California Case Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
Digital Doctor said:
That is IB's plan for sure.
IB should be forced to pay Xenforo's legal fees after all this.
Otherwise this lawsuit really was a full out farce.
Click to expand...
Isn't that already decided? I remember something like that mentioned here. IMO they should pay more than that, because it will be obvious that they had bad intentions, unlike XenForo. But that's probably too much to hope for.
 
dutchbb said:
Isn't that already decided? I remember something like that mentioned here. IMO they should pay more than that, because it will be obvious that they had bad intentions, unlike XenForo. But that's probably too much to hope for.
Click to expand...

That's the UK case, at least.
 
dutchbb said:
Isn't that already decided? I remember something like that mentioned here. IMO they should pay more than that, because it will be obvious that they had bad intentions, unlike XenForo. But that's probably too much to hope for.
Click to expand...
Not that I recall - IB had to put money into escrow since it only has a shell left in the UK and the court required a security.
 
wow...are they going for a friggin Oscar?

Wow I can't believe that is actually a legal document.

Just wow.

at which point do they explain exactly HOW they think anyone copied THEIR work?
 
wow...just wow Shamil...

It is crazy...basically they accuse of red herrings while that is exactly what this doc feels like. To me the point of the case is simple, did they do something or did they not....in order to answer that question...the accuser must present their claim clearly and show HOW they accused did so.

They basically said because of how code is structured they infringed not so much the function of the code itself....Are they really claiming to have invented OOP?..I mean when I try to make plain english out of these docs...that is what this read like to me.

Someone please make ib stand at a pedestal with a keyboard and a mouse right next to xf in court and let them try to explain in a civil debate why they feel violated which is crazy because if you step back...only one party is getting violated and it isn't IB.
 
This is what I read in case I misunderstood what their GENERAL claim here says.

fhfghgdhdhf.webp


To me it looks like they are saying it is XF's need to prove they didn't violate anything and need to show why, isn't it the other way around...

I have never heard of a case where someone actually can't show any examples of what has been viloated and still manages to file a claim somehow.

This case is ab-so-lute-ly re-diC-u-lous.

edit:

Also..how can something hold from a case involving two film studios ....at this point the codecs I use to encode video have more capability then the hardware they were using at that time to record movies. How is that citing even relevant to these lines?

I must be confused.

In Walt Disney v. Filmation, 628 F.Supp. 871 (C.D. Cal. 1986), for example, Filmation used copies of Disney's animation cells in the process of making their own animated film, but Filmation's final marketed product did not resemble Disney's work closely enough to infringe copyright. A court held that copying Disney's work during the production process in itself could be copyright infringement.

How is using a cell in animation even in the ballpark of using css html php zend framework to build an oop based web application. Disney owns cells...who owns OOP?
 
Internet Brands is talking about themselves again....

Defendant's Internet Brand's Opposition is a collection of: 1) novel theories lacking any legal support; 3) cropped quotes that change the meaning of the selected text; 3) mis-statements of fact and law; and 4) rantings intended to distract from the issues on this Motion, regarding alledged "discovery issues" that are so significant...
 
A lot of legal mumbo jumbo (the equivalent of an illusionist waving their right hand around to grab your attention while manipulating something with the left hand) but they are just digging into Darren, Colin, and Mert! :eek:

Page #7 said:
At the time Darby and Sullivan quit, Plaintiff had no reason to suspect that they were conspiring with the moles they had left behind to illegally transfer Plaintiff's confidential files. The fact that Darby and Sullivan did not return property to Plaintiff upon their departure does not indicate that they were conspiring with moles inside the company to steal its trade secrets.
Click to expand...
 
Page 7 said:
does not indicate that they were conspiring with moles inside the company to steal its trade secrets
Click to expand...

So are they actually accusing Kier and Mike of working here or something? Really?...I mean really?...someone watched too many James Bond movies before they wrote up that document....was there an Alfred Hitchcock marathon on the night before...i just don't get it.
 
EQnoble said:
So are they actually accusing Kier and Mike of working here or something? Really?...I mean really?...someone watched too many James Bond movies before they wrote up that document....was there an Alfred Hitchcock marathon on the night before...i just don't get it.
Click to expand...
It's actually much more ridiculous - it's not James Bond. RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) = The Sopranos. It's an accusation that several of the company's employed workers were allegedly engaged in an ongoing criminal enterprise, e.g. the Sopranos, conducting racketeering efforts dedicated to stealing VB 4 trade secrets. Despite these illegal activities by "made men" of the Soprano-XenForo Crime Syndicate, two of them (one who is still employed at vBSI) are NOT named as defendants. One can only wonder whether these two members of the Family struck a deal with the vBSI and also with DA Jack McCoy to squeal.
 
TheLaw said:
It's actually much more ridiculous - it's not James Bond. RICO = The Sopranos. It's an accusation that several of the company's employed workers were allegedly engaged in an ongoing criminal enterprise, e.g. the Sopranos, conducting racketeering efforts dedicated to stealing VB 4 trade secrets. Despite these illegal activities by "made men" of the Soprano-XenForo Crime Syndicate, two of them (one who is still employed at vBSI) are NOT named as defendants. One can only wonder whether these two members of the Family struck a deal with the vBSI and also with DA Jack McCoy to squeal.
Click to expand...
OMFG THAT IS JUST PRECIOUS!

But really I just read again and came to the part about Rico Predicates...

speaking of Rico and the sopranos...the folks who are carelessly throwing around serious accusations like they are a request to pass the butter... made me realize that they remind me of (in character and nick-name) Anthony Jr's uncle who sleeps with fish (Sal).
 
I wouldn't be surprised if the Judge drew an x thru this B.S. and sent it back to them. To me there seem to be statements that might interpreted by some as veiled accusations of incompetence of the Bench in their screed.
 
It just keeps going in circles, as though VB continue to express that they somehow own copyright on ideas such as, prefixes, notices, threads, posts, edit posts, upload a file, insert an image, use a WYSIWYG editor for ease of use, etc etc etc....

None of these are VB ideas to begin with... these ideas are in nearly every CMS / Blog / Forum type software available on the web today. You cannot copyright an idea that you did not think off and/or, you have not already expressly chased existing use of said ideas used in any other software prior to Xenforo being built, which they haven't.

Even if VB came up with something like "prefixes" as an example, then they must have launched prior suits against every software developer who is using prefixes within their community software, which is lots... and to my knowledge, they haven't... so they continue to have no excuse and only further target Xenforo uniquely because its an actual threat to them directly, for nothing other than Kier made VB what it is with 3.x, they screwed up and lost him, now he is making the same statement with Xenforo.

VB... seriously, quit the crap before you have zero customers left, let alone staff.
 
HydraulicJack said:
I wouldn't be surprised if the Judge drew an x thru this B.S. and sent it back to them. To me there seem to be statements that might interpreted by some as veiled accusations of incompetence of the Bench in their screed.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is incompetance...I think they have no case..and I also think they KNOW they have no case, but if the system is going to allow them to play dumb and go through every motion just to lengthen time (increase cost for xf)...well ...they seem to use the loopholes and then say in statement that xf is crying poor like Kier isn't a guy with a family trying to make a living.

It is really shameless that they accuse people of things as serious as they are (Rico...really) and then no one for their side will show up in court and say yes he did that here is the evidence. That should be a crime....last time I didn't show up to court I had a warrant affidavit out for my arrest with my name on it.

Someone please send ib a writ of prohibition to keep them from accusing people of things they can not prove. Also one to tell them they should never go into writing...well they should make sure to put their works in the fiction section.
 
What baffles me is VB's claim that Kier did not return certain documents to Lynne, when asked. Yet, VB does nowhere provide proof of which documents these are, nor proof that Kier did not return them.

The rest is just smoke and mirrors. The XF defense in my eyes stated that none of the claims made by vB were backed in the evidence they supplied. Rather than actually pointing out how and where the documents DO prove the claims, they retort by making up even more crap.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom