Lawyer jokes split off to here: http://xenforo.com/community/threads/have-you-heard-the-one-about.11855/
Not always. In some states, "judge' is an elected position, meaning a judge is a politician, not a lawyer. But even that is a grey area. Look how many members (in every meaning) serving in the US House and Senate are lawyers?
So it seems to me that lawyer is the pupal form of politicians.
Q: What do you call 100,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A: A good start.
Think all this anti-lawyer stuff is new?
Remember this is a FEDERAL court and not a STATE court. Federal judges are nominated by the President of the United States, Confirmed by the United States Senate, and serve for LIFE.
I have a question. If the california case proceeds to hearing, will the same judge preside over it? No disrespect or anything but i somehow get a feeling that IB's argument (all the frivolous whiteboard stuff and facebook page arguments) were made with this particular judge in mind. It seems IB's lawyers knew that they could get away with these arguments, which any tech savvy person would throw out immediately, with a person who may not be up to speed with internet technologies which have grown over the last decade.
So if the same judge is to preside over the entire case, XF guys really need to prepare their defense with the internet technology handicap (again, no disrespect intended) of the Judge in mind. And this would make the case much much more difficult for Xenforo i am afraid, compared to if a regular internet user person was to hear it.
Whilst that is valid within your own country, I am talking about a UK citizen having to bother about fighting something in a US court, and what can the US court really do to a UK citizen? Nothing, unless there are warrants, etc, then requests to extradite, etc etc... all of which won't / don't happen for a minor civil suite. You need to have done some major things to be extradited across borders, and even then, atleast you get to fight it and challenge that order in your country of residence.Because if you don't answer a lawsuit or pay attention to it the judge enters a summary judgment against you and you lose.
Whilst that is valid within your own country, I am talking about a UK citizen having to bother about fighting something in a US court, and what can the US court really do to a UK citizen? Nothing, unless there are warrants, etc, then requests to extradite, etc etc... all of which won't / don't happen for a minor civil suite. You need to have done some major things to be extradited across borders, and even then, atleast you get to fight it and challenge that order in your country of residence.
It is like IB trying to take legal action against me, US > Australia. They could lodge anything they wanted in a US court, it has zero bearing because I am an Australian citizen. I wouldn't even have to respond. If they lodged it in an Australian court though, then I would have to respond and fight it, but it would be under Australian law, not US law, they they would have to argue.
There is no difference to that example and IB taking Kier only + Xenforo into a US court. UK citizen + UK registered company = Zero real jurisdiction in the US if they don't respond. What can they do? Can anyone really answer that legally? What exactly can the US do if Xenforo didn't respond to the US action. Not the UK action, just the US aspect?
Saving face, defending yourself, I get that... but that is to be done in the UK court, not the US court.
The risk is that the foreign judgment (US) may be brought as a common law action and enforced in the UK. There is a substantial risk of that. Note that this is particular to enforcing a US judgment in the UK. There are various treaties out there for direct recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. The difference with the US-UK situation is that to enforce the US judgment, you actually need to bring a second judgment debtor action in the UK. This is not an unusual circumstance and under common law principle, you do not re-litigate the case normally, you are essentially saying that there is a judgment debt and the debtor owes on that debt.
To be honest, the copyright claims are the one bit that with the help of an expert witness, hold absolutely no water whatsoever. There is simply no, *read my (virtual) lips*, no shared code between VB and XenForo.The only thing that would give me pause would be Copyright claims as they do not have extra-territorial application (but I can see how they still might fall under the analysis above under some international law conventions).
To be honest, the copyright claims are the one bit that with the help of an expert witness, hold absolutely no water whatsoever. There is simply no, *read my (virtual) lips*, no shared code between VB and XenForo.
It would be like saying Windows 7 is based on Mac OS code.
Sure there may be functions or segments of code that look very alike and do the same thing, but there is frankly no way that anyone would think XF is derived from VB, its as completely different as an Apple is from a Pear.
Yes, they're both fruit, with a skin and a fleshy middle bit, oh and pips too. But they are not the same.
I am under the impression that having two lawsuits, both with the same complaint, comes into this as partial protection.
Good point. It may well be that the judge wants the trial to go ahead as he thinks CA has authority as the copyright claim is by a US company, i.e. they claim its their code that's been copied, the location of the defendants in that case is irrelevant.Agree 100%. That is, as to the underlying merits. I was talking about how a judge might view the issue of whether there is an adequate remedy for a US Copyright claim in a UK court.
This is most important. For example, if IB fails to show that there is a copyright issue to be resolved by a reasonable jury, there is no claim and it gets bounced before trial. Proving infringement is likely an expensive proposition. There doesn't seem to be any code that they can point to which is "per se infringement" on its face and show the court the smoking gun. Motions to dismiss a claim can be made before trial. We haven't arrived at that stage yet.The judge's role is to make ruling of law and to "shepherd" the case to completion with the "help" of the parties. There has been a demand for a jury trial, so if the case gets that far, the jury will make determinations of "fact." That is the main distinction between the judge and the jury. Judges make ruling of law. Juries make determinations of fact. The jury will have to decide what facts are proven. The presentation of evidence will come from the parties. That is, IB will have to demonstrate the "facts" that are in dispute in order to win on the factual issues (in some cases, the judge will rule that the facts, even if shown, do not amount to a violation of the law...in that instance, it will be be a "failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted" situation....that is a ruling of law, which I mentioned is the judges provenance).
I think I know what you mean. I would disagree, though. Let's say XF did not defend. After the entry of a default judgment, the court then awards a massive judgment because he only has one side of the story. Then IB takes that massive judgment and files a new action to enforce it in the UK. Well, I would say that XF could use the judgment and action to argue that the first filed suit in the UK (the original claim) should be dismissed. I think they would win, at least as to every issue that was litigated in the US. However, there is still the matter of this massive judgment, which they are not likely to be able to challenge the underlying merits.
We may be talking the same thing when you say "partial protection." However, I think the consequences of not defending could be dire and I don't think it would be much protection at all.
Perhaps you should be defending them?This is most important. For example, if IB fails to show that there is a copyright issue to be resolved by a reasonable jury, there is no claim and it gets bounced before trial. Proving infringement is likely an expensive proposition. There doesn't seem to be any code that they can point to which is "per se infringement" on its face and show the court the smoking gun. Motions to dismiss a claim can be made before trial. We haven't arrived at that stage yet.
Holy crap EXACTLY ..ITS FRICKEN FORUM SOFTWARE. PERIOD. That's the only thing it shares...the fact that it is software for internet communities. End of that story.To be honest, the copyright claims are the one bit that with the help of an expert witness, hold absolutely no water whatsoever. There is simply no, *read my (virtual) lips*, no shared code between VB and XenForo.
It would be like saying Windows 7 is based on Mac OS code.
Sure there may be functions or segments of code that look very alike and do the same thing, but there is frankly no way that anyone would think XF is derived from VB, its as completely different as an Apple is from a Pear.
Yes, they're both fruit, with a skin and a fleshy middle bit, oh and pips too. But they are not the same.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.