dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

North York, ON
reply to apvm

Re: Why we are not opposing motion on Monday.

said by apvm:

said by resa1983:

Let me just state that I didn't see this Christine Dobby in the court room for the first hearing. 2nd or 3rd hand information is notoriously suspect. David however was in the courtroom sitting beside me, and taking a TON of notes.

As for Teksavvy's plans not to fight the court order... Marc may have publicly announced not to fight it before the first court date, but circumstances changed, and they did fight it a bit during the first court hearing. Teksavvy's lawyers gave multiple reasons as to why they were fighting it as well. The judge also gave multiple reasons as to why he was adjourning it, all of which were Teksavvy's reasons for fighting the court order.

There were multiple reasons as to the extension. Circumstances changed from between when the original post was made, and the court date. None of which were lies.

I really would read David's post and think about it..

They did not fight for you but fight for themselves because they made a mistake and send the notice to more than 40 of their customers.

Which they didn't need to do. They could have started the IP -> customer name, and had it ready & waiting for when the court order was handed out. By law, Teksavvy doesn't even need to inform you until after the court order's signed because Notice and Notice isn't law yet.

That has happened twice now with other copytroll suits in the last 1 1/2 years.
Battle.net Tech Support MVP