See related files:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video (EFF Archive)
http://cryptome.org/cryptout.htm#DVD-DeCSS
(Cryptome Archive)
http://www.2600.com/dvd/docs (2600 Archive)
http://eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/dvd/ (Harvard DVD OpenLaw Project)
1
VOLUME: I
PAGES: 1-85
EXHIBITS: 1-3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case No. 00 CIV 277 (LAK)(RLE)
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.; )
PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION; )
METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS, )
INC.; TRISTAN PICTURES, INC.; )
COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, )
INC.; TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT )
CO., L.P.; DISNEY ENTERPRISES, )
INC.; AND TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX )
FILM CORPORATION, )
Plaintiffs, )
)
VS. )
)
SHAWN C. REIMEREDES; ERIC CORLEY )
A/K/A "EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN"; )
ROMAN KAZAN AND 2600 ENTERPRISES,)
INC. )
Defendants. )
DEPOSITION OF OLEGARIO L. CRAIG,
a witness called on behalf of the Plaintiffs,
taken pursuant to the provisions of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, before Loretta
Hennessey, Registered Merit Reporter and Notary
Public in and for the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, at the offices of Choate, Hall &
Stewart, 53 State Street, Boston, Massachusetts,
on Monday, July 5, 2000, commencing at 3:49 p.m.
2
1 APPEARANCES:
2
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
3 (By William M. Hart, Esq.)
1585 Broadway
4 New York, New York 10036
for the Plaintiffs.
5
6
FRANKFURT GARBUS KLEIN & SELZ, P.C.
7 (By Martin Garbus, Esq., and
Edward Hernstadt, Esq.)
8 488 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10022
9 for the Defendants.
10
11 ____________
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
3
1 I N D E X
2 Witness Direct Cross Redirect Recross
3 OLEGARIO L. CRAIG
4 (By Mr. Hart) 4 --
5
6
E X H I B I T S
7
Exhibit No. Page
8
1 Notice of Deposition. 21
9
2 Subpoena. 21
10
3 Declaration of Olegario L.
11 Craig. 21
12
13
_______________
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
4
1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 OLEGARIO L. CRAIG, Sworn
3 a witness called on behalf of the Plaintiffs,
4 having been duly sworn, was examined and
5 testified as follows:
6 DIRECT EXAMINATION
7 BY MR. HART:
8 Q. Have you ever been deposed before, Mr. Craig?
9 A. Nope.
10 Q. Have you ever testified in connection with a
11 lawsuit before?
12 A. I don't think so.
13 Q. How old are you?
14 A. 30.
15 Q. Are you employed?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. By whom?
18 A. The University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
19 Q. How long have you been employed there?
20 A. Since July of 1995.
21 Q. And has your job capacity changed in any way
22 since July of '95?
23 A. Yes. I have acquired more responsibilities, more
24 depth of knowledge, and generally sort of have
5
1 been moved away from front line support and into
2 second or third tier support, depending on how
3 you define the industry terms.
4 Q. Second or third tier being higher?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. What were your responsibilities when you
7 initially went to work for the University of
8 Massachusetts?
9 A. Analogous to front line help desk support at an
10 ISP. I answered phone calls, I talked to people
11 who walk in the front door, I answered E-mail and
12 triaged them for type of problem and operating
13 system to second and third tier support, if I
14 couldn't answer them myself, which was often the
15 case.
16 Q. Now what do you do?
17 A. Now I am primarily responsible for operating
18 system issues on Linux and digital Unix systems,
19 but I have had a hand in solving problems and
20 finding solutions in various operating systems
21 and applications --
22 Q. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt you.
23 A. -- and network topologies.
24 Q. Do you have a curriculum vitae or resume?
6
1 A. I sort of have one. I haven't been job seeking
2 recently, so I have a very out-of-date job
3 description and a very out-of-date resume.
4 Q. Can you briefly tell us what your educational
5 background is?
6 A. Went to the University of Massachusetts as a
7 freshman in 1988, studied computer science for
8 three years, dropped out for various reasons;
9 stayed in the area and went back to UMass after
10 two years to pursue a degree in communication,
11 which I finished in 1995, May of 1995.
12 Q. Is that a bachelor's degree?
13 A. Yes, BA.
14 Q. Bachelor of arts?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do you have any post-graduate degrees or have you
17 studied at the post-graduate level?
18 A. I have sat in on various classes as part of my
19 work, but I don't actually -- I don't have any
20 written record of those classes. I didn't audit
21 them formally, as an example.
22 Q. And prior to 1995, did you have any experience
23 with computers or the Internet?
24 A. Yes, I have been an active participant on the
7
1 Internet since 1986.
2 Q. And that's pre the World Wide Web, then?
3 A. Oh, yes. I remember thinking that the World Wide
4 Web was yet another newfangled Internet
5 application. Oh, it will never catch on.
6 Q. Is it fair to say that things have changed and
7 changed rapidly in the last ten years with
8 respect to the Internet?
9 MR. HERNSTADT: Object to the form.
10 A. It depends on what things you're looking at.
11 Some things have.
12 Q. Let's talk about bandwidth.
13 A. Okay.
14 Q. What kind of Internet connection do you currently
15 have at UMass in your office?
16 A. In my office I have a hundred megabit Ethernet to
17 my desk -- this is actually described in my
18 declaration -- a hundred megabit Ethernet to my
19 desk which is connected to a gigabit Ethernet
20 fiber optic link to the UMass backbone which has
21 24 megabit per second link to the general
22 Internet, commodity Internet connection is what
23 we call it, through Cable & Wireless.
24 Q. And what about students at UMass., what kind of
8
1 Internet connections do they have access to
2 generally?
3 A. Are you talking about the dormitories?
4 Q. Well, if you have different answers for different
5 places, tell me.
6 A. I do. The dormitories have a segregated 10
7 megabit Ethernet in each dorm. When I say
8 segregated, I mean all the dorms together cannot
9 saturate our 24 megabit per second link to the
10 Internet at large. Each of those 10 megabit per
11 second Ethernet networks in each dormitory is
12 then linked via a hundred megabit uplink to a
13 router which connects to our campus FDDI
14 backbone. Those routers are configured not to
15 allow each dorm to -- let me back up a second.
16 This is actually not the area that I
17 administer, so I'm working on knowledge of
18 somebody else's responsibilities here.
19 Q. When you say "area," what do you mean by "area"?
20 A. I am not responsible for the campus networking,
21 I'm only responsible for the computer science
22 department.
23 Q. Gotcha. Go ahead.
24 A. Each dorm has a 10 megabit per second internal
9
1 network with a hundred megabit per second uplink,
2 so the entire dorm has a 100 megabit per second
3 uplink to the router on the campus backbone. The
4 campus backbone is FDDI, digital fiber optical.
5 Those are in turn connected to a router which
6 connects to the Cable & Wireless point of
7 presence in Amherst.
8 Q. And you said a second ago in response to my
9 question about what kinds of Internet connections
10 the students had access to --
11 A. There are various places on campus where students
12 can go to use PCs and Macs that are connected
13 via, I believe, higher speed networks, hundred
14 megabit Ethernet for each PC or Mac, but this is
15 a supervised situation with a lab monitor and the
16 lab closed at night.
17 Q. I'm sorry, is supervised?
18 A. Is monitored. When I was a student, I ran one of
19 these, long before it was networked to the
20 Internet. The labs each have monitors, and they
21 are expressly for educational purposes: You're
22 not allowed to play games, you're not allowed
23 to -- you're not supposed to download things.
24 I'm not certain how carefully they monitor
10
1 individual students' activities on each PC or
2 Mac.
3 Q. Have you had a Napster problem at your school?
4 A. Can you define a "problem"?
5 Q. Well, let's start with have you had any problems
6 in terms of your servers or networks being
7 overloaded as a result of students trading MP3
8 audio files through file sharing protocols such
9 as Napster?
10 A. We have not had anything directly attributable to
11 that. However, I should state that most of the
12 servers to which you refer would not be within my
13 area of administration, so if there were some
14 problems, I could not pinpoint them.
15 Q. Gotcha. And apart from issues of overloading the
16 system, as it were, are you aware whether there
17 have been any problems in terms of students using
18 Napster in violation of any rules of conduct or
19 policies of the university?
20 A. The university has not prosecuted anyone in
21 relation to Napster, nor, to the best of my
22 knowledge, have they employed administrative
23 sanctions against anyone.
24 If a particular student on the network
11
1 could be shown to be starving the network of
2 resources, just hogging as much bandwidth as he
3 or she could, there are policies in place under
4 which the Office of Information Technologies
5 would be free to sanction that student, cut off
6 their Internet access, do anything they want,
7 regardless of the type of content or transaction
8 that caused the problem.
9 Q. Gotcha.
10 A. It's a shared resource, and part of the
11 acceptable use policy that OIT has is a student
12 cannot, by means of actions, whether they're
13 otherwise legal or not, monopolize the resource
14 such that other students can't use it.
15 Q. Gotcha. Do you regard Napster as legal?
16 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection. He's not a
17 lawyer. If you're asking for his personal
18 opinion as opposed to a legal opinion, you can
19 answer the question.
20 Q. Just so we're clear, to avoid cluttering the
21 record with similar objections in the future, I
22 will stipulate whenever I ask you a question like
23 that, I'm asking for your view and not a lawyer's
24 view.
12
1 A. Okay.
2 MR. HERNSTADT: Let me add then, will
3 you also stipulate that anything he expresses in
4 terms of his view on what could be considered a
5 legal matter is by stipulation not the
6 Defendants' position or an admission of anything?
7 MR. HART: He's your witness. I'm
8 just saying I'm not asking a question that calls
9 for a legal conclusion.
10 Q. You used the word "legal" in your last answer,
11 and we can read it back if you like. I'm just
12 asking what your view of "legal" is.
13 A. Okay. So which question do you want me to
14 answer?
15 Q. In your view, is Napster legal?
16 A. Okay. I have read the latest defense brief by
17 David Boies as to why he thinks Napster is legal,
18 and I think he presents some pretty compelling
19 arguments. I think that Napster, as it exists
20 right now, is a method for file transfer, so
21 Napster itself, I think, is wholly legal. It
22 sort of falls under what I would see as a common
23 carrier definition, regardless of the content of
24 the files that are being transferred.
13
1 (Discussion off the record.)
2 Q. Did you ever have any experience in using any
3 video compression technologies?
4 A. Not since being a student and doing various
5 things with videotape while trying to create
6 presentations for communications classes. So not
7 in the last five years.
8 Q. Okay. Fair enough.
9 Have you heard of MPEG-4 or DivX?
10 A. Yes, I have.
11 Q. And what is your understanding of what that is?
12 A. It's a lossy compression algorithm; essentially a
13 method for taking video and squeezing as much as
14 you possibly can out of it, data that is
15 considered unnecessary for the final product,
16 much as the water in orange juice is considered
17 unnecessary for frozen concentrated orange juice,
18 and then putting it into a stream and making it
19 playable via a player.
20 Q. Isn't it also like MP3 in the sense that MP3 is
21 used to compress audio files for transfer over
22 the Internet?
23 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to form.
24 Argumentative. Go ahead. If you can answer.
14
1 A. It is similar in that it compresses. That is a
2 very, very broad statement.
3 Q. Have you ever used DivX?
4 A. Nope.
5 Q. Have you ever used DeCSS?
6 A. DeCCS?
7 Q. Uh-huh.
8 A. I have not.
9 Q. Do you know what it is?
10 A. I do.
11 Q. What is it?
12 A. It's a method for -- it's a program that allows
13 you to take the contents of a DVD and descramble
14 it, decrypt, there are various words being used,
15 essentially read it in a readable format from the
16 DVD without the use of software sanctioned by the
17 MPAA.
18 Q. And how do you know this?
19 A. From reading various documents. Originally, the
20 reason that I came into this is that I was
21 looking for a way to play DVDs on my Linux box.
22 Q. When you say your "Linux box," what are you
23 referring to?
24 A. I'm referring to my home computer, which I built
15
1 myself, and I paid extravagant money for a
2 hardware DVD player and a hardware DVD decoder
3 which I cannot use under Linux.
4 Q. When you say hardware DVD player, what are you
5 referring to?
6 A. I'm referring to two things in that previous
7 statement, one of which was a hardware DVD
8 player, that is the actual physical player into
9 which the DVD sits and which can read disks that
10 are formatted in DVD format, otherwise higher
11 density than the CD-ROM. The DVD decoder is a
12 piece of hardware, mine happens to be
13 manufactured by Creative Labs, that theoretically
14 does the decompression and decryption of the DVD
15 in hardware so software is not really required to
16 access the bits on the DVD. This offloads the
17 necessity of doing decryption and decompression
18 on the CPU.
19 Q. I'm sorry, were you finished? I don't mean to
20 interrupt you.
21 A. I was just going to say, so theoretically you
22 could run it with a slower CPU or with software
23 that didn't know how to read DVDs by itself.
24 In answer to your original question,
16
1 the reason I got into this was I looked at a site
2 called openDVD, and they had a mention of the DVD
3 discussion ongoing at the server at the Harvard
4 School of Law, which I went and subscribed to.
5 Q. Gotcha. How long have you owned a Linux-based
6 operating system computer?
7 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to form.
8 How long he's owned the computer or how long he's
9 used Linux?
10 MR. HART: I think the question was
11 the latter, but if there's some way you could
12 interpret it to mean something else, by all means
13 answer the second question.
14 MR. HERNSTADT: It might be the
15 latter.
16 THE WITNESS: I think I understand
17 what he means.
18 A. I've had Linux as a primary operating system on
19 my home computer since 199 -- I want to say 6,
20 but it could have been 7.
21 Q. And how much do you have invested in that home
22 computer system at this point in terms of sunk
23 cost?
24 A. It's a difficult thing to answer because I
17
1 upgrade piecemeal. I buy a new box that I can
2 put a new motherboard in, but I keep the old hard
3 drive, and then later I buy a new hard drive and
4 then scrap the old one or put it in another
5 system.
6 Q. Sure, I understand.
7 A. That particular system, all told with the stuff
8 that's in it right now, I would say over $1,000.
9 Can I make an editorial comment about
10 that?
11 Q. If you feel you must, sure.
12 A. Purchasing an equivalent system from one of the
13 commercial system integrators like Dell, Gateway,
14 IBM, would probably run you upwards of $2,000. I
15 do my own research into hardware integration, and
16 there's a fair amount of labor in what I do as a
17 hobby and sort of a private consulting business
18 that would be soaked up as profit if buying a
19 system commercially.
20 Q. Gotcha. You are going to testify at the trial in
21 this case; is that right?
22 A. I have not been, I think, asked to formally.
23 MR. HART: Mr. Hernstadt is giving me
24 the thumb's up, which means he's going to let the
18
1 witness live or someone won a race or something.
2 MR. GARBUS: Why don't you invite the
3 witness to testify.
4 MR. HERNSTADT: No, we intend --
5 MR. HART: I was attempting to have
6 the witness testify until Mr. Hernstadt, in the
7 middle of his testimony, stuck his thumb up.
8 MR. HERNSTADT: That was intended to
9 communicate to you that we intend to have him
10 testify at trial.
11 Q. Did you know that?
12 A. I had gathered it from inferences, but we
13 hadn't -- there was some question as to whether
14 this deposition would be videotaped and perhaps
15 that would be admissible at trial. It's going to
16 be a hassle for me to go to New York.
17 Q. But you can come?
18 A. Probably. I would need to know as far in advance
19 as possible as to what day I need to take off
20 from work, because we're already short-staffed,
21 and there are several vacations due in the months
22 of July and August.
23 Q. I understand.
24 So far you haven't downloaded DeCSS
19
1 onto your computer; is that right?
2 A. That's a good question. I may have done, because
3 it may still be a part of the Linux DVD project's
4 source tree, which I downloaded, but have not
5 really had a chance to play around with.
6 Q. So you don't know whether you've already
7 downloaded DeCSS?
8 A. I suspect I have.
9 Q. But you haven't been using it --
10 A. No.
11 Q. -- in conjunction with your DVD drive to play it
12 on your Linux operating system; is that right?
13 A. At the present time I'm forced to boot into a
14 Microsoft operating system to be able to play
15 videos on my DVD player.
16 Q. Do you know what language DeCSS operates in, what
17 its operating environment is?
18 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to form. If
19 you understand the question.
20 MR. HART: That's fine.
21 Q. You can rephrase my question in giving me the
22 answer.
23 A. DeCSS has been posted, to my knowledge, in
24 several different forms. I understand the
20
1 original executable and source code were written
2 for the Windows operating system. This was for a
3 proof of concept, if you will. As one of the
4 pieces of a software DVD player, it's necessary
5 to be able to actually read the DVD. And to do
6 so without code that is under NDA or other
7 agreement in the open source model is necessary
8 for development of an open source player.
9 Q. So it's posted in Windows, is that what you said?
10 A. The original source code and executable were
11 written for Windows. However, source code and
12 concepts in source code can be easily transferred
13 from one operating system to another, it's a
14 question of the hooks that you use.
15 Q. Have you, to use your terms, transferred those
16 concepts into a Linux application?
17 A. Are you asking me whether I've transferred the
18 concepts embodied in DeCSS into a Linux
19 application?
20 Q. Uh-huh.
21 A. No, I have not.
22 Q. Are you personally engaged in that process?
23 A. No, I'm not.
24 Q. Apart from your declaration, which we're going to
21
1 mark in a moment, have you prepared any other
2 materials for use in connection with this case?
3 By "any materials," I mean in any form, whether
4 it's written in English or in computer code or
5 anything else.
6 A. Aside from E-mails that I sent to the public list
7 and a couple of things between Wendy Seltzer, and
8 Ed Hernstadt and myself, I can't think of
9 anything that falls within that definition.
10 Q. When you say "the public list," what are you
11 referring to?
12 A. The discussion list dvd-discuss, which is hosted
13 at eon.law.harvard.edu.
14 MR. HART: Let's mark 1, 2, 3.
15 (Documents marked as Exhibits 1, 2, 3
16 for identification.)
17 (Documents exhibited to witness.)
18 Q. I've just had the reporter mark and show you
19 Exhibits 1 through 3, Mr. Craig. They should be
20 respectively a deposition notice, a subpoena and
21 a copy of your declaration.
22 Working backwards, I suppose, turning
23 to Exhibit 3 first, is that a true copy of the
24 declaration that you submitted in this case?
22
1 A. Without reading every word, it appears to be.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 With respect to Exhibits 2 and 1, have
4 you ever seen either of those documents before?
5 A. Presuming they are in fact the subpoena and the
6 notice of deposition that -- wait a minute. Yes,
7 presuming they are in fact the same documents
8 that were presented to me by the server, I've
9 seen them.
10 Q. Okay.
11 (Discussion off the record.)
12 THE WITNESS: If it's an appropriate
13 time for a break, I'd like another cup of water.
14 (Discussion off the record.)
15 Q. Mr. Craig, what expertise do you have in the
16 design and operation of system networks?
17 A. System networks? I'm not certain I understand
18 what you mean.
19 Q. I'm going to have to apologize in advance because
20 I'm sure that there will be times when I don't
21 use the terminology in the proper way. What I'm
22 trying to refer to is, in a very general way,
23 networking of computers into larger systems
24 whereby computers can interact with each other
23
1 within an environment such as a college or
2 university.
3 A. Sure.
4 Q. With that definition in mind, I ask you to answer
5 the question.
6 A. For, I would guess, the last three years, I've
7 been involved with our own -- when I say "our,"
8 I'm referring to the Department of Computer
9 Science and my group, which is called the
10 Computer Science Computing Facility, and as a
11 group we are responsible for all of the
12 networking infrastructure that the Computer
13 Science Department utilizes.
14 We have recently moved to a new
15 building and had to plan the network there. We
16 had to upgrade several pieces of old networking
17 equipment, several sections of old networking, in
18 essence, over the past three years, and of course
19 that's an ongoing process.
20 I regularly build custom installations
21 of operating system software for computer systems
22 which are connected to our networking and in some
23 cases are being used as clustering systems; in
24 other words, computers that have a private
24
1 network that connects between them as well as
2 each computer having an external interphase that
3 is seen by the rest of the world, and for all
4 intents and purposes these compute servers are
5 intended to be seen as one machine. So the
6 private network between the systems does the work
7 of sharing the data and the processing load, and
8 you in essence have not a massively parallel
9 computer, that's actually a technical term, but a
10 parallel processing cluster. You can see bigger
11 examples of such things at NASA's Beowulf
12 project.
13 Q. So you really haven't had responsibility for the
14 networks that students have access to through
15 their dorms, but you have had responsibility in
16 designing and implementing the network as it
17 exists in the computer lab facility?
18 A. That's correct. That also includes, that
19 includes an educational lab that has networking
20 comparable to what you would see in the student
21 dorms, except that it's a smaller lab so there
22 are less computers than you would find, I would
23 guess, in a typical college dorm, presuming that
24 one out of two students have a computer connected
25
1 to the network.
2 Q. When you say you had a lab that was comparable to
3 what was in the dorms --
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. -- you mean comparable in terms of bandwidth and
6 speed?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And that is again what?
9 A. That's the computer science ed. lab. The speed,
10 I assume that's what you're asking?
11 Q. Correct.
12 A. The speed is 10 megabit Ethernet to a hub, which
13 then has a connection to a switch which has a
14 connection to our main -- actually, it has a
15 connection to our router.
16 Q. Now, in your declaration, you made certain claims
17 with respect to the size and speed at which
18 certain files could be transferred over certain
19 types of networks; is that correct?
20 A. That is correct.
21 Q. I want to take a look at some of the statements
22 that you made in your declaration.
23 In Paragraph 4B of your declaration
24 you say that you were able to transfer a 1.5
26
1 gigabyte file using a 10 meg switched Ethernet
2 connection, and that the transfer time for that
3 size file took two hours and 15 minutes; is that
4 -- do I have that right?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. Can you tell me what the effective transfer rate
7 of that operation was as a function of your
8 actual bandwidth? And if I don't have it right,
9 please correct that in your answer.
10 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to form.
11 You can answer it if you can.
12 A. Okay. The available bandwidth would be measured
13 by the smallest bandwidth available over the
14 entire connection. This actually was a better
15 situation than you would expect to find in most
16 local area networks, because in order to simulate
17 a 10 megabit connection without using one of the
18 ed. lab computers, which is the only 10 megabit
19 Ethernet available to me, I had to downgrade a
20 port on the switch to 10 megabits, which is just
21 basically flipping a switch in software on the
22 port, on the Ethernet switch.
23 Q. Right.
24 A. So the source computer, the computer from which
27
1 files were being transferred, was connected at a
2 hundred megabit Ethernet to a switch, and the
3 target computer, to which the files were being
4 transferred, was connected at 10 megabit Ethernet
5 to the same switch. In all practicality, that
6 situation would never exist in a 10 megabit LAN.
7 So this figure is actually a better than average
8 or even expected best case, but I think it
9 suffices for the purposes of illustration.
10 Q. Now can you answer my question?
11 A. I'm sorry.
12 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form,
13 being argumentative.
14 Q. What was the effective transfer rate?
15 A. The effective transfer rate, according to?
16 Q. As a proportion of the overall bandwidth of this
17 10 meg connection.
18 A. Two hours and 15 minutes per 10 megabit per
19 second. That's something, if you want me to pull
20 out a calculator, I can work it out.
21 Q. Would you?
22 A. Sure.
23 (Witness complies.)
24 So that was not actually a very good
28
1 reflection of a 10 megabit per second Ethernet.
2 I actually achieved a transfer rate of 15.5
3 megabits per second.
4 Q. Which means what in plain English?
5 A. It means I achieved faster than the theoretical
6 maximum of the 10 megabit per second Ethernet.
7 Probably the port was overloading. I'd have to
8 look at the hardware specs to find out why that
9 was.
10 Q. You're saying the test in 4B isn't good because
11 it actually exceeded what you claim to be 10
12 megabit per second capacity?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. Okay. Now, what would you say that the normal --
15 if there is a range, you can give me the range --
16 but the normal effective transfer rate of
17 content, let's say, of a 1.5 gig file would be
18 over a 10 meg per second switched Ethernet
19 connection?
20 A. That's a difficult question to answer. When you
21 say normal, are you talking about a typical local
22 area network with other users using it?
23 Q. Uh-huh.
24 A. I would expect to see a maximum of one third to
29
1 one quarter the theoretical maximum.
2 Q. Which would translate into what in terms of
3 speed?
4 A. That would be 3 to 4 megabits per second. I'm
5 sorry, one third to one fourth. Less than 3
6 megabits per second.
7 Q. Less than 3 megabits per --
8 A. 2.5 to 3 megabits per second.
9 Q. Now, do you know what the size of a DivX
10 compressed feature film is on average in terms of
11 file size?
12 A. That's a very difficult question to answer. As I
13 understand it, the person doing the compression
14 makes choices as to how much compression they
15 want to obtain.
16 Q. Gotcha. And the trade-off is between file size
17 and image quality; is that --
18 A. To a certain extent. There's a law of
19 diminishing returns where as you try, assuming
20 you're talking about MPEG, talking about
21 reduction of MPEG stream, MPEG has various frames
22 in it that are not actual still picture frames
23 but merely an explanation of what bits had to
24 change from the previous frame. So the more you
30
1 try to squeeze out, the more changes you have to
2 make to the previous frame, so the more data you
3 have to put into those intermediate frames.
4 There comes a point where the quality will be so
5 poor that you can't get anything more out of it
6 without doing something else.
7 One of the things that I've seen on
8 the explanations of DivX -- meaning, I assume
9 we're talking about the new hacked version of
10 Microsoft MPEG-4 Kodak and not the old
11 pay-per-view scheme from Circuit City -- is that
12 you can reduce the frame rate, in other words,
13 the number of actual frames that the eye sees,
14 from 30 per second, which is the rate at which a
15 DVD can display, down to 20 or 24, or perhaps to
16 even fewer.
17 Q. Would you accept for the sake of this discussion
18 that a feature film could be compressed using
19 DivX -- the DivX we were referring to as MPEG-4,
20 not the Circuit City scheme, as you referred to.
21 Throughout I will be referring to the former
22 DivX, not the latter. Okay?
23 A. The former we discussed, not the former in time?
24 Q. Correct. Just to be clear, the compression
31
1 scheme, not the Circuit City scheme, as it
2 were --
3 A. Right.
4 Q. -- in your words.
5 That one can compress a feature-length
6 movie into a file using DivX into a file size of
7 650 megabytes. Does that sound right to you?
8 MR. HERNSTADT: Object to the form of
9 the question.
10 A. I would not actually be able to accept that
11 without seeing the results. I think that what
12 you would get at that point would be so degraded
13 in quality from the original that it wouldn't be
14 worth watching.
15 Q. You've never used DivX?
16 A. But I've never used DivX. I'm basing that purely
17 on my knowledge of what has to be thrown out.
18 Q. Have you ever seen DivX displayed?
19 A. I have not.
20 Q. Just work with me for a moment. I won't ask you
21 to accept those numbers as gospel, but if we were
22 using 650 megabytes as the file size for a DivX
23 compressed movie, using what you consider to be
24 a, quote, normal transfer time over a 10 megabit
32
1 per second network with the normal amount of
2 traffic, what kind of file transfer time are we
3 talking about?
4 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
5 of the question. It assumes facts not in
6 evidence, or, more specifically, what's the
7 source of the movie?
8 MR. HART: Who cares?
9 MR. HERNSTADT: Well, if it's a
10 camcorder as opposed to a DVD you're talking
11 about.
12 MR. HART: Stop. It's not an
13 objection anymore. Let me make it easy.
14 MR. HERNSTADT: Please, that's what
15 we're looking for.
16 Q. (*)4B in your dec, you say, a 1.5 gig file
17 transferred using 10 meg per second switched
18 Ethernet yielded two hours 15 minutes. You've
19 now said that figure is an error, that was
20 actually optimistic --
21 A. Right.
22 Q. -- for a real 10 meg network, according to you.
23 I guess I'm asking with respect to
24 what you believe is the normal transfer,
33
1 effective transfer rate of a real 10 meg network,
2 with normal traffic, you use a 650 megabyte file
3 rather than a 1.5 gig file, right?
4 A. Right.
5 Q. What kind of transfer time are we talking about?
6 (**)?
7 A. Can I take out the calculator?
8 Q. Absolutely.
9 MR. GARBUS: Can I hear the question
10 back.
11 MR. HART: Fine.
12 (Record read from * to **.)
13 (Discussion off the record.)
14 THE WITNESS: Are we off the record?
15 MR. HART: We can be if you'd like.
16 THE WITNESS: I'd like.
17 (Discussion off the record.)
18 MR. HERNSTADT: Back on the record.
19 Why don't you explain what happened.
20 THE WITNESS: In my hasty calculations
21 answering the earlier mathematical question, I
22 forgot to divide by 1024 once yielding 15, an
23 answer of 15 megabits per second, which was in
24 fact incorrect. I actually got 1.5 megabits per
34
1 second.
2 MR. HERNSTADT: That was in response
3 to the question on what the effective transfer
4 rate was of the 1.5 gigabyte file in Paragraph 4B
5 of the Craig declaration?
6 THE WITNESS: Right.
7 BY MR. HART:
8 Q. Well, more specifically, it was with respect to
9 the effective transfer rate of a 10 meg per
10 second switched Ethernet connection subject to
11 normal traffic?
12 A. Uh-huh.
13 Q. Right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. We were talking about what you would expect to
16 actually see in that network?
17 A. Right.
18 Q. Your answer as corrected is what, just so we have
19 the record clear in one place?
20 A. My answer as corrected would be probably one
21 third of that, which would be --
22 Q. I'm sorry, one third of 10 megs per second?
23 A. One third to one quarter of 10 megabits per
24 second. But the problem in going between these
35
1 figures is that the number of bits being shoved
2 down the pipe does not reflect the number of bits
3 in the original file, it reflects that number
4 plus all of the overhead for the packet, packet
5 encapsulation.
6 Each piece of the file is a certain
7 number of bits, but then it's shoved into
8 something that has a known beginning and ending
9 sequence. And the beginning sequence also
10 specifies the length of that packet and sequence
11 number, this is No. 2 of I don't know how many
12 packets being shoved down, and a bunch of other
13 stuff.
14 Q. Right. So you're saying we have to take into
15 account the 2 of 5 or 2 of 10 nomenclature that's
16 part of the file?
17 A. Right. So my answer as to what I would expect to
18 see down the pipe on an average Ethernet is the
19 number --
20 Q. On a 10 megabit per second switched Ethernet
21 connection?
22 A. Right. I apologize for my imprecision.
23 -- reflects the number of bits that
24 would be moving. It doesn't reflect what I would
36
1 expect to see for file transfer rates over that
2 Ethernet, and I perhaps should have made that
3 clear.
4 Q. Okay. So what I'm trying to do, this is not a
5 trick question, I'm just trying to get it in one
6 place, with all your caveats. And I'm giving you
7 the opportunity, I want that to be clear, for you
8 to take into account any of these variables,
9 taking into account traffic on the network.
10 And what would you, in your best
11 approximation, knowing everything you know, your
12 experience, say would be the effective transfer
13 rate of file content --
14 A. File content.
15 Q. Okay. -- using a 10 meg per second switched
16 Ethernet connection?
17 A. I would guess between one and -- between 1 and 2
18 megabits per second of the actual file. So let's
19 take an average of that: 1.5 megabits for the
20 file itself.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. Which is actually what we got doing our math
23 here.
24 Q. Okay.
37
1 A. Now we're going back to the 650 megabyte?
2 Q. I'm that predictable, huh? That's where we're
3 going, Mr. Craig.
4 Again, so the record is clear -- and,
5 please, part of my tedium is simply to make clear
6 the record. We may understand each other, but
7 when somebody like a judge tries to look at this
8 later --
9 MR. GARBUS: Or Garbus.
10 MR. HART: Forget Garbus, he's not the
11 test.
12 Q. When somebody tries to make sense of this later,
13 the record has to be clear.
14 So the next question, as you rightly
15 predicted, is what kind of transfer time are we
16 talking about when we deal with a 650 megabyte
17 file using a 10 megabit per second switched
18 Ethernet connection with the effective transfer
19 rate that you just described?
20 A. Right.
21 So I would come up with an answer of
22 57 and three quarter minutes.
23 Q. Is it fair to say that 10 megabit per second
24 switched Ethernet connections are pretty commonly
38
1 available throughout colleges and universities
2 throughout the United States?
3 A. The technology has been widely available for
4 twenty years. That's pretty much the de facto
5 standard.
6 Q. As implemented?
7 A. As implemented.
8 Q. Let's switch to the attachment to your dec for a
9 come of minutes, Mr. Craig. This is the
10 supplement, as you call it. In there you give
11 some of the sort of technical parameters of your
12 experiments, if you will.
13 A. Right.
14 Q. Let me go to paragraph 10 where you're talking
15 about, in your words, the trace route from target
16 computer A to source computer.
17 A. Uh-huh.
18 Q. This data in the columns numbered 1 through 16
19 below paragraph No. 10 reflects 16 hops from
20 target to source; is that --
21 A. That is correct.
22 Q. Would you say that that's a normal number of hops
23 for an efficient Internet connection between two
24 computers, on average?
39
1 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to form.
2 A. I think that's actually fairly good. The two
3 computers that we used are relatively close to
4 one another in terms of Internet topology, and
5 the interlying networks are all relatively high
6 speed.
7 Q. Okay. Now, does this trace route for target
8 computer A to source computer, right, is that
9 applicable in any way to the kind of file
10 transfer that you made in example 4B of your
11 declaration?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Is there a difference between a shared network
14 and a switched network; and if so, can you
15 explain to me what that difference is?
16 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to form.
17 A. Yes, there is a difference. The difference is
18 that in a shared network, let's take an example,
19 simplify it down to its bare bones, of three
20 computers connected to a shared network. Each
21 computer has a line, piece of network cable
22 running between it and the hub.
23 The hub is a piece of electronics that
24 merely copies everything that exists on any of
40
1 the lines to the other two lines so all three
2 computers see the same amount of traffic on the
3 network. They all see -- for instance, computer
4 A and B will see all communications going to
5 computer C. Computer C will see all
6 communications between computers A and B. It is
7 less efficient than a switched network, but it is
8 much more cost effective.
9 A switched network, if we take the
10 same three computers, each have a cable running
11 between the computer and the switch, the switch
12 examines each piece of traffic as it comes in,
13 each packet, and determines where it needs to go.
14 So communications between computers A and B come
15 out of the line attached to computer A, and are
16 routed to the connection attached to computer B.
17 Computer C never sees those communications.
18 Likewise, communications between computer C and
19 computer A are never seen by computer B. It's
20 much more efficient because you don't have any
21 unnecessary packets being translated. It's much
22 more expensive because the electronics has to be
23 able to recognize all the protocols being talked
24 across.
41
1 Q. Do you have switched networks at UMass?
2 A. I have switched networks in the networks that I
3 administer. The networks in the dorms at UMass
4 are not switched, they are shared.
5 Q. Within any one dorm building --
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. -- all of the computers are on a shared network,
8 but when you leave the dorm and treat that
9 building as one unit, are the various dorms
10 hooked up in a switched facility --
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. -- to the network?
13 A. I'm sorry. Are you finished?
14 Q. I think we both finished the question.
15 A. In point of fact it's my understanding -- again,
16 this is not a network I administer personally --
17 it's my understanding that each floor of a given
18 dorm has a shared network. Those shared networks
19 all have uplinks that connect to, I believe, a
20 switch, which then has a hundred megabit uplink
21 to the backbone.
22 Q. Gotcha. I think you answered that more
23 eloquently than I asked it, and I thank you for
24 that.
42
1 So switching improves network
2 efficiency; is that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And in that process, would one expect to see less
5 burden on a switched system than a shared system
6 for a given amount of traffic?
7 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
8 of the question.
9 A. It really depends on the traffic. If you have
10 computers talking to one another -- in other
11 words, go back to our previous example with the
12 three computers. Add in a fourth computer, or
13 the Internet, it really doesn't matter for
14 purposes of the discussion --
15 Q. Gotcha.
16 A. -- that is on what's known as an uplink port
17 attached to the switch or the hub.
18 In the case of the switch, any traffic
19 going to or from the Internet gets routed onto
20 the Internet port, the uplink. So if all three
21 computers behind the switch are talking to the
22 Internet and getting data back, then that uplink
23 port is going to be the bottleneck.
24 Q. Gotcha. But let's take a closed system, take an
43
1 example where we have a file that is going to be
2 sent from one computer to another within that
3 closed system.
4 A. Okay. Are we talking about --
5 Q. Computer A and B.
6 A. They're both behind a hub, or they're both behind
7 hubs which are attached to switches put on
8 separate networks?
9 Q. Forget the hub, they are just part of a switched
10 network.
11 By comparison, is that network going
12 to be a lot less burden than it would be if there
13 was a hub or Internet uplink or some other
14 variable in the middle of it?
15 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
16 of the question. If you understand the
17 terminology he used, go head and answer it.
18 THE WITNESS: I think I do.
19 A. Regardless of the technology in between, the two
20 computers can only transmit and receive so fast.
21 Q. Okay. What's that a function of?
22 A. That's a function of the cards and, the cards in
23 each computer, the network connecting them and --
24 the network connecting them to the hubs, and the
44
1 speed at which the hub is able to -- I'm sorry,
2 you said a switch.
3 Q. Let's forget hubs.
4 A. Okay. The speed at which the switch is able to
5 write across ports.
6 In a switched network, two computers
7 talking to each other will not burden the switch
8 any more than four computers with two talking to
9 two.
10 Q. Okay. And can we do that exponentially?
11 A. How far do you want to go?
12 Q. 16 to 16?
13 A. If you have -- well, there aren't that many
14 switches --
15 Q. Switched.
16 A. -- that -- you'd have to show me a picture of the
17 topology that you wanted to describe. This is
18 the kind of thing that drives network engineers
19 up the wall.
20 Q. Excellent. I'm glad I'm finally getting to you.
21 We say that in jest, because everyone is smiling.
22 A. Providing for the instance in which computer A is
23 talking to computer Z is a separate equation from
24 the instance in which computer A is talking to
45
1 computer B, if there are, for instance, two
2 levels of switches in between. And it's not fair
3 to say that if there are two levels of switches
4 in between A and Z, that A and Z talking to each
5 other is not going to burden B and Y talking to
6 each other.
7 MR. HERNSTADT: Why don't we take
8 five.
9 MR. HART: This is a good opportunity.
10 I'm sorry for the interruption.
11 (Brief recess.)
12 BY MR. HART:
13 Q. Have you ever visited the 2600 web site?
14 A. I may have done. I spend half of my working day
15 looking for things on the Internet in order to
16 solve problems at work. I couldn't tell you
17 every site that I visited in the last month, let
18 alone the last five years.
19 Q. You have no specific recollection as a result of
20 your involvement in this case --
21 A. Unless I followed --
22 Q. Let me finish my question for the record.
23 You have no specific recollection of
24 having gone to 2600's web site?
46
1 A. Unless I followed a link to a page archived there
2 related to the proceedings, which would have been
3 within the site and not the front page.
4 Q. How did you first get involved in this case?
5 A. I believe we've gone over that, but I'll answer
6 it again.
7 MR. HERNSTADT: Go ahead.
8 Q. Well, let me phrase the question a little
9 differently, because I don't think we did.
10 Did you contact the Defendants or did
11 the Defendants or their lawyers contact you?
12 A. The Defendants, or their lawyers in this case,
13 contacted me.
14 Q. And who contacted you?
15 A. Initially Wendy Seltzer acting, I believe, as
16 liaison for Ed Hernstadt.
17 Q. And who is Wendy Seltzer?
18 A. She is the originator of the Open Law Forum at
19 Harvard, which at that point I was a subscribed
20 member of, the discussion list.
21 Q. Can you tell me how many communications you've
22 had with Mr. Hernstadt or his law firm since the
23 first communication with him?
24 A. I'd have to sit down and look. It was mostly
47
1 E-mail. I'd have to sit down and look at them to
2 give you an exact number. I would say a handful,
3 fewer than 20, possibly more than 10.
4 Q. Was your communication with Mr. Hernstadt
5 exclusively by E-mail?
6 A. We had a couple of phone calls.
7 Q. "A couple" meaning two or three?
8 A. Two or three.
9 Q. But apart from two or three phone calls, all of
10 your other communications with Mr. Hernstadt were
11 via E-mail?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. Do you have those E-mails with you?
14 A. Actually, those E-mails I do not, but I can get
15 them for you. Depending on what kind of network
16 there is in this building, I could even do that
17 this afternoon, but I can't promise that. I do
18 have the E-mail that I have sent to the DVD
19 discussion list with me on a floppy disk.
20 MR. HERNSTADT: Off the record for a
21 second.
22 (Discussion off the record.)
23 Q. I'm sorry, you said you did have on a floppy with
24 you what, Mr. Craig?
48
1 A. I have a floppy containing the text of my
2 declaration as I submitted it to Mr. Hernstadt.
3 It also has all of the messages that I've sent to
4 the DVD discussion list, which I thought you
5 might want for some reason.
6 Those are the only things of the DVD
7 discussion list over which I feel I have the
8 right to hand over in terms of giving you
9 documents that are relevant to the case.
10 Q. Is this discussion list a public forum?
11 A. Yes. This is all available online.
12 Q. If I got online, I could get whatever you
13 submitted?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. Are you aware that there are at least two CSS
16 licensed Linux players at present?
17 A. I am aware that people have said that there are
18 Linux CSS licensed players. However, I have not
19 seen any evidence of one for sale or for download
20 anywhere, and believe me, I looked. So the
21 answer to your question is that in my opinion
22 they are what's known in the industry as
23 vaporware.
24 (Discussion off the record.)
49
1 Q. To your knowledge, is DeCSS itself a DVD player?
2 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to form.
3 A. So as part of that question it sounds like you're
4 asking me what a DVD player is.
5 Q. No, I'm just asking you whether DeCSS in and of
6 itself is a DVD player?
7 A. In the sense that it does not output files to the
8 screen by itself, I couldn't say that it is.
9 Q. To your knowledge, is there currently available
10 an unlicensed Linux-based DVD player available?
11 And by "unlicensed," I mean one not licensed by,
12 to use CSS?
13 A. The Linux DVD project, LiViD is how it's
14 acronymized, with a capital L, a capital V, a
15 capital D and smaller case Is, will play video
16 from DVDs. It is not perfect in that the frame
17 rates are not -- the quality overall is not what
18 you would see on a well-installed Windows system
19 as an example. The audio can be out of sync at
20 times. Still very much in beta, if that is
21 appropriate. It's a term of art meaning software
22 that's not really ready for complete release.
23 Q. So to go back to my question, can you give me an
24 answer?
50
1 A. It's available. It is a DVD player. It's not a
2 fully functional DVD player.
3 Q. Have you used it?
4 A. To some degree, yeah. I've seen the quality of
5 what it puts out.
6 Q. Where did you get it from?
7 A. The LiViD download tree.
8 (Discussion off the record.)
9 Q. Do you know if this beta version of a Linux DVD
10 player incorporates DeCSS software?
11 A. I have not looked at the source code to see what
12 is there and compare it to DeCSS. It is my
13 understanding that the portion of the Linux DVD,
14 the portion of the LiViD project that does the
15 reading of the DVD, including the descrambling
16 part of the --
17 Q. Decryption?
18 A. I don't want to use either of those words,
19 really, because it's not quite what it does. But
20 the transfer of the files on the DVD into a
21 readable format was written at about the same
22 time, the first version was written at about the
23 same time DeCSS came about, and I am given to
24 understand, based on the mailing list of the
51
1 development project, that the guy who wrote that
2 code, a fellow by the name of Derek Fawcus,
3 communicated to a great extent with John
4 Johansen, the fellow who apparently first posted
5 DeCSS, and that there is evidence of -- what's a
6 good word -- cross fertilization between the code
7 bases. At one point DeCSS was included as part
8 of the CVS repository that one could use to build
9 Linux DVD, LiViD.
10 Q. CVS standing for what?
11 A. Concurrent Versioning System. It's a method to
12 maintain a code base such that multiple people
13 can download it, work on it, make changes, fix
14 bugs, upload it again, and then merge the various
15 version into a coherent whole.
16 Q. You yourself are not a participant in the LiViD
17 project?
18 A. I am not a participant. I have not modified any
19 code; I have not submitted anything to it.
20 Q. You said there's a mailing list of LiViD
21 participants; is that right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. So it would be quite possible to exchange
24 information among LiViD participants within that
52
1 group without necessarily posting that
2 information to the public, the general public?
3 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
4 of the question.
5 A. Not really. The way that an open source
6 development model works is that you put what
7 you've got in a public place, and anyone can come
8 and work on it. And anyone who has an idea that
9 looks like it works, that idea gets incorporated
10 into the development tree.
11 Q. Gotcha.
12 A. The whole point of being an open source model is
13 that there are many more eyes to look at the
14 code, and, therefore, bugs are found much, much
15 faster. This is one of the reasons Linux has
16 exploded in the last five years.
17 Q. How does one get onto the LiViD mailing list?
18 A. One sends an E-mail to the LiViD mailing list
19 server saying, "subscribe me to the list."
20 Q. Have you subscribed to the list?
21 A. I have not.
22 Q. But if, for example, you had something to
23 contribute in this context, you could get on that
24 list?
53
1 A. Uh-huh. Or even if I was just curious.
2 Q. You could get on the list?
3 A. Yes. There's no restriction on access.
4 Q. You described a few moments ago in your testimony
5 what Mr. Fawcus did or didn't do and what Mr.
6 Johansen did or didn't do. How do you know that?
7 A. I have seen excerpts from the archives of that
8 list. I've also seen excerpts of interviews with
9 Mr. Johansen and statements attributed to Derek
10 Fawcus, but I cannot state with absolute
11 certitude that what I saw was a true
12 representation of events.
13 Q. Okay. That's fair.
14 Have you seen the declaration of Chris
15 Moseng in this case?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you know Mr. Moseng?
18 A. Nope.
19 Q. Have you ever spoken with him?
20 A. No. We've exchanged E-mails.
21 Q. That was going to be my next question.
22 A. Okay.
23 Q. You've exchanged E-mails?
24 A. Yes.
54
1 Q. What was the subject of those E-mails?
2 A. He also did some file transfer testing, and at
3 one point he sent me mail indicating the results
4 of his testing and comparing it with mine, and
5 made some comments about, made some comments as
6 to the direction he was going to take in his
7 declaration.
8 Q. And what did he say to you about that?
9 A. I don't at this time recall. I'd have to look at
10 the E-mail again. Again, you're more than
11 welcome to it if you need it.
12 Q. Can you produce it to me right now?
13 A. I cannot. It didn't occur to me that it would be
14 material.
15 Q. Okay. Did you review the document request with
16 Mr. Hernstadt or Mr. Garbus prior to your
17 appearing here today?
18 A. We talked about it when I was in the offices
19 here, but we didn't really talk about it before
20 then, to my recollection. I could be wrong.
21 Q. Are they representing you for the purpose of this
22 deposition?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Were you asked by them to bring any documents
55
1 responsive to the document request to this
2 deposition?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Is it your understanding that under the subpoena
5 you were required to bring with you certain
6 documents called for by the document demand?
7 A. It was my understanding I was going to give
8 testimony related to the document that I had
9 already submitted, the declaration, and as to
10 facts in my head. I brought other things with me
11 as they occurred to me, just in case.
12 Q. Did you get any advice from Mr. Hernstadt or Mr.
13 Garbus about what you were or were not supposed
14 to bring to the deposition?
15 MR. HERNSTADT: You can answer that.
16 A. Not to my recollection, no.
17 Q. When did you first engage Mr. Garbus's firm to
18 represent you?
19 MR. HERNSTADT: Object to the form of
20 the question, assumes facts not in evidence.
21 A. I did not act to engage Mr. Garbus's firm. It
22 was my understanding that for the purposes of
23 this declaration, they would be representing me
24 insofar as I am giving evidence on their behalf.
56
1 MR. HERNSTADT: You mean declaration
2 or deposition?
3 THE WITNESS: Deposition. I'm sorry.
4 Thank you.
5 Q. Are you saying that you chose yourself to read
6 the subpoena and decide what or what you did not
7 have to bring here today?
8 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
9 of the question.
10 A. I believe Ed told me this morning on the phone
11 that -- that's not quite the question you asked.
12 No, I don't think so.
13 Q. No, you don't think what?
14 A. No, I don't think that I made the decision as to
15 what to bring and not to bring entirely on my
16 own.
17 Q. Then who did?
18 A. I believe that I talked to Mr. Hernstadt this
19 morning about it.
20 Q. So you were advised as to what you were
21 responsible for bringing or not bringing to the
22 deposition by Mr. Hernstadt; is that correct?
23 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form.
24 A. Yes.
57
1 MR. HART: You can object, you're
2 right.
3 Q. Now I want the answer.
4 A. I think so.
5 Q. You think so?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is "yes" an affirmative answer?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MR. HART: Let's take three minutes
11 here. Excuse me.
12 (Discussion off the record.)
13 Q. So you did have communications with Mr. Moseng
14 via E-mail regarding his testimony. Did you also
15 have communications with him concerning yours?
16 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form.
17 It misstates the testimony.
18 A. I'm also curious, are we on the record?
19 Q. We are absolutely on the record.
20 A. You just said that you wanted to take three
21 minutes.
22 Q. We were only taking three minutes because we got
23 interrupted. I think we're back on the record.
24 A. I'm sorry. I misunderstood. Could you restate
58
1 the question?
2 MR. HERNSTADT: Could you read it
3 back?
4 (Question read.)
5 MR. HERNSTADT: And you got my
6 objection.
7 A. Only to the extent that I mentioned my
8 methodologies, and I think I mentioned a choice
9 piece of phrasing that I plan to use.
10 Q. Which was?
11 A. The orange juice analogy.
12 THE WITNESS: Can we take a couple of
13 minutes?
14 MR. HART: Sure.
15 THE WITNESS: I think I need to talk
16 to Ed about some stuff. I don't understand the
17 legal terms that are being used, so I want to
18 make sure I'm not answering incorrectly, if I
19 may.
20 MR. HERNSTADT: Yeah, come on.
21 (Witness and Mr. Hernstadt leave room.)
22 BY MR. HART:
23 Q. Do you wish to change any of your answers in view
24 of your conversation with Mr. Hernstadt?
59
1 A. No, thank you.
2 Q. Have you had occasion to see a declaration filed
3 in this case or produced in this case by a Dr.
4 Michael Shamos?
5 A. Yes, I have.
6 Q. And when did you first see that?
7 A. A few days ago. Less than a week.
8 Q. And how did you come to first see that?
9 A. It was mentioned on the dvd-discuss mailing list.
10 Q. Again, just because I'm old and my memory is
11 starting to fail me, this is the Harvard group?
12 A. That's the Harvard group.
13 Q. Thanks.
14 And what was said regarding it?
15 A. The first mention of it was John Young saying
16 that it was available in Cryptome. Therefore the
17 members of the list, myself included, looked at
18 various statements that Dr. Shamos had made and
19 tried to figure out where they had come from, how
20 he had come to the conclusions he had come to,
21 and whether his figures, opinions and conclusions
22 really bore weight, in our opinion, our
23 collective opinion, being the list.
24 Q. I see. Well, let me ask you this: Insofar as
60
1 you're concerned, what are your conclusions
2 concerning Dr. Shamos's conclusions?
3 MR. HERNSTADT: Are you going to show
4 him the declaration?
5 MR. HART: No, right now I don't think
6 we need to.
7 A. I find it surprising that he presented an
8 experiment which is not reproducible. By that I
9 mean that there are too many things left out --
10 and I don't think that this was a case of things
11 being blacked out by counsel -- too many things
12 left out in order to faithfully reproduce the
13 circumstances and equipment of his experiment.
14 Q. Like what?
15 A. I'd have to look at the declaration again to be
16 sure of all of the items, but --
17 MR. HERNSTADT: If you want the
18 declaration, you can have it.
19 MR. HART: He said "but."
20 Q. Do the best to answer it without the declaration.
21 MR. HERNSTADT: Fine. I'll tell him
22 the same thing. If you can answer without, go
23 ahead. If you want the declaration, you should
24 ask for it.
61
1 MR. HART: Thank you, Ed.
2 A. In particular he talks about compressing a DVD
3 into a DivX, and then gives a transfer time for
4 that DivX without stating what size the resulting
5 DivX was. So "I transferred something and it
6 took this long," but the "something" wasn't
7 really defined.
8 It states that everything was done by
9 himself or his assistants acting at his
10 direction. The assistants' expertise is not
11 assessed, and there are questions as to what was
12 done by whom when.
13 There are obviously portions of the
14 chat log, the IRC chat log that are redacted in
15 some way.
16 Q. Why is that a concern?
17 A. There are -- they're talking about how they're
18 going to do something, and there are pieces of
19 that conversation missing.
20 Q. Pieces of conversation missing, or simply the
21 identity of one of the participants?
22 A. No, I don't know what's missing, because it's
23 missing, but there are pieces of the conversation
24 that are not there, and it's obvious, by trying
62
1 to follow the flow of conversation, that the flow
2 is interrupted. One of those pieces specifically
3 refers to how the transfer is going to be
4 accomplished. That can be somewhat inferred from
5 context.
6 I had one more thought at the
7 beginning of this and now I've lost it.
8 Oh, yes. The file that he downloaded
9 in trade from his unknown accomplice on the
10 Internet, we don't know how it was produced,
11 where was the DivX from, did it actually have its
12 origin in a DeCSSed DVD, and if so, how does he
13 know that. And if not, why is it relevant?
14 You'll have to forgive those of us who
15 are amateurs and not lawyerly, we do a great deal
16 of speculation on this list as to things. Some
17 of it probably seems pretty foolish.
18 Q. I'm not making any judgment about what's foolish
19 and what's not, I'm just trying to get at the
20 truth here.
21 A. Okay.
22 Q. Did you ever hear of Dr. Shamos before?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Does it surprise you that people are trading DivX
63
1 files of movies on IRC or in other locations via
2 the Internet?
3 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
4 of the question.
5 A. I'm not certain why I should be surprised at
6 people transferring files. I guess I really
7 don't understand your question.
8 MR. HART: Read the question back,
9 please.
10 (Question read.)
11 MR. HERNSTADT: I'll also object
12 because it assumes facts not in evidence. If you
13 can answer it, go ahead.
14 A. File transfer is essentially the function of the
15 Internet. It does not surprise me to find that
16 files are being transferred on the Internet.
17 Q. How about files of movies?
18 A. Movies are files, just like anything else.
19 Q. (*) If, for example, someone used DeCSS to -- I
20 think "unscramble" is the preferred word in your
21 lexicon, rather than "decrypt"?
22 A. Not really, but I haven't found a good word.
23 "Reformat," perhaps.
24 Q. For the sake of the question, we'll use the word
64
1 "reformat."
2 -- to reformat a DVD movie that was
3 CSS encoded -- with me so far?
4 A. Uh-huh.
5 Q. -- and processed it by DivX to compress it, okay,
6 and made that movie file available on the
7 Internet, would you regard that as -- without
8 permission of the owner of the rights of the
9 movie, would you regard that as a normal function
10 of the Internet? (**)?
11 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
12 of the question, it's an incomplete hypothetical,
13 calls for legal conclusion. If you can answer
14 it, go ahead.
15 A. I'm sorry, can you read back the question.
16 (Record read from * to **.)
17 A. No, because the actions that you describe are not
18 part of the Internet, they were actions on the
19 part of an individual.
20 Q. Okay. We were talking during the break about
21 Napster and different views, and I'm not going to
22 repeat any of that conversation on the record
23 here, but I guess more to the point right now,
24 I'm going to ask you what your views of the
65
1 propriety of file sharing of movies on the
2 Internet is based on the hypothetical I just gave
3 you; namely, the DeCSSed DivX movie put up on the
4 Internet, made available to others, without
5 permission of the copyright owner. Is that okay
6 or not okay in your book?
7 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
8 of the question, compound, assumes facts not in
9 evidence, calls for a legal conclusion.
10 A. I guess it would have to depend on many things.
11 I would want somebody else's opinion, probably
12 one of the gentlemen in this room at the least,
13 as to whether the file available for download,
14 that this person made available for download, was
15 in fact a copyright violation. I am given to
16 understand that there are cases in which that
17 might not be the case.
18 If it's not a copyright violation,
19 then of course I'm okay with it. If it is a
20 copyright violation, then it's my view that such
21 things occur and are pursued by, again, people
22 like the gentlemen in this room, for copyright
23 violation, and that there are many ways to
24 prohibit people from doing that or deter people
66
1 from doing that, I guess is the best word, and
2 existing copyright law takes care of that very
3 nicely.
4 And in that regard, once copyright
5 infringement has been alleged, then it's up to
6 the people who have the beef about it to go after
7 the person who posted it originally.
8 Q. Why is it that you don't like to refer to DeCSS
9 as a decryption device?
10 A. I'm not an encryption expert.
11 Q. Okay. Accepted.
12 A. But I do know a great deal about its practical
13 use. And if I had a dictionary in hand, I'd look
14 up the definition of "encryption," but it
15 involves the mixing of a piece of what we'll call
16 text in this discussion, with a secret; and in
17 order to get the text back in a readable form,
18 you have to know the secret.
19 And as a matter of accepted fact among
20 cryptologists, as I understand it, the secret
21 can't be part of the entire thing that you are
22 decrypting; the secret has to be applied in some
23 other manner.
24 Again, as I understand it, a DVD
67
1 contains the keys which are necessary to
2 unscramble its message right on the DVD, and so
3 it is possible, by examining the DVD, and with no
4 other information, to find what is there. So
5 it's just taking what's on the DVD and
6 rearranging it so that it's readable by an MPEG
7 player. That's not decryption.
8 Q. Have you ever tried to ascertain or access the
9 keys in a DVD?
10 A. I have not.
11 Q. Do you believe that there's a greater potential
12 for infringement when you are dealing with
13 digital media and the Internet than with analog
14 copies and nonelectronic transmission?
15 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection, calls for
16 legal conclusion, calls for speculation, assumes
17 facts not in evidence. If you can answer the
18 question, go ahead.
19 A. I don't believe so. Certainly not with the
20 current state of technology.
21 Q. So, for example, the phenomenon that's known as
22 Napster is not, in your view, the product of
23 technology and poses no greater threat of
24 unauthorized copying than existed before MP3 and
68
1 before file sharing and before the Internet?
2 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection, misstates
3 the testimony.
4 A. I believe that there is an ongoing lawsuit to
5 determine whether that's legal. I certainly
6 couldn't comment.
7 Q. I'm not asking you to comment whether it's legal.
8 I'm asking you whether the technology enables the
9 proliferation of copies, given both the digital
10 nature of the content, the format that it's in
11 digitally, and also given the facility to
12 transmit things over the Internet electronically?
13 MR. HERNSTADT: Object to the form of
14 the question. What are you talking about? I
15 mean, I can't actually let him answer that. Are
16 you talking about MP3 or are you talking about
17 movies?
18 MR. HART: Do you want to instruct
19 him?
20 MR. HERNSTADT: Yeah. Don't answer
21 the question unless you understand what he's
22 talking about.
23 THE WITNESS: Okay.
24 A. I don't think that I'm certain enough of what
69
1 you're asking to answer the question.
2 Q. Before you got Mr. Hernstadt's instruction, would
3 you have been willing to answer the question?
4 A. I would have been willing to engage in a dialogue
5 with you to try to understand the question.
6 Q. Okay. Then let's take it one step at a time.
7 A. Okay.
8 Q. My focus is not on legalities. I'm not asking
9 you to draw a conclusion about whether the
10 behavior is legal or illegal. I'm simply asking
11 you whether, as a practical matter, the
12 technology as it exists today enables the
13 proliferation of content in a way that is a
14 greater threat because of both the digital format
15 and the ease of transmission on the Internet?
16 And if you want to break down your answer
17 differently with respect to audio and video
18 recordings, you may do so.
19 A. With respect to audio recordings and MP3 files,
20 from what I have read about the ongoing trial,
21 there is no evidence whatsoever that harm has
22 been suffered, that people are actually copying
23 recorded music and deciding not to buy authorized
24 works because they have the copy.
70
1 Q. You appreciate that isn't my question. You're
2 not answering my question. Are you doing that
3 deliberately, or is it because you don't
4 understand it?
5 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection, harassment.
6 Q. Would you like to have the question read back to
7 you so you can answer the question I asked?
8 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection, harassing
9 the witness. Bill, just do it right.
10 MR. HART: Let's have my question read
11 back. I'll ask you to listen very carefully to
12 the question before you answer it. I'd like you
13 to answer my question, please. Okay? Thank you.
14 (Question read.)
15 Q. I see where you went astray on that one. I
16 apologize. The "greater threat" is what led you
17 to talk about economic harm.
18 I want to, again, confine my question
19 to simply the ability to multiply files and to
20 transmit them, and that there is a difference
21 given the digital medium and the availability of
22 the Internet to multiply files and transmit them
23 more readily given the technology that exists
24 today. That's the question.
71
1 MR. HERNSTADT: To my prior objections
2 let me add Mr. Cooper's favorite question,
3 unintelligible.
4 Q. Do you understand the question?
5 MR. HERNSTADT: Go ahead.
6 A. I think so.
7 The Internet, as a part of its
8 function, enables file transfer more easily than
9 was previously possible. As to whether that is a
10 threat --
11 Q. I'm taking "threat" out of the equation.
12 A. Okay.
13 Q. Okay? (*) Does compression technology facilitate
14 file transfer on the Internet?
15 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form.
16 Go ahead.
17 A. In answering this question, I'd like to point out
18 that there are two broad categories of
19 compression technology: One is called, generally
20 speaking, lossless, and the other is called
21 lossy. Lossless compression technology does
22 facilitate file transfer on the Internet because
23 you get out of a lossless compression exactly
24 what you put into it. You are able to restore
72
1 the full meaning of what you put into the
2 compressor.
3 Q. Is MP3 lossy and/or lossless?
4 A. MP3 is lossy. MP3 is lossy and DivX is lossy,
5 but we'll just talk about MP3.
6 The recording that you get by
7 listening to an MP3 is qualitatively different:
8 It is lesser than what you put into the MP3
9 recorder from the CD, which is, in turn, less
10 than what could be heard at the recording studio.
11 MR. HART: Why don't you read back the
12 question before the lossy versus lossless.
13 (*Question read.)
14 Q. Same question.
15 A. Can you please define --
16 MR. HERNSTADT: Sorry. Objection,
17 asked and answered.
18 A. Can you please define "facilitate" and "file
19 transfer," because in terms of compression
20 technology, if we're talking about a lossy
21 compression, you can't get back the stuff that
22 was lost during compression, so if you need an
23 exact copy of the original, it's not there, so
24 that's not facilitated.
73
1 Q. (*) Is it your belief the people who are using
2 Napster are deterred from using it because it
3 involves lossy compression?
4 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection. Objection
5 to the form of the question. It's well outside
6 the declaration here. If you have an opinion.
7 A. Napster doesn't enable compression at all.
8 Napster is just file transfer.
9 Q. I understand. Let's read that one back -- we'll
10 do it the long way -- because you're under oath
11 here.
12 A. Uh-huh.
13 Q. You have to answer my questions.
14 MR. HERNSTADT: He is answering your
15 questions, Bill. He answered the question about
16 facilitate. Go back and read that answer. He
17 said, if it's lossy, it does not facilitate. He
18 answered your question, Bill. It wasn't quite
19 the answer you want.
20 MR. HART: Enough, Ed.
21 MR. HERNSTADT: You are badgering the
22 witness at this point.
23 MR. HART: Ed, enough. Let's read
24 back the question.
74
1 (*Question read.)
2 Q. Is Napster an MP3 centric system?
3 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form.
4 A. The way it's currently being used, it's being
5 used to transfer MP3s.
6 Q. And you've testified that MP3 is a lossy
7 compression device, correct?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. (*) So my question is: Do you think people who
10 are using Napster are deterred because it
11 involves the use of a lossy compression device?
12 A. I think the reason I'm having trouble answering
13 this question is that you're asking about people
14 using MP3s, but you're using the word "Napster,"
15 and it's not equivalent.
16 Q. We'll do it again, then.
17 MR. HERNSTADT: Bill, listen --
18 MR. HART: I don't want you testifying
19 because we're going to get into a real problem.
20 MR. HERNSTADT: I want to put
21 something on the record.
22 MR. HART: Then I want the witness to
23 walk out of the room.
24 MR. HERNSTADT: You have no idea what
75
1 I'm going to say.
2 MR. HART: I don't want you coaching
3 the witness.
4 MR. HERNSTADT: I'm not coaching the
5 witness, Bill, what I'm doing is coaching you.
6 You can take this deposition any way you want to.
7 I'm permitting you to go well outside the scope
8 of anything that's relevant or reasonable because
9 I want this witness to be finished and be
10 reasonable. You have to be polite. Don't badger
11 the witness. Okay? You can do it the long way,
12 you can do it the short way, but do it nice
13 either way.
14 MR. HART: Are you done, Mr.
15 Hernstadt?
16 MR. HERNSTADT: I'm done. You can
17 continue now.
18 MR. HART: Thank you.
19 MR. HERNSTADT: You're welcome.
20 MR. HART: Read the last question
21 back.
22 (*Question read.)
23 MR. HERNSTADT: Restate my objections.
24 Q. Do you want to answer the question?
76
1 A. I think that people who are using MP3s know that
2 they are using a lossy compression algorithm, and
3 accept that as part of the usefulness of MP3s. I
4 think that people who are using Napster to
5 transfer MP3s have already accepted that.
6 Q. Uh-huh. So the answer to my question whether the
7 use of lossy compression, as you call it, has
8 deterred people from using it in the context of
9 MP3 compression as it's used in Napster file
10 transfer protocol is, no, it hasn't deterred
11 people just because it's lossy compression,
12 right? Isn't that the answer?
13 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection. You are
14 badgering the witness again, Bill. He can answer
15 the way he wants to. Asked and answered.
16 A. I would say that that question leaves out the
17 fact that people who don't want to use MP3s are
18 already not use being MP3s and therefore are not
19 using Napster. So the people using Napster are
20 obviously not deterred because they're not the
21 ones who decided MP3s are not good enough.
22 Q. Do you know how many people that comprises?
23 A. I have no idea.
24 Q. In the millions?
77
1 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection, asked and
2 answered.
3 MR. HART: I'm sorry?
4 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection, asked and
5 answered.
6 A. I do not know.
7 Q. Are there any other areas that you contemplate
8 testifying on at trial that we have not already
9 discussed here today in your testimony?
10 A. I really have no idea how I will be useful to
11 either side in my testimony. I've certainly not
12 had any discussions with Mr. Garbus or Mr.
13 Hernstadt regarding how I would testify. I
14 didn't really know for sure until today that I
15 would be testifying.
16 Q. Do you consider yourself an impartial witness?
17 MR. HERNSTADT: Objection to the form
18 of the question. Go ahead.
19 A. To the best of my knowledge, I would be
20 testifying to facts. I don't see how one can be
21 partial to facts.
22 Q. How much storage capacity do you have on your
23 home computer?
24 A. On the largest computer, I have 40 gigabyte hard
78
1 disk.
2 Q. What did that cost you?
3 A. Three months ago, I think -- no, closer to five
4 months ago, it cost me between $250 and $300.
5 Q. And is the time at which you purchased that hard
6 drive relevant to its cost?
7 A. Hardware prices tend to go downwards over time.
8 Q. Ever hear of Gnutella?
9 A. You're talking about Gnutella with a G in front
10 of it?
11 Q. Yes.
12 A. Yes, I have.
13 Q. What is it?
14 A. It is the same idea as Napster in terms of a file
15 sharing protocol, but it's decentralized.
16 Q. Do you know why it's decentralized?
17 A. You're asking me to speculate on the design
18 decisions of the programmers, and I haven't seen
19 any statements by the programmers.
20 Q. Is there a technical reason or some other reason,
21 based on your knowledge, as to why it would be
22 designed to be decentralized?
23 A. For the same reason the Internet is
24 decentralized.
79
1 Q. Which is? I'm sorry?
2 A. It eliminates a single point of failure.
3 Q. You said a little bit earlier when we were
4 talking about hypotheticals about file transfer
5 of movies, and you raised an issue about
6 copyright protection, that you were "given to
7 understand," I think you used the words, that
8 there may not be copyright on some, or something
9 like that. I'm not interested in pinning you
10 down on that particular thing than I am in trying
11 to understand "given to understand." If you need
12 to repeat your testimony so you understand --
13 MR. HERNSTADT: Can you read back the
14 question, please.
15 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry, which
16 question?
17 MR. HART: I'll rephrase the question,
18 just in the interest of moving it along. You
19 look tired, Ed.
20 MR. HERNSTADT: Thank you. I'm just
21 confused by that question.
22 Q. Do you recall earlier when we were talking about
23 file sharing and video, you made a distinction
24 between that which was copyrighted and that which
80
1 was not, or that which amounted to copyright
2 infringement and that didn't. Do you recall
3 making that distinction?
4 A. I do recall making that distinction. That's very
5 different from copyright protection.
6 Q. You said something to the effect you were given
7 to understand in certain instances file sharing
8 of content on the Internet was not copyright
9 infringement. I don't want to misstate what you
10 said, so correct me if I'm wrong. Is that what
11 you said?
12 A. That is what I said.
13 Q. When you say you were "given to understand" that
14 in such instances, based on what?
15 A. I believe this was regarding a discussion of the
16 brief in the Napster case by David Boies -- how
17 do you say that?
18 Q. You've said it correctly.
19 A. Boies.
20 -- wherein he makes an argument that
21 under the law regarding copyrights, that sharing
22 of copyrighted works between noncommercial
23 parties is not necessarily copyright
24 infringement.
81
1 Q. Okay. Do you share that view?
2 A. I -- that's a legal conclusion.
3 Q. No, no, I'm not asking you for a legal
4 conclusion. I'm asking you if that's your view,
5 if you adopt that view, if you personally feel
6 like that's correct?
7 MR. HERNSTADT: Which question do you
8 want him to answer?
9 (Discussion off the record.)
10 MR. HERNSTADT: State which question
11 you're answering when you answer it.
12 A. I'm sorry, can you read back the --
13 Q. I asked you if you shared that view?
14 A. I understand you asked me if I shared that view.
15 I'm asking her to read back the record so that I
16 can understand which view I'm sharing.
17 Q. Mr. Boies's view that file sharing is not
18 infringement, that it's okay if it's done as you
19 describe it?
20 A. I think that -- I'm sorry.
21 MR. HERNSTADT: Let me object to this
22 entire line of questioning as calling for legal
23 conclusions. Go ahead.
24 Q. We've been over that ground. I'm not asking for
82
1 a legal conclusion, I'm asking you if that result
2 is something you approve of, if you think that's
3 okay, if that's right in your gut?
4 A. As I the lay person understand it?
5 Q. As a lay person involved in computers, involved
6 in networks, who put in a declaration in this
7 case and participates to the degree that you
8 participated in these issues, yes, as a lay
9 person.
10 A. Okay.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. I'm sorry, I have a habit of speaking where I
13 sometimes pause in the middle. That was such a
14 pause.
15 As I, a lay person, understands it,
16 copyright is solely for the promotion of science
17 and the useful arts, I think is the original
18 phrase. And to that end, Congress gives
19 copyright to authors and creators so they may be,
20 so that they are given incentive to keep on
21 writing and creating. And that in order for
22 copyrighted works to be of use to the rest of us
23 who didn't write them or create them, that
24 something called fair use exists where one makes
83
1 use of the copyrighted work, and such use is
2 inherently not copyright infringement because
3 it's fair use. And if I understand Mr. Boies
4 correctly, there are instances in which sharing
5 of copyrighted works is fair use and therefore
6 not infringement.
7 MR. HART: I don't think I have
8 anything further for you, Mr. Craig, and I thank
9 you for your patience. And I apologize for the
10 difficulties in communications here today. I'm
11 sure it was my fault, not yours.
12 MR. GARBUS: I agree.
13 MR. HERNSTADT: We're done? Thank
14 you. Thank you, Mr. Craig.
15 (Whereupon, at 6:22 p.m., the
16 deposition was adjourned.)
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
84
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2 I, OLEGARIO L. CRAIG, do hereby certify that I
have read the foregoing transcript of my
3 testimony given on July 5, 2000, and I further
certify that said transcript is a true and
4 accurate record of said testimony (with the
exception of the corrections listed below):
5
Page Line Correction
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16 Dated at , this
day of , 2000.
17
18 OLEGARIO L. CRAIG
19
20 SIGNED UNDER THE PAINS AND PENALTIES OF PERJURY
21
22
23
24
85
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
4 SUFFOLK, SS.
5 I, Loretta Hennessey, Registered Merit
6 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the
7 Commonwealth of Massachusetts, do hereby certify:
8 That OLEGARIO L. CRAIG, the witness whose
9 testimony is hereinbefore set forth, was duly
10 sworn by me and that such testimony is a true and
11 accurate record of my stenotype notes taken in
12 the foregoing matter, to the best of my
13 knowledge, skill and ability.
14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set
15 my hand and Notarial Seal this 6th day of July,
16 2000.
17
18
19
20 Loretta Hennessey, RMR
21 Notary Public
22
23 My Commission Expires: 6/10/05
24