• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

New Zealand software vendor intends to sue

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

tylerzambori

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Nevada

me for defamation. (actually libel)

He claims that he now has an "affiliate" office in the U.S., but as far as I know,
his corporate offices are in New Zealand and Europe.

Ok, I bought a rendering software from him. I have two licenses. The software is still in beta so there is no warranty, as I understand. At some point he decided that he was having too much trouble with software piracy, so he decided to implement a DRM measure that would require a constant internet connection. Here's the official announcement about it:

*** (software X)will require network connection for use ***
Hi all,

I'm writing this post to explain a few things about what we're currently doing while working on beta 2.3,
and some of it's new concepts/features, which are moved from beta3 to 2.3 and changed a bit due to recent/massive piracy of (software X).

We have decided to not invest any time nor money into anti-cracking technologies to combat piracy.

These things not only cost us time and money but also present a burden to people that pay for a license,
and in the end it will get cracked anyway, so we have come up with an alternative.

Although I cannot at this time talk in detail about our plans, as we would like exclusivity until we release them,
and our competition is watching us closely, i'll explain grosso-modo what we will do, and more importantly, what it requires.
(software X), as of beta 2.3, will require an internet connection to be used.

This gives a lot of new possibilities for great new features, workflow and cooperation community-wise,
allow for floating licenses (eg lock your license on one machine and unlock it on another),
and enjoy tightly integrated updates and sharing of content between users.

I understand having to use an internet connection to run (software X) (the GUI version, command line versions for renderfarms in the future

won't) can sound like a bad thing, but i think the benefits it gives, including the complete elimination of piracy,
will certainly be appreciated.

Especially once you've seen what we've been working on, (software X) is looking very different now than 2.2 here, and you'll be able to see that soon yourself with the coming intermediate release.

It's very important for us to do this now, and there are no alternatives or 50/50 solutions, off-line mode possibilities, etc...

We've already put a lot of thought into this.

Simply put, if we don't stop piracy of octane with this solution, which is going to make the workflow and licensing easier for

legitimate/paying customers, and give a lot of unique new features and freedoms, we won't be able keep developing (software X) at a higher rate,

and we might even not be around anymore next year.

One thing to note is that we'll be having a multiple server (multi-datacenter) redundant backend, so you don't have to worry about not

being able to use (software X) due to a server failure. We have done awesome business during the last 6 months and have a lot of reserves, so you can count on the online service being available for a very long time still.

That's it, if anyone has any serious issues with our decision, please contact us via email and we will try to find a solution to your

problem.

We have explored all other alternatives and have taken this decision after much thought, so it's not up for discussion anymore,
so discussing and presenting alternative solutions in this topic won't be of much use at this time, but we do appreciate the time taken by people who write complementary suggestions to what i've just explained.

So the language is pretty clear that the DRM measure of requiring an internet connection is being done to prevent piracy, right? This was posted in a public forum for all to see by someone other than myself, so I can't be faulted for taking a somewhat private announcement public.

It does apparently include some big secret added functionality which he does not talk about. The problem is, he then started telling people they were imagining things by thinking he's implementing this required internet connection for DRM or piracy prevention purposes. And this is where I started having a problem with him. He started saying that when version 2.3 comes out, everyone will love the new added features very much, and denying the piracy prevention. So I pointed out the problem with his thinking,
and his reaction was he was too busy too deal with it. I have since figured out this is his standard response.

After a couple more questions on my part, on his private forum, he banned me form the forum and even from being able to see his web site, and he deacitvated my account. He e-mailed me to say that when 2.3 comes out,
he wwould re-activate my account and give me forum access. He did not do that.

I haven't said a single word to him since then, until today, when he wrote me with his threat of a defamation suit.

Ok, what I have done, is to warn people on a few forums about this upcoming DRM measure, so that they would not buy into it without being aware it was going to happen. Some of the people who bought it before the announcement were suddenly in difficulties because of living in small towns without a constant internet connection, or because of having clients that stipulate no internet connection period on the computer that their work is being done on. So at first I didn't even say "I don't recommend it," but rather "you should know this before you buy." I eventually got to "I don't recommend it," because of the owner's rather awful customer service skills.
And I'm not the first person to notice the rather awful customer service skills, which I learned more about as I went along, from other people's stories.

Ok so now, he has apparently noticed my comments on forums, and he wrote me this letter:

Your factually severely incorrect smear campaign is directy legally
provable and is already documented in great detail, with provable
correlation in losses that surpass 4 zeroes.
We have signed printouts of the forum founders where you undertook
these activities.

'for them it will never be enough'. (software X new features) is the best feature ever now, all our customers love it, as they know now what it is
instead of your silly DRM story based upon poor speculation.

This is called in legal terms 'defamation trial', easy to arrange with
our new american affiliates's lawyers.
They are in fact easily initiated from overseas, where libel trials
are a day to day operation in corporate legal affairs.

Defamation, Libel, and Slander Per Se
(it's possible in nevada)

(He inserted my name and address here....)

even if this is incorrect we'll get a subscription access and contact
COX internet to get your real identity, history and location.

Since i'm not the evil person you tried to convince everyone about,
and i can have a bailiff serve you an affidavit in 2 days,
who don't do these things unless there's no chance you'll get fined
the 4 zero+ damages (in euros), plus the reputation damages,
i'm willing to help you and your family,
as i'm an honest person.

But the choice is up to you, pick anyone from these 2, no reply in 48
hours and i will engage solution 1.

Solution 1: misery, pain, debt, defended by a cheap lawyer. any
infomation about this private mail, our company or any of our
employees, will also add a 'slander' charge.
you'll also receive an IRS audit and a lot of other checks from your past.

Solution 2: you remove all your posts, on our forums, on all other
forums, blogs etc... about (software X)(any piece of text with the
word (software X) in it that's out there typed by yourself, and i
will reactivate your account, and write a post that (software X new features) is not what you thougt it was, but it's great (which it really is) after
you've played with 2.3 v4 for 1 day when you're forum post is
reactivated after you've done the prior mentioned tasks. (on all
forums involved) but it will be your (re-activated) account will
be indefinately if i find only one post anywhere. we shake hands and
you're off.

Solution 1+2 = you agree to solution 2, backstabbing me instead, which
will then automatically revert to solution one. (plus the slander
charges)

I await your answer. This is'nt a forum flamewar you can log out off,
this is monday morning doorbell **** that will put you in a lot of
trouble.
If you decide to go with option one, i'll give you a headstart, so we
don't pound you down, get a lawyer quickly, dig into your savings.

Sorry but people who work 12+ hours a day 7 days of the week for there
customers don't deserve what you have done, and i need to pay my rent
and food too, including my new 2 developers.
This is a rather threatening letter. My impression about is that it's "a lot of yelling." He even attached a map of my neighborhood to the e-mail, as if to say to me "I know where you live." I think that is harrassment.

And he is once again trying to claim that he is not implementing any anti-piracy or DRM measures. His whole letter is based on the claim that I am lying; that I am putting forth a "silly DRM story based upon poor speculation."

(continued)
 
Last edited:


tylerzambori

Junior Member
(continued from first post)


Does he even remember his own initial announcement about it? Should I even take him seriously? I am thinking the only way he could do this would be if he got a dishonest lawyer who doesn't care that the guy already stated that
piracy is in fact one of the main reasons they are implementing this internet connection thing. I only repeated what he himself said he was going to do, and it's been made public by someone else.

If he was really honest and nice, he would not be trying to force me to say his software is great on his forum. Also, how would he, a citizen of New Zealand, go about getting the IRS to audit me? He would have to make up some lies, and it would probably have to be big to get any attention from them.

I do not find option 2 acceptable. I no longer want anything to do with him or his software. In fact, I think a refund is in order, but I don't think that is going to happen.

So what do you think - would it be reasonable to think I can ignore his threats?
 

quincy

Senior Member
You could ignore his threats and wait to be served with a complaint, informing you that you are being sued - in which case you would want the services of an attorney - or you can consult with an attorney now to go over all of the facts of the situation, to better assess your risks of a suit and to determine what your best course of action would be.

Good luck.
 

tylerzambori

Junior Member
I have no money, so it looks like I'm going to have to go delete the posts,
if I can gt forum moderators to do it. But I will not go say that his software is great on his fourm.
 

quincy

Senior Member
While I tend to think that, from what you have posted, the guy is a bit of a blowhard, without a review of exactly what you wrote, it is impossible to say if he could bring any suit against you that has merit. There are too many unknowns here.

And even a meritless suit can be expensive to defend against.

Although it is never nice to have your right to free speech abridged, removing the posts you wrote that this character finds offensive stands to be the cheapest solution to the problem you are facing.

Good luck.
 

tylerzambori

Junior Member
What if I ask him for proof (name and address) that he actually
does have a U.S. affiliate? If he actually does not, would that make a
difference?

The thing is, you are right, he is a blowhard, and I think everything
he said to me was just designed to initimidate.

From what I know of him, it's already established that he is a liar,
and he may be psychologically unsound as well.


I don't believe he actually does have a U.S. affiliate. I think without a
U.S. affiliate or company office , it's going to be harder for him to do
much.
 

quincy

Senior Member
If he is in New Zealand, he will have to sue you for defamation in the U.S. under U.S. laws. This will be costly for him, and defamation suits are not exactly known for being inexpensive suits to begin with.

If you want to better assess your risks of being sued, by contacting this fellow and inquiring about the U.S. affiiliate he claims exists, you are certainly free to do so. I think having no contact with him of any kind is probably a wiser course of action, but it is up to you.

Perhaps you can take a print-out of what you wrote to a free legal aid clinic, a law school clinic or to an attorney offering a free initial consultation, and see what an attorney at any one of those places says of your postings. If it seems fairly clear after a review of your writings that what you wrote is not defamatory, you are probably safe from a defamation suit loss. Unfortunately, the fact that this fellow may not have a solid case does not prevent him from filing suit against you anyway, should he not care about the expense involved, if he feels he has suffered significant injury as a result of your postings, if he is willing to gamble with a lawsuit loss, and/or if he happens to be the litigious sort.

It's a crap shoot, tyler. I doubt, based only on what you have posted here, that this guy will file suit against you, this whether you leave your postings up or not. Threats of defamation suits are far more common than the actual filings of defamation suits. But my doubts amount to nothing, really, because I have not reviewed what you wrote, I have no idea who the fellow is who is threatening you with a suit, and I know very little about the facts or the situation you find yourself in.

If you are afraid he will sue, and you are not the wait-and-see type, the best thing you can do would be to contact an attorney in your area. The attorney can advise you better of your risks after a review of the material you wrote and a personal review of all of the facts. Perhaps speaking with an attorney can ease your mind a bit. And you will definitely want to contact an attorney if you ARE served with a complaint, indicating he has followed through with his threats.

Good luck.

(as a note: you should refrain from saying this guy is "psychologically unsound," as that could be seen as defamatory ;))
 
Last edited:

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top