California Case Update

[Kim]

it would have been impossible for a software company ofXenforo's size to develop XenForo from scratch between June 30,2009, and July 28, 2010,

You can write a Ruby on Rails Forum in a matter of hours... http://railsonedge.blogspot.com/2008/02/rails-forum-tutorial-for-beginners-part.html

I do believe the developer who made the above statement is woefully out of touch with modern programming and frameworks, and that IB are woefully out of touch with reality if they believe there is any secrets or proprietory information involved in Forum Software! lol

 

[iTuN3r]

You can write a Ruby on Rails Forum in a matter of hours... http://railsonedge.blogspot.com/2008/02/rails-forum-tutorial-for-beginners-part.html

I do believe the developer who made the above statement is woefully out of touch with modern programming and frameworks, and that IB are woefully out of touch with reality if they believe there is any secrets or proprietory information involved in Forum Software! lol

They are Delusional .

 

[Jerry]

You can write a Ruby on Rails Forum in a matter of hours... http://railsonedge.blogspot.com/2008/02/rails-forum-tutorial-for-beginners-part.html

I did one in codeigniter (with a user authentication module and TinyMCE ) as a test in under 2 hours.

 

[Kim]

I did one in codeigniter (with a user authentication module and TinyMCE ) as a test in under 2 hours.

Hey cool 2 hours is pretty darn impressive!

Not to take anything away from the awesome job Mike and Kier have done, but it is perfectly possible to write a forum to an alpha stage using a framework in a very short time, further more they can prove it.

What a lot of utter utter BS this litigation is...

 

[Carlos]

Good point Dragonfly. It's not the same thing, but you're trying to make a point.

 

[Jerry]

Given PHP json_encode (et al) and jQuery during the original build of 3 ...... I can't even imagine how quick, and what we would of churned out.

 

[DoctorWatsOn]

I find it difficult to see how the California court could justify dragging everyone and everything over from the U.K. to the U.S. for what is, in essence, a duplication of the U.K. action.

There's also the more fundamental question of whether a U.S. state court has any jurisdiction over a U.K. company/citizens that have never lived, worked, or been resident there?

Cheers,
Shaun

I agree, it seems common sense that the California court should throw the case out and leave it to the Royal Courts in London not only for the reasons you have stated but also because IB commenced action in the UK first and this is basically a duplicate case that would appear to only have been started for malicious reasons.

We can only keep our fingers crossed for the 18th January; hope the California court sees the sense in throwing the case out and wish the guys the very best of luck in he meantime.

 

[Grover]

It looks like they photocopied half the internet as evidence. There's gotta be some evidence in there *somewhere*, right?

I believe this ^ says it all... 'case closed' indeed.

 

[erich37]

LOL, the domain registration is using the WHO-IS-Guard which is a service located in California. But this does not mean the person who registered the domain (Real Administrative Contact) is located in California.
VB lawyers have no clue about domains and domain registrations.....

Probably just remove the WHO-IS-Guard (Privacy Protection Service) and show your real business-address to the public (UK-location) ?

 

[SilverCircle]

Hey cool 2 hours is pretty darn impressive!

Not to take anything away from the awesome job Mike and Kier have done, but it is perfectly possible to write a forum to an alpha stage using a framework in a very short time, further more they can prove it.

Well, yes, sort of.

A good framework alone doesn't produce anything on its own. You still need skilled and experienced developers to get good results and this is very obviously the case here.

I'm not exactly a PHP expert, but I have 15+ years experience in C/C++ (+ some other languages) and I can safely say that a good C++ framework like Qt can easily cut development times down to 1/5 of the time that would be needed to write the same stuff in plain old C w/o any toolkit assistance.

This is especially true for all parts of a software package that interact with users.

Same for game development. You could try to write your own game engine and spend 5 years for the groundwork alone or use existing technology and save these 5 years, allowing you to concentrate on the content. Still, good developers AND talented artists are needed to achieve good results. The best technology has been (ab)used to produce crap results, so the technology alone isn't enough.

Claiming that it cannot be possible to write good software in a short time is, however, nonsense and I would say the person who made this claim has little, if any, knowledge about software development in general.

Combine good developers with good tools, throw in some high level of dedication and expect better (and faster) results than good developers with the same level of dedication alone would be able to produce.

 

[Shelley]

Who made the claim that it couldn't be done, creating a good software in the time span? Was this merely opinions from their development group currently employed by IB/vbs?

 

[DoctorWatsOn]

Who made the claim that it couldn't be done, creating a good software in the time span? Was this merely opinions from their development group currently employed by IB/vbs?

Yes - if memory serves me right, i.e. I am not going back to re-read it all.

 

[Carlos]

Who made the claim that it couldn't be done, creating a good software in the time span? Was this merely opinions from their development group currently employed by IB/vbs?

Opinions from devs at iB/VBS. Both the lawyer, and the guys at iB.

Probably just remove the WHO-IS-Guard (Privacy Protection Service) and show your real business-address to the public (UK-location) ?

Not exactly a good idea.

The address that's beneath the whoisguard is one of the founders' physical home address.

They can edit it, but they don't want to make the home address public. There are sites that make addresses very, rather, very.... very, very public.

 

[Shelley]

Yes - if memory serves me right, i.e. I am not going back to re-read it all.

Opinions from devs at iB/VBS. Both the lawyer, and the guys at iB.

Wouldn't this be seen then as a conflict of interest?

@Doctor - I don't blame you reading 1pdf was enough for me to stomach.

I think what we need is more of these respectable, professional decent developers (not the incompetent type) that can prove that it can (and has been done). It just seems now, a frivolous tactic to destroy a community and company that will obviously fail.

Why would anyone degrade themselves, putting their neck out on the line and say it can't be done when obviously it can. I guess they'll resort to anything to ensure they are currently in work.

 

[MGSteve]

To be fair though, the guy was the Chief Technical bloke over at IB, its hardly going to look good if he turns around and says 'yes, its perfectly possible to create software like XF from scratch in 12 months'.

If he did, it would seriously damage, probably undermine totally, their action.

I wouldn't expect him to say anything else. Whether privately he believes this of course is another issue. If he does, then it explains why vB is in the state its in now.

 

[Peggy]

Who made the claim that it couldn't be done, creating a good software in the time span? Was this merely opinions from their development group currently employed by IB/vbs?

I believe Joe Rosenblum stated this in his deposition that I read yesterday, but it was also stated in an earlier court document.

 

[steven s]

Probably just remove the WHO-IS-Guard (Privacy Protection Service) and show your real business-address to the public (UK-location) ?

The address that's beneath the whoisguard is one of the founders' physical home address.

Besides, I would think a judge could issue a court order to view the actual address.
There is no reason to make the address public if it's just to satisfy the case.

 

[John]

I think we all can agree on the continuing absurdity of these claims from IB. The key here is whether the CA judge sees it that way as well and dismisses the CA case. This is what we all need to be hoping for...a lot hinges on this January 18th hearing.

 

[DoctorWatsOn]

I think we all can agree on the continuing absurdity of these claims from IB. The key here is whether the CA judge sees it that way as well and dismisses the CA case. This is what we all need to be hoping for...a lot hinges on this January 18th hearing.

Agreed, fingers remain firmly crossed.

 

[Shamil]

I believe this ^ says it all... 'case closed' indeed.

The pages are photocopied into the system. The files are not delivered electronically, I believe, hence why everything is photocopied. Additionally, for them to provide any proof it would have to be sanctioned of paper first, I think.