Comments on: Interview with Marc Bragg’s Lawyer, Jason Archinaco

By: John Truempy

John Truempy — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:13:58 +0000

This case is more confusing now in my mind then it was before. From what I read of the case now it is not over taken land but a real dumb person. “it was called land” so it must be land. “it was called a sale” so it must be a sale.
Someone too dumb to know it is all just data on a server. I can make a prim and texture it gold I guess to Bragg it is real gold. I can take 10 prims and build a box I guess to Bragg it is a real house if that is what anyone calls it. Sorry to insult any lawyers here but they must remove a persons brain when they go there…. I only have a high school diploma and I am not that dumb.
Ohh and MR don’t ever include me in the ” Well, maybe Linden should have communicated that fact to the fifty-thousand or so people who now think they’ve purchased land.” I may be no “backward browsing.” Trying to pull off a scam collage and law school educated person but I knew that it was just words. I knew that buy my own land meant. I had use of there servers for as long as I paid my bills and did not get kicked off.
Hay Bragg LL told you that you can fly also do us all a favor and climb up a real tall building and prove them wrong LOL

By: The Forge · Bragg vs. Linden - Interview

The Forge · Bragg vs. Linden - Interview — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:58:37 +0000

[...] Virtually Blind has a very readable interview up with Jason Archinaco, Marc Bragg’s lawyer in the case. For those unsure about the details of the case, I’ve covered it before here and then here. [...]

By: Tony

Tony — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:52:25 +0000

I don’t know about the backward browsing part, but I am interested in seeing how the land part turns out.

It could have further implications in the casino issue if they were to start deleting and taking land back without some kind of 3rd party judgment.

I wasn’t running a casino myself, but if LL were to suddenly declare my business bad or take my land and objects. Well, I’d really be pissed, and I’d consider myself wronged.

I’m not a lawyer, but Ashcroft makes sense to me in that these services are probably not the same as property rights, but something just doesn’t sit right that they could take it whenever they wanted. They’ve promoted using the land and operating business and “owning” things quite a bit and I’m sure people might think twice if LL could suddenly take your scripted objects and stop your services. I mean, what if they terminated services that supported SLX or OnRez because they thought they could profit from it? If we don’t at least get a case through court, the courts may have a harder time dealing with that in the future.

By: Hiro Pendragon

Hiro Pendragon — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 05:00:54 +0000

Great interview. Not surprising that the lawyer straw-manned the whole point where Bragg not only “typed in a web page”, but went through with the auction he knew was not up for sale yet, and then claimed it was his.

The whole mention of 10,000 islands sounds like he’s trying to pull some class-action move. When did ethics leave the law profession, anyway? Why do 9,999 island owners not have a problem and this one guy, Bragg, who’s by virtue of his being an accredited lawyer should be intelligent, somehow have a problem? Doesn’t the “common man” principle enter into account, here?

By: Benjamin Duranske

Benjamin Duranske — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:46:17 +0000

@2 – Generally, there is an immunity for good faith filings. His argument, which is in a footnote to the most recent motion to dismiss, is that Linden Lab waived that immunity by running the accusation on their web site. I haven’t looked up the case he cites for that proposition, but it’s plausible.

By: A Resident

A Resident — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:35:02 +0000

Comments about ‘typing the url’ sound pretty silly and uninspired to me. Bragg intentionally and with mal intent manipulated the system to profit out of an exploit.

Try subpoena THIS to get my name, I am defamatory for saying the above, according to you. Silly.

Get a life. Stay away from the Second.

By: Ashcroft Burhham

Ashcroft Burhham — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:57:15 +0000

I notice that the interview focusses on the strongest part of Bragg’s case (the defence to the counterclaim; the remarks made about backwards browsing are compelling), and that Mr. Archinaco does not even attempt to deal with the numerus clausus issue that the principal claim raises (viz. that it is legally nonsensical to claim that a right to use a service can ever be a “property” right, rendering the analogies to Wal-Mart and banks forfeiting their customers’ money absurd).

As to the point about defamation, isn’t there a principle of privilege over there?

By: Benjamin Duranske

Benjamin Duranske — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 05:42:09 +0000

I should note, for the record, that I have emailed Linden Lab’s lead counsel in this case, John Crittenden (of Cooley Godward Kronish in San Francisco) to give him the opportunity to participate in a similar on-the-record interview, but have not yet been able to connect with him. Readers should not read too much in to that because many law firms, particularly in the context of representing corporate clients, have policies against talking to the press. That said, I remain hopeful that VB will be able to secure an interview with Mr. Crittenden.