Bragg v. Linden Lab: Response to Bragg’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims Filed; Discovery Continues
September 14th, 2007 by Benjamin Duranske
There are two developments in Bragg v. Linden Lab this week. First, Marc Bragg made several new discovery documents available on his website. Second, Linden Lab responded to Bragg’s motion to dismiss Linden Lab’s counterclaims, providing more detail on its claim that Bragg used an exploit to buy land at less than its full value.
Readers just finding this coverage can read more about the Bragg case in previous VB posts. The discovery documents posted this week are as follows:
- Bragg’s 1st Interrogatories to Linden Lab (.pdf)
- Bragg’s 1st Request for Admissions to Linden Lab (.pdf)
- Bragg’s 3rd Request for Production of Documents to Linden Lab (.pdf)
- Bragg’s Notice of Deposition for Person Most Knowledgeable (.pdf)
I am not going to run excerpts from these documents because they’re not terribly interesting without answers (I’ll run excerpts with the responses, if they are illuminating) but one new wrinkle in this case does jump out: Linden Lab apparently changed the Second Life website around the end of August, removing the longstanding “Own Virtual Land” button, and replacing it with one that says “Get Virtual Land.” Also, the text, “Second Life is a 3D Online Digital World imagined, created, and owned by its residents,” appears to have been edited to remove the word “owned.” These requests largely target information related to these changes.
I’m not sure how much mileage Bragg can get out of these requests. At least for now, the “own virtual land” language does still appear on the Second Life website in the “What is Second Life?” section. Moreover, there is a Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE 407) that prohibits introduction of evidence of a subsequent remedial measure “to prove negligence [or] culpable conduct,” though I’ve typically seen the rule used in product liability cases, and there are exceptions. I’d be interested in reader thoughts on this.
Turning now to Linden Lab’s response to Bragg’s motion to dismiss:
Stylistically, Linden Lab’s response could not be more different that Bragg’s brief in support of the motion to dismiss. Where Bragg’s brief was fairly combative (recall the “cornered rat,”) Linden Lab’s response is rather reserved.
The parties also take very different approaches to the “story” here. Though Bragg devoted several pages to Philip Rosedale’s comments, the only mention of them in Linden Lab’s brief is an introductory sentence stating that the case is not about how “how computing resources that emulate property in the virtual world Linden maintains called ‘Second Life’ were described by the company founder.” Instead, Linden Lab uses its introduction to describe in significant detail Bragg’s land purchases. Both parties appear to be using these initial briefs to lay out their stories and educate the Court as to their primary arguments as well as argue the motion, a fairly common practice.
Though I’ve excerpted quite a bit of Linden Lab’s brief, I have not included the arguments from case law or the arguments regarding standards of pleading because they won’t interest more than a handful of readers.
Excerpts of Linden Lab’s response to Bragg’s motion follow.
Related Posts on Virtually Blind
- Bragg v. Linden Lab – Confidential Settlement Reached; ‘Marc Woebegone’ Back in Second Life: "Linden Lab announced today that it reached a confidential settlement..." (10 comments)
- Bragg v. Linden Lab Update – New Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims Filed; Complete Chat Logs Available: "Plaintiff Marc Bragg has filed a new Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss ..." (6 comments)
- Bragg v. Linden Lab: Discovery Heats Up, Linden Documents Posted on Bragg’s Web Site: "Discovery is heating up in the Bragg v. Linden Lab case, and Marc..." (3 comments)



Cornell Professor 
In response to some good questions from interviewer ‘Dreamingen Writer,’ ‘Shang’ discusses covenants, Linden Lab’s gambling ban, in-world legal systems, difficulties in Second Life’s financial sector, and evidence collection in virtual worlds. It’s an interesting interview that covers a lot of ground.