The day started at 8:15, when the press conference organizers started to congregate on the front steps of the L.A. courthouse where the hearing was going to take place. I found out from them which room the hearing was going to be in and decided that I wanted to see it. The hearing itself (case number BC216606) was in a judge's chambers and looked like it wasn't going to be anything more than a telephone conference. The etoy sympathizers there included me, a law student, a guy with a Microsoft parody Web site, and an E-press person. But it didn't turn out to be even a non-public hearing; the law student asked about it and found that the hearing had been moved to January 10. So we all trooped back to the courthouse steps.

By the way, I wouldn't expect anything to happen at these hearings. Etoys probably plans to drag things out as long as possible with various legal delaying tactics. In the real world, legal cases aren't over in an hour with time for commercials. I'm an environmental activist, and I'm familair with the idea of SLAPP suits: Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, used against people who do such things as call a landfill a "dump" at a public hearing. The point isn't to win, it's to harass and delay.

The press conference happened on the steps; it was attended by maybe 15 people including onlookers. There was one E-press person. Four people spoke: Pete Franklin, a spokesperson for former eToys employees; Amy Alexander, Internet artist and faculty member of the California Institute of the Arts; Peter Lunenfeld, writer, critic and member of the Faculty at Pasadena Art Center and founder of The Southern California New Media Working Group; and RTMark spokesperson Rita Margolis. The press conference was probably a good organizing tool; at least people got to meet each other.