California Case Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wondered about that from the day the claim was originally made.

I know the economy is tough right now but if I were Freddie, I am not sure how I could continue working for a company that made such allegations about me in an ongoing lawsuit.


As for the 12 million in loses -- how exactly did they come up with that number? They suckered the majority of people into buying vb4 during the presale and under the new model they devised - they would not see yearly renewals until vb5 is released. The only way I can see them reaching that number is if they included those who elected -not- to purchase the additional premium addon's that are now being offered like the mobile suite.
 
I can't believe he's still working for them, seems very odd.

As for the 12 million, maybe they wasted that offshoring the development to China? (Wasn't that something Kier said in his testimony?)
 
It seems to me that Internet Brand's strategy is simply to bleed Xenforo dry. Lawsuits are expensive and many businesses use them (in the US) as a financial weapon against their competitors to put people out of business! How shameful. I hope Xenforo later counter sues and gets all their money back and MORE! Internet Brands lawsuit itself is WHAT IS DAMAGING their own company. Vbulletin's reputation as a stellar top-notch piece of forum software has been forever ruined by their own hands.
 
Mert said:
Won't this actually extend the case and somehow allow vbulletin to achieve their target ( getting xenforo focused and spend money on the case ) ?
Click to expand...

A later suit would.....XF could have filed a simultaneous cross claim to the suit. However, they did not. In any case, depending on how the case resolves, XF can still apply for attorney's fees and costs. They have asked the court to award these in the Answer.
 
My concern is with having a jury trial, as software is a complicated issue and normal joe schmoes will just assume it's all the same and that stuff was stolen (which is wasn't)! A judge may be able to discern the difference but average people might not. I'm sure Internet Brands planned it this way all along.
 
Deepmartini said:
My concern is with having a jury trial, as software is a complicated issue and normal joe schmoes will just assume it's all the same and that stuff was stolen (which is wasn't)! A judge may be able to discern the difference but average people might not. I'm sure Internet Brands planned it this way all along.
Click to expand...
Most judges have less understanding of technology than your average jury.
 
Remember though, if enough evidence is not adduced at trial to support the claim, the judge will not let the jury decide. The law favors letting claims go forward to trial IF there is a plausible basis for the claim (and in deciding this they will assume what the plaintiff claims is true). This is a simplification, but is good enough for discussion purposes. So, in order to avoid appeals from cases that are borderline, many judges will let the case go to trial. But, if at trial there is no evidence supporting the claim, the judge will enter judgment in favor of the defendant.

Not saying that it will happen this way, but I would not assume either that this would reach a jury.
 
CivilWarTalk said:
This is odd, what if IB pays Freddy to admit that he and the other defendants are guilty? Isn't this a conflict of interest?
Click to expand...
And how much money do you think it would require for him to willingly take on the risk of going to jail for lying under oath? {rolls eyes} Far more than IB would be willing to pay. :)
 
digitalpoint said:
And how much money do you think it would require for him to willingly take on the risk of going to jail for lying under oath? {rolls eyes} Far more than IB would be willing to pay. :)
Click to expand...

Even still, it doesn't need to be money, it could be his job, I still think it's a conflict the judge should plainly see.
 
CivilWarTalk said:
Even still, it doesn't need to be money, it could be his job, I still think it's a conflict the judge should plainly see.
Click to expand...
He could find a job somewhere else if it came to that. Imagine if your employer came to you asking you to risk jail time and that you should lie under oath. He could quit at that point and IB would be forced to continue to pay his salary under false employment termination laws.

Either way, why are we even talking about "what if" someone lies under oath? lol Clearly even CTO wasn't willing to lie under oath... he simply refused to answer any questions under oath. :) http://gracelaw.com/XenForo-Rosenblum.html
 
I have a hard time thinking how any uncorroborated testimony would help IB much. Not sure I have thought of every conceivable statement, but my thought is that anything testified to would still require some objective evidence to be worth anything.
 
Forsaken said:
Most judges have less understanding of technology than your average jury.
Click to expand...
There was an interesting article here in the UK recently where an academic had followed judges for a number of weeks, and found they were actually far more aware of what was going on than your average citizen, for the simple reason that they had so many different things and people appearing in their courts. Obviously, that's the UK and not US, but I wouldn't immediately rule the judges out just because the image in the press of them isn't always great (and certainly the ones I've met, including those on our supreme court, are very much on the ball).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom