Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

vbAdvanced Gallery - Speculation No Longer

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mike Sullivan
    replied
    Complain all you want, but I think it's time for this thread to bow out...

    Leave a comment:


  • ChrisLM2001
    replied
    Originally posted by Vtec44
    Protecting your product is one thing, you can sue and obtain the script back, but going after a person's personal properties is just a bit harsh.
    It's a classic example of a SLAPP suit. Designed to not only get there's, but to screw who they accused. Classic marker of that is reaching for more than the worth of the actual damages, and making it a personal screw.

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • joeychgo
    replied
    Originally posted by ChrisLM2001
    Looks like it's something, considering just going after the script (let alone $250,000) wasn't enough.

    Just asking for what they claim is theirs and court expenses is enough. Going for momma's wedding ring and stuff, isn't about punishment, it's about screwing a rival.

    Chris

    or about intimidating a defendant to the point that he just gives up.

    Leave a comment:


  • ChrisLM2001
    replied
    Originally posted by ManagerJosh
    Perhaps Personal vendette?
    Looks like it's something, considering just going after the script (let alone $250,000) wasn't enough.

    Just asking for what they claim is theirs and court expenses is enough. Going for momma's wedding ring and stuff, isn't about punishment, it's about screwing a rival.

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • steven s
    replied
    I think I'll wait for the movie to come out.

    Leave a comment:


  • ManagerJosh
    replied
    Originally posted by Vtec44
    As a business owner, I can totally understand the concept of having a corporate protection "umbrella". What I don't understand is why would someone want to go after a person's personal properties. Protecting your product is one thing, you can sue and obtain the script back, but going after a person's personal properties is just a bit harsh.
    Perhaps Personal vendette?

    Leave a comment:


  • Vtec44
    replied
    Originally posted by ChrisLM2001
    Whoa!

    In case folks don't understand: being incorporated gives an owner certain protections from being sued -- like their personal assets can't be touched (their home, car, boat, etc.) to pay back debts or penalities. It's why folks incorporate (plus gain it's tax advantages).

    Chris
    As a business owner, I can totally understand the concept of having a corporate protection "umbrella". What I don't understand is why would someone want to go after a person's personal properties. Protecting your product is one thing, you can sue and obtain the script back, but going after a person's personal properties is just a bit harsh.

    Leave a comment:


  • ChrisLM2001
    replied
    Originally posted by BrentWilson
    Please, someone tell me what purpose this thread serves in the PP vs. VBGallery lawsuit that is over and done with.
    It's a public record of all those who are participating. It not only shows who's not objective and ugly, it shows what no court document can -- the behavior of the participants in question.

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Jose Amaral Rego
    replied
    Originally posted by ChrisLM2001
    Whoa!

    In case folks don't understand: being incorporated gives an owner certain protections from being sued -- like their personal assets can't be touched (their home, car, boat, etc.) to pay back debts or penalities. It's why folks incorporate (plus gain it's tax advantages).

    Chris
    Another way while still incorporate is just change your company name every 6months to aviod beening sued.

    Leave a comment:


  • ChrisLM2001
    replied
    Originally posted by joeychgo
    Oh, and for those of you thinking that PP wasnt in this for the money. Let me offer this. #14 in the complaint is an attempt by PP to break the corporate veil of plurplanet. That means, if successful, not only could brian have lost the script and any assets of the company, but PP could have taken his house, cars, and anything else Brian owns to satisfy the judgement. So PP made this about alot more then just the script. And believe me, that is a real eye opener when you realize you could lose alot more then just the script.
    Whoa!

    In case folks don't understand: being incorporated gives an owner certain protections from being sued -- like their personal assets can't be touched (their home, car, boat, etc.) to pay back debts or penalities. It's why folks incorporate (plus gain it's tax advantages).

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • ChrisLM2001
    replied
    Originally posted by BrentWilson
    Why are you fighting this tooth and nail and what do you hope to gain out of this?
    I gave you the reason. Shouting won't make it any louder.

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Vtec44
    replied
    Originally posted by BrentWilson
    You are not getting vBadvanced Gallery back!!!! You are not offering evidence to prove him innocent just like others in this thread are not offering evidence to prove him guilty, all you seem to be doing is trying to defend Brian, some guy you have never met that may or may not have actually done what the lawsuit claims.
    Then stop reading this thread!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Zonex
    replied
    Oh crap, leave the damn thing open. Close, close, close. Let people post if they want to.

    Leave a comment:


  • BamaStangGuy
    replied
    Originally posted by joeychgo
    I would think that loaning the PP software has nothing to do with the case in reality.

    Someone please explain to me how brian allegedly loaning his copy of PP to someone else has any bearing on whether or not he violated copyright in regard to vbgallery....

    The 2 are totally unrelated.

    Also, let me remind people - Brian didnt just make that statemnt quoted in the complaint. That statement was part of a conversation. Why didnt they include the whole conversation? We dont know in what context those statements were made. The conversatio surrounding it could easily change the meaning of what was sad.

    Oh, and for those of you thinking that PP wasnt in this for the money. Let me offer this. #14 in the complaint is an attempt by PP to break the corporate veil of plurplanet. That means, if successful, not only could brian have lost the script and any assets of the company, but PP could have taken his house, cars, and anything else Brian owns to satisfy the judgement. So PP made this about alot more then just the script. And believe me, that is a real eye opener when you realize you could lose alot more then just the script.

    These cases are rarely an open and shut, one side is all right and the other is all wrong. I would guess that no matter who won, the other side would not be paying attorney's fees of the winner. Those kinds of awards are usually reserved for truly frivalous lawsuits.

    I remind everyone, you are not seeing ANY evidence, only the accusation. MY read on the complaint sounds to me like Brian was using PP and set out to develop something better for himself, eventually rewriting the entire code and developing a product he discovered could be resold. This says to me that he originally did not plan to resell the software, and as he got into developing it more and more, began to make it more his own until it no longer had any code in it that was original to the software.

    I dont know if thats the case or not, but merely my speculation. I also suspect strongly that PP through so much legal power at Brian that even if Brian won the case, it would have cost him far more then the software was worth. I know Brian had already spent in excess of $30k on his defense. Should he spend another $100k on a trial? What does he win then? Its called a bad risk.

    Again, just speculation - nothing more, but something to consider and debate. I am not trying to defend Brian nor attack PP. But alot of people were originally quite pissed at Brian and thought he was a sellout. Clearly, that is not the case.
    Speculation is all it is, just like you said.

    Close the thread already. What purpose does it serve.

    Please, someone tell me what purpose this thread serves in the PP vs. VBGallery lawsuit that is over and done with.

    If you want opinions you got them! If you want anything more than that you are wishfully thinking.

    Leave a comment:


  • joeychgo
    replied
    I would think that loaning the PP software has nothing to do with the case in reality.

    Someone please explain to me how brian allegedly loaning his copy of PP to someone else has any bearing on whether or not he violated copyright in regard to vbgallery....

    The 2 are totally unrelated.

    Also, let me remind people - Brian didnt just make that statemnt quoted in the complaint. That statement was part of a conversation. Why didnt they include the whole conversation? We dont know in what context those statements were made. The conversatio surrounding it could easily change the meaning of what was sad.

    Oh, and for those of you thinking that PP wasnt in this for the money. Let me offer this. #14 in the complaint is an attempt by PP to break the corporate veil of plurplanet. That means, if successful, not only could brian have lost the script and any assets of the company, but PP could have taken his house, cars, and anything else Brian owns to satisfy the judgement. So PP made this about alot more then just the script. And believe me, that is a real eye opener when you realize you could lose alot more then just the script.

    These cases are rarely an open and shut, one side is all right and the other is all wrong. I would guess that no matter who won, the other side would not be paying attorney's fees of the winner. Those kinds of awards are usually reserved for truly frivalous lawsuits.

    I remind everyone, you are not seeing ANY evidence, only the accusation. MY read on the complaint sounds to me like Brian was using PP and set out to develop something better for himself, eventually rewriting the entire code and developing a product he discovered could be resold. This says to me that he originally did not plan to resell the software, and as he got into developing it more and more, began to make it more his own until it no longer had any code in it that was original to the software.

    I dont know if thats the case or not, but merely my speculation. I also suspect strongly that PP through so much legal power at Brian that even if Brian won the case, it would have cost him far more then the software was worth. I know Brian had already spent in excess of $30k on his defense. Should he spend another $100k on a trial? What does he win then? Its called a bad risk.

    Again, just speculation - nothing more, but something to consider and debate. I am not trying to defend Brian nor attack PP. But alot of people were originally quite pissed at Brian and thought he was a sellout. Clearly, that is not the case.

    Leave a comment:

Related Topics

Collapse

  • DemOnstar
    Gzip, how to?
    by DemOnstar
    Compressing the following resources with gzip could reduce their transfer size by 354.3KiB (77% reduction).



    How do I compress all of this for optimization? Does it all sit...
    Sun 16th Dec '12, 8:15pm
Working...
X