BillyVance 35 #1 February 14, 2009 QuoteThe thing is someone already posted comments on the judges ruling. That thread was recycled. I asked that it be recycled because the ruling was sealed at the time. It has now been unsealed and is now available. Here is the 56 page document. I will repost the summary that was originally posted next."Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #2 February 14, 2009 Skydive Arizona's Lanham Act 43(a) claim The court granted summary judgment in Skydive Arizona favor on Lanham Act Section 43(a) claim. The Defendants' liability has been established. On the issue of damages, the Court ruled that it is now awarding Skydive Arizona profits on all of the defendant's sales activities attributable to Arizona, and the defendant's have the burden of proof on showing which of its total sales are not attributable to Arizona. They have 30 days to submit such proof. On the issue of whether Skydive Arizona will get an award of all of the Defendants' profits nationwide, the Court ruled that "in the absence of bad faith and willful infringement (which has yet to be determined), the Court should limit Plaintiff's recovery to those profits obtained from Defendants' business operations in Arizona, i.e., Defendants' Arizona-related sales." Order, at page 52, lines 18-25. The Court said, "the Court cannot determine at this time whether a further award of additional profits is necessary to ensure deterrence." Order, at page 53, lines 2-4. Trial will be set on the issues of bad faith and willfulness, with liability having already been established, and based on the evidence presented at trial, the Court will decide whether a further award of additional profits is necessary to effectuate the Lanham Act's policy of deterrence. The Court agrees that "the trial court's primary function should center on making any violations of the Lanham Act unprofitable to the infringing party." Order, at page 52, line 28 to page 53, line 1. The Defendants' Counterclaim Against Larry Hill The court granted summary judgment in Larry Hill's favor on the counterclaims asserted against Larry Hill personally. Other Motions All other summary judgment motions were denied. The Court reaffirmed its ruling that it has personal jurisdiction over the individual defendants. In response to one of Skydive Arizona's motions, the Court has ordered the Defendants to produce, no later than 30 days from now, documentation to support their contentions made in response to Skydive Arizona's motion to freeze assets concerning their financial assets [i.e., (1) their annual revenue is in excess of $5,000,000; and (2) the value of the company is in excess of $5,000,000]; and the Defendants must produce documentation concerning "any transfer of assets between Defendants or between Defendants and third-parties." Order, page 54. Good day for Skydive Arizona...BAD day for Skyride"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jumpdude 0 #3 February 14, 2009 This is a damn good start and is a good example of what IS good for the Skydiving community.Refuse to Lose!!! Failure is NOT an option! 1800skyrideripoff.com Nashvilleskydiving.org Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #4 February 14, 2009 I wonder if "assets" includes web page ownership.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jumpdude 0 #5 February 14, 2009 QuoteI wonder if "assets" includes web page ownership. I hope!Refuse to Lose!!! Failure is NOT an option! 1800skyrideripoff.com Nashvilleskydiving.org Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #6 February 14, 2009 To bad you didn't just start a new thread so people would have to wade through 2 pages of bullshit to find the real news.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
3331 137 #7 February 14, 2009 Take time to read the unsealed order Billy Vance attached to his post. I printed it out and like most legal documents it has to be translated from English to English. Jan Meyer is in the details and surprisingly the name Carbone is there too. I've always believed in poetic justice, it just takes too long. I Jumped with the guys who invented Skydiving. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #8 February 14, 2009 QuoteTo bad you didn't just start a new thread so people would have to wade through 2 pages of bullshit to find the real news. Well maybe BillVon could edit the thread title to show the court order has been unsealed and document attached, etc... Or split the thread off starting with my post including the attachment to a new thread..."Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johndh1 0 #9 February 14, 2009 One of my favorite statements is p. 11, beginning line 3, where the obvious frustration of the court in dealing with the B & C shows: "It is disconcerting and dispiriting that the Individual Defendants bring the instant renewed motion to dismiss..." their personal responsibility for the actions of Skyride, etc. Didn't work, though.Roll Tide Roll Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt.Slog 0 #10 February 15, 2009 fascinating reading. Thanks, BV. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
