AA/SDS recasting issue...
- Thread starter Gytheran
- Start date
First, he told the courts he never entered into contract with people of California. Come to find out, he did so with AT LEAST *19* residents of California.
Then it was found he was STILL soliciting business from residents of California... at the same time telling the courts he never did...
Yup... those are lies.
exoray
Master Member
What??? An oral contract is 100% valid in the court of law since it's a valid UK contract, please do some more research, you can start with my post... If taken to court it would become a he said - they said argument, but face the facts there was an agreement made...
Have you bothered to even read the paperwork I have provided on the case???
AA on his signed under oath Declaration Filed August 16, 2005 he states "I incorportated Shepperon in England in 2002..." Sorry he incorporated in 2004, and changes his story in his Declaration filed September 20, 2005 once he was confronted with copies of his UK incorporation paperwork...
There are a few other instances pointed out but I will leave them for you to read...
Durasteel Corporation
Well-Known Member
Cant we talk about terrorists or something useful?
How about prostate cancer we all have a chance of getting?
The housing boom that seems to be over?
Anyone used minoxodil or propecia to grow wookie hair?
or how about a
Prop hunt: What kind of tape did they used to tape down Leia's bust?
Seriously, let it go guys. More important crap to sweat.
How about prostate cancer we all have a chance of getting?
The housing boom that seems to be over?
Anyone used minoxodil or propecia to grow wookie hair?
or how about a
Prop hunt: What kind of tape did they used to tape down Leia's bust?
Seriously, let it go guys. More important crap to sweat.
Durasteel Croporation,
Man, how about you just butt out if it doesn't interest you. Comments like what you just made is no different then:
A nonsmoker telling a smoker that he could die. No @#$%.. We all die.
Someone asking a guy with a flat tire if he has a flat.
Asking a guy who just hurt himself if it hurt.
Saying to someone that it's a beautiful day. Unless that someone is blind, I think they already know that.
Going somewhere when it is raining hard and telling people inside it is really raining when they can see for themselves.
Completely pointless and utterly stupid.
Darbycrash
Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Lord Abaddon+Jan 19 2006, 01:37 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Lord Abaddon @ Jan 19 2006, 01:37 PM)</div>
Yes the RPF opinion is important as long as people understand that very few actual facts have been presented, just opinion and assumptions. Too many people, including yourself, have been presenting otherwise.
One question I asked you never answered was if it is found that AA actually is in the right and/or has the original molds would you ever admit you were wrong?
As for mentioning the other forum, it's simple. The majority of the "absolutists" are from there. They are the ones that are saying, without doubt, AA is guilty, is a liar, etc. They are the ones presenting their opinions as facts. Not all, but most. So, as an example, if someone from the Republican party (say you) walks into an extensive discussion (this thread) about if Pres. Bush lied about WMDs (AA) I don't think anyone would say that such a member of the Republican party is going to say "Oh Bush lied, he lied big time, let's fry him."
And it's funny you find my having answered the questions, and you're not seeing the answers, as some how defensive and related to the other forum. There is no relation at all, especially since I'm not a member. Actually it's more like your goading is also being supported by other members which is why you have repetitively asked the same thing again and again and again even when the answers are blatantly in front of you. But until I actually say *exactly* what you (and likely others) want to hear (which I never will...as I've already answered it) you'll just keep it up.
I guess it would take a 2x4 upside the head to make it any clearer what my opinion is...but I like you too much Ben to do that to you. :lol
[snapback]1163042[/snapback][/b]
Mike my answer is yes I would admit I was wrong. You say the facts that I have posted were assumptions. Could you please point out which ones are please I would like to know.
Trallis
Well-Known Member
starkids, just to clarify, when i said AA=liar, that was a seperate thought from the rest. AA is a liar, we know because there are plenty of things proven that he lied about such as saying his armor is ANH when it is clearly rotj. There is more but we all know it all. The next part was my reasoning for thinking he is also lying about the sculpt. I feel that there is a reason he refuses to come out and say for himself that he is the sculpter, he says everything but, and tries to make you come to that conclusion.
The next part I admit sounded like a fact but it was my opinion. Sorry next time I will clarify. I stopped saying I think because most of this thrad is speculation anyway. I figured everyone would assume it was opinion. I dont mean to force opinions on anone sorry if it seemed that way
The next part I admit sounded like a fact but it was my opinion. Sorry next time I will clarify. I stopped saying I think because most of this thrad is speculation anyway. I figured everyone would assume it was opinion. I dont mean to force opinions on anone sorry if it seemed that way
Durasteel Corporation
Well-Known Member
But it does interest me to see yalls energy wasted on something that will neither benefit your nor hurt you.
And again, what you guys dont realize is that you are giving AA free press by keeping these threads alive.
Lastly, at what point will someone have the clarity of thought to realize after the 200th thread and 10,000th reply ....that these AA threads dont ever achieve anything. Just rants one way or another.
If ranting is your goal, fine I guess :confused ....but it seems to me there is a better use of your time than this type of thing. What do you hope to accomplish...seriously Gav? Nothing against you...you know that, just dont see the point of these god forsaken anti AA novels that get authored every week. :unsure
If AA did something wrong, these threads only serve to create more curiosity on the viewers part....curiosity that can translate into AAs sales before (as someone might see it) "he gets taken down." Why add fuel to the fire?
D
exoray
Master Member
So?
If he is found to have the right to sell his items and wasn't lying all the power to him, but on the flip side if he isn't he will pay many 100s fold for each item sold...
So good or bad publicity it's still AA's choice to make his buisness call...
These threads have exposed many legal issues 100% relavent to this community on both sides, if you feel that this isn't achieving anything then that's your opinion... They have also empowerd people to see both sides and many issues that they can use to make an educated decision on what they are purchasing, again if you feel this isn't achieving anything then that's your opinion...
To be bluntly honest, "pot calling the kettle black"
Miniaturizer Ray
Well-Known Member
Roger Sinclair, right?
Actually, although it has no bearing on the subject at hand, Sinclair may be wrong about the proviso that the contract does not offend against any particular rule which makes it unlawful:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1988954,00.html
(I say that Sinclair may be wrong because, despite the way that the story reads, it isn't explicitly stated that Reeves was actually found guilty of breach of contract). It's a fairly amusing story, in any case
DC,
I have no personal stake in this thread or the topic of AA. Instead, I try to add flavor to the discussions for those who do find enjoyment in them. I don't assume it should be my goal to tell them that what they desire to talk about on this forum is a waste of time and energy and instead I try to encourage a nicely executed and mature debate about it (which this thread is despite a slight interuption by one of the staff).
You offer no helpful insight or valid arguments into the discussion and instead insult those who wish to discuss this topic even though it is for the 10,000th time by telling them to do something else.
Like I said, take a hike. Let them continue doing what they love to do which is discuss AA. You can continue doing what you do best (what I don't have a clue) but in a different topic as it isn't wanted here.
So once again, if you don't have anything useful to add, butt the hell out.
I have no personal stake in this thread or the topic of AA. Instead, I try to add flavor to the discussions for those who do find enjoyment in them. I don't assume it should be my goal to tell them that what they desire to talk about on this forum is a waste of time and energy and instead I try to encourage a nicely executed and mature debate about it (which this thread is despite a slight interuption by one of the staff).
You offer no helpful insight or valid arguments into the discussion and instead insult those who wish to discuss this topic even though it is for the 10,000th time by telling them to do something else.
Like I said, take a hike. Let them continue doing what they love to do which is discuss AA. You can continue doing what you do best (what I don't have a clue) but in a different topic as it isn't wanted here.
So once again, if you don't have anything useful to add, butt the hell out.
Lord Abaddon
Sr Member
They all are Ben.
You aren't an attorney on the case.
You don't work for LFL's legal team nor LFL itself.
You weren't there when SW was being made back in the '70s.
You don't know AA nor have access to his files.
You aren't part of AA's legal team.
You haven't flown to England and seen the molds.
You haven't seen what work, if any, was redone on the molds.
Etc.
So it's ALL assumptions. Everything being stated is ONLY assumptions and opinions.
You assume AA is wrong. Your opinion is he's unethical.
I assume AA is right. My opinion is he is not unethical.
If you're wrong, you'll admit it.
If I'm wrong, I'll admit it.
Hell both of us probably thought OJ was guilty, right?
That's about where things stand.
jeezycreezy
Well-Known Member
To those who post in here only to tell people they shouldn't post in here:
Would you go into Arby's knowing you don't like the food, scarf down a Beef 'n' Cheddar, curly fries and a Jamocha shake, and then bitch out everyone there who was enjoying their meal?
Or would you just not go to Arby's?
On the topic of The RPF's hot new advertising campaign for SDS:
I think it's good that AA gets the advertising he gets in this thread for free. Or else he'd be asking for his money back.
Seriously, I can't think of a single way in which the RPF's dogged pursuit of the truth has actually helped pimp a single square inch of milky white acrylic capped ABS or so-thin-you-can-see-the-signature styrene. They say any publicity is good publicity, but if it was me, I wouldn't want my lies, business ethics, recasting and legal problems dragged out in public for all to see.
On talking about boring sweaty things:
I do talk about more important things than plastic outer wear. But not on prop boards. This is where I come to talk and read about a very specialized topic that I can't talk about with most of the people I know. Please let me.
I am often times more aggravated than entertained by these threads, but I do enjoy reading them and thank people (especially exoray) who are trying to convey the facts of the case. I wasn't interested in the case before but this thread has changed that. Great stuff Flynn, thanks.
Cheers.
TJ
Would you go into Arby's knowing you don't like the food, scarf down a Beef 'n' Cheddar, curly fries and a Jamocha shake, and then bitch out everyone there who was enjoying their meal?
Or would you just not go to Arby's?
On the topic of The RPF's hot new advertising campaign for SDS:
I think it's good that AA gets the advertising he gets in this thread for free. Or else he'd be asking for his money back.
Seriously, I can't think of a single way in which the RPF's dogged pursuit of the truth has actually helped pimp a single square inch of milky white acrylic capped ABS or so-thin-you-can-see-the-signature styrene. They say any publicity is good publicity, but if it was me, I wouldn't want my lies, business ethics, recasting and legal problems dragged out in public for all to see.
On talking about boring sweaty things:
I do talk about more important things than plastic outer wear. But not on prop boards. This is where I come to talk and read about a very specialized topic that I can't talk about with most of the people I know. Please let me.
I am often times more aggravated than entertained by these threads, but I do enjoy reading them and thank people (especially exoray) who are trying to convey the facts of the case. I wasn't interested in the case before but this thread has changed that. Great stuff Flynn, thanks.
Cheers.
TJ
exoray
Master Member
Can't say as it was more in regards to just pointing out how different UK contract law is then US... In the UK verbal contracts are almost as good as a written one and will hold up in court...
This site below also has a very good summary of the UK take on a mere verbal contract, and a Google search for "verbal contract binding UK" will pop a mess load of sites that state just how vailid a verbal contract is under UK law, and how they have and do hold up in court...
http://www.artquest.org.uk/artlaw/contract...commissions.htm
To say there was no contract between LFL and AA, and focus on the assumed lack of a written contract is once again only telling the one side of the story that fits your argument, while turning a blind cheak and ignoring the pieces that don't...
Does anyone believe for even a minute that there was no agreement between LFL and AA before he did work, even be in verbal?
Lord Abaddon
Sr Member
From what has been said there was a third party involved between AA and LFL. Consequently wouldn't the real question be what transpired between LFL, the contractor and then AA as sub-contractor? That I think is the real question here.
Is it possible there was some lack of agreement? Sure. New film company, hoping to stay on the cheap end of things to meet the budget, contractor wants to look good so doesn't present everything, etc. It wouldn't be the first time such a thing happened.
By your own interpretation they are lies.
What you are actually then saying is that his lawyers in California and the UK are lying so you must then know more about UK and US law than AA's lawyers in California and the UK. When you say someone is lying and it's unfounded that can be construed as defamation.
It's obvious that when you advertise on the internet you are not targeting any single group. To say so then you would be specifically targeting every group/nation/province/state on the planet which is rediculous.
Your interest in calling others liers when you have no grasp of the law is surprising since it was you who so righteously started this thread in the first place. The fact you call someone a lier with no basis throws into question your very motivation for beginning this thread as well.
:cheers,
Thomas
He advertises it as REPLICA stormtrooper armor. Not from Star Wars, not from ANH, not from ESB, not from ROTJ. If it's a replica it can't be from the original molds. If by implication they are like the ANH pieces then that is your statement, but I don't see it advertised as such.
:cheers,
Thomas
