View Single Post
Old 04-26-2011, 09:12 AM  
davecummings
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by NemesisEnforcer View Post
My point exactly. FSC does not do that. Look at their previous effort with 2257, you had to join FSC to be included. That's what they envision for the future as well.

Per chance, did you happen to catch who won both the Superbowl and World Series in 2012 or 2013?
As one of the three plaintiffs against DOJ, I was in the room that June day of 2005 in Denver with all the attorneys when FSC Attorney Paul Cambria was negotiating on the phone with DOJ.

In order to have legal "Standing" with anything that DOJ might agree to, and since DOJ would only agree to FSC members being included, Paul got DOJ to agree to members through a date that was a few days into the future; no, it was NOT a FSC ploy to get new members, it was an attempt to provide coverage for those non-members who wanted to be included in any helpful decisions that the Court might agree to. Don't blame FSC, blame DOJ which seemed to be wanting to exclude non-members from a TRO against 2257 enforcement. I was there and witnessed FSC trying to help EVERYONE, not just active members.
__________________
Dave Cummings
www.davecummings.com
www.davecummings.tv
San Diego

Email--- [email protected]
davecummings is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote