular service, spoofing

  22   cellular service.  This is from 1996, before the onset of

  23   digital cellular, so it was a much bigger issue then for the

  24   electronic serial number to be grabbed literally as you were

  25   driving down a highway by a cellular thief, I guess is the




804



   1   best way to describe him, someone sitting on the side of a

   2   road with a particular type of scanner who would simply grab

   3   your numbers and just by grabbing your numbers, that would be

   4   enough for them to become you and start making phone calls

   5   under your phone number, and this is another gaping security

   6   hole that we felt needed to be known, and I understand that

   7   this kind of system is increasingly rare and is probably not

   8   going to be around much longer at all.

   9   Q.  Are there other individuals who use the name 2600.com

  10   other than you?

  11   A.  We are the only people who can use 2600.com.  There are

  12   other 2600 names in other countries.  There is really no way

  13   for us to register every single country name, nor would we

  14   want to.  And it is also possible for somebody to register a

  15   machine as 2600.  They could register 2600.Microsoft.com for

  16   instance, so basically we are happy with having our website

  17   2600.com and making sure that people know that's us.

  18   Q.  Are there other websites out there using a name or

  19   something like that which people to your knowledge think are

  20   associated with you?

  21   A.  Yeah, the only site associated with us are the sites we

  22   run.  The other types of association, it's more of an

  23   emotional type of association where they may support the

  24   magazine or agree with our basic philosophy and them might put

  25   2600 in their name and that's something that really doesn't




805



   1   concern us.  We don't see that as a copyright issue or

   2   something that's necessarily evil.  The only time it would

   3   concern us if they were doing something in our name that we

   4   considered to be wrong.

   5   Q.  But you have no control over it?

   6   A.  We have no control over it.

   7   Q.  There are separate people using 2600?

   8   A.  Right, in that context, it would be an incredible waste of

   9   time to try and control everybody who used that.

  10   Q.  Go ahead.

  11   A.  This article is entitled the Backyard Phreaker,

  12   P-H-R-E-A-K-E-R.

  13            And this goes into some detail on people who

  14   literally climb telephone poles and hook into phone lines and

  15   make phone calls.  This happens quite a bit in unsecured

  16   locations.  It happens in New York City in the basements of

  17   apartment buildings where the phone lines come into the

  18   building and are left unsecured.  What we find in many cases

  19   is that unsuspecting people get these large phone bills and

  20   the phone company says it was dialed from your phone number,

  21   therefore, you had to have done it.  We are showing here that

  22   there are many ways people can make these phone calls on your

  23   phone line without you ever knowing about it.  And many

  24   people, including a lot of the WBAI listeners, have used this

  25   kind of information to battle the phone company and say, you




806



   1   know, there are many other ways somebody could have used this

   2   phone number to place this fraudulent call.  And we also like

   3   to think that this might encourage people to lock those boxes

   4   so that everybody in the world can't get access to them.

   5   Q.  Continue.

   6   A.  This is actually --

   7            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I think we have heard enough.

   8   You have the magazines in evidence.  I can look at the

   9   magazines.  I don't need anymore summaries.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  I have no more questions of this

  11   witness.

  12            THE COURT:  Okay.  Mr. Gold?

  13            Just so we are clear, Mr. Garbus, if you had other

  14   questions, you are welcome to continue.  I just don't need

  15   more summaries of magazine articles.  Do you understand?

  16            MR. GARBUS:  Yes.

  17            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  18            MR. GOLD:  May we have the exhibits, the magazines?

  19            THE COURT:  Yes.

  20            MR. GOLD:  May I approach the witness for that

  21   purpose?

  22            THE COURT:  Yes.

  23            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, sir.

  24   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  25   BY MR. GOLD:




807



   1   Q.  Good afternoon, Mr. Goldstein.

   2   A.  Good afternoon.

   3   Q.  Nice to see you again.  Mr. Goldstein, in 1999, did your

   4   2600.com site mirror DeCSS?

   5   A.  That's correct.

   6   Q.  When did you start?

   7   A.  I believe we started in late November.  I don't have the

   8   precise date.

   9   Q.  The posting that you've just referred to was done by who?

  10   A.  Who specifically posted the -- it was either myself or my

  11   webmaster.

  12   Q.  And was this a webmaster you preapproved?

  13   A.  Yes, I take responsibility for everything that's on the

  14   site.

  15   Q.  Is it true that prior to the preliminary injunction, any

  16   member of the general public was able to download DeCSS

  17   directly from the 2600.com website?

  18   A.  Any member who had a computer and a net connection could

  19   do that, yes.

  20   Q.  Is it true that 2600.com is currently linking to other

  21   sites that post DeCSS?

  22   A.  Yes, we have been linking from the beginning.

  23            THE COURT:  Let me ask this, I think I know the

  24   answer to this, but I think it ought to be in the record.

  25            What does mirror mean as you understood it when you




808



   1   answered Mr. Gold's question?

   2            THE WITNESS:  Mirror is basically a link to another

   3   site.  Actually, mirror is a duplicate of your site, so it's

   4   not entirely correct.  I think Mr. Gold is referring to links.

   5   A mirror is, say, our site goes down, you go to a site B and

   6   it's the exact same thing, so in that particular case, it's

   7   not the same.  I believe you're referring to links.

   8            THE COURT:  But he asked you right at the beginning

   9   of his examination whether in 1999 your site was mirroring

  10   DeCSS and you said it was.  What did you mean by that?

  11            THE WITNESS:  That refers to the specific program

  12   DeCSS, so that, yes, that program was mirrored on our site.

  13   The site itself, we were not mirroring the entire other site,

  14   just the program.

  15            THE COURT:  Yeah, but I asked you what mirroring

  16   means.

  17            THE WITNESS:  Mirroring means duplicating material

  18   that's on another website, whether it be one file or an entire

  19   site.

  20            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  21   Q.  In 1999, on the 2600.com site, did you encourage people

  22   who were interested in supporting you to mirror DeCSS?

  23   A.  We gave people various constructive ways of expressing

  24   themselves and that was one of them, yes.

  25   Q.  And did you continue to do that in 2000?




809



   1   A.  Yes, it's still up to this day.

   2   Q.  Is it true that with the links you have provided and you

   3   do provide on the 2600.com site, someone, anyone, can go to

   4   the 2600 site, click once on a mouse, which takes you directly

   5   to another site that is posting DeCSS?

   6   A.  Yes, they could do that.  They could do it in many other

   7   ways as well.

   8   Q.  In all the time that you were posting and all the time

   9   that you have been linking, did you know that DeCSS is

  10   designed to circumvent the encryption technology that protects

  11   the digital content stored on a DVD?

  12   A.  I knew that it did one thing and that it was --

  13            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

  14            THE COURT:  Ground?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  Use of the word "circumvent."

  16            THE COURT:  I take it in the colloquial rather than

  17   the legal sense.

  18   A.  We knew that DeCSS basically got around CSS, got around

  19   the encryption that was not holding up to the stress.

  20   Q.  Is it true, Mr. Goldstein, that DeCSS exists to decrypt

  21   CSS?

  22   A.  That's what it was written to do, yes.

  23   Q.  Is it true that in a write-up or article that appeared on

  24   the 2600.com site, DeCSS was described as a free DVD decoder

  25   that allows people to copy DVDs?




810



   1   A.  Yes, that was on our site, and I have since said that part

   2   of that statement is inaccurate, that it was not written

   3   solely to copy DVDs.  It was written to decrypt CSS.  I wasn't

   4   aware of the difference myself.  I didn't write that piece at

   5   the time that it came out.  I believed that was completely

   6   accurate, but it turns out that it's a bit more complicated

   7   than I had at first thought.  It's not simply about copying.

   8   It's about access control.

   9   Q.  You recall that you made that statement in your

  10   deposition, sir?

  11   A.  I'm sorry?

  12   Q.  You recall, sir, that you made that statement in your

  13   deposition?

  14   A.  Yes, I believe I clarified that.

  15   Q.  And when you say you have just gotten some other evidence,

  16   when did you get that?

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I object if we are going to the

  18   deposition.  If he wants to read in the question and the

  19   answer, he can do that.

  20            THE COURT:  I will sustain the objection as to form,

  21   because I think the question is muddy.  But let's see if we

  22   get another question.

  23   Q.  You indicated that you got some new information since the

  24   time of your deposition about your last answer, the one that

  25   you --




811



   1   A.  No, that's not what I said.

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

   3   Q.  Could you tell me what was you said?

   4            THE COURT:  The objection is overruled.  He said he

   5   thought the statement was accurate when made it and now he

   6   thinks it's inaccurate.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  No, no, I think there are two different

   8   time frames we are talking about.

   9            THE COURT:  Obviously.  The deposition and now.

  10            MR. GARBUS:  No, no.  From the writing of the

  11   article, the deposition and now are three different time

  12   frames.

  13            THE COURT:  We are going to break for the day at this

  14   point anyway.  I will see you all at 9 o'clock tomorrow

  15   morning.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, could we address a

  17   scheduling matter?

  18            THE COURT:  Sure.  Address it.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  May we approach?

  20            THE COURT:  No.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  Fair enough.  Tomorrow, your Honor,

  22   we have one witness.  I know your Honor said that we have to

  23   keep the witnesses coming.  Unfortunately, every other witness

  24   we have, one of them has informed us that he couldn't come at

  25   all, and all the other ones are out of state.  We've got them




812



   1   lined up for Tuesday and Wednesday.  Depending on

   2   cross-examination we expect, if you permit us to continue, we

   3   expect to complete the witnesses by the end of Wednesday.

   4            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I was hoping that we would be

   5   finished with this case before Wednesday, and I would like to

   6   go to San Francisco Wednesday to try to present a part of the

   7   argument being made in court that day on Napster.

   8            THE COURT:  You better get your people here.

   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, unfortunately it's not

  10   possible.

  11            THE COURT:  I gave you a lot of advanced warning of

  12   this.  Do your best.

  13            MR. GARBUS:  Can I get some kind -- can Mr. Gold tell

  14   me how long he expects the cross-examination to be?

  15            THE COURT:  Tell them what you think.

  16            MR. GOLD:  I can't imagine it would take as long as

  17   as an hour and a half, and I think it will be shorter, but

  18   something like that, best guess.

  19            THE COURT:  Okay.  9 o'clock.

  20            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, what we have been told, so

  21   that we are all clear, is that Mr. Peterson is available for

  22   tomorrow.  The other names we have been given are for Tuesday.

  23            THE COURT:  Who were the other people?

  24            MR. GARBUS:  Can I just say one thing?

  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we have on Tuesday




813



   1   Olegario Craig.

   2            THE COURT:  Say the name again.

   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  Olegario Craig.  He is a systems

   4   administrator at the University of Massachusetts.  He can't

   5   get off from his job until then.  He is taking two days of

   6   vacation to come down for it.  Matthew Pavlovich who is the

   7   director of the LiViD project lives in Dallas, Chris DiBona

   8   who works with Linux and he is addressing the Linux operating

   9   system, he is in Palo Alto.  Peter Ramadge who is at

  10   Princeton, but he is going to do a demonstration and we were

  11   unable to get the monitors to do the demonstration until

  12   Monday.  Michael Einhorn who is in New Jersey.  Dave Touretzky

  13   is in Holland and Andrew Appel is in Hawaii.

  14            MR. GOLD:  I think none of our witnesses were from

  15   this area and they all disturbed their plans to meet their

  16   obligations to be in court.

  17            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, all of our witnesses are

  18   volunteers, pro bono, coming at their own expense.  We are

  19   doing the best we can to get them here.  We don't have -- we

  20   don't control them.  I apologize.

  21            THE COURT:  Look, Princeton, New Jersey, the last

  22   time I looked was about an hour from here.  Dallas is a three-

  23   and-a-quarter-hour airplane ride.  And there are planes this

  24   evening.  You do what you can.  I'm not making any ruling now,

  25   but I remind you that you were told there would be no gaps,




814



   1   both sides were told, you were warned about it, you were told

   2   that the plaintiff expected to rest on Thursday.  They did

   3   rest on Thursday.  There have been no surprises.

   4            Thank you, folks.

   5            (Trial adjourned to July 21, 2000, at 9:00 a.m.)

   6

   7

   8

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25




815



   1

   2                        INDEX OF EXAMINATION

   3   Witness                    D      X      RD     RX

   4   JON JOHANSEN.............616    627     641

   5   MIKHAIL REIDER...........646    676

   6   EDWARD FELTEN............731    763

   7   ERIC CORLEY..............774    806

   8

   9                         PLAINTIFF EXHIBITS

  10   Exhibit No.                                Received

  11    113, 114, 115, 116

  12    1.11, 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8,

  13    1.7, 1.5, 1.3 and 1.12  ................... 794

  14

  15                         DEFENDANT EXHIBITS

  16   Exhibit No.                                 Received

  17    BBP .........................................735

  18    B to Exhibit BBS ............................755

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25


Transcript of Trial - Day 5, MPAA v. 2600 NY; July 21, 2000  
 

Transcript of Trial - Day 5, MPAA v. 2600

NY; July 21, 2000

Transcript Courtesy of the Electronic Frontier Foundation

See related files:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video (EFF Archive)
http://jya.com/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS (Cryptome Archive)
http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs (2600 Archive)
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/ (Harvard DVD OpenLaw Project)



 

816



   1   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
       SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
   2   ------------------------------x

   3   UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.,
       ]et al,
   4
                      Plaintiffs,
   5
                  v.                           00 Civ. 277 (LAK)
   6
       SHAWN C. REIMERDES, et al,
   7
                      Defendants.
   8
       ------------------------------x
   9
                                               July 21, 2000
  10                                           9:00 a.m.

  11   Before:

  12                       HON. LEWIS A. KAPLAN,

  13                                           District Judge

  14                            APPEARANCES

  15   PROSKAUER, ROSE, L.L.P.
            Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  16   BY:  LEON P. GOLD
            CHARLES S. SIMS
  17        SCOTT P. COOPER

  18   FRANKFURT, GARBUS, KLEIN & SELZ
            Attorneys for Defendants
  19   BY:  MARTIN GARBUS
            ERNEST HERNSTADT
  20        DAVID ATLAS

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



817



   1            (Trial resumed)

   2            THE COURT:  A couple of preliminary things on my list

   3   before we get started.  First of all, have you been able to

   4   reach agreement or otherwise come to a view on the specific

   5   findings of the Microsoft case that I asked whether you would

   6   stipulate to?

   7            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor we haven't yet.  We will over

   8   the weekend.

   9            THE COURT:  Just so I am clear, if I don't hear an

  10   objection on the specific findings that I have identified, I

  11   will take judicial notice of them and the deadline for any

  12   objections is 11 o'clock on Monday.  As I say, they are in the

  13   nature of definitions and I --

  14            MR. GARBUS:  I can't see why it would be a problem?

  15            MR. SIMS:  I am advised we have gotten to it, we have

  16   no objection.

  17            THE COURT:  You might consider also because I will be

  18   looking further at that opinion for other things that might be

  19   useful by way of background here, to see whether there is a

  20   description in it of Linux that you can agree on as to what it

  21   is, what its relationship to Microsoft windows is.  You may be

  22   able to do that, you may be able to save time.  OK.

  23            The second item on my list is that I am going to

  24   alert you to an issue I thought I had because I am going to

  25   ask for a brief on this if by the end of the trial I think it



818



   1   is relevant and you might as well start thinking about it.  If

   2   I am understanding at least certain of the arguments here, the

   3   defendants are arguing that there are encryption utilities

   4   other than DeCSS that would decrypt CSS protected DVDs, that

   5   there is no proof, direct or otherwise -- as to direct I think

   6   it is stipulated -- that any particular decrypted movie that

   7   may have been offered over the Internet or on a file-sharing

   8   utility or whatever other relevant modes of distribution may

   9   be, that was decrypted with DeCSS as opposed to some other

  10   decryption utility and what the defendants I think would ask

  11   me to conclude from that is that the plaintiffs therefore

  12   can't have had any injury actually or threatened by reason of

  13   these defendants' actions.

  14            Just by way of a parenthetical digression, I am well

  15   aware that the issue of the extent to which there is

  16   sufficient proof that there are in fact decrypted movies

  17   available over the Internet has not been decided and we are

  18   going to have further discussion about that.  My question

  19   presupposes, just on a hypothetical basis, if there is

  20   adequate proof to find that there are such movies out there.

  21            The thought that occurred to me last night and on

  22   which I may want briefs is whether the burden of proving that

  23   whatever decryptions are out there came from the defendant or

  24   more broadly DeCSS is on the plaintiff as distinguished from

  25   the burden being on the defendant to prove that they did not.



819



   1   The case that prompted me to think about that, I know we all

   2   read this in law school a long time ago, Summers v. Tyce,

   3   decided by the California Supreme Court in 1948 which seems at

   4   least superficially to be analogous to this problem.

   5            The case involved a group of hunters out hunting with

   6   shotguns, two hunters fired simultaneously.  One shotgun

   7   pellet hit the plaintiff.  Because they were shotgun pellets

   8   as opposed to bullets out of a rifled weapon, it was

   9   impossible to tell which shotgun the pellet came from.  The

  10   California Supreme Court said that the burden of proof was on

  11   the defendants to show that their shotgun did not discharge

  12   the bullet that hit the plaintiff and in the absence of such

  13   proof, everybody who fired a shotgun at that time was jointly

  14   and severally liable.

  15            I am not inviting argument on that this morning, but

  16   I wanted you to know that I am thinking about that and to give

  17   you an opportunity to address it at the appropriate time.

  18            OK.  That said -- and I should add there is a lot of

  19   development in the law of products liability, I am sure you

  20   all the know the case Summers v. Tyce as its starting point

  21   and some of you may know that.  Let's continue where we are.

  22            Mr. Corley, come on up.  You are still under owes.

  23            MR. GARBUS:  We had that open question before you

  24   concerning certain aspects of Mr. Corley's testimony.  I

  25   presume we are not getting into it until such time as a



820



   1   further discussion of the court.

   2            THE COURT:  Absolutely.  Absolutely.  If it is

   3   something you are going to want to go into Mr. Gold, tell me

   4   you need to talk to me privately with Mr. Garbus.

   5            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

   6   CROSS-EXAMINATION

   7   BY MR. GOLD:

   8   Q.  Good morning, Mr. Goldstein.

   9   A.  Good morning.

  10   Q.  We left off yesterday discussing a statement that you had

  11   made and I am going to give it to you again.  Did you not at

  12   one point in time, after October of '99, state that DeCSS was

  13   a free DVD decoder that allows people to copy DVDs?

  14   A.  That was a statement that was made on our web site which I

  15   did not write but I take responsibility for.  It was at some

  16   point after it was published on our web site I believe in

  17   November that we realized that it was a lot more complicated

  18   than just that and we -- future writings on the web site

  19   reflected this.

  20   Q.  What do you mean when you say it was a lot more

  21   complicated than that?

  22   A.  It wasn't simply a bit of code that allowed someone to

  23   copy DVDs.  At that point in time, I wasn't even that familiar

  24   with the technology.  I wasn't aware of how the encryption

  25   worked, I wasn't aware of the extent of existing DVD piracy



821



   1   and wasn't aware that simply copying a DVD was a trivial thing

   2   that had been done for years, so I misread the actual facts of

   3   the case.  When I realized it was more complicated than what

   4   we had reported, the case actually became very much more

   5   interesting to me.

   6   Q.  Did you discover after you first made the statement we

   7   have just referred to that it was incorrect?

   8   A.  Did I discover -- first of all, I didn't make the

   9   statement.  I discovered after looking at various public

  10   forums, discussions about the subject, that this was not a

  11   case about copying.  It had nothing to do with copying.  It

  12   was about something called access control which was, prior to

  13   November, I had been unfamiliar with that.

  14            THE COURT:  The question, Mr. Corley, wasn't about

  15   what this case was about.  The question was about the

  16   statement that appeared on your web site.

  17            THE WITNESS:  I am sorry.  Not the case but what was

  18   going on at the time, the people whose web sites were being

  19   shut down, the story itself, that apparently was not about

  20   copying DVDs as we had initially stated.

  21   Q.  Let me ask you, Mr. Goldstein, is it not true that DeCSS

  22   is a free DVD decoder that allows people to copy DVDs?

  23   A.  I believe it allows the data to be copied to a hard drive

  24   at some point during its operation as do many other utilities

  25   but I believe that it can do that if you write it in a



822



   1   particular way.

   2   Q.  Then the prior statement you made was correct, I guess?

   3   A.  Not entirely because it did not exist for the purpose of

   4   copying DVDs.  One would not run that program to copy DVDs.

   5   Q.  But you said that it was a free DVD decoder that allows

   6   people to copy DVDs and if I understand your testimony this

   7   morning, you are saying the same thing?

   8   A.  It allows you to do that but that's not the purpose of it.

   9   Again, I am looking at this from a journalistic perspective.

  10   Q.  I am not asking you the purpose, I am asking you what it

  11   does.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I will object to Mr. Gold cutting off

  13   the witness' answer.

  14            THE COURT:  The witness is being unresponsive.

  15   A.  I am explaining it as best I can.  Basically the program

  16   exists to allow someone to bypass the CSS encryption on the

  17   DVD.  Now, whether that's the purpose of that is to copy a

  18   DVD, that's something that we initially didn't understand

  19   properly and I realize, I realized in November that it was --

  20   that was not the case at all, that it was about defeating

  21   access control, being able to have a player that worked under

  22   the Linux operating system among other things.

  23   Q.  You began posting DeCSS on your web site in November of

  24   1999?

  25   A.  That's correct.



823



   1   Q.  Is it your testimony that you did that as a journalist to

   2   write a story?

   3   A.  That's correct.

   4   Q.  Could you have written the identical story without the

   5   posting, using the letters DeCSS as many times as you wanted

   6   in the story?

   7   A.  Not writing a story that would have been respected as a

   8   journalistic piece, no, because in a journalistic world, you

   9   have to pretty much put up or shut up.  You have to show your

  10   evidence and in this particular case, we would be writing an

  11   evidence without showing what we were talking about and

  12   particularly in the magazine that I work for, people want to

  13   see specifically what it is that we are referring to, what bit

  14   of technology that doesn't work, what new advancement, what

  15   evidence do we have and simply saying that somebody else said

  16   something just won't cut it.

  17            So in this particular case, we pointed to the

  18   evidence itself which was already firmly established out there

  19   in the Internet world.  We just put it up on our site so we

  20   could write our perspective on it and show the world what it

  21   was all about.

  22   Q.  Getting back to the question, in November of 1999, was it

  23   possible for you to write a story about DeCSS on your web

  24   site, using the letters DeCSS next to each other as many times

  25   as you wanted, without posting DeCSS?



824



   1   A.  I will take another shot at it.  I -- basically, the story

   2   would not hold any value to our readers if we simply printed

   3   allegations without showing evidence.

   4   Q.  I am not asking you, sir, what value your story would

   5   have.

   6            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus.

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I object.  The questions are

   8   argumentative.  And bad as to form.

   9            THE COURT:  Certainly the one in the process of

  10   winding up is.

  11            Do you have another question, Mr. Gold?  Ask it,

  12   please.

  13   Q.  In order to post DeCSS, didn't you have to go to your

  14   computer and get it?

  15   A.  Go to my computer and get it?

  16   Q.  Doesn't anyone have to -- yes, go to your computer, the

  17   same one you used to write the story?

  18   A.  We had to get DeCSS from a computer, not our computer

  19   because we didn't have it.  We took it from one of the other

  20   sites that had it at the time and posted it based on that.

  21   Q.  Once you did that, when you wrote DeCSS in your story, in

  22   effect now you had posted it, isn't that right?

  23   A.  That's correct.

  24   Q.  Couldn't you have written the same story using the same

  25   exact words and using DeCSS without going out and getting



825



   1   DeCSS and posting it?

   2   A.  No.  It would not have been the same story.  It is

   3   analogous to printing a story about a picture and not printing

   4   the picture.  People want to see what you are talking about.

   5   Q.  Does your web site now have a slogan "Stop the MPAA"?

   6   A.  It is probably on there somewhere, yes.

   7   Q.  Doesn't it stand out in bold letters?

   8   A.  I'm not exactly sure where it would stand out, but

   9   wherever it is, I'm sure it stands out graphically.

  10   Q.  And what is the meaning of that phrase, what do you mean

  11   to convey by stopping the MPAA?

  12   A.  Well, it is basically a phrase that I didn't coin myself.

  13   It has come from a number of people that see the actions of

  14   this lawsuit and other events over the past few months as

  15   ominous and something that should be stood up to and that's

  16   what people are doing simply by vocalizing that.

  17   Q.  Have you tried to stop the MPAA by writing stories about

  18   the MPAA and describing what they do as inappropriate?

  19   A.  I don't know if they carry that much weight where I could

  20   stop the MPAA by writing a story, but I have written stories

  21   to educate people as to the facts of the case.

  22   Q.  Have you ever tried to stop the MPAA by making

  23   contributions to organizations that were espousing the repeal

  24   of the antisurf protection laws?

  25   A.  We have tried to raise funds, I am not in a position to



826



   1   make contributions unfortunately, but we are trying to raise

   2   funds to help pay for our defense.

   3   Q.  Have you promoted through your web site the taking or

   4   downloading of DeCSS?

   5   A.  We have promoted the linking to various sites that still

   6   have it posted because that has not been ruled illegal in any

   7   way.

   8   Q.  Is it your belief as a reporter that to write a story

   9   about trafficking in illegal drugs in Manhattan, you would

  10   have to spend time actually trafficking in illegal drugs?

  11   A.  No, I don't think it is similar at all.  One is a computer

  12   file, one is an actual substance.

  13   Q.  Is it true that the number of sites posting CSS has

  14   increased since January 2000 when you started linking?

  15   A.  It is hard to say exactly how many there are at any one

  16   particular point in time.  There were a lot already up when we

  17   started the story.  We came in kind of late.  I believe CSS

  18   was cracked, I am hearing dates of October, and we didn't post

  19   the story until nearly a month later.

  20            At that point in time, there were already hundreds of

  21   sites that had it and that was a good part of the story that

  22   we posted.  I don't know how many there are now, and I don't

  23   know how many came up in January.  I do know there was an

  24   increase after the preliminary injunction against us and I'm

  25   not sure where that stands today or how many sites actually



827



   1   have it or how many sites that haven't been reported that have

   2   it.

   3   Q.  Mr. Goldstein, are you a leader in the hacker community?

   4   A.  Some people may say that.  I don't like to refer to myself

   5   as a leader but I am certainly somebody who certainly follows

   6   that particular aspect of society and I try to speak

   7   intelligently on it.

   8   Q.  You publish the Hacker Quarterly?

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  Your web site 2600 is known to virtually every hacker

  11   throughout the United States?

  12   A.  And quite a number of nonhackers as well, yes.

  13   Q.  You have appeared on radio and television?

  14            THE COURT:  We are not going to repeat what Mr.

  15   Garbus did yesterday, are we?  We went through the TV programs

  16   and magazine articles.  Let's go, Mr. Gold.  He has a right

  17   not to like this law and he has a right to say so.

  18            MR. GOLD:  Absolutely.

  19            THE COURT:  The question is whether he violated it

  20   and that's a different question.

  21            MR. GOLD:  My point, yes.

  22   Q.  There was a hacker convention last weekend, is that true?

  23   A.  That's correct, the third HOPE convention, call H2K.

  24   Q.  And there was a Mr. Johansen appeared at that?

  25   A.  Joe Johansen appeared on panel.



828



   1   Q.  And he spoke?

   2   A.  He and his father both spoke.

   3   Q.  Was a mock trial held of this case on --

   4   A.  Yes, actually we had scheduled that before the trial had

   5   been scheduled so the timing was kind of strange but yeah,

   6   that was organized by somebody else.

   7   Q.  Is it fair to say that the hacker community in the United

   8   States is following this trial carefully?

   9   A.  I would say the hacker community, open source community,

  10   the Linux community, yes.

  11            THE COURT:  What do you mean by the open source

  12   community?

  13            THE WITNESS:  The open source community is basically

  14   people who write software, release the source code, share

  15   information, it overlaps into the Linux world.  I am actually

  16   not a part of that community.  I didn't know much about that

  17   community before this case.

  18            THE COURT:  OK, thank you.

  19   Q.  Is it true that the 2600.com site provides a form for

  20   people to fill out so they can add their site to the 2600.com

  21   mirror list?

  22   A.  Yes, we have two forms.  We have a form where people know

  23   about a site that carries DeCSS or know of a site that carries

  24   DeCSS, they can submit that, or if they know of a site that we

  25   are listing that no longer has it, they can fill that out as



829



   1   well.  But I should also point out that that has not been

   2   worked upon for a couple of months simply because we are too

   3   busy with other projects.

   4   Q.  But the form has been there for many months?

   5   A.  The form has been there from the beginning, yes.

   6   Q.  And it still is?

   7   A.  I believe so.

   8   Q.  You don't know?

   9   A.  I haven't looked at our web site in a while but I don't

  10   believe any changes were made, no.

  11   Q.  How long a while?

  12   A.  I don't look at every page.

  13   Q.  How long a while haven't you looked at your web site?

  14   A.  I have looked at my web site.  That particular page I have

  15   not looked at probably in a couple of weeks but I believe it

  16   is still up there because we don't make changes.

  17   Q.  Do you understand that it is wrong to break through a

  18   protective device that protects a digital copyrighted work in

  19   order to take that work?

  20            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question.

  21            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  22            Let me ask you something about the mirror list and

  23   some of the sites to which you have linked.  Are there sites

  24   to which you are linked on which by clicking on the link on

  25   your site, you reach a page at the linked site that has a



830



   1   variety of content on it which may or may not include DeCSS on

   2   the first page that comes up?

   3            THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's correct.  I would say

   4   that's probably the case more times than not.

   5            THE COURT:  Do some of those sites then give the

   6   person who reaches it through clicking on the hyperlink on

   7   your site then give the user or visitor, whatever you want to

   8   call it, the option to go further in the -- I'll call it the

   9   transferee site if the visitor wishes to download DeCSS?

  10            THE WITNESS:  The person is given the choice as to

  11   whether or not they want to proceed further?  Yes.

  12            THE COURT:  Are there sites to which you are linked

  13   or have been linked where the effect of clicking on the

  14   hyperlink on your site is to begin a download to the user of

  15   DeCSS without the user or the viewer taking any further

  16   action?

  17            THE WITNESS:  You would always have to take some bit

  18   of further action even for something as simple as verifying

  19   where you want to put the file on your hard drive.  There are

  20   no instances that I know of where you can only click once on

  21   one of our hyperlinks and immediately start a download.

  22            THE COURT:  From your understanding, is it possible

  23   to construct a link of the type I have described, whether it

  24   is on your site or not?

  25            THE WITNESS:  I imagine anything is possible but I'm



831



   1   not familiar with that particular application.

   2            THE COURT:  Are there links listed on your mirror

   3   list in which the user, when the user clicks on the link is

   4   transferred to a point on a transferee site that has no

   5   content that comes up on the screen other than DeCSS or a

   6   dialog box that requires the user to do something like verify

   7   that the user wishes to download DeCSS?  That is to say, no

   8   other content?

   9            THE WITNESS:  Yes, that's certainly possible.

  10            THE COURT:  OK, thank you.  Go ahead, Mr. Gold.

  11   Q.  Mr. Goldstein, have you ever publicly advocated that it is

  12   wrong to infringe on anyone's copyright?

  13   A.  Yes, I support the copyright laws as I understand them.

  14   Q.  Have you, sir, publicly advocated that helping someone to

  15   commit a copyright infringement is wrong?

  16   A.  I believe that helping somebody to break the law is wrong,

  17   yes.

  18   Q.  What do you mean by wrong?

  19   A.  Illegal, immoral, something I wouldn't do.

  20   Q.  Now, at the end of 1999, did you know that CSS was a

  21   protected device protecting digital copyrighted movies?

  22   A.  I knew it was an encryption standard that had been applied

  23   to DVDs.  I did not see it as the same thing as preventing

  24   illegal copying, no.

  25   Q.  Why not?  What's the difference?



832



   1   A.  Again, I'm not a lawyer, so my understanding of the

   2   nuances might be a bit vague, but --

   3   Q.  Sir, I would like you to not give me any legal opinions.

   4            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, he was trying to answer so

   5   let's hear the answer.

   6            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, your Honor.

   7   A.  My understanding is the protection, the copyright law is

   8   meant to protect the owner of the copyright from having

   9   illegal works distributed whether by copying or any other kind

  10   of infringement where the work or the copyright holder is not

  11   compensated for the work.  And my analysis of CSS and what CSS

  12   accomplished was not the same thing as that.  In other words,

  13   copying of DVDs was not affected by whether or not one

  14   decrypted CSS or one did not decrypt CSS.

  15   Q.  Did you know at the end of 1999 that the movies made by

  16   the major Hollywood studios were copyrighted?

  17   A.  Did I know they were copyrighted?  Yes, of course.

  18   Q.  Is the quarterly published, Hacker -- forgive me --

  19   A.  Hacker Quarterly.

  20   Q.  Is that copyrighted?

  21   A.  Yes, we copyright both the magazine and material on the

  22   web page.

  23   Q.  Why?

  24   A.  We don't wish for people to be able to simply copy

  25   everything on our site and claim ownership as theirs.



833



   1   Q.  Did you make the copyright application or authorize that

   2   it be made?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  Now, by providing links through the 2600.com site, are you

   5   making it possible for any member of the general public to

   6   download DeCSS if they have a computer?

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the form of the question.

   8            THE COURT:  What's the objection?

   9            MR. GARBUS:  Let me hear the question again.

  10            (Record read)

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I will withdraw the objection.

  12   A.  If they have a computer and a connection and they choose

  13   to go to our site, yes, they can download it that way.

  14   Q.  Is it your understanding that once someone has downloaded

  15   DeCSS through the 2600.com site, neither you nor 2600 has any

  16   control over what they do with that, what they did with DeCSS?

  17   A.  That's correct, we have no control what people do after

  18   they leave our site.

  19   Q.  Did you make any efforts to confine your providing DeCSS

  20   to people who were going to use it for any specific purpose?

  21   A.  I don't think such control is possible on the net.  So the

  22   answer would be no.

  23   Q.  Is it true that anyone who downloads DeCSS can use it for

  24   any purpose that they want to put it to?

  25   A.  Any purpose they want --



834



   1   Q.  Any purpose at all?

   2   A.  I'm not -- I am having trouble following that.  DeCSS can

   3   only do a limited number of things.  It can't do anything

   4   somebody wants.

   5   Q.  Is it not true that all DeCSS can do is decrypt CSS?

   6   A.  DeCSS exists for the purpose of bypassing CSS, correct.

   7   Q.  Is it true that your posting of DeCSS and your linking to

   8   other sites that post DeCSS is being done for the sole reason

   9   that you are a journalist?

  10   A.  The reason the story appeared was because it was a

  11   journalistic piece.  The reason we continued to write about it

  12   and talk about it is because we believe it continues to be

  13   that kind of a story.

  14   Q.  Writing it and being a journalist was your only purpose of

  15   posting or linking to other sites that --

  16   A.  That's the purpose for our site, that's the purpose for

  17   our magazine.  It is a journalistic endeavor, yes.

  18   Q.  Did you ever write that the mirroring of DeCSS was a

  19   demonstration of electronic civil disobedience?

  20   A.  I can't say that I wrote those specific words but I

  21   believe those words may have appeared on our web site.

  22   Q.  And you're responsible for them?

  23   A.  I take responsibility for what appears on our web site,

  24   yes.

  25   Q.  What is your definition of civil disobedience?



835



   1            MR. GARBUS:  I object.

   2            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   3   Q.  When those words appeared on your web site, what did you

   4   understand them to mean?

   5   A.  My definition of civil disobedience, electronic civil

   6   disobedience, I suppose simply people taking a stand in a way

   7   they perceive as morally just.  I really think it should be

   8   left up to the individual person to make that definition on

   9   their own.  That's how I would picture it on the web site.

  10   Again, I don't know the exact context of how it appeared on

  11   our web site.  I would have to look at that.

  12   Q.  Is it not true, to your knowledge, that civil disobedience

  13   means violating some law for the purpose of making a

  14   statement?

  15   A.  It many cases, it does involve sitting in front of a door,

  16   for instance, a minor violation to prove a point, yes.

  17   Q.  It is limited only to minor violations?

  18   A.  It can be bigger than that, I suppose.

  19   Q.  Now, do you write a news story on your web site or does a

  20   news story appear on your web site relating to DeCSS every

  21   single day?

  22   A.  I write a story occasionally.  There are other people who

  23   write stories occasionally on the web site.  They do not

  24   appear every day, no.

  25   Q.  How often in the course of a week in the last three months



836



   1   have stories about DeCSS appeared on your web site?

   2   A.  I would say probably an average of about one a week.  And

   3   that's simply because we don't have very much in the way of

   4   staff.

   5   Q.  But I gather that you link to sites that post DeCSS every

   6   single day, every single minute, every hour of the year?

   7   A.  It is not an ongoing thing.  We are not consciously doing

   8   it -- basically every story we write on our web page stays up

   9   until the end of time or until we are ordered to take it down.

  10   Q.  Is it possible for you to remove it?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  You haven't done that?

  13   A.  No, I have not.

  14   Q.  And you don't take it down on each day when you are not

  15   writing a story about DeCSS, is that true?

  16   A.  No, we believe in keeping our stories up even when a story

  17   has a factual error in it.  Our philosophy is it would be

  18   wrong to rewrite history and pretend we didn't say something

  19   that was wrong.

  20   Q.  Have you made any money by posting DeCSS or linking it to

  21   other sites that post DeCSS?

  22   A.  I would strongly suspect not.

  23   Q.  Why would you only suspect?  Do you know?

  24   A.  I'm certain I haven't made any money from posting DeCSS.

  25   I have probably lost quite a bit of money because I have not



837



   1   been able to devote my time to the things I am supposed to be

   2   doing.

   3   Q.  There has been a great increase in people coming to your

   4   web site since you first started to post DeCSS, is that not

   5   true?

   6   A.  I have no way of knowing that since we haven't kept a

   7   counter since last summer.

   8   Q.  Wasn't that because so many people were coming to your web

   9   site?

  10   A.  That was last summer before all this started.  I have no

  11   way of knowing how many people are hitting our site.  We have

  12   no ads on our site so we have no economic need for more people

  13   to come there.  I do note a lot of people are talking about

  14   it.  I can suspect that more people are coming to our site but

  15   I have no real way of proving that.

  16   Q.  I gather al of your income comes from the Hacker

  17   Quarterly?

  18   A.  That's correct.

  19            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, isn't that whole line

  20   irrelevant, in line of Greeging and a whole line of cases all

  21   the way back to Greeging?

  22   Q.  Have you talked with anyone at all with about

  23   advertisements in the Hacker Quarterly in the last several

  24   months, the possibility of advertising?

  25   A.  No, our policy is never to accept advertising.



838



   1   Q.  And you have had a discussion with no one about that?

   2   A.  No.

   3   Q.  I gather, Mr. Goldstein, that you have never been involved

   4   personally in reverse engineering?

   5   A.  No, I'm not an engineer.

   6   Q.  And I gather you have never been involved in cryptographic

   7   research?

   8   A.  No, I am not a cryptologist.

   9            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I believe it would be

  10   appropriate to have a sidebar at this point before I get into

  11   another subject.

  12            THE COURT:  Come to the sidebar.

  13

  14            (Continued on next page)

  15            (Pages 839-842 filed under seal)

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



843



   1            (In open court)

   2            MR. GARBUS:  I would ask that this part of the record

   3   be deemed confidential.

   4            THE COURT:  The transcript of the sidebar will be

   5   separately bound and filed under seal.  It will be available

   6   to counsel but not otherwise.

   7            Implicit in that of course is there will be no

   8   discussion by counsel or revelation to anybody about what the

   9   sidebar was all about.

  10            THE COURT:  Anything else, Mr. Gold?

  11            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, I would like to offer pages 58

  12   and 59 of Mr. Goldstein's deposition transcript as an exhibit

  13   in the record at this point.

  14            THE COURT:  You have your objection, Mr. Garbus.  I

  15   take it subject to the objection.  If I don't refer to it in

  16   my decision, you should assume that I sustained the objection.

  17   BY MR. GOLD:

  18   Q.  Mr. Corley, I have noticed that a picture of a telephone

  19   and a telephone booth appears to an appear on the back cover

  20   of every issue of the Hacker Quarterly?

  21   A.  That's correct.  We print foreign pay phone pictures.

  22   Q.  For what purpose?

  23   A.  People seem to be interested in what pay phones in other

  24   countries look like so they send us their photos when they go

  25   on vacation or if they live in that particular country and we



844



   1   compile them together and print four pictures on the back of

   2   every issue.

   3   Q.  And the 2600, that title of your quarterly, is that --

   4   does that relate to a situation occurring with frequency in

   5   the '80s and '90s relating to phone service?

   6   A.  No, actually as I said yesterday, that dates back to the

   7   1960s.  It is something known as in-band signaling where a

   8   particular frequency sent over a long distance telephone line

   9   cause certain conditions to occur.  And committing a 2600

  10   hertz tone would drop a subscriber into what was known as

  11   operator mode where they could route phone calls, route

  12   themselves to internal operator and explore the entire system.

  13   That has not worked for quite a while and it is a symbolic

  14   type of name.

  15   Q.  Going back to the description you just gave us, was it

  16   possible to use what you described to make phone calls without

  17   paying for them?

  18   A.  That's one use, yes, it could have been used in that way

  19   as well.

  20   Q.  Yesterday we were reviewing certain articles or your

  21   counsel was reviewing with you articles that appeared in the

  22   Hacker Quarterly.  I am not going to go through them line by

  23   line at this point.  However, do you recall whether that

  24   warning about -- that goes something like if I remember it, we

  25   don't advocate the breaking of the law so we are not



845



   1   advocating that you perform the acts described above, did that

   2   appear in every column in the last four or five years?

   3   A.  It is something that has recurred.  We don't print it on

   4   every page in every issue.  So for instance, if somebody

   5   writes a letter to the editor and I think you could point to

   6   virtually every expression of this, somebody expresses an

   7   intent to commit a crime, we will without fail advise them not

   8   to do that or try to convince them that's a really bad idea.

   9   Q.  Such descriptive articles about acts which were in fact

  10   illegal did not contain that warning?

  11   A.  The articles are written from the author's perspective.

  12   If the author wrote the article from a different perspective

  13   as ours, there would be no such correction in there.

  14   Q.  By the way, how do we know that those authors weren't you?

  15   A.  Well, I can tell you they weren't me but other than that,

  16   I don't know how I can prove it.

  17   Q.  So --

  18   A.  Without violating --

  19   Q.  So Bull Finch and Crypton and whoever people sign, are you

  20   sure those people aren't you?

  21   A.  I'm very sure, very sure.  For one thing, I don't have the

  22   technical expertise to write many of those articles.  I write

  23   the editorial, I write the responses to the letters and

  24   occasionally news updates.

  25   Q.  Do you recall one such article where there was a



846



   1   description of how one could climb up a tree on his street

   2   where there would be a black box that related to telephone

   3   service in the community --

   4   A.  I believe you made reference to that yesterday.  It is not

   5   really a black box.

   6   Q.  What color is it?

   7   A.  It is different colors, but beige, white, silver.

   8   Q.  Those are the boxes?

   9   A.  Basically that particular story entailed people who could

  10   climb poles or go into basements or closets in buildings and

  11   make phone calls off subscriber lines.

  12   Q.  Do you remember in one paragraph, there was a description

  13   of how you could climb the tree or pole and get to the black

  14   box and whatever color it was and rip it apart so there would

  15   be no telephone service to the community?

  16   A.  I don't recall specifically that paragraph but that could

  17   have been something that the author wrote.

  18   Q.  And you did not write that article?

  19   A.  No, I did not.

  20   Q.  Does that article, if you remember, contain a warning

  21   about don't break the law and don't do the things that are set

  22   forth above?

  23   A.  No, as I said, we warned people through letters and our

  24   editorial policy.  We don't insert our comments into other

  25   people's articles.



847



   1   Q.  I am asking if you remember that that particular article

   2   did not contain such a warning?

   3   A.  I don't remember the particular article but our policy

   4   states we don't insert our editorial policy into articles.

   5            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, I think you made your point.

   6            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, Mr. Goldstein.  Thank you I

   7   have no further questions.

   8            Oh, yes, if I may, there is one area that I haven't

   9   gotten into.  I thank my colleague.

  10   Q.  Mr. Goldstein, is it true that unless you are enjoined,

  11   you intend to keep providing links on 2600.com to other sites

  12   where DeCSS is available, do you not?

  13   A.  It is my understanding that that's legal so until we are

  14   told otherwise, yes.

  15   Q.  The answer is yes?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17            MR. GOLD:  Thank you.

  18            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Gold.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  I have one question.

  20   REDIRECT EXAMINATION

  21   BY MR. GARBUS:

  22   Q.  The judge asked you about linking.  If www.garb.com comes

  23   to you and asks you to link, do you know what material I will

  24   have on my site when you give me permission to link to you?

  25   A.  Well, first of all, I believe you mean permission for us



848



   1   to link to you.

   2   Q.  Yes?

   3   A.  What we had been doing while we were keeping the list

   4   updated was basically going to the site, seeing if the file

   5   names were there, were present, and if so, and this is because

   6   we were getting so many submissions, we would just say yes,

   7   OK, we will post this one.

   8            What we later found out, there were some dummy files

   9   out there.  Some sites had the file names but they weren't

  10   really the files.  They were gibberish or even empty files.

  11   It is simply impossible for us to go out there and verify that

  12   each file is exactly what it says it is.  That's one of the

  13   reasons we stopped doing it, because it was kind of pointless

  14   after a while.

  15   Q.  Turning to the judge's question, do you know if you are

  16   going to link to www.garb.com who allegedly has DeCSS there,

  17   whether it is on the first page, second page, fifth page or

  18   what other information is contained on that site?

  19   A.  I am sorry, could you rephrase that a little?

  20   Q.  Let's, let's assume on your site 2600.com, you had

  21   ww.garb.com as a linking site.  Do you know -- and that

  22   linking site allegedly has something about DeCSS, do you know

  23   whether -- it has comments on DeCSS, do you know whether it

  24   has the actual mirror and do you know where that appears on

  25   the first page, the fifth page of the site?



849



   1            MR. GOLD:  Objection, your Honor.

   2            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   3   A.  We would know when we initially verified the existence of

   4   the site if it was on the fifth page or first page or wherever

   5   but we wouldn't retain that knowledge and that could change,

   6   too.  A person could take down DeCSS the day after we link to

   7   them and until somebody told us that, we wouldn't know to take

   8   it off the list.  As I mentioned over the past few months, we

   9   haven't maintained it at all.

  10   Q.  Do you know how many clicks it takes once you get to that

  11   site to get to the actual mirror of DeCSS?

  12   A.  It differs with every site.  Some may have a diatribe of

  13   have a various political ideology that they want you to read

  14   before you get to the particular mirror of the file where you

  15   click on it.  Some might have nothing but the file name when

  16   you get to their site that you click on.  So it varies with

  17   every site.  We have no way of controlling that.

  18            THE COURT:  Ever heard of the term "deep linking"?

  19            THE WITNESS:  I have heard the term.  I am a little

  20   confused by it because I know of one type of linking.  I might

  21   have an idea of what that is.  I think it involves going into

  22   a site beyond the main page, I think Ticket Master was doing

  23   something like that or somebody was doing something like that

  24   to Ticket Master.

  25            THE COURT:  Now, your web site has a home page,



850



   1   right?

   2            THE WITNESS:  Correct.

   3            THE COURT:  That's the page you get if you enter the

   4   universal resource locator www.2600.com into your browser,

   5   true?

   6            THE WITNESS:  That is right.

   7            THE COURT:  You have other pages that are, so to

   8   speak, behind the home page, right?

   9            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

  10            THE COURT:  Every one of those other pages has its

  11   own universal resource locator or URL, correct?

  12            THE WITNESS:  That's correct, yes.

  13            THE COURT:  So someone who wished to link to your

  14   site and not to your home page but rather to some specific

  15   page beyond your home page could enter in his own web page a

  16   hyperlink not to your home page, but rather to the page behind

  17   your home page in which the person was interested in linking,

  18   right?

  19            THE WITNESS:  That's true, yes.

  20            THE COURT:  So if, for example, let's just make an

  21   assumption, the New York Times, which is www.NYTimes.com, has

  22   a web site, the home page has the URL that I just indicated,

  23   right?

  24            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

  25            THE COURT:  And let's just suppose that as somebody



851



   1   suggested somewhere in the bowels of the New York Times web

   2   site is the DeCSS code, all right?  Are you with me?

   3            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

   4            THE COURT:  That code would appear on a page or out

   5   there in hyperspace with its own unique URL, true?

   6            THE WITNESS:  Correct.

   7            THE COURT:  Now, if the New York Times wanted you to

   8   carry a link to its mirror, you might link to that mirror in

   9   more than one way, isn't that true?

  10            THE WITNESS:  There are several ways you can do it,

  11   yes.

  12            THE COURT:  You could link by inserting the hyperlink

  13   to www.NYTimes.com and then leave the user to navigate through

  14   the New York Times web site, true?

  15            THE WITNESS:  Correct.

  16            THE COURT:  Or you could link by inserting the

  17   appropriate URL to the specific page on the New York Times web

  18   site that had the DeCSS code, am I correct?

  19            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

  20            THE COURT:  And it was your practice to verify the

  21   existence of proposed mirrors before you linked to them, when

  22   you put them on your mirror list, right?

  23            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.

  24            THE COURT:  So the means of knowing whether the link

  25   that you posted on your mirror list took someone who clicked



852



   1   on that hyperlink to a page containing a whole bunch of

   2   content, some of it relating to DeCSS and others relating to

   3   God only knows what, as compared to taking you directly to the

   4   source code for DeCSS was in your hands, true?

   5            THE WITNESS:  If we had spent more time on it, we

   6   could have refined it so it took you directly to the actual

   7   files, yes.

   8            THE COURT:  Or not?

   9            THE WITNESS:  Yes.  What we did was we took what they

  10   gave us and looked at that and said does this go to DeCSS,

  11   either on the first page, second page or whatever and if it

  12   did, we just put it in the way they gave it to us.

  13            THE COURT:  OK.  Anybody want any further

  14   examination?

  15            MR. GARBUS:  One thing.

  16            If the court were to issue a declaratory judgment

  17   saying that the posting of DeCSS were illegal or

  18   inappropriate, would you stop posting the linking?

  19            THE WITNESS:  Yes, of course.

  20            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold?

  21   RECROSS-EXAMINATION

  22   BY MR. GOLD:

  23   Q.  One question, do you know what a declaratory judgment is?

  24   A.  I am sorry.

  25   Q.  Do you know what a declaratory judgment is?



853



   1   A.  It is similar to an injunction, preliminary injunction.

   2            MR. GOLD:  Thank you.

   3            THE COURT:  OK, anything else?  Mr. Corley, you are

   4   excused.  Thank you.

   5            (Witness excused)

   6            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, can I approach the bench for

   7   a moment.

   8            THE COURT:  OK, you and Mr. Cooper or Mr. Sims,

   9   whoever wants to come.

  10            (At the sidebar)

  11            MR. GARBUS:  I think the Summer v. Tyce issue that

  12   you raised is an issue that we have been conscious of since

  13   the beginning and just to use the analogy, if one of the

  14   bullets is defective --

  15            THE COURT:  I don't want to hear argument about it

  16   now.

  17            MR. GARBUS:  I don't want to also, but I just want to

  18   go into the question and relate it and I don't want to get

  19   contumacious, the whole question of discovery and the question

  20   of robustness is directly related to that issue and it has

  21   always been our argument, which we have not had a chance to

  22   document through discovery, there is the Merden report, the

  23   Macrovision report which indicated that DeCSS was not a bullet

  24   in the same way that the other utilities were bullets and it

  25   has been, that's been our position from the beginning.



854



   1            THE COURT:  I am glad to hear that, Mr. Garbus,

   2   because this is the very first time you have said it.

   3            MR. GARBUS:  That robustness was an issue and the

   4   efficacy of DeCSS --

   5            THE COURT:  You just told me the Summer v. Tyce issue

   6   has been in your mind from the beginning and the first person

   7   to raise it in this case is me on the 5th day of trial.  You

   8   are trying to make a record for another purpose.  If you want

   9   to make a motion at an appropriate point for whatever relief

  10   you think is appropriate, you make that motion, but we are

  11   going to hear evidence right now.

  12            (In open court)

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt, your next witness?

  14            MR. HERNSTADT:  Very briefly, before you go to the

  15   next witness, yesterday we sent a letter in asking the Court's

  16   permission to use a computer to do a demonstration.  We

  17   thought it was for next week but we have managed to bring the

  18   witnesses in for today, so we have another letter asking

  19   permission to do it this afternoon.

  20            THE COURT:  Tell me what it is about.  Tell me what

  21   the demonstration is supposed to be about, Mr. Hernstadt.

  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  This afternoon we would like to do a

  23   demonstration of the LiVid Linux DVD player.  The software is

  24   still in an alpha -- in other words, even before it is

  25   released for general testing, but it is functioning software



855



   1   so we would like to show you how it works.

   2            THE COURT:  All right, I have signed the letter.  I

   3   didn't see the letter you sent yesterday.

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  The other possible demonstration is

   5   similar to the one Dr. Shamos did.

   6            THE COURT:  Mr. Cooper?

   7            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, we have had no notice of

   8   either of these demonstrations to my knowledge.  It is

   9   difficult for me to understand the relevancy of the first

  10   described demonstration to any of the issues in this lawsuit

  11   and we would like an opportunity to get more detail from

  12   opposing counsel regarding what the demonstrations are.

  13            THE COURT:  How long is it going to take, Mr.

  14   Hernstadt?

  15            MR. HERNSTADT:  The demonstration?

  16            THE COURT:  Yes.

  17            MR. HERNSTADT:  A few minutes.

  18            THE COURT:  Relax, Mr. Cooper.

  19            Next witness?

  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  The defendants call Larry Peterson.

  21

  22    LARRY PETERSON,

  23        called as a witness by the defendant,

  24        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

  25   DIRECT EXAMINATION



856



   1   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

   2   Q.  Good morning, Professor Peterson.  Can you tell us about

   3   your educational background please?

   4   A.  I have a Ph.D. in computer science from Purdue University.

   5   Q.  What year did you graduate?

   6   A.  1985.

   7   Q.  What was the subject of your dissertation?

   8   A.  It had to do with several issues relating to computer

   9   networks and focused primarily on e-mail and use of e-mail.

  10   Q.  After you received your degree, where were you employed?

  11   A.  I then took an assistant professorship position at

  12   University of Arizona.  I was there for 13 years, last two of

  13   which I was department head.

  14   Q.  Of which department?

  15   A.  The computer science department.

  16   Q.  For the last couple of years, where have you been?

  17   A.  Princeton University.

  18   Q.  What courses do you teach at Princeton?

  19   A.  At Princeton, I have been teaching the computer networks

  20   class and introductory programming class.

  21   Q.  What is involved in the computer networks class?

  22   A.  Primarily I walk students through the motivation behind

  23   the Internet, the problems that cropped up over a number of

  24   years as the Internet evolved, and how researchers had solved

  25   them to evolve the Internet to where it is today.



857



   1   Q.  How long have you been studying the Internet?

   2   A.  Since I was a graduate student in 1980.

   3   Q.  How long has the Internet been around?

   4   A.  For a few more years than that.  In 1980 is when it took

   5   on the form that we are familiar with today roughly.  Before

   6   that, it was a packet switch network called the Arpanet.

   7   Because of the advent of ethernet and wanting to bring more

   8   networks into the fold, the Internet technology was deployed

   9   in the very early '80s.

  10   Q.  And what are your research subjects?

  11   A.  My is research crosses between networks and operating

  12   systems.  Both of them are broadly the study of computer

  13   systems.  We build systems, we measure them, and evaluate how

  14   they work, so it primarily has been focusing on how we can

  15   build operating systems so that networks can be more effective

  16   for users.  We take a very, what we call, end-to-end

  17   perspective so we are concerned not just with one particular

  18   thing and how fast you can transmit over it or even the fact

  19   that the links are catenated together to form the network or

  20   that there is a computer attached to either end and

  21   application programming or processes right on those computers,

  22   so we have been focused on how to get data from an application

  23   on this side of the network to an application on the other

  24   side of the network.

  25   Q.  Have you ever researched a high speed connections from a



858



   1   network to a computer?

   2   A.  Back during the early '90s, we were a part of what was

   3   called the gigabit test, it was a national initiative to push

   4   the edges of gigabit network technology and at that time, what

   5   we in particular were doing was trying to move bits between a

   6   processor on one computer to a processor on another computer

   7   at the same speeds that the link connecting those two

   8   computers operated which at the time was 622 megabits a

   9   second, technology called OC12, and we were in fact able to

  10   move the data from one machine to another at that speed.

  11   There are a number of obstacles we had to overcome to do that.

  12   Q.  Is OC12, could you explain what OC12 is?

  13   A.  It's stands for Optical Carrier 12.  There is a base unit

  14   of transmission -- let me go back.  There is basically the

  15   technology having to do with fiber optics and there is a base

  16   rate at which people can transmit which is roughly 55 megabits

  17   per second and you keep multiplying that by 2 or 3 or 6 or 12,

  18   so 6 times that base rate gives you 622. something megabits

  19   per second.  It is the way the bandwidth is measured on

  20   optical links.

  21   Q.  Is OC12 used in the Internet today?

  22   A.  Yes, it is.

  23   Q.  Where do you find it?

  24   A.  You would find it in the backbone of the Internet.  So let

  25   me just give you a broad picture of the Internet and I can



859



   1   tell you where different technology applies.

   2            You can characterize the very core of the Internet

   3   which is a set of long hold networks running across the

   4   country from Los Angeles to New York and so on and cities in

   5   between as the backbone of the Internet.  A number of carriers

   6   have provided backbones.  In the original days of the

   7   Internet, they were typically provided by government agencies

   8   so there was the NSF net in the early '90s and eventually

   9   commercial companies replaced that.  So today you go to Sprint

  10   or AT&T and they have a backbone.  The links that make up the

  11   backbone running between Chicago and Houston or whatnot might

  12   be at 622 megabits per second.

  13            Out near the edges of that backbone then, you connect

  14   in various ISPs, Internet Service Providers, so your local

  15   cable company might in one direction provide you a service at

  16   home, but they have to turn around and connect into the

  17   Internet at the high end, they would possibly use a 622

  18   megabit link from their site into SprintNet, for example.

  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, may I approach?

  20            THE COURT:  Yes.

  21   Q.  I have handed you Exhibit BDC.  By way of explanation,

  22   could you tell us what this is?

  23   A.  This is just the layout of Sprint's Internet backbone

  24   network.  I found it on the web a few days ago.  It shows

  25   links connecting various cities.  I know Sprint has a



860



   1   significant presence in Kansas City, for example, so it will

   2   show you the link running from Kansas City to Fort Worth and

   3   collectively this would make up the Sprint backbone.

   4   Q.  Can you explain what the different links are?

   5   A.  This is color coded and it is hard to tell for sure which

   6   are which, but these are the various links technologies being

   7   used in the Sprint backbone, DS3, an older technology, 45

   8   megabits per second.  OC3 is 155; OC12, 622; 0C48, that's 6.4

   9   gigabits per second.

  10            MR. COOPER:  From a foundational standpoint, can we

  11   get some information from the witness about where this

  12   document comes from?

  13            THE COURT:  He said he found it on the Internet a

  14   couple of days ago.

  15            MR. COOPER:  We have not seen it before and I am

  16   looking for some indication about how he went about locating

  17   it and whether this is some area of his expertise or whether

  18   he did some research and pulled it down.

  19            THE COURT:  Is that about the size of it?

  20            THE WITNESS:  Yeah, I went to Sprint.com as a good

  21   guess of where to find Sprint's backbone, some links off

  22   there, I couldn't give you the exact URL, and I found this

  23   page.

  24            THE COURT:  What do you want me to do with it if

  25   anything?



861



   1            MR. COOPER:  I am trying to explore the foundation of

   2   documents of this type so we have an even playing field as far

   3   as cross-examination is concerned, your Honor.

   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we would move this into

   5   evidence insofar as it assists your Honor in understanding

   6   what this --

   7            THE COURT:  Now you are not worried that things that

   8   appear on the Internet that are hearsay.  But there is no

   9   objection so I will receive it.

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.

  11            (Defendant's Exhibit BDC received in evidence)

  12   Q.  Professor Peterson, have you received any honors or awards

  13   in connection with your work?

  14   A.  Several of my papers have been Outstanding Papers at

  15   different conferences, two in particular were Student Paper

  16   awards where I was co-author with one of my students at

  17   SigComm which is premiere conference for the networking

  18   community.

  19   Q.  Are you an editor now of one of the --

  20   A.  I am editor and chief of ECM which is the computer

  21   sciences professional organizations tracking on computer

  22   systems.  That's the premiere journal on computer systems.

  23   Q.  Have you authored any publications?

  24   A.  Several.  I think I counted this morning over 50.

  25   Technical papers.



862



   1            THE COURT:  Do you have a CV?

   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  I was about to ask if I could

   3   approach.

   4            THE COURT:  Yes.

   5   Q.  Professor Peterson, is this your curriculum vitae?

   6   A.  Yes, it is.

   7   Q.  Does this accurately reflect your publications?

   8   A.  Yeah, I believe it does.

   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we offer this into

  10   evidence.

  11            THE COURT:  Received.

  12            (Defendant's Exhibit BBD received in evidence)

  13   Q.  Professor Peterson, what is Internet 2?

  14   A.  Internet 2 is a consortium of 150-odd universities.  In

  15   the old days, the Internet was a play thing of the researchers

  16   at universities, but of course it has become a very commercial

  17   entity today and that has impacted the way research is

  18   conducted.  So primarily research universities have gotten

  19   together to build an another piece, another corner of the

  20   Internet that they can use for research purposes and done in

  21   collaboration with some of the carriers, equipment companies

  22   and the like, Cisco and Nortel, I am not precisely sure who

  23   all the players are, so that they can have high speed

  24   connectivity so their astrophysicists can send huge files to

  25   each other in the national labs.



863



   1   Q.  Will it replace the Internet?

   2   A.  No, it is supplemental purely for the use of education.

   3   In fact, to join the consortium, you have to agree you will

   4   only use the connectivity and bandwidth for research and

   5   teaching purposes.

   6   Q.  Are you being paid for your appearance today?

   7   A.  No, I am not.

   8   Q.  Or for any of the work you have done in connection with

   9   this matter?

  10   A.  No.

  11   Q.  Can you describe how the Internet works by, for example,

  12   if you were to send a file from your office to a colleague's

  13   office, what are the various steps it would take?

  14   A.  As I have already briefly described that there is a

  15   backbone and off the edge -- there are multiple backbones.

  16   Off the edge of those backbones will be individual service

  17   providers.  They may be cable companies, local phone

  18   companies.  There are a variety of people who have gotten in

  19   the business of providing Internet service.  They will then

  20   connect at some number of links into the various backbones

  21   They might connect for one or might connect to more.

  22   Collectively, you can think of that as the majority of the

  23   Internet in terms of its capacity.

  24            What happens at the edges then is that individual

  25   users or consumers will buy some link into one of those



864



   1   service providers.  So maybe it is just they have a 56-kilobit

   2   modem and they dial into the service provider periodically or

   3   maybe they have released a line which is sometimes referred to

   4   as the last mile, last mile link into the Internet.

   5            So now we have the backbone surrounded by service

   6   providers surrounded by the last mile links.  That constitutes

   7   then all the bandwidth that makes up the Internet.  One point

   8   I should make, if you go into the Internet, it is not just

   9   links.  There are nodes, computers, in essence, that connect

  10   those links together sometimes called packet switchers,

  11   sometimes called routers.  So at every one of the connection

  12   points, there is a router of some sort.  Of course at the

  13   edges, individual PCs and laptops and whatnot that the end

  14   user has is connected to that last mile link.

  15   Q.  OK, could you tell us what file transfer speed is?

  16   A.  File transfer speed would be the number of bytes in the

  17   file divided by how long it took to transfer the file.  That

  18   would give you a bit rate or byte rate.

  19   Q.  Are connections to the Internet or pieces of the Internet

  20   rated by how fast you are capable of --

  21   A.  Any one of these links, you can talk about the bandwidth

  22   it could potentially deliver.  Whether or not you get the same

  23   transfer speed as you have individual links depends on a

  24   number of factors.  It certainly depends on the fastest link

  25   between the sender and receiver.  So I couldn't go -- the



865



   1   transfer time couldn't be any faster than the slowest link

   2   between the source and the destination.  There are other

   3   factors that come into play though.

   4   Q.  In practical terms, does one ever get the maximum

   5   theoretical speed of any piece of the Internet?

   6            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, it is ambiguous and lacks

   7   foundation.

   8            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   9   A.  We get it in the line.  We can get conditions set up just

  10   right that we can transfer at the theoretical maximum rate

  11   that the link would provide.  On any given day at any given

  12   time, you might see something approaching that speed, might

  13   see half of it, a tenth of it, it is hard to predict.  It

  14   depends on a number of factors, not the least of which is how

  15   many other people are attempting to use the network at the

  16   same time and so -- I could expand upon that, but there is

  17   clearly going to be a point at which, as I have described it,

  18   we have got millions and millions of end users connecting to

  19   their ISPs, connecting to backbone.  There is some point at

  20   which there is a link that goes from Kansas City to Fort Worth

  21   that is trying to carry all of that traffic and that link

  22   could potentially be a bottleneck, a pinch point in the

  23   network.

  24   Q.  Is that, what you have just described, is that what is

  25   known as congestion?



866



   1   A.  Let me be more precise, congestion is a state where you

   2   have multiple incoming flows of packets attempting to go out

   3   on a shared link and the input rate exceeds the output

   4   capability.  So what happens is the packets get skewed as much

   5   as they can be, but there is a limited amount of memory in any

   6   one of those routers.  As soon as that queue is full, packets

   7   are dropped and they simply are not delivered.  The state at

   8   which you drop packets is the state of congestion.

   9   Q.  What is the impact of the congestion on the rates of

  10   speed?

  11   A.  Because congestion means packets are being dropped and not

  12   being delivered, if you go to the software on the in-points,

  13   they are charged with the responsibility of making sure every

  14   packet gets through exactly as it was presented, so as the

  15   packets are coming out is exactly the same as the packets that

  16   go in.  If you ever detect a packet didn't get through, then

  17   the sending software is responsible for retransmitting that

  18   packet.  But the bottom line, you will not get the same rate

  19   that the theoretical capacity of the links might have

  20   suggested you would.

  21            THE COURT:  When you say they are dropped, does that

  22   mean they are never transmitted or they are delayed?

  23            THE WITNESS:  They are dropped.  They will be delayed

  24   as long as they are queued in any one of the routers, but they

  25   are literally, if I have no room to hold them, I reject the



867



   1   packet as it is coming in.

   2            THE COURT:  The question whether a packet is dropped

   3   or simply delayed depends on the capacity of the router?

   4            THE WITNESS:  That is right.

   5            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

   6   Q.  What are some of the other pinch points that you

   7   mentioned?

   8   A.  Well, the software that I have been talking about is TCP,

   9   transmission control protocol.  It is the key protocol of the

  10   Internet technology.  TCP is a very delicate protocol in that

  11   it has to be tuned just right to get the transfer rates that

  12   the underlying bandwidth might suggest.  So, for example, TCP

  13   will allow some number of packets to be in transit before

  14   getting an acknowledgement which is a packet that says I got

  15   packet 42, before getting an acknowledgement back.

  16            You would not want to be in a situation where I sent

  17   you one packet and waited for you to respond I got it and then

  18   send a second packet and then respond because then I have only

  19   one packet in flight and cross-country legacies being what

  20   they are, you have very low bandwidth, you get very far from

  21   the capability of underlying links.

  22            So what TCP does, it will send multiple packets and

  23   multiple packets in flight, ideally as many as the Internet

  24   capacity can hold.  As I said, it is a simple matter of

  25   tuning.  If your TCP has not been tuned to keep enough packets



868



   1   in flight, you will get far less bandwidth than you might have

   2   expected.

   3   Q.  What are some of the solutions if any for congestion?

   4   A.  Well, there is no solution for congestion aside from

   5   putting in more capacity.  All we can do is program nodes so

   6   they detect when congestion is happening so the sources stop

   7   sending so fast because if they continue to send fast, the

   8   network will eventually collapse, which is get no useful work

   9   done, I am spending all my time sending packets that will

  10   eventually be dropped so nothing gets through.  So the

  11   solution is what TCP does today which is slow down whenever it

  12   detects that congestion is happening on the network.

  13   Q.  Have you ever heard of technology called Napster?

  14   A.  Yes, I have.

  15   Q.  Is Napster or use of Napster clogging the Internet?

  16            MR. COOPER:  Foundation.

  17            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  18   Q.  Are you aware of any impact on the Internet of Napster?

  19   A.  I am not aware of any studies that say Napster is

  20   accounting for "X" percentage of the packets being exchanged.

  21   It has not come up in any circles I have been in where people

  22   point to Napster as detectable in the traffic.

  23   Q.  Are you aware of any other file-sharing technology similar

  24   to Napster?

  25   A.  Gnutella is the only one I can think of.



869



   1   Q.  Are you aware of any impact on the Internet of Gnutella?

   2   A.  No.

   3   Q.  Is there, at Princeton University, is there what is

   4   reported in the press as a Napster problem?  Do you understand

   5   what I mean by that?

   6   A.  Princeton has not taken any action to limit the use of

   7   Napster is all that I know.

   8   Q.  What is the network topology?

   9   A.  Well, roughly speaking it is like this, and I'm not the

  10   Princeton system administrator so I am sure there are details

  11   that I don't know.  Each dorm at Princeton currently has a 10-

  12   megabit shared network for all the students within that dorm

  13   that would then be connected by 100-megabit ethernet into the

  14   central facilities of the university.  So it is one of a --

  15   like a tree, like the central facility, the core, 100 megabits

  16   going down the dorms and various departments as well and in

  17   the dorms, you would have 10 megabits shared.  Within

  18   individual apartments, you have richer connectivity because

  19   there are other things they are trying to do.

  20   Q.  Are you aware of use of Napster in uploading, downloading

  21   MP3 files at Princeton?

  22   A.  Not that I am aware of, no.

  23   Q.  Could the Internet sustain file transfers of a size of 650

  24   megabytes in any kind of significant volume?

  25            MR. COOPER:  Object to the form, and foundation.



870



   1            THE COURT:  Yes, sustained.

   2   Q.  Are you aware of the size of a Napster file?

   3   A.  Napster files are in the neighborhood of 3 or 4 megabytes.

   4   Q.  Are you aware of a general volume of Napster files that

   5   are being transferred over the Internet?

   6   A.  I'm not aware of the volume of transfers, no.

   7   Q.  Could the Internet as it is now configured handle a

   8   significant number of transfers of 650 megabit files?

   9            MR. COOPER:  Object to the form and foundation.

  10            THE COURT:  Sustained as to both.

  11   Q.  Based on your experience and your expertise with

  12   networking the Internet, is it your opinion that the Internet

  13   as it is presently configured could handle thousands of 650

  14   megabyte files transferred?

  15            MR. COOPER:  Same objection.

  16            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  17   Q.  I would like you to assume the following scenario, that

  18   tens of thousands of 650-megabit files are being transferred

  19   each day and could you tell us what your opinion --

  20   A.  A minute ago you asked me if I knew what the volume of

  21   Napster was and I don't know in any detail what the volume of

  22   Napster is.  But I can say, I can make a comparison with 650

  23   megabyte video files and say for whatever fault that volume

  24   is, I can talk about how that would strain the Internet.

  25   Q.  Please do so.



871



   1   A.  It doesn't matter what that volume is.  If you take

   2   Napster to be a problem and 10,000, 100,000 or a million and

   3   you suddenly just translated 3 megabytes into 650 megabytes,

   4   then I could talk about that.

   5            MR. COOPER:  I would still like a foundation if I

   6   could, your Honor.

   7            THE COURT:  I think you need it.

   8            MR. HERNSTADT:  I am asking him to assume -- he

   9   stated he knows the size of a Napster file.  I am asking him

  10   to assume there are tens of thousands --

  11            THE COURT:  Look, this is a little bit along these

  12   lines, you have the Tappan Zee bridge going across the Hudson

  13   River up there, and we don't know how many cars are going

  14   across it, and so far we don't know how many lanes it is and

  15   you are saying if instead of whatever numbers of cars are

  16   going across it, we had a lot more very big trucks, would

  17   there be a problem, and I think you can see that there are

  18   some problems with that question.

  19            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, can we take a five-minute

  20   break?

  21            THE COURT:  Yes.

  22            (Recess)

  23   Q.  Professor Peterson, have you ever heard of DivX?

  24   A.  I heard of DivX, the intake for compression tool, yes.

  25   Q.  Do you know what -- do you understand a part of this



872



   1   lawsuit is about the threat that plaintiff has alleged will be

   2   posed by movies being on DVDs being decrypted by DeCSS

   3   compressed to a 150-megabyte file and then sent on the

   4   Internet?

   5   A.  Yes, I understand that's the basic idea.

   6   Q.  Does that as a new technology and new threat -- in other

   7   words, a year ago, DeCSS has been around since approximately

   8   October of 1999.

   9            THE COURT:  Is there a question?

  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes.

  11   Q.  Let me ask you to assume that as of July 2000, there is

  12   additional traffic on the Internet consisting of these

  13   650-megabyte DivX files of DVD movies?

  14   A.  If people started to transmit 650-megabyte DivX --

  15            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, is there a question?

  16            THE COURT:  There is not yet.

  17            Patience, Mr. Peterson.

  18   Q.  My question to you, Professor Peterson, based on your

  19   experience, do you have an opinion as to what the effect on

  20   the Internet would be posed by a new flow of 650-megabyte

  21   files being added to it?

  22            MR. COOPER:  Objection to the form.  It is an

  23   incomplete hypothetical.

  24            THE COURT:  It sure is.  I am going to hear it sooner

  25   or later, so I may as well hear it now and then I will ask the



873



   1   next question and then we will be past this I think.

   2            Go ahead, answer.

   3   A.  I believe the question being asked is if the transfer of

   4   650-megabyte files in the Internet -- I'm not sure if that's

   5   what he asked -- I am sorry.  I am having a little trouble

   6   knowing exactly what it is I should answer.

   7            THE COURT:  I think I know where Mr. Hernstadt is

   8   going and I will help him get there.

   9            The net has a finite capacity today, right?

  10            THE WITNESS:  Correct.

  11            THE COURT:  It has whatever level of congestion or

  12   lack of congestion that it has, right?

  13            THE WITNESS:  Right.

  14            THE COURT:  If there is a big new load placed on it,

  15   depending on how big the load is and what the current capacity

  16   is, it may or may not put a strain on the capacity of the

  17   system, true?

  18            THE WITNESS:  True.

  19            THE COURT:  When networks such as the Internet in the

  20   past have encountered limitations due to the volume of traffic

  21   pressing their capacity, the tendency has been to expand the

  22   capacity, right?

  23            THE WITNESS:  Right.

  24            THE COURT:  Kind of like the interstate highway

  25   system?



874



   1            THE WITNESS:  That's an accurate analogy.

   2            THE COURT:  All right, let's go, Mr. Hernstadt.

   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.  Actually, I thought you

   4   were doing very well, your Honor.

   5   Q.  Professor Peterson, in such an instance, how much of an

   6   expansion would there have to be?

   7   A.  Well --

   8            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor.

   9            THE COURT:  Obviously the answer is it depends.  How

  10   many messages, what the capacity is, whether there is

  11   overcapacity or undercapacity, unless you have got some

  12   specifics here, you are nowhere, and even if you have the

  13   specifics, you have to address the expansion question.

  14   Q.  If we are talking about the addition of 650-megabyte files

  15   being traded or being sent via the Internet by let's say --

  16   and let us assume for the purposes of this at an additional

  17   rate of 10,000, 10,000 650-megabyte files per day, will that

  18   pose a strain on the Internet?

  19   A.  I can't say whether 10,000 transfers exactly would pose a

  20   strain.  What I can say, if you look at the Internet today as

  21   to what is a common-sized file that's transferred and make the

  22   assumption that the Internet is engineered for what is

  23   happening today, that you see files in the neighborhood of

  24   like the -- like the music example, MP3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

  25   megabytes, that's a typical transfer file size at the high



875



   1   end.  There are certainly smaller transfers, but that is

   2   considered to be a sizable transfer in today's Internet, 650

   3   megabytes is two orders of magnitude or a hundred times larger

   4   than that.

   5            (Continued on next page)

   6

   7

   8

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



876



   1   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

   2   Q.  And based upon your experience, do you have an opinion as

   3   to how long it would take for the backbone of the Internet to

   4   be increased by two orders of magnitude?

   5            MR. COOPER:  No foundation for that question, your

   6   Honor.

   7            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   8   Q.  Professor Peterson, do you have any experience with the

   9   growth of the backbone of the Internet?

  10   A.  Yes, I do.

  11   Q.  Do you know how fast the Internet, the backbone of the

  12   Internet, has developed, how much speed on the Internet has

  13   increased over the last ten year?

  14   A.  Yes, I could walk through that if you'd like.

  15   Q.  Please.

  16            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, I would like to have some

  17   foundation for the information the professor is about to give.

  18            THE COURT:  I'm satisfied.  Overruled.

  19   A.  Sir, there are different ways of measuring exactly what we

  20   are talking about here, but let me give you a couple of

  21   example ways of looking at this.

  22            If you start in 1990, approximately ten years ago,

  23   the Internet backbone at that time run by the National Science

  24   Foundation consisted of 1.5 megabits per second links.  In

  25   1993 that was upgraded to 45 megabit per second links.



877



   1            THE COURT:  What was the second one?

   2            THE WITNESS:  45 megabits.  If you go to 1995, we are

   3   now seeing some new technology introduced, we start to see the

   4   commercial carriers become bigger and bigger players.  A

   5   cutting age network that was a follow onto the Nation Science

   6   Foundation's network was running at 155 megabits per second.

   7   That was the cutting edge technology in 1995 for the long haul

   8   lengths that make up the Internet.

   9            If you keep following that history, and I don't have

  10   an exact date here, but it's in the '98 neighborhood, I don't

  11   know exactly when this particular turnover took place, we

  12   started to go see the OC12 that we were talking about a little

  13   earlier in the backbone, 622 megabits per second.

  14            Today you can find OC48 links, they are at 2.4

  15   gigabits.  So if you look at the peak technology available

  16   over a ten year period, you will see that it's increased two

  17   orders of magnitude over that ten year period, if I've got my

  18   numbers right.

  19            If you focus just on the last five years, which I

  20   think is probably a little bit more appropriate because that's

  21   the technology that's carrying us today, OC3, OC12, OC48,

  22   we've gone from bandwidths measured in the hundreds of

  23   megabits per second to gigabits per second.  That's one order

  24   of magnitude improvement in the backbone's capacity in a five

  25   year period.  It could be a little bit more precise, but for



878



   1   now I'll stay with orders of magnitude.

   2            We are looking at if you take the assumption that you

   3   need to improve the capacity of Internet by two orders of

   4   magnitude, so that 650 megabyte file transfers, because as

   5   common place as today, 3 megabyte or 4 or 5 megabyte

   6   transfers, that's going to take two orders of magnitude

   7   improvement in capacity.  As I just said, it was a five year

   8   period to see the last order of magnitude improvement.

   9   Q.  Could you define what is an order of magnitude?

  10   A.  Factor of ten.  Two orders of magnitude is a factor of

  11   100.

  12   Q.  What is the connection between the increased capacity of

  13   the backbone and the increased connection speed for the

  14   average consumer, connection to the home?

  15            MR. COOPER:  Can we have a foundation, your Honor?

  16            THE COURT:  I don't even understand the question.

  17   Try again.

  18   Q.  Professor Peterson, is there a connection between how fast

  19   a connection is available to the home and how much capacity is

  20   available on the backbone?

  21   A.  Yes, because more consumers in the home start sending in

  22   and receiving data, that data is traveling over the shared

  23   capacity of the backbone, the backbone capacity has to keep

  24   pace as you add more users or you add larger files that those

  25   users are transferring.



879



   1   Q.  Professor Peterson, in your opinion, what would be the

   2   effect on the effective transfer schemes of files if the

   3   average file size being transferred increased but the Internet

   4   backbone did not?

   5            MR. COOPER:  I object to the form of the question,

   6   because it's an incomplete hypothetical, and I think it still

   7   lacks foundation.  I think it's the same question.

   8            THE COURT:  Look, I am going to take it, but let me

   9   say this:  Obviously I have a lot of respect for Professor

  10   Peterson's expertise, but this just has so many limitations

  11   that it's close to being of no value, because there are so

  12   many factors here that you are not controlling for and so many

  13   things that we don't know about, that it's just not of much

  14   help.  But go ahead.

  15   Q.  Professor Peterson, what are the factors that determine

  16   the transfer rate that a home user would obtain when sending a

  17   file from his or her home to somebody else?

  18   A.  The factors that would come into play would be the

  19   capacity of the links between the sender and receiver, and we

  20   have already been talking about the backbone, but it might

  21   most likely be limited by those two edge links which would be

  22   the uplink speed of the sender and the download speed of the

  23   receiver, because these links are typically not symmetric into

  24   the home.  And while I may be the only one using my end link,

  25   the links that are in the middle of the network are being



880



   1   shared with thousands and millions of other users, and so

   2   congestion is going to happen on those links, and of course it

   3   depends on the level of congestion exactly what transfer fee

   4   I'm going to get.

   5   Q.  Is the Internet capacity today sufficient so that

   6   congestion is only an occasional problem in terms of slowing

   7   transfer rate down?

   8   A.  Congestion happens all the time on the Internet today.

   9   Q.  If everything else remained the same but the size of the

  10   average file being sent increased, is it predictable what the

  11   impact would be on the transfer speeds?

  12            MR. COOPER:  Same objections, your Honor.

  13            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  14   A.  There would be increased congestion.  I would expect there

  15   to be increased congestion.

  16   Q.  And what is the connection between increased congestion

  17   and transfer speeds?

  18   A.  Congestion is probably the predominant factor after the

  19   actual link speed that affect the transfer rate.

  20   Q.  And to get a sense of what two orders of magnitude means,

  21   could you compare that to an increase, for example, in

  22   microprocessor speed of two orders of magnitude?

  23   A.  Just as an example a lot of people today would consider

  24   having a 500 megahertz PC as being pretty good.  Two orders of

  25   magnitude back in time, that was 5 megahertz, which has been



881



   1   quite a while ago in a lot of people's memory.

   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Professor

   3   Peterson.

   4            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Mr. Cooper.

   5   CROSS-EXAMINATION

   6   BY MR. COOPER:

   7   Q.  Good morning, professor.

   8   A.  Good morning.

   9   Q.  I believe you testified regarding some information

  10   regarding the Internet backbone and made reference to OC12.

  11   Those are routers, is that correct?

  12   A.  OC12 is a link speed.

  13   Q.  Okay.  And the speed is 622.08 megabytes, is that correct?

  14   A.  I forget if the .08 is correct, but it's 622. Something

  15   megabits per second.

  16   Q.  And the speed at which the switchers and transfers are

  17   I'll to operate now have increased significantly from the

  18   OC12, have they not?

  19   A.  Today there are OC48 links in the backbone.

  20   Q.  Are there not OC96?

  21   A.  There are probably some OC96.  I'm not aware specifically

  22   but that's possible.

  23   Q.  Are there not OC92 that have an effective rate of 9.93

  24   megabytes current any use?

  25   A.  I'm not aware of their use in the Internet backbone.



882



   1   Q.  Are you aware of their use in connection with work being

   2   done at the high speed connectivity consortium?

   3   A.  I'm not specifically aware of that consortium.

   4   Q.  Have you not heard of the consortium, a consortium that

   5   involves the Carnegie Mellon University, Cisco Systems Inc.,

   6   the Corporation for National Research Initiatives among

   7   others?

   8   A.  There are lots of consortiums like that.  I'm not familiar

   9   with that particular one.

  10   Q.  Your writing partner in your book is Mr. David, is that

  11   correct?

  12   A.  Um-hum.

  13   Q.  He is a fellow with Cisco Systems, is he not?

  14   A.  That's correct.

  15   Q.  The only experiment you conducted in connection with your

  16   testimony today, as I understand it, was to check the

  17   effective download speed of your home DSL, is that correct?

  18   A.  That's correct.

  19   Q.  And the effective download speed that you experienced was

  20   2 meg, correct?

  21   A.  2 megabits per second, yes.

  22            MR. COOPER:  I have no further questions, your Honor.

  23            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt.

  24   REDIRECT EXAMINATION

  25   BY MR. HERNSTADT:



883



   1   Q.  One question.  Professor Peterson, what is your Internet

   2   connection from your home?

   3   A.  It's a DSL.

   4   Q.  Where does it go?

   5   A.  It goes directly into the department, so I have a leased

   6   line directly into the department, so the department is in

   7   essence my ISP.

   8   Q.  What is the connection of your department?

   9   A.  The department into the Internet?

  10   Q.  Yes.

  11   A.  We are connected by 100 megabit into the campus.  The

  12   campus is then connected to the Internet at I believe 50

  13   megabits per second.

  14            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much.

  15            THE COURT:  Professor Peterson.  Thank you very much.

  16            MR. ATLAS:  We are going to be calling Professor

  17   Peter Ramadage.  I wonder if we could have a short break so he

  18   can set up a laptop computer.

  19            THE COURT:  Sure.  We will take 15 minutes.

  20            (Recess)

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Atlas.

  22            MR. ATLAS:  Good morning, your Honor.  Defense calls

  23   professor Peter Ramadage.

  24    PETER RAMADAGE,

  25        called as a witness by the Defendants,



884



   1        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

   2            DEPUTY COURT CLERK:  State your name, spelling your

   3   last name.

   4            THE WITNESS:  Peter Ramadage, R-A-M-A-D-G-E.

   5            THE COURT:  Proceed, Mr. Atlas, please.

   6   DIRECT EXAMINATION

   7   BY MR. ATLAS:

   8   Q.  Professor Ramadage, where are you presently employed?

   9   A.  Princeton University.

  10   Q.  What do you do at Princeton?

  11   A.  A professor in the department of electrical engineering at

  12   Princeton University, so I am engaged in teaching both

  13   graduate and undergraduate students, and also research.

  14   Q.  Do you teach in any specialized area?

  15   A.  Yes, I do teaching and research in the area of digital

  16   video libraries, digital signal processing for video, search

  17   techniques for digital video, video compression and

  18   transcoding of digital video.

  19   Q.  Could you briefly go through each one of those areas in

  20   which you teach and just describe them for the Court, please.

  21   A.  My primary focus at the moment is in digital video

  22   libraries.  With the ever increasing amount of digital video

  23   that's available, it becomes important to have an indexing,

  24   search and browsing mechanism for retrieving video content

  25   once it has been archived.  We are developing tools which will



885



   1   go into producing systems to achieve that goal.  This is a

   2   relatively new area, so we are only at the very beginning of

   3   the research.  We are developing very elementary building

   4   blocks for different types of searches, different types of

   5   browsing mechanisms to aid in the formation of digital

   6   libraries.

   7   Q.  Could you describe the area of signal processing for us,

   8   please.

   9   A.  Okay.  Signal processing generally is the area in which

  10   you input a given signal, let's suppose it's a video signal,

  11   for example, and then you pass those bits that you are waiting

  12   through an algorithm, whose purpose is to come up with either

  13   a different version of what has been input or to answer some

  14   question that the user has input based on the video content

  15   that you are searching or inputting into the algorithm.

  16   Q.  I think you also mentioned compression technology.

  17   A.  Yes.

  18   Q.  What do you do in compression technology?

  19   A.  Let's restrict our attention to video files.  Because

  20   video is a very, very intensive signal to convert to digital

  21   format, it requires very many bits to convert adequately into

  22   the right format.  It results in a very large file.  Now to

  23   store those files in an efficient way, or to transmit them to

  24   another person in an efficient way one normally uses a

  25   compression technology.  That compression technology comes in



886



   1   two forms.  It's a form called loss less compression, and in

   2   loss less compression the file is transformed into a format

   3   which is smaller and requires less space but which can be

   4   decompressed and you get back the original content completely

   5   without any change.  So it's called loss less, because no

   6   information was lost.

   7            Another type of compression technology is lossy

   8   compression, and lossy compression you are willing to trade

   9   off accuracy of the decompressed files, so the decompressed

  10   file would be an approximation to the original, but you will

  11   benefit by being able to get much, much greater compression.

  12   That's typically used for consumer video, video on the

  13   Internet, for example, video phones, wireless multimedia, they

  14   all use lossy compression.

  15   Q.  Are you familiar with any other types of compression

  16   technology?

  17   A.  Those are the main two.  There is also a general purpose

  18   compression technology used on computer files.  Typically it's

  19   under the name of zip files or LZW double compression

  20   techniques.  That's a loss less compression technology.

  21   Q.  You also mentioned transcoding.  If you could briefly

  22   describe that for us.

  23   A.  Okay.  There are various applications when after a video

  24   has been produced and it has been stored in a compressed

  25   format that one needs to actually compress it further or to



887



   1   transform it inn some other way to a different format.

   2            To give you an example, if I have a video stored and

   3   I wanted to transmit it to someone over a wireless

   4   communication channel, there simply may not be enough

   5   bandwidth on the wireless communication channel to transmit

   6   the video in a reasonable amount of time in its current

   7   format, so you would take that current format and you would

   8   transcode it or basically you would take an existing

   9   compressed file, process it, and to achieve greater

  10   compression or change other attributes of the video such as

  11   the frame rate or the frame size to make it better suited to

  12   transmit over the wireless communication channel.  That would

  13   be one application of transcoding.

  14   Q.  How long have you taught at Princeton?

  15   A.  16 years.

  16   Q.  What degrees do you hold and from what schools?

  17   A.  I have two undergraduate degrees, one in physics, one in

  18   electrical engineering from the University of New Castle in

  19   Australia.  I have a masters degree in electrical engineer

  20   from the University of New Castle.  I have a Ph.D. from the

  21   University of Toronto in Canada.

  22   Q.  Have you received any professional honors?

  23   A.  Yes.  I have been awarded a complication medal from my

  24   undergraduate institution.  I have been awarded a best paper

  25   award by the IEEE.  I have been awarded several teaching



888



   1   awards both from inside Princeton University and agencies

   2   outside Princeton University; NSF research initiation grants;

   3   IBM young investigator awards, I think.

   4   Q.  What is the IEEE?

   5   A.  The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.

   6   Q.  Have you received any teaching awards separate and award

   7   from what you described?

   8   A.  Those are the main ones.

   9   Q.  Have you been published?

  10   A.  Yes, I have published over 80 referee journals and

  11   conference articles.

  12            MR. ATLAS:  I am going to show the witness what we

  13   have marked as Defendants' Exhibit BDE.  It's a copy.  I will

  14   let the witness describe what it is.

  15            THE COURT:  Any objection?

  16            MR. MERVIS:  No objection, your Honor.

  17            THE COURT:  Your name is?

  18            MR. MERVIS:  Michael Mervis.

  19            THE COURT:  BDE is received.

  20            (Defendants' Exhibit BDE received in evidence)

  21   Q.  Can you tell us what BDE is?

  22   A.  This is my curriculum vitae.  I would say it's the latest

  23   one that I just produced about two or three weeks ago.

  24   Q.  Does this reflect your published articles and conference

  25   papers?



889



   1   A.  Yes.  Yes, it's got the most recent articles we will be

   2   presenting this September at the IEEE conference on image

   3   conferencing.  Those have been added.

   4   Q.  Have you ever testified before as an expert?

   5   A.  Not in court, no.  I have been employed as an expert

   6   witness on other court cases, but I haven't actually

   7   testified.

   8   Q.  Have you been deposed before as an expert?

   9   A.  Yes, I have.

  10   Q.  In which case?

  11   A.  There is a case I. Omega v. Cyquest concerning the patent

  12   infringement on removable media disk drives.

  13   Q.  Were you being compensated for your time in that case?

  14   A.  Yes, I was.  I was being paid an hourly rate of -- it

  15   started at $200 an hour and it went up to $250 an hour by the

  16   end of the case.

  17   Q.  Are you being compensated for your time in this case?

  18   A.  No, I am not.

  19   Q.  Do I take that to understand that you are offering your

  20   service as an expert for no compensation?

  21   A.  That's correct.  I believed it is important to present my

  22   point of view and perhaps the point of view of other

  23   researchers in this area, that it's important for academics

  24   and researchers in industry to have fair access use of digital

  25   content in my own area of research.  That happens to be



890



   1   digital video.  And I think it's very important for

   2   researchers in digital video today to have access to the

   3   digital video that's in the marketplace for fair use, use in

   4   research.  And down the road when this technology is mature I

   5   think it would be important for other researchers in

   6   disciplines not necessarily related to technology also to have

   7   access to this digital information.

   8   Q.  Can you describe in a little bit more detail the specific

   9   areas of research you are currently engaged in now at

  10   Princeton?

  11   A.  Okay.  Sir, we have I think several projects running

  12   currently.  One project has to do with searching video by

  13   example, so we have stored in a data base a large amount of

  14   video.  This is a hypothetical example.  What we would like to

  15   do is someone comes in and says I would like to see what

  16   you've got in your data base, clips that look like this

  17   example, and they bring with them an example of what they

  18   would like to see, what they would like to retrieve from the

  19   data base, and we have been working on algorithms for quickly

  20   searching through the data base to try and match the example

  21   of what is in the data base and pull those thing out of the

  22   data base.

  23            Now because the video in the data base is stored in

  24   compressed form to save space, it is important that these

  25   algorithms actually operate on the compressed video.  So we



891



   1   have been developing algorithms that do that.  That's one

   2   project.

   3            Another project has to do with multicamera video. We

   4   have video from two cameras taking a video of a scene

   5   simultaneously, and we are creating a synthetic video as seen

   6   from a virtual camera on the baseline between the two real

   7   cameras.  That might have application in replays of sporting

   8   events, it might have application in surveillance.  The Navy

   9   is very interested in this because they are putting cameras on

  10   the decks of aircraft carriers, so we will also be talking to

  11   the Navy about these possible applications.

  12            Another project is using the information which is

  13   embedded in the compressed video to quickly search through

  14   that based on camera motion, try to estimate how the camera

  15   was moving by using the information embedded in the compressed

  16   video.  And once you extracted what the camera was doing, that

  17   can often help you say what is happening in the video.

  18            To give you a specific example, in a basketball game

  19   the camera often follows the ball very closely, so by

  20   determining the camera motion you can quite easily pick out

  21   things like fast breaks, jump shots, lay-ups and things like

  22   this.

  23   Q.  Any other areas of research you are currently engaged in?

  24   A.  We also are developing some novel compression algorithms.

  25   Based on some other work we think we might have some ideas



892



   1   that will lead to novel compression algorithms.  These are not

   2   general purpose algorithms.  These are rather specialized

   3   compression algorithms that might be applicable in computer

   4   graphics, compressing computer graphics or compressing video

   5   game video.

   6   Q.  What is the general purpose of your research in this area?

   7   A.  We are working towards providing tools for the browsing,

   8   manipulation and searching and indexing of digital video.

   9   That's our general objective.  This is a very new discipline,

  10   so we are not working on everything right now.  We are working

  11   taking the very first steps and working on the very elementary

  12   building blocks that would go into building such a system.

  13   Q.  When you say this is a new discipline, you are referring

  14   specifically to your research or the general research in this

  15   area?

  16   A.  The general research in this area is relatively new,

  17   really has come to the forefront in the past five years.

  18   Q.  Do you have any expectation of how this research will

  19   develop in the future?

  20   A.  The expectation is that after maybe in ten years time,

  21   after we have all the elementary pieces worked out, people

  22   will start to put these together into commercial systems or

  23   even public domain systems, and then people from the

  24   humanities, people from the social sciences, as well as people

  25   from technology and the sciences will be able to use these



893



   1   tools as part of their research.  It will become a research

   2   tool for people outside of the immediate technological area

   3   where they were developed.

   4   Q.  Now in your research, and specifically in the development

   5   of the algorithms you testified about, do you use digital

   6   content?

   7   A.  Almost exclusively everything is based on digital content.

   8   Q.  How do you use the digital content?

   9   A.  One of the advantages of having digital video is that you

  10   can search through it in a very quick way.  Digital video

  11   enables many things which are not possible with analog video.

  12   You can search through the video, you can jump into it in a

  13   random access type of way rather than sequentially have to

  14   start from the beginning.  You can store it very conveniently,

  15   and you can create data bases and libraries of it very

  16   conveniently.  The idea is you can create a library of video

  17   content, both video, sound as well as text.

  18   Q.  What are the sources of digital video content that you use

  19   in your research?

  20   A.  We have a variety of sources, and I also should tell you

  21   that at different stages of the research we use different

  22   types of video, so we have our own camera, it's a digital

  23   camera and it stores its video on a high quality digital tape.

  24   From there we can transcode it into different formats,

  25   whatever format we find most convenient.  We find MPEG1 the



894



   1   most convenient to work with, so we often transcode into MPEG

   2   1 format.

   3   Q.  Explain what MPEG1 is.

   4   A.  MPEG 1 -- there are various standard compression

   5   technologies.  One of the very first is called MPEG1.  MPEG

   6   stands for Motion Picture Expert Group.  It was a consortium

   7   of people interested, industries interested in digital video,

   8   as well as representatives of the standards organizations, and

   9   they produced over a period of three to four years an ISO

  10   standard called MPEG1.

  11            We also download pieces of video that other

  12   researchers have, and they make small clips of video available

  13   on their web pages, either displaying the result of their

  14   algorithms, or often in conjunction with that they will put up

  15   the original video, unprocessed video, to allow other people

  16   to try to replicated their results on videos.  Those are very

  17   short videos, less than ten seconds.

  18            Occasionally my students are able to download some

  19   digital video from the web that a movie studio has put up as a

  20   publicity piece for a movie or something like this.  So we

  21   also have something like that.

  22            In addition, on two occasions we have been able to

  23   negotiate through an industrial partner permission to use an

  24   extensive piece of video, copyrighted video from the content

  25   producer.  That is subject to much more restricted use.



895



   1   Q.  Those are the four primary sources of digital content you

   2   have available to you now?

   3   A.  There is another source, and that is we can take analog

   4   tapes and convert them into digital form.  Several years ago

   5   that was how we relied for getting digital video, but it

   6   wasn't totally satisfactory.  It's subject to the noise of the

   7   analog recording process, then the noise of the analog

   8   playback process, and then the peculiarity of the particular

   9   digitizer that you use and compression hardware that you use

  10   to actually do the digitization and compression.  So we prefer

  11   not to have to rely on that too much.

  12            As I said, algorithms rely on processing the

  13   compressed domain video, and we don't want to get tied to a

  14   particular compressor, a particular piece of hardware that

  15   does the compression, because then maybe our algorithms will

  16   only work with that particular piece of hardware, so it's

  17   important for us not to get too dependent on that mechanism.

  18   Q.  In terms of the variety of digital content that you have

  19   just gone through, the five categories, do you find the

  20   variety available in those categories best suits the type of

  21   work you're doing?

  22   A.  There are problems with each of those video sources that I

  23   have mentioned.  Let me elaborate on that a little bit.

  24            First we have our own camera, but it's quite a steep

  25   learning curve to learn how to use the digital camera, so our



896



   1   graduate students spend some time learning it if they need to

   2   produce video, but the resultant video is not particularly

   3   high quality.  They are not professional cameramen, and they

   4   are faced with various hurdles that they have to come up with,

   5   and they are quite innovative in trying to overcome those

   6   hurdles, but the resulting video is not commercial quality

   7   video.  For example, we can't hold the camera very steady.

   8   It's a hand-held camera.  We can't take multicamera video.  We

   9   only have one camera.  And we can't control the lighting very

  10   well.

  11            The video that we download from the web from other

  12   researchers is typically very, very short and sometimes has a

  13   lower frame rate than we would like to work with, and

  14   sometimes a very small frame size, small number of pixels in

  15   it.

  16            Video that we digitize from analog tape I think I

  17   said already there is a couple of problems with that.  I won't

  18   go over those again.

  19            By far the best quality digital video that we can

  20   obtain is from DVDs.

  21   Q.  Have you heard of DeCSS?

  22   A.  Yes, I have.

  23   Q.  Have you used DeCSS?

  24   A.  Yes, I have.  I have used it.  I went to the --

  25   Q.  Wait.  What do you understand DeCSS to be?



897



   1   A.  It's a program which will read the contents, the table of

   2   contents of a DVD disk, and then you can ask it to descramble

   3   the scrambled VOB files, the video object files on that disk,

   4   and store them to your hard drive.

   5   Q.  You testified a moment ago that you used DeCSS.  How did

   6   you obtain DeCSS?

   7   A.  I went to a search engine, Google.com and I just typed in

   8   DeCSS and did a search.  It came up with about over 7,000

   9   hits, so I did a bit of a search through those hits until I

  10   found a site that had the software, and I downloaded the

  11   source and executable program.

  12   Q.  Do you recall the site you downloaded it from?

  13   A.  No, because it involved a search through all of the

  14   various hits I don't actually remember the site I eventually

  15   found it on.  Sometimes when you go to these sites you don't

  16   actually end up on the front page of the site, you end up on

  17   some lower page that has the feel you want, but it's not

  18   immediately clear what site this is ultimately connected to.

  19   Q.  Do you know whether it's 2600.com?

  20   A.  I don't believe it was 2600.com, no.

  21   Q.  What form was DeCSS in when you downloaded it?

  22   A.  It was a zip file which is a loss less compression, that's

  23   a general type of loss less compression used to compress

  24   general computer files.  When I decompressed that, I believe

  25   it gave me the source, the executable and maybe another



898



   1   document, I can't remember, a "read me" file or something like

   2   that.

   3   Q.  Do you have an opinion on whether DeCSS would be useful to

   4   you in your area of research?

   5            MR. MERVIS:  Objection, your Honor.  There is no

   6   foundation.

   7            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   8   A.  My initial experiments have indicated that's by far the

   9   best source of high quality digital video available to us

  10   today.

  11   Q.  What is the best?

  12   A.  The DVD.  In terms of the breadth of video that's

  13   available to us, the wide variety of video available to us

  14   from various sources, and the high quality of the content,

  15   DVDs are the best source for us.

  16   Q.  What I'm asking you is do you have an opinion on whether

  17   the DeCSS utility would be useful to you in your area of

  18   research?

  19   A.  Oh, absolutely, because the video content on DVDs is

  20   scrambled, and so to get access to it we have to unscramble it

  21   and that's exactly what DeCSS does, it unscrambles that video

  22   content.

  23   Q.  If you were to have access to a wide variety of high

  24   quality digital content like on DVDs, why would that be

  25   helpful to your research?



899



   1   A.  Okay.  Initially when we first start developing an

   2   algorithm, we usually use very short pieces of video, because

   3   videos are a very time consuming object to work with and it

   4   takes a lot of space.  But after we've got the prototype

   5   working, it's very important to test the algorithm on a wide

   6   variety of different video.  It's important for two reasons.

   7   First, you want to make sure your algorithm isn't somehow

   8   dependent on the type of video you took or the type of encoder

   9   you used.  That's step number one.

  10            Step two is you would like to search for video for

  11   which it doesn't work, and to do that you need to get out

  12   there and search through a whole range of different types of

  13   video.  You are specifically looking for video where your

  14   algorithm fails to help you improve your algorithm or maybe

  15   start up a different research direction.

  16   Q.  In order to use the video, the high quality video that's

  17   available on DVDs, do you have an understanding of whether you

  18   need to decrypt them first?

  19   A.  Yes.  There are several types of files in the DVDs.  There

  20   are files with the extension IFO, which I believe is an

  21   abbreviation for information, and those contain like a table

  22   of content type information about what is on the DVD.  There

  23   are files with the extension BUP, which I believe stands for

  24   back up.  Those I think are back-ups for the IFO files.  Then

  25   there are files with the extension VOB, which I believe is an



900



   1   abbreviation for video object.  And those actually contain the

   2   video and those are scrambled, and those are the things that

   3   need to be unscrambled before you can actually use the video.

   4            Now I should also add that that video is already in a

   5   compressed form.  It's in a compressed form called MPEG2,

   6   which was the second extension of the ISO standard from MPEG1

   7   to MPEG2, and that dealt with a higher quality video.  The

   8   initial base standard for MPEG2 was intended to produce

   9   compressed video of comparable quality to broadcast video.

  10   But it also includes higher level video standards as well.

  11   Q.  In terms of the digital video content that's commercially

  12   available on DVDs, is that preferable to the digital content

  13   that you described before, the digital content that's

  14   currently available here?

  15   A.  Yes, it's very high quality, clean, no noise.  It is

  16   already digitized, which is excellent, which means we avoid

  17   having to digitize it ourselves and then pick out any

  18   peculiarities our own digitizer exhibits.  So, it's a very

  19   sound and preferable source of digital content.  Also because

  20   of the wide variety of DVDs available, it satisfies our need

  21   for a large source of different varieties of video.

  22            And in addition, I want to add one other thing.  When

  23   we use our own camera we try to avoid introducing any bias.

  24   We don't want to sort of take video which is too favorable to

  25   what we are trying to do, because the scientific method



901



   1   demands that if you want to thoroughly test your algorithm you

   2   have to use the video which has been taken independently by

   3   somebody else.  That's a basic fundamental premise of the

   4   scientific method.

   5   Q.  Is there a relationship between the amount or variety of

   6   digital video that you would use in connection with your

   7   research and the confidence you would have in the results of

   8   your research?

   9   A.  Absolutely.  One of the criticisms -- I have been to

  10   conferences.  I have also given talks in industry, and one of

  11   the criticisms that industry often has mentioned is that you

  12   really need to test your algorithms on a wider variety of

  13   video.  I often hear that from people in the industry.

  14   Q.  Are there any other applications of your research that

  15   would benefit from having access to the high quality digital

  16   content of DVDs?

  17   A.  I think I have covered the main points.

  18   Q.  In terms of compression technology, do you use compression

  19   technology in your research?

  20   A.  Yes, as I have said, our algorithms are designed to work

  21   with compressed files, and because of that we need to have a

  22   working knowledge of the compression technologies that are

  23   employed.  We also do our own transcoding of video from

  24   different compression standards to a second compression

  25   standard in order to test our algorithms on a variety of



902



   1   compression standards.

   2   Q.  I believe earlier you testified that there was lossy

   3   compression and loss less compression?

   4   A.  Yes.

   5   Q.  Do you know what type of compression is used on

   6   consumer-oriented video like the DVDs you buy in a store?

   7   A.  Yes, both the MPEG1 standard and the MPEG2 standard are

   8   lossy compression technologies.  That means when the video is

   9   compressed, information is thrown away.  If it's a good

  10   encoder, a good compressing algorithm, it will first try to

  11   throw away information which is least perceptually

  12   significant, but the more compression you ask for, the more

  13   bits it has to discard or the more information it has to

  14   discard, and eventually it is discarding important

  15   information, and that shows up as artifacts in the resultant

  16   video when you uncompress it.

  17   Q.  As a general matter, why would you use lossy compression

  18   if you can use loss less compression?

  19   A.  Okay.  Loss less compression that can achieve compression

  20   factors of 2 is quite typical.  If you are very lucky you

  21   might get higher than 2.  So, a 2 gigabyte file would be

  22   reduced to 1 gigabyte with a compression factor of 2.  By

  23   applying loss compression, you can -- I'm quoting here from

  24   the MPEG standard -- you can achieve compression factors of

  25   around 20 to 30 without any visible perceptual difference



903



   1   between the uncompressed video and the compressed video.  So,

   2   that's a factor of ten better at least than the loss less

   3   compression technology.  And in practice you often find

   4   compression factors as high as 40 used.

   5   Q.  Now, could you just describe for us a little bit in

   6   greater detail as you use more and more compression on content

   7   what happens to that content.

   8   A.  Okay.  Almost all of these compression technologies are

   9   block based.  What I mean by that is that each frame of the

  10   video is divided into small blocks, nonoverlapping blocks in

  11   the simplest case.  These blocks are about 16 by 16, 16 pixels

  12   horizontally by 16 pixels vertically.

  13            The compression is based on those elementary blocks,

  14   so when you start to throw away too many pieces of

  15   information, those blocks don't get represented correctly in

  16   the uncompressed video, so you start to actually visibly see

  17   these blocks in the uncompressed video, and you start to see

  18   miscoloring of the blocks.

  19            One of the things that underlies most of the

  20   compression technologies is that high frequency information is

  21   discarded first.  Now, high frequency information encodes

  22   things like edges, where there are sharp transitions, sudden

  23   changes in the image, so when you have discarded enough of

  24   this high frequency information or too much of this high

  25   frequency information, you start to see artifacts at the edge



904



   1   boundaries, a phenomenon called ringing, where there seems to

   2   be a time varying fluctuation around the edge, and you can

   3   visibly see this in highly compressed video.

   4   Q.  Is that what you referred to before as an artifact?

   5   A.  That's an artifact.  The fact that you can see the blocks

   6   is an artifact.  The fact that the blocks are miscolored is an

   7   artifact, and this ringing is an artifact.  There are other

   8   artifacts as well, but those are the main ones.

   9   Q.  Do you have an understanding of an average size of a DVD

  10   film?

  11   A.  Well, I have looked at the DVD for the movie Contact, and

  12   the total amount of information on that DVD disk was about

  13   seven and a half gigabytes.  Most DVDs contain the original

  14   movie as well as some additional add-ons such as director's

  15   comments, or things that were cut from the movie might be

  16   added on there, or special effects might be added on.

  17            In the particular case of the DVD Contact, the actual

  18   video file and the audio file took up about 6 gigabytes, and

  19   the remaining gigabyte and a half were the extras and the

  20   add-ons.

  21   Q.  Do you have an understanding of how much an average CDR

  22   can hold in terms of megabytes or gigabytes?

  23   A.  The standard is 650 megabytes.

  24   Q.  So, if I wanted to copy a DVD that I went out and

  25   purchased and copied it onto a CD, I would have to compress



905



   1   the content to go from 6 or 7 gigabytes down to 650 megabytes?

   2   A.  That's correct.

   3   Q.  How would that be done?

   4   A.  Well, you would use a transcoder.  Your video that you

   5   have from the DVD after you've descrambled it, you must

   6   descramble it first or else it won't work at all.  Let's say

   7   you descrambled the VOB files, now they are in MPEG2 format.

   8   That has a bit rate -- and I will explain what bit rate is in

   9   a second -- it has a bit rate of about 6 to 10 megabits per

  10   second.  Now the bit rate is how many bits are coming out of

  11   the player per second in order to display the video on the

  12   screen on average.  That's an average rate.  Sometimes it's

  13   higher, sometimes it's lower.  But on average it's about 6.7

  14   megabytes per second.  You have to now transcode that down to

  15   a much, much lower rate.

  16            You have available on the CD a space of 650

  17   megabytes.  Let's take the movie Contact.  That's a two and a

  18   half hour movie, so I have to get two and a half hours at 6.7

  19   megabits per second down into a 650 megabyte disk.  If you do

  20   the conversion of units to make all the units appropriate, and

  21   then work out the math, the bit rate after you have done the

  22   transcoding for both the audio and the video needs to be

  23   around 590 kilobits per second.  So you need to go from 6.7

  24   megabits per second down to 490 kilobits per second.

  25            That's an enormous compression.



906



   1   Q.  Would that type of compression result in artifacts being

   2   present on the ultimate product you end up on the CDR?

   3   A.  Yes, most definitely.  The artifacts would be most visible

   4   when there are scene changes, camera motion or when there is

   5   movement of objects in the scene.

   6            Just as a point of comparison, MPEG1, the rate for

   7   MPEG1 which is generally to be believed below broadcast

   8   quality video is 1.5 megabits per second.

   9   Q.  Based on your experience, if someone were going to

  10   compress a film file to send over the Internet, is it more

  11   likely that such a person would use lossy or loss less

  12   compression?

  13   A.  If they used loss less compression you would take a 6

  14   gigabyte file down to about 3 gigabytes.  That is way too big

  15   to transmit over the Internet.  So that forces you, you must

  16   use lossy compression if you are going to get it down to any

  17   reasonable size.  And even at 650 megabytes that's a very

  18   large file.

  19   Q.  In terms of the use of lossy compression, are there

  20   trade-offs to the user in connection with this type of

  21   compression?

  22   A.  The user, if you want to do a transcoding from say MPEG2,

  23   which is the DVD format, down to a much more highly compressed

  24   format, there are various parameters you get to choose.  The

  25   most important parameter is the bit rate.  Because you only



907



   1   have a limited amount of space, you have 650 megabytes, and

   2   you have a two and a half hour movie, that determines the bit

   3   rate.  That's fixed.

   4            Now you can play with other factors.  You can change

   5   the size of the image.  You can make the image smaller.  You

   6   can change the frame rate so the frame rate of the DVD is

   7   29.97 frames per second.  You could attempt to do better by

   8   decreasing the frame rate.

   9   Q.  What effect would decreasing the frame rate have in terms

  10   of viewing the ultimate product?

  11   A.  You would see fewer frames per second.  If the video was

  12   interlaced, which MPEG2 can be an interlaced video, I think

  13   the interlacing would be much more prominent at the lower

  14   frame rate.

  15   Q.  Could you just explain to us what the term "interlacing"

  16   refers to.

  17   A.  Yes.  Broadcast video doesn't present each image in the

  18   video all at once on the screen.  It actually does it in two

  19   passes.  In the first pass it draws every second line on the

  20   screen.  Then 1/60th of a second later it comes back and draws

  21   the lines it missed.  That's called interlacing.  These two

  22   scans are interlaced and they are 1/60th of a second apart.

  23            Now if there is motion in the scene, then during that

  24   1/60th per second things will have moved, so one of the

  25   problems with interlacing is that you begin to see slight



908



   1   jagged edges around objects that are moving because of the

   2   interlacing.

   3            Computer screens don't use interlacing.  They use

   4   what is called progressive scan, and progressive scan you

   5   start at the top and you draw each line sequentially down the

   6   screen.

   7   Q.  In your opinion, what is the current state of compression

   8   technology?

   9   A.  Okay.  Sir, compression technology has been a very hot and

  10   active area of research for about the past 12 years.  The

  11   MPEG1 standard started around the end of the 1980s, started to

  12   meet and form MPEG1 standard.  The MPEG2 standard was even

  13   started before the MPEG1 standard was finalized in the early

  14   1990s.  The JPEG standard was also in the first half of the

  15   1990s.  We are now just past, at the end of 1999 the second

  16   generation of the JPEG standard, JPEG 2000.  At this point

  17   compression technology is maturing and we are seeing fewer and

  18   fewer gains in the compression for each new generation of

  19   technology that comes along.

  20            In the past there have been some interesting

  21   suggestions about potential ways of increasing the compression

  22   rates dramatically.  None of those have panned out yet.  In

  23   fact some of them have even been put aside now as areas of

  24   research that are not likely to be productive.

  25   Q.  Looking out for the next five years or so, do you see any



909



   1   breakthroughs in compression technology that would allow a

   2   person to compress a file to a greater extent than is

   3   currently available now?

   4            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, I object.  There is no

   5   foundation for this testimony.

   6            THE COURT:  I will take the answer.  Overruled.

   7   A.  In talking to my colleagues, we often have lunch together,

   8   some of them are very very actively involved in the

   9   compression community and actually have graduate students

  10   working together putting the pieces into the next ISO

  11   standards.

  12            THE COURT:  Excuse me.  I had understood from your

  13   earlier testimony that you were offering yourself as an expert

  14   on compression, is that right?

  15            THE WITNESS:  I am.  I also want to let you know that

  16   this issue is a hot topic of discussion in the department

  17   about where is compression going.

  18            THE COURT:  Go ahead.

  19            THE WITNESS:  And it seems right now that the only

  20   technology which looks promising is the wavelet technology,

  21   and that has been the basis of the JPEG 2000 standard which

  22   has just recently been issued.

  23            So, it looks like from this point on there is only

  24   going to be incremental improvement.  There is nothing that is

  25   known to be on the horizon which promises drastic gains.



910



   1   Everything right now looks like it's going to be incremental

   2   for the next five years.  I can't see any further ahead than

   3   the next five years, so I don't want to speculate beyond that.

   4   Q.  Fair enough.  Have you heard the term fractal compression?

   5   A.  Yes.

   6   Q.  Do you have an understanding of what that is?

   7   A.  Around 1988 a researcher by the name of Barnsley proposed

   8   this compression technology called fractal compression.  I

   9   think he has two patents on that technology issued around 1990

  10   and 1991.  He formed a company I think which is called

  11   Iterated Systems, but since then nothing has really panned out

  12   from that technology.  The latest I heard in the journals and

  13   other reading that I have done is that his latest version

  14   produced by his company is not quite as good as JPEG.

  15            THE COURT:  Now, isn't there software on the market

  16   in the digital photographic area known as genuine fractals?

  17            THE WITNESS:  I haven't heard of that software.

  18            THE COURT:  Isn't it in commercial use and supported

  19   by service bureaus for high compression of digital

  20   photographic files?

  21            THE WITNESS:  I have no information on that.

  22            THE COURT:  All right.  Go ahead, Mr. Atlas.

  23   Q.  Have you heard the term DivX before?

  24   A.  Yes, I have.

  25   Q.  What is DivX, as you understand it?



911



   1            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, can I be heard on this?  I

   2   have an objection.  This witness was deposed a week ago on

   3   July 14, and as of that time the testimony was that he heard

   4   of DivX, that he downloaded some things from the Internet that

   5   he thought might be DivX, but he had done no further work on

   6   the subject.  So, whatever we are going to hear from the

   7   witness in response to that question is something we have had

   8   no discovery on, no notice of, and we will not have any

   9   ability to effectively cross-examine.

  10            THE COURT:  Mr. Atlas, what about it?

  11            MR. ATLAS:  Actually at his deposition he testified

  12   about what he had done with DiVX and what he intended to do

  13   with DivX between the time of his deposition and the time he

  14   would be testifying, and I suggest that if plaintiffs wanted

  15   any further deposition before trial, they had an opportunity

  16   to seek it.  But I think the witness clearly put them on

  17   notice of what he intended to do and what he looked to get out

  18   of it.

  19            THE COURT:  Let me see the deposition and tell me

  20   what you're referring to.

  21            MR. MERVIS:  Yes, your Honor.  Can I approach?

  22            THE COURT:  I'm sure you will tell me the numbers.

  23            MR. MERVIS:  The subject of the DivX was covered on

  24   the following pages:  15 through 17, 21 through 22, 25 to --

  25            THE COURT:  I can't remember them all that fast.



912



   1            MR. MERVIS:  I'm sorry.  Perhaps you let me know when

   2   you're ready.

   3            THE COURT:  Yes.  What's after page 17?

   4            MR. MERVIS:  Pages 21 to 22, your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  Next?

   6            MR. MERVIS:  25 through 28, Judge.

   7            THE COURT:  Next.

   8            MR. MERVIS:  Page 70, your Honor.

   9            THE COURT:  Was there any representation made to you

  10   about whether or not he would testify in this area?

  11            MR. MERVIS:  The only representation that I know of,

  12   your Honor, was that his studies were continuing.  And I would

  13   simply point out in response to my adversary's comment, this

  14   is expert testimony.  Of course obviously we have been

  15   proceeding somewhat informally, but the notion that we would

  16   be given no notice of any further developments in this

  17   expert's experiments I think is inconsistent with the general

  18   standards of expert discovery.  All of a sudden we are here

  19   today hearing about DiVX, and we have never heard a peep out

  20   of defense counsel.

  21            MR. ATLAS:  Your Honor, at page 16 he was asked

  22   whether he had made any evaluation of DivX.  He said he was in

  23   the process of doing it.

  24            THE COURT:  I read it.

  25            MR. ATLAS:  You read that.  I don't think this comes



913



   1   as any surprise, and we have been talking to each other every

   2   day -- not Mr. Mervis and I -- but they certainly were aware,

   3   and I think if they wanted further examination of this witness

   4   before trial, with eight letters a day, I think they could

   5   have included that in a letter.

   6            THE COURT:  Is that all you get?

   7            MR. ATLAS:  It's not a surprise.  I think it's clear,

   8   given the time constraint, he put them on notice that he would

   9   be doing this before trial.

  10            THE COURT:  I will hear the evidence.

  11            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, may I make just one further

  12   application?  I am prepared to cross-examine Professor

  13   Ramadage on everything so far.  I don't know what he is going

  14   to say right now, but I do think that at the very least we

  15   should have the opportunity -- and I understand the Court

  16   wishes to hear the evidence now, but I do think we should have

  17   the opportunity to take the witness's deposition on these

  18   points and perhaps bring him back or perhaps just submit that

  19   deposition testimony, because I don't think it's appropriate,

  20   and I don't think it's fair to the Court, the witness or the

  21   defense counsel for me to be doing cross-examination on that

  22   topic.  I think it's a better use of time to have a short

  23   deposition and we can submit the appropriate exerts if there

  24   are not --

  25            THE COURT:  Why not do that?



914



   1            MR. ATLAS:  I have no objection to that.

   2            THE COURT:  It's easy.  You will finish your direct,

   3   Mr. Mervis will cross-examine him to wherever he gets to where

   4   he wants to insert DivX.  You will get a deposition done in

   5   the next three days sometime, indeed before the trial is over.

   6   I certainly don't necessarily want to interfere with the

   7   professor's weekend if I don't have to.  Lawyers are

   8   different.

   9            MR. MERVIS:  My son might disagree, your Honor, but I

  10   understand.

  11            THE COURT:  I understand, but it's an occupational

  12   hazard for sons of lawyers.  And then we will proceed that

  13   way.

  14            MR. MERVIS:  Thank you.

  15            THE COURT:  All right.

  16            MR. ATLAS:  Could you repeat back the last question

  17   and answer, please.

  18            THE COURT:  I might observe this, and I do so because

  19   I want to be corrected if I misunderstand.  Don't I have in

  20   evidence here Sleepless in Seattle and the Matrix, both in the

  21   form of the original DVD and in the form of a DeCSS decoded

  22   DivX'd compressed CD-ROM copy?  Don't I have that?

  23            MR. MERVIS:  You do, your Honor, that's correct.  I'm

  24   not sure we have moved the -- yes, we have.  Your Honor, you

  25   do have both of them.



915



   1            THE COURT:  Okay.  So I mean I suppose the purpose of

   2   all that is to ask me to look at the two movies and see to

   3   what extent I think that the copy is or isn't a commercial

   4   threat in the marketplace.

   5            MR. ATLAS:  That's part of it, your Honor.  I think

   6   your Honor permitting, the witness has done his own test along

   7   the lines of what Mr. Shamos did.  It will not take very long.

   8            THE COURT:  That's fine.  I said I would hear it, but

   9   I'm just, you know, I don't know what form the testimony is

  10   coming in in, but I think movie fans probably don't think in

  11   terms of artifacts per movie.  I think they look at the movie

  12   and they say is this an acceptable quality to watch.

  13            MR. ATLAS:  I agree.  That's exactly where we are

  14   going in terms of whether it is acceptable quality.  Can I

  15   hear the Last question and answer.

  16            (Record read)

  17   A.  DivX is what is called a codec, and a codec is an

  18   abbreviation of two words, coder, decoder.  So when you

  19   compress a video, you also have to at some later time

  20   uncompress it or decompress it.  Each coder comes together

  21   with its appropriate decoder.  That pair is called a codec.

  22   And DivX is an example of a codec, a coder/decoder pair.

  23   Q.  Have you used a DivX before?

  24   A.  Yes, I downloaded it from the web, installed it on my

  25   laptop computer and on the work station in my office.  Then I



916



   1   employed a program called flask MPEG.

   2   Q.  Is this in connection with your work for this lawsuit?

   3   A.  Yes, it was with this lawsuit.  I used a program called

   4   flask MPEG to select the DivX codec.  Now, let me add here

   5   that there were actually two DivX codecs, one called a low

   6   motion codec and one called a fast motion codec.

   7            I experimented with both of these codecs, and I took

   8   the descrambled VOB files from the movie Contact and I passed

   9   them through this codec to compress them further down to a

  10   much lower bit rate.  I said before we need to go down to an

  11   average of 590 kilobits per second.  That's for both the video

  12   and the audio.  If we subtract off from that 590 128 kilobits

  13   per second for the audio, then that tells us what our bit rate

  14   has to be for the video, and so I have employed a bit rate of

  15   about 450 kilobits per second to further compress the video

  16   for the movie Contact into a compressed file in what is called

  17   an AVI format.  AVI is a Microsoft format.

  18            (Continued on next page)

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



917



   1   Q.  What size are you looking to compress?

   2   A.  That was to get it down to 650 megabytes.

   3   Q.  Why was that?

   4   A.  That's the size you can write onto a CD writable disk.

   5   Q.  How long, the point we are at now in terms of this

   6   experiment you conducted, can you tell me with respect to each

   7   step how long it took?

   8   A.  Roughly.  To download DeCSS took maybe three-quarters of

   9   an hour.  To use it to descramble all of the VOB files on the

  10   DVD took about an hour.  Then to use the DivX codec through

  11   the flask MPEG program to transcode it down to about 650

  12   megabytes, that was done in various stages because each VOB

  13   file is about a gigabyte and there are about seven of them in

  14   the movie.  It took about two and a half hours per gigabyte.

  15   At least one of them was not playable after I had transferred

  16   it, there was some error, so I had to redo that one.  After it

  17   was all said and done, I would say it took about 20 hours to

  18   do the transcoding.

  19   Q.  What did you do next in your experiment?

  20   A.  I needed to ascertain whether this -- all of these codecs,

  21   including the DivX codec are what are call variable bit rate

  22   codecs, so even though you tell it I want 450 kilobits per

  23   second, it actually decides itself how many bits to use based

  24   on the -- what's happening in the video at any given time.

  25            If there is lots of fast motion, it will use more



918



   1   bits and if there isn't very much action, if it is a very slow

   2   scene, it would try to use fewer bits.  So it tries to budget

   3   the bits and do the best it can depending on how much action

   4   there is in the scene.  So even though you tell it ahead of

   5   time to use about 450 kilobits a second, you may use more, you

   6   may use less.

   7            I did an experiment to see exactly how flexible the

   8   DivX codecs were.  It turns out that one of the codecs, the

   9   one called the fast motion codec is very stingy with its bits,

  10   it tries to use as few bits as possible to save space, but the

  11   result in quality suffers.  The low motion codec is very

  12   generous with the bits.  When more bits are needed, it uses

  13   them and it hopes it can save later when the video isn't

  14   moving as quickly.  Generally, the video content was better

  15   using the low motion codec.

  16            Having decided that the low motion codec was the best

  17   one to use, I then transcoded in particular -- I am sorry.

  18   Let me step back a second.  Because the low motion codec is a

  19   variable bit rate because, if you say you want 450 kilobits a

  20   second doesn't guarantee you will be under 450 kilobits a

  21   second.  In fact, you tended to go over by about 2 to 5

  22   percent.

  23   Q.  So what did you do next in your experiment?

  24   A.  So I selected three representative two-minute slices of

  25   the video for further examination.  These pieces were selected



919



   1   so that they contained some slow motion as well as some fast

   2   motion, try to get an average sample of what it is going to do

   3   on this slice.  Two minutes of video is quite long.  That's

   4   3600 frames.  And then I transcoded those two-minute segments

   5   down to a target rate of 450 kilobits per second and I

   6   examined the resultant quality of the video.

   7            For my first example, I actually did it at several

   8   rates to see what the effect of the rates would be and to try

   9   to keep it of course below the required size and for the next

  10   two examples, I just did it at the one rate, set rate of 450

  11   kilobits per second.  In all three examples, there are a large

  12   number of visible artifacts, a sufficient number in fact that

  13   I think the average person would say this stinks.

  14            MR. ATLAS:  With the court's permission, I believe

  15   the witness can demonstrate the examples he was just talking

  16   about on his laptop computer.  If your Honor is willing, I

  17   think the professor will take us through it.

  18            THE COURT:  Sure, let's get the exhibits marked.

  19            MR. ATLAS:  I have got Exhibit RDF is a copy that --

  20   BDF.

  21            THE COURT:  Say it once more.

  22            MR. ATLAS:  Defendant's Exhibit BDF, the Professor

  23   has this material on his hard drive.  I have one for the court

  24   and one for the defendants.

  25            THE COURT:  Are we playing it from the hard drive or



920



   1   off this disk?

   2            MR. ATLAS:  We could do it off either.

   3            THE COURT:  Let's play it off the disk.  I don't know

   4   if what is in the hard drive and I don't know if I have a

   5   record of what's in the hard drive.

   6            THE WITNESS:  In order to do a comparison, I would

   7   first like to show the original CD.

   8            THE COURT:  Is that marked?

   9            MR. ATLAS:  Do you have it?  I think I may have to

  10   ask you to give up your copy of Contact.

  11            THE COURT:  Let's get it marked, please.

  12            MR. ATLAS:  Do you have the box it came on?

  13            THE COURT:  Mark it on the disk.

  14            MR. ATLAS:  Will that affect --

  15            THE COURT:  On this side.

  16            THE WITNESS:  It shouldn't affect on this side.

  17            THE COURT:  The original CD of the movie Contact is

  18   Defendant's Exhibit BDG.

  19   BY MR. ATLAS:

  20   Q.  Did you purchase this, by the way?

  21   A.  I did.

  22            MR. ATLAS:  If plaintiff's counsel wants, I will buy

  23   you a copy but you seem to have a ton back there.

  24   A.  Let me open to the original DVD.

  25   Q.  First in terms of viewing it, where would the best place



921



   1   for us to stand be?

   2   A.  Let me get it set up.  So because it is a laptop screen,

   3   the best thing to do it is view it perpendicular to the laptop

   4   screen.  We can adjust the screen.  Please feel free to do

   5   that.

   6            THE COURT:  It is fine.

   7   A.  The best place to stand is right around this little circle

   8   here.  That's a list of all the files on the DVD.  The VOB the

   9   encrypted video files.  To try it, we double-click on the

  10   info-file which is the table of contents and that will start

  11   the DVD playing then what I would like to do is show you at

  12   least two of the examples from the DVD that I transcoded and

  13   that will be the best way of comparing the resultant quality

  14   after transcribing to the quality before.

  15            We will skip to the video start and then I think I

  16   will jump to one of the scenes.  Let's see if we can get there

  17   OK.  The first scene that I transcoded is this scene.  I

  18   transcoded the first two minutes starting from roughly around

  19   here where you see Jodie Foster get up and start to walk

  20   outside.  So there is some slow motion at the beginning.

  21   Notice how clear that antenna is right there.  We will jump to

  22   some fast motion.  That's enough from that scene.

  23            Let me jump to another part of the DVD.  This is my

  24   second example.  I will fast forward a little bit until I get

  25   to the scene that I have transcoded.  This is my second



922



   1   example.  I have transcoded two minutes starting around here.

   2   Q.  Why did you choose this particular scene?

   3   A.  Again, I am looking for examples where it contains some

   4   fast motion as well as some slow motion.

   5            THE COURT:  We will take a recess.  Five minutes.

   6            (In the robing room)

   7            MR. GARBUS:  I just saw the professor in the

   8   bathroom.  He is throwing up.  He is very sick, what I would

   9   suggest is we take a lunch break.

  10            THE COURT:  I guess we have no practical alternative.

  11   All right, 2 o'clock.  Fine.

  12            MR. GARBUS:  I presume he will be all right by 2

  13   o'clock.  I know nothing about it.  If he is not, we will put

  14   somebody else on.

  15            THE COURT:  Right, thank you.

  16            (Luncheon recess)

  17            (Continued on next page)

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



923



   1                         AFTERNOON SESSION

   2                            2:00 p.m.

   3            THE COURT:  Professor, better?

   4            MR. ATLAS:  He is.  Before we begin, some

   5   housekeeping matters in terms of our work for the weekend,

   6   depositions and documents.  I wanted to have a good idea of

   7   how the Court wanted to handle these things if you wanted to

   8   take five minutes now or at the end of the day.

   9            THE COURT:  Let's do it at the end of the day.  Maybe

  10   we can get this man on the road before rush hour.

  11            Are we ready for the matinee?

  12            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

  13            I am just starting the original DVD.  We will see the

  14   header first and then I will go to the second one, the second

  15   scene.

  16            THE COURT:  Right.

  17            THE WITNESS:  The second scene will begin around

  18   here, last for two minutes.  I have selected this scene again

  19   because it has both parts where there is not much motion,

  20   camera pans as you see here, and other parts where there are

  21   lots of moving pictures, so it is sort of a representative

  22   two-minute sample.  It is not much motion, pan of Jodi Foster,

  23   here is a camera pan.  Notice the clarity of people against

  24   the background.  You will see some ladies on top of a van in a

  25   second singing.  I want you to pay close attention to how



924



   1   clear they took against the blue sky.

   2            The ladies in the green T shirts against the blue

   3   sky.  This Elvis has something written on the back of his

   4   guitar.  See if you can read it.  So you get the idea.  That's

   5   the crispness, another slow scene.  I go all the way to the

   6   point where this gentleman points to the Jodi Foster.

   7            OK, so now let's go to the last example.  That's

   8   going to begin when part is released right about here and we

   9   will see a two-minute clip from the point where I started this

  10   video.  This again has mixed scenes, some very fast action, a

  11   lot of things changing all at once, interspersed with some

  12   close-ups of Jodi Foster where there is a little bit of change

  13   but not a fast change.  This will be the most challenging of

  14   the three samples after you are done transcoding.

  15            Notice the individual lines here in this

  16   computer-generated display in which she is traveling through

  17   this tunnel, they are all clearly visible.  And now a slow

  18   scene.  And then it will take off again and you will see a

  19   similar transversal through another tunnel.  I think you get

  20   the idea.

  21            Let's close the DVD now and I will put this CD, 650

  22   megabyte CD but I have some short samples burnt into the CD.

  23            THE COURT:  That is BDF?

  24            MR. ATLAS:  It is marked, yes.

  25            Now, let's close the DVD player.  And open up that CD



925



   1   which should be down here, right there, and here are my three

   2   examples.  Let's start with example one.  I will play this, it

   3   is in AVI format and I will play it through Microsoft media

   4   player.

   5   BY MR. ATLAS:

   6   Q.  Before you play it, what is AVI?

   7   A.  It is a format for video.  It was a Microsoft format.  The

   8   media player is a Microsoft product.  It comes standard with

   9   the windows operating system.  So this has been reduced in

  10   size from the original frame size of the DVD, so I am going to

  11   play this at full screen and this is the first scene that I

  12   showed you on the DVD.

  13            Notice the fuzziness of the general appearance.  Look

  14   at all the detail lost around the antenna area.  If you look

  15   closely around edges, you will see the ringing effect, the

  16   halos around edges and along the tree line.  This is the slow

  17   scene, the slow part of the scene so this isn't the

  18   challenging part of the scene yet.

  19            These individual pieces aren't as crisp as they were

  20   in the original DVD.  Now here is the fast part.  Notice all

  21   of the artifacts, there is a phenomena called contouring where

  22   you have big spreads of constant color.  It is trying to code

  23   this but it doesn't have enough bits.  It is saying I don't

  24   have enough bits for this, let me use fewer bits for this

  25   whole area.  You will see here in the Jodi Foster area a



926



   1   pattern of blocks, that's the block artifact that I discussed

   2   before.  If we wait until she gets out of the car, we will see

   3   it more prominently on the back of her shirt.  Right there.

   4            Notice the loss of detail of all of the faces in the

   5   scene.  Again, the coder, transcoder is trying to save bits

   6   and place the bits were things are graphically changing, so

   7   all the detail on the background has been lost.  You can tell

   8   it is rocks, but all of the fuzziness in here, and you can see

   9   the detail has been lost.  That's the first example.  It is a

  10   mixture, as I pointed out, of slow and fast.

  11            We will close that one and start the second example.

  12   The second example is the crowd scene.  Again, you notice the

  13   general fuzziness, not as crisp as before.  Notice the ringing

  14   artifacts around all of the moving edges.  You will see the

  15   effect of the block, blockiness there.  The slow part, it is a

  16   little bit better on the slow part.  Ringing, see the ringing

  17   around that lady just a second ago.

  18            Whenever there is a scene change where there is a

  19   rapid change, you notice all these artifacts more prominently.

  20   The slow part, it does better on the slow parts.  Ringing

  21   around there.  Let me stop it for a second and you can see all

  22   the block artifacts there right across the scene.  That

  23   contributes to the general fuzziness of the appearance.  There

  24   are three ladies, green ladies coming up.  Generally much

  25   fuzzier, ringed, with the ringed artifacts.  Here is Elvis,



927



   1   see the back of his guitar, it is gone.

   2            THE COURT:  I wouldn't say it was quite gone.  It was

   3   not as distinct but it was not gone.

   4            THE WITNESS:  OK.  That's the end of the second

   5   example.

   6            And the third example is the last scene and the part

   7   that leaves the launch station and starts to go through the

   8   tunnel.  Here again, you see it struggling, it doesn't have

   9   enough bits to fill in the detail.  Notice all the block

  10   artifacts right there.  It is a little better on the close-up

  11   scene where it is closer, lot of block artifacts.  Everything

  12   is changing here very rapidly.  It just can't keep up.  The

  13   lines of the tunnel are not distinct, disappeared.  We just

  14   see the general color.

  15            The slow part again, contouring artifacts.  Rapid

  16   change, you see the block artifacts all over the scene there.

  17   Again, all the lines are lost, individual lines are lost,

  18   block artifacts clearly visible.  And I can stop it and you

  19   can see all of the individual block artifacts.  In fact, this

  20   is a constant color, the contouring effect, it doesn't have

  21   enough bits to fill in the colors that were there and says I

  22   am going to fill in that patch with just one color.  You have

  23   seen all of the artifacts that are present.

  24            THE COURT:  OK, thank you.

  25            MR. ATLAS:  I just have a few other questions.  If I



928



   1   can move BDF and BDG into evidence.

   2            THE COURT:  Any objection?

   3            MR. MERVIS:  Only with respect to what we might see

   4   in the deposition, your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  All right, received on that basis.

   6            (Defendant's Exhibits BDF and BDG received in

   7   evidence)

   8   Q.  A few more questions, Professor.

   9            Have you heard of the MPEG committee?

  10   A.  Yes, there are several MPEG committees.  There was an MPEG

  11   1 committee, an MPEG 2 committee.  There was for a brief

  12   period of time an MPEG 3 committee and MPEG 4 committee.

  13   Those are all concerned with designing standards for video

  14   compression.

  15   Q.  In terms of the MPEG 2 committee, is that the MPEG

  16   committee that determined the standards for DVDs?

  17   A.  The MPEG 2 committee determined a standard and that

  18   standard, part of what's called the baseline MPEG 2 standard

  19   is what was used to encode and compress the video on that DVD

  20   Contact that I used.  I believe that is quite standard.

  21   Q.  Do you know who makes up the MPEG 2 committee?

  22            MR. MERVIS:  Objection, your Honor, relevance.

  23            THE COURT:  What's the relevance, Mr. Atlas?

  24            MR. ATLAS:  I think it will be clear in a minute.

  25            THE COURT:  Why don't you tell me the relevance.



929



   1            MR. ATLAS:  The MPEG committee, they have issued

   2   certain findings in books and articles, they do studies of

   3   different compression techniques and they have issued what

   4   they consider findings on what level of compression is

   5   acceptable for the consumer viewing.

   6            THE COURT:  How is that any better than your opinion

   7   or mine?

   8            MR. ATLAS:  This is from a committee that is made up

   9   of I believe motion picture companies and some of the computer

  10   companies.  These are the people who are in charge of deciding

  11   what a good standard is for consumer viewing and I was going

  12   to have the professor testify about the standards that they

  13   have said are appropriate for consumers.

  14            THE COURT:  What's the basis, Professor, of your

  15   knowledge, if any, about who is on the MPEG committee?

  16            THE WITNESS:  I don't know any of the individual's

  17   names on the committee.  I do know they are made up of

  18   representatives from many industries and the international

  19   standards office.

  20            THE COURT:  Do you know how many different

  21   organizations are represented on the committee?

  22            THE WITNESS:  A large number but I don't know the

  23   exact number.

  24            THE COURT:  Do you know whether they adopt standards

  25   only by unanimity or by some vote short of unanimity?



930



   1            THE WITNESS:  I believe it is a vote short of

   2   unanimity.

   3            THE COURT:  Go ahead, Mr. Atlas.  We will see if

   4   there is anything that the witness can testify to.

   5   BY MR. ATLAS:

   6   Q.  Are you aware of any testing performed by the MPEG

   7   committee, I gather the MPEG 2 committee, regarding different

   8   compression technology?

   9   A.  All of the MPEG committees extensively test -- they call

  10   for submissions or proposals for things to be included in the

  11   standard and there is extensive testing of the submissions.

  12   Then a final draft of standards is proposed.  These are

  13   extensively tested.  It is my understanding from my reading of

  14   articles and books they even do subjective testing with

  15   bringing individuals in to rate the quality of the resultant

  16   video.

  17            MR. MERVIS:  I would object and move to strike the

  18   testimony on the grounds it constitutes hearsay.

  19            THE COURT:  I think so.  It is stricken.

  20            MR. ATLAS:  I think these are things considered by

  21   the expert in terms of giving his impression on compression

  22   technology.  This is part of the general literature.

  23            THE COURT:  If we are going to take what's part of

  24   the general literature, we don't have a hearsay rule, do we,

  25   as part of published materials?



931



   1            MR. ATLAS:  I will ask the witness in terms of

   2   whether he relies on this material for -- I would like to ask

   3   the witness whether he relied at all on these type of reports

   4   in connection with any of the opinions he has given on

   5   compression technology.

   6            THE COURT:  You better get, tie it up to a specific

   7   opinion he has given in this case.

   8            MR. ATLAS:  May I take a minute?

   9            (Pause)

  10            MR. ATLAS:  I have no further questions of this

  11   witness, your Honor.

  12            THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you.  Cross-examination

  13   Mr. Mervis?

  14            MR. MERVIS:  Thank you, your Honor.

  15   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  16   BY MR. MERVIS:

  17   Q.  Good afternoon, Professor Ramadge.  Is it your belief that

  18   you need to get access to encrypted DVD materials in order to

  19   further your research into digital video?

  20   A.  I believe it would provide us with a very widespread,

  21   reliable, high quality source of digital video which would be

  22   a great benefit to our research.

  23   Q.  I see.  The type of research that you described on your

  24   direct, you have been conducting that sort of research for

  25   about five years, isn't that right?



932



   1   A.  Correct.

   2   Q.  And the first time that you ever encrypted a DVD was in

   3   connection with this lawsuit, isn't that correct?

   4   A.  That's correct.

   5   Q.  Now, on direct, you talked about working with industrial

   6   partners, is that right?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  Who are these industrial partners?

   9   A.  One of them is IBM.  They have given us or negotiated us

  10   the rights to use two pieces of video.  The other one is the

  11   Navy.

  12   Q.  And is it your contemplation that one of the end products

  13   of the research you are developing now would be to develop

  14   commercial tools?

  15   A.  No, I am not in the process of developing commercial tools

  16   myself.  We are developing elementary pieces or elementary

  17   blocks which later might be put together by people who develop

  18   commercial tools.

  19   Q.  To your knowledge, would that be something, is that

  20   something that your industrial partners are contemplating?

  21   A.  That's something they are very interested in, yes.

  22            THE COURT:  Let me ask you, you said the Navy, this

  23   technology that you have addressed in terms of indexing,

  24   searching and browsing, without by any means disclosing any

  25   confidential information, is of a great deal of interest to



933



   1   the military, is it not?

   2            THE WITNESS:  It is.

   3            THE COURT:  It might, for example, be used to enable

   4   targets to be identified electronically in aircraft that move

   5   too quickly to permit a human being to identify the targets on

   6   their own, right?

   7            THE WITNESS:  Certainly aspects of technology could

   8   be used for such purposes but that's not the area of my

   9   research.

  10            THE COURT:  No.  I didn't suggest that.  Let's leave

  11   it at that.

  12            I suppose the Department of Defense has an ability to

  13   give you high quality video to work with, doesn't it?

  14            THE WITNESS:  They have various constraints on the

  15   cameras.  The cameras must be extremely robust because of the

  16   environment and conditions in which they operate, so they have

  17   a range of different qualities of video.  We are working

  18   actually with the Navy with a lower quality video.

  19            THE COURT:  All right, go ahead.

  20   Q.  You testified on direct one of your sources, current

  21   sources of digital video content was content that your

  22   industrial partners got from copyright owners by a license, is

  23   that correct?

  24   A.  I don't know if it was by license, it was by some

  25   agreement which I wasn't a party to.



934



   1   Q.  Your understanding is your industrial partners went out

   2   and talked to the copyright owners and got permission to let

   3   you use the content?

   4   A.  I don't know because I wasn't part of the negotiation.  I

   5   don't know who contacted who first to negotiate the permission

   6   to use the copyrighted material.

   7   Q.  So is it fair to say that you have no firsthand knowledge

   8   of any of your industrial partners ever approaching any of the

   9   plaintiffs for permission to use any of their DVD products and

  10   having that permission denied?

  11   A.  I wasn't present at such meetings.

  12   Q.  Is it correct, Professor Ramadge that lossy compression is

  13   considered to be acceptable compression for consumer use?

  14   A.  There is a whole range of lossy compression.  Certain

  15   ranges of lossy compression have been tested and have been

  16   agreed upon as acceptable for consumer use.

  17   Q.  Now, I am correct, am I not, that if you compress digital

  18   content to 650 megabytes, you can put that on a single CD-Rom,

  19   is that correct?

  20   A.  The file size has to be 650 megabytes, that is correct.

  21   Q.  And to do this, you need a few pieces of equipment, right,

  22   a computer with proper software, you need a CD-writable drive,

  23   and need the CD, correct?

  24   A.  Correct.

  25   Q.  And the computer that you need would run you roughly 2,000



935



   1   bucks?

   2   A.  I think you need not CD but DVD.

   3   Q.  I am sorry.  Thank you for correcting me.  And the

   4   computer would cost about $2,000, right?

   5   A.  That's in the right ballpark, yes.

   6   Q.  And the DVD drive would cost somewhere between 200 and

   7   300, maybe a little bit less, right?

   8   A.  That's correct.

   9   Q.  And cost of the black CD, that's a writable CD, that's

  10   what, a dollar?

  11   A.  Correct.

  12   Q.  You testified the film you were working with, Contact,

  13   that was two and a half hours?

  14   A.  Correct.

  15   Q.  It was too long to put on a single CD?

  16   A.  No, it is possible to put it on to a single CD.  I

  17   designed those samples you just viewed, I designed the

  18   compression factor to fit the movie Contact to a single CD.

  19   Q.  You could have used a lesser degree of compression and put

  20   the film on two CDs, correct?

  21   A.  Correct.

  22   Q.  And the sum total of those two CD's would be $2?

  23   A.  Excuse me?

  24   Q.  The total cost of two CDs would be $2, right?

  25   A.  Yes.



936



   1   Q.  Now, Professor Ramadge, with all of your expertise and

   2   experience with digital video, am I correct in understanding

   3   that you don't own a DVD, sir?

   4   A.  I am sorry, a DVD player?  There is a DVD player on my

   5   laptop right there.

   6   Q.  What do you use for home viewing?

   7   A.  I use VHS, a tape player.

   8   Q.  You have never used a DVD player at home, have you?

   9   A.  I have used that DVD player at home.

  10   Q.  Since when?

  11   A.  Since I bought the laptop.

  12   Q.  When did you buy it?

  13   A.  Two years ago.  But I don't own a DVD player at home.

  14   Q.  The 20 hours that you testified to that it took you to,

  15   from beginning to end to complete the DivX-ing process, was

  16   that 20 consecutive?

  17   A.  How would we count this, the files on the DVD are

  18   separated into approximately 1 gigabyte chunks.  There are a

  19   few smaller chunks because the movie doesn't divide into an

  20   even number of 1 gigabyte chunks.  Each one-gigabyte file was

  21   processed separately.  Before I processed the next file, I had

  22   to wait for the computer to finish and load in the next file,

  23   type in the necessary commands to do that, double-check the

  24   parameters to make sure nothing had changed.

  25            After all, if it is going to take a while, you don't



937



   1   want to make a mistake and come back, change the file name

   2   where it was stored, check that there was enough empty space

   3   on the disk, nothing will go wrong and run it again.  It is

   4   consecutive in that sense, do one file, stop, do another file.

   5            However, in my initial investigations, I didn't do

   6   all the files consecutively.  I did some timing analysis based

   7   upon largest of the files of one-gigabyte size and estimated

   8   how long it would take and set aside certain portions of my

   9   time to accomplish the rest.

  10   Q.  Am I correct in understanding that you didn't sit there in

  11   front of the computer for 20  consecutive hours to complete

  12   the task?

  13   A.  As I said, it depends how you count this.  I didn't sit

  14   there for 20 consecutive hours because I didn't do it all in

  15   one sitting.

  16   Q.  Thank you very much.  Is it also correct that certainly a

  17   good portion of the time that it took, you had no reason to

  18   look at your computer screen or have any other interface with

  19   a computer, right?

  20   A.  For the purposes of my experiment, I did look occasionally

  21   at the computer screen.  I wanted to check the bit rate, the

  22   current bit rate because it is a variable bit rate coda so

  23   even though I say use such-and-such a bit rate, it could be

  24   using less or using more.  It tries to use the allocated

  25   budget in an intelligent way.  I periodically checked it to



938



   1   see what the bit rate was.

   2   Q.  I understand but it is fair to say a good deal of the

   3   DivX-ing process is automated, is that right?

   4   A.  It depends what you mean.  The programs seem rather

   5   delicate.  I crashed the program several times.  Several times

   6   I tried to open the one-gigabyte files and Microsoft media

   7   player crashed the system, so I think when you say automated,

   8   it creates the impression you press the button and it is done.

   9   It wasn't quite ought that automated.  You needed to pay

  10   certain attention to what you were doing.  It was a hands-on

  11   process.

  12   Q.  You didn't need to pay 20 hours attention?

  13            MR. ATLAS:  Objection.

  14   A.  I did glance away from the computer screen probably 50

  15   percent of the time at least while it was doing the

  16   transcoding.

  17            MR. MERVIS:  Thank you, Professor.  No further

  18   questions.

  19            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Any redirect, Mr. Atlas?

  20            MR. ATLAS:  No further questions.

  21            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Thank you, Professor.

  22            (Witness excused)

  23            THE COURT:  Next witness?

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  Defendants call Matthew Pavlovich.

  25   He also has a computer and I don't know if you prefer he set



939



   1   it up now.  It won't take but a few minutes or if you prefer

   2   he do it during his testimony when we get to that point --

   3            THE COURT:  I am indifferent.

   4            THE WITNESS:  If it is not a problem, I can set it up

   5   right now.

   6            THE COURT:  Let's do it.

   7    MATTHEW PAVLOVICH,

   8        called as a witness by the defendant,

   9        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:

  10   DIRECT EXAMINATION

  11   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

  12   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich, where do you live?

  13   A.  I currently live in Dallas, Texas.

  14   Q.  What is your present occupation?

  15   A.  I am an -- I work for a new technology start-up Media

  16   Driver LLC.

  17   Q.  Are you one of the founders of that company?

  18   A.  Yes, I am a cofounder and currently the president.

  19   Q.  When did you first use a computer?

  20   A.  Could you repeat the question?

  21   Q.  When did you first use a computer?

  22   A.  We got our first computer when I was about 9.

  23   Q.  How long ago was that?

  24   A.  Thirteen years.

  25   Q.  Do you know the Linux operating system?



940



   1   A.  Yes, Linux is an open source alternative to other

   2   operating systems on the market.  It is developed by

   3   individuals in the technology community.

   4   Q.  What does open source mean as relates to the Linux --

   5   A.  Open source is a term used by people who developed the

   6   model, that applications that make up the operating system,

   7   that the source code or recipe to program is available

   8   publicly for anybody to use.  The source code is generally

   9   licensed and copyrighted, but the structure of the license

  10   makes it so anybody can use it, make modifications, and things

  11   of that nature.

  12   Q.  When did you first use Linux?

  13   A.  I first used Linux when I was a sophomore in high school.

  14   Q.  Is it your primary operating system?

  15   A.  It has been my primary operating system for the last five

  16   years.

  17   Q.  How many computers do you have?

  18   A.  I have four.

  19   Q.  Do you use Linux on all of them?

  20   A.  Yes, they all -- all four run Linux.

  21   Q.  Can you tell us about your education, please?

  22   A.  I went to high school in Texas, senior class president for

  23   Marcus High School in Flowermount, Texas.  When I went to

  24   college, I studied computer engineering at Purdue University.

  25   Q.  Did you graduate from Purdue?



941



   1   A.  No, I left Purdue University in mid April.  I took a leave

   2   of absence to start Media Driver.

   3   Q.  Could you tell us about your employment history?

   4   A.  I started back when I was in high school, worked for Best

   5   Buy Incorporated.  I managed the series of PC repair

   6   technicians.  All during high school and through college, I

   7   have worked during the school years and in the summers and

   8   some of the jobs kind of overlapped and intertwined.

   9            After working at Best Buy, I also worked for a

  10   company called Ping Tech Corporation.  We built custom systems

  11   and small networks for small businesses and things of that

  12   nature.

  13            While at Purdue University, second semester my

  14   freshman year, I worked for Purdue Data Network.  I worked on

  15   the network upgrade, that was a big project there at Purdue.

  16   After that, I worked for the school of liberal arts.  I was a

  17   systems and network administrator there, user base of 5 to 600

  18   users.

  19            After that, I worked for Allegiance Telecom which is

  20   a publicly-held telecommunications company that specializes in

  21   providing business telecom solutions.

  22   Q.  What did you do for Allegiance?

  23   A.  I was a support intern.  I worked for hybrid networks

  24   primarily UNIX and NT-based systems.

  25   Q.  Are you, do you know the Purdue network topology?



942



   1   A.  Yes, during my job there as network technician, we

   2   installed, I installed hubs and switches, routers, connected

   3   cable, during the major upgrade, the fiber optics, so, yes, I

   4   know that work.

   5   Q.  What was upgraded, the internet connection upgraded?

   6   A.  Not at first.  When I first attended Purdue, they had a

   7   pair of T1s that was load balanced and what that does is take

   8   two T1 lines and makes them act as one.  T1 is a data

   9   connection line of 1.55 megabits per second.  And when I left,

  10   they had upgraded the main connection to the internet to a T3.

  11   However, the main focus of the upgrade was the internal

  12   infrastructure at Purdue, the backbone, the connections to

  13   labs, connections to dorms, things of that nature.

  14   Q.  What is a T3 line, what's is the access speed on that?

  15   A.  T3 is 44.5 megabits per second.

  16   Q.  Is that an increase of what magnitude?

  17   A.  30 times.

  18   Q.  From what it was before?

  19   A.  I am sorry, it is 30 times larger than T1.  We had a pair

  20   of T1s, so that would only be 15 times.

  21   Q.  When the upgrade of the internet access to the university

  22   was achieved, did that mean that the same increase in

  23   magnitude was found in the dorm rooms?

  24   A.  No, when we were doing the network roll-out, updating the

  25   systems, the primary goal was to improve efficiency on the



943



   1   network.  The early roll-outs were just put up almost in haste

   2   just to get functionality and we were working through and

   3   reworking things.

   4            When you upgrade the main pipe to the internet, there

   5   is still a lot of factors that take into account what the end

   6   users, for example, the students in the dorm, are going to

   7   experience when you upgrade a connection likes that.  There

   8   are several points within the network pinch points where

   9   things bottleneck.

  10            For example, our typical connection to a dorm would

  11   only be 10 megabit shared connection and that shared

  12   connection would be used by anywhere from 2 to 400 students.

  13   When you upgrade the main connection to the internet, we

  14   weren't necessarily upgrading those pieces.

  15   Q.  Did you live in the Purdue dorms?

  16   A.  Yes, I lived in the dorms my freshman and sophomore years

  17   at Purdue.

  18            THE COURT:  When was that so I have a time frame?

  19            THE WITNESS:  That was fall of '96 through spring of

  20   '98.

  21            THE COURT:  Thanks.

  22   Q.  What was the network available to your dorm room at

  23   Purdue?

  24   A.  The --

  25            MS. MILLER:  Objection, I fail to see the relevance



944



   1   to this line of questioning.

   2            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   3   A.  When I initially went to Purdue freshman year, the process

   4   of the migration of the main upgraded backbone was in its

   5   infancy and halfway through my freshman year, we actually saw

   6   the fruits of it in the dorm.  When we started, we had a 19.2

   7   kilobyte connection and once the roll-out reached the dorm, we

   8   had a 10-megabit shared connection.  I had a 10-megabit

   9   connection, every room had a 10-megabit line to it which would

  10   funnel down so everyone in that one room would share a

  11   10-megabit line to the campus backbone.

  12   Q.  What access speeds do you experience on the 10-megabit

  13   line?

  14   A.  When I first got the line, when I first was connected, I

  15   was one of the early few utilizing the new speed and we could

  16   readily see 100-kilobits per second line when they first

  17   installed it.

  18   Q.  You said 100 kilobits per second?

  19   A.  100 kilobits per second.

  20   Q.  About 10 percent of the rated speed of the line?

  21   A.  Right, those numbers come -- I wasn't the only one using

  22   the network and so other students using that.

  23            The other thing when we first got that, the

  24   university still had those load balance T1s and that line is

  25   only 3-megabits per second line and the design of the network,



945



   1   the dorms would never, one dorm room or one computer in a dorm

   2   room would never have full access to the 3 megabits.

   3   Q.  Did the speed that you were able to experience change at

   4   any time during your time in the dorm?

   5   A.  Yes, they actually got worse.  During the roll-out,

   6   everything was done in phases.  We did one and two dorms at a

   7   time and as we brought more dorms on line to the network, our

   8   connection speeds and what -- the data transfer rates we

   9   experienced gradually decreased.

  10   Q.  Before I asked you about 100 kilobits was 10 percent, I

  11   meant to say 1 percent of the 10-megabit lines?

  12   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  13   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich, are you being paid to be here to testify?

  14   A.  No.  However, I feel I should mention the Electronic

  15   Frontier Foundation paid for my airplane ticket.  I got a call

  16   yesterday from Ed Hernstadt and they said they needed me up

  17   here, so I caught the last plane of the evening, 7 p.m.

  18   Q.  We thank you for that.

  19            Have you ever been involved in a project to develop a

  20   piece of Linux software?

  21   A.  Yes.  Just to kind of give you a quick background, when we

  22   say project and what Linux is before we obfuscate and things

  23   get confused, the development process --

  24            THE COURT:  When do we get to doing that, obfuscate

  25   and things get confused?



946



   1            THE WITNESS:  I will do my best here.

   2   A.  We had a project, the way we define a project is the users

   3   of the system, users of the Linux operating system and

   4   primarily developers get to a point in their developing their

   5   code that they realize we now have the foundation to work on

   6   something else, whether it be 3D graphics, video playback, a

   7   word processor program now, things like that.

   8            Interested developers will make announcements on many

   9   mailing lists, bulletin boards saying I am John Q. Developer,

  10   I wish to develop this application, I will be working with

  11   this web site, this mailing list, the code archive will be

  12   stored here, and anyone else that wants to join in, come over

  13   here and we will start working on here on this.  In a short

  14   period of time, anywhere from a half dozen to a hundreds of

  15   developers will work on any given project.

  16   Q.  What is a code archive?

  17   A.  A code archive, we tend to give that name to a system we

  18   use, when you have a large number of developers working on a

  19   project, it is very easy for people to overwrite someone

  20   else's work.  So a code archive using a special program called

  21   CVS allows you to make changes to code and store the changes

  22   between each revision.  So multiple developers can change the

  23   same piece of code and if something gets squashed, you can go

  24   back and revert to the original piece.

  25   Q.  What piece of code gets selected under the conversion?



947



   1   A.  I am sorry?

   2   Q.  How is there a selection of and different versions of the

   3   same code?

   4            MS. MILLER:  Objection, foundation.

   5            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   6   Q.  Is one piece of code selected out of the different

   7   versions of the same codes that are written?

   8   A.  When a developer, say we are developing a word processor

   9   and fixing the spell check function and one developer sends up

  10   a fix for a bug and another developer gets into a PC he meant

  11   to get in two days ago and created another bug.  What will

  12   generally happen is they will look at it and just make another

  13   patch to go on top of it.  It is really a revolving process.

  14   The last piece committed to a developer that has access to it

  15   is generally the one people are working from.

  16   Q.  Have you ever worked in an environment where you have a

  17   traditional process of making software?

  18            MS. MILLER:  Objection.

  19            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.  I don't know what

  20   that means.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  I am sorry, your Honor.

  22   Q.  Do you understand what I mean when I say the traditional

  23   way of writing software?

  24   A.  I think you mean the traditional commercial development

  25   model.  The open source model has many advantages in that it



948



   1   levels the playing field, so if you are the most senior

   2   developer or most junior developer, you both have equal say in

   3   what goes on in the code base and the best idea wins or best

   4   piece of code wins and that is very advantageous because a lot

   5   of times, you will get a 17-year-old that is really sharp at

   6   what he knows and it is a better way of doing something.  In

   7   traditional, it is more top-down manner, where the most senior

   8   manager or developer says this is how we are doing it even

   9   though it might not necessarily be the best way to do it.

  10   Q.  Which Linux projects have you worked on?

  11   A.  I have worked with several.  The first one was the Debian

  12   Linux distribution, a Linux distribution is a term we give to

  13   another project that takes the collective of all the smaller

  14   projects and puts it together in a way that end users can

  15   easily install and maintain a system running Linux and it

  16   makes it a lot easier than working from raw code base, so

  17   there is much more continuity and stability to the system.

  18   Q.  Can you give an example of that?

  19   A.  An example of?

  20   Q.  A distribution, what might be bundles to go?

  21   A.  For example, Debian includes all the necessary tools and

  22   applications one would need to set up a web server, a mailing

  23   server, set up a desktop system for doing code development,

  24   word processing, networks, virtually anything you can do with

  25   a computer, there is an application available that you can do.



949



   1   Q.  What other projects have you worked on?

   2   A.  I worked -- I am sorry?

   3   Q.  What other projects have you worked on?

   4   A.  One of the developers I met while working on the Debian

   5   project approached me and said he had received some

   6   documentation on how to start getting 3D graphic support under

   7   Linux.  I was very interested in this because I was at that

   8   time looking into what it would take to get a DVD working

   9   under Linux, so I worked with him and we started the Utah GLX

  10   project which was one of the founding projects for hardware

  11   accelerated 3D graphics in Linux.

  12            In fact, it was the founding project for that.  My

  13   role there, I lobbied several hardware manufacturers for

  14   documentation.  Our goal there was we needed specific

  15   documentation to the various video chip sets in order for us

  16   to support those cards in Linux.

  17   Q.  What does it mean when you say to support a card in Linux?

  18   A.  There is literally dozens of hardware vendors selling

  19   common PC hardware and users often when they buy a system,

  20   they are not sure which piece they get and in order for Linux

  21   to run on the hardware they have, we have to have support for

  22   their chips and so our goal is to get Linux to run on their

  23   system, we have to have support for all the available chips.

  24   Q.  Does support mean that the operating system and the chip

  25   can interact?



950



   1   A.  That's what I mean by support, the Linux can communicate

   2   with the card, how the card was intended to be used for.

   3   Q.  Can you explain what a graphic accelerator is?

   4   A.  Graphic accelerator is a term used for the latest

   5   generation of video cards where they specifically have designs

   6   in them for doing 3D graphics, gaming, a lot of times they are

   7   adding in support for hardware accelerated video play back,

   8   motion compensation, video -- I can throw catch phrases all

   9   day but --

  10   Q.  What was the next project you worked on?

  11   A.  After getting to the point where we had gotten to where we

  12   needed to begin the DVD project, I spun a sister project off

  13   from Utah GLX that became known as the Linux Video project or

  14   for short, LiViD.

  15   Q.  Why did you start LiViD?

  16   A.  Quite frankly, I wanted to play DVDs on my Linux box.  I

  17   received documentation for a hardware decoder that worked with

  18   my video code at the time and I wanted to be able to utilize

  19   that decoder chip and the DVD drive and movies I bought under

  20   Linux.

  21   Q.  What was your role with the LiViD project?

  22   A.  I was the founder, project leader of LiViD.

  23   Q.  What does it mean to be a project leader?

  24   A.  It can mean a lot of things, it depends on the project.  A

  25   lot of times the project leader in my case went out and



951



   1   actively seeked developers working on similar projects,

   2   video-related project.  My idea was if we get all the

   3   developers working on video and DVD-related projects, we could

   4   all work from a common code base and have more a cohesive and

   5   efficient code group as opposed to several projects working on

   6   different things and not necessarily coming up with a

   7   standardized set of tools.

   8   Q.  When did you start working on the LiViD project?

   9   A.  I founded LiViD June, July, in the time period of 1999.

  10   Q.  Are you still working on it?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  How much time do you devote to LiViD?

  13   A.  When I originally started LiViD, I put upwards of 40 hours

  14   a week, talking with developers, talking to hardware vendors,

  15   looking at specifications, looking at code, writing code.

  16   With my job and what I have been doing now, I have not been

  17   able to commit as much time and now I would say I commit

  18   anywhere from 10 to 20 hours a week.

  19   Q.  Are you being paid for any of your work on the project?

  20   A.  No, I am not.

  21   Q.  Have you ever heard of DeCSS?

  22   A.  Yes, DeCSS is commonly referred to as a Windows program

  23   that decrypts DVD data.

  24   Q.  When did you first become aware of it?

  25   A.  Summer/fall period of '99 when it was first posted to the



952



   1   LiViD mailing list.

   2   Q.  Did you try it out when it was first posted?

   3   A.  When it was first posted, it was posted in binary form.

   4   We were more -- I was more interested in the source code

   5   version which came shortly thereafter.  When it first came

   6   out, I did not use it.

   7   Q.  Was DeCSS part of or connected to the LiViD project?

   8            MS. MILLER:  Objection, your Honor, no foundation.

   9            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  10   A.  Yes, the DeCSS has actually a long history of being

  11   related to the LiViD project.  The CSS project or CSS process

  12   has a few phases, the authentication between a decoder or the

  13   piece whether it be hardware or software that takes the DVD

  14   data and converts it here in audio and video presentation and

  15   the actual decryption where it decrypts the encrypted content.

  16            The first part of that process was the authentication

  17   and that was written and released for and under the LiViD

  18   project.  DeCSS utilized the CSS routines from the LiViD

  19   project as a piece of DeCSS.  DeCSS, the source code was later

  20   translated, the core functions were used in the decrypting

  21   part of the DeCSS for the Linux video player.

  22   Q.  In other words, you are saying part of the DeCSS came from

  23   Linux and the second part of DeCSS went back into Linux?

  24   A.  That is correct.

  25   Q.  Is the source code for DeCSS available now?



953



   1   A.  Yes.

   2   Q.  Is the source code for LiViD project available?

   3   A.  Yes, all the code for the LiViD project is available.  We

   4   released all the under the GNU general public license which is

   5   the open source license that most Linux projects are using.

   6   Q.  Why was DeCSS a Windows program?

   7            MS. MILLER:  Objection, your Honor.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   9   Q.  Do you know why DeCSS was a Windows project?

  10            MS. MILLER:  Objection, we have already heard

  11   testimony from Mr. Johansen.

  12            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  13            MR. HERNSTADT:  OK.

  14            THE COURT:  He didn't write the code.

  15            MR. HERNSTADT:  I will try it an a different way,

  16   your Honor.

  17   Q.  Was DeCSS used by the project in developing the LiViD

  18   player?

  19   A.  Yes.  Many of the other developers that had -- I didn't

  20   have a windows system at that time and many of the other

  21   developers used DeCSS to test the tool, to decrypt DVD data to

  22   use the unencrypted data for the other parts of the DVD

  23   player.  A DVD player would have ten steps to decode a DVD

  24   fully and CSS represents two of those and we were unable to

  25   develop many of the other pieces without having those two



954



   1   steps.  So many of the developers would use the unencrypted

   2   content to start analyzing the other parts of it and many

   3   developers analyzed the algorithm which was then brought back

   4   into the LiViD player.

   5            MS. MILLER:  Objection, move to strike the last

   6   answer.  This witness has not laid a foundation for how he

   7   knows what the other developers in the Linux project have.

   8            THE COURT:  Granted.

   9   Q.  You were the project leader of the LiViD project?

  10   A.  That's correct.

  11   Q.  As project leader, you observed all the different changes

  12   of major source code as they were made, is that correct?

  13   A.  I observed most of them.  It is difficult to see every

  14   piece of code that goes in, but when a developer posts a

  15   change to the LiViD project or LiViD archive, we set up a tool

  16   to where the developer would commit his changes and it would

  17   list it and then e-mail back to the mailing list, without the

  18   developer having to do anything, the list of the files that

  19   were changed and give an area for a note to what the developer

  20   said he had just changed in that latest patch or update.

  21            So it was very easy to track the developments by

  22   following the mailed postings.  They listed the files that

  23   were changed and what was changed in those files.

  24   Q.  You said you followed the postings to the forum as well?

  25   A.  Sure, and the code archive itself.



955



   1   Q.  Was it your responsibility to know what was going on in

   2   the LiViD project as its leader?

   3   A.  It was my responsibility in a sense that, you know, I felt

   4   like I founded this project, I started it, this is something I

   5   wanted to do.  I had no obligation, no one was going to punish

   6   me if I didn't follow everything but I had an interest and I

   7   wanted to see a project that I started get completed so I

   8   actively followed the developments of the project.

   9   Q.  Did other people working on the project report to you what

  10   they were doing?

  11   A.  Yes.  We would release status reports on occasion and I

  12   would send out notes to other developers saying give me an

  13   update on, you know, what piece you are working on, where you

  14   see this going, if you need help in a certain area so we could

  15   give the general community an idea of what was going on in a

  16   project for all the people that weren't following the project

  17   directly on the mailing list.

  18            MR. HERNSTADT:  I would suggest that that would

  19   provide the foundation.

  20            THE COURT:  It shows that he knows a lot of hearsay.

  21   I am very interested in what's going on in Camp David and I

  22   read the paper every morning.  I am not capable of testifying

  23   to what's going on at Camp David in a court of law.

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  I understand.  He is the leader of a

  25   project, they all report to him about what they do.



956



   1            I will try it a different way.

   2   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich, given what you know about the LiViD

   3   project, can you tell me if it would be necessary if you

   4   wanted to, if you were to write a DeCSS program to do it in

   5   Windows?

   6   A.  I am sorry.  I didn't understand the question.

   7   Q.  Given what you know about the LiViD project and Linux in

   8   or about the fall of 1999, if you are going to write a DeCSS

   9   program, would you have to do it in Windows?

  10            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  I don't understand the

  11   question.  It is completely ambiguous.

  12            THE COURT:  I think the witness and I do, Ms. Miller.

  13   Overruled.

  14            We are now going to hear about the file formats for

  15   the third or fourth time.

  16   A.  The file system found on DVDs is the UDF support for Linux

  17   was in infancy at the time, so one would need to have access

  18   to read the data before being able to decrypt the data on the

  19   disk, so yes someone would have to use windows or an operating

  20   system that supported UDF to develop DeCSS.

  21   Q.  Did you consider testing the LiViD project using

  22   unencrypted disks?

  23   A.  Yes, some of the developers found, you know, through the

  24   course of their testing of the disks, they found a few

  25   unencrypted DVDs.  The main issue of that is there is no



957



   1   labeling on a DVD when you buy it whether it is encrypted or

   2   unencrypted.  Through my research, I found only a dozen or two

   3   dozen DVDs that are known to be unencrypted.

   4            The other issue, some of the DVDs were found early on

   5   to be unencrypted and either in later pressings or later

   6   releases were then encrypted.

   7   Q.  Is there any other reason you didn't use unencrypted disks

   8   to test the Linux project?

   9   A.  Most DVDs are encrypted and our DVD player wanted to be

  10   full featured.  We wanted to be able to play all the DVDs on

  11   the market.  The other thing here that we really were

  12   developing for was our own personal use but also all the other

  13   users for Linux and limiting the DVD player to only un

  14   encrypted DVDs would have severely hampered the usability of

  15   the Linux DVD player.

  16   Q.  Is the LiViD player project completed?  Is there a player

  17   that works now?

  18   A.  In our initial design, we have kind of had two phases of

  19   the project.  When we first started getting all the necessary

  20   documentation and information needed to develop the LiViD

  21   player, we did a proof of concept design where we put a bunch

  22   of hodge-podge code together and we were able to test whether

  23   everything was going to be technologically feasible.

  24            Over last six or seven months, we designed a new

  25   architecture which is going to allow us to have improved



958



   1   playback performance, hardware acceleration, support for

   2   multiple hardware decoder part boards and video cords and

   3   currently the DVD player for Linux can play DVDs, decode the

   4   audio.  We have not had a formal release, a version 101 so to

   5   speak, however the program is in a working state.

   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  I would like to have the witness give

   7   a demonstration of the LiViD program here.  It is about a

   8   three or four-minute process to show you how it works and what

   9   it is.

  10            MS. MILLER:  Plaintiffs object to that demonstration

  11   on the grounds of relevance.  Whether or not there is an

  12   unlicensed LiViD DVD player right now has no significance, any

  13   relevance to the issues in this lawsuit.

  14            THE COURT:  I take it your position is you don't

  15   dispute that there is a working unlicensed DVD player, not

  16   that you are conceding it, but you don't care to dispute it

  17   for the case of the trial.

  18            MS. MILLER:  That's correct.

  19            THE COURT:  I don't think we need it then, Mr.

  20   Hernstadt.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  If it is not contested, then --

  22            THE COURT:  It is not contested.

  23            (Continued on next page)

  24

  25



959



   1   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

   2   Q.  Does the LiViD player have a save function that permits

   3   you to copy the movie on the DVD to some place on the hard

   4   drive?

   5   A.  No.  The design of the LiViD DVD player was never geared

   6   around copying.  Our main goal was to get compatibility and

   7   performance of a DVD player so we could support it on as many

   8   systems with as wide a range of hardware as any user would use

   9   as possible, and copying was never a main focus of the

  10   project.

  11   Q.  Have you ever used DeCSS to decrypt a DVD?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  When did you do that?

  14   A.  During the course of this trial I used it on Windows to

  15   test, run some tests, test the application, get a feel for it.

  16   Q.  What did you do with the files that you made when you used

  17   the DeCSS program?

  18   A.  The Windows system I used has a very small space allocated

  19   for Windows, only 1 gigabyte, so I'm not able to decrypt the

  20   entire disk.  I decrypted one small piece of it, just tested

  21   it, to see that the application worked, deleted it when I was

  22   done.

  23   Q.  Have you reviewed the source code of DeCSS?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  Is that source code in the Linux DVD player now?



960



   1   A.  The derivatives of the DeCSS are.  The core functions in

   2   DeCSS, the mathematical algorithms and the process for

   3   decrypting were converted from DeCSS back into the LiViD DVD

   4   player.

   5   Q.  Do you know what DivX is?

   6   A.  Yes.

   7   Q.  What is it?

   8   A.  DivX is in the term I have seen it used in these court

   9   proceedings for an MPEG4-based video format.

  10   Q.  Have you ever used DivX?

  11   A.  No.

  12   Q.  Have you ever used any program other than DeCSS and the

  13   one instance you mentioned to decrypt a DVD movie?

  14   A.  I've got a DVD player on my Windows side, my Windows

  15   installation.  That's the only other one.

  16   Q.  But have you ever used a program like DVD Rip?

  17   A.  No.

  18   Q.  Or Speed Ripper?

  19   A.  No.

  20   Q.  Or any other "ripper"?

  21   A.  No.

  22   Q.  Do you own DVDs?

  23   A.  Yes.

  24   Q.  How many?

  25   A.  I've got 20, 25 DVDs.



961



   1   Q.  Did you buy them?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  Have you ever played a DVD that you didn't buy?

   4   A.  Only the ones I rented.

   5            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  Relevance.

   6            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   7   Q.  Have you ever made a decrypted DVD movie available on the

   8   Internet?

   9   A.  No.

  10   Q.  Have you ever made a copy of a decrypted DVD on any

  11   format, VCD, CD, DVD, and made it available to anyone else?

  12   A.  No.

  13   Q.  Or sold it to anyone else?

  14   A.  No.

  15            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Mr. Pavlovich.

  16            THE COURT:  All right.  We will take our afternoon

  17   break, 15 minutes.

  18            (Recess)

  19            THE COURT:  Okay, Ms. Miller, you may proceed.

  20   CROSS-EXAMINATION

  21   BY MS. MILLER:

  22   Q.  Good afternoon, Mr. Pavlovich.

  23   A.  Good afternoon, Ms. Miller.

  24   Q.  I'm correct that you didn't have anything to do with the

  25   creation of DeCSS, right?



962



   1   A.  Could you please repeat the question.

   2   Q.  I'm correct that you didn't have anything to do with the

   3   creation of DeCSS, that's right, isn't it?

   4   A.  I did not develop any of the code.  However, I started the

   5   project for Linux in which the algorithms in DeCSS were part

   6   of it.

   7   Q.  Now, you talked about performing a test of DeCSS for the

   8   first time after getting involved in this lawsuit, is that

   9   correct?

  10   A.  That is correct.

  11   Q.  The machine that you used to perform your test of DeCSS,

  12   you told me in your deposition that machine actually has a 10

  13   gigabyte hard drive, is that correct?

  14   A.  That's correct.

  15   Q.  That only 1 gigabyte was reserved for Windows to be able

  16   to use DeCSS?

  17   A.  That's correct.

  18   Q.  You testified that the css-auth program was originally

  19   developed as part of the Linux development project for a DVD

  20   player, is that correct?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  At what point in time was that program developed, if you

  23   know?

  24   A.  That was in the summer of '99.

  25   Q.  Had you actually reviewed the source code for the css-auth



963



   1   program?

   2   A.  Yes.

   3   Q.  What functions does the css-auth program perform?

   4   A.  Css-auth does what they call handshaking between the DVD

   5   drive and the decoder on the system, and it passes the keys

   6   that are on a DVD disk and the key that is present in the

   7   player, and it does authentication and matching of those keys

   8   to see if you have a viable match.

   9   Q.  And the css-auth program that you're referring to is

  10   written for the Linux operating system, is that correct?

  11   A.  Yes, yes.

  12   Q.  Now, am I correct that no one on behalf of the LiViD

  13   project sought a license from the DVD-CCA for CSS?

  14   A.  Can you please repeat the question.

  15   Q.  No one from the LiViD project ever sought a CSS license

  16   from the DVD-CCA, is that correct?

  17   A.  There are contributors to the project that were familiar

  18   with the licensing.  The project as a collective never sought

  19   out a license.  There were individuals that were interested in

  20   the development that had understanding of the license, other

  21   people working on other projects.

  22   Q.  So the answer to my question is no one associated with the

  23   LiViD project ever sought a license from the DVD-CCA?

  24   A.  The answer is "sort of," because when you say "a member of

  25   the LiViD project," it's not like we have a list of people who



964



   1   are in the group.  It's an open development process, and there

   2   were other people what might say they are part of LiViD, one

   3   might say they are not, that did go seek out the license.

   4   Q.  But you testified in your deposition, did you not, that

   5   the LiViD project basically resolved that they wouldn't seek a

   6   DVD-CCA license because of the nondisclosure requirement,

   7   isn't that correct?

   8            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt?

   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  Could we have a page and line number?

  10            THE COURT:  Ms. Miller, I did issue an order on this.

  11   Please just indicate the page and line and just read the

  12   testimony.  Then if you want to ask the witness if the

  13   testimony was true, you can do that.

  14            (Pause)

  15            MS. MILLER:  Sorry, your Honor.  I just need one more

  16   moment to find the testimony.  I'm almost there.

  17            THE COURT:  Fine.

  18            THE WITNESS:  Could I have a copy to review when you

  19   discuss, so I can get the context?

  20            MS. MILLER:  Certainly.

  21            THE COURT:  Do you want to perhaps pass to another

  22   subject and have one of your colleagues look through that?

  23   Mr. Sims will find it.

  24   Q.  Now, you have heard of a company called Sigma Designs, is

  25   that correct, Mr. Pavlovich?



965



   1   A.  Yes, I have.  I worked with one of their -- I believe he

   2   is a marketing manager at Sigma Designs.

   3   Q.  And can you explain for the Court what Sigma Designs does?

   4   A.  Sigma Designs develops hardware decoder chips for doing

   5   particularly DVD playback.  They released a number of cards

   6   into the market to support that.

   7   Q.  Does Sigma Designs also have a DVD player on the market?

   8   A.  They have an application that works with their hardware

   9   boards.

  10   Q.  And does that application run under Microsoft Windows?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  Now, you are aware, are you not, that Sigma Designs is a

  13   CSS licensee, is that correct?

  14   A.  I have not reviewed their documentation.  I don't know

  15   firsthand if they are a licensee.  It would lead me to believe

  16   that they are, due to the fact that they released equipment

  17   onto the market.

  18   Q.  Now, are you also aware that Sigma Designs recently

  19   announced plans to develop a Linux DVD player?  Is that

  20   correct?

  21   A.  Yes, they are releasing plans to develop a DVD player to

  22   support their next generation adapter.  In fact I'm on the

  23   list of beta developers for that card.

  24   Q.  Now, did anyone from Sigma Designs ever post anything to

  25   the LiViD mailing list?



966



   1   A.  Marshall Goldberg.  He was the gentleman who was the

   2   marketing manager that I worked with.

   3   Q.  Now, it's correct, isn't it, that Mr. Goldberg posted a

   4   message to the LiViD mailing list expressing concern about the

   5   legality of LiViD's development activities in creating an

   6   unlicensed DVD player, correct?

   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection.  Hearsay.

   8            THE COURT:  I take it it's not offered for the truth.

   9            MS. MILLER:  That's correct, your Honor.

  10            THE WITNESS:  Could you please repeat the question.

  11   Q.  It's correct, isn't it, that Mr. Goldberg expressed some

  12   concern on the LiViD mailing list about the LiViD team's

  13   development of an unlicensed DVD player for Linux, isn't that

  14   true?

  15   A.  I believe he did.  I would have to review the archives to

  16   be sure.

  17   Q.  Do you recall testifying in your deposition about

  18   Mr. Goldberg's mailing list posting?

  19   A.  Yes, I believe you showed me one of the postings, and upon

  20   reading it I recognized the message.

  21   Q.  And isn't it also true that Sigma Designs declined to

  22   release to LiViD certain of their specifications for their

  23   interface cards because of their nondisclosure requirements

  24   under the CCA's license?

  25   A.  I don't know the disclosure requirements under the CSS



967



   1   license.  However, Marshall expressed to me that they could

   2   not release any specification on their most popular board,

   3   which was the Sigma Designs known as the H Plus Board,

   4   however, we did learn that that board did not do any CSS

   5   routines that we knew of, and that board was reverse

   6   engineered, or the driver for that was reverse engineered, and

   7   support for that board is now going to be available in the

   8   LiViD player.

   9   Q.  You also know the name Paul Bocco, is that correct?

  10   A.  That's correct.

  11   Q.  Paul Bocco is one of the leaders of another team referred

  12   to as LS DVD, is that not correct?

  13   A.  That is correct.  LS DVD has also worked with LiViD.  We

  14   have been working to try to create a cohesive set of tools so

  15   that our code sets could work together as best possible.

  16   Q.  In fact the LS DVD project members and LiViD project

  17   members shared information about their ongoing development

  18   efforts for Linux DVD players, correct?

  19   A.  Yes, that's correct.

  20   Q.  Now Mr. Bocco also expressed some concern on the LiViD

  21   mailing list about creating an unlicensed DVD player, isn't

  22   that correct?

  23   A.  That is correct.

  24   Q.  And as far as you know, is the LiViD -- excuse me -- is

  25   the LS DVD team now seeking licensing from the DVD-CCA?



968



   1   A.  I believe they are.  Paul sent an update to the list,

   2   mentioning that they had found a company to help fund the

   3   necessary -- or to raise enough money to buy the licensing and

   4   what not.

   5            However, I think it's important to note that we have

   6   seen no code from either of these companies yet, and that

   7   their announcements have been met with skepticism.  The common

   8   term used is vaporware, meaning somebody announces they are

   9   going to do something in the future, we are going to release

  10   widget A or application B, and a lot of times they never

  11   materialize.  As of yet both of those people have made

  12   announcements they are going to do it, however, we have not

  13   seen any fruits of their labor.

  14   Q.  Now, you testified earlier this afternoon that you have

  15   never used any rippers like DVD Rip or Power Rip and the Power

  16   Ripper, is that correct?

  17   A.  That is correct.

  18   Q.  You submitted a declaration in this lawsuit, is that

  19   correct?

  20   A.  I submitted two.

  21   Q.  Okay.  And do you recall the date of the first declaration

  22   that you submitted in this lawsuit?

  23   A.  I believe it was the end of April, beginning of May.

  24            MS. MILLER:  Your Honor, may I approach the witness?

  25            THE COURT:  Yes.



969



   1   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich --

   2   A.  Could you just give me one second to just take a quick

   3   gander here.

   4            THE COURT:  You have given him Defendants' BBO, as I

   5   understand it, is that right?

   6            MS. MILLER:  I actually thought it had been

   7   designated as Defendants' S.

   8            MR. HERNSTADT:  Defendants' S is what I have.

   9            THE COURT:  S?

  10            THE WITNESS:  I have BBO at the bottom.

  11            THE COURT:  Mine and the witness's are BBO, and BBO

  12   it is.

  13            MR. HERNSTADT:  May I inquire, is that the

  14   declaration dated April 30?

  15            THE COURT:  Yes.

  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.

  17   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich, have you reviewed the declaration?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  Do you recognize this as the first declaration you filed

  20   in this case?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  I would like to direct your attention to page 6, paragraph

  23   13 of that declaration.

  24   A.  Okay.

  25   Q.  Paragraph 13 you state, "At the same time, other tools for



970



   1   copying movies from DVDs such as DVD Rip (a program that

   2   intercepts the decrypted DVD data stream and creates a freely

   3   copiable data file) and Power Ripper are widely available and

   4   were for months prior to the release of DeCSS.  Additionally,

   5   they are the tools used when digital-to-digital (for instance

   6   DVD to VCD) copies are made from DVDs, because they are much

   7   easier to use than DeCSS."

   8            Have I just accurately read paragraph 13 of your

   9   declaration?

  10            THE COURT:  You don't have to ask that question.

  11   It's right in front of us.  Next question, please.

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  Did you write this paragraph of your declaration?

  14   A.  Yes.

  15   Q.  But you had actually never used either one of these

  16   rippers --

  17   A.  No.

  18   Q.  -- prior to writing this paragraph?

  19            THE COURT:  In other words, it's correct that you

  20   have never used any of these other rippers?

  21            THE WITNESS:  That is correct.

  22   Q.  You also indicated in your deposition, did you not, that

  23   your only knowledge about Power Ripper is that it has

  24   something to do with DVDs and that it's a Windows program.

  25   A.  Yes.



971



   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, could we have a page and

   2   line?

   3            MS. MILLER:  Certainly.  That would be page 99 of the

   4   deposition, line 11 through line 25.

   5            THE WITNESS:  Could I get a copy of the deposition?

   6   I have not received it.

   7            THE COURT:  It's not necessary right now,

   8   Mr. Pavlovich.  Let's please move on with this.

   9            THE WITNESS:  I apologize.

  10            THE COURT:  I wasn't being impatient with you,

  11   Mr. Pavlovich.  I issued an order in this case two weeks ago

  12   explaining exactly how to do this, and I have reiterated it

  13   several times during the trial.

  14   Q.  Now, Mr. Pavlovich, you also have told me in your

  15   deposition, and I am reading now from page 100, line 14

  16   through 15, and I asked you:

  17   "Q.  What about DVD Rip?"  And your answer:

  18   "A.  I have never heard of DVD Rip."

  19            Was that an accurate statement in your deposition?

  20   A.  I believe if that's how you are reading it from the paper,

  21   yes.

  22            THE COURT:  That wasn't the question.  Was the

  23   testimony you gave in the deposition truthful, the portion

  24   that was just read to you?

  25            THE WITNESS:  No, I mean I have heard of DVD Rip.



972



   1   Q.  And at what point in time did you hear of DVD Rip?  Was it

   2   prior to your declaration?

   3   A.  I don't have a date when I remember hearing about DVD Rip.

   4   You know, through the course of developing the DVD player and

   5   researching it.

   6            THE COURT:  Had you heard of it before your

   7   deposition was taken?

   8            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

   9            THE COURT:  So when you testified in your deposition

  10   you never heard of it, you testified falsely.  Is that about

  11   the size of it?

  12            THE WITNESS:  Yes.

  13            THE COURT:  Is there some particular reason why you

  14   did that?

  15            THE WITNESS:  Not that I can think of now.

  16            THE COURT:  Let's go on.

  17            MS. MILLER:  No further questions, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Mr. Hernstadt?

  19   REDIRECT EXAMINATION

  20   BY MR. HERNSTADT:

  21   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich, do you remember being asked about DVD Rip

  22   at your deposition?

  23   A.  Not particularly.

  24   Q.  Were you trying to hide something in your testimony when

  25   you said you had never heard of it?



973



   1   A.  No.  There is a lot of utilities out there available along

   2   this genre, and I think it's difficult to keep track of the

   3   exact names of everything.

   4            When you know of an application and you wish to

   5   research it and what it does, it's very easy to go and make a

   6   search of it and find that application and find the specific

   7   name of it.  There are literally dozens of applications along

   8   these lines, and I made a mistake.

   9   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich, where is the information about the LiViD

  10   project stored?

  11   A.  On the LiViD website.  It has the links to all the

  12   information for the project.

  13   Q.  Is that information available to anyone?

  14   A.  Yes, it's publicly available.

  15   Q.  You were asked why you didn't go to the DVD-CCA for a

  16   license.  Why didn't you?

  17   A.  There was a long discussion on the LiViD development list

  18   on that topic, and many people are expressing several

  19   different opinions.

  20            One of the major deciding factors was the license

  21   that we were using for developing a Linux DVD player was the

  22   GNU public license, and it would provide an incompatibility

  23   with what we knew of the CSS license.  And there is also the

  24   issue of raising the funds and coordinating who would handle

  25   the actual facilitation of the licensing and be bound to the



974



   1   contract, etc.

   2   Q.  When you say "incompatibility," can you explain what you

   3   mean by that?

   4   A.  The GNU public license is a license placed on the software

   5   and it's a legal incompatibility.  GNU public license was

   6   designed to protect code that was released under that license

   7   so people couldn't take it, make a modification and sell it

   8   without providing the source which they changed.  That's in a

   9   nutshell what the core function of the license is.  And what

  10   we knew of the CSS license, we would not be able to release

  11   the source code for the CSS in the DVD player.

  12   Q.  In writing software for Linux applications is reverse

  13   engineering a tool that you use?

  14   A.  Reverse engineering is I think better defined as a method

  15   or a process.  It's kind of a general term.  Yeah, reverse

  16   engineering is used all the time under Linux development

  17   projects.  Hardware manufacturers often don't release all the

  18   necessary information on products, whether it be an interface

  19   for talking to graphics hardware, file sharing technology.

  20            For example, one project that I followed very closely

  21   over its development is the SAMBA project which incorporates

  22   file sharing for UNIX systems in between Microsoft Windows

  23   systems.  Microsoft provided information on the file

  24   technology, however they did not release all the information

  25   needed.  They made a few changes to the protocol so it would



975



   1   be impossible to develop a compatible program to talk to

   2   Microsoft systems on a non-Microsoft system.  So the SAMBA

   3   team had to reverse engineer the SMB protocol across the wire

   4   to effectively communicate with Microsoft systems.

   5   Q.  Thank you.  You were asked if you had done a declaration.

   6   You said you had done two declarations.

   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  May I approach, your Honor?

   8            THE COURT:  Yes.

   9   Q.  Mr. Pavlovich, is that the second declaration you did in

  10   this case?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  I move the two declarations into

  13   evidence.

  14            MS. MILLER:  Your Honor, objection to moving the

  15   first declaration into evidence.  As I read the declaration,

  16   there are several statements in there that would purport to

  17   give opinion testimony about Linux and other things having to

  18   do with reverse engineering and system development.  I don't

  19   think that Mr. Pavlovich has been properly qualified as an

  20   expert under Rule 702, so we would object on that basis.

  21            Also, there seems to be some discrepancy particularly

  22   as to paragraph 13 of the first declaration, whether in fact

  23   that's true or if he has personal knowledge of the facts that

  24   he related in that paragraph, given that he testified today

  25   that he has never used any rippers.



976



   1            THE COURT:  And the second declaration?

   2            MS. MILLER:  The second declaration, in so far as

   3   Mr. Pavlovich is explaining what DeCSS does, I am going to

   4   object on the ground that we have already heard testimony from

   5   Jon Johansen about what DeCSS does on that basis.  That would

   6   be cumulative.  I also understand that he is responding in the

   7   second declaration to some of the information in

   8   Mr. Schumann's declaration, which is at issue with some of the

   9   aspects of Mr. Pavlovich's first declaration.  So on that

  10   basis we have no problem, but certainly as to paragraph 5, the

  11   second declaration, purporting to say what Mr. Johansen said

  12   about the purpose of DeCSS, we would move to strike that or at

  13   least not have it offered into evidence.

  14            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Hernstadt, I have a problem

  15   with this.  You had the witness here on direct, you could have

  16   asked him anything you wanted to ask him, and to come in on

  17   redirect with two declarations, narrative material, part of

  18   which is incompetent, part of which is hearsay, part of which

  19   is beyond the scope of the cross, you are opening the witness

  20   all over again.

  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  I will withdraw the question, your

  22   Honor.

  23            THE COURT:  All right.

  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Mr. Pavlovich.

  25   Nothing further.



977



   1            THE COURT:  Anything else for Mr. Pavlovich,

   2   Ms. Miller?

   3            MS. MILLER:  Nothing, your Honor.

   4            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Pavlovich.  You are

   5   excused.

   6            All right.  In view of the hour, let's get to the

   7   housekeeping stuff you people wanted to raise, because I have

   8   another matter at 4:30.

   9            MR. ATLAS:  I don't think we need to do it on the

  10   record unless your Honor wishes.

  11            THE COURT:  I think in this case I want to do

  12   everything on the record.

  13            MR. ATLAS:  Fair enough.  Should we come up or do it

  14   from here?

  15            THE COURT:  You can do it from there.

  16            MR. ATLAS:  Really it's just an issue of how your

  17   Honor wants the deposition designations and some of the

  18   documents.

  19            My thought, and I have talked about it with Mr. Sims,

  20   would be to move into evidence the depositions.  What we have

  21   done is we have marked the actual transcripts, we have

  22   bracketed them, and I believe at the front of each deposition

  23   is sort of a designation page that we have designated these

  24   pages, they have objected, or they have counterdesignated and

  25   we have countered the counters in some instances.



978



   1            THE COURT:  I am almost 100 percent sure about two or

   2   three weeks ago I issued an order of a page or two explaining

   3   exactly how this was to be done.  Did that somehow escape

   4   everybody's attention?

   5            MR. SIMS:  I thought Mr. Atlas wasn't clear.

   6            THE COURT:  I want to know what the question is

   7   exactly.

   8            MR. ATLAS:  I assume we will move those kings into

   9   evidence, and the Court as it goes through the evidence in

  10   this case will decide on the objections as it is necessary.

  11            THE COURT:  Sure.

  12            MR. ATLAS:  The second thing is with respect to the

  13   documents, Mr. Sims has provided me with a list of the

  14   exhibits he wishes to move wholesale into evidence.  I am

  15   going through that now.  I think a lot of them I don't have a

  16   problem with, some of them I do and I am noting those

  17   objectives.  I am going to do the same thing.

  18            Now, we will do the same process, move all those

  19   documents into evidence, and the Court will as its going

  20   through the material decide whether my objections or

  21   Mr. Sims's objections are valid and decide whether the

  22   documents stay in evidence.

  23            THE COURT:  I am not sure how we are going to do the

  24   documents.  It is going to depend on volume.

  25            MR. ATLAS:  My goal this weekend is to significantly



979



   1   narrow the volume.

   2            THE COURT:  Well, I would certainly hope you both do

   3   that.  Plaintiffs identified a hundred and some.

   4            MR. SIMS:  We have provided a much smaller list, less

   5   than a third.

   6            THE COURT:  And you provided well over a thousand.

   7            MR. ATLAS:  I promise you it will be less than a

   8   third.

   9            THE COURT:  Yes, I can't even begin to imagine that

  10   all of that stuff is necessary.

  11            MR. ATLAS:  That's what we are going to do.  Assuming

  12   you want the process to be handled the same way, which is we

  13   give you everything and you rule on the objections, the only

  14   wrinkle to that is the documents marked privileged and

  15   confidential, attorneys eyes only.  Do you want to handle

  16   those any differently?

  17            THE COURT:  How many of those are there going to be?

  18            MR. ATLAS:  I don't know.  I'm going to go through

  19   that this weekend.

  20            THE COURT:  "It depends" is the short answer.

  21            MR. ATLAS:  I anticipate coming on Tuesday with all

  22   this stuff ready to go and at that point we can decide

  23   whatever we want to do and we will provide it.

  24            THE COURT:  What is left on defendants' case?

  25            MR. ATLAS:  It looks like we have four, possibly five



980



   1   witnesses left.  My best guess is it would be hard to imagine

   2   we would go past Wednesday on this.  Again that's just an

   3   estimate of what I know from these witnesses and how long the

   4   direct is.  Obviously it would be subject to whatever cross.

   5   But we have been moving at a pretty fast clip unless it slows

   6   down significantly.

   7            THE COURT:  Who are the remaining witnesses?

   8            MR. ATLAS:  I will give you the possible choices.

   9            THE COURT:  This sounds look a trade for a pitcher.

  10            MR. ATLAS:  Mr. Einhorn, Mr. Touretzky, Mr. Appel,

  11   Mr. DiBona and Mr. Abelson are sort of the potentials, and

  12   over the weekend we are going to work out exactly who we feel

  13   we need, and we will advise plaintiffs' counsel as soon as we

  14   know.

  15            THE COURT:  I assume -- Mr. Cooper?

  16            MR. COOPER:  I just want to know for our own

  17   preparation over the weekend that there is not anyone else

  18   they are contemplating so that we won't fail over the weekend

  19   to prepare for somebody and then find on Tuesday that they are

  20   being offered.

  21            MR. ATLAS:  Just give me a second.

  22            THE COURT:  Look, I am taking that until I hear some

  23   spectacularly wonderful reason nobody other than these five

  24   are going to get on the stand.

  25            MR. ATLAS:  Possibly Olegario Craig.  Definitely him.



981



   1            THE COURT:  I assume the plaintiffs have some clue as

   2   to what these people are all about, right?

   3            MR. SIMS:  These people have all been deposed.

   4            THE COURT:  Okay.  So, if, as seems entirely likely,

   5   this is the rest of the defendants' case, is there likely to

   6   be a rebuttal case?

   7            MR. GOLD:  Your Honor, we have been discussing that

   8   for several hours last night, and today's testimony threw some

   9   question on it, so if there is a rebuttal witness it will be

  10   short.  He personally is fairly tall, but he will only testify

  11   for less than an hour.

  12            THE COURT:  I am glad we are beginning to get some

  13   humor into this case.

  14            MR. ATLAS:  Is there a name, or you don't know who it

  15   would be?

  16            THE COURT:  Whoever this is is not testifying before

  17   Wednesday, right?

  18            MR. GOLD:  Obviously.

  19            MR. ATLAS:  It sounds like it may be somebody who has

  20   not surfaced in the case.  If that's the case, then I would

  21   request an opportunity to depose them beforehand.

  22            MR. GOLD:  Well then that's reasonable, and we will

  23   tell you and you can depose this person on Monday or Monday

  24   night.

  25            THE COURT:  All right.  That sounds cooperative and



982



   1   reasonable.  All right.  Anything else?

   2            MR. GOLD:  No, your Honor.

   3            THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you folks.

   4            (Trial adjourned to July 25, 2000 at 9:00 a.m.)

   5

   6

   7

   8

   9

  10

  11

  12

  13

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25



983



   1

   2

   3                        INDEX OF EXAMINATION

   4   Witness                    D      X      RD     RX

   5   LARRY PETERSON...........856    882     883

   6   PETER RAMADAGE...........884    932

   7   MATTHEW PAVLOVICH........940    962     973

   8                         DEFENDANT EXHIBITS

   9   Exhibit No.                                Received

  10    BDC .........................................862

  11    BBD .........................................863

  12    BDE .........................................889

  13    BDF and BDG .................................929

  14

  15

  16

  17

  18

  19

  20

  21

  22

  23

  24

  25

Transcript of Trial - Day 6, MPAA v. 2600 NY; July 25, 2000  

Transcript of Trial - Day 6, MPAA v. 2600

NY; July 25, 2000

Transcript courtesy of the Electronic Frontier Foundation

See related files:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video (EFF Archive)
http://jya.com/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS (Cryptome Archive)
http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs (2600 Archive)
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/ (Harvard DVD OpenLaw Project)



 



984
   1   UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
       SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
   2   ------------------------------x
   3   UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.,
       et al,
   4                  Plaintiffs,
   5                  v.                           00 Civ. 277 (LAK)
   6   SHAWN C. REIMERDES, et al,
   7                  Defendants.
   8   ------------------------------x
   9                                           July 25, 2000
  10                                           9:00 a.m.
  11   Before:
  12                       HON. LEWIS A. KAPLAN,
  13                                           District Judge
  14                            APPEARANCES
  15   PROSKAUER, ROSE, L.L.P.
            Attorneys for Plaintiffs
  16   BY:  LEON P. GOLD
            CHARLES S. SIMS
  17        CARLA MILLER
            WILLIAM M. HART
  18        MICHAEL MERVIS
  19   FRANKFURT, GARBUS, KLEIN & SELZ
            Attorneys for Defendants
  20   BY:  MARTIN GARBUS
            ERNEST HERNSTADT
  21        DAVID ATLAS
            JEFFREY ROLLINGS
  22
  23
  24
  25
985
   1            (In open court)
   2            THE COURT:  Good morning.
   3            MR. ATLAS:  Before we begin with the testimony today,
   4   would it be possible to move in the exhibits and the
   5   deposition testimony, or would you rather do that before the
   6   break or whatever?
   7            THE COURT:  Let's not keep the witness waiting.
   8            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, can I just approach the
   9   bench a minute?  I hope the last bench approach.
  10            (At the sidebar)
  11            MR. GARBUS:  I just wanted to point out, because the
  12   comments on Thursday and Friday that I briefed at the reply on
  13   page 2, footnote 2, is whether one agrees or disagrees that
  14   plaintiff's conduct and the relief sought in the complaint
  15   also violates antitrust law and the first sale doctrine, as
  16   well as 1201(b)(3)'s prohibition against encryption technology
  17   that like CSS and home DVD players requires a particular
  18   design.
  19            Plaintiffs believe that the licensing regime and the
  20   DVD-CCA constructed permits them to dictate to members of the
  21   public who purchased their movies on DVDs (but not on VHS or
  22   VCD) as then purchased and approved CSS-licensed DVD players
  23   on which to view the movie.
  24            And then there's a quote.  It says:  Indeed, Fritz
  25   Attaway was the MPADC general counsel and many congressional
986
   1   lobbyists testified that "In order to obtain authorized access
   2   to a DVD, the consumer has to, in fact, make two purchases.
   3   He or she has to buy a DVD disk and also has to purchase a DVD
   4   display device."
   5            I just wanted to point that out that whether or not
   6   that's an issue in the case, we perceived it to be an issue,
   7   whether one agrees with it or disagrees with it or not.
   8            THE COURT:  Well, the Court doesn't perceive it to be
   9   an issue.  You never pleaded it.
  10            (In open court)
  11            THE COURT:  Mr. Cooper?
  12            MR. COOPER:  I have one issue with respect to the
  13   exclusion of witnesses.  My understanding is that we will hear
  14   from the defense today, five expert witnesses.  I would like
  15   to be able to have Mr. Schumann sit in on their testimony in
  16   order to aid us in preparing for potential rebuttal in the
  17   event that any of them testified to matters to which he might
  18   need to respond.  If there's no objection, I'd like him to
  19   attend that portion.
  20            THE COURT:  Is there any objection?
  21            MR. GARBUS:  No, your Honor.
  22            MR. COOPER:  Thank you, your Honor.
  23            THE COURT:  Your next witness, Mr. Garbus?
  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  Good morning, your Honor.
  25            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt, I see where you spent the
987
   1   weekend.
   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  I'm sorry?
   3            THE COURT:  I see where you spent the weekend.
   4            MR. HERNSTADT:  For some reason everybody has noticed
   5   today.  The defendants call Chris DiBona.
   6    CHRIS DI BONA,
   7        called as a witness by the defendant,
   8        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
   9            THE CLERK:  State your name for the record.
  10            THE WITNESS:  My name is Chris DiBona, D-I B-O-N-A.
  11            THE COURT:  You may proceed, Mr. Hernstadt.
  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, your Honor.
  13   DIRECT EXAMINATION
  14   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
  15   Q.  Good morning, Mr. DiBona.
  16            Mr. DiBona, where do you live?
  17   A.  Well, Palo Alto, California.
  18   Q.  Can you describe your educational background?
  19   A.  Yeah.  Let's see now.  I went to school over at George
  20   Mason and studied computer science.
  21   Q.  When was that?
  22   A.  That probably was from about '91 until about '96.
  23   Q.  And what were the courses that you took in your computer
  24   science program?
  25   A.  You know, your basic broad-range of courses ranging from
988
   1   programming languages to database design, compiler design,
   2   system architecture, systems engineering, that sort of thing.
   3   Q.  And could you describe your employment history, please?
   4            THE COURT:  Well, did you graduate?
   5            THE WITNESS:  No, I have one class left, sir.
   6            THE COURT:  I'm sorry?  I couldn't understand your
   7   answer.
   8            THE WITNESS:  I have one class left.
   9            THE COURT:  And this is for a bachelor's degree?
  10            THE WITNESS:  Yes.
  11            THE COURT:  Go ahead.
  12   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
  13   Q.  Could you describe your employment history, please.
  14   A.  In chronological order or -- O.K.  I worked for the United
  15   States Department of State in their office of information
  16   management doing prototype software and doing dispute security
  17   work for them.  I then went to work for a law firm in
  18   Washington, where I administered an E-mail system.
  19            I worked -- came up to the -- I worked for Tandem,
  20   and I worked for Tandem and Smart Cards.  I started
  21   consulting.  Then I discovered VA Linux systems.
  22   Q.  When did you first start using Linux?
  23   A.  I first discovered Linux in late '94 as part of my
  24   computer science studies, at Sun Labs.  So, it was easier for
  25   me to install the Linux on the machine at home and do my
989
   1   homework there.
   2   Q.  And have you been using it as your system of choice for --
   3   since 1994?
   4   A.  Pretty much.
   5   Q.  Are you being paid by the defendants or DFF to be here
   6   today?
   7   A.  No, I'm not.
   8   Q.  What does VA Linux do?
   9   A.  VA Linux is a provider of systems software and
  10   professional services around the Linux operating system.  We
  11   sell, you know, computers for the infrastructure market.  We
  12   sell scientific computing clusters and a limited range of
  13   graphical work stations.
  14   Q.  Can you explain what those last two items are?
  15   A.  A scientific cluster is -- basically, it's a large
  16   collection of computers that are designed to attack a
  17   scientific problem, say weather or nuclear weapons
  18   simulations.  Those two are the common uses of those.  Instead
  19   of using one very, very large, very, very expensive system,
  20   you take a number of much smaller, much less expensive
  21   computers to attack the jobs, as far as --
  22            THE COURT:  Mr. DiBona, it's very difficult for me to
  23   understand.  Obviously the reporter is having a tough time,
  24   too.
  25            THE WITNESS:  Sorry, your Honor.
990
   1   Q.  Mr. DiBona, if you could perhaps talk a little more
   2   slowly, it might make it easier for everybody to understand
   3   you.
   4   A.  No problem.
   5   Q.  Thanks.
   6            You were talking about scientific clusters.
   7   A.  For graphical work stations.  So, one of our clusters,
   8   already a graphical work station, is used by scientists and
   9   engineers to simulate or visualize data sites so that people
  10   can understand them, what kind of data they're working with.
  11   Q.  And does VA Linux provide the software and the hardware
  12   for these systems?
  13   A.  Yes, we do.
  14   Q.  And what's the software on systems?
  15   A.  Usually it's just -- you know, we install Linux.  We
  16   configure it specifically for the hardware, so it performs
  17   well.  We do some third-party software that we add on top of
  18   it sometimes.  It depends on the need of customer.
  19   Q.  And does VA Linux provide anything other than for software
  20   and hardware for its customers?
  21   A.  Under the circumstances, you have professional services,
  22   integration services, deployment services.  That's about it.
  23   Q.  Is VA Linux a publicly-traded company?
  24   A.  Yes, we are.  We went public December of last year.
  25   Q.  And are there other publicly-traded companies that deal
991
   1   with the Linux operating system?
   2            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  Foundation.
   3            THE COURT:  Overruled.  Go ahead.
   4   A.  There are a number of them.  They're Caldera, Red Hat.
   5   Also companies like Dell, Compac and IBM all start up with
   6   Linux's efforts.
   7   Q.  And what is the nature of these efforts?
   8   A.  They saw the market growing, and so they're trying to
   9   address it in their own ways.
  10   Q.  Is this both software and hardware?
  11   A.  Yes.
  12   Q.  Based upon your -- excuse me, what is your position at VA
  13   Linux?
  14   A.  I'm a director in the marketing department.  My job is
  15   essentially development with the Linux community at large.
  16   So, they sort of have a way of talking with us, and we have a
  17   way of starting dialogue with them, if need be.
  18   Q.  And how do you accomplish that function?
  19   A.  A lot of different ways.  We give away hardware to groups
  20   who need it for their development.  We provide hosting and
  21   network bandwidth to projects that need it.  I go to trade
  22   shows and speak a lot, that sort of thing.
  23   Q.  Now, based upon your job at VA Linux, do you have
  24   information about how many people are using the Linux
  25   operating system now?
992
   1   A.  Yeah.  Currently, depending on who you talk to, it's about
   2   20 million people is the best guess right now.  That's from
   3   using numbers from IDC combined with sort of the work that
   4   Red Hat and we've done on sort of measuring the Linux market.
   5   Q.  And what is IDC?
   6   A.  IDC is a company up in Farmingham, Massachusetts that
   7   specializes in market research reports on the computer
   8   industry.
   9   Q.  And what are the uses for Linux right now?
  10   A.  Right now, Linux is --
  11            MS. MILLER:  Objection; relevance, foundation.
  12            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  13   Q.  Based upon your position at VA Linux, can you say how
  14   successful Linux is as a program right now?
  15            MS. MILLER:  Objection.
  16            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  17            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, on relevance?
  18            THE COURT:  Well, I think relevance.  I think
  19   foundation.  I think it's basically calling for hearsay.  You
  20   don't -- there is no definition of what "successful" means.
  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  O.K.
  22            THE COURT:  It's kind of like asking somebody who
  23   buys for supermarkets whether Tide is successful to get the
  24   stains out.  I don't know.
  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  I understand, your Honor.
993
   1   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
   2   Q.  Mr. DiBona, from the perspective of VA Linux and you, as
   3   the director of marketing, what is the measure of success in
   4   terms of the Linux operating system?  How would you measure
   5   it?
   6            MS. MILLER:  Same objection.
   7            THE COURT:  Overruled.
   8   A.  We measure it a number of different ways.  We rely on
   9   Netcraft to show us the growth of Linux in the Internet
  10   serving market.  That tells us how Linux is growing in terms
  11   of percentage of web servers out there.
  12            THE COURT:  What is Netcraft?
  13            THE WITNESS:  Netcraft is an another market research
  14   site.  What they do is they, using a program, sort of pull
  15   different machines on the Internet to see what they are
  16   running, and they put together a report based on that, and
  17   from this point they can tell if they're running Windows or
  18   Linux or whatever.
  19            And from information like this, we can tell how Linux
  20   is doing in the marketplace, and it helps us in our
  21   forecasting and predictions on our own sales because we know
  22   that our percentage of sales of that market is connected to
  23   the growth of Linux.  So, that's how we figure out how to
  24   attack the market.
  25   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
994
   1   Q.  And what results do you see today with respect to how
   2   Linux is growing in the market?
   3   A.  Well, specifically VA Linux has been growing depending on
   4   which part you look at, between 30 and 60 percent each
   5   quarter.  That's pretty much above what Netcraft is showing as
   6   a percentage of the Internet serving market.
   7            THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  I don't understand the
   8   answer.  What is VA?
   9            THE WITNESS:  VA, that's the company I work for.
  10   Sorry.
  11            THE COURT:  I see.  So, basically, what you are
  12   telling us is that this Netcraft service tells you that Linux
  13   is growing 30 to 60 percent per quarter.
  14            THE WITNESS:  No, that's our own numbers.  The
  15   Netcraft shows that Linux is growing anywhere --  basically a
  16   little percentage each month.
  17            THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  A little percentage each
  18   month?
  19            THE WITNESS:  Yeah, like a percent or two each month,
  20   as a percentage of total Internet circuit.
  21            THE COURT:  What percentage?  I'm not sure this was
  22   the right witness or that this isn't hearsay.
  23            Just out of curiosity, what percentage of the market
  24   for operating systems in the United States does Linux account
  25   for as far as if you know?
995
   1            THE WITNESS:  Internet serving market.  I can tell
   2   you a number that makes sense.
   3            THE COURT:  In the server market?
   4            THE WITNESS:  Yeah.  Specifically, Linux is about
   5   32 percent.
   6            THE COURT:  In the server market?
   7            THE WITNESS:  In the web server market.
   8            THE COURT:  In the web server market?
   9            THE WITNESS:  Yes.
  10            THE COURT:  And overall?
  11            THE WITNESS:  It's almost impossible to tell you.
  12            THE COURT:  All right.  Go ahead.
  13   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
  14   Q.  Does VA Linux have plans to expand into its desktop
  15   market?
  16   A.  We have a few offerings in the desktop market, but it's
  17   not a very large percentage of our sales right now.
  18   Q.  What kind of offerings do you have right now?
  19   A.  We have a very low-end desktop and sort of a medium-range
  20   graphical work station.
  21   Q.  What is limiting, if anything, about VA Linux's ability to
  22   get into the desktop market?
  23            MS. MILLER:  Objection.  Leading, foundation,
  24   relevance.
  25            THE COURT:  I don't see the relevance, counsel.
996
   1   What's the relevance?
   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  The relevance is that Mr. DiBona can
   3   testify about why there is a disparity between the server
   4   market and the operating system market for the general public
   5   and the desktop.
   6            THE COURT:  What does that matter to this case?
   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  It matters because one of the reasons
   8   it's different is the lack of applications and applications,
   9   such as, for example, a DVD player.  Those applications are
  10   necessary to make an operating system generally attractive and
  11   generally viable.
  12            And to the extent that this case is about DeCSS and
  13   DeCSS is a part of the reverse engineering project to bring
  14   DVD players to the Linux operating system, Mr. DiBona can
  15   testify that that's an essential ingredient in the viability
  16   of Linux as an operating system.
  17            THE COURT:  What has that got to do with the issues
  18   in this case?  This isn't the Microsoft case.  I could
  19   understand this line of questioning in the Microsoft case.
  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  I understand, your Honor.  I think
  21   what it gives you is more as to the liquidity of reverse
  22   engineering.
  23            THE COURT:  As to the --
  24            MR. HERNSTADT:  To the presence of reverse
  25   engineering.
997
   1            THE COURT:  To the presence of reverse engineering.
   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  That it is a normal and, in fact,
   3   necessary part of building Linux applications, that the DVD
   4   player application is a necessary part to make the Linux
   5   operating system viable, and it was DeCSS was part with the
   6   reverse engineering in order to give the DVD player a
   7   presence.
   8            I understand that when I was not here there were
   9   discussions about antitrust and --
  10            THE COURT:  That would be something of an
  11   overstatement.
  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  O.K.  I think that what this can
  13   show, though, is that if Linux and if applications are not
  14   made for Linux, then that will have an anti-competitive effect
  15   on the Linux operating system and will deny -- make it much
  16   more difficult for it to be viable, which will have an
  17   anti-competitive effect.
  18            THE COURT:  What's that got to do with this case?
  19            MR. HERNSTADT:  We have an affirmative defense.
  20            THE COURT:  Your affirmative defense is that the DMCA
  21   violates the antitrust laws.  I expressed myself fully on that
  22   last week.  That's not a defense to anything.
  23            MR. HERNSTADT:  I think, also, your Honor, in terms
  24   of statutory construction, perhaps it gives a certain amount
  25   of guidance that, if the statute permits, an interpretation as
998
   1   opposed to another interpretation, if one interpretation
   2   permits a situation that has anti-competitive effects and is
   3   bad for the public, because of that, that perhaps that's
   4   not -- that might be one of the factors that would --
   5            THE COURT:  You know, the patent laws have an
   6   anti-competitive effect.  If a drug company finds the cure for
   7   cancer and patents it, it will be the only drug company that
   8   can sell it.  They will charge whatever they want, and it will
   9   be highly anti-competitive, and it will be perfectly legal
  10   because the Patent Code so permits.  So, I just don't get the
  11   argument.
  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  I understand, your Honor.  This is
  13   not a patent situation.  The plaintiffs --
  14            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, can I just briefly be heard
  15   with regard to that?
  16            THE COURT:  I will hear you.
  17            MR. GARBUS:  I think the position that we take and
  18   the answer says the DMCA as interpreted applied, it doesn't
  19   say facially.  And what it says is that if this Court or any
  20   Court were to permit an anti-competitive situation, an
  21   antitrust situation to create that, that would be -- that
  22   would be an interpretation the DMCA made, which we believe
  23   runs up against Sony, Sega, and the other issues.
  24            I don't want to have the argument now.  I think the
  25   Court has expressed its feeling.  I just did want to point out
999
   1   that that is the position that we take to make it clear with
   2   respect to this witness' testimony.  And I know the Court
   3   disagrees.
   4            THE COURT:  Ms. Miller?
   5            MS. MILLER:  As the Court has already stated, the
   6   plaintiffs view this as completely irrelevant testimony.  The
   7   defendant has already admitted that he's not engaged
   8   personally in reverse engineering activities.
   9            And as far as whether or not there is a DVD player
  10   available, and if it's a Linux operating system, you've
  11   already heard testimony that other developers of DVD players
  12   have sought and in certain instances obtained licensing from
  13   the DVD-CCA and developed such players.  Again, this adds
  14   nothing to the record.
  15            THE COURT:  I take it, Ms. Miller, that you don't
  16   have any quarrel with the basic proposition that the ability
  17   of any operating system, be it Linux or anything else, to
  18   succeed in the marketplace is related to the extent to which
  19   applications that run under that operating system are
  20   available; is that true?
  21            MS. MILLER:  Theoretically and absolutely not.  We
  22   have no quarrel with that.
  23            THE COURT:  And not only theoretically, I take it you
  24   have no quarrel with the proposition that that's true for
  25   Linux.
1000
   1            MS. MILLER:  I don't know that that's true for Linux.
   2   I don't think we've heard through this witness whether or not
   3   that, in fact, is true.
   4            THE COURT:  Well, I was trying to save some time, but
   5   I guess we are not going to save some time.
   6            Go ahead, counsel.
   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, your Honor.
   8            Actually, could we have the last question and answer
   9   read back before we went into the objection, your Honor?
  10            THE COURT:  Yes.
  11            (Record read)
  12            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.
  13   A.  There is a certain lack of applications for the desktop
  14   market.  For instance, office productivity and certain
  15   vertical market applications for things like doctors, dentist
  16   offices, and that sort of thing.  You have to have a certain
  17   number of applications before you can sell the personal
  18   desktop, everything from software for small offices to large
  19   ones, so...
  20   Q.  Is the DVD player one of the applications that your
  21   company thinks would be necessary to make the Linux operating
  22   system viable for the personal market?
  23            MS. MILLER:  Objection, relevance.
  24            THE COURT:  I'm going to hear it.
  25   A.  Basically multimedia is still very important for the
1001
   1   personal market.  If we were to sell to an end user, we would
   2   have to be able to compete, and for DVD, CD, audio, the whole
   3   thing.  And most of that is that for Linux DVD is not because
   4   of the -- it is just the manufacturers never made a player,
   5   and when the people tried to write one themselves, the
   6   developers out there on the net and such, they were met with
   7   resistance, and that's why I'm here.
   8   Q.  Is VA Linux doing anything to develop applications?
   9   A.  Well, we have a couple of efforts.  My regular activities,
  10   where I give away hardware and make sure that people who are
  11   working on these kinds of problems are helped out however we
  12   can, be it by hosting or by serving or administration of our
  13   machines.
  14            We also have a project called Source Forge, and it
  15   hosts about 6,800 projects, and about 40,000 of them source
  16   developer, the idea being that if we administer the machines
  17   and take care of backups and provide for messages and
  18   discussions and reports, that they can get to the business of
  19   doing the software that they want to do without having to
  20   worry about the minutia of system administration and such.
  21   Q.  You said it hosts about 6,800 projects.  Are those
  22   different projects for Linux applications?
  23   A.  Yes.
  24   Q.  And who owns the application if the project is successful
  25   and completed?
1002
   1            MS. MILLER:  Objection, relevance, calls for
   2   speculation.
   3            THE COURT:  Overruled.
   4            They are owned by the project leaders and the
   5   developers on the site.  VA doesn't take an ownership of the
   6   projects.  They are just there to help.
   7   Q.  Mr. DiBona, do you know what DeCSS is?
   8   A.  Yes.
   9   Q.  Have you ever used DeCSS on a DVD?
  10   A.  For the purpose of my writing my declaration, I used DeCSS
  11   to copy a VOB file off of a DVD.
  12   Q.  Have you ever made a DVD available on the Internet to
  13   other people to upload?
  14   A.  Never.
  15   Q.  Have you ever downloaded a DVD from the Internet?
  16   A.  Never.
  17            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much.
  18            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Hernstadt.
  19            Ms. Miller?
  20            MS. MILLER:  No questions, your Honor.
  21            THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you, Mr. DiBona.  You
  22   are excused.
  23            THE WITNESS:  Thank you, your Honor.
  24            THE COURT:  Next witness?
  25            (Witness excused)
1003
   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, the defendants call on
   2   Olevario Craig.
   3   OLEVARIO LOPEZ CRAIG,
   4        called as a witness by the defendant,
   5        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
   6            THE CLERK:  State your name, spelling it slowly.
   7            THE WITNESS:  Olevario Lopez Craig.  O-L-E-V-A-R-I-O
   8   L-O-P-E-Z   C-R-AI-G.
   9            THE COURT:  Counsel, you may proceed.
  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you.
  11   DIRECT EXAMINATION
  12   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
  13   Q.  Mr. Craig, where do you live?
  14   A.  In Amherst, Massachusetts.
  15   Q.  Can you describe your educational background, please?
  16   A.  I assume you just want higher education.
  17            I attended UMASS in the fall of 1998 and spent three
  18   years as a computer science major, dropped out for reasons
  19   both academic and non, and then came back to complete a degree
  20   in communications, which is a B.A., and that was -- I finished
  21   in May of 1995.
  22   Q.  How long have you been working with computers?
  23   A.  Depends on how one defines "working," but I've been using
  24   computers since, oh, I would guess 1983.  I've been employed
  25   regarding computers since mid-high school, which would be
1004
   1   1986.
   2   Q.  And could you describe your employment history?
   3   A.  With regard to computers?
   4   Q.  Sure.
   5   A.  Several summer jobs, working for a small software company
   6   in Waltham, Massachusetts, which is now defunct by the name of
   7   DataTree.  At that point in time, I did things like create
   8   their software distributions, make the floppy disks that
   9   actually had the software on it, package it up, send it out.
  10            I also set up a bulletin board system, which was at
  11   that point the height of customer service technology, not
  12   really related to work.  But at the same time, the high school
  13   that I attended had old deck hardware, Digital Equipment
  14   Corporation hardware, including VAX 11780 and previously
  15   PDP1170, both of which ran Unix Operations, U-N-I-X operating
  16   systems.
  17   Q.  And how long have you been employed by the University of
  18   Massachusetts?
  19   A.  Since shortly after graduation in 1995.
  20   Q.  What is your position there?
  21   A.  Well, my position has changed somewhat over the past five
  22   years, but I was initially hired as entry-level software
  23   support for people who were familiar with ISP, that would be
  24   analogous to help desk support.  You call up and you tell
  25   somebody that something is not working and they help you
1005
   1   figure it out.
   2            I have since moved away from that and into second and
   3   third tier operations, operating systems applications and
   4   networking support.
   5   Q.  And have you done any consulting work?
   6   A.  From time to time, on the side, I do various bits and
   7   pieces, mostly relating to people who want to set up
   8   networking in their mall business or home office.  I've had a
   9   few clients.  I couldn't really point to a number, probably
  10   less than five over the last three years.
  11   Q.  And what operating system do you use in your work?
  12   A.  At work, we have a very heterogenous environment.  We
  13   maintain seven different players of Unix operations.  One
  14   includes Unix, in addition to Windows NT, '95, and Windows
  15   2000, and several different versions of the McIntosh system.
  16   Q.  And what operating system do you use at home?
  17   A.  In my house, I have several computers.  On my main
  18   computer, the one that I use most often, I have both Linux and
  19   Windows '98.
  20   Q.  And Mr. Craig, are you being paid to be here today?
  21   A.  I am not.  Actually, spending my vacation time to be here.
  22   Q.  You said that you have a Windows program on your home
  23   computer.  What do you use that for?
  24   A.  Interestingly enough, as it pertains to this case, I use
  25   Windows -- I have Windows on my home computer as a bootable
1006
   1   operating system solely to be able to play DVDs.  I don't
   2   really play games anymore.  There aren't many reasons, from my
   3   point of view, to actually boot into Windows, rather than run
   4   it under an application like VM Ware.  Playing DVDs is really
   5   the only reason why I have Windows as a bootable operating
   6   system on my home computer.
   7   Q.  Can you explain what the difference is between booting
   8   into Windows and using it in an application like VM Ware?
   9   A.  Certainly.  It's typical when setting up a Linux system on
  10   a system that already has Windows installed, to set it up on
  11   what's called a dual boot, meaning that if you turn the
  12   computer on, you have the choice of which operating system to
  13   run.
  14            And, thereafter, after that session, you are locked
  15   into that operating system.  In other words, to get to the
  16   other operating system, you have to reboot the operating
  17   system controlling the computer completely.
  18            And if you want to run programs from another
  19   operating system, you have to reboot.  The only reason that I
  20   boot into Windows is that I can run the software in running my
  21   DVD player card.  The software to do that under Linux -- which
  22   tells me it's going to happen really soon -- is not yet really
  23   ready for just sitting down and playing.
  24            MR. COOPER:  Move to strike the last portion; hearsay
  25   grounds.
1007
   1            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, I can inquire what the
   2   basis of the --
   3            THE COURT:  All right.  Go ahead and do that.
   4   Q.  Mr. Craig, when you were talking about the Linux DVD
   5   player, what is the basis of your knowledge, if any, about the
   6   Linux DVD player?
   7   A.  Well, starting, I would guess, sometime in November or
   8   December of last year, I was really looking to get Windows off
   9   of my home computer.  I had reached a level of frustration
  10   with it, and as I said, I decided that I really didn't need it
  11   for anything else.
  12            So, I was looking for a Linux application to play
  13   DVDs and went to the Web and searched and found the LiViD home
  14   page, followed the links and saw that there was this ongoing
  15   trial, but that there was something there that could be
  16   downloaded from the CVS repository.  So, I downloaded at that
  17   point in time and built it -- wasn't really able to get it to
  18   work satisfactorily.
  19            At that point, it was particularly on my particular
  20   hardware decoder card which wasn't supported, and it wasn't at
  21   a level that I felt comfortable to try to replace my Windows
  22   application operating system.
  23   Q.  Would you explain, Mr. Craig, what the CVS is?
  24            MR. COOPER:  Relevancy, your Honor.
  25            THE COURT:  Overruled.
1008
   1   A.  It has nothing to do with pharmacies.  It stands for
   2   Concurrent Version System.  It's a method by which people can
   3   work on a single code base and download the code, make
   4   changes, fix bugs, upload the code, and merge it into a
   5   coherent hole.
   6   Q.  Mr. Craig, in your position as the systems administrator
   7   in the computer science department in Amherst, Massachusetts,
   8   have you worked with the network for the computer science
   9   department?
  10   A.  Extensively.  I'm involved in design decisions.  I don't
  11   usually make purchasing decisions, but I help lay out the
  12   groundwork for what needs need to be filled, where we should
  13   go for upgrade capacity, what kind of room we need to leave
  14   ourselves for future improvement.
  15   Q.  And are you also familiar with the University of
  16   Massachusetts' network of a hole?
  17   A.  I am familiar to a lesser degree.  It's not a network that
  18   I administer personally, but I do know a great deal about how
  19   it works by necessity because we are connected to it.  I also
  20   know a great deal about the hardware on which it runs.
  21   Q.  And what's the basis of your knowledge?
  22   A.  Having to work with it, having to connect to it, it's also
  23   a point of interest for what we do in order to tell an
  24   incoming student or a prospective student or prospective
  25   faculty member what kind of facilities they're going to have.
1009
   1            We regularly try to update our own description on
   2   what the University of Massachusetts has for technology
   3   resources and particularly after my deposition in this case, I
   4   went and made it my business to research more about the UMASS
   5   network in specific.
   6   Q.  Is research a part of your job?
   7   A.  Absolutely.
   8   Q.  And how do you research -- do you do research information
   9   about systems or networks or the research that you do in your
  10   job?
  11   A.  The web is by far the greatest tool that has ever been
  12   invented for research.  Second to that, there is the archive
  13   of news groups at what's called Deja News, which allows one to
  14   see roughly the last five to ten years' worth depending on the
  15   hierarchy of on-line discussions regarding any subject, you
  16   can imagine the subjects that I generally go looking for are
  17   hardware and software integration, but the web is certainly a
  18   primary source.
  19   Q.  Is that true for systems administrators generally or is
  20   that true just for you?
  21   A.  I think that's absolutely true for systems administrators
  22   in general.  Without the Web, finding information necessary to
  23   solve problems becomes much more difficult.
  24   Q.  Mr. Craig, could you describe the topology of the
  25   University of Massachusetts network?
1010
   1   A.  The UMASS network itself or our section of it, the campus
   2   backbone, which is the core of the network is what's called
   3   star wired single mode fiber that is gigabyte Ethernet.  It
   4   has a transfer of theoretical maximum capacity of 1,000
   5   megabits per second.
   6            That is attached to five routers from which
   7   subsections of networking depend at a speed of 100 megabits
   8   per second.  So, it uplinks to the routers of 100 megabits per
   9   second.
  10            From those five sections, you get various physical
  11   areas of campus.  The southwest residential area, as an
  12   example, has its own switch which is connected to the --
  13   actually, it's a Cisco 5500 switch, which is connected to the
  14   Whitmore switch, which is one of the five switches on one of
  15   the five switches connected to the routers in the backbone.
  16            Other areas of campus are likewise funneled into
  17   those five routers.  Typically, an area of campus right -- if
  18   you think of it as a tree coming out from that router, you'll
  19   get thinner and thinner branches, but most sections of campus
  20   one of 100 megabit Ethernet right up to the point where one
  21   dissolves, so the leaves, the nodes, where you generally get
  22   between 10 and 100 megabits per second depending on that
  23   particular section of campus and the architecture and what
  24   it's required to do.
  25            I should state that an exception to all of this is my
1011
   1   network or what I like to think of as my network which is
   2   attached outside the campus backbone directly to the router
   3   that connects both to the cable and wireless Internet
   4   connection, which is our commodity Internet connection.
   5   Q.  Do you know who has access to the Internet to connections?
   6   A.  I know that access from the dorms is extremely limited.
   7   That router is rate limited and, in fact, we are -- I think we
   8   are the only department on campus that can take as much
   9   bandwidth as we need for that router.
  10            MR. COOPER:  Move to strike, your Honor.
  11            The witness was asked whether he knew and then he
  12   supplied an answer, which I believe is based on hearsay.
  13            THE COURT:  Is that right Mr. Craig?
  14            THE WITNESS:  I don't believe so.
  15            THE COURT:  Well, how did you know what you just told
  16   us?
  17            THE WITNESS:  Because I've seen the router and I've
  18   worked with the cables that are connected to it.
  19            THE COURT:  Motion denied.
  20   Q.  What is the speed -- or excuse me -- the bandwidth of the
  21   Internet connection from the campus backbone to the Internet?
  22   A.  It's what's called a partial DS-3.  We have 30 megabits
  23   per second on the cable and wireless router.
  24   Q.  By way of example, could you explain the different
  25   switches or connections that a file sent from a dorm room to
1012
   1   the Internet would have to go through on the way?
   2            MR. COOPER:  Lacks foundation.
   3   Q.  Do you know from personal knowledge how the topology of
   4   the Internet, so that you could describe that based on your
   5   knowledge?
   6   A.  Yes.
   7   Q.  O.K., could you do so, please?
   8            MR. COOPER:  Lacks foundation.
   9            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  10   A.  I mentioned earlier the southwest dormitories which are
  11   the single largest residential area on campus.  A file going
  12   from a dorm room in the southwest dormitories would go from
  13   the student's computer to what's called a node room, a switch
  14   Ethernet connection to a node room in the dorm, there are up
  15   to three node rooms per dormitory.
  16            The node rooms have switches in them that are 10
  17   megabits to the students' rooms and then they are star wired
  18   with 100 megabit uplink to a core switch, which would then go
  19   to the aforementioned Cisco 5500 router switch off of the
  20   southwest residential area, which is connected to the
  21   Whitmore, which is connected to the Whitmore -- I can't
  22   remember the numbers.
  23            It's connected to a Cisco router at the Whitmore
  24   point of presence on the backbone.  So, it would then go from
  25   100 megabit between the southwest switch and the Whitmore
1013
   1   switch to the gigabit Ethernet on the backbone.  Then it would
   2   go to the LGRC router, which connects to the cable and
   3   wireless router and out to the commodity Internet.
   4            THE COURT:  Is the bottom line of all this that if
   5   somebody wanted to up or download a file from a dorm room, the
   6   transfer rate limitation would be the 10-megabit-per-second
   7   switch in the dorm and whatever proportion of that capacity
   8   might be available at the moment to the particular user?
   9            THE WITNESS:  Actually, it's a little bit more
  10   complicated than that.
  11            THE COURT:  Go ahead.
  12            THE WITNESS:  I mentioned the 100 megabit uplink to
  13   the -- let's take the 100-megabit section between the node
  14   room and the southwest router.  That 100-megabit uplink is
  15   taking all the traffic from -- if we have a large dorm, we
  16   have three node rooms.  It's taking all of the traffic from
  17   all of the students in those rooms.  I think the largest dorm
  18   we have on campus is in the realm of 1,400 students.
  19            I know that we have at least 1,400 students in a
  20   single dorm because I was in such a dorm.  So, that's 1,400
  21   guided by a maximum of three node rooms.  And if you have any
  22   proportion of those 1,400 students using the Internet, what
  23   you're going to see is not a fraction of the
  24   10-megabit-per-second link to the student which is actually
  25   switched.
1014
   1            You're going to see a fraction of the
   2   100-megabit-per-second uplink which is shared among those
   3   1,400 students.
   4            THE COURT:  O.K.  Thank you.
   5            Mr. Hernstadt?
   6   Q.  Has University of Massachusetts upgraded its system in the
   7   last two years?
   8   A.  Extensively.
   9   Q.  And at which points on the route have they made the
  10   upgrades?
  11   A.  The dorm networking project is ongoing, so they are
  12   pulling what in industry is called the last mile, but in the
  13   legal area network, it's actually a much shorter distance into
  14   new dormitory rooms probably as we speak.
  15            We have I think 42 dormitories total that plan to be
  16   wired, and I think of those, 35 are completed.  They have also
  17   upgraded the campus backbone which used to be fiber digital
  18   internet, FDDI, F-D-D-I.  They have upgraded that to single
  19   mode fiber gigabit Ethernet.
  20            They have -- because that that particular change
  21   necessitates a change in technology, they had to upgrade all
  22   the routers connected to the gigabit mesh.  The previous
  23   router would not accept any technology.  And they have
  24   upgraded the router that connects to -- they've upgraded the
  25   routers that connect both to the commodity and the cable and
1015
   1   wireless commodity Internet and the Internet 2 connection.
   2            THE COURT:  I take it, Mr. Craig, that it is not
   3   actually unheard of for students to access the Internet at the
   4   University of Massachusetts from computers that are not in
   5   their dorm room; right?
   6            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.
   7            THE COURT:  It happens in the computer science
   8   department from time to time?
   9            THE WITNESS:  Well, yes.  We have an educational
  10   laboratory that at the moment has 20 computers that we are
  11   keeping and 20 computers that we are throwing out because
  12   they're too old and we are planning to upgrade it with a bunch
  13   of Linux PCs; however, and there are other facilities on
  14   campus where students attach to a particular program, would be
  15   able to use the computers directly connected to the Internet.
  16            There are also places on campus and I actually ran
  17   one when I was a student that are just labs for general use
  18   and all you have to have is a student I.D. to be able to sit
  19   down at a computer.  These are, however, monitor situations.
  20            As an example, I have -- I have myself in the past
  21   terminated student access to the educational lab computers for
  22   resource starvation and what we call misuse of the resources.
  23   There was one person who was continually keeping enormous
  24   files on a shared disk and preventing other students from
  25   completing their classwork because the disk was full with --
1016
   1   actually what he was downloading was the Linux source industry
   2   at that time.  So, it wasn't the content of the -- the use
   3   that we found objectionable, it was simply the fact that he
   4   was using so much that other people couldn't use the research
   5   and, therefore, it was against our policy.
   6            THE COURT:  O.K.  Go ahead, Mr. Hernstadt.
   7   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
   8   Q.  You testified before in response to the judge's questions
   9   that the point -- it would not be the 10-megabit switched
  10   network in the dorm room that would limit transfer rates, but
  11   100-megabit uplink.  Has -- is that correct?
  12   A.  That's actually oversimplifying, and I apologize since it
  13   was obviously my fault for the oversimplification.  It would
  14   most likely be the fraction of the 100 megabit Ethernet that
  15   would be the pinch point.  At no point in time is a single
  16   student going to get more than 10 megabits down or up.  We
  17   don't do differential upload and download rates.
  18            However, more likely, if you have a significant
  19   number of people in that 1,400-person dorm that I mentioned
  20   using the Internet, it's not going to be their individual
  21   10-megabit-per-section connections that's going to limit them.
  22   Rather, it's going to be the fact that they have to divide one
  23   megabit, that one single 100-megabit Ethernet connection
  24   between all of them.
  25            And as I said, in a case with 1,400 students, that's
1017
   1   significantly less than a fraction of then a
   2   10-megabit-per-second link.  If you were to assume that 700 of
   3   those 1,400 students were using the Internet at one time, you
   4   could probably work out the math better than I can.
   5            Without a calculator on me, I would guess you'd get
   6   less than two megabits per second out of that entire hundred.
   7   You'd get less than -- probably less than 500 mg.
   8            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor, move to strike the last
   9   portion of that as speculation, without foundation.
  10            THE COURT:  It's arithmetic; overruled.
  11   Q.  And Mr. Craig, based on your knowledge of the University
  12   of Mass. network and the upgrades that are being done to it,
  13   what would they have to upgrade for to relieve that pinch
  14   point?
  15   A.  They would have to put in -- the problem with relieving
  16   that pinch point is that's the best logical place to put the
  17   pinch point.  We only have 30 megabits per second out to the
  18   Internet total, so there has to be a pinch point someplace and
  19   it's better not to have it on the incoming router.
  20            Particularly since there is a predilection in the
  21   administration level to provide better service to, for
  22   instance, the computer science department than to the
  23   dormitories as a whole because there are researchers in the
  24   computer science department who are doing research and
  25   collaboration with international figures and they really need
1018
   1   that bandwidth.
   2            So, it's difficult to answer your question.  They'd
   3   have to spend a lot of money on a bunch of different places.
   4   The network as it is I think is optimized pretty much as well
   5   as it can be without spending an enormous amount of money.
   6   Q.  Are you personally knowledgeable about the Internet access
   7   available to consumers in their homes in the area of the
   8   University of Massachusetts?
   9            MR. COOPER:  Foundation, your Honor?
  10   Q.  And if you are, could you tell us what the basis of that
  11   personal knowledge Is?
  12   A.  Earlier this spring, I gave a talk to the assembled
  13   faculty grad students and staff regarding their options as to
  14   home access.  As you might imagine, it's a very hot topic
  15   among computer science professionals, the ability to be
  16   connected at all times, and we did, myself and a coworker, did
  17   a survey of what was available in the area, what was planned
  18   to be available in the area for the next -- for the
  19   foreseeable future, in other words, as much information as the
  20   local providers were willing to give us, "providers" meaning
  21   cable modem providers, DSL providers, the telecommunications
  22   companies that are in the area currently.
  23            In particular, I focused on cable modems, but we did
  24   a great deal of research into DSL available as well, because
  25   there are some areas where DSL is available.  There are some
1019
   1   areas where cable modems are available and there are some
   2   areas where both are available and at that point, we had a lot
   3   of professors asking us, which should I choose?  Which would
   4   be better in the long run?
   5   Q.  And what is the name typically given that to type of
   6   network?
   7            MR. COOPER:  Your Honor --
   8            THE COURT:  To what kind of network?
   9            MR. HERNSTADT:  The network of Internet access
  10   providers to a locality or a region and in this case, the
  11   region around Amherst.
  12            MR. COOPER:  This is a topic we've never heard from
  13   this witness before, never heard about this study, never had
  14   it provided to us.  I have no reason to believe he has
  15   expertise in this area of general network and consumer speed
  16   access in the general area around his university.  He's
  17   certainly not employed in the area and has no apparent
  18   expertise.
  19            THE COURT:  Well, look, I am going to hear what he
  20   has to say.  But, Mr. Hernstadt, if the point of all this is
  21   to suggest that consumers will not have in the foreseeable
  22   future adequate bandwidth to upload and download movie files
  23   from the Internet, you are sure not going to do it by
  24   addressing Amherst, Massachusetts, it's atypical of which as
  25   measured against urban markets is perfectly obvious to
1020
   1   anybody.
   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  Actually, the point is slightly
   3   different than that.
   4            THE COURT:  All right.  Go ahead.
   5            MR. HERNSTADT:  O.K.
   6   Q.  Let me be more specific.  The network at the University of
   7   Massachusetts is known as a local area network, is that
   8   correct?
   9   A.  That's correct.
  10   Q.  What is the name given to the network of a region such as
  11   around the University of Massachusetts?
  12   A.  Generally, you wouldn't collectively call that a network.
  13   You would call it wide-area networking.  It is an
  14   implementation thereof, but one doesn't think of local area
  15   networking as what you can put in a small defined physical
  16   area because there are limits to the lengths of cables in the
  17   technologies involved.
  18            Specifically, for 100-megabit Ethernet, I believe
  19   you're limited to 200-meters total between devices, so between
  20   the computer and a switch or a repeater.  And you can't really
  21   achieve more than five kilometers even using fiber, which is
  22   able to span greater distances.
  23            You can't really go more than five kilometers between
  24   one end point on the network and another end point on the
  25   network.  So, the technologies for local area networks are
1021
   1   very different from the technologies used for wide-area
   2   networks.  When you start trying to connect --
   3            THE COURT:  What exactly is wide-area networking as
   4   you are using the term?
   5            THE WITNESS:  Any networking technology used to
   6   connect physical places that are not contiguous, that are not
   7   close to each other.
   8            THE COURT:  So, under that definition, ordinary
   9   telephone lines are all part of a wide-area network, is that
  10   right?  Because you can transmit data over them and they are
  11   in the physically contiguous locations?
  12            THE WITNESS:  That would be -- yes, that would be
  13   correct.
  14            THE COURT:  O.K.
  15   Q.  And did you have -- have you studied wide-area networking
  16   in the your course of studies at the University of
  17   Massachusetts?
  18   A.  Not in my course of studies, but as part of research for a
  19   consulting client who was wondering about what kind of network
  20   connection they should get in to a small business.  The
  21   difference between a cable modem and the next step up which
  22   would be a T1 using frame relay.
  23            The T1 using frame relay was, at that point in time,
  24   $1,600 a month and a cable modem, which is soon to be
  25   available at that time, this was I think a year and a half ago
1022
   1   was projected to be $50 a month.
   2            THE COURT:  Look, Mr. Hernstadt, if you want to
   3   elicit from him what he found out when he went around and
   4   asked people what kind of connections they could get in
   5   Amherst, Massachusetts ask him.  If you want to qualify him on
   6   this subject --
   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  Actually, two or three more questions
   8   on this subject.
   9            THE COURT:  All right.
  10   Q.  As a result of your research, did you learn the costs of
  11   how much it would cost to upgrade wide-area networking?
  12            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor; foundation.
  13            THE COURT:  I don't understand what that question
  14   means.  I mean, by his definition, one possible answer to that
  15   is what it would cost to replace all the telephone wires in
  16   that part of the country.  What does it mean?
  17            MR. HERNSTADT:  O.K.  I can use -- take a few more
  18   questions and be a little bit more specific.
  19   Q.  In conducting your research into the Amherst region, as
  20   you described before, did you learn the types of equipment
  21   that were used in the Amherst region to provide Internet
  22   connections to the consumers there?
  23   A.  Yes.
  24   Q.  And -- I'm sorry, well --
  25   A.  You can basically divide them into two categories, those
1023
   1   that are delivered by telephone and those that are delivered
   2   by other wires into the house, well, a cable into the house.
   3            Everyone needs some way to get the information into
   4   and out of the house in order to provide service.  The focus
   5   in the industry has been on wires that already exist in the
   6   house, which basically means cable, telephone, and power, I
   7   suppose.
   8            The power technology really doesn't seem to have gone
   9   anywhere.  The cable and telephone solutions have reached a
  10   point where any improvements in their service is limited by
  11   the physical characteristics of the wires into the house.  So,
  12   in order to upgrade any of the -- the rates that you can now
  13   get with a cable modem over the DSL connection, the person
  14   providing the service would have to pull new wires, which
  15   seems to be something that everybody is trying to avoid.
  16   Q.  And in the course of your research --
  17            MR. COOPER:  Move to strike that last comment as
  18   plainly without foundation.
  19            THE COURT:  Yes, I'm striking it.  I simply do not
  20   accept this gentleman as an expert on this subject.  So,
  21   whatever opinion testimony he's giving, it's useless.
  22            MR. HERNSTADT:  I'm not asking for his opinion
  23   testimony.  I'm asking for what his research revealed to him
  24   and specifically in terms, the next question I'm going to ask
  25   is what did he learn -- did he learn in his research about the
1024
   1   cost of upgrading the types of networks that he just described
   2   in comparison with the cost of upgrading a local --
   3            THE COURT:  As I told you, if you want him to tell
   4   you what Southern New England Tel. or whatever it is out there
   5   told him what it costs to put in a T1 line, I'll let you ask
   6   him that, but your questions are less focused.
   7            MR. HERNSTADT:  I'll move on.  May I approach the
   8   witness?
   9            THE COURT:  Yes.
  10   Q.  Mr. Craig, I've handed you Defendant's Exhibit BDT.  Could
  11   you look at it and identify it, please.
  12   A.  Yes, this is a declaration that I wrote regarding some of
  13   the claims made in the Shamos declaration, I believe the
  14   second Shamos declaration.
  15   Q.  Shamos or the --
  16   A.  I'm sorry; Schumann.  My apologies.
  17   Q.  And this is your declaration, is that correct?
  18   A.  This is my declaration, that's correct.
  19   Q.  And does this set forth experiments that you personally
  20   undertook?
  21   A.  Yes, it does.
  22   Q.  And is everything in this declaration a description of
  23   acts that you personally undertook?
  24            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor.
  25            Is the intent to submit this as the witness'
1025
   1   testimony by having him affirm the truth of it?
   2            THE COURT:  I don't know.
   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  This is a declaration that sets forth
   4   experiments that Mr. Craig conducted regarding transfer rates
   5   available on the University of Massachusetts.  Rather than
   6   walk him through it, I would offer this into evidence and I'm
   7   trying to establish that this is a factual statement of acts
   8   that he undertook himself.
   9            THE COURT:  So, I guess the short answer is, yes, Mr.
  10   Cooper.
  11            MR. COOPER:  I object to the form.  It's also without
  12   foundation.
  13            THE COURT:  What's wrong with the form?
  14            MR. COOPER:  To begin with, your Honor, I believe
  15   that it is obviously compound and I think that if a proper
  16   foundation were attempted to be laid, we would find that the
  17   conclusions are based on a variety of assumptions for which
  18   there is no factual basis.
  19            THE COURT:  Well, you can cross-examine.
  20            Now, what is the other objection?  You said you have
  21   two objections.  One was form and I asked you about form, and
  22   you told me.  What was the other one?
  23            MR. COOPER:  Foundation.
  24            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  25            I'm going to receive this.  The points counsel makes,
1026
   1   they can cross-examine.
   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you, your Honor.
   3            (Defendant's Exhibit BDT received in evidence)
   4   Q.  Mr. Craig, do you know what DeCSS is?
   5   A.  Yes, I do.
   6   Q.  Have you ever used DeCSS on a DVD?
   7   A.  No.
   8   Q.  Do you know what DiVX is?
   9   A.  Yes, I do.
  10   Q.  Have you ever used DiVX on a DVD?
  11   A.  No, I have not.
  12   Q.  Have you ever made a movie available on the Internet for
  13   uploading?
  14   A.  No, I have not.
  15   Q.  Have you ever downloaded a movie from the Internet?
  16   A.  No, I have not.
  17            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Mr. Craig.
  18            THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you, Mr. Hernstadt.
  19            Mr. Cooper?
  20   CROSS-EXAMINATION
  21   BY MR. COOPER:
  22   Q.  Good morning, Mr. Craig.
  23   A.  Good morning.
  24   Q.  You have no job responsibility for the portion of the
  25   University of Massachusetts network that involves the
1027
   1   dormitories; correct?
   2   A.  That's correct.
   3   Q.  Your job responsibilities are limited to that portion of
   4   the computer system which is contained within the computer
   5   science department; correct?
   6   A.  More or less, correct.  I would add that I also support
   7   professors and students who are connecting from other places.
   8   So, to that extent, I would say that I support more than just
   9   the network contained within our department.
  10   Q.  And your direct responsibility by definition of your job
  11   description is limited to the computer science, computer
  12   system; correct?
  13   A.  That's correct.
  14   Q.  Now, again, your declaration, Exhibit BBT, could you
  15   please turn to paragraph 4 on page 2.  You refer in that
  16   paragraph to certain tests you conducted; correct?
  17   A.  That's correct.
  18   Q.  Now, those tests did not actually involve any downloads
  19   from the Internet; correct?
  20   A.  No, that's not correct.  The first --
  21   Q.  Let me understand.  You used certain T1 and 10-megabit and
  22   100-megabit lines in your experiment; correct?
  23   A.  That's correct.
  24   Q.  And you adjusted the speed at which some of those lines
  25   operated in order to simulate certain speeds that you expected
1028
   1   to receive in connection with downloads; correct?
   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  Objection to the form of the
   3   question.
   4            THE COURT:  Overruled.
   5   A.  I adjusted one of the tests to simulate a 10-megabit
   6   connection.  That test is listed as subparagraph B of that
   7   paragraph.
   8   Q.  Where did you get the files that you actually downloaded?
   9   A.  I created them.
  10   Q.  And where were those files taken from when you downloaded
  11   them?
  12   A.  I should make a distinction here in test A, I did not do
  13   the downloading.  I offered for downloading and a
  14   co-conspirator, if you will, a fellow by the name of Sean
  15   Standish downloaded over the Internet from me.
  16   Q.  And in the second test, paragraph 4B, there was no
  17   download from the Internet at all; correct?
  18   A.  That was downloaded from a computer on our network to
  19   another computer on our network.
  20   Q.  So, it doesn't reflect any Internet download speeds?
  21   A.  It reflects download speeds within a local area network
  22   which was what I was trying to address with that test.
  23   Q.  But it doesn't reflect any actual experience on the
  24   Internet; does it?
  25   A.  For B, it does not; that's correct.
1029
   1   Q.  And the same is true for C; is it not?
   2   A.  That is correct.
   3   Q.  And the same is true for D; is it not?
   4   A.  That is correct.
   5   Q.  And all of those speeds as to which you testified in B, C
   6   and D of paragraph 4 of your declaration are created by,
   7   assuming certain decreases in the maximum potential download
   8   speed from the systems you were using; correct?
   9   A.  I'm sorry.  I don't think I understand your question.
  10   Q.  Well, do I understand correctly that there were certain
  11   assumptions built into your laboratory process as reflected in
  12   B, C and D?
  13   A.  I -- perhaps you can identify assumptions that you think I
  14   made.  I'm not certain what you're asking.
  15   Q.  Well, actually your declaration doesn't explain how it is
  16   that you generated the particular speeds that you did generate
  17   and since they weren't on the Internet, I'm asking you what
  18   assumptions went into the process that resulted in the speeds
  19   that you did generate?
  20   A.  How do you refer to generating speeds?  Are you talking
  21   about the speeds of the cables and switches which I put in
  22   between?
  23   Q.  Yes.
  24   A.  Those are described in Exhibit 1.
  25   Q.  And you constructed those for purposes of this laboratory
1030
   1   experiment, is that correct?
   2   A.  No, I used what was available on our local area network.
   3   The only exception is 4B where in order to simulate a slower
   4   lab, I downgraded a switch -- downgraded a port on a switch.
   5   Q.  And for each of these experiments, have you downloaded a
   6   650 megabyte file rather than the 1.5 gigabyte file, the
   7   actual download times would have been substantially less;
   8   correct?
   9   A.  Probably.
  10   Q.  Do you know what those download times would have been for
  11   a 650 megabyte file at even the speeds that you created in
  12   this laboratory environment?
  13   A.  I don't know off the top of my head, but if you want, I
  14   can take out a calculator.  Would you like me to do that?
  15   Q.  Let's see if it makes sense for me to suggest some times
  16   for you and you can tell me if it sounds about right.
  17            THE COURT:  Well, is the relationship linear,
  18   Mr. Craig?
  19            THE WITNESS:  The reason I chose a file size that
  20   charge was to eliminate any possibility of there being a
  21   relationship between the file size and an increasing or
  22   decreasing rate of return.  So, yes, the relationship should
  23   be linear.
  24   Q.  It's a constant relationship?
  25   A.  More or less.  It's -- it would be expressed in a function
1031
   1   with a constant, if you will.
   2   Q.  Does the percentage difference that you would receive
   3   downloading a 650 megabyte file, as opposed to a 1.5 gigabyte
   4   file equal 43.3 percent?
   5   A.  Wouldn't equal it.  It would probably be 43. -- I'm
   6   assuming without doing the math in my head that that's the
   7   percentage of 650 megabytes to 1.5 gigabytes.
   8   Q.  So, the answer is yes?  That sounds right?
   9   A.  If we stipulate that that's the mathematics of it, then it
  10   would be that percentage, plus a certain constant for
  11   overhead, probably something like 5 percent, between 2 and
  12   5 percent.
  13   Q.  That's a constant for overhead?
  14   A.  Yes.
  15   Q.  And how do you arrive at a constant for overhead?
  16   A.  There is a certain amount of data that has to be sent with
  17   each packet and even though you can put a lot of data into a
  18   single packet, you have to increase it by a constant for the
  19   length of the packet.
  20   Q.  So that an amount of the overhead would actually be higher
  21   for a 1.5 gigabyte file than it would be for a 650 gigabyte
  22   file?
  23   A.  No, the amount of the overhead would be higher for the 650
  24   megabyte as a percentage of the total transfer.
  25   Q.  Total time would still be reduced by the reduced number of
1032
   1   packets; correct?
   2   A.  Well, I think I understand what you're saying and the
   3   answer is probably yes, but packets are not a unit of time.
   4   So, I agree with you, but that's not quite how you phrased the
   5   question.
   6   Q.  You mentioned in paragraph 4D that your experiment in the
   7   laboratory using 100-megabit-per-second networking using your
   8   view, the "absolute best case possible scenario"; correct?
   9   A.  That's correct.
  10   Q.  You're aware, are you not, that the new Abilene network
  11   that has been developed for major universities is running at
  12   2.4 gigabits-per-second speeds?
  13   A.  That speed is not what you can attain in between
  14   individual computers, however.
  15   Q.  No, but it is the new state of the art used at
  16   universities rather than 100-megabit-per-second network;
  17   correct?
  18   A.  I don't think it's used at any university other than
  19   Abilene and its partners, so.
  20   Q.  Do you have any idea who those partners are now?
  21   A.  I do not.
  22   Q.  Does 37 sound about right to you?
  23   A.  I do not have an idea.
  24            MR. COOPER:  No further questions, your Honor.
  25            THE COURT:  Let me follow up on one thing.
1033
   1            In the supplement to your declaration, you list in
   2   the source computer several of the components, including SCSI
   3   busts?
   4            THE WITNESS:  That's correct.
   5            THE COURT:  And what I take to be the hard disks,
   6   both the system and the data disks have 40-megabyte-per-second
   7   transfer rates.  Are there faster components for those
   8   functions?  Are there faster SCSI busts and hard drives?
   9            THE WITNESS:  There are.
  10            THE COURT:  How much faster?
  11            THE WITNESS:  The fastest SCSI bust I've actually
  12   seen was on a very expensive computer and we are not talking
  13   actually about technology that's limited by the speed of the
  14   disks, but rather by the speed of the controller that uses
  15   several disks to increase speed and that was 80 megabytes per
  16   second.
  17            THE COURT:  And these components that are rated at
  18   40-megabytes components that limit the speed of the transfers
  19   in your tests?
  20            THE WITNESS:  40 megabytes per second is still much
  21   faster than 100 megabits per second.  So, I would say no.
  22            THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. Hernstadt, anything else?
  23            MR. HERNSTADT:  A couple of questions, your Honor.
  24   REDIRECT EXAMINATION
  25   BY MR. HERNSTADT:
1034
   1   Q.  Mr. Craig, Mr. Cooper asked you about the speeds that you
   2   created.  Did you create any transfer speeds in the experiment
   3   contained or described in your declaration?
   4   A.  I used what was available to me in a typical large local
   5   area network installation with a lot of high-speed networking.
   6   I did not specifically create any connection speeds with the
   7   exception of, I think it was 4B, where in order to simulate a
   8   slower network, I set a port on a switch to negotiate at 10
   9   megabits per second, rather than 100.
  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Thank you very much, Mr. Craig.
  11            I have nothing further, your Honor.
  12            THE COURT:  Mr. Cooper?
  13            MR. COOPER:  Nothing further, your Honor.
  14            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Craig.
  15            (Witness excused)
  16            THE COURT:  Next witness, please?
  17            (Continued on next page)
  18
  19
  20
  21
  22
  23
  24
  25
1035
   1    MICHAEL EINHORN,
   2        called as a witness by the Defendant,
   3        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
   4   DIRECT EXAMINATION
   5   BY MR. GARBUS:
   6   Q.  Mr. Einhorn, describe your educational background.
   7   A.  I received a BA in economics summa cum laude from
   8   Dartmouth in 1974 and a Ph.D. from Yale University in 1981 in
   9   economics.
  10   Q.  Did you also receive a masters from Yale?
  11   A.  In 1976.
  12   Q.  And can you tell me something about your work background.
  13   A.  Since receiving my Ph.D., I worked at Bell Laboratories as
  14   a member of their technical staff.  I've been Assistant
  15   Professor at Rutgers University.  I worked for six and a half
  16   years in the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of
  17   Justice, and two years, two and a half years at Broadcast
  18   Music, Incorporated.
  19            I'm now a research fellow at Columbia University, and
  20   I'll be joining the faculty as a visiting professor of William
  21   Patterson University, which is a school in New Jersey that has
  22   a music management department, the only one of three in the
  23   U.S., and I am negotiating as an adjunct at Columbia this year
  24   as well.
  25   Q.  Have you ever testified in a court before?
1036
   1   A.  No, just in small claims court.
   2   Q.  Are you being compensated for your work?
   3   A.  I'm working pro bono.
   4            THE COURT:  We're not going to go into that.
   5   Q.  You're not an expert in small claims.  Okay.  You work for
   6   pro bono.  Can you tell me something about your publications.
   7   A.  I published, I think, about -- I didn't count them up --
   8   maybe 40 to 50 publications.  My areas of specialty generally
   9   can be called applied microeconomics.  Microeconomics can deal
  10   with a number of issues, including public utility regulation,
  11   antitrust, general market conditions, and intellectual
  12   property.  I have either published in or spoken in or
  13   submitted papers in all of those areas.
  14   Q.  Can you tell me what materials you have read prior to your
  15   testimony here today concerning the issues in this case?
  16   A.  Most importantly, I've read a number of declarations.
  17   I've read Franklin Fisher's deposition.  I read Franklin
  18   Fisher's declaration.  I've done a thorough literal search of
  19   all the articles bearing on the topics of copying and piracy.
  20            I visited the website of Charles River Associates.  I
  21   went to the Department of Justice and looked through their
  22   antitrust guidelines on intellectual property, and I read a
  23   number of Law Review articles that I felt were related to
  24   copyright.
  25   Q.  Have you done any independent empirical studies on your
1037
   1   own with respect to DVDs or the loss of sales, any particular
   2   studies since we've actually come into this case?
   3   A.  I've done no empirical studies.
   4   Q.  You mentioned Charles River Associates.  Can you give me
   5   some of the names of people whose articles you have read?
   6   A.  In particular, in the course of my involvement in
   7   intellectual property, there were three people in the course
   8   of my career whom I became aware of at Charles River
   9   Associates and who are personal associates of mine,
  10   professional associates of mine who work in the area of
  11   intellectual property.
  12            Those three people are Stanley Besen, John Woodbury
  13   and Steve Salop.  S-a-l-o-p.  Besen, B-e-s-e-n.  Besen, in
  14   particular, is described by Charles River Associates as a
  15   nationally renowned expert on intellecutal property on their
  16   website.
  17   Q.  And you know that Mr. Fisher is with Charles River
  18   Associates?
  19   A.  He is the chairman.
  20   Q.  Have you read articles by any of those three?
  21   A.  In particular, Mr. Besen.  I've also read one by
  22   Mr. Solomon a while ago, but Mr. Besen -- when I said I did a
  23   literal search on the topic of copying in piracy, I didn't
  24   survey all the articles that could have been written by the
  25   Charles River people on this topic.  I stayed specifically
1038
   1   within the area of copying and piracy and found two that
   2   Mr. Besen had his name on.  I'm sorry.  Conceivably three.
   3   Q.  Let me just ask you, I'm going to read to you a sentence
   4   from the Fisher affidavit and I ask you to comment on it and
   5   give us your opinion on it.
   6            It's paragraph 8.  It says: "The availability of
   7   unauthorized copies of feature length films on the Internet
   8   would have a considerable, negative financial and market
   9   impact on the major motion picture companies."  May I have
  10   your opinion on that?
  11   A.  If that availability were made free of charge, with equal
  12   quality and equal amount of time necessary, there could be
  13   truth to that, but the comment, as it relates to this case, is
  14   entirely hypothetical because he's ignoring issues that are
  15   very much related to the kind of unauthorized reproduction
  16   that we're talking about here.
  17   Q.  And what are these other issues?
  18   A.  Well, in particular, I measure three.  Number one is
  19   quality.  He doesn't own up to the possibility that the kind
  20   of DiVX downloads that we're talking about will be far
  21   inferior to the DVD movies that one can get with high
  22   definition.  That's number one.
  23            Number two is he ignores the time that's required to
  24   make these DVDs pirated moves.  There are two issues in time
  25   that I see.  First of all, as Mr. Shamos has pointed out to
1039
   1   us, one has to go about in the current market now preparing a
   2   DiVX to trade with somebody else.  That takes a certain amount
   3   of investment in one's time to put that trading material
   4   together.
   5            But more important right now, if a DVD has,
   6   hypothetically, 6 gigabytes on it, which I'm led to believe is
   7   the reasonable size of a DVD right now, and one has a 56
   8   kilobit modem, which is what maybe 90 to 95 percent of the
   9   population has right now, it will take you over 200 hours to
  10   download a DVD onto your hard drive.  Finally, a hard drive
  11   only has -- my hard drive only has 28 gegabits, and a DVD has
  12   up to 6 or 8.  That's taking up an awful lot of hard drive.
  13            Or another issue related to this that Mr. Fisher
  14   doesn't talk about are the costs.  If you decide to put it
  15   onto a blank DVD, right now the cost of a blank DVD exceed
  16   those -- the necessary tape requirements and the cost of that
  17   blank tape exceed the costs of buying the tape flat out.  It's
  18   cheaper for me just to buy the tape with the movie on it.
  19            furthermore, the minimum -- from the testimony I've
  20   read about and heard about, the minimum cost of a burner,
  21   which is necessary to burn the movie into a blank DVD, is
  22   $500.  That's Mr. Shamos saying that.  Someone else testified
  23   at $5,000.
  24            So there are three major issues.  There's a bad
  25   quality.  There's the amount of time that it takes, and
1040
   1   there's the cost of the equipment.
   2            THE COURT:  Did you ever look at a movie that was
   3   decrypted with DeCSS?
   4            THE WITNESS:  I have not.
   5            THE COURT:  You're the expert on quality?  Go ahead,
   6   Mr. Garbus.
   7            MR. GARBUS:  He didn't say that at all.  He said
   8   quality is a factor.  He didn't say he was an expert on
   9   quality, and he wasn't produced as an expert on quality.
  10            THE COURT:  Do you have any more questions, Mr.
  11   Garbus?
  12   BY MR. GARBUS:
  13   Q.  What does Mr. Besen say, if you recall, of the overall
  14   effect of copying on sales?
  15            MR. SIMS:  Objection.
  16            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  17   Q.  Are there any other factors to take into account?  Did you
  18   read the affidavit of Mr. Kurlantzick?
  19            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  Which question is he asking
  20   for an answer to?
  21            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.
  22   Q.  Did you read the affidavit of Mr. Kurlantzick?
  23   A.  I read the affidavit of Mr. Kurlantzick.
  24   Q.  And do you have an opinion with respect to it?
  25            MR. SIMS:  Objection.
1041
   1            THE COURT:  Sustained.
   2   Q.  Let me show you the affidavit of Mr. Kurlantzick, and I
   3   address your attention to paragraphs 3 and 4 of the affidavit.
   4            THE COURT:  What exhibit is this?
   5            MR. SIMS:  It's not an exhibit, your Honor, that I'm
   6   aware of.  Mr. Kurlantzick was offered by them in pretrial
   7   proceedings for deposition.  We took his deposition, and we've
   8   heard no more.
   9            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, that's not so.  We heard
  10   Mr. Fisher being cross-examined on Mr. Kurlantzick's
  11   affidavit.
  12            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, if you have a question,
  13   please put it.
  14   BY MR. GARBUS:
  15   Q.  I show you paragraphs 3 and 4 of Mr. Kurlantzick's
  16   affidavit, and I ask you whether or not you agree or disagree
  17   with the opinions expressed therein?
  18            THE COURT:  Objection sustained.  If you want to ask
  19   him for his opinion, ask him for his opinion, but not about
  20   somebody else's article or somebody else's affidavit in this
  21   way.  There is a hearsay rule, Mr. Garbus.  If you wanted to
  22   call Mr. Kurlantzick, you should have called Mr. Kurlantzick.
  23            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, we had a discussion during
  24   Mr. Fisher's examination, and they wanted to ask questions off
  25   the Kurlantzick affidavit, and they asked questions off the
1042
   1   Kurlantzick affidavit.  There was dialogue there about that,
   2   and he was permitted to do it.
   3            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, I'm not stopping you from
   4   asking this witness questions about opinions he may have
   5   formed concerning issues relevant in the case.
   6   BY MR. GARBUS:
   7   Q.  Do you have an opinion on the question of positing
   8   one-to-one ratios between acts of copying and displaced sales?
   9   A.  Yes, I do.
  10   Q.  What is that opinion?
  11   A.  I think it is theoretically unjustified by economic theory
  12   to suggest that there is a one-to-one relationship between a
  13   sale of a good at hypothetically zero price and a displacement
  14   of a "legitimate" good at a higher price.
  15   Q.  And can you tell me how this, in your opinion, applies to
  16   the whole question of DVDs?
  17            MR. SIMS:  Objection.
  18            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  19   A.  There are two things that one must consider in the DVD
  20   issue.  First of all, one must identify the costs associated
  21   with using the DVD.  That's issue number one.
  22            And number two, if, indeed, DVDs are determined to
  23   have lower prices than legitimate movies or original movies,
  24   then one must also recognize that many of the sales of DVDs
  25   that take place at hypothetically -- hypothetically zero
1043
   1   dollars or one dollar would not have ensued at a higher price
   2   of $25.
   3            That's what the one-to-one -- that's why the
   4   one-to-one rule is not a theoretically justified rule because
   5   there is no direct correspondence.
   6   Q.  Can you tell me what the impact of the rental DVD is on
   7   this?
   8   A.  Yeah; I certainly shall.  What happens now in the United
   9   States is most of the home video market, of course, is video
  10   cassettes.  I'd say in the U.S. last year consumers spent
  11   about $41 billion on movies, on watching movies on television,
  12   the box office and from video cassettes and DVDs.
  13            Of that $41 billion, about $18 billion was spent on
  14   video cassettes and a small $1 billion was spent on DVDs.  In
  15   that video cassette market, over half, 60 percent, was spent
  16   on rentals.  What happens, as we know, is rentals are the main
  17   factor in the video cassette market.
  18            What I'm surprised at -- what we need to do is
  19   establish if there's going to be piracy or illegitimate
  20   copying, we have to consider that the pirate or the copier is
  21   going to consider all the costs of alternative ways of getting
  22   his or her hands on the movie.  This includes not only buying
  23   a DVD at $25.
  24            It will include -- as we have the build-out of the
  25   DVD players that right now are not yet built-out, it will
1044
   1   include in the infrastructure, also, the rental industry.
   2            Right now, the average video cassette in the U.S.
   3   last year rented for $2.78.  So if I want, I can go into
   4   Blockbuster, my Blockbuster, on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday
   5   and get two movies or the price of one.  So you may be talking
   6   here about $1.39.  Furthermore, the price of video cassettes,
   7   the real price of video cassettes has fallen -- real price,
   8   adjusted for CPI -- has fallen 25 percent -- this is for
   9   rentals -- for rentals has fallen 25 percent since 1986.
  10            MR. SIMS:  Objection.  Move to strike.  Lack of
  11   foundation.
  12            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  13   Q.  Go ahead.
  14            THE COURT:  Mr. Garbus, your previous point on
  15   reviewing my notes was well taken.  I did allow the other side
  16   to ask a question on Kurlantzick's affidavit because you said
  17   you would call substantially equivalent testimony.  If you
  18   want to do so, you may do so.
  19            THE WITNESS:  Can I answer?
  20            THE COURT:  I thought you were finished.
  21            THE WITNESS:  I'd like to go a little more if I may.
  22   I'm almost done.
  23   BY MR. GARBUS:
  24   Q.  Go ahead, sir.
  25   A.  So what we have to do here is consider when people talk of
1045
   1   piracy and when this is going to take place, hypothetically
   2   five years out into the future when everyone has got the broad
   3   band equivalent of what they don't have now at their modem,
   4   five years from the future, anyone who wants to pirate is
   5   going to have the opportunity to go in and making my
   6   projections, I'd say buy that -- they can go in and rent a
   7   DVD.  If they can get a video cassette now at $2.78, okay, and
   8   that rate is falling over real time due to -- because it
   9   doesn't keep up with inflation, it's conceivable they can get
  10   this thing for about two bucks.
  11            So if you want to talk about piracy, let's just bear
  12   in mind there's another kind of technology out there that
  13   hasn't even been mentioned by Mr. Fisher or anybody whose
  14   declaration that I have read, and that is, is this piracy
  15   going to be cost effective to people who can go to video
  16   stores and pop these movies for five days for two bucks.
  17   Q.  Let me ask you this.  I want you to assume -- and this is
  18   very obvious -- that there are Linux operating systems that
  19   also could use DVDs.  Does that widen the market for DVDs?
  20   A.  Yes, it does.
  21   Q.  And what are the possible consequences of that?
  22   A.  The very important thing to recognize about the video
  23   cassette market, the home rental market over the past 12 years
  24   is that it has been driven by the growth, the saturation, the
  25   penetration of the video cassette recorder at home.  And I've
1046
   1   got some numbers here that will substantiate that.
   2   Q.  Tell us what they are.
   3   A.  Okay.  Remember I said that the rental price has fallen in
   4   real terms 25 percent since 1986.  That's the rental price.
   5            The sale price of a video cassette has fallen since
   6   1986 by 60 percent.  Despite the fact the real rental price
   7   has fallen and the real sale price -- by "real" I mean
   8   consumer price index adjusted.  Despite the fact that both of
   9   those sales prices have fallen, total spending in the video
  10   cassette market has gone up by over 200 percent.
  11            Why?  Because the VCR has built out.  We've gone up
  12   from 30 million homes to 85.9 million homes.  What is
  13   happening here is the American consumer buys the VCR, and the
  14   reason why they keep buying the VCR is because there's a
  15   build-out of cheaper movies for them to get their hands on and
  16   more movies to get their hands on.
  17            And by enabling people to get their hands on movies
  18   that are falling in price and more and more movies, the VC
  19   market has grown out because of the growth -- I'm sorry, the
  20   video cassette market has grown out because of the increased
  21   penetration of the VCR.
  22   Q.  And what is the benefit to the consumers if you have,
  23   let's say, Linux players out there playing DVDs that people
  24   purchase?
  25            MR. SIMS:  Objection; irrelevant.
1047
   1            THE COURT:  Sustained.
   2   Q.  Do you have any opinion on what the effect would be on the
   3   price of DVDs if Linux players were out there?
   4            MR. SIMS:  Objection, your Honor.  Irrelevant.
   5            THE COURT:  Sustained.
   6   Q.  Now, have you looked at the Microsoft decision in the
   7   Microsoft case?
   8   A.  I have looked at it.
   9   Q.  And do you have any opinion between the question of the
  10   strength of an operating system and the availability of
  11   applications and its consumer period?  Go ahead.
  12            MR. SIMS:  Objection.
  13            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  14   Q.  Do you have any experience or any knowledge of the
  15   relationship between anything you had at the Department of
  16   Justice, between the strength of an operating system and the
  17   availability of application?
  18            MR. SIMS:  Objection.
  19            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  20   Q.  Now, can you tell me any other benefits that you can see
  21   from consumers having an open-source system such as Linux?
  22            MR. SIMS:  Objection.
  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  24            MR. GARBUS:  I think I may be through, your Honor.
  25   Thank you very much.
1048
   1            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Garbus.  Mr. Sims.
   2            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, can we take a mid-morning
   3   break now.
   4            THE COURT:  All right.  15 minutes.
   5            THE DEPUTY CLERK:  All rise.
   6            (Recess)
   7            (In open court)
   8            THE COURT:  Okay, Mr. Sims, cross-examination.
   9            MR. SIMS:  Thank you, Judge.
  10   CROSS-EXAMINATION
  11   BY MR. SIMS:
  12   Q.  Professor Einhorn, BMI recently severed your employment,
  13   correct?
  14   A.  Correct.
  15   Q.  Except for working on a single matter involving a radio
  16   company merger, you have no experience in the entertainment
  17   issues, correct?
  18   A.  I think when I worked at BMI, I worked for two and a half
  19   years in the entertainment industry.
  20   Q.  Anything related to video, home video market at BMI?
  21   A.  At BMI, no.
  22            THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  Was it BMI that fired you or
  23   was it EMI?
  24            THE WITNESS:  BMI.
  25            THE COURT:  BMI.  I know the difference.
1049
   1   BY MR. SIMS:
   2   Q.  And your present employment as an economist is limited to
   3   a one-year terminal position at the Patterson State University
   4   in New Jersey as an adjunct visiting professor?
   5   A.  I'm also doing some private consulting work at the same
   6   time now.
   7   Q.  You've never taught any course relating to copyright?
   8   A.  Relating to copyright?
   9   Q.  Yes.
  10   A.  Specifically copyright, no, I have not.
  11   Q.  Or any course involving markets where the marginal cost of
  12   an additional copy is essentially zero?
  13   A.  I've taught courses in applied microeconomics, and I've
  14   taught them for seven years.  In particular -- wait, if I may
  15   finish.  In the course of teaching applied microeconomics,
  16   I've taught the theory of public goods.  In the theory of
  17   public goods, many of the issues that are discussed in the
  18   theory of public good is the fact that the marginal cost of
  19   using a public good can be zero.
  20            I have not taught a course specifically on copyright,
  21   but the issue of marginal cost being equal to zero comes up in
  22   a standard applied microeconomics course, which I have taught
  23   for seven years.
  24   Q.  Is it your view, Mr. Einhorn, that motion pictures created
  25   by the plaintiffs are public goods?
1050
   1   A.  No; they are not.
   2   Q.  Okay.  Thank you.  Now, you made no study of consumer
   3   behavior in connection with this matter, correct?
   4   A.  I have yesterday reviewed some data on consumer behavior
   5   in the video cassette market.  I do not have, at this point,
   6   enough information in my hands to study consumer behavior in
   7   the DVD market.
   8   Q.  You would agree with me, sir, that your ability as an
   9   economist doesn't help you at all in assessing the likelihood
  10   that DeCSS on defendants' website may lead to copying of
  11   plaintiffs' motion pictures from DVDs?
  12   A.  I am an economist, and I do not purport to understand the
  13   workings -- the technical workings of DeCSS.  I can only point
  14   out the factors that should be considered to make an economic
  15   decision.
  16   Q.  So the answer to my question is yes?
  17   A.  Yes.
  18   Q.  Now, are you aware of Steven King's recent decision to put
  19   a Gnutella on the Internet on -- strike that.  Are you aware
  20   of Steven King and Simon and Shuster's experiment earlier this
  21   year in delivering a Steven King Gnutella over the Internet?
  22            MR. GARBUS:  Objection.
  23            THE COURT:  Where is this going, Mr. Sims?
  24            MR. SIMS:  I'm asking him since he opined on what he
  25   sees as a reason to or not to copy, whether he is aware of
1051
   1   Mr. King's objection on television that he was amazed that
   2   lots of hackers spent 48 hours trying to hack into a system in
   3   which his novel was available for $2.50.
   4            THE COURT:  Sustained.
   5            MR. GARBUS:  Sorry Mr. Sims wasn't under oath for
   6   that.
   7            THE COURT:  We can do without those comments.
   8            MR. GARBUS:  I'm sorry.  I apologize.
   9   BY MR. SIMS:
  10   Q.  Mr. Einhorn, you testified, I think, that you saw no
  11   one-to-one relationship between copying and sales
  12   displacement, correct?
  13   A.  That's correct.
  14   Q.  You would agree though, wouldn't you, that the motion
  15   pictures studio's development of a market on the net for
  16   digital delivery of their own motion pictures may be thwarted
  17   by the presence of unauthorized reduced-costs product?
  18   A.  I'm sorry.  Can you repeat the question again, please.
  19   Q.  Yes.  You would agree, wouldn't you, that the motion
  20   picture studio's development of a market on the Internet for
  21   digital delivery of their own motion pictures will be thwarted
  22   by the presence of unauthorized reduced-costs product?
  23            MR. GARBUS:  I object to the question.  "Will be
  24   thwarted" is speculative.
  25            THE COURT:  In that form, yes.  Sustained.
1052
   1   Q.  You would agree, wouldn't you, sir, that the motion
   2   picture studio's development of a market on the net for
   3   digital delivery of their motion pictures may be thwarted by
   4   the presence of unauthorized reduced-costs product?
   5            MR. GARBUS:  I object to it.
   6            THE COURT:  Sustained as to form.  Why don't you try
   7   may be affected adversely.
   8   Q.  Would you agree, sir, that the motion pictures studio's
   9   development of a market on The internet for digital
  10   delivery --
  11            MR. GARBUS:  I think I would object to it unless it
  12   was the same market.
  13            THE COURT:  I don't understand your objection, sir.
  14            MR. GARBUS:  As I understand the question we're not
  15   talking about DVDs.  We're talking about delivery of movies on
  16   the Internet.  It's a different market.
  17            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  18   BY MR. SIMS:
  19   Q.  Do you understand the question, Mr. Einhorn?
  20   A.  No, I'm sorry, because -- please repeat it.
  21   Q.  I'll do it again.  You would agree, wouldn't you, that the
  22   motion picture studio's development of a market on the net for
  23   digital delivery of their motion pictures may be adversely
  24   impacted by the presence of unauthorized reduced-costs
  25   product?
1053
   1   A.  There's a very important word -- there's a very important
   2   word you used there, "reduced costs."  It's essential that we
   3   understand that when I answer your question here, I'm talking
   4   here about a hypothetical market where costs are, indeed,
   5   reduced.
   6            Now, I would agree that if there were a reduced --
   7   reduced-cost technology that is able to offer movie content at
   8   reduced costs, I would agree that could adversely affect the
   9   studios.  However, the measurement of costs is a very serious
  10   matter in economics.  In fact, that's our bread and butter.
  11   Economics is a science of benefits and costs accurately
  12   measuring each and determining an optimum position that trades
  13   them off.  All costs must be considered if we're applying your
  14   paradigm to any one market.
  15   Q.  Let me turn to page 84 of your deposition taken last week.
  16   A.  I'm going to need to see it because I don't have it in
  17   front of me.
  18   Q.  I'll read the following question and answer:
  19   "Q.  As a matter of economic theory, do you agree with the
  20   statement made in paragraph 9 of the Fisher declaration that
  21   any expectation that the film companies have to develop a
  22   legitimate market on the Internet for the delivery of their
  23   films will be significantly thwarted by the presence of
  24   unauthorized product available at little or no charge to the
  25   consumer?"
1054
   1            An objection from Mr. Hernstadt to form and
   2   foundation.
   3   "A.  I'd rather say could instead of will.  I think there is
   4   certainly a possibility that is true."
   5            Was that testimony truthful, sir?
   6   A.  You have reflected what I said on the issue.
   7   Q.  Now, from the viewpoint of economic theory as you
   8   understand it, am I correct that the availability over the
   9   Internet of unauthorized decrypted copies of a blockbuster
  10   like Matrix would likely adversely impact the revenues for
  11   that film?
  12   A.  This is a question that was asked at the deposition, and
  13   it's very essential and important for me to understand what
  14   "over the Internet" means, okay.  When we talk about "over the
  15   Internet," let me -- when I hear the words "over the
  16   Internet," how I imagine what that phrase could mean is a
  17   realtime streaming application that is scheduled.  So that at
  18   9 o'clock in the evening on Sunday evening, I could go, read
  19   my video guide or whatever I read for my movies, and
  20   understand that at 9 o'clock, I will get a streamed, realtime
  21   movie that will show me the Matrix.
  22            And in that instance, I would agree that if someone
  23   can stream that movie at me, that can conceivably displace
  24   other sales of that movie.  But while we talk about over the
  25   Internet, once again, like everything else, we need some
1055
   1   specificity.  Realtime streaming is not the same thing as
   2   downloading, and down loading in an hour is not the same thing
   3   as downloading at 300 hours.
   4            So what I'm asking for me is some specificity.  In
   5   the abstract, I agree.  In the abstract, I would agree that
   6   movies over the Internet -- and what I'm thinking about here
   7   is realtime streaming -- present that danger.  I shouldn't say
   8   danger because I think the movie studios will be doing it
   9   themselves, but would present that issue of -- of an
  10   application that could lead people to say, look, we don't have
  11   to bother to go to the theatre because at 9 o'clock, it's on
  12   tonight, and it's on in the same full quality that we have
  13   right now.
  14   Q.  And do you believe, sir, that the impact, adverse impact
  15   on blockbusters like Matrix would be seen in the box office,
  16   as well as in the home video market?  Correct?
  17   A.  Once again, we're talk about hypothetical.  I would agree
  18   that movies over the Internet, in certain formats, could
  19   affect blockbuster sales in the movie theatre or at the -- in
  20   any number of different windows.  Movies over the Internet
  21   being taken to mean, as I said, a realtime streaming
  22   technology.
  23   Q.  Now, finally, your testimony on direct, as I understand
  24   it, is that as a matter of economics, you don't see why there
  25   would be a market for DVD piracy when it's pretty cheap to
1056
   1   rent a DVD?  Is that essentially what you were testifying to?
   2   A.  I didn't say that.
   3            THE COURT:  The witness can answer.
   4   A.  I didn't say that.  What I said is this, I said to do an
   5   economic analysis -- and this point has been sustained in
   6   economic research for the past 15 years.  It's been said by a
   7   number of researchers, and it's been said by Stan Besen in
   8   print, okay.  I read through this literature, and I saw what
   9   other economists say.
  10            What economists say is you've got to do lots of
  11   research.  You have to understand the facts.  You've got to
  12   understand the nature of technology.  You've got to understand
  13   quality.  You've got to understand time, okay.  Now, in the
  14   course of these things, in understanding them, certain
  15   outcomes can go one way or the other, but you've --
  16            I'm sorry.  Can you -- I missed the second half of
  17   your question.
  18            MR. SIMS:  Can you reread the question, please.
  19            (Record read)
  20   A.  Thank you so much.  I'm not making any predictions about
  21   piracy or not.  What I'm calling for here is some kind of
  22   evidence to go beyond a step.  I can't even talk about that
  23   stuff because I haven't seen anything that would meet the
  24   criterion that my profession has established as necessary
  25   criterion to analyze piracy and copyright issues.
1057
   1   Q.  Now, you came out earlier with many statistics.  What's
   2   the cost, as you understand it, of renting a VHS from a store
   3   like Blockbuster?
   4   A.  My understanding right now is that 95 percent -- by VHS,
   5   you mean --
   6   Q.  VHS, a video cassette from Blockbuster.  How much does it
   7   cost to rent?
   8   A.  The average is $2.78.
   9   Q.  And are you aware of the size of the market for video
  10   cassette piracy in the United States?
  11   A.  No, I'm not.
  12   Q.  Do you believe, sir, that individuals want to possess
  13   copies of films in various formats and not merely see them
  14   streaming?
  15            MR. GARBUS:  I object to this.
  16            THE COURT:  Pardon me.
  17            MR. GARBUS:  I object.
  18            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  19            MR. SIMS:  No more questions, your Honor.
  20   REDIRECT EXAMINATION
  21   BY MR. GARBUS:
  22   Q.  I'll just ask two questions, and that is whether or not
  23   you have an opinion on whether the availability of movies on
  24   videotape has an adverse impact on revenues?
  25   A.  On videotape?
1058
   1   Q.  Whether VCRs have an adverse impact on revenues.
   2            MR. SIMS:  Objection.
   3   Q.  Do you know one way or the other?
   4            THE COURT:  Let's find out if he has an opinion
   5   first.
   6   A.  Okay, I don't know of any research one way or the other.
   7   Because these things come later, the question is to what
   8   degree are there people who will move from going to the movie
   9   theatre and instead say, look, I'm not going to go to the
  10   theatre, I'm going to wait 26 weeks or 39 weeks, and I'm going
  11   to wait for them at Blockbuster.  Personally I do that, okay,
  12   but that's just one person.
  13   Q.  Do you know whether the movie companies presently make
  14   more monies on VCR or DVDs than off theatre revenues?
  15   A.  Yes, they do.  I'll repeat.  Let me give you numbers.
  16   These are not necessarily for American studios.  In 1999, the
  17   American consumer spent $41 billion on movies.  Those being
  18   combined over cable, home video, and the box office.  Of that
  19   $41 billion, I'd say $19 billion is spent in the home market.
  20            About $7 billion, $8 billion -- I'm going to miss
  21   some numbers here because I'm not rounding off correctly, but
  22   $8 billion is spent at the box office, and the remaining 13 or
  23   $14 billion is spent on cable, and cable, of course, subsumes
  24   a number of different applications.  The biggest single market
  25   now in the U.S. for movies is the home video market.  Of
1059
   1   course, there are some home videos -- and most of that is
   2   right now video cassette, and most of the video cassette
   3   market is the rental market.
   4            This is why it's essential.  If you're going to talk
   5   about whether piracy really has an economic meaning is to talk
   6   about the other technologies that a consumer can have to
   7   pirate.  And that particular technology is, hey, for two
   8   bucks, you can go to Blockbuster, and for 3 bucks or 4 bucks,
   9   Cosmo will deliver it to you within an hour.  If you want to
  10   pirate, take 250 hours to download a DVD, it's your life.
  11   Q.  Can you tell me the difference between piracy relating
  12   to -- you read about the Napster case -- piracy with respect
  13   to audio and piracy with respect to DVDs?
  14            MR. SIMS:  Objection; beyond the scope of cross.
  15            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  16            MR. GARBUS:  I have no further questions.
  17            THE COURT:  What's the source of the revenue dollars
  18   you just gave us, sir?
  19            THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.  That was from a book by --
  20   it's an annual report published by an investment banking firm
  21   named Verona Suller, Incorporated.  Every year they put out an
  22   annual report of --
  23            THE COURT:  This is not something that's within your
  24   area of expertise.  You're just relating what you read
  25   somewhere.
1060
   1            THE WITNESS:  No.  As a matter of fact, I worked on
   2   the annual report this year.
   3            THE COURT:  And what did you do that produced these
   4   numbers?
   5            THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.  The numbers that I'm
   6   reporting here were taken from other trade publications by
   7   research analysts those trade publications include --
   8            THE COURT:  Okay.  I understand.  Thank you.
   9            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you for your testimony.
  10            (Witness excused)
  11            THE COURT:  Your next witness, please.
  12            MR. GARBUS:  I think we'll be finished by lunch with
  13   our witnesses.
  14            THE COURT:  Mr. Sims, I hope you're ready to go after
  15   lunch.
  16            MR. ATLAS:  Defendants call Dr. David Touretzky.
  17            MR. GARBUS:  If I could say something.  I didn't know
  18   there was going to be any rebuttal case.
  19            THE COURT:  Well, on Friday we discussed this, and
  20   they indicated that they might do so.  That's all I know.
  21            MR. SIMS:  Actually, I spoke to Ed Hernstadt last
  22   night, probably at 11 o'clock, and we said we weren't certain
  23   we might have a witness, and if so, we would present him for
  24   deposition.  We haven't yet decided.  We wanted to see this
  25   morning's witnesses before we decided.
1061
   1            THE COURT:  Okay.  Let's proceed.
   2    DAVID TOURETZKY,
   3        called as a witness by the Defendant,
   4        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
   5            THE COURT:  Proceed, Mr. Atlas.
   6   DIRECT EXAMINATION
   7   BY MR. ATLAS:
   8   Q.  Good morning, Doctor.  Can you tell us by whom you are
   9   presently employed?
  10   A.  Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
  11   Q.  And what do you do at Carnegie Mellon?
  12   A.  I do research and teaching computer science.
  13   Q.  Do you teach in any specialized area within the field of
  14   computer science?
  15   A.  Artificial intelligence and computational neuroscience.
  16   Q.  Can you just describe briefly those areas in a little bit
  17   greater detail?
  18   A.  Artificial intelligence is concerned with getting
  19   computers to do things that normally require human-like
  20   intelligence or animal-like sense.  Computational neuroscience
  21   is the use of computers to understand how brains work.
  22   Q.  And how long have you taught computer science at Carnegie
  23   Mellon?
  24   A.  I've been on the faculty since 1984.
  25   Q.  Can you tell us what degrees you have and from which
1062
   1   schools you obtained them?
   2   A.  I have a bachelors degree in computer science from Rutgers
   3   University, and I have a masters and Ph.D. degree in computer
   4   science from Carnegie Mellon.
   5   Q.  Do you serve on any boards?
   6   A.  I serve on several editorial boards:  The Editorial Board
   7   of Cognitive Science.  It's a journal.  The Editorial Board of
   8   Neuro-Computation.  I'm also on the board of directors of
   9   NIPS.  NIPS stands for neural information processing systems.
  10   It's a foundation that manages an annual conference for
  11   researchers in the field of neuro-networks.
  12   Q.  Have you published any books?
  13   A.  Yes.  I've published three books.
  14   Q.  Have you published any articles?
  15   A.  Approximately two dozen journal articles and about 60
  16   conference papers.
  17            MR. ATLAS:  May I approach, your Honor?
  18            THE COURT:  Yes.
  19   Q.  I'd like to show the witness what we've marked as
  20   Defendants' Exhibit CCM, and if you could tell us what that
  21   is.
  22   A.  This is a copy of my curriculum vitae as of,
  23   approximately, April of this year.
  24   Q.  Are there any changes to your CV that are not reflected on
  25   the April version?
1063
   1   A.  There are a few changes, a few articles that were listed
   2   and perhaps now have page numbers.  And I've added two items
   3   to the CV that are relevant to this case.  I now cite my
   4   Gallery of CSS Descramblers as a publication and also a page
   5   on the CSS descrambling algorithms.  That's now included in my
   6   vitae as a publication.
   7            MR. ATLAS:  If I may approach again.  I'd like to
   8   move Dr. Touretzky's CV into evidence.
   9            THE COURT:  Any objection, Mr. Mervis?
  10            MR. MERVIS:  Plaintiffs have no objection, your
  11   Honor.
  12            MR. ATLAS:  If I may approach again, your Honor.
  13            THE COURT:  Go ahead.
  14   BY MR. ATLAS:
  15   Q.  Dr. Touretzky, did you prepare a declaration in this case?
  16   A.  Yes, I did.
  17   Q.  I'd like to show the witness what we've marked as
  18   Defendants' Exhibit BBC and ask the witness if that's the
  19   declaration that you prepared and signed in this case?
  20   A.  Yes, it is.
  21            MR. ATLAS:  I'd like to move Dr. Touretzky's
  22   declaration into evidence as well, your Honor.
  23            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, I suppose to the extent that
  24   this won't help illustrate his testimony, I have an objection,
  25   which is -- and it may be premature -- which is that the
1064
   1   testimony is going to be cumulative from what you heard from
   2   Dr. Felton.
   3            Notwithstanding that, your Honor, I do have an
   4   objection in specific to paragraph 7 of this declaration.  The
   5   grounds for that objection are as follows:  Relevance,
   6   hearsay, best evidence, and that, in fact, it does not involve
   7   any expertise whatsoever.
   8            THE COURT:  What do you say, Mr. Atlas?
   9            MR. ATLAS:  I think Dr. Touretzky will be testifying
  10   as an expert.  I think he can opine on the matters he has in
  11   paragraph 7, but I have no objection if the Court takes it for
  12   everything other than paragraph 7.  I think it will help for
  13   the Court.
  14            THE COURT:  Dr. Touretzky, I take it that you're
  15   telling us that the statements made in this document are true.
  16            THE WITNESS:  Yes.
  17            THE COURT:  Correct?
  18            THE WITNESS:  Correct.
  19            THE COURT:  All right.  I will receive paragraphs 1
  20   through 6 simply as a way of shortcutting his direct testimony
  21   in open court.  I do note that to the extent he expresses
  22   opinions on legal subjects, I'm not going to consider those
  23   opinions as evidence.  Obviously some of these things are
  24   matters for me to decide.
  25            The one that caught my eye particularly is the
1065
   1   assertion at the beginning of paragraph 3 that "source code is
   2   expressive speech meriting the full protection of the First
   3   Amendment."  That is ultimately for me to decide.
   4            This witness is not here as a law professor, but,
   5   obviously, he may have things that are relevant to my
   6   determination of that question to say.
   7            MR. ATLAS:  That's what I would like to focus this
   8   witness' testimony on today, especially his gallery of CSS
   9   descramblers which he's testified about.
  10   BY MR. ATLAS:
  11   Q.  Dr. Touretzky, do you have a website?
  12   A.  Yes, I do.
  13   Q.  Is the Gallery of CSS Descramblers that you testified a
  14   moment ago posted on this website?
  15   A.  Yes.  I have an extensive website about DeCSS, and one
  16   portion of that website is the Gallery of CSS Descramblers.
  17            THE COURT:  I should note, Mr. Atlas, that
  18   Defendants' Exhibit BBC does include internal references to
  19   attached exhibits, which are not attached, one of which is a
  20   printout of the gallery.
  21            MR. ATLAS:  I've broken them down separately, and I'm
  22   going to take them as individual exhibits.
  23            THE COURT:  All right.
  24            MR. ATLAS:  If I could approach the witness.
  25            THE COURT:  All right.
1066
   1            MR. ATLAS:  It's Exhibit CCN.
   2            THE COURT:  CC.
   3            MR. ATLAS:  N.
   4            THE COURT:  N.
   5            MR. ATLAS:  Just so we're clear, I'd like to show the
   6   witness -- the witness provided me this morning with a copy
   7   that has various colors on it.  He said it would be easier as
   8   he goes through and describes what the gallery is if he can
   9   refer to this one.  The copies I have are black and white.  Is
  10   there an objection to my showing him the colored version?
  11            MR. MERVIS:  No.
  12   BY MR. ATLAS:
  13   Q.  Dr. Touretzky, can you tell us what Defendants' Exhibit
  14   CCN is?
  15   A.  This is a printout of the main page of my Gallery of CSS
  16   Descramblers.
  17   Q.  Now, what is the Gallery of CSS Descramblers?
  18   A.  The gallery is a presentation of the CSS decryption of
  19   algorithms in various forms in an attempt to show that these
  20   forms are equivalent and that it's not possible to
  21   discriminate between them.
  22   Q.  Why did you create the gallery?
  23   A.  Well, in reading reports of this case, it seemed to me
  24   that the public discussion of some of these issues having to
  25   do with legal status of computer code as speech could benefit
1067
   1   from pointing out some of the things I try to point out in the
   2   gallery.  And since no one else seemed to be discussing it, I
   3   thought I would create this website.
   4   Q.  If we could referring to Defendants' Exhibit CCN, which is
   5   your gallery.  If you could take us through, I guess,
   6   beginning with the reference here to the anonymous C source
   7   code, and just explain what it is you were trying to do.
   8   A.  Sure.  So, the two points that the gallery tries to make
   9   are, first of all, that source code has expressive content,
  10   and, secondly, that you can't distinguish between different
  11   forms of description of an algorithm, whether they're in
  12   computer language like C or English or some other notation.
  13            So the first two items in the gallery -- the first
  14   item is the anonymous C source code, which is the source code
  15   that was posted to the LiViD mailing list in October of 1999.
  16   This is one of the items that is covered, I believe, by the
  17   injunction issued by this Court.
  18            The second item is another version of the same
  19   algorithm.  This.item is called CSS descramble.c, and this
  20   comes from the CSS-auth software package that was authored by
  21   Derek Fawcus.  And the point of providing these two versions
  22   is to show that it is possible to have different
  23   implementation of an algorithm, and by looking at these
  24   different implementations, one can gain knowledge that one
  25   couldn't get from looking at other decryptions of the
1068
   1   algorithms.
   2            So, for example, if you compare CSS descramble.com
   3   against the anonymous C source code, one of the things you see
   4   is that Mr. Fawcus used fewer tables in his implementation,
   5   and he unrolls one of the loops.
   6            So, what he's telling us is, hey, there's more than
   7   one way to implement this algorithm.  You don't need to use so
   8   many tables.  You can use fewer tables.  You don't have to do
   9   this operation in a loop.  Maybe it's more efficient to unroll
  10   the loop and have the individual operations stated as separate
  11   lines of code, and that's a message that Mr. Fawcus is
  12   expressing in his chosen implementation of the algorithm.
  13            You can't get that message, except by looking at the
  14   source code and reading the source code.  So that's the only
  15   thing that can be expressed in the source code.
  16   Q.  By the way, if you could turn the page to page 2 of the
  17   gallery.  And can you explain to us what the first item on
  18   page 2 is?
  19   A.  Yes.  I should say that the next section of the gallery,
  20   the items on page 2, they all have to do with the issue of
  21   different forms the code can take and the fact that this Court
  22   has enjoined some forms and not others, and I was puzzled by
  23   that.  It struck me as unusual that the Court would decide
  24   that it was okay to ban, say, the C source code, but the Court
  25   declined to ban discussion of the algorithm.
1069
   1   Q.  Why?
   2   A.  Because in my mind, these things are all equivalent, and
   3   so I was wondering what your Honor was thinking when he
   4   decided that this would be an effective remedy and why the
   5   MPA's lawyers thought they won something when they got this
   6   injunction because to my mind this didn't -- I couldn't make
   7   sense of it.
   8            So in an attempt to explore what the reasoning of the
   9   Court and the plaintiffs' lawyers might have been, I decided
  10   to investigate different forms that the code could take and
  11   look at the implications of that.
  12            So I began with the first two exhibits, which we've
  13   already discussed, which are the actual C source code, but the
  14   LiViD version and the CSS-auth version, which I believe have
  15   been enjoined.
  16            Now, it seemed to me that it could be that The
  17   Court's reasoning was that these are files that could be fed
  18   to a C compiler, whereas an English description, which the
  19   Court declined to enjoin, could not be fed to a C compiler.
  20   So if that was the Court's reasoning, what I've shown in this
  21   exhibit on the top of page 2 is a screen dump of the CSS
  22   descrambling code.  So this is the CSS code written as a
  23   binary image file.  So in this form, the code cannot be feed
  24   to a C compiler, and, perhaps, therefore, it would fall into
  25   the category of protective speech.
1070
   1            But if that was the case, the problem here is that
   2   any human could look at this image and just type the
   3   characters that they see into a text editor, and then they
   4   would have the C source code again.  Furthermore, there are
   5   today, there are OCR programs.  OCR stands for optical
   6   character recognition, which can take a binary image file like
   7   this and turn it automatically into text form.
   8            So it's not clear to me then if these binary images,
   9   if these pictures of the source code -- that's what they are,
  10   pictures -- if the pictures themselves are really illegal
  11   circumvention devices under the DMCA, but since they can't be
  12   feed to a C compiler directly, maybe they're protected speech.
  13   Q.  Did you reach any conclusion in terms of your examination
  14   of this particular description of the code?
  15   A.  Well, my conclusion is that if these images are protected
  16   speech, then really the Court has provided the plaintiffs no
  17   protection at all because it was trivial to turn these back
  18   into text files.  So, since the plaintiffs seem to think that
  19   they won something with this injunction, it must be that these
  20   images are not protected speech.  They must be circumvention
  21   devices.
  22   Q.  Why is that?
  23   A.  Well, because they're trivially convertible into
  24   circumvention devices by looking at the picture and typing the
  25   words.
1071
   1   Q.  Moving down to the second item.
   2            THE COURT:  So, is the net of your view that if the
   3   preliminary injunction decision was in substance correct, as a
   4   matter of law, the problem is that the injunction is far too
   5   narrow?  Is that one way of putting your conclusion?
   6            THE WITNESS:  Yes; I think that's correct.
   7            THE COURT:  Okay.  I thought that's where you were
   8   going.
   9   BY MR. ATLAS:
  10   Q.  The second item on page 2.
  11   A.  The second item is a file called new-language.txt, and I
  12   believe that you have a printout of that that you can
  13   introduce as a separate exhibit.
  14   Q.  Actually before I get to that, I'd like to explore
  15   something the judge had just asked you if you don't mind.
  16   Why, in your view, would it be too narrow, the injunction, as
  17   it currently stands?
  18   A.  Well, I think what the Court was trying to do in the
  19   injunction is prevent people from obtaining technology that
  20   could be used to decrypt DVDs without the authority and
  21   permission of the motion picture industry, and simply
  22   restricting a particular form of the C source code will not be
  23   an effective way of preventing that.
  24            And so if you're going to be effective about it, if
  25   you're really going to stop people from doing it, you've got
1072
   1   to stop them from hearing the message that the defendants were
   2   trying to convey.  You've got to stop them from any
   3   description of the algorithm, which could be used to construct
   4   one of these devices.
   5   Q.  Would that say that could include an oral conversation
   6   that one would have in sufficient detail in discussing the
   7   DeCSS program?
   8   A.  Yes, it would.  I could certainly sit down with someone
   9   who had the appropriate degree of knowledge of C programming
  10   and of encryption technology, and with an oral conversation --
  11   assuming that person had a good memory -- they could acquire
  12   the knowledge necessary to reconstruct this program, yes.
  13   Q.  Let's draw your attention to back to page 2, which you
  14   said I might have a copy of that.  One moment.
  15            MR. ATLAS:  If I may approach, your Honor.  This is
  16   Exhibit CCQ, Defendants' Exhibit CCQ.
  17   BY MR. ATLAS:
  18   Q.  What is that document, Dr. Touretzky?
  19   A.  This is a printout of the second exhibit on page 2 of the
  20   gallery, which is called new-language.txt.  And what I did
  21   with this exhibit, I tried to further explore this issue of
  22   the legal status of computer code.  So if these pictures of
  23   the code in the previous gallery exhibit, if the Court had a
  24   problem with distributing those pictures of the C code, maybe
  25   that wasn't -- maybe that wasn't protected speech.
1073
   1            If they have a problem with that, maybe the problem
   2   is that these are pictures of code expressed in a language for
   3   which there is a compiler.  There are C compilers available
   4   for free, and so if you had a picture of the code, you could
   5   type the code in, just literally typing what you see on the
   6   screen, and then you can run it through the C compiler.
   7            So if that was the problem, then maybe it would be
   8   okay to describe the algorithm in another computer language
   9   that had all the precision of C, but for which there did not
  10   exist a compiler.  So what I did is I created a computer
  11   language, which has the same semantics as a C programming
  12   language, but perhaps has a different syntax, and I
  13   recompressed the DeCSS algorithm in this new language.
  14            Now, there is no compiler for this language, and so
  15   it could be that the Court would find that since you can't
  16   feed this to a compiler, because there isn't a compiler, then
  17   this form of the algorithm might be protected speech, might be
  18   okay.  But I have to say I'm pretty worried about this because
  19   with this version of the code out on the web, I have no way of
  20   preventing another person from writing a compiler for my
  21   language.
  22            And having done that, they will then make me in the
  23   position of having provided code that's now compilable even
  24   though I didn't create the compiler, and, in fact, there was
  25   no compiler when the code was originally written.  So I think
1074
   1   this raises problems, too, that expressing the code in a
   2   language that is as precise as C, but for which there is no
   3   compiler, really you can't give that the same protected status
   4   as other kinds of speech.  You have to view it as a device
   5   because it could become compilable at any time.
   6   Q.  Moving down to the next item on your gallery.  I think I
   7   have a copy of that.
   8            MR. ATLAS:  It's Exhibit CCO.
   9   Q.  Is this the next step in your analysis, Dr. Touretzky?
  10   A.  Yes.  This is a copy of the file plain-english.html.
  11   Q.  What was the purpose of doing that?
  12            THE COURT:  I'm delighted, Doctor, that this is plain
  13   English to someone.
  14            THE WITNESS:  I did my best.
  15            THE COURT:  I wasn't finding fault.
  16   A.  This is the third gallery item on page 2 of the gallery
  17   printout.  So what I tried to do here was, again, to further
  18   explore this issue of the status of source code, and if it's
  19   the case that the previous file, my new-language.txt -- if
  20   that was, perhaps, not deserving of First Amendment protection
  21   because somebody could write a compiler for it -- and the
  22   Court had already refused to enjoin mere discussion of the
  23   algorithm -- I know that from reading the transcript of the
  24   preliminary injunction hearing and from reading the memorandum
  25   that the judge subsequently wrote -- it seemed to me that the
1075
   1   next thing one could consider was translation of the algorithm
   2   in English.
   3            Now, there's two ways to do that.  The most
   4   mechanical way is to simply translate the C code directly into
   5   English and make no other changes, and I decided not to bother
   6   with that.  I'll leave that as an exercise for an
   7   undergraduate, but I thought a more interesting way to do it
   8   would be to translate the C code into English, but, in
   9   addition, include some explanatory text and some editorial
  10   comments.  And that's what I've done in this version.
  11            So if you look at this version, the first couple of
  12   paragraphs are introductory text, and then that's followed by
  13   an image, which I borrowed from a website in Norway that
  14   explains the big picture of how DVDs -- how movies on DVDs are
  15   descrambled.  And after that image, there's another paragraph
  16   of text where I explain what the image conveys.
  17            And following that, the remainder of this document is
  18   my translation of the C code into plain English, and that
  19   translation is done pretty much line by line, but it contains
  20   certain informalities of language and minor editorial
  21   comments, which are the kinds of things that a human could do,
  22   but a computer program typically could not do.
  23   Q.  And did you reach any conclusions in preparing this
  24   plain-english.html version?
  25   A.  My conclusion is that this version is substantially
1076
   1   equivalent to the original C source code that was the first
   2   very exhibit in the gallery.  That any person with a
   3   rudimentary knowledge of C would be able to go from this
   4   English description back to the C source code and reproduce
   5   the C source code flawlessly.
   6            So it seems to me that this document ought to be
   7   enjoined for the same reason that all the others are, is that
   8   it's providing exactly the same information.  It's providing a
   9   description of the algorithm with enough precision that
  10   another person could reproduce the software.
  11   Q.  Moving down to the fourth item on page 2 of your gallery.
  12   It's the english-and-c.html version.
  13            MR. ATLAS:  I have a copy of that as well.  It's
  14   Defendants' Exhibit CCP.
  15   Q.  I'm showing you what's been marked as Defendants' Exhibit
  16   CCP.  Could you tell us what that is?
  17   A.  Yes.  This is a printout of the fourth exhibit on page 2
  18   of the gallery.  This is another version of that essay that we
  19   just discussed.
  20   Q.  Why dis you create this version of the essay?
  21   A.  Well, I wanted to further explore the issue of plain
  22   english descriptions being protected.  Given that the Court
  23   declined to enjoin discussion of the algorithm in plain
  24   english, it could be that the previous exhibit,
  25   plain-english.html, perhaps that was protected speech, and if
1077
   1   it was protected speech, then what would happen if one simply
   2   made a little more explicit the mapping between the English
   3   description of the algorithm and the C code.
   4            So for people who haven't yet acquired a rudimentary
   5   knowledge of the C programming language, I thought I could
   6   give them a little help in converting the English back to C.
   7   And so what I've done is, beginning on page 2 of this
   8   nine-page document, for each English paragraph that
   9   corresponds to a line of C code, I have presented an inset
  10   that gives the translation of that English into C.
  11            And in the original document, that inset is done in a
  12   light blue background to make it visually distinct, and it's
  13   also indented.  The indentation surveyed the copying process
  14   here, but the blue background did not.
  15            So in going through this, you see for each line of
  16   the algorithm described in English, there is the corresponding
  17   expression of that algorithm in C code.  All I'm doing is
  18   translating my English into statements in the C language.  So
  19   an interesting thing about this document is that it contains
  20   within it the source code for the CSS descrambling program,
  21   which the Court has enjoined.
  22            But you cannot feed this file to a C compiler because
  23   that C source code is interspersed with both English and with
  24   HTML formatting commands, which provides the blue background
  25   and information and so on.  So you can't compile this thing,
1078
   1   but you can read it, even if you're not a very good C
   2   programmer.  But what you learn from reading this document
   3   would allow you to recreate with perfect accuracy the original
   4   descrambling algorithm.
   5   Q.  When did you put up the gallery?  When did you post the
   6   gallery?
   7   A.  In March of this year.
   8   Q.  Did anyone involved in this case suggest or encourage you
   9   to create this gallery that you've been testifying about?
  10   A.  The creation of the gallery was my own idea.  I did
  11   discuss it with my graduate students, who thought it was a
  12   pretty good idea and that I should go ahead with it.
  13   Q.  Why did you create and post it?
  14   A.  I wanted to spare public discussion of these issues.  This
  15   case raises what for me are very serious concerns about the
  16   future of computer science and my ability to function as a
  17   computer scientist.
  18   Q.  Why?
  19   A.  Because what the plaintiffs are trying to do is carve a
  20   hole in the First Amendment and say, this kind of speech you
  21   can engage in and that kind of speech you can't.  And as a
  22   computer scientist, this is my livelihood.  I've been
  23   programming computers since I was 12 years old, and I'm very
  24   concerned when events take place that threaten my ability to
  25   express myself.
1079
   1            THE COURT:  Mr. Mervis.
   2            MR. MERVIS:  I move to strike that portion of the
   3   answer which Dr. Touretzky purports to describe what the
   4   plaintiffs are trying to do in this case and to the extent he
   5   is, also, offering opinion about legal matters.
   6            MR. ATLAS:  I think it's the witness' perception of
   7   how the plaintiffs' position in this case impacts what it is
   8   that he does and how he communicates with his peers and his
   9   students, and I think it's acceptable testimony.
  10            THE COURT:  To the very limited extent of the motion,
  11   it's granted.  I'm not taking Dr. Touretzky's view of the
  12   First Amendment as evidence.  His testimony presupposes a view
  13   of the scope of the First Amendment on which he is not an
  14   expert, which is not a proper subject for testimony and which
  15   is ultimately for me and appellate courts to decide.
  16            There is no doubt that yelling "fire" in crowded
  17   theatre is something that is problematic and probably impedes
  18   expression by certain twisted individuals.  I'm not drawing a
  19   one-to-one analogy.  You know how dangerous one-to-one
  20   relationships are this morning, but you see the point.
  21            MR. ATLAS:  I think it explains why the witness is
  22   here, but I may be --
  23            THE COURT:  I understand that.  I understand why he's
  24   here.
  25   BY MR. ATLAS:
1080
   1   Q.  By the way, the different ways that you have approached
   2   communicating the DeCSS source code or the DeCSS code, would
   3   those be the types of communication you may -- strike that.
   4            These different ways of approaching the DeCSS code,
   5   are those ways that you communicate with the people in -- your
   6   peers, the other professors, the other faculty members?
   7   A.  Yes.  We mix these techniques freely, and even on the same
   8   page of a paper, you might have descriptions in English.  You
   9   might have mathematical equations, bits of code in a
  10   acceptable programming language, bits of code in a language I
  11   just made up because it's particularly convenient for trying
  12   to express what I'm trying to express.  We use all of these
  13   forms of expression all the time.
  14   Q.  Turning to the last page of your gallery, page 3 --
  15            MR. ATLAS:  Actually before we get to that, what I'd
  16   like to do, your Honor, at this time is move into evidence the
  17   gallery, which is Exhibit CCN and then the three different
  18   types of entries on the gallery, which I think we've marked as
  19   CCO, CCP and CCQ.
  20            MR. MERVIS:  No objection.
  21            THE COURT:  They're received.
  22            (Defendants' Exhibits CCN, CCO, CCP, and CCQ
  23   received in evidence)
  24   BY MR. ATLAS:
  25   Q.  Turning on the top of page 3, the Cryptanalysis of CSS.
1081
   1   Can you explain what the entry of this refers to?
   2   A.  Yes.  This entry is actually a collection of writings by
   3   Frank Stevenson, rather than a single document.  And in those
   4   writings, which I believe have been entered in this case
   5   already -- in those writings, Mr. Stevenson talks about
   6   various cryptographic attacks on pieces of the CSS encryption
   7   scheme, and some of these documents are English text and some
   8   of them are little bits of C code, which illustrate the point
   9   he's trying to make.
  10            The interesting thing about this exhibit in the
  11   gallery is that this is not -- the software provided here
  12   would not allow you to immediately decrypt the DVD.  What's
  13   here is software that illustrates the effectiveness of the
  14   attacks that Mr. Stevenson developed.  And, yet, again, to
  15   provide the plaintiffs' effective protection, one would have
  16   to somehow prevent the discussion of this material because in
  17   the hands of a knowledgeable person, it could be used to
  18   access the material on the DVD.
  19   Q.  The next item, the DeCSS T-shirt, why did you post this on
  20   the website on the gallery?
  21   A.  Well, this is a photograph of a T-shirt that's offered for
  22   sale by an outfit called CopyLeft, and I purchased one of
  23   those shirts myself.  And the point of including it here is it
  24   seems to me that there is some confusion among all the parties
  25   in this case about whether something is speech or not.
1082
   1            And my reaction is if you can put it on a T-shirt,
   2   it's speech.  And so the point of showing the T-shirt was to
   3   illustrate that and, also, to raise the question if this
   4   T-shirt, itself, would have to be prohibited, then I wonder
   5   what would happen to me if I wore the shirt in public.
   6   Wearing the shirt in public could, perhaps, be interpreted as
   7   engaging in trafficking a circumvention device.
   8            So if one really wants to afford the plaintiffs the
   9   protection that they seek, I think I would only be able to
  10   wear my shirt in the privacy of my own home and must not go
  11   outdoors with it.
  12   Q.  The final item on here, can you tell us what this refers
  13   to?
  14   A.  Yes.  This is an image file.  It was constructed by Andrea
  15   Gnesutta, who was the winner of a contest for the best way to
  16   distribute the DVD source code.  And what she did was she
  17   created an image file that looks like a bumper sticker.  It
  18   says, DVD Source Code Distribution Contest.  But inside this
  19   image file is the source code.  And although you can't see the
  20   source code, when you display the image on your web browser,
  21   the mere fact that this image appears on this screen -- if
  22   you're looking at a website and this image comes up means that
  23   the source code has been downloaded onto your computer.
  24            And Ms. Gnesutta gives the technique necessary to
  25   extract the source code from the binary image file.  It's a
1083
   1   couple of simple operations can pull out those bytes, and then
   2   one can easily obtain the text file from that.
   3            (Continued on next page)
   4
   5
   6
   7
   8
   9
  10
  11
  12
  13
  14
  15
  16
  17
  18
  19
  20
  21
  22
  23
  24
  25
1084
   1   Q.  So, summing up, looking at all the different items you
   2   have on your gallery of CSS -- do you have a difference --
   3   strike that.
   4            Do you have an opinion on the differences, if any,
   5   between them?
   6   A.  My opinion is that there's no effective difference between
   7   any of these forms in that if you want to accomplish what the
   8   Court set out to do in its preliminary injunction, you have to
   9   enjoin all of these forms because if any one of them is
  10   allowed, then it's a trivial matter to transform it into any
  11   of the others.  They're all interconvertible.
  12   Q.  Do you have any opinion on the effect within your field,
  13   the computer science field, if the Court were to issue an
  14   injunction first over the DeCSS executable resource code?
  15            MR. COOPER:  Objection, your Honor; relevance.
  16            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  17   A.  Well, yeah, I see this as having a chilling effect on my
  18   ability as a computer scientist to express myself.  In
  19   comparison, I know I could publish the formula for LSD using
  20   chemical notation and even though I'm not allowed to possess
  21   LSD, no one would try to stop me from publishing the formula.
  22            And I could publish the schematic for the timing
  23   device for a bomb, and even though I'm not allowed to possess
  24   a bomb, no one would try to stop me from publishing those
  25   schematics.
1085
   1            The language that -- in which I try to express myself
   2   is the computer language and if the Court upholds this
   3   injunction, what would happen is that certain uses of computer
   4   language, my preferred means of expression would illegal.
   5   They'd be enjoined.  And that means that anything I do from
   6   now on has the potential to be ruled illegal.
   7            And furthermore, what I've tried to show with the
   8   gallery, even if I just decided never to try another line of
   9   computer code again, I wouldn't be any better off because
  10   simply writing English, if I wrote it with the same precision
  11   as I used in my plain English on an HTML file would accomplish
  12   the same thing.
  13            So, I could merely by using the kind of precision
  14   that I've been trained to use as a computer scientist simply
  15   by expressing myself that way, I could be opening myself up to
  16   legal liability.
  17            THE COURT:  Dr. Touretzky, do people in your field of
  18   endeavor sometimes make bits of hardware, computer hardware?
  19            THE WITNESS:  Yes, they do.
  20            THE COURT:  Are there circumstances in which it might
  21   be helpful to a computer scientist to make a bit of hardware
  22   as to which somebody else holds the patent?
  23            THE WITNESS:  Yes, I think so.
  24            THE COURT:  O.K.  Mr. Atlas?
  25   Q.  Dr. Touretzky, would a declaration by the Court that the
1086
   1   CSS descriptions are illegal have a similar chilling effect
   2   compared to an injunction?
   3            MR. COOPER:  I have the same relevance objection,
   4   your Honor.
   5            THE COURT:  Overruled.
   6   A.  Well, it would certainly.  It would certainly make me
   7   afraid to publish things like that; yes.  Any indication by
   8   the Court that this was illegal would concern me; yes.
   9   Q.  By the way, are you being compensated for your role as an
  10   expert in this case?
  11   A.  No, I'm not.
  12   Q.  Why are you rendering services if you're not being
  13   compensated here?
  14   A.  I think the issues being decided here have tremendous
  15   importance for the field of computer science and it's actually
  16   I consider it a privilege to be allowed to come here and
  17   express my views and hope to influence the outcome.
  18   Q.  One other thing, Doctor.  I believe in your deposition an
  19   article that you had prepared was marked -- or actually I
  20   believe it's Exhibit 2 at your deposition, we've marked it as
  21   Exhibit BBE, it's an article entitled "Source Versus Object
  22   Code."
  23            MR. ATLAS:  May I approach, your Honor?
  24            THE COURT:  Yes.
  25   Q.  Dr. Touretzky, if I may, why did you write this article?
1087
   1   A.  I wrote this article because after reading various
   2   depositions in this case, it occurred to me that the both
   3   sides were grappling with the issue of source versus object
   4   code.  And I could see that several of the other defense
   5   witnesses had tried in depositions to explain that source and
   6   object code are really the same thing, that there isn't any
   7   rational way to distinguish one from the other, but I'm not
   8   sure that the lawyers were getting it.
   9            And I think it's kind of hard to do that in
  10   deposition.  So, by constructing this essay, including the
  11   illustrative appendices at the end, I hoped to assist both
  12   sides in understanding this.
  13   Q.  That's actually what I'd like to refer your attention to
  14   appendices beginning on page 4 of 6 of your article.  Appendix
  15   A, Appendix C, and D.  I was wondering if you could explain
  16   the relationship between these appendices?
  17   A.  Yes, these appendices are four different forms of the same
  18   program.  I'd like to go through them in order and then back
  19   up.
  20            So, starting with Appendix A, Appendix A is a source
  21   file written in the C language for a simple program that
  22   multiplies the numbers 1 through 5 together and then prints
  23   out the result.  In mathematical results, we'd say the program
  24   computes the quantity 5 factorial.
  25            I should say that Appendix A is the same form as the
1088
   1   version of the DeCSS code that the Court has enjoined.  The
   2   source code written in the C program language just like the
   3   anonymous C source code that the Court has enjoined.
   4            What I next did was I compiled this source code.
   5   Now, a compilation is actually a complicated process with a
   6   number of different steps which are typically invisible to the
   7   lay person, but computer scientists know about them.
   8            So, when you feed the C source code to a C compiler,
   9   let's say GCC, the new C compiler, it's a very commonly-used C
  10   compiler.  What the C compiler does it translates that source
  11   code into a language called RTL, which is an abstract machine
  12   language.  Then it translates the RTL into assembly language
  13   for whatever processor you're compiling for.  In this case, I
  14   was compiling for a spark processor for the sun work station
  15   in my office.
  16            Then an assembler takes the assembly language code
  17   and translates that into machine executable code.  So, what we
  18   have in Appendix B is an intermediate stage in that process.
  19            What I asked the C compiler to do was when it
  20   translated the C to RTL, and then the RTL into assembly
  21   language, I asked it to tell me and give me back the assembly
  22   language, the intermediate product.  So, from the C compiler's
  23   point of view, Appendix B is the object code is a result of
  24   what the C compiler does to the source code, but from the
  25   assembler's point of view, assembler being the next guy in
1089
   1   line that's going to process this, the assembler used this as
   2   a source code, but as the assembler is going to turn it into
   3   by their machine instructions.
   4            So, if we proceed to Appendix C, what I next did was
   5   I told the C compiler, go ahead and compile this program, and
   6   instead of stopping at the assembly language level, stop at
   7   the level of the binary machine code.  What's called the .0
   8   file or the object file and then I took that .0 file and I
   9   displayed it using a utility program that displays binary
  10   files.
  11            And so, what you see are in Appendix C, the column of
  12   numbers on the left, the leftmost column are the equivalent of
  13   line numbers in a deposition.  They're basically keeping track
  14   of the position in the file and the remaining columns of
  15   numbers are hexadecimal encryption codings of the binary bits
  16   that make up the object file.
  17            Finally, in Appendix D, I took that object file and
  18   fed it to a program called a disassembler.  And the object --
  19   the disassembler translated the object file back into symbolic
  20   assembly language form, and that's what we see in Appendix D.
  21            Now, so the point I want to make here is that the
  22   same ideas that were expressed in my statement to you that
  23   five factorial is the product of the numbers 1 through 5 are
  24   also expressed in all four of these appendices and they're
  25   expressed in ways that are transparent to a computer
1090
   1   scientist.  And I'd like to show you that starting at Appendix
   2   D, if you look at the line labeled 20 in Appendix D, it's 20
   3   and a colon.
   4            That line in the middle of that line, you see the
   5   letters CMP, which stands for compare.  So, this line is a
   6   line that's telling the computer to compare two numbers.
   7            And if you look to the right of the CMP, what it's
   8   saying is compare the contents of register 00 with the number
   9   5.  So, this is a piece of symbolic assembly language code
  10   which computer scientists can read just fine.
  11            And if you look to the left of the CMP, you'll see
  12   four groups of numbers.  These are hexadecimal numbers.  The
  13   numbers are 80822005.  This is the encoding of that compare
  14   instruction in the binary machine language of the spark
  15   processor.
  16            So now, if you go back to Appendix C, and if you look
  17   at in Appendix C, the line labeled 220, so it's about 10 lines
  18   at the -- down from the top, the line labeled -- it's actually
  19   0000220.
  20            And if you look about halfway in that line, you'll
  21   see the sequence 80822005.  So, this is -- again, this is the
  22   binary machine instruction that's that compare instruction
  23   that we saw in Appendix D.
  24            Now, we can go back once more to Appendix B.  And if
  25   you look at Appendix B, this is again symbolic assembly
1091
   1   language.  And so, on the left side of Appendix B, you'll see
   2   some labels.  There's a label main and a little bit further
   3   down there's a label that says .LL3 on the left-hand side.
   4            And if you look two lines below that .LL3, we see
   5   again the compare instruction.  CMP percent 00, 5.  It's
   6   comparing the contents of register 00 with the No. 5.  We can
   7   go back one more step and look at Appendix A, my C source
   8   code.
   9            And in Appendix A, about 5 lines down, there's a four
  10   alone.  It begins with the word "four" and then it says:  Left
  11   (I equals 1; I less than 6).  That "I less than 6" that is
  12   exactly what that compare instruction was turned into by the C
  13   compiler.
  14            So, the compare instruction is the expression of this
  15   concept, "I less than 6" in the machine's assembly language.
  16   Q.  So, do I understand that these four appendices are
  17   different ways of expressing the same idea?
  18   A.  Yes, it's exactly the same idea and you might ask, well,
  19   why does "I less than 6" and yet in the assembly language
  20   code, we are comparing the register against the No. 5.  And
  21   the reason is that it reflects a certain strategy used by the
  22   C compiler to encryption code this 4 loop and that the only
  23   way you could know about that strategy is to read the assembly
  24   language.
  25            And I hope what I've shown is that it's not that hard
1092
   1   to do that.
   2   Q.  In terms of taking one of the items?
   3            THE COURT:  We are all going to get into
   4   post-assembly language this afternoon.
   5            THE WITNESS:  Excuse me?
   6            THE COURT:  We are all going to get to post-assembly
   7   language this afternoon.
   8   Q.  Doctor, can you tell me the skill level it would take to
   9   take any one of the identities that appear on your gallery of
  10   CSS descramblers and turn that into any one of the other
  11   identities that appear on your gallery of descramblers, what
  12   skill level would be involved?
  13            MR. MERVIS:  I object to the form of the question.
  14            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  15            I think we can understand it.
  16   A.  Yes, since I've been involved in teaching computer science
  17   for quite a few years, I'd say that anyone who had taken an
  18   undergraduate level C programming course should be able to
  19   convert between any of these forms.
  20            MR. ATLAS:  The final thing I'd like to move into
  21   evidence, Exhibit BBE, which is the article and the appendices
  22   that the doctor was just talking about.
  23            MR. MERVIS:  No objection, your Honor.
  24            THE COURT:  Received.
  25            (Defendant's Exhibit BBE received in evidence)
1093
   1            MR. ATLAS:  I have no further questions for Dr.
   2   Touretzky.
   3            THE COURT:  Thank you.
   4            Any cross-examination, Mr. Mervis?
   5            MR. MERVIS:  Unless the professor is going to give us
   6   all a quiz, the plaintiffs have no questions.
   7            THE COURT:  Well, Dr. Touretzky, let me just tell you
   8   that this was illuminating and important.  I was hoping we
   9   were going to hear something like this through the whole
  10   trial.  I appreciate your having come.
  11            THE WITNESS:  Thank you, your Honor.
  12            THE COURT:  Thank you.
  13            (Witness excused)
  14            THE COURT:  The witness is excused.
  15            What's next?
  16   ANDREW APPEL,
  17        called as a witness by the Defendants,
  18        having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
  19            THE CLERK:  State your name, spelling it slowly.
  20            THE WITNESS:  My name is Andrew Appel; A-P-P-E-L.
  21            THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. Garbus, please proceed.
  22            MR. GARBUS:  Professor Appel is our clean-up hitter.
  23   I think a lot of this has been cleaned up, so I'll just try to
  24   cut short, if I can.
  25   DIRECT EXAMINATION
1094
   1   BY MR. GARBUS:
   2   Q.  Professor Appel, can you tell me something about your
   3   educational background?
   4   A.  Yes, I have a bachelor of arts with highest honors from
   5   Princeton University in 1981 in physics.  I have a Ph.D. in
   6   computer science from Carnegie-Mellon University in 1985.
   7   Q.  And can you tell me something of your professional
   8   appointments?
   9   A.  Yes.  In 1986, I became an assistant professor of computer
  10   science at Princeton University.  Then in approximately 1992,
  11   I was promoted to associate professor and then later to full
  12   professor.
  13   Q.  And have you been at other universities as well?
  14   A.  No, my career since receiving the Ph.D. has been at
  15   Princeton University.
  16   Q.  And what awards and honors have you won?
  17   A.  I received in 1981, the Cusaka Memorial Prize for my
  18   undergraduate research in physics and the National Science
  19   Foundation graduate fellowship and two or three years ago, I
  20   was elected a fellow of the Association for Computing
  21   Machinery.
  22   Q.  And what is the Association for Computing Machinery?
  23   A.  It's the primary scholarly and professional society in the
  24   field of computer science and computing.
  25   Q.  Have you written any books or chapters in books and in
1095
   1   what areas?
   2   A.  I've written two books in the area of compilers, one
   3   graduate textbook in 1991 and one an undergraduate and
   4   graduate textbook in 1998 and I've written approximately 50
   5   published papers.
   6   Q.  Now, one of the questions is:  What do you bring to this
   7   case that let's say some of the other witnesses who have
   8   testified, what is the difference between your area of work
   9   and Professor Felton?
  10   A.  We both do research in the broad area of computer
  11   security.  My research systems from my previous work in the
  12   area of programming languages and compilers and is more in the
  13   area of theoretical approaches to protecting computers from
  14   the programs that run on them and protecting the programs from
  15   the computers that run them.
  16            Professor Felton's area is more in the broad area of
  17   systems security, what are the practical vulnerabilities of
  18   real systems as implemented.
  19   Q.  And during the course of your work, do you publish codes?
  20   A.  In my work on compilers, I routinely would publish
  21   computer programs in both source code and object code form so
  22   that other scientists could take my work and do comparisons or
  23   improve it by replacing one component or another.
  24   Q.  Are compilers an area of your expertise?
  25   A.  Yeah, I've done about 10 or 12 years of research in the
1096
   1   area of compilers and published two books and many articles in
   2   that area.
   3   Q.  What is the relationship between compilers and this whole
   4   question of source and object code?
   5   A.  The compiler is what translates the source code to the
   6   object code.  So, that's the relationship.
   7   Q.  How does it work?
   8   A.  The compiler reads the source code, parses its structure,
   9   understands the semantics, and then translates -- translates
  10   each of those structures into the appropriate manifestation in
  11   object code.
  12   Q.  Are you being paid for your work here today?
  13   A.  No, I believe not.
  14   Q.  Why are you testifying?
  15   A.  I'm concerned about censorship of computer programs.  I'm
  16   concerned about the prospects or the end of fair use of
  17   material distributed digitally.  Those are the main reasons.
  18   Q.  Have you ever written any article -- did you co-author an
  19   article with Professor Felton?
  20   A.  I've co-authored two or three articles with Professor
  21   Felton.
  22   Q.  And did you co-author an article with him entitled,
  23   "Technological access control interferes with noninfringing
  24   scholarship"?
  25   A.  Yes.
1097
   1   Q.  And what was the source of the information in that
   2   article?
   3   A.  In that article, we wanted to demonstrate that many kinds
   4   of scholarship, especially scholarly searches of different
   5   kinds of material would require access to the unencrypted
   6   content.
   7            Some of the sources were our own expertise in the
   8   representation of text and computer programs and for the
   9   sections on audio and video, we also read the research
  10   literature and consulted with other experts.
  11   Q.  And do you recall the examples you used in your article?
  12   A.  I used examples of searching text materials such as books
  13   for not only individual words, but also correlations between
  14   one part of the document and another.  I used examples of
  15   analyzing musical scores to extract themes.  I used examples
  16   of searching digital audio such as CDs for themes and
  17   transitions.
  18   Q.  And how is that affected by the issues that we face here?
  19            MR. MERVIS:  Objection, your Honor, relevance.
  20            THE COURT:  Overruled.
  21   A.  If scholars are unable to access the unencrypted content
  22   of movies, then they will not be able to do research that
  23   requires automated search of those materials.  And there are
  24   many benefits to those areas of research.
  25   Q.  What are the benefits?
1098
   1   A.  Well, the first benefit is in developing the methods
   2   themselves for doing automated search.  Scientists need input
   3   on which to test their methods.
   4            The second is that the searches themselves will be
   5   useful, not just to computer scientists or experts in video,
   6   but scientists may wish to do searches for purposes in society
   7   and the example we gave in the paper is that one might in the
   8   future wish to search a library of Hollywood movies for scenes
   9   that contain cigarettes, perhaps as part of public health
  10   research.
  11            The technology is not there yet for doing a search of
  12   that kind, but that's just the kind of thing that computer
  13   scientists and video engineers are working on.
  14   Q.  This, also, applied to books that run DVDs or music that
  15   was on DVDs?
  16   A.  Yeah, if other kinds of content such as books and audio
  17   are distributed with technological access controls, then many
  18   kinds of searches on those materials will also become
  19   impossible.
  20   Q.  Did you follow the development of the DMCA, the Digital
  21   Millennium Copyright Act?
  22            MR. MERVIS:  Objection, your Honor, relevance.
  23            THE COURT:  Sustained.
  24   Q.  Did you submit a paper to Congress?
  25   A.  The article that you mentioned on technological access
1099
   1   controls was submitted to the copyright office as part of its
   2   rule-making procedures.
   3            I believe I also signed a letter initiated by Gene
   4   Spafford which had to do with the exemption in the law for
   5   research by cryptography research for reverse engineering of
   6   access controls.
   7   Q.  In what form are text files stored in a computer?
   8   A.  The text files are stored using 1's and 0's usually in a
   9   correspondence given by the ASCII codes that matched the 1's
  10   and 0's to letters and numbers.
  11   Q.  Is that source code or object code or both?
  12   A.  Source code would be stored, you know, according to the
  13   correspondence given by the ASCII code.  Object code would be
  14   stored as 1's and 0's, according to the correspondence given
  15   in the reference manual for the particular computer.
  16   Q.  Do you know what DeCSS is?
  17   A.  DeCSS is a program that decrypts content that was
  18   encrypted CSS with algorithm.
  19   Q.  When did you first learn about it?
  20   A.  I think I learned of the existence of DeCSS sometime I
  21   would guess around January.  I became more familiar with it in
  22   approximately March or April.
  23   Q.  And where did you go to find it?
  24   A.  I just typed DeCSS into a web search engine.  I believe I
  25   used Google, and that gave me a few hundred hits, I believe,
1100
   1   and I examined each of the web pages just by viewing it until
   2   I found some that had source code claiming to be DeCSS.
   3   Q.  Did you go to Bruce Schneier's website?
   4   A.  I believe I did, yes.
   5   Q.  And who is he?
   6   A.  Bruce Schneier is a cryptographer.  He's an author of a
   7   widely-used text and reference book on applied cryptography.
   8   Q.  Did you go to David Wagner's site?
   9   A.  Yes, I did.
  10   Q.  And who is he?
  11   A.  David Wagner is a graduate student or maybe he's just
  12   received the Ph.D. from the University of California at
  13   Berkeley.  He does research in practical aspects of computer
  14   security, including cryptographic protocols.
  15   Q.  And did you also go to Professor Touretzky's site?
  16   A.  Yes, I did.
  17   Q.  Did you go to Greg Nuby's site?
  18   A.  Yes.
  19   Q.  And who is he?
  20   A.  Greg Nuby is a professor of library science and he had a
  21   website that discussed DeCSS as it would be useful to
  22   librarians in archiving digital material.
  23   Q.  Do you have a web page?
  24   A.  Yes, I do.
  25   Q.  Did you post DeCSS?
1101
   1   A.  No, I do not.
   2   Q.  Why not?
   3   A.  I wasn't sure what the legal aspects of doing so would be
   4   and I didn't have an immediate need to do it.
   5   Q.  Now, is it your testimony -- text and source code and
   6   object code each stored its 1's and 0's in the computer?
   7   A.  They're all stored as 1's and 0's.
   8   Q.  Now, now does the -- does the word "blowfish" mean
   9   anything to you?
  10   A.  "Blowfish" is an encryption algorithm designed I believe
  11   by Bruce Schneier two or three years ago.
  12   Q.  And the following initial C2TXT2C, can you tell me what
  13   that is?
  14   A.  Yes.  At the time that blowfish was invented, there was
  15   still some question in the United States law whether it was
  16   permissible to post cryptographic algorithms on the Internet.
  17            So, a computer scientist in Finland, I believe,
  18   designed a program called C2 Text 2C that would translate
  19   Schneier's computer program from source code to English
  20   language text.  And English language text would be, in effect,
  21   a description of the computer program, but it would not be the
  22   computer program itself.
  23            And there's also as part of this utility a program
  24   that would translate the English language text back to a C
  25   program.  So, I was interested in this because it shows the
1102
   1   difficulty of drawing a line in prohibiting the distribution
   2   of source code, but not prohibiting descriptions of the
   3   algorithm in English.
   4   Q.  Now, have you ever met Eric Corley or Emmanuel Goldstein
   5   in this case?
   6   A.  No, I have not.
   7   Q.  You testified that you do work in the area of security
   8   with Professor Felton, can you tell us about your experience
   9   with the web browser?
  10   A.  Yes.  About three or four years ago, when web browsers
  11   were just coming out, that supported the java programming
  12   language, that is to say, a website could provide a computer
  13   program that would run in the browser of the user.
  14            There was some concern about whether this would be a
  15   way for viruses to propagate from the website being browsed
  16   into the user's computer.  And the claim made with the initial
  17   java enabled browsers was that they provided security against
  18   attacks by the website to the user's computer.
  19            Some students at Princeton found ways to defeat the
  20   security.  Half a dozen different methods initially and they
  21   came to me and I believe also they came separately to
  22   Professor Felton asking whether they should publish a
  23   description of these security holes and whether that would be
  24   research in computer science that would be valuable to pursue.
  25   And I advised them that it would be an excellent subject for
1103
   1   research and they did, in fact, publish that paper.
   2   Q.  Have you been involved in any other situations concerning
   3   vulnerabilities of codes --
   4   A.  Well, the research I do has to do with -- I'm not sure.
   5   Q.  You don't have a sun tan, but were you in Hawaii last
   6   week?
   7   A.  I was at a meeting of the defense advanced research
   8   project agency meeting of principal investigators in the area
   9   of computer security.
  10   Q.  And were you at a conference that dealt specifically with
  11   the whole question of vulnerability in systems?
  12   A.  Right.  The -- one of the program managers who works for
  13   the defense department convened a workshop of all of these
  14   researchers working in the area of security.  These
  15   researchers are trying to build more secure systems that can
  16   defend against attacks by hackers.  And one of the workshops
  17   that he convened was to have the researchers explain exactly
  18   what kinds of attacks they're defending against.
  19            And one thing we concluded in this discussion was
  20   that the researchers building the defenses don't have a very
  21   good exploit the vulnerabilities in systems the better so that
  22   we can design more security systems to make that defense.
  23            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, move to strike the answer.
  24   It was entirely based on hearsay.
  25   A.  Right.  The -- one of the program managers who works for
1104
   1   the defense department convened a workshop of all of these
   2   researchers working in the area of security.  These
   3   researchers are trying to build more secure systems that can
   4   defend against attacks by hackers.
   5            And one of the workshops that he convened was to have
   6   the researchers explain exactly what kinds of attacks they're
   7   defending against.  And 1 thing we concluded in this
   8   discussion was that the researchers builds the defenses don't
   9   have a very good exploit the vulnerabilities in systems the
  10   better so that we can design more security systems to make
  11   that defense.
  12            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, move to strike the answer.
  13   It was entirely based on hearsay.
  14            THE COURT:  What do you say, Mr. Garbus?
  15   BY MR. GARBUS:
  16   Q.  Did you participate in these conversations?
  17   A.  I participate in the conversations and I gave a short
  18   presentation of about 15 minutes.
  19            THE COURT:  Look it seems to me this is an is self
  20   evident proposition, I will overrule the objection.
  21   Q.  With respect to Frank Stevenson, have you ever read his
  22   paper dealing with DeCSS?
  23   A.  Yes, that was one of the first things I found on the web
  24   when I was looking for DeCSS and I found his analysis of the
  25   DeCSS algorithm to be very helpful.
1105
   1   Q.  Why?
   2   A.  Because it explained what the source code was doing, what
   3   the CSS system itself was accomplishing that the source code
   4   was undoing and what were the weaknesses in the system.
   5            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you, Professor.
   6            I would like to move in as Defendant's BL, the
   7   affidavit of Professor Appel, which goes into more deeply,
   8   which I don't think I have to go into here and annexed to it
   9   is his vitae and annexed to that is the paper that he's
  10   referred to.
  11            THE COURT:  Mr. Mervis?
  12            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, with respect to the
  13   affidavit, I just have to find a copy of it.  We do object to
  14   paragraphs 14 -- we don't object to the CV.  So, that's no
  15   objection to that.
  16            THE COURT:  May I have a copy of this exhibit?
  17            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, you have already made
  18   rulings on the previous affidavit.  I would think those would
  19   be appropriate here in not accepting Professor Appel's --
  20            THE COURT:  Tell me what the paragraph is you are
  21   objecting to, Mr. Mervis.
  22            MR. MERVIS:  Paragraphs 1 through 13, I think are of
  23   dubious relevance, but we don't have any particular objection.
  24            14 through 19, we do object to on the grounds of
  25   relevance.  We also in particular object to that part of
1106
   1   paragraph 14 that discusses what appears on various websites
   2   on two grounds; No. 1, that it's not the best evidence, and
   3   No. 2, it's hearsay.
   4            THE COURT:  Let me just look at it.
   5            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, to save time, you might want
   6   to just take it subject to those rulings.
   7            THE COURT:  Just give me a moment.
   8            What about Attachment B, Mr. Mervis?
   9            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, I believe that this exhibit
  10   is already in evidence.
  11            THE COURT:  So, then you don't have a problem with
  12   it?
  13            MR. MERVIS:  Well, no, your Honor.  I have no
  14   problem, assuming that your Honor's comments with respect to
  15   the exhibit and its weight, I assume, would apply with respect
  16   to this witness as well.
  17            THE COURT:  I'm not sure I made any.
  18            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, let me see if I can find
  19   the --
  20            THE COURT:  All right, look --
  21            MR. MERVIS:  The answer is no.  I don't have an
  22   objection.  It's reflected at page 755 of the trial
  23   transcript.
  24            THE COURT:  O.K., fine.  So, I'm going to take BL out
  25   to the extent that the witness in BL offers opinions on the
1107
   1   law.  I'm obviously not going to consider it.
   2            To the extent that paragraph 14 relates to what he
   3   saw on other people's websites, what about that, Mr. Garbus?
   4            MR. GARBUS:  Let me ask him the question.
   5   BY MR. GARBUS:
   6   Q.  Did you see this material on other people's websites?
   7   A.  Yes.
   8            MR. MERVIS:  I did.  The material discussed in
   9   paragraph 14 I found by searching the web for references to
  10   DeCSS and taking particular note of those that were describing
  11   it in a scholarly context.
  12            THE COURT:  That's adequate, as far as I could see.
  13            So, BL is received with its attachments except to the
  14   extent it contains legal opinions.
  15            And I think that takes care of that.
  16            MR. GARBUS:  Thank you.  I have no further questions.
  17            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Any cross-examination?
  18            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, I thought I'd get through the
  19   trial without making any requests for a sidebar, but by 15
  20   minutes I lost.  May we approach?
  21            THE COURT:  All right.
  22            (At the sidebar)
  23            MR GOLD:  Your Honor, as a result of the testimony of
  24   the last witness, which we didn't expect based on his
  25   deposition or anything, as I said before, I need about 15
1108
   1   minutes or 20 to decide whether we have any cross for him at
   2   all and whether we were going to go forward with our efforts
   3   to put in a witness on rebuttal.
   4            So, what I'd like to do, with your Honor's
   5   indulgence, is take the lunch break 15 minutes early, come
   6   back 15 minutes earlier than usual, and then announce whether
   7   we'll cross him and whether we have any rebuttal case and who
   8   it would be and how long.
   9            THE COURT:  Any problem?
  10            MR. GARBUS:  That would be fine.
  11            MR. ATLAS:  I said something which probably should be
  12   clarified.  Before we close, we would have to deal with all
  13   the documents.
  14            THE COURT:  They have their documents, too.
  15            MR. GARBUS:  That would be part of the case before
  16   anybody closes.
  17            MR. ATLAS:  You'd be glad to know we took our seven
  18   boxes and narrowed it is down to three-quarters of a box.
  19            THE COURT:  Good.
  20            MR. MERVIS:  I did note it was a small case about
  21   what was in here, I was right about that.
  22            MR. ATLAS:  We provided plaintiff's counsel with the
  23   list of exhibits.  I'm sure they'll have some objections, too.
  24            THE COURT:  We will deal with that later.
  25            (In open court)
1109
   1            THE COURT:  We are going to take the lunch recess
   2   now.  I will see everybody back at a quarter to 2 and we will
   3   go from there.
   4            (Luncheon recess)
   5            (Continued on next page)
   6
   7
   8
   9
  10
  11
  12
  13
  14
  15
  16
  17
  18
  19
  20
  21
  22
  23
  24
  25
1110
   1                  A F T E R N O O N  S E S S I O N
   2            (In open court)
   3            THE COURT:  Please be seated.  Good afternoon folks.
   4   Any cross-examination for this witness?
   5            MR. MERVIS:  Yes, your Honor, a little bit.
   6            THE COURT:  Okay.
   7    ANDREW APPEL, resumed.
   8   CROSS-EXAMINATION
   9   BY MR. MERVIS:
  10   Q.  Good afternoon, Professor Appel.  Am I correct in
  11   understanding that you have never personally used the DeCSS?
  12   A.  That's correct.
  13   Q.  And that would include the encrypted DVD?
  14   A.  That's correct.
  15   Q.  And am I also correct that in connection with your
  16   teaching at Princeton, you've never used the DeCSS code, is
  17   that correct?
  18   A.  That is also true.
  19   Q.  And apart from the presence of your declaration in this
  20   case on your website, your website doesn't discuss DeCSS in
  21   any way, is that right?
  22   A.  That's right.
  23   Q.  And is it, also, correct that you have never analyzed the
  24   DeCSS in object code form?
  25   A.  That's right.  I've analyzed other programs in connection
1111
   1   with reverse engineering of encryption software in object
   2   code, but not DeCSS in particular.
   3   Q.  Thank you.  Now, do you recall testifying this morning on
   4   direct that you used the Google search engine to find DeCSS
   5   code on the Internet?
   6   A.  That's right.
   7   Q.  And am I correct in understanding that your search was you
   8   typed in the character stream DeCSS?
   9   A.  That's right.
  10   Q.  And you got, what, about a hundred hits or so?
  11   A.  At least a hundred.
  12   Q.  At least a hundred.  Now, am I correct in understanding
  13   that when you conducted that search, you were looking for
  14   DeCSS source code, is that right?
  15   A.  My primary interest at that time was to look for the
  16   source code.
  17   Q.  Now, approximately how many sites did you visit, that were
  18   reported under search result, before you actually found the
  19   source code?
  20   A.  I don't recall.  My guess is somewhere between five and
  21   ten.
  22   Q.  And with respect to those five or ten sites that you
  23   visited before you found the source code, is it correct that
  24   you don't know whether object code was present on any of those
  25   sites?
1112
   1   A.  I don't recall.
   2   Q.  Now, once you found the source code after visiting five to
   3   ten sites, did you make any further searches of any other
   4   sites that were reported on your search result?
   5   A.  Yes, I did.  I was interested in seeing how many of the
   6   sites were posting DeCSS in a scholarly context.
   7   Q.  I see.  And how many such sites did you visit?
   8   A.  Out of the sites I visited, at that time I identified four
   9   in particular.
  10   Q.  Four of those you visited.  Okay, four had -- you claim
  11   had some sort of scholarly commentary on them?
  12   A.  Right, a discussion of DeCSS in a scholarly context.
  13   Q.  I see.  Now, how many sites total did you visit to find
  14   those four?
  15   A.  My estimate is on the order of a hundred.
  16   Q.  On the order of a hundred.  Now, of those hundred, how
  17   many of them contain or had posed to them either DeCSS source
  18   code or object code?
  19   A.  My guess is it would have been on the order of 20 or 30.
  20   Q.  So roughly a quarter, less than a quarter?
  21   A.  I just don't recall.
  22            THE COURT:  You don't need a Ph.D. in engineering
  23   from Princeton to do that one.
  24            MR. MERVIS:  Your Honor, agreed, and I will not do
  25   that one.  My math is not that good.
1113
   1   Q.  Now, is it correct, Dr. Appel, that the search result from
   2   a search engine is driven by the character stream you type in,
   3   is that right?
   4   A.  That's right.
   5   Q.  And in this case the character stream was DeCSS, is that
   6   right?
   7   A.  That's right.
   8   Q.  Am I correct in understanding that the Google search that
   9   you did not tell you how many of the site hits you got
  10   actually had on them either DeCSS source code or object or
  11   binary code, right?
  12   A.  That's right.
  13   Q.  Were any of the sites that were reported in your search
  14   results offered on the same ISP?
  15   A.  I don't recall.  The same ISP as each other?
  16   Q.  Correct.
  17   A.  I don't recall.
  18   Q.  And do you know whether any of the sites that were
  19   reported on your search result were foreign sites?
  20   A.  Yes.  Some of them were foreign sites.
  21   Q.  About how many?
  22   A.  I don't -- I didn't keep track of the proportion.
  23   Q.  And were there instances in which the same site was
  24   reported more than once in your search result?
  25   A.  I don't remember.
1114
   1   Q.  That's something that's -- excuse me.  I'm sorry.  I just
   2   ate lunch.  That's something that's common with search
   3   engines, isn't it?
   4   A.  It's common to have different pages on the same site pop
   5   up in the same search.
   6   Q.  Do you know whether any of the sites that were reported in
   7   your search result merely linked to other sites where either
   8   it did not have DeCSS code posted or were simply inactive?
   9   A.  Some of the sites I found didn't have DeCSS and didn't
  10   link to it.  They just mentioned it.  Some of them linked to
  11   it.  Some of them had it directly.  I didn't keep count of
  12   which was which.
  13            MR. MERVIS:  Can I take a moment to consult, your
  14   Honor?
  15            THE COURT:  Yes.
  16            MR. MERVIS:  Nothing further, Judge.
  17            THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Mervis.  Any redirect?
  18            MR. GARBUS:  We have no redirect.
  19            THE COURT:  Thank you.  You're excused.
  20            (Witness excused)
  21            THE COURT:  Any witnesses for the defendants?
  22            MR. GOLD:  Oh, excuse me.
  23            MR. GARBUS:  That's the end of live witnesses.  We
  24   have some depositions of witnesses who will not be here, but I
  25   guess that becomes the subject of later discussion.
1115
   1            THE COURT:  Right.  Mr. Gold, will there be any
   2   rebuttal witnesses?
   3            MR. GOLD:  There will not be, your Honor.
   4            THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, then I think the logical
   5   order is to take up first the plaintiffs' and then the
   6   defendants' documents that remain unresolved and conclude the
   7   taking of evidence.  Mr. Gold.  Mr. Sims.
   8            MR. SIMS:  Yes.  First of all, I would just like to
   9   correct the record if I might.  On page 794, on July 20th, we
  10   had moved in four exhibits, and they were 1.13, 1.14, 1.15 and
  11   1.16, and the record reflects 113, 114, 115 and 116, and I'd
  12   like the record to be correct.
  13            THE COURT:  Tell me the page number.
  14            MR. SIMS:  794, I believe.  July 20th.
  15            THE COURT:  July 20th.
  16            MR. SIMS:  July 20.
  17            THE COURT:  Okay.  That's better.  The page hasn't
  18   come up yet.  All right.  Is there any dispute about it, first
  19   of all?  Mr. Garbus.
  20            MR. GARBUS:  Excuse me.  Mr. Atlas will handle this.
  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Atlas.
  22            MR. ATLAS:  Certain dates were not --
  23            MR. SIMS:  Okay.  There were four exhibits moved in
  24   on the 20th, which were 1.13 through 1.16, and the transcript
  25   refers to them as 113, 114, 115, and 116.
1116
   1            MR. ATLAS:  Those are the demonstratives.
   2            THE COURT:  Look, my notes reflect that what --
   3            MR. SIMS:  They were the hacker magazines.  I'm
   4   sorry.
   5            THE COURT:  My notes reflect at that time what were
   6   113, 114, 115, 116, 1.11, 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 1.7, 1.5,
   7   1.3, and 1.12.
   8            MR. SIMS:  They should all have a decimal point after
   9   the first one.  They were each quarterly magazines that Mr.
  10   Garbus gave to the witnesses.
  11            THE COURT:  So it's not Plaintiffs' 113.  It's 1.13
  12   through 1.6.  Any disagreement with that, Mr. Atlas?
  13            MR. ATLAS:  No.
  14            THE COURT:  Okay.  That correction is made.
  15            MR. SIMS:  Secondly, we had given last Wednesday, I
  16   think, a list of plaintiffs' exhibits that we wanted to move
  17   in, and the defendants gave me a list of objections, and they
  18   stated positions with respect to all of the exhibits on our
  19   list, other than the last three.
  20            And I've typed this up, and I've given it to Mr.
  21   Atlas this morning.  And, I think, assuming that it's
  22   complete -- or we can correct it -- one way to do this would
  23   be to mark this, and then you'll have -- we can do it another
  24   way as well.  But this is a list of exhibits we want, together
  25   with those objections that they have, and I think there are
1117
   1   just three more to go.
   2            THE COURT:  Just hand it up.
   3            MR. ATLAS:  On 62, you have our objection being
   4   hearsay.  I'm told that what's missing is we object as to
   5   completeness as well.
   6            MR. SIMS:  62.
   7            MR. ATLAS:  That's fine.
   8            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, would it help you if we did
   9   this outside of your presence and just give you the exhibits
  10   or would that --
  11            THE COURT:  I'm afraid that I'll get 1500 documents
  12   that way.
  13            MR. SIMS:  I think we can do it pretty efficiently.
  14            THE COURT:  All right.  Hand this up, and let's get
  15   it resolved.  I appreciate the suggestion, but I would just
  16   assume get this nailed down once and for all.
  17            All right, Mr. Sims, hand it up.  Let's go.
  18            MR. SIMS:  Here it is, your Honor.  I think it should
  19   be marked for convenience as 132.
  20            THE DEPUTY CLERK:  Mark this one 132?
  21            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, would you like it as an
  22   exhibit?
  23            THE COURT:  It's 132 for identification.  Let me just
  24   look at it.
  25            (Pause)
1118
   1            THE COURT:  All right.  So the following are received
   2   without objection.  Plaintiffs 1, Plaintiffs 4, Plaintiffs 28,
   3   Plaintiffs 51 through 55, inclusive, Plaintiffs 64, 69, 72,
   4   79, 126 and 129.
   5            (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 1, 4, 28, 51-55, 64, 69, 72,
   6   79, 126 and 129 received in evidence)
   7            MR. ATLAS:  We provided counsel for plaintiffs a list
   8   of the exhibits we wanted to move in.  I haven't gotten
   9   objections yet, but --
  10            THE COURT:  Wait a second.  Before we get to your
  11   exhibits, let's deal with the rest of them.  All right.  Do I
  12   correctly understand, Mr. Atlas that as to Plaintiffs' 2,
  13   which consists of 2.1 through 2.34, physical exhibits, you
  14   object only to 2.1?  Is that right?
  15            MR. ATLAS:  Hold on.  Do you have the letter you sent
  16   to me?
  17            MR. SIMS:  I gave it to you this morning.
  18            (Pause)
  19            MR. ATLAS:  I believe in terms of 2, it was just
  20   given to me as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2.  Those were the
  21   demonstrative exhibits, the photographs.
  22            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, Exhibit 2 was a group of DVDs,
  23   commercially marketed, some from each plaintiff, and then
  24   Exhibit 3 were the copyright certificates.
  25            THE COURT:  Do you have any problem with any of them?
1119
   1            MR. ATLAS:  No.
   2            THE COURT:  Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2.1 through 2.34 and
   3   the corresponding certificates of registration, which are 3.1
   4   through, I assume, 34, whatever it is, are received.
   5            (Plaintiffs Exhibits 2.1 through 2.34 and 3.1 through
   6   3.34 received in evidence)
   7            MR. ATLAS:  For the record, we have, I believe,
   8   copies of the copyright forms.  We don't have copies of the
   9   films.  I suppose if we're going to put them in, we should
  10   have a set.
  11            MR. SIMS:  We could stipulate to the relevant fact.
  12   The relevant fact is simply that all of the plaintiffs have
  13   commercially marketed DVDs protected by DeCSS.  We have
  14   testimony of that, which are registered.  I mean, we don't
  15   need the Court to look at all the movies.
  16            THE COURT:  So stipulated?  So I'm not getting 34 DVD
  17   movies here?
  18            MR. SIMS:  We're glad to make them available.
  19            THE COURT:  Okay.  Next we have Plaintiffs' Exhibit
  20   5.  My exhibit book is blank.  There is no Plaintiffs' Exhibit
  21   5 here.
  22            MR. ATLAS:  We understand Plaintiffs' Exhibit 5 were
  23   copies of pirated CDs, is how they were described to me.
  24            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, we'll withdraw Exhibit 5.
  25            THE COURT:  That takes care of that.  All right.  The
1120
   1   next objection as noted is Plaintiffs' 59.  What's going on
   2   here?
   3            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, 59 through -- do you have the
   4   exhibit list, your Honor, or not?  59 through 73, whichever of
   5   those are on this list, were all web pages that were attached
   6   to the Boyden declaration.  I had an agreement with Mr.
   7   Hernstadt that all of those exhibits could come in.  We were
   8   discussing the separate question as to whether the allegations
   9   and the affidavit could come in.
  10            We finally decided at the time Mr. Boyden was brought
  11   up not to put him on with respect to the allegations in his
  12   affidavit on reliance of Mr. Hernstadt's agreement that the
  13   exhibits, which are simply web pages, would come in, and we
  14   would have a stipulation of authenticity with the other side
  15   that we've signed.  I believe they've signed, and I think --
  16   I'm not sure the record reflects that stipulation.
  17            If I might ask, maybe this would be an appropriate
  18   place to get the stipulation of authenticity on the record,
  19   and then I can't imagine that there's a problem with these web
  20   pages.
  21            MR. HERNSTADT:  Your Honor, we agreed that rather
  22   than require Mr. Boyden to come in up here and look at the
  23   screen and say this is a screen shot, that we would accept the
  24   representation that that is what he would say, and the screen
  25   shot could come in for what they were, which is a screen shot
1121
   1   of a particular web page on a particular date.
   2            THE COURT:  So I take it there's no objection to any
   3   of 59 through 73 to the extent that they're offered as screen
   4   shots of the web pages?  They're dated as of the dates they
   5   were taken.  Correct?
   6            MR. HERNSTADT:  Correct.
   7            THE COURT:  Okay, now -- and then I assume further
   8   that the question of whether anything that may appear on them
   9   is to be considered for the truth is going to be considered
  10   under the broad analysis that we discussed previously, which
  11   I've asked you for briefing?
  12            MR. SIMS:  Yes.
  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Hernstadt.
  14            MR. HERNSTADT:  Yes.
  15            THE COURT:  So that takes care of 59 to 73.  My law
  16   clerk has just handed me a note to remind you that the
  17   deadline I established last week, having gone without
  18   objection, I'm taking notice of the specific paragraphs of the
  19   Microsoft findings that I alerted you to.
  20            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, we had actually said it was
  21   all right, and with respect to the Linux matter, paragraph 50
  22   in that opinion relates to Linux.
  23            THE COURT:  Yes.  I'm familiar with that.
  24            MR. SIMS:  And we don't have any objection to
  25   paragraph 50.
1122
   1            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, I would like to take a look
   2   at it if I can and get back to you.  May I?  Thank you.
   3            THE COURT:  Okay.  We'll move ahead while you take a
   4   look at it.
   5            MR. GARBUS:  I don't see how we could have an
   6   objection to it anyway.  It's a court objection.
   7            THE COURT:  Of course you can have an objection to it
   8   as a matter of fact.  Courts make all sorts of funny findings
   9   of facts as I'm told.
  10            MR. ATLAS:  74, I believe.
  11            THE COURT:  74.  Mr. Sims.
  12            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, if I could go briefly out of
  13   order.  77 and 93 were attached to the deposition of Mr.
  14   Kenswil, which we're offering. he's unavailable.  We've
  15   offered it.  He's a music industry executive.  He's talking
  16   about the sorts of harm that can arise.  77 and 93 were
  17   testified to in the deposition, which we'll offer in a bit, as
  18   providing the bases in part of his opinion, and, therefore,
  19   they come in, I believe, under 703 for that purpose as you
  20   ruled with respect to other matters.
  21            I don't recall actually that he testified that he
  22   relied on 74 through -- and 75 and 76, so I guess --
  23            THE COURT:  So you're withdrawing 74 to 76?
  24            MR. SIMS:  Yes.
  25            THE COURT:  93 and 77.
1123
   1            MR. SIMS:  And 93.
   2            THE COURT:  And 93.  Any objection to they're coming
   3   in under 703 for the limited purpose that it so contemplates?
   4            MR. ATLAS:  I don't have a recollection that the
   5   witness testified he relied on them.  They were provided in a
   6   packet by Mr. Gold of things that he relied upon or he would
   7   be asked about.  If the transcript reflects that he relied on
   8   them, I guess I would have no objection to they're coming in
   9   for that limited purpose.
  10            THE COURT:  I'm going to take them in for that
  11   limited purpose subject, of course, to the predicate being
  12   laid in the transcript.
  13            (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 77 and 93 received in evidence)
  14            MR. ATLAS:  I guess I have a separate objection to
  15   his testimony all together, as well as these exhibits.  It's a
  16   different case.  It's a music case.  I think what may or may
  17   not have happened in the music case with Napster is not
  18   relevant to what's before us now.
  19            THE COURT:  You want to respond to that?
  20            MR. SIMS:  Sure.  He testified in the deposition
  21   about the quickness, the speed with which this new technology
  22   began causing substantial harm.  And since, I think, one of
  23   the issues here is the reasonable apprehension of harm that
  24   the plaintiffs face, I think his testimony is relevant to that
  25   issue.
1124
   1            THE COURT:  All right.  I'm going to take it for what
   2   it's worth, but I'm not sure it's worth much.  Okay that takes
   3   us to 92.  What about 92, Mr. Sims?
   4            MR. SIMS:  92, I think, I do not recall that he
   5   expressly -- it's the same thing.  I don't recall that he
   6   expressly relied on it.
   7            THE COURT:  So it's withdrawn.
   8            MR. SIMS:  Yes.
   9            THE COURT:  Okay, 93.
  10            MR. SIMS:  We've just covered.  It was 93 and 77 that
  11   I believe you did rule in.
  12            THE COURT:  96.
  13            MR. SIMS:  That is the deposition of Mr. Corely as
  14   designated.  I believe we moved that in some days earlier.  If
  15   not, we would certainly move it in as a completion of the
  16   cross-examination under the ruling that you made, I believe,
  17   last week.
  18            THE COURT:  Any objections to 96?  While you think
  19   about that, Mr. Atlas, you've got a couple hundred pages of
  20   material here, Mr. Sims.  Now -- maybe 400.  I mean, do you
  21   really want me to read this?  I'm serious.  I mean, we had the
  22   man on the stand.  Is there anything in there that I need to
  23   read to decide this case?
  24            MR. SIMS:  There are admissions in there, your Honor.
  25   I mean, as I understood the rulings you had made, it was that
1125
   1   a party couldn't call its own witness and then dump in, if you
   2   would, the deposition, but that with respect to a witness
   3   called by the other side, that could be added in terms of --
   4            THE COURT:  Well, sure.  But haven't you picked out
   5   the gems, or is that what these little black lines in the
   6   margin mean?
   7            MR. SIMS:  Well, with respect to every deposition
   8   that's been handed to you, you're getting a complete
   9   transcript, but there are lines on the side that are the
  10   portions designated.
  11            THE COURT:  I see.
  12            MR. SIMS:  In some of them, there's no distinction
  13   between who designated because it doesn't really matter.  So
  14   it's not that the whole deposition is being offered.  It's
  15   just the pieces that have been marked which comprises the
  16   markings by both sides.
  17            MR. ATLAS:  I believe we're objecting to portions of
  18   their designations, but I believe that would be reflected
  19   before.
  20            THE COURT:  Pardon me.
  21            MR. ATLAS:  In what we are submitting.
  22            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, we might be able to pare down
  23   depending on the rest of the rulings here.
  24            THE COURT:  Look, for the sake of wrapping this up,
  25   I'll take the designated portions of 96 subject to whatever
1126
   1   objections have been made.  And if I don't in the course of my
   2   findings rely on something in 96 or any other deposition, you
   3   should just assume it's not in if it's objected to.
   4            MR. ATLAS:  Your Honor, I don't know whether Exhibit
   5   96 reflects our objections to the testimony.  Does it?
   6            THE COURT:  Not that I see, other than the form
   7   objections, of course.
   8            MR. ATLAS:  I think Mr. Rollings who handle the
   9   depositions objected to some of the portions that you tried to
  10   get in.  I just want to make sure before they go to the Court.
  11            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, there's an index in the front.
  12   If Mr. Rollings has given us a revised version of that, that
  13   has a few more objections on it, I have no objection.
  14            THE COURT:  There's nothing here.  The index in the
  15   front just includes plaintiffs' designations.
  16            MR. SIMS:  And there's no objections.
  17            THE COURT:  Correct.
  18            MR. SIMS:  I don't have a problem if it's a
  19   mechanical problem that you don't have them in court.
  20            MR. ATLAS:  I mean, we could present, if the Court
  21   wishes, depositions, color marks showing who objected to
  22   what -- I think Mr. Rollings -- well --
  23            MR. SIMS:  It is the defendants' testimony in case.
  24            THE COURT:  I know.  Look --
  25            MR. ATLAS:  I think we have designations to which we
1127
   1   objected to and, I could provide the Court with that
   2   information.
   3            THE COURT:  Do that.  Okay, fine.  That takes care of
   4   96.  97?
   5            MR. ATLAS:  I think that was actually offered into
   6   evidence.  I think even accepted at one point. =20
   7            THE COURT:  It looks very familiar.
   8            MR. ATLAS:  The one that had the words at the bottom.
   9            MR. SIMS:  I'm sorry.  97 is in evidence on the 18th.
  10            THE COURT:  So, 97 is in.  98.
  11            MR. ATLAS:  97 is in with an objection to those words
  12   that have been inserted by the witness.
  13            THE COURT:  And then I think the witness testified to
  14   the words, or whatever the transcript shows, it shows.
  15            MR. ATLAS:  Fine.
  16            THE COURT:  98, what is this?  This is the download
  17   of all the links on the Joint 2600 or something else?
  18            MR. SIMS:  It's a sample of those, your Honor.
  19            THE COURT:  Is there any objection on 98?
  20            MR. ATLAS:  I think for completeness, it's probably
  21   hearsay.
  22            MR. SIMS:  I think the stipulation of authenticity
  23   covers it, your Honor.
  24            MR. ATLAS:  Well, it's not just links.  There's also
  25   a lot of text.  Stop DMCA.  Stop download here.  I guess I
1128
   1   don't know what they're trying to get it in for.
   2            MR. SIMS:  It's not offered for the truth.  It is
   3   what it is, and I think it's relevant to questions.
   4            THE COURT:  I'm taking it on that limited basis.
   5            (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 98 received in evidence)
   6            THE COURT:   Okay.  Moving right along.  127, kenswil
   7   deposition.
   8            MR. SIMS:  Yes.  If your Honor wants to take the
   9   depositions -- well, these are the depositions we're moving
  10   in.  Mr. Kenswil is the music executive that I referred to
  11   earlier.  We took his deposition.  We established on the
  12   record that he would be unavailable.
  13            THE COURT:  All right.  So that's subject to the
  14   ruling I already made.
  15            MR. ATLAS:  We have no objection to the entire
  16   testimony coming in, but we've noted that --
  17            THE COURT:  Yes, I understand.  I'm just not going to
  18   resolve it right now.  I'm going to take it, and if it's worth
  19   something  -- but I understand your relevance objection, and I
  20   am not supposed to be trying the music case here.  Okay.
  21            MR. ATLAS:  We also designated an -- I guess we
  22   objected to portions of Mr. Kenswil's deposition, and in
  23   addition to relevance, I don't know whether those are
  24   reflected on what your Honor has.
  25            THE COURT:  They are not.
1129
   1            MR. SIMS:  I don't have any problem with their
   2   substituting a copy.
   3            THE COURT:  You'll get me these objections by
   4   tomorrow.
   5            MR. GARBUS:  I have looked at section 50, and I do
   6   object to it, paragraph 50.
   7            THE COURT:  If you'll pass it back to me, I will see
   8   if it's something that's worth taking further discussion.  All
   9   right.  If you don't want it, you don't want it.  I think your
  10   witnesses basically testified to most of it today.
  11            MR. GARBUS:  Some of it.
  12            THE COURT:  That issue is closed.  Okay.  130 and 131
  13   I do not have.
  14            MR. SIMS:  We've both been working on this the last
  15   few days.  The one is for the deposition of Rick Burns that
  16   was taken during the trial, if you'll recall, your Honor, and
  17   the other is that during the trial deposition of Professor
  18   Ramadge, with respect to the demonstration that he did and I
  19   think -- I think we can both give your Honor those
  20   designations with whatever objections we have in the way we
  21   will with respect to any other.
  22            THE COURT:  Okay.  I will take those on the same
  23   basis as all the other depositions.  I take it that's the end
  24   of plaintiffs' case.
  25            MR. SIMS:  Yes, your Honor.  Thank you.
1130
   1            THE COURT:  Okay.  Mr. Atlas, you're up.
   2            MR. ATLAS:  Do the documents first, and then we'll
   3   deal with the deposition afterwards.
   4            THE COURT:  Do the documents first.
   5            MR. ATLAS:  It may not be as easygoing as with
   6   plaintiffs' exhibits.  Where's the box?
   7            Well, what I'll present the Court with is a box of
   8   documents that we would like to offer on our case.  I've got
   9   an updated master exhibit list of everything that we had
  10   originally designated, and then I have a shortened list of
  11   just what we're dealing with now.  I don't know whether this
  12   many be helpful to you.  I'm happy to provide to the Court
  13   another inch and a half of paper.  You could throw it away if
  14   you want.
  15            THE COURT:  Here we are in a paperless society.
  16            MR. ATLAS:  This is just what we're dealing with now.
  17   That's all that's relevant for today.
  18            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, if I might, we were provided
  19   with their list, I think, on disk, and we've printed it out
  20   and added in the "objection" column all of our objections.
  21   I'm glad to go --
  22            THE COURT:  Why don't we swap.
  23            MR. SIMS:  Here it is, but unfortunately it's my only
  24   copy.  Can I get a copy of it?  I have it on the machine, but
  25   if I give it to you, I won't have it.  It was just completed
1131
   1   early this morning.
   2            MR. ATLAS:  I haven't seen it.
   3            THE COURT:  Well, with all due respect Mr. Sims, I
   4   don't think this is really going to help me very much.  Are
   5   there any exhibits on here you don't object to?
   6            MR. SIMS:  I believe there are a few that we don't
   7   object to, yes.
   8            THE COURT:  Okay.  I see them.  They're fairly
   9   jumping out at me.  Defendants' Exhibit CS is received without
  10   objection.
  11            (Defendants' Exhibit CS received in evidence)
  12            THE COURT:  That one I see.  Defendants' Exhibit FH
  13   is received without objection.
  14            (Defendants' Exhibit FH received in evidence)
  15            MR. ATLAS:  Your Honor, I'm told that we have two
  16   more exhibits.
  17            THE COURT:  Let me just -- does that exhaust the ones
  18   that aren't objected to?
  19            MR. SIMS:  I'm not sure, your Honor.  The ones that
  20   are in yellow, we've never gotten a copy of.  So I haven't
  21   been able to formulate that position one way or the other.
  22            THE COURT:  Well, that does it out of this monster
  23   list.  Those are the only ones that are no objection.
  24            MR. ATLAS:  Our task is much easier now.  We have two
  25   exhibits which are not on that list, and I apologize for the
1132
   1   lateness of the list.  These were two documents that were
   2   shown to Mr. Kenswil.  Our position is that they complete the
   3   exhibits that he wishes to offer for his deposition, the
   4   things that he allegedly relied on.  I would ask that these be
   5   admitted also to counter those to the extent the Court wishes
   6   to deal with those issues.  It's Court Exhibit CCR and Exhibit
   7   CCS.  I'll give a copy to Mr. Sims.
   8            THE COURT:  You know, frankly, gentlemen, I'm
   9   virtually at a loss.  I figured there are about 150 exhibits
  10   on this page or these pages.  There are no descriptions of any
  11   of them.  Can't you people work this out?
  12            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, we tried.
  13            MR. ATLAS:  Well, we haven't -- I even gotten your
  14   objections to the documents.  I'm happy to spend a day and try
  15   to go through some of this stuff.
  16            MR. SIMS:  I was hoping to get the list on Saturday
  17   morning.  I had a lot of people waiting around to work on
  18   them.  Given when we finally got them, this is the best we
  19   could do.  We might make some progress if we could spend any
  20   time together, but given when we got the lists --
  21            MR. ATLAS:  You want a hand?
  22            THE COURT:  Oh, for God sake.  Come on, guys.
  23            MR. ATLAS:  I have two more.
  24            THE COURT:  You've got Professor Appel's affidavit in
  25   here.
1133
   1            MR. ATLAS:  The declarations are in there.  They've
   2   been marked.
   3            THE COURT:  There's all kinds of stuff in here.
   4            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, much of what's in that box is
   5   stuff that under the rulings you've already made generically
   6   shouldn't be there at all, including declarations of various
   7   witnesses they've put on the stand.
   8            THE COURT:  I mean, to quote Judge Ward in another
   9   case, "The purpose of evidence is to persuade, not to
  10   inundate."
  11            All right, look, you people are going to have to try
  12   to reach agreement on this or, at least, to narrow down the
  13   list in light of rulings that have been made at trial.  I'll
  14   resolve whatever you can't resolve, but, I mean, my reaction
  15   in looking at all this is that it seems like overkill, and
  16   that in light of what I've done so far, you ought to be able
  17   to resolve these things.
  18            MR. ATLAS:  I mean, having been the one that went
  19   through this weekend all seven of our boxes, I speak from
  20   personal experience.
  21            THE COURT:  You definitely get the purple heart.
  22   There's no question about that.
  23            MR. ATLAS:  What I tried to do --
  24            THE COURT:  You've got an affidavit in here from
  25   Professor Samuelson.  I mean, if he's not testifying live, the
1134
   1   objection is hearsay.  It's sustained, right?  Is there any
   2   other basis to do this?  Right?
   3            MR. ATLAS:  We'll take the documents back.
   4            THE COURT:  Okay.  Look, I'm not trying to deprive
   5   you of any evidence that's probably in here.  Just, please,
   6   edit first, and really I understand you all have been working
   7   very hard.  I do.  Okay.
   8            MR. ATLAS:  My wife is very forgiving.
   9            THE COURT:  Oh, yes, I remember how forgiving my wife
  10   used to be.  Okay, let's deal with this CCR and CCS.  Talk to
  11   me, Mr. Atlas, about CCR.
  12            MR. ATLAS:  The studies that Mr. Kenswil referred to,
  13   in such relied upon for his testimony, dealt with how much
  14   money the music industry would be losing as a result of the
  15   MP3 and the Napster issues.  These studies, which were also
  16   submitted in the Napster case in California, counter that and
  17   show that, in fact, Napster has spurred sales in the music
  18   industry.  It's the flip side to what Mr. Kenswil was
  19   testifying about.
  20            THE COURT:  Well, is this material that Mr. Kenswil
  21   relied on in coming to his opinions, or is this a rebuttal of
  22   Mr. Kenswil?
  23            MR. ATLAS:  I don't believe he relied on it.  The
  24   argument would be that it is a rebuttal or is more so offered
  25   as completeness to the materials that they want in.
1135
   1            MR. SIMS:  I think under Rule 703, your Honor, that
   2   just -- that dog won't hunt.
   3            THE COURT:  You spent too much time in Texas.  Look,
   4   I need to understand exactly what I'm dealing with here, Mr.
   5   Atlas.
   6            MR. ATLAS:  These were not documents he relied on.
   7            THE COURT:  These are not documents he relied on.  So
   8   why aren't they simply hearsay?  They're out-of-court
   9   statements by declarants offered for the truth of the
  10   statements made, because you claim that the truth of their
  11   statements rebuts a witness who testified under oath in his
  12   cross-exam.
  13            MR. ATLAS:  I also disagree with that.  The point, I
  14   guess, I'm making is that if your Honor is going to consider
  15   some of these issues, your Honor is taking the documents Mr.
  16   Kenswil relied upon for what they were worth, I would ask that
  17   this presents a contrary view that may be useful to the Court
  18   if the Court wants to --
  19            THE COURT:  That isn't the point.  There are rules of
  20   evidence.  Kenswil was deposed, as I understand it, and he was
  21   offered for cross-examination.  Am I right?
  22            MR. SIMS:  Absolutely.
  23            THE COURT:  And he gave an opinion, and he said his
  24   opinion was based on certain things.  Am I correct?
  25            MR. SIMS:  Yes.
1136
   1            THE COURT:  And among the things he said the opinion
   2   was based on was materials that the plaintiffs offered in
   3   evidence.  Am I right, Mr. Atlas?
   4            MR. ATLAS:  Yes.
   5            THE COURT:  And they offered those materials upon
   6   which he relied, not for the truth of the matters and the
   7   materials, but to illustrate the opinions and the basis for
   8   the opinion.  Am I right so far?
   9            MR. ATLAS:  I see where you're going.
  10            THE COURT:  Okay.  Objection sustained to CCR and
  11   CCS.  Okay, anything else?  You're going to try to work out
  12   the exhibits.  What else?
  13            MR. ATLAS:  We come to the depositions, and I guess
  14   over the weekend, I got some letters from Mr. Sims and his
  15   team to the effect that certain deposition -- they were going
  16   to object to the admission of certain deposition testimony.
  17   They refer to certain rulings of the Court, that I was
  18   admittedly not here for the entire trial, but it was not my
  19   understanding that the Court had made those rulings.  But I'll
  20   let him speak to the issue.
  21            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, I believe you ruled in
  22   accordance with what I think is clearly the prevailing law,
  23   that to the extent that they called witnesses to the stand,
  24   including, for example, the witnesses that were illustrative
  25   this morning, after they're done, they just can't move in
1137
   1   designations of those people's deposition.
   2            And under that ruling, if it is, in fact, to be
   3   adhered to, the following designated depositions that they've
   4   offered should be excluded.  Abelson, Appel -- Abelson is a
   5   different category, I'm sorry.  I'll get to Abelson in a
   6   moment.  Appel, who testified this morning.  Craig, who
   7   testified this morning.  DiBona, who testified this morning.
   8   Felton, who testified earlier.  Einhorn, Pavlovich, Touretzky,
   9   Ramadge, leaving aside the supplemental deposition, and
  10   Peterson.
  11            THE COURT:  Now, do you have a reference in the
  12   transcript to where you say I made this ruling?
  13            MR. SIMS:  I don't have a page reference, but I
  14   remember precisely there was a witness they called earlier on.
  15   I think it was Peterson.  I think it was the first expert.
  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  Felton.
  17            MR. SIMS:  Professor Felton.  And after the cross was
  18   done on redirect, they then tried to add in the deposition and
  19   declaration.
  20            MR. ATLAS:  I was here for that.  It was the
  21   declaration.  As I recall, the reason your Honor didn't let it
  22   in was it was not within the scope of the -- we tried to get
  23   it in on redirect, and what your Honor said was that it wasn't
  24   dealt with on cross.
  25            THE COURT:  Okay.  I do remember that now.  Now,
1138
   1   look, Rule 32 sets out the parameters as to when you can offer
   2   a deposition.  Now, if I'm understanding Mr. Sims correctly,
   3   he is saying that none of the ones he ticked off come within
   4   Rule 32.  Am I right, Mr. Sims?  That's your position?
   5            MR. SIMS:  Exactly, your Honor.
   6            THE COURT:  So, Mr. Atlas, what about that?
   7            MR. ATLAS:  Part of this, I think, was the nature of
   8   the trial, was to try and get the witnesses on, to try and be
   9   as quick as possible.  I had understood that we had permission
  10   to put in depositions to cut down on some of the examinations,
  11   both on direct and on cross.  I think putting in these
  12   transcripts will do that.  I don't know that it's clearly
  13   prohibited by Rule 32, and I think there's also an exception
  14   in Rule 32 for exceptional circumstances.
  15            THE COURT:  Well, what makes this exceptional?
  16            MR. ATLAS:  In terms of keeping the trial time low
  17   and trying to get the witnesses on and off.
  18            THE COURT:  Look, you guys told me at one point that
  19   this was a three- to four-week trial, and I didn't raise any
  20   objection to that.  I'm glad you wound up sooner, but nobody
  21   stopped you from putting in whatever you wanted to put in.
  22            Look, if at any point in this trial I indicated that
  23   I was going to take deposition testimony of a witness that was
  24   not otherwise admissible under Rule 32, for the purpose of
  25   economy, I will certainly live by the ruling, but somebody is
1139
   1   going to have to show it to me.  Otherwise I think Mr. Sims is
   2   within his rights.  And if you want to think about it
   3   overnight and look in the transcript, that's okay.
   4            MR. ATLAS:  I know --
   5            THE COURT:  My deputy is trying to tell me something.
   6            (Pause)
   7            THE COURT:  Well, my deputy is saying she thinks she
   8   may remember something in the final pretrial conference.  I
   9   just don't.
  10            MR. ATLAS:  Yeah, I think --
  11            THE COURT:  Can we get the transcript?  It's the July
  12   12th transcript.
  13            MR. GARBUS:  I believe you said, Mr. Garbus, thank
  14   you for the solution.  That was my memory.  Some solution.
  15            THE COURT:  Look, obviously what I'm concerned about
  16   here is that it would be unfair for you to have offered
  17   somebody on direct, put forward a fairly direct and narrow
  18   direct, have Mr. Sims do the cross by direct, and then to have
  19   him get sandbagged with hundreds of pages of testimony after
  20   the fact.  If that's what's happened, if that's what's being
  21   offered, I'm not going to allow it.
  22            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor.
  23            MR. ATLAS:  There's no sandbagging.  All of the
  24   deposition designations were provided before the trial
  25   started.
1140
   1            THE COURT:  No, I understand that, but it was not
   2   meant in a pejorative way.  Simply meant to describe surprise
   3   borne of the fact that he had a right, perhaps, to rely on the
   4   scope of your direct.
   5            MR. ATLAS:  These were depositions conducted by the
   6   plaintiffs.
   7            THE COURT:  That doesn't matter.  They're entitled to
   8   take discovery in depositions.  While my law clerk is getting
   9   that transcript, let's go on to depositions in other
  10   categories.  Are there any?
  11            MR. SIMS:  There are a few.  Professor Abelson at MIT
  12   would be usable -- I guess it is usable under Rule 32.  So we
  13   don't have any objection to the designated Abelson.
  14            THE COURT:  Okay.  So let's mark it as an exhibit,
  15   and it will be Defendant's Number 1?
  16            MR. ATLAS:  I know we're not dealing with it now, but
  17   I have a note that there is one other pieces of business
  18   before we finish all this up.
  19            Mr. Rollings put together the binders.  I believe
  20   he's better qualified to go through this.
  21            MR. ROLLINGS:  Each deposition is indexed as to what
  22   would have been designated, what would have been objected to,
  23   what has been counterdesignated, and if there are any
  24   objections, they're objections to what is indicated.  Each
  25   transcript sets forth all the designations.  And so those are
1141
   1   cross-referenced and whose objecting to what.
   2            There are three volumes.  We had Tab 1 through Tab
   3   24.  So on each volume there is an index of the exhibit
   4   number, which corresponds to each deponent or deposition being
   5   offered.  It is very self-explanatory if you go through it.
   6            THE COURT:  So there is an exhibit number attached to
   7   each particular deposition.
   8            MR. ROLLINGS:  Each has an exhibit number on it, and
   9   it's indexed at the beginning of each volume.
  10            THE COURT:  So, Mr. Atlas, what exhibit is Abelson?
  11            MR. ROLLINGS:  It's Tab 1.  So the exhibit --
  12            THE COURT:  I see.  All right.  What's the next
  13   defendants' exhibit number?
  14            MR. ATLAS:  Pardon me.
  15            THE COURT:  What is your next exhibit number?
  16            MR. ATLAS:  What's the next exhibit number?
  17            THE COURT:  We don't even need it.  The three binders
  18   are collectively market Defendants' Exhibit XXX for
  19   identification.  I'm taking the Abelson's deposition subject
  20   to the objections and rulings on the objected parts.  What
  21   besides Abelson is not objected to?
  22            MR. SIMS:  Is not objected to?
  23            THE COURT:  Not objected to.
  24            MR. SIMS:  There are designated depositions which
  25   reflect objections of the following witnesses to which they've
1142
   1   offered, and we don't object.
   2            THE COURT:  Shoot.
   3            MR. SIMS:  Burns, Schumann, Reider, Fisher, King, and
   4   Hunt.
   5            THE COURT:  All right.  I will take those seven
   6   deposition designations on the same basis as everything else.
   7            MR. ATLAS:  We have also Barbara Simons,
   8            THE COURT:  Pardon me.
   9            MR. ATLAS:  The depositions of Barbara Simons, who
  10   was going to be an expert for our side, but did not testify.
  11   Those depositions are designated.
  12            THE COURT:  They're in the XXX binders.
  13            MR. ATLAS:  Yes.  Bruise Schneier.
  14            THE COURT:  So that's the next category, right?
  15            MR. SIMS:  I'm sorry, your Honor.
  16            THE COURT:  I'm asking, Mr. Atlas.
  17            MR. ATLAS:  There are several experts that did not
  18   come and testify in court.  Abelson, Schneier, and Simons were
  19   the three experts whose depositions we designated, but who did
  20   not come in to testify.
  21            THE COURT:  Abelson I already took.
  22            MR. ATLAS:  Correct.  Simons and Schneier.
  23            THE COURT:  Are there objections to Schneier and
  24   Simons?
  25            MR. SIMS:  There is an objection to Simons, your
1143
   1   Honor.  There is no establishment on the record that he was
   2   unavailable.
   3            MR. HERNSTADT:  I informed the plaintiff that he had
   4   informed us that he would not be able to come.  He's basically
   5   in San Jose and in Minneapolis, and we had put him on the
   6   list.  At the time of the deposition, they were also aware
   7   that we intended to call him, but that he had limitations on
   8   his schedule, that he might not be able to make it, and he
   9   informed us that he was not able to make it.  And I so
  10   informed the plaintiffs.
  11            THE COURT:  Okay, Mr. Sims, what do you have to say?
  12            MR. SIMS:  What I have to say, your Honor, is that I
  13   just checked with my colleagues at the table, and as far as we
  14   recall, we were advised last week that they wouldn't be
  15   calling him and, we think, for technical reasons, but that's
  16   not the same as establishing that he's unavailable.
  17            THE COURT:  Well, he's more than a hundred miles
  18   away, so Rule 32 is satisfied.  So your argument is you were
  19   told he wasn't going to be offered at all?
  20            MR. SIMS:  And we had cited to your Honor in an
  21   earlier brief a Delaware case establishing that with respect
  22   to experts, it's not simply where they are in the country, but
  23   they have to establish unavailability.
  24            THE COURT:  Well, how about that, folks?
  25            MR. HERNSTADT:  I informed plaintiffs that he was
1144
   1   unavailable.  They did not say, well, you'll have to establish
   2   his unavailability on the record.  They accepted my telling
   3   him that he wasn't going to be able to make it.
   4            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, we haven't even designated the
   5   Schneier deposition precisely because we were told he wouldn't
   6   be presented, and I sent them a letter to which Mr. Atlas or
   7   Mr. Hernstadt referred to last week saying --
   8            THE COURT:  You can put all this argument on Schneier
   9   in two letters, not to exceed two pages, each tomorrow, and
  10   I'll simply rule on it.  What about Simons?
  11            MR. SIMS:  It's cumulative, your Honor, but other
  12   than that, we don't have an objection.
  13            THE COURT:  All right.  I'm taking Simons on the same
  14   basis as the others.  What other depositions?
  15            MR. SIMS:  There is a deposition they're offering of
  16   Rick Hirsch, who is a former MPAA employee who lives in
  17   Ardley, and I believe that under Rule 32, there is no basis
  18   for the introduction of that deposition.
  19            THE COURT:  Mr. Atlas.
  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  Rick Hirsch was the head of
  21   anti-piracy up until April of this year.  When we saw his
  22   deposition, the MPAA acted as an interceder and informed us
  23   that he lives half the year in LA and half the year in
  24   Washington, that he's bicoastal on his job and offered his
  25   deposition in California or here.
1145
   1            THE COURT:  Well, that was months ago.
   2            MR. HERNSTADT:  That was last month.  That was July.
   3            MR. SIMS:  At the time of his deposition, he moved to
   4   New York.  He so testified, and he's working for the ISTA
   5   downtown.
   6            THE COURT:  What does his deposition say about where
   7   he lives?  Presumably you have it right there, Mr. Atlas.
   8            MR. ATLAS:  I believe he said Rye.
   9            THE COURT:  Objection sustained.  What else?
  10            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, they've offered the
  11   depositions of Michael Eisner and Jack Valenti.  Those we
  12   object to on grounds of relevance.  Relevance, your Honor.
  13            THE COURT:  All right.  I'm going to take them
  14   subject to ruling on that.  I mean, you know, I read Valenti,
  15   and my general recollection of it is that there's
  16   substantially nothing relevant.  But I'm not going to simply
  17   exclude the whole thing on the basis of that broad
  18   recollection.  So I'll look at it.  If I find anything
  19   relevant, I'll rely on it, and if I don't, consider that
  20   they're not in.
  21            MR. SIMS:  Your Honor, that completes, as far as I
  22   know, except that I would ask the Court for permission for us
  23   to just check the indexes that we've been exchanging with
  24   respect to objections, to make certain that the Court's copies
  25   have the most updated copies we each have.  If I could do that
1146
   1   with Anna or --
   2            THE COURT:  You're welcome to do that.  Now, let's
   3   come back to that other point about depositions.  The
   4   discussion at the pretrial conference about depositions was
   5   this.  Mr. Garbus said that with respect to long depositions
   6   of people like Schumann, who would be giving direct, he saw no
   7   purpose in repeating on cross lengthy cross-examination that
   8   he had done in their depositions, and that he wanted to put
   9   the depositions of those witnesses in in order to curtail the
  10   length of their cross.  And that's at page 41.
  11            And I went along with that idea on the following
  12   page.  Now, whose deposition were we talking about a few
  13   minutes ago?
  14            MR. GARBUS:  It was not one of the plaintiffs'
  15   witnesses.  It was something else, your Honor.
  16            MR. ATLAS:  The witnesses that we had called.  The
  17   experts that we had called and whether we could get our
  18   designations in on those witnesses.
  19            THE COURT:  If there's anything else in the record,
  20   please call to it my attention by tomorrow, but this is what I
  21   think I remember.  So that would imply that I will sustain the
  22   Rule 32 objections as to depositions of the people you called
  23   live.  Okay.  Anything else with respect to evidence?
  24            MR. ATLAS:  There's one other point.  I believe
  25   during one of the witnesses, we offered and it was accepted
1147
   1   the licenses of the DVD-CCA.
   2            THE COURT:  I believe you are right.
   3            MR. ATLAS:  And your Honor took it and filed it under
   4   seal.  I'd like to make a motion to unseal it.  As I
   5   understand, the copy of a declaration from John Hoy, who I
   6   understand runs the DVD-CCA, he filed an affidavit in the
   7   California action and attached as an exhibit, I think, a
   8   form -- one of the form DVD-CCA licensees.
   9            In reading through the documents, I think he had
  10   originally filed the affidavit and included the DeCSS code,
  11   which was a big brouhaha because he filed in it open court and
  12   then that aspect of it was sealed.  But as I understand, the
  13   license agreement --
  14            THE COURT:  You place all this reliance on these
  15   orders, and every year there is another classic case.  I mean,
  16   last year it was the SEC producing inadvertently their
  17   prosecution memorandum in a civil case.  The year before that
  18   the F.B.I. attached some super secret document out in Arizona.
  19   So this is this case's version.
  20            MR. ATLAS:  Anyway, the copy I have is Exhibit A
  21   sealed, Exhibit B sealed, and then Exhibit C is the restated
  22   DVD-CCA licensing agreement.
  23            THE COURT:  It looks like a blank form.
  24            MR. ATLAS:  The point is that -- yeah, it is blank,
  25   the exhibit that we have offered, and we've offered all of the
1148
   1   interim licenses among the exhibits that we have.
   2            THE COURT:  You didn't really.
   3            MR. ATLAS:  I did only because I couldn't read them.
   4   I wasn't sure if they were all identical.  And if I understand
   5   that they're identical, I'll pull them out.  I didn't want to
   6   take the chance that one said something different, because
   7   there was an original, and then there was a restated one and
   8   there are points in there.
   9            THE COURT:  I had a feeling that box was too heavy.
  10            MR. HERNSTADT:  Just to save Mr. Atlas on this point,
  11   it's not all of the licenses.  There are over a hundred
  12   licenses.  It's a selection of licenses for different
  13   purposes, for making hardware, for making players, for doing
  14   different things.  There are 12 different licenses, and it's a
  15   selection.  Maybe not as limited as it will be tomorrow.
  16            THE COURT:  All right.  Work on it.
  17            MR. ATLAS:  In any event, I would make a motion to
  18   unseal.
  19            THE COURT:  Write a letter with the other side
  20   responding, and I gather that you ought to copy the DVD-CCA
  21   lawyers on it.
  22            MR. SIMS:  They've been asking.
  23            MR. ATLAS:  Do they have an issue?
  24            MR. SIMS:  I don't know.  I know they sent letters,
  25   please, let us know.
1149
   1            THE COURT:  Okay.  Any other evidence to be
   2   presented?
   3            MR. SIMS:  Yes, we do.  Your Honor.  We would like to
   4   ask the Court to draw an adverse inference with respect to the
   5   defendant's harddrive in light of the refusal throughout the
   6   entire matter to produce any e-mails or letters from it or to
   7   comply with the Court's letters with respect to an
   8   investigation.
   9            THE COURT:  I'm not going to hear any argument about
  10   this now.  I've heard enough discovery in this case enough to
  11   last me a lifetime.
  12            MR. ATLAS:  One other deposition.  I'm told the
  13   deposition of Mr. Attaway was not addressed a few moments ago.
  14            THE COURT:  What about Mr. Attaway?  Who wants it in?
  15            MR. ATLAS:  We want it in.
  16            MR. HERNSTADT:  It was designated and
  17   counterdesignated, but it was inadvertently left out of the
  18   binder, and Mr. Attaway is one of their --
  19            THE COURT:  I know who he is.
  20            MR. HERNSTADT:  Okay.  And was a witness on their
  21   witness list who didn't testify.
  22            MR. ATLAS:  We'll provide that to the Court in a
  23   letter tomorrow.
  24            MR. SIMS:  We don't have any problem.
  25            THE COURT:  That will be XXY.  So mark it please.
1150
   1   You with me, folks?  XXY, Attaway's deposition designations.
   2   Any other evidence?  Going once.  Going twice.  Closed.  All
   3   right.
   4            Does anybody want any closing argument in this case?
   5            MR. GARBUS:  I think we were talking about submitting
   6   briefs certainly.  I think, perhaps, after the briefs are in,
   7   you might want to do that.  I don't know what your Honor's
   8   schedule is.  I don't feel any real need for it now.  Your
   9   Honor had posed questions to us at the very beginning, and it
  10   may be that we will resolve those issues.
  11            There were four questions.  I don't have them in
  12   front of me.  I think I would like to make after the briefs
  13   come in a closing argument, but that depends on your
  14   scheduling.
  15            THE COURT:  Well, my own disposition really is that I
  16   think I would rather hear the closing sooner rather than
  17   later, because we're almost familiar with the record now, if
  18   there's to be a closing argument.
  19            MR. GARBUS:  Your Honor, can I think on it and get
  20   back to you as to, at least, the necessity?
  21            THE COURT:  Yes.  And my thought was to do it later
  22   this week.  Now, as far as briefs are concerned, with the
  23   exception of three points that are bothering me in particular,
  24   I will, within limits -- assuming we can get the proper time
  25   frame -- leave the question of putting briefs in up to you.
1151
   1            We had mentioned two and possibly three of these
   2   issues during the course of the trial.  One is what, if
   3   anything, I were to do about an injunction here if I conclude
   4   that this horse is out of the barn already.  Something tells
   5   me there's ancient equitable maxim that I haven't been able to
   6   find this week to the effect that courts will not issue
   7   injunctions where to do so would be entirely futile.  I think
   8   we've talked about that.
   9            Secondly, I'm sure we talked about Summers v. Tise
  10   and its implications here.  And thirdly is whether and to what
  11   extent I properly may conclude from the evidence that's in the
  12   record that decoded DVD movies actually are available either
  13   over or through the internet.  That's essentially an
  14   evidentiary question.
  15            Now, beyond addressing those three questions, does
  16   anyone want to file a brief in this case?
  17            MR. GARBUS:  I think we would like to file a brief
  18   with respect to a pulling together of the legal arguments.  I
  19   think that we have -- our last brief, I think, was a reply
  20   brief I mentioned, June 14th, where we made speculations about
  21   what we thought the evidence and the law would be.  Since
  22   then, we've taken discovery and gone through this trial.  I'd
  23   like to prepare a document that I think represents that.
  24            I know your Honor doesn't want to delay it too much.
  25   I don't know -- I think I'd like to have a chance to go
1152
   1   through the facts and go through the briefs and go through the
   2   law, but I'm sensitive to your Honor's scheduling.
   3            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, what's your pleasure?
   4            MR. GOLD:  Well, your Honor, but for the three issues
   5   your Honor has just described -- and when I think of the
   6   briefs on both sides, I think there has been an awful lot
   7   submitted to you and more than once on the remaining issues.
   8            So if we touch on them, it will be touching on them
   9   very briefly indeed, but these three issues, of course, we
  10   would like to brief.
  11            THE COURT:  All right.  Well, suit yourself.  We'll
  12   have a simultaneous exchange.  This is July 25th.  Can you get
  13   them for me by August 4th?
  14            MR. SIMS:  Yes, sir.
  15            MR. ATLAS:  Would it be possible to get --
  16            MR. GARBUS:  I think some of us -- is August 15th
  17   good for you?
  18            THE COURT:  Well, it isn't as good.  It isn't as
  19   good.  If you want more time, I'll give it to you.
  20            MR. GARBUS:  Yeah.  I think that our position,
  21   frankly, is that we've just absorbed the discovery.  We've
  22   absorbed the material at trial, and we would like to put
  23   together a document which we think is coherent and puts
  24   everything together.  Normally, I would ask for a good deal of
  25   time to do that.  I understand the Court's scheduling, but I
1153
   1   do feel that we should put together -- there have been some
   2   questions about whether we raised certain issues, whether we
   3   didn't raise certain issues.  I think be would like to have an
   4   opportunity to put our case together coherently.
   5            THE COURT:  Mr. Gold, what were you about to say?
   6            MR. GOLD:  Well, on the August 4th simultaneous
   7   exchange sounds wonderful to me, unless your Honor would make
   8   it August 3rd.  I believe that the shorter it is, the more
   9   focused these briefs will be and the more helpful they'll be
  10   to the Court, and the longer the time, the much longer the
  11   briefs are likely to be.
  12            THE COURT:  We're going to cut the bacon in half.
  13   We're going to make it August 8th.  And a 35-page limit.  And
  14   let me give you a little guidance.
  15            I haven't really had a chance during the course of
  16   the last week to go back over the opinion in January in light
  17   of the evidence at trial.  Obviously, there was no record
  18   before me in January.  There was nothing from the defense at
  19   all, and there was very little from the plaintiffs compared to
  20   what's there now.
  21            But my tentative sense, from having listened this
  22   week and last with a lot of care, is that probably nothing
  23   much has changed with respect to the analysis of the DMCA
  24   itself.  I may be wrong in that, but that's my gut reaction
  25   here.
1154
   1            I think one thing probably has changed with respect
   2   to the constitutional analysis, and that is that subject to
   3   thinking about it some more, I really find what Professor
   4   Touretzky had to say today extremely persuasive and
   5   educational about computer code.
   6            Now, of course, which way that cuts is another
   7   matter, but I just don't think it's likely ultimately to prove
   8   tenable to say that computer code of any kind has no
   9   expressive content, source or object.  Which then gets you to
  10   the question of how then do you deal with it under the First
  11   Amendment.  I found myself wondering and I'm thinking out loud
  12   here, because I really want both sides to understand where my
  13   mind is going on this, because then they're going to focus
  14   more closely on what concerns me.
  15            I'm really in doubt as to whether saying that
  16   computer code is constitutionally protected speech goes very
  17   far toward answering the questions in this case.
  18            In the past, the Supreme Court has dealt with
  19   questions involving the regulation of expression essentially
  20   by fitting the particular kind of expression into various
  21   pigeon holes, fighting words, obscenity, conduct as contrasted
  22   with speech, commercial speech, and they've developed over the
  23   years various kinds of definitions that to one degree or
  24   another separate those different categories.
  25            I'm really not sure that paradigm fits this case.  Or
1155
   1   if it does, where exactly -- which is the right pigeon hole
   2   for this case.  I reread the draft card burning case over the
   3   lunch hour, and the Supreme Court there said that although the
   4   burning of the draft card was obviously intended as
   5   expression, the government had the right to prohibit it, to
   6   criminalize it because of the governmental interest in running
   7   the draft.  I remember what I thought about that in 1968.  Not
   8   that I'm telling anybody.
   9            The speech conduct distinction they draw in that
  10   case, I think, one fairly can say is one that is debatable,
  11   and they put the expressive draft card burning purely into the
  12   conduct box, so that it could be regulated even though it was
  13   obviously expressive.  There's some kind of analogy here.  So
  14   I share those views.  They're very unformed.  They're very
  15   tentative.  But I guess what I'm intending to communicate by
  16   this is that rhetoric is not really likely to cut it very
  17   much.  I'm really very interested in the guts of this, and for
  18   what it's worth, there you have it.
  19            Okay.  Anything else?  I do think it appropriate to
  20   thank all counsel because I know what a huge personal effort
  21   getting ready has been.  Nobody should think that I was ever
  22   unmindful of that, and I appreciate that for everybody.
  23            Okay, our business is concluded.  I'll hear from you
  24   on these other odds and ends of documents from you tomorrow.
  25   Now, to whatever extent I don't have the exhibits, I need
1156
   1   them.
   2            MR. GOLD:  Thank you, very much.
   3            MR. ATLAS:  Thank you, your Honor.
   4            THE COURT:  Thank you, folks.
   5                      o0o
   6
   7
   8
   9
  10
  11
  12
  13
  14
  15
  16
  17
  18
  19
  20
  21
  22
  23
  24
  25
1157
   1
   2                        INDEX OF EXAMINATION
   3   Witness                    D      X      RD     RX
   4   CHRIS DI BONA............987   1026    1033
   5   MICHAEL EINHORN.........1034   1048    1057
   6   DAVID TOURETZKY.........1061   1110
   7                         PLAINTIFF EXHIBITS
   8   Exhibit No.                                     Received
   9    1, 4, 28, 51-55, 64, 69, 72, 79, 126 and 129 1118
  10    2.1 through 2.34 and 3.1 through 3.34 ......1119
  11    77 and 93 ..................................1123
  12    98 .........................................1128
  13                         DEFENDANT EXHIBITS
  14   Exhibit No.                                     Received
  15    BDT ........................................1026
  16    CCN, CCO, CCP, and CCQ  ....................1080
  17    BBE ........................................1092
  18    CS .........................................1131
  19    FH .........................................1131
  20
  21
  22
  23
  24
  25