I really don't think it should be discussed.
It's difficult to know where a line should be drawn, as Kier posted in the statement earlier, "please refrain as far as possible from speculating upon aspects of the case that are
not yet public knowledge."
It is, however, now public knowledge and is being discussed across the road.
All I'll add here is what I've posted over there since reading the claim filed in the US court, and that is:
There’re a lot of allegations, and in particular the claim that the xF code was being worked on prior to employment ending with Jelsoft, that even if true, are going to be very hard or impossible to prove.
I had a similar document served on me once, it was actually a counter-claim against action I was talking against a large company I had sold a business to, it had allsorts of allegations that would have appeared very serious to any third party reading it.
However, I knew those allegations were nonsense and they had not a hope in hell of proving them, they were just trying to scare me off, and it dragged on for months. About a week before the court case they dropped their case and made an offer of 80% of what I was claiming. This was increased to 95% a couple of days later and finally 100% the day before the case.
They also had to pay all my legal costs, which I had covered under legal expenses insurance anyway.
The moral of this story – don’t take anything you read in such documents on face value, only time will tell.
