California Case Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shamil said:
<body><p>Here's a document from IB + Lawyers with a cause to deny XF/Darby's Motion:<p>http://cl.ly/0244284431451c1h2E2W
Click to expand...

Interesting reading,

The problem is, vBulletin has to prove that Kier
a) took the information
b) Did not return or delete that information on leaving
c) Did not need that information to work on whatever project he was working on at the time.

By all accounts, b will be un-provable... and C could be simply replied that whatever feature was being worked on at the time... the data was relevent for reason XYZ....
 
Slavik said:
Interesting reading,

The problem is, vBulletin has to prove that Kier
a) took the information
b) Did not return or delete that information on leaving
c) Did not need that information to work on whatever project he was working on at the time.

By all accounts, b will be un-provable... and C could be simply replied that whatever feature was being worked on at the time... the data was relevent for reason XYZ....
Click to expand...

LoL over that why did IB stayed quiet over a year when Kier denied to return the information . Did they noticed this issue only when xenforo showed up as their competator . What a bunch of Morons !
 
very wordy but IB is saying that they gave Kier access to records for business purposes. Kier already said that those records were only used for legit vbulletin business. The rest is just rehashing and doesn't actually provide proof of any wrong doing as far I can see.
 
As I see it and read it, the key to all of those claims will depend on the timelines involved. If I.B. can convince the court that Kier was accessing the I.B. computers during a time while he was already building XF and that he was doing so for the purpose of using the materials to compete with vBulletin, then perhaps I.B. have some kind of claim with respect to those points. If not, then they most likely don't.

Hopefully one of these two cases will get dismissed before too long, as it makes no sense to be litigating these same claims in two different courts.

-Chris
 
I think they are saying that XenForo concept was conceive at some brainstorming meetings, but not actually coding structure (They would of release vB 4 with it it by now and not just trying very hard into adding it after two plus (+) years after alpha). If you look within private forum 'Lic# Forum Member(s)', then you will see that they are implementing things that are currently in XenForo (TinyMce Editor and moving away from YUI<[Not quite sure, but read it somewhere]).

I am surprized they did not ask for your first born.... (Conceived during employment at IB.... Let me see.... 'Rumpelstiltskin!'... Meh! IB still exist... Maybe its another word...).

Wait, then I was the one that came up with Windows 7.... :rolleyes:... Well, they say I did, as I ask to have outlook to be more social back in 2005....

Edit: Mar 16, 2011
Correction information posted by Kier below....
 
Reeve of Shinra said:
IPB is moving to TinyMCE editor as well and moving away from YUI to a different package is really kind of a meh who cares point. :)
Click to expand...
Tell that to IB, as they still think they own every concept.... If Kier, Mike and Ashley did not work for vB, then this would not been an issue. This would be just another forum product.
 
After selling off all eight lic# I had with other company.... I did not have the same access to information that is within 'Lic# Forum Member(s)' anymore... Have no clue on why they want to hide business roadmap (roadmap is in Jira aswell) in such a forum. I can always use JIRA to see whats on the menu and should did this before I made my other postings.... I should just move on and not bother with the activities of the other company anymore, as I did invest with XenForo....
 
When you have such a great experience with them the first 5+ years, it's hard to let go after the last few. It's that simple.
 
Looks to me that XF has a great lawyer and the references to previous cases is enough to remind me and hopefully everyone else that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff....

Also noting the way that motion is written , I don't understand how anyone could not see that IB has tried to manipulate peoples opinions by mislabeling actions that probably never happened anyways. Shame on them for that. I wonder if IBs legal team realizes how full of crap the people they represent are and if they would step up to the plate the same way knowing that they will lie in a court of law ( 2 courts of law ) to suit their own end.

Go Pamela Go!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom