Let's play the what if game.. XclusiveCash vs NATS - GoFuckYourself.com

jact · 08-24-2006, 06:42 PM

Let's say for a second that XclusiveCash wins the $5M settlement from TMM, would TMM be in a financial position to continue their business? If not, what would happen to NATS? All the programs that run NATS?

I'm not saying either way if they have a case or not, I'm simply curious what if...

Tempest · 08-24-2006, 06:49 PM

The best defense is a good offense... If I was NATs I'd be tempted to bring some suits against Xclusive just for the hell of it.

Bruce_Miller · 08-24-2006, 06:50 PM

let's play the... "I won't touch that with a 10' pole"

Bruce_Miller · 08-24-2006, 06:50 PM

let's play the... "I won't touch that with a 10' pole"

DirtyJ_ExtendedMarketing · 08-24-2006, 06:50 PM

Not that I know what Im talking about, but I believe if there wasnt a clause in the contract saying they could do what they did, TMM is fucked.. and everyone who is running nats should start working on their backup system...

Doctor Dre · 08-24-2006, 06:52 PM

I somehow doubt the suit will go anywhere.

Biggy · 08-24-2006, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

I somehow doubt the suit will go anywhere.

yeah, i expect it to get thrown out in court. i read thru a lot of the complaint. truth is the best defense. nats said there was a discrepancy, and they were met with resistance and profanity and that they terminated their license. they said nothing more.

KrisKross · 08-24-2006, 06:56 PM

They're suing for $5 mil? Talk about exorbitant. Does the program even pull in $1 mil a year from affiliates? I'd be surprised.

Anyone who has spent a couple of months on GFY knows that defamation of character is worthless around here. Take a look at Ramos and Rinaldo for proof. Hell, Gary and Grimshawn could start posting here again and most people wouldn't even know who they were, let alone care about what they did.

studiocritic · 08-24-2006, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

I somehow doubt the suit will go anywhere.

The thread is still interesting..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quick Buck

We personally purchased non expiring licenses for a sizable, one time upfront sum because we didn't want to deal with licensing headaches and knew we'd be around long enough to make it worth it.

Weren't we suprised when suddenly our admin stopped working cause... suprise suprise, it wasnt really a perpetual license but a 3 month license that we had to "request" be updated every 3 months.

Doesn't this mean if NATS folds.. even people who paid for permanent licenses would still be SOL within 90 days? (Assuming QB's account is accurate)

Miguel T · 08-24-2006, 07:06 PM

Shit, $5mil is alot of money... They're fucked up!

mailman · 08-24-2006, 07:06 PM

I still cant belive people seem to belive XC. I mean I could be wrong but Nats is a much larger program out of the 2 and they have NOTHING to gain by going after XC so why go after them unless there was a discrepancy?

XC stays quiet and trys to exploit the situation and walk away with 5 million?

studiocritic · 08-24-2006, 08:28 PM

bump?

marketsmart · 08-24-2006, 08:33 PM

i think its too early to speak without concrete facts. the only facts so far are that NR is sueing and that nats terminated their account. anything else is only speculation imo...

Adult Warden · 08-24-2006, 08:36 PM

I don't see the lawsuit going anywhere

NATS has more to loose then XC...why would NATS put themselfs at risk without legal counsel...anyone who knows John knows he isn't stupid...

Good luck to XC...they are going to need it...

DateDoc · 08-24-2006, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mailman

I still cant belive people seem to belive XC. I mean I could be wrong but Nats is a much larger program out of the 2 and they have NOTHING to gain by going after XC so why go after them unless there was a discrepancy?

XC stays quiet and trys to exploit the situation and walk away with 5 million?

If someone does something to you that you think causes you or your business harm and you think you may end up suing them keep quiet and let your atty speak for you. XC has done everything their atty could have hoped for by keeping their mouth shut.

spacedog · 08-24-2006, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adult Warden

I don't see the lawsuit going anywhere

NATS has more to loose then XC...why would NATS put themselfs at risk without legal counsel...anyone who knows John knows he isn't stupid...

Good luck to XC...they are going to need it...

No, but he is one mouthy fucking sonofabitch & this time his cocky attitude got him in trouble.

JMM · 08-24-2006, 08:44 PM

In my opinion, I believe that the suit is without merit.

That being said...

I have known Tucker for a long time, I don't see him as being dishonest, not for a second.

That being said...

I don't believe Tucker was involved in the day to day operation of the program. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. If there WAS dishonesty, I would bet that Tucker was not involved.

As to the NATS issue, I recall a conversation I had with NATS before we started using their software and I specifically asked, what happens if you go out of business? The answer as I recall was that a copy of the source code and a lifetime permanent license was on file with their attorney and that should that happen, all current licensees would receive them.

My memory could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that it is not.

Did I protect myself enough with my wording in this post?

dissipate · 08-24-2006, 08:46 PM

The truth is nothing is going to happen. John posted factual information, the plaintiff is fucked.

Quick Buck · 08-24-2006, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mailman

I mean I could be wrong but Nats is a much larger program out of the 2 and they have NOTHING to gain by going after XC so why go after them unless there was a discrepancy?

simple... ego.

Quick Buck · 08-24-2006, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMM

As to the NATS issue, I recall a conversation I had with NATS before we started using their software and I specifically asked, what happens if you go out of business? The answer as I recall was that a copy of the source code and a lifetime permanent license was on file with their attorney and that should that happen, all current licensees would receive them.

Is it in the contract?

Quick Buck · 08-24-2006, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adult Warden

NATS has more to loose then XC...why would NATS put themselfs at risk without legal counsel...anyone who knows John knows he isn't stupid...

stupid no. ego.. yes. better people have let their ego ruin things.

i wouldnt be so quick to assume that everything he posts was reviewed by a lawyer... or that a lawyer ever gave them any advice at all about their product or contracts.

JMM · 08-24-2006, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quick Buck

Is it in the contract?

Don't know. This was a verbal conversation.

All our non-essential paperwork is still in storage, have to dig it out.

jact · 08-24-2006, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marketsmart

i think its too early to speak without concrete facts. the only facts so far are that NR is sueing and that nats terminated their account. anything else is only speculation imo...

Nobody's asking about facts, we're playing what if. I'm just curious what people think about this possible outcome. I personally wish it had been able to have been solved before the post was ever made.

marketsmart · 08-24-2006, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

Nobody's asking about facts, we're playing what if. I'm just curious what people think about this possible outcome. I personally wish it had been able to have been solved before the post was ever made.

ok then heres a what if...

if it was shaving, then NR is fucked

if it was due to an error on NATS system or via processor, then NATS is fucked

there is also another possability that i wont go into that no one has mentioned yet...

PMdave · 08-24-2006, 09:27 PM

If xc wins NATS programs are fucked unless they have a back-up in place. The sourcecode being with their att. is probably worth nothing. Programs that have a programmer on their payroll that understands the source and knows how to install it will probably using a custom script.
In that case 90% of the NATS program owner probably got what they deserved as they were flowing with the "we use nats thus cannot shave"-flow TMM created instead of building a solod reputation. TMM got their spin to the point that if you werent't using them you were most lightly shaving in the eyes of a large percentage of webmasters.

In case xc looses... well what do they have to loose at this point?

Scootermuze · 08-24-2006, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KrisKross

........
Anyone who has spent a couple of months on GFY knows that defamation of character is worthless around here. .....

Unless they file a defamation or libel suit... It's just that nobody pursues such..
til now...
But I think that issue was just something to add to the case to give it more credance.. Lawyers like to stack issues; knowing some may be thrown out, while others may me accepted..

WiredGuy · 08-24-2006, 11:45 PM

As I understood it, NATS did make a posting ages ago saying that the source code would be entrusted to their lawfirm in such a case. As to what would happen from there, I have no clue. I doubt the lawfirm would have a clue either.
WG

Pete-KT · 08-24-2006, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

As I understood it, NATS did make a posting ages ago saying that the source code would be entrusted to their lawfirm in such a case. As to what would happen from there, I have no clue. I doubt the lawfirm would have a clue either.
WG

that is correct, i have talked to charlie about this, If something were to happen to nats, every program running it would get the full un-encrypted and no license version of nats to use on there end

08-24-2006, 06:42 PM	#1
jact Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Oakville, Canada Posts: 9,134	Let's play the what if game.. XclusiveCash vs NATS Let's say for a second that XclusiveCash wins the $5M settlement from TMM, would TMM be in a financial position to continue their business? If not, what would happen to NATS? All the programs that run NATS? I'm not saying either way if they have a case or not, I'm simply curious what if... __________________ Free agent

08-24-2006, 06:50 PM	#5
DirtyJ_ExtendedMarketing Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 375	Not that I know what Im talking about, but I believe if there wasnt a clause in the contract saying they could do what they did, TMM is fucked.. and everyone who is running nats should start working on their backup system... __________________ High Quality Domains for Sale - No Reserve Prices - Many ANY Offer Part vampire, Part warrior, Carnivore and voyeur

08-24-2006, 06:56 PM	#8
KrisKross Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 5,024	They're suing for $5 mil? Talk about exorbitant. Does the program even pull in $1 mil a year from affiliates? I'd be surprised. Anyone who has spent a couple of months on GFY knows that defamation of character is worthless around here. Take a look at Ramos and Rinaldo for proof. Hell, Gary and Grimshawn could start posting here again and most people wouldn't even know who they were, let alone care about what they did. __________________

08-24-2006, 07:06 PM	#10
Miguel T ♦ Web Developer ♦ Industry Role: Join Date: May 2005 Location: Full-Stack Developer Posts: 12,472	Shit, $5mil is alot of money... They're fucked up! __________________ Full Stack Webdeveloper: HTML5/CSS3, jQuery, AJAX, ElevatedX, NATS, MechBunny, Wordpress

08-24-2006, 08:28 PM	#12
studiocritic Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Irvine, CA Posts: 2,442	bump? __________________ 254342256

08-24-2006, 06:49 PM	#2
Tempest Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2004 Location: West Coast, Canada. Posts: 10,217	The best defense is a good offense... If I was NATs I'd be tempted to bring some suits against Xclusive just for the hell of it.

08-24-2006, 06:50 PM	#3
Bruce_Miller Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: 4REALCASH.COM Posts: 783	let's play the... "I won't touch that with a 10' pole"

08-24-2006, 07:06 PM	#11
mailman Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 6,311	I still cant belive people seem to belive XC. I mean I could be wrong but Nats is a much larger program out of the 2 and they have NOTHING to gain by going after XC so why go after them unless there was a discrepancy? XC stays quiet and trys to exploit the situation and walk away with 5 million?

08-24-2006, 08:33 PM	#13
marketsmart HOMICIDAL TROLL KILLER Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sunnybrook Institution for the Criminally Insane Posts: 20,419	i think its too early to speak without concrete facts. the only facts so far are that NR is sueing and that nats terminated their account. anything else is only speculation imo...

08-24-2006, 08:36 PM	#14
Adult Warden So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,822	I don't see the lawsuit going anywhere NATS has more to loose then XC...why would NATS put themselfs at risk without legal counsel...anyone who knows John knows he isn't stupid... Good luck to XC...they are going to need it...

08-24-2006, 08:44 PM	#17
JMM Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 1,755	In my opinion, I believe that the suit is without merit. That being said... I have known Tucker for a long time, I don't see him as being dishonest, not for a second. That being said... I don't believe Tucker was involved in the day to day operation of the program. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. If there WAS dishonesty, I would bet that Tucker was not involved. As to the NATS issue, I recall a conversation I had with NATS before we started using their software and I specifically asked, what happens if you go out of business? The answer as I recall was that a copy of the source code and a lifetime permanent license was on file with their attorney and that should that happen, all current licensees would receive them. My memory could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that it is not. Did I protect myself enough with my wording in this post?

08-24-2006, 08:46 PM	#18
dissipate The Dirty Frenchman Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lost Angeles Posts: 8,904	The truth is nothing is going to happen. John posted factual information, the plaintiff is fucked.

08-24-2006, 09:27 PM	#25
PMdave Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,517	If xc wins NATS programs are fucked unless they have a back-up in place. The sourcecode being with their att. is probably worth nothing. Programs that have a programmer on their payroll that understands the source and knows how to install it will probably using a custom script. In that case 90% of the NATS program owner probably got what they deserved as they were flowing with the "we use nats thus cannot shave"-flow TMM created instead of building a solod reputation. TMM got their spin to the point that if you werent't using them you were most lightly shaving in the eyes of a large percentage of webmasters. In case xc looses... well what do they have to loose at this point?

08-24-2006, 11:45 PM	#27
WiredGuy Pounding Googlebot Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 34,481	As I understood it, NATS did make a posting ages ago saying that the source code would be entrusted to their lawfirm in such a case. As to what would happen from there, I have no clue. I doubt the lawfirm would have a clue either. WG __________________ I play with Google.