California Case Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheLaw said:
*snip*
I hope this clears things up and look forward to the same spirited but "civil" conversation (pardon the pun.) :)
Click to expand...
I appreciate that reply. I now understand what is happening (or at least the overall picture). I have never really followed a court case before which is why I asked as I want to see how, in general, it works :).

Thanks for your time and effort TheLaw.
 
TheLaw said:
Just before XF was to question VBSI's witnesses, VBSI withdrew its preliminary injunction and now appears to want to continue discovery and wait for a trial date, at least on the surface. That could happen or, with more discovery, a settlement may take place. That doesn't mean that both parties suddenly become friends. It could mean that one party has decided to cut its losses realizing that it will not win its case, prosecuting or defending.
Click to expand...

If for the sake of argument VBSI were to completely withdraw their claim, is there a mechanism in US law by which the defendant can recover their costs?
 
zappaDPJ said:
If for the sake of argument VBSI were to completely withdraw their claim, is there a mechanism in US law by which the defendant can recover their costs?
Click to expand...
If that would take place, it would almost certainly be a part of settlement negotiations and wouldn't get that far as the result would be obvious.
 
TheLaw said:
It's not like there are 10 motions and then it's all done. We are in the phase called "pre-trial" which means exactly what it says - pre/before trial. What is trial? Trial is where a case gets heard before a judge or jury and a decision is made.

Most cases are settled pre-trial because that is the time when each party can request information from the other party ("discovery" of evidence) to be used as trial to show the judge or jury "proof" that they are right. Evidence can include email correspondences, digital data, the employment contracts in question, the code of XenForo and work done in preparation, etc. It is also an opportunity to ask questions of witnesses who are to appear at trial to get answers (depositions.)

During the pre-trial phase, the strength of each party's case (or weakness) becomes clearer as a result of the evidence and proof they obtain that either strengthens or weakens their case. The actual trial date is usually set at least several months after the complaint is filed (perhaps even a year) since (a) it can take a long time to perform discovery, and (b) the court wants the parties to settle if they can.

At this point, VBSI requested the court enjoin (prevent) XF from doing business before trial (motion for a "preliminary injunction".) No judge will grant that motion without a fair trial unless it appears certain the plaintiff will win the case and if it doesn't do so, the plaintiff will be harmed without remedy. For example, if VBSI claimed XYZ was about to drink the only bottle of champagne bottled by King Edward II, if it didn't stop XYZ from doing it, that prize champagne would be gone forever so it has to step in.

XF had a right to defend itself and requested that it be able to question VBSI's witnesses under oath and make them swear that what they are saying is the truth and also ask more inquiring questions about specific facts. For example, if a witness for the plaintiff vaguely claims that XF contains copied code then XF can ask "now that you've sworn code is copied, tell us, exactly what code specifically are you alleging has been copied?"

Just before XF was to question VBSI's witnesses, VBSI withdrew its preliminary injunction and now appears to want to continue discovery and wait for a trial date, at least on the surface. That could happen or, with more discovery, a settlement may take place. That doesn't mean that both parties suddenly become friends. It could mean that one party has decided to cut its losses realizing that it will not win its case, prosecuting or defending.

I hope this clears things up and look forward to the same spirited but "civil" conversation (pardon the pun.) :)
Click to expand...

Thanks for explaining this.
 
Could I make a polite suggestion that the "banter" be moved to a "XF court cases - general discussion" thread that is (perhaps) stuck to the top of Off-Topic ?

It would stop this (more factual/serious) thread being overly extending, and on the odd occasion when there is some news, we can all get up-to-speed very quickly - just by checking in here at this thread.

Just a thought ... <ducks for cover> :ROFLMAO:
 
Peggy said:
I agree that there has been too much off topic banter. However Shamil has been very good about keeping the first post updated, so it shouldn't be too hard to find the new news.
Click to expand...

Yup we can find update in first post but sometimes when we follow some important conversation in Topics like this they just get lost within offtopic issues in no time .
 
GeeksChat said:
Could I make a polite suggestion that the "banter" be moved to a "XF court cases - general discussion" thread that is (perhaps) stuck to the top of Off-Topic ?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't make much difference to be honest, people would still deviate from the subject, so there would just be two "general discussion" threads instead of one.
Far better to just keep it all on one thread and try to deal with those instances where it does stray off topic.

DoctorWatson's suggestion of adding useful links to the first post is a good one.
 
TheLaw said:
Both lawsuits contain corporate and personal defendants. IB's subsidiary is suing Kier personally in the US and Kier, Mike and Ashley personally in the UK. They are claiming that the company is liable and that all three are personally liable based upon breach of contract and other mischief that has been alleged (the James Bond espionage bit in California.)
Click to expand...

Sorry. Coming in here a bit late.

But James Bond would have had a much smaller camera.;):D

xenDach
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kim
And sorry for keeping the topic off-topic....again, but from all this I think I have a new suggestion.

A "Reply Off-topic" button or check box.

Press it and the post is labeled off-topic, maybe even given a bit of different color and points are taken away from the user (you have to pay to continue to discuss off-topic). Also, there could be a possibility to hide, with a press of another button, those volutarily added off-topic posts from within the thread. In other words, the user can quickly blind out the unnecessary posts. Mods could also have a tool to flag a post "off-topic" too and give the user that same penatly for going off-topic.

Hehehe.....:p

Sorry, back to the topic please!

I think IB has done themselves no good with the lawsuits and with this injunction back-stepping, the intentions of dragging XenForo and KMA through the courts to try and "make them pay" is even more apparent now. At least that is the impression one can get from all this. The suits just aren't really about protecting ones legal rights. And, IMHO, they are actually hurting IB's already poor reputation, instead of helping it.

xenDach
 
SchmitzIT said:
Guess who made TheRegister after... someone... tipped them off?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/22/vbulletin_abandons_us_lawsuit_against_former_devs/
Click to expand...

"Net forumware giant vBulletin has abandoned its US lawsuit against its former lead developer and his new forumware company, the UK-based XenForo."

While I wish this were true, but didn't IB only drop their motion for a preliminary injunction? If so, that's much different than abandoning the lawsuit entirely -- as in the case will now run its normal course. This is exactly why I no longer follow much of what The Register reports anymore. They can sometimes be a good lead for a story, but rarely a great source for a story as most of what they report/post contains factual inaccuracies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom