wiegie Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/03/id...py_machine.html CLEVELAND, Ohio -- What is a photocopier? That seems like such a simple question. But last year, a lawyer in a public-records case being heard by the Ohio Supreme Court had a hard time getting a $64,000-a-year Cuyahoga County worker to say whether the county recorder's office had a photocopier. The effort consumes nearly 10 pages of a court transcript. The overall case is about whether deeds and other records at the county recorder's office -- records that were collected and are maintained with your taxes -- should be readily available at reasonable cost. The lawyers involved in the case say the question about the photocopier is technical, getting at an arcane point of law. You be the judge. What follows is a transcript of the deposition of Lawrence Patterson, acting head of information technology for the recorder's division of the county fiscal office. The questioner is attorney David Marburger, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of title companies. Another attorney, Matthew Cavanagh, represents the county and raises objections. Marburger: During your tenure in the computer department at the Recorder's office, has the Recorder's office had photocopying machines? Cavanagh: Objection. Marburger: Any photocopying machine? Patterson: When you say "photocopying machine," what do you mean? Marburger: Let me be -- let me make sure I understand your question. You don't have an understanding of what a photocopying machine is? Patterson: No. I want to make sure that I answer your question correctly. Cavanagh: Dave, I'll object to the tone of the question. You make it sound like it's unbelievable to you that he wouldn't know what the definition of a photocopy machine is. Marburger: I didn't ask him to define it. I asked him if he had any. Patterson: When you say "photocopying machine," what do you mean? Marburger: Let me be clear. The term "photocopying machine" is so ambiguous that you can't picture in your mind what a photocopying machine is in an office setting? Patterson: I just want to make sure I answer your question correctly. Marburger: Well, we'll find out. If you can say yes or no, I can do follow-ups, but it seems -- if you really don't know in an office setting what a photocopying machine is, I'd like the Ohio Supreme Court to hear you say so. Patterson: I just want to make sure I answer your question correctly. Cavanagh: There's different types of photocopiers, Dave. Marburger: You're speaking instead of -- you're not under oath. This guy is. Cavanagh: I understand that, but I understand what his objection is. You want him to answer the question, but I don't think it's fair. Marburger: It's not fair? Cavanagh: It's not a fair question. A photocopy machine can be a machine that uses photostatic technology, that uses xerographic technology, that uses scanning technology. Marburger: I don't care what kind of technology it uses. Has your offices -- we don't have technocrats on the Ohio Supreme Court. We've got people like me, general guys -- Cavanagh: Objection. Marburger: -- or gals. I'm not really very interested in what the technology element of it is. I want to know -- Cavanagh: That's what's at issue in the case, Dave. Marburger: Not in my judgment. Do you have photocopying machines at the Recorder's office? If you don't know what that means in an office setting, please tell the court you don't know what it means in an office setting to have a photocopying machine. Patterson: I would like to answer your question to the best of my ability. Marburger: I'm asking you to answer that. Patterson: So if you could explain to me what you mean by -- Marburger: I'm not going to do that because I want you -- I want to establish on the record that you really don't know what it is. I want to establish that. Now, do you know what it is or do you not know what it is? Do you understand what that term means in common parlance or not? Patterson: Common parlance? Marburger: Common language. Patterson: I'm sorry. I didn't know what that meant. I understand that there are photocopying machines, and there are different types of them just like -- Marburger: Are there any in the Recorder's office? Patterson: -- there are different cars. Some of them run under gas power, some of them under electric power, and I'm asking if you could help me out by explaining what you mean by "photocopying machines" -- Marburger: That's a great point. Patterson: -- instead of trying to make me feel stupid. Marburger: If you feel stupid, it's not because I'm making you feel that way. Cavanagh: Objection. Patterson: I have self-confidence and I have no problem. Marburger: I don't think you're stupid. Patterson: I think -- I don't have any problem answering the question. Marburger: I think you're playing games with me. Cavanagh: Dave, the word "photocopying" is at issue in this case, and you're asking him whether something is or isn't a photocopy machine, which is a legal conclusion -- Marburger: This isn't a patent case. There's no statute that defines -- where I'm asking him to define technology for me. I'm asking -- I want to find out from a layperson's perspective, not an engineer's perspective, not a technician's perspective, but from -- I have an idea. Marburger: How about this: Have you ever heard the term "photocopier" or "photocopy" used in the Recorder's office by anybody? Patterson: Photocopy? I'm sure in the time I've been there someone has used the term. Marburger: And have you ever heard them use it in referencing a particular device or machine within the Recorder's office? By way of example, "can you photocopy that for me?" That's an example of office parlance. Patterson: That particular terminology I've not witnessed. Marburger: What was the context that you've heard the term "photocopy" used in the Recorder's office? Patterson: I'm sure it's been used. I didn't say I remembered a specific instance. Marburger: All right. But you have a general understanding that people have used the term "photocopy" within the Recorder's office in terms of something that could be done there; is that true? Patterson: I'm sure it's been used. I don't remember a specific instance or how it was used. I'm sure it's been used. Marburger: And is it fair to say that it's been used in terms of being able to copy one piece of paper onto another piece of paper using a machine? No? Not sure of that? Patterson: I'm sure it's been used. I don't recall a specific instance in which it was. Marburger: Do you have a secretary? Patterson: No. Marburger: Does anybody there have a secretary? Patterson: Yes. Marburger: Have you ever heard a secretary use the term "photocopy"? Patterson: No. Marburger: Have you ever--do you have machines there where I can put in a paper document, push a button or two, and out will come copies of that paper document also on paper? Do you have such a machine? Patterson: Yes, sir. Marburger: What do you call that machine? Patterson: Xerox. Marburger: Xerox. Is the machine made by the Xerox Company? Is that why it's called Xerox? Patterson: No. Marburger: So Xerox, in the parlance that you've described, the language that you've described, is being used generically as opposed to describing a particular brand; is that right? Patterson: All of my life I've just known people to say Xerox. It's not commonplace to use the terminology that you're using. Marburger: You mean it's more -- people say Xerox instead of photocopy? Patterson: If you're referring to a type of machine where you place a piece of paper on the top and press a button and out comes copies of it, they usually refer to it as a Xerox. Marburger: Have you ever heard it referred to as photocopying? Patterson: Not with my generation, no. Edited March 24, 2011 by wiegie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 wow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 IT Guy in the process of driving lawyer insane. All is well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
satelliteoflovegm Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I sometimes still say "make a ditto" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 IT Guy in the process of driving lawyer insane. All is well. On the one hand, it's nice seeing a lawyer get stumped by his own legalease. On the other hand, you have another damned gov't employee doing what he can to screw the taxpayer. Can we hope they both get caught by the zombies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Patterson sounds like a smartass little brat. No wonder he doesn't have a secretary...and never will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Hilarious. Althought, the strangest part of the whole exchange is that in my experience, Xerox is the antiquated terminology. Most people call it "the copier" or the "piece of $hit" around our office. I guess it's like ordering a Coke and the waitress asking you what kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Now I want the transcripts for the entire case. If this much was made of the Xerox just think what was made over the extra 10 minutes for lunch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 If I was on they jury I would've been jumping out of the window by now screaming that I'm too intelligent and that $15 a day (or whatever) isn't enough to kill this many brain cells listening to these two morans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddahj Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 If I was on they jury I would've been jumping out of the window by now screaming that I'm too intelligent and that $15 a day (or whatever) isn't enough to kill this many brain cells listening to these two morans. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 It's clear to me that from this exchange, the defense attorney and the person on the stand made a conscious decision to not speak directly to the word "photocopier". In that regard, I think they achieved the goal remarkably well. They forced to prosecutor to use a different word to identify that particular action of making a copy of one document from another. I'm not sure what the end game was, but for that one brief moment, that was very well played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) It's clear to me that from this exchange, the defense attorney and the person on the stand made a conscious decision to not speak directly to the word "photocopier". In that regard, I think they achieved the goal remarkably well. They forced to prosecutor to use a different word to identify that particular action of making a copy of one document from another. I'm not sure what the end game was, but for that one brief moment, that was very well played. Which is absolutely a disservice to the entire legal system, because, if what you say is true, this seems like it's all part of some lame attempt to get the guy off on a technicality stemming from someone not being "clear enough" by referring to making a copy as "using the photocopier" rather than "make a Xerox". Surely, anyone in any office setting, anywhere where English is spoken understands that these are the same thing and court should not be about anyone pretending otherwise. In short, it seems like this: "Were you asked to make a photocopy?" "I was not asked to make a Xerox and that is the only term I recognize as "taking a piece of paper and putting it in a machine that produces another piece that looks just like it. Thus, I clearly ignored the request because the person was referring to something that I know nothing about or, at very least, using a phrase that I don't associate with that act." And that's BS. And, were I the prosecutor, I'd now be in jail for attempting to strangle the witness. Edited March 24, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Kill them all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 It's a copier. This could be a hung jury. Each jury member will hang themselves before it's over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Ok, I just read the first line of the story now where it says CLEVELAND, Ohio This story makes perfect sense now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathpig Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 If the prosecutor could make the guy cry on the stand, he could offer him some 'facial tissue'... just to confuse him even more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 If the prosecutor could make the guy cry on the stand, he could offer him some 'facial tissue'... just to confuse him even more. Prosecutor: Could you take this out to the trash bin? Witness: I'm sorry, what? Prosecutor: The trash bin, outside. Witness: I'm not following you. Prosecutor: THE TRASH BIN. The thing outside that you throw garbage into. Witness: OH! You mean the Dumpster! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Itals Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 The Xerox company actually used an advertising campaign in the late 80's - early 90's to get people to call it a "photocopy" instead of a "Xerox". They obviously failed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 If the prosecutor could make the guy cry on the stand, he could offer him some 'facial tissue'... just to confuse him even more. I've never heard that but he could probably use a Kleenex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballjoe Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Did any of you actual read the whole thing? After the first 10 lines I had to skip to the end. Hell, that was complicated. Oh I mean Gehenna. Never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennykravitz2004 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Not sure I follow this... maybe if they established Who's on 2nd first for me... this would've been all cleared up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 I don't think I've ever used the term photocopy (and I worked in a copy shop as one of my first jobs), but I certainly wouldn't need clarification on what the word means. Almost everyone I know says make a copy. If someone said please make a photocopy of this, I would think that they are either very old or haven't worked in an office for a while (or ever). Maybe its a regional dialect kind of thing though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 (edited) When a secretary from the John Deere Corporation sits on the copier and copies her bare ass, that is a photo copy. Work Safe link (noticed that they used the term "Xeroxing" for copy in the link) When a normal average dude puts a paper in the copier and hits the copy button, that machine is called a copier. Clear now? Edited March 25, 2011 by MikesVikes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 I want a copy of the document, not a copy of the photo, so no photocopy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.