Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: More Email Interception Arguments....

Expand Messages
  • Ricky Gurley
    ... Judge seems ... system, ... charges, ... SURPRISINGLY, you and I are pretty much in agreement here.... Rick.
    Message 1 of 52 , Aug 6 4:02 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Parker" <Jim@...> wrote:

      > That being said, if the e-mails were really in "storage" as this
      Judge seems
      > to believe, why are prosecutors not going after the hacker for unlawful
      > access to stored communications, illegal access to a secure computer
      system,
      > using a computer to commit a crime and any number of other related
      charges,
      > and going after the MPAA for conspiracy?
      >
      > Jim


      SURPRISINGLY, you and I are pretty much in agreement here....


      Rick.
    • suesarkis@aol.com
      In a message dated 8/8/2008 2:43:43 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, rmriinc@grouply.com writes: Excellent! In the meantime see if you and the experts can
      Message 52 of 52 , Aug 8 4:56 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 8/8/2008 2:43:43 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
        rmriinc@... writes:

        Excellent! In the meantime see if you and the "experts" can reverse
        the denial of the motion for summary judgment sought by Valence
        Media....... LOL.



        Rick -

        In the very beginning I said that she found for the good guys against the
        thieves although the good guys did a no-no. However, I also stated something
        to the effect that with bad guys operating out of foreign countries and the
        like, American businesses do not stand a chance anymore if they are forced to
        abide by the laws since the bad guys don't.

        In this case Discovery was ordered. The defense said certain records didn't
        exist and that they provided everything they were ordered to do. They did
        NOT. The plaintiffs then went out and got the ordered docs themselves. They
        did exist and the court reviewed them.

        Now, had she not ruled as she did, the unlawfully obtained docs would have
        been quashed and she would not have been able to grant a 110+ MIL judgment
        along with a permanent INJUNCTION. The money is a moot issue since all defs have
        filed BK but the INJUNCTION is what they really needed. The piracy was
        costing American companies a small fortune to the detriment of the American
        economy and the good guys inuring to the benefit of the pirates.

        As I said to Branscum many years ago, sometimes the ends does justify the
        means.

        By the way, if anyone wants to review the entire case excluding only the
        "chamber sessions" they can do so at -
        _http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/california/cacdce/2:2006cv01093/182718/_
        (http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/california/cacdce/2:2006cv01093/182718/)


        Sincerely yours,
        Sue
        ________________________
        Sue Sarkis
        Sarkis Detective Agency

        (est. 1976)
        PI 6564
        _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

        1346 Ethel Street
        Glendale, CA 91207-1826
        818-242-2505
        818-246-3001 FAX

        "one Nation under God"

        If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
        a military veteran



        **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
        Read reviews on AOL Autos.
        (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.