Chatlogged

SO telling to read Benjamin Duranske's parsing of the latest documents to surface in the Bragg case. NONE of that prosecutorial zeal and forum fanboyz' gleeful gotcha over the facts emerging pointing to Bragg's guilt. The Lindens have submitted the server chatlogs in the case, showing unmistakably that Marc Bragg (Marc Woebegon) knowingly and deliberately defrauded LL. He knew that he was using an exploit, and even enlisted other people in the scam. Bragg even plotted how not to appear "too greedy" on this "dollar auction".

SUCH a contrast to Duranske's firey and zealous coverage of Ginko, which has him shutting down Linden Lab for supposedly not complying with law, and putting Ginko in stripes by the end of the year, well, just because...because he once had a case kinda like that and thinks he's guilty. None of those wishes for stripes for Bragg, though it seems pretty clear from these documents that he's guilty of computer fraud under the laws of the State of California, those very same "real life laws" that "apply but haven't been enforced," as Duranske's notion of the Ginko case.

I guess this is what you call a liberal lawyer, one bending the law to an ideological agenda. His default is likely to hate those in authority or power, like Linden Lab, and figure whatever can "stick it to the man," i.e. prove that they defrauded the public by "false" claims of "land for sale." Proving either a) the validity of virtual land or b) that Philip lied about it being like real land, is simply more interesting to him. (Urizenus Sklar follows this exact same line of reason, brushing away Bragg's scam, and focusing only on what exposes LL.)

So for them, Bragg's fraud and theft and malice and cover-up simply isn't of interest. Duranske's dry, cautious tones completely contrast with his pronouncements on the Ginko case. What a surprise.

The surfacing of chatlogs during discovery gives the lie to FlipperPAY Peregrine's claim, and the claims of other fanboyz, that the Lindens delete these chatlogs within a day or two.

Of course they don't. Everything you say is on record, always, and no doubt they'll find ways to capture voice routinely when they need to, as well. We are witnessing the dawning of a chapter where these records aren't going to be impugned, or even somehow rare in surfacing, or even more rare in being accessible to the public (as Duranske claims they are in this case).

Why? Because they are server logs, and we all know that truth resides only server-side in the Metaverse of code-as-law. This will become more and more routine and accepted. No one will doubt a server and its logs, anymore than they might doubt a deli's video camera showing a stick-up of the guy at the register.

The excruciating detail about Bragg's scam is unmistakable. The kind of persuasive detail from documents supplied by lawyers (real lawyers, practicing law) to a court of law, and accepted as evidence. Yet Duranske is all "alleged" this and that -- so unlike Ginko, where no discovery, no real lawyers, no real courts have been involved -- not yet, anyway.

What becomes abundantly clear from these documents is the motivation for Bragg's outrageous and seemingly bizarre lawsuit, when he was so clearly appearing guilty as heisting sims. It's simple: by being as outrageous as he could, and aggressively telling the Lindens he would sue them by "7:00 am the next morning in court", he could deflect them (in theory) from pursuing an investigation of him and suspecting him of the fraud he had in fact committed.

It was a perfect Woodbury University Eddie Haskell moment, Mrs. Cleaver -- such a lovely dress! In this case, it's "Mr. Linden, what an ugly lawsuit!" but the gambit failed.

I have a feeling that mining these documents carefully will give insights into how land might be viewed when the Lindens sell out/IPO/open-source -- turn it all into a goat farm. So I do hope to return and study it and hope others will with that in mind as well.

Comments

[Prok]

Duranske has answered this post here:
http://virtuallyblind.com/2007/08/23/vb-commentary-active-suits-unsettled-issues/

Without referencing this post of course.

And it's totally lame, as there has been no discovery or documents or reliable information that he possesses on this case, such as to pronounce it a Ponzi. While it may show every sign of being one, it's not his to judge, absent any reliable knowledge. It's all speculation. And his lawerly parsing is just a CYA routine, and I hope someone calls him on it.

[Lem Skall]

"Duranske has answered this post here: [...] Without referencing this post of course."

Wow! That guy, Benjamin Duranske, seems to be really obsessed with you.

[Untameable Wildcat]

Geez, that took some wading through. Having looked at the documents Bragg is demanding I'm wondering if he's given up on his original arguments and wants to try and win on a technicality (of Linden being required to produce documents and not doing so.)

For example he demands (section 110) "Documents sufficient to identify each purchaser of virtual land from defendant Linden" - what the HELL??? and what the hell again? He's asking for every single land purchase ever made from Linden Labs to be documented in such a way that it not only identifies the avatar but the real name of every single person! At least, that's how I interpret this request, given that there are no period start or finish dates mentioned.

Bragg's a bent lawyer. He tried to cheat, he got caught, he got banned. He knew the risks. He let greed get the better of him and hacked into Linden Labs computers to make himself rich. He's even caught all but admitting to that to someone in IM:

User M.S.: kid getting away with fingers in the candy jar?
Bragg: guess so... lol

Now I'm no huge fan of Linden Labs (as you know) but Bragg knowingly and deliberately and purposefully broke the rules, defrauded LL and this whole lawsuit is (pardon my Brit phrasing) a load of bollocks.

I hope the court sees sense and throws Bragg's case out, but I do fear that there will be other attempts by other dodgy lawyers to bring down the system for their own greed.

Bragg can't be the only one out there.

[Wynter Loon]

"Yet Duranske is all "alleged" this and that..."

If, Mr. Neva, you were well educated in Law and the ways of law, even someone who is known to have committed murder or some other crime, it is always 'alleged' that they committed the crime due to the fact that one is always assumed innocent until proven guilty in the USA.

To say someone is guilty before they are found so in a court of law is incorrect and improper. It is considered trying the case in public if done so.

One should always hear anyone talking about a case that has not gone to trial as 'alleged' charges, including the news media, lawyers, judges and police, until the issue is decided in court.

Mr. Duranske uses the term 'alleged' because he is being a good lawyer and doing things the correct way.

[Brennan Planer]

Prokofy, are you doing any more traffic reports?

[MadamG Zagato]

Hi Prok! :wave:
I saw you at SLCC but didn't get to meet you! :(

I had a hug with your name on it, but our paths never crossed. Maybe next year! Stay safe til then!

~Maddy

[marc Woebegone]

Hi Prokofy: (did I spell your name correctly?)

You mentioned that "Lindens have submitted the server chatlogs in the case".... can you please post / tell where they've been submitted? or posted? Or did you "oops" and mean the statements they've made in the answer they filed with the court?

And, what laws of California are you referring to in stating "... under the laws of the State of California," ... "those very same "real life laws"? Do you actually know what laws you are talking about? or?

btw, I renew my offer to write for your column ....

Regards,

Marc

[Prok]

Um, I know that DUH, Wynter. So...where were you when Duranske did NOT say "alleged" about Ginko, eh? See, you are so hypocritical.

I'm not interested in having you write for my paper, Mark Woebegon, um, you're an asshole?

And submitted = statements answered, duh, like this is a bar exam here? I'm just describing that the chatlogs were published, duh, what the hell are you going on about?

I'm not the one invoking "the laws of California" all the time. Duranske is. Go ask him.

[Prok]

I'm not doing any more traffic reports for now, no, because Skype keeps dropping out when I try to run it with SL, I have to find some other way to tape and upload it.

[marc Woebegone]

"JA: Well, I can’t respond directly to nameless commentators, but I’ll say this: the counterclaim that Bragg violated a criminal code is absolutely outrageous, and it’s also defamatory. Not only are we moving to dismiss the counterclaim but, it could really give rise to a defamation claim too. The only reason to bring the claim is so Linden Lab can allege Bragg violated a law on their web site."

http://virtuallyblind.com/2007/08/28/jason-archinaco-interview-marc-bragg/