• català
  • español
  • english

  • Main menu:

    Segueix en viu


    Mountaineers for Himalayas Foundation


    Segueix en viu


    Llistat de noticies:

    RSS Català



    Lo siento, este artículo no está disponible en español


    ¡Participa! Escribe un comentario

    Els vostres comentaris

    Comentario de Juceila
    Fecha: 19 December 2015, 2:14 AM

    While Doe disagrees with the chtczrteriaaaion of its efforts as misguided, it is the court opinions which disparage plaintiffs, not Doe. The cases cited by Doe speak for themselves.I hear the sound of a *Whack*. This one was hit cleanly out of the park.Plaintiffs’ claim that MediaSentry was employed by its attorneys is in sharp contrast to the Linares Declaration under penalty of perjury that MediaSentry was hired by RIAA to investigate and uncover copyright infringements, rather than by an attorney for plaintiffs. If Linares made a false statement in his Declaration, the entire Declaration, which was the basis for granting the expedited discovery, should be stricken.*Whack* And may I suggest that among the documents to be subpoenaed from MediaSentry are copies of all the checks used to pay for their services in regard to P2P file sharing. Let’s see who actually wrote those checks….if plaintiffs knew of the action taken by the Commonwealth against MediaSentry for conducting private investigations without a license prior to the Hearing, they had a duty to inform the Court of the Commonwealth’s action at the oral hearing on the motion of their own accord*Whack* Plaintiffs have clearly attempted to deceive and misinform The Court. I hope that The Court has an outrage over this.I also hope that they can somehow fit in the recently revealed decision by Her Honor, Judge Janet Bond Arterton of the District Court of Connecticut, as revealed below here on this blog.XK-E

    Comentario de monca
    Fecha: 8 June 2009, 9:48 AM

    Tio + més valent !!!!

    Només t’en falten dos i les tres creus .

    Felicitats i bon retorn.

    Gas !!!