Hi David -
Below was forwarded to me - as a long time Decluder I am very
disappointed in seeing something like this -
-Nick
http://dozierinternetlawpc.cybertriallawyer.com/computer-lawyer
DECLUDE, INC. AND DNSSTUFF, LLC. v. R. SCOTT PERRY DISTRICT OF
MASSACHUSETTS (BOSTON)
I am not a lawyer so dont understand 100%.
So Scott Perry agreed to sell the code but kept a copy anyway and when the
new owners of Declude went to raise capital they found out that Scott Perry
had already developed an additional product with the code they had bought.
I dont see the problem
From whats posted below I draw the same conclusion as you Craig.
Craig Edmonds wrote:
I am not a lawyer so dont understand 100%.
So Scott Perry agreed to sell the code but kept a copy anyway and when
the new owners of Declude went to raise capital they found out that
Scott Perry had
Hi,
Well, we are all outsiders - and don't know what transpired.
An alternate scenario would be - the author developed Declude, which of
course contains many generic TCP functions, such as DNS lookups to check
RBLS, to check MX records, to check SPF, etc. etc. The author would have
Did he keep a copy of the code, or did he just use libraries he developed
through the years, as all programmers do, that he used for all of his
programming? It's not possible to tell that without an in-depth review of
source code for both products.
Also, bear in mind that programmers tend to
Hi Craig,
Craig Edmonds wrote:
I am not a lawyer so dont understand 100%.
So Scott Perry agreed to sell the code but kept a copy anyway and when
the new owners of Declude went to raise capital they found out that
Scott Perry had already developed an additional product with the code
they
Well, Darin - it may be relevant to look at the timeline.
Example:
1. Declude is developed
2. Declude is purchased
3. Developer keeps source code and NOW starts to reuse it to develop
DNSstuff.com
vs.
1. Declude is developed
2. DNSstuff is developed
Perhaps suing your partners is a Rich Person(tm) idea of good Corporate
Stewardship(tm). It certainly is a far cry from supporting, promoting,
and improving the product line, you know, the normal way a company Earns
Money(tm).
Andrew.
From: [EMAIL
#2 was certainly the scenario.
So what's the deal. Was or is Scott being bullied out of both of his
businesses? Didn't Scott maintain an equity stake in both companies?
That write up on the case just sounds like thievery.
Matt
Andy Schmidt wrote:
Well, Darin -- it may be relevant to
We all know the second example is the timeline...
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: Andy Schmidt
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Re:Declude vs Perry (ES)
Well, Darin - it may be relevant to look at the
And we all know that there will not be posts regarding the suit from any of the
parties.
-d
- Original Message -
From: Darin Cox
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Re:Declude vs Perry (ES)
We all
11 matches
Mail list logo
