One of the many assertions made by SCEA is that Hotz agreed to SCEA's terms of service, and (I believe) that he did so in California. The user they identified

One of the many assertions made by SCEA is that Hotz agreed to SCEA's terms of service, and (I believe) that he did so in California. The user they identified as doing these actions was called "blickmaniac" (or maybe blickmanic according to some blogs). Hotz has denied being blickmaniac, and a number of people have come forward and claimed that he/she is blickmaniac, including, apparently, Hotz' neighbour. Fundamentally, many of the maneuvers SCEA is going through right now are intended to demonstrate that Hotz had a contract with a California company, so that they can sue him in California. Hotz's side is that he bought something made by Sony of Japan, and hacked at it while living in (New Jersey?), never connected to SCEA's network, never read any TOS, posted source code from New Jersey, etc. What's at stake is partly the judge (the current judge ruled DVD copying is illegal if I recall correctly), inconvenience / expense for Hotz, and also from his perspective, hopefully showing SCEA up to be lying bastards, hurting their future case when jurisdiction is finally settled.