Internet Brands claims against XenForo

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm thinking more and more they already know they can't win, but do this for two main reasons:

- giving bad reputation (how suitable for vB) to XF and hopefully make their (vB's) customers believe XF isn't a honest company
- using their money (instead of their brains) to take money away from XF and making it hard for a smaller company to fight back

They already failed miserably in the first reasoning, and for the second part it remains to be seen how long this case is going to last.
 
TheLaw said:
Defence to what - that the damage was caused byXF was really caused by IB themselves because the customers found the lawsuit filing hideous? No, certainly not. In general, IB is alleging that XF does not have a legal right to exist and sold as an alternative to VB and that each sale represents the unauthorized sale that is the property of IB. As I said before, I haven't seen anything more than bare allegations and no specific facts.
Click to expand...

I agree. Please keep us informed of any details that you get.
 
TheLaw said:
I highly doubt that this will be considered a frivolous lawsuit. One has to stretch the limits to do so, unfortunately, at least in the US. I am sure that if IB used a high powered attorney/solicitor, the court would be hesitant to punish one of its own.

The real issue for smaller companies in cases where claims might be close to a sham is the fact that what might feel frivolous is not considered frivolous and punishable under the law. If a big company plaintiff blows $50,000 on legal fees to shut down a smaller competitor who cannot afford the legal costs, job is done and the merits of the case are never reached. It's called a legal and business strategy while others might consider it steamrolling an innocent defendant.

Dismissing a case is not easy if a plaintiff shows that the basic elements are present to assert that a claim could exist and then the case proceeds to "discovery" where the plaintiff can go on a fact finding mission to support the allegations. A judge may say "well... those claims are murky and I wouldn't take your odds of winning if I was a betting man... but it's your right to fund your lawsuit and have a jury decide based upon the evidence." Same problem ensues - while the plaintiff doesn't want to blow any more money than necessary, it might be worth it to bleed the defendant dry rather than lose the market of customers to the defendant.

I'm not passing judgment on either side. I'm just telling you like it is.
Click to expand...


You seem to miss the point that this is not America, the law courts here are very different. All the speculation should stop.
 
AdrianH said:
You seem to miss the point that this is not America, the law courts here are very different. All the speculation should stop.
Click to expand...
I haven't missed the point at all. America's court system is based on principles that originate from the English system. The laws of common sense usually dictate much of the basic law in most countries. The speculation about the case needs to stop because, as of right now, nobody even knows what IB is actually claiming other than a few vague allegations in a filing nobody has seen.
 
Just because the American system is based on the English system, it doesn't mean that there are no fundamental differences.
 
AnthonyCea said:
Michael, I was sued by a large publishing company and did not even retain a lawyer, I responded to each motion on my own, it took 2 years but eventually the case was won by me, not a cent paid to a law firm, the publisher dropped their case against me because I showed that they fraudulently billed me twice for services they never rendered to me in the first place, so they decided to end the case based on that response and my demand for a jury trial.
Click to expand...
Power to you!!!! :) Good job!!!!

In your case, there is a set amount of money which limited value of a lawsuit. If the publishing company realized that it would cost $20k to prosecute a claim for $10 and it's not even clear they would win, they drop the lawsuit since they'll more likely lose money than fighting it. The variables are different here. But still, that doesn't mean that the little guy can't do well in court such as you did!
 
AnthonyCea said:
Michael, I was sued by a large publishing company and did not even retain a lawyer, I responded to each motion on my own, it took 2 years but eventually the case was won by me, not a cent paid to a law firm, ...
Click to expand...

I took one case to the High Court (UK) top level without hoing to Parliament.
I won an incide tally set a precedent in law.

I did use a solicitor. The trick is to look for a good one who isn't at the top but ambitious. Package your case as "interesting" on its issues, promise publicity around it ... they love that. Lawyers take on some cases to add interest to their CV.

I've only ever lost one court case and that was when I was very ill for a year and not clearheaded.
I've fought cases for myself, for my child, for other families, and helped various people with theirs. Mo0stly the lawyers are more trouble than they are worth - and they ALWAYS overlook things.
It's not rocket science. Just careful paperwork.

Note. A lot of the posts here are talking American law. A lot of it is different and XF is a UK company. A case has to be filed on the homeground of the defendant.
Plus none of the devs were resident or staying in the USA for long enough during their IB contracts to support a USA based contract. An American employer has to submit to UK law if the employee lives here and does the majority of their work here. (I used to deal with this around people getting visas)

However the main thing is that IB haven't a hope of getting a case going. Both code experts and legal ones have analysed that to death. and no I'm not going all through that again. Done it already. Check past posts here by me and by pthers.
 
Shamil said:
Just because the American system is based on the English system, it doesn't mean that there are no fundamental differences.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But I'm saying that usually the differences are not with regard to basic procedure that affects people in the same way regardless of country. Every court system needs a way to provide parties a fair right to be heard with regard to a dispute. The screening process is designed to do the same thing.
 
As long as you respond to each motion the case drags on for years.

Even a layman can do this by looking at legal case responses and learn to list causes of action in a counter lawsuit, most of the time a judge will sit down and read your response just as he does with one filed by a lawyer, sometimes they will also look at it and tell you to hire a lawyer.
 
TheLaw said:
Agreed. But I'm saying that usually the differences are not with regard to basic procedure that affects people in the same way regardless of country. Every court system needs a way to provide parties a fair right to be heard with regard to a dispute. The screening process is designed to do the same thing.
Click to expand...

That is true. The problem is over hear, the courts will favour a UK business, even more so, as it's a start-up.
 
Shamil said:
That is true. The problem is over hear, the courts will favour a UK business, even more so, as it's a start-up.
Click to expand...
The "unofficial home field advantage" is an issue in every jurisdiction, my friend. :) Bottom line is that most courts will not blatantly disregard the law, especially when it involves steamrolling a big foreign business that may be represented by some big time English solicitor who plays golf regularly with the judiciary! But the fact is I'm just talking about law, not politics or other elements that may or may not shape the outcome.

I think we should all chill out and wait and see. Lots of interesting new things to talk about here. :)
 
TheLaw said:
The "unofficial home field advantage" is an issue in every jurisdiction, my friend. :) Bottom line is that most courts will not blatantly disregard the law, especially when it involves steamrolling a big foreign business that may be represented by some big time English solicitor who plays golf regularly with the judiciary! But the fact is I'm just talking about law, not politics or other elements that may or may not shape the outcome.

I think we should all chill out and wait and see. Lots of interesting new things to talk about here. :)
Click to expand...

I too think we should chill out, but do remember that IB are already being investigated by the UK authorities.
 
AnthonyCea said:
Michael, I was sued by a large publishing company and did not even retain a lawyer, I responded to each motion on my own, it took 2 years but eventually the case was won by me, not a cent paid to a law firm, the publisher dropped their case against me because I showed that they fraudulently billed me twice for services they never rendered to me in the first place, so they decided to end the case based on that response and my demand for a jury trial.
Click to expand...

I have had huge success in court against debt collectors and counter sued them every step of the way. When you file a counter claim things change drastically and they are more willing to 'negotiate' rather than lose in open court. Well, that's how it works in NYC Civil court at least. And I also filed for attorney's fees and I did not have an attorney and never paid for one but as a 'pro se' litigant certain rules afford you the right to file for attorney's fees because you have to take the time to research the law and file motions as any attorney would.

Of course, as officers of the court, some attorneys will not engage in a strategy that might cause harm to the opposing attorney. This is sometimes the drawback to using attorneys if you give them full control of your case and are not 100% aware of your rights.

As for this case in particular, IB would have to show that the code that runs xF is line for line identical to even begin to consider a copyright case. It is highly doubtful that this is the case. IB would have had better luck filing patent infringement suite if they indeed owned the patents that show their company developed this technology. Again, very doubtful.

I stand by my opinion that this case if frivolous and a misuse of the court system because I'm certain that the code behind xF is not identical to that which runs vB. Just because the outcome is a messaging forum and all have similar features that at first glance look similar doesn't mean the code behind was lifted off of vB. I mean xF runs and has features vB can only dream of at this point and they are still in beta! :D

Come on now. Hopefully the courts will realize what this suit really entails and throw it out on its arse! :D
 
Well i finally got through all 85 pages. wow, not much left to comment on. But I did want to say I support xF and will be ordering my licenses as soon as the funds become available.. Ive been having plenty of issues to deal with since i downgraded to 4.0.x. At one time i had no intentions of moving a cpl particular sites to x but there is very little doubt left in my mind about what i am going to do in the future regarding xF and vB.. I have also decided that i will not be selling of my vB licenses. Id rather box them permanently. (Deep Freeze) so my intentions to buy one license has become three maybe more over time.. I still really need to look under the hood.

Also thanks specifically to IB, i decided long ago i wont be an early adopter of any future software purchases.. But now that im done reading this thread (12 hrs) i can now begin to catch up on some of the early reactions to finally having the software in peoples hands..

Live long and prosper xF... lol will the Vulcan race sue me now???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom