Xclusive Cash to sue NATS for 5 Million - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

Adult Warden · 08-24-2006, 01:40 PM

100 reasons to get 5 million dollars

haha

Oh...and see sig

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE · 08-24-2006, 01:41 PM

All I can say is...
I was right.

xxxice · 08-24-2006, 01:42 PM

oh my

Tom_PM · 08-24-2006, 01:47 PM

I never saw the point of the original post. That is all.

Pete-KT · 08-24-2006, 01:47 PM

Thats the funniest thing I have ever read, good LUCK SCAMMERS

patmccrotch · 08-24-2006, 01:48 PM

that's it.

now i'm not promoting programs that use the following:

MPA
NATS
CCBILL
or custom written buggy apps.

Spam me with your programs that don't use any of that and still have referrer stats and pay bi-weekly.

mikeyddddd · 08-24-2006, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jace

and wtf is this?

XclusiveCash will also launch its own proprietary back-end tracking system, which has been in development for the past year, in the next two months. But can they recover?

YEAH RIGHT

come on now, you shaved affiliates, and now you want to build your own backend system?

Unfortunately, the memory of most people is about as long as my dick

Theo · 08-24-2006, 01:50 PM

they should sue themselves for wasting affiliates traffic to such tours.

Advanced Intellect · 08-24-2006, 01:50 PM

Jace,

You're on the wrong side of the fence bud.

All you're doing is making yourself look more scummy and untrustworthy than you already are.

What John did was WRONG, and he WILL PAY for it.

XPays · 08-24-2006, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patmccrotch

that's it.

now i'm not promoting programs that use the following:

MPA
NATS
CCBILL
or custom written buggy apps.

Spam me with your programs that don't use any of that and still have referrer stats and pay bi-weekly.

XPays.com - Patented and no leaks.

Jaeger · 08-24-2006, 01:51 PM

all this fuss over such a small affiliate programme... who even promoted them anyway?

WiredGuy · 08-24-2006, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quick Buck

if somebody locked me out of the admin that I had already paid for there would be hell to pay. My guess is that xc is taking the same attitude.

nats had no agreement with xc that gave them the right to disable the license that had been paid for.

The defamation is probably the smallest part of their suit. The breach is big thing imho.

I agree, the effect of suspending the license is the same as preventing access to their records/books which in effect is crippling their business. Then add the thread made on GFY and that's ruining their reputation. It doesn't say they're shaving, but they're certainly hinting at it.

I'm sorry to say, but I don't support NATS actions here, while they may be trying to prevent shaving for webmasters, they're actions are crippling a business and they certainly are in order to litigate.
WG

Advanced Intellect · 08-24-2006, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaeger

all this fuss over such a small affiliate programme... who even promoted them anyway?

That's not the point.

The point is what John did was WRONG, and there are repercussions in business for such things.

I say Good Job and Good Luck!

Nubiles · 08-24-2006, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quick Buck

Telling somebody "do what I want or I'll close your program, ruin you in public and destroy your business" sounds more like extortion or blackmail to me.

My guess from all of what i've read is that the phone call didn't go something like this:

nats: Hi, we think there may be a problem with your installation. When can we schedule to take a look at it?
xclusivecash: fuck you you prick. (hangup).

perhaps more like this:
nats: What are you doing? Whats going on with this? We think you're doing something fishy and you either need to let us fix it now or we're going to disable your license.
xclusivecash: Dude, i'm in my fucking car, there isnt anything i can do right now, what the hell. I'll call you when i'm back in town.
nats: So you wont let us update your install at this moment?
xclusivecash: no, it's my program and I don't want anything changed til we can see whats up.
nats: so be it... then we're disabling your license.
xclusivecash: dude, fuck you what kind of shit is that?
nats: goodbye (posts)

Maybe it went like this:
n:We have had problems with our software in the past and we have noticed this same problem on your program. Now you need to pay out rebills that got missed. You owe $xx,xxx in rebills.
x:that sucks how could the program make this mistake?
n:its been fixed now but you need to payout this money
x:ok yeah if its due i have to pay it out however can you give me a refund on some fees since the program made the error
n:sorry cant do that

then it got nasty from there, of course this is all speculation

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:03 PM

http://avnonline.com/imagearchive/27...dComplaint.pdf

See page 20 - point #112

And they are asking for $5,000,000??????

With 200 affiliates and gross profits last year of only $500,000??? GROSS profits. Wow.

This affiliate program is smaller than I thought.

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:07 PM

Wow, that complaint was a pretty good read.

ronaldo · 08-24-2006, 02:07 PM

Things I noticed and am taking away from this drama...

1. While the 5 million dollars may seem like a ridiculous amount to sue for, how many people reading this thread will ever do business with XclusiveCash again? Their business HAS been harmed irreparably, and noone here is capable of putting a dollar amount on the actual amount of business loss. Clearly, lawyers ARE capable however.

2. Ultimately the lawyers for BOTH sides will be the big winners. One of the lawyers on the plaintiff's side recently asked me for hockey tickets for some upcoming games. The price just went up Albert.

3. Jace has become bitter in the last 4 months or so, and not just in regards to this drama, but his posts in general. He used to be a relatively mellow poster, but he's been outright hostile lately. Rarely do I notice the personality of an individual poster without having met them, but he was one over the years that I did, and it's become pretty harsh lately (Just an observation. Not meant to be an attack. I hope there's not a serious reason for this personality change).

Jace · 08-24-2006, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

nahhhh, not in a million years. maybe $50,000

it was sarcasm ;)

jacked · 08-24-2006, 02:16 PM

sad very sad best of luck to both companies...

john and the NATS crew are a good bunch of people

PMdave · 08-24-2006, 02:16 PM

Now just imagine xc winning this case... what will this mean to all those affiliate programs using nats? Interesting times comming up for sure...

Jace · 08-24-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Advanced Intellect

Jace,

You're on the wrong side of the fence bud.

All you're doing is making yourself look more scummy and untrustworthy than you already are.

What John did was WRONG, and he WILL PAY for it.

wow, gosh, what do I do now? a fake nick on a message board insulted me

/me goes to cry now

SiMpLe · 08-24-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

I agree, the effect of suspending the license is the same as preventing access to their records/books which in effect is crippling their business. Then add the thread made on GFY and that's ruining their reputation. It doesn't say they're shaving, but they're certainly hinting at it.

I'm sorry to say, but I don't support NATS actions here, while they may be trying to prevent shaving for webmasters, they're actions are crippling a business and they certainly are in order to litigate.
WG

Absolutely agree with you - When I first read the TMM thread I thought WTF are they thinking, did they actually clear this with their lawyer to let it roll to the masses... After reading the compliant PDF, XC for sure has a solid case.

Check this - XC is a REV-SHARE why would a rev shave in the first place - The goal of a rev-share is to build up as much recurring as possible or your affiliates split on you. No recurring joins = no affiliates simple as that. To me it was a flaw just like all the other times. Noted in the PDF are the programs who have had issues with Nats vs CCbill. TMM took a different path this time for some reason and for this, its going to bite them in the ass.

TMM is brilliant

WiredGuy · 08-24-2006, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Degenerate

http://avnonline.com/imagearchive/27...dComplaint.pdf

See page 20 - point #112

And they are asking for $5,000,000??????

With 200 affiliates and gross profits last year of only $500,000??? GROSS profits. Wow.

This affiliate program is smaller than I thought.

That was based on 2 sites. Based on the partnership with Falcon Foto, this surely meant more sites would be released. The reference with Hustler sending traffic is definitely a plus, as to what scale it would have been, I have no idea, but surely dropping a large brand like that glorifies their case. I'm curious to see what percentage of that $500k gross profit was based on affiliate traffic and what percentage was from inhouse marketing.
WG

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMdave

Now just imagine xc winning this case... what will this mean to all those affiliate programs using nats? Interesting times comming up for sure...

Yup, there is already some talk I am hearing. At the end of the day though, its software issues, nothing more.

Jace · 08-24-2006, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronaldo

3. Jace has become bitter in the last 4 months or so, and not just in regards to this drama, but his posts in general. He used to be a relatively mellow poster, but he's been outright hostile lately. Rarely do I notice the personality of an individual poster without having met them, but he was one over the years that I did, and it's become pretty harsh lately (Just an observation. Not meant to be an attack. I hope there's not a serious reason for this personality change).

you are right, I have

just sick of it all I guess

maybe i need to slow it down a bit

AbulletAway · 08-24-2006, 02:20 PM

I was reading the court papers. OMG! They should go to Hell for lying like that. People on death row don't lie that much trying to win their freedom. They are dusgusting people who will say whatever it takes to make you like them and fuck you over in a hear beat if they can.

WiredGuy · 08-24-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiMpLe

Absolutely agree with you - When I first read the TMM thread I thought WTF are they thinking, did they actually clear this with their lawyer to let it roll to the masses... After reading the compliant PDF, XC for sure has a solid case.

I think most program owners would concur if they were in their place. Cripple my business, and expect a backlash from the lawyers.
WG

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

That was based on 2 sites. Based on the partnership with Falcon Foto, this surely meant more sites would be released. The reference with Hustler sending traffic is definitely a plus, as to what scale it would have been, I have no idea, but surely dropping a large brand like that glorifies their case. I'm curious to see what percentage of that $500k gross profit was based on affiliate traffic and what percentage was from inhouse marketing.
WG

Some very valid points you made there. I would also like to be able to substaniate the Hustler claim. I also know that 200 affiliates isn't a lot, but it is if the 200 affiliates are all like "WiredGuy"

HAHAHAHAHAHA

eroswebmaster · 08-24-2006, 02:22 PM

Personally...I would toss in Playboy Inc, and Adult.Com / ICS Entertainment, Inc. into the suit for allowing the post to stay up, as it continues to stay up to this day.

WiredGuy · 08-24-2006, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbulletAwayGoneBad

I was reading the court papers. OMG! They should go to Hell for lying like that. People on death row don't lie that much trying to win their freedom. They are dusgusting people who will say whatever it takes to make you like them and fuck you over in a hear beat if they can.

Who are you claiming is lying here?
WG

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbulletAwayGoneBad

I was reading the court papers. OMG! They should go to Hell for lying like that. People on death row don't lie that much trying to win their freedom. They are dusgusting people who will say whatever it takes to make you like them and fuck you over in a hear beat if they can.

Care to expand? I didn't get that from reading the same papers.

Manowar · 08-24-2006, 02:24 PM

mad sig drama

PMdave · 08-24-2006, 02:28 PM

Now on the other hand... I know what I make with my sponsors. If some software developper came along telling me the sponsors I use are shaving I just couln't care less. I know my income. I tried other sponsors and I know what does best for me. Even if that means the sponsor making me the most $$ is shaving me. $$/ unique click (according to my own tracking) is all I care about.

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMdave

Now on the other hand... I know what I make with my sponsors. If some software developper came along telling me the sponsors I use are shaving I just couln't care less. I know my income. I tried other sponsors and I know what does best for me. Even if that means the sponsor making me the most $$ is shaving me. $$/ unique click (according to my own tracking) is all I care about.

Good point, but what is they start shaving more? I hope you would leave. You are essentially telling them here its okay to shave me, just only a little. Integrity is more important that that I think.

Theo · 08-24-2006, 02:31 PM

158. On or about August 2004, Naked Rhino and TMM entered into oral agreement concerning NATS.

so lets get this straight,there's no written agreement?

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eroswebmaster

Personally...I would toss in Playboy Inc, and Adult.Com / ICS Entertainment, Inc. into the suit for allowing the post to stay up, as it continues to stay up to this day.

Ignorace must be bliss. This is a message board. They are not liable.

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

158. On or about August 2004, Naked Rhino and TMM entered into oral agreement concerning NATS.

so lets get this straight,there's no written agreement?

That would be news to me.

RRRED · 08-24-2006, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiMpLe

Absolutely agree with you - When I first read the TMM thread I thought WTF are they thinking, did they actually clear this with their lawyer to let it roll to the masses... After reading the compliant PDF, XC for sure has a solid case.

Check this - XC is a REV-SHARE why would a rev shave in the first place - The goal of a rev-share is to build up as much recurring as possible or your affiliates split on you. No recurring joins = no affiliates simple as that. To me it was a flaw just like all the other times. Noted in the PDF are the programs who have had issues with Nats vs CCbill. TMM took a different path this time for some reason and for this, its going to bite them in the ass.

TMM is brilliant

Psst.. I need to talk to you...

Some Guy · 08-24-2006, 02:39 PM

$500,000.00 gross for two sites isn't anything to scoff at. That's pretty decent, actually.

MaDalton · 08-24-2006, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunkspringbreakgirls

Maybe it went like this:
n:We have had problems with our software in the past and we have noticed this same problem on your program. Now you need to pay out rebills that got missed. You owe $xx,xxx in rebills.
x:that sucks how could the program make this mistake?
n:its been fixed now but you need to payout this money
x:ok yeah if its due i have to pay it out however can you give me a refund on some fees since the program made the error
n:sorry cant do that

then it got nasty from there, of course this is all speculation

a little bird told me that this could be a very feasible scenario...

PMdave · 08-24-2006, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Degenerate

Good point, but what is they start shaving more? I hope you would leave. You are essentially telling them here its okay to shave me, just only a little. Integrity is more important that that I think.

Again $$/click is all that mathers. If they start shaving more the $$/click gets down and when they reach a lower level than other sponsors they get kicked.

TheSenator · 08-24-2006, 02:40 PM

"XclusiveCash will also launch its own proprietary back-end tracking system, which has been in development for the past year, in the next two months. But can they recover?" -----

SHAVE ALERT SHAVE ALERT SHAVE ALERT

SiMpLe · 08-24-2006, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RRRED

Psst.. I need to talk to you...

Call me

Big Red Machine · 08-24-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gerco

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...hreadid=332087

"3. Integrity. Simply put, NO SHAVE FEATURE. If a client comes to us asking to integrate a shave feature into NATS we turn them away. Some people think this is stupid, however we think it is one thing that really sets us apart. By not having a shave feature for any of our clients a reseller is safe to assume they are not being shorted when using a program powered by NATS."

In the same thread, Originally posted by Lensman....

"The #1 reason affiliates should PREFER NATS is that programs that use it have NO ability to shave."

Posted by Nathan on another board... Will not link it due to the rules here but you can do a simple google search...

"The only way to integrate shaving into nats by anyone other than us is rewriting their own versions of around 10 of our scripts, if not more. People will not do that, they would just write their own to begin with."

So, maybe they are not outright saying it can not be done. but they are pretty clear that you can't do it. At least thats how I'm reading it.

Looks like marketing....I see soo many sites saying they have the best porn on the net.(obviously this is different cause its B2B but they have competition)

Quick Buck · 08-24-2006, 02:53 PM

no written agreement it would seem. Just a check that paid for a license up through (i assume) the end of august, perhaps longer. who knows. I'm pretty sure the oral agreement never included "if you don't behave in a way that I feel is polite I'll terminate your license before it expires".

nats could have saved themselves a huge headache by just refusing to renew the license on sept 1st...or having a written contract that allowed them to terminate for any reason.

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.

Sell me a car, I pay cash, and then make my car stop in the middle of the road every 3 months unless I get a tow into the dealer to reactivate my car? No thanks.

hey at least the good news is that if xc wins and nats goes under, all the source code is on file with nats attorney... they said so at least... right?

Theo · 08-24-2006, 02:57 PM

so Hooper, how do you specify the terms of an oral agreement, therefore determine the breach of them? It seems to me each party can claim anything at this point. Thats an interesting case to watch.

Quick Buck · 08-24-2006, 03:02 PM

i dont remember what the legal term is... but if i say "hey i'll buy your car for $10k" and you say "ok" and then i give you a check for $10k and the memo says "purchase for your car" and you give me the car and cash the check... you can't go take the car back next month saying that we didnt have a contract.

i think the word is "implied contract"

http://www.google.com/search?q=define:implied+contract

Quote:

An agreement which is not reduced to writing but is created, under the common law, on the basis of the behavior of the parties which suggests that they are acting under an agreement.

It sounds like their lawyers are basically saying that they paid tmm every month, and tmm let them use the software every month, so by virtue of the history... so the only part that is probably really enforcable in that implied contact is the "xc pays tmm and tmm allows xc to use nats".

Degenerate · 08-24-2006, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

so Hooper, how do you specify the terms of an oral agreement, therefore determine the breach of them? It seems to me each party can claim anything at this point. Thats an interesting case to watch.

for sure.

eroswebmaster · 08-24-2006, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Degenerate

Ignorace must be bliss. This is a message board. They are not liable.

LOL so naive.

karlm · 08-24-2006, 03:05 PM

Shame it has to go to the courts

08-24-2006, 01:40 PM	#101
Adult Warden So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,822	100 reasons to get 5 million dollars haha Oh...and see sig Last edited by Adult Warden; 08-24-2006 at 01:43 PM..

08-24-2006, 01:41 PM	#102
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE best designer on GFY Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IALIEN.COM - High Definition Video and Photographic Productions -ICQ 78943384 Posts: 30,307	All I can say is... I was right. __________________ NAKED HOSTING FTW!11 I'm On The INSANE PLAN $9.95/mo! \| The Alien Blog Adult News Worth Reading Updated Daily \| Content For Sale! 641 PICS 216 MINUTES OF VIDEO $350.00 \|ICQ: 78943384 \|

08-24-2006, 01:47 PM	#104
Tom_PM Porn Meister Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 16,443	I never saw the point of the original post. That is all. __________________ 43-922-863 Shut up and play your guitar.

08-24-2006, 02:03 PM	#115
Degenerate Confirmed User Join Date: May 2006 Location: USA Posts: 1,294	http://avnonline.com/imagearchive/27...dComplaint.pdf See page 20 - point #112 And they are asking for $5,000,000?????? With 200 affiliates and gross profits last year of only $500,000??? GROSS profits. Wow. This affiliate program is smaller than I thought. __________________ .

08-24-2006, 02:07 PM	#116
Degenerate Confirmed User Join Date: May 2006 Location: USA Posts: 1,294	Wow, that complaint was a pretty good read. __________________ .

08-24-2006, 01:42 PM	#103
xxxice Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,042	oh my

08-24-2006, 01:47 PM	#105
Pete-KT Workin With The Devil Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: West Bloomfield, MI Posts: 51,532	Thats the funniest thing I have ever read, good LUCK SCAMMERS

08-24-2006, 01:48 PM	#106
patmccrotch Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: edinburgh Posts: 655	that's it. now i'm not promoting programs that use the following: MPA NATS CCBILL or custom written buggy apps. Spam me with your programs that don't use any of that and still have referrer stats and pay bi-weekly.

08-24-2006, 01:50 PM	#108
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	they should sue themselves for wasting affiliates traffic to such tours.

08-24-2006, 01:50 PM	#109
Advanced Intellect Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 118	Jace, You're on the wrong side of the fence bud. All you're doing is making yourself look more scummy and untrustworthy than you already are. What John did was WRONG, and he WILL PAY for it.

08-24-2006, 01:51 PM	#111
Jaeger Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Dark Side of Uranus Posts: 567	all this fuss over such a small affiliate programme... who even promoted them anyway?

08-24-2006, 02:07 PM	#117
ronaldo Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: ICQ#: 272000271 Posts: 5,475	Things I noticed and am taking away from this drama... 1. While the 5 million dollars may seem like a ridiculous amount to sue for, how many people reading this thread will ever do business with XclusiveCash again? Their business HAS been harmed irreparably, and noone here is capable of putting a dollar amount on the actual amount of business loss. Clearly, lawyers ARE capable however. 2. Ultimately the lawyers for BOTH sides will be the big winners. One of the lawyers on the plaintiff's side recently asked me for hockey tickets for some upcoming games. The price just went up Albert. 3. Jace has become bitter in the last 4 months or so, and not just in regards to this drama, but his posts in general. He used to be a relatively mellow poster, but he's been outright hostile lately. Rarely do I notice the personality of an individual poster without having met them, but he was one over the years that I did, and it's become pretty harsh lately (Just an observation. Not meant to be an attack. I hope there's not a serious reason for this personality change).

08-24-2006, 02:16 PM	#119
jacked sperm tail Industry Role: Join Date: May 2004 Location: nj Posts: 11,019	sad very sad best of luck to both companies... john and the NATS crew are a good bunch of people __________________ Got Cam Models? icq: 361-607-616

08-24-2006, 02:16 PM	#120
PMdave Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,517	Now just imagine xc winning this case... what will this mean to all those affiliate programs using nats? Interesting times comming up for sure...

08-24-2006, 02:20 PM	#126
AbulletAway Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Hesperia, CA Posts: 760	I was reading the court papers. OMG! They should go to Hell for lying like that. People on death row don't lie that much trying to win their freedom. They are dusgusting people who will say whatever it takes to make you like them and fuck you over in a hear beat if they can. __________________ 11 MODEL SITES \| NOW WITH PPS Sign up now or your dog will die.

08-24-2006, 02:22 PM	#129
eroswebmaster March 1st, 2003 Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Seat 4 @ Venetian Poker Room Posts: 20,295	Personally...I would toss in Playboy Inc, and Adult.Com / ICS Entertainment, Inc. into the suit for allowing the post to stay up, as it continues to stay up to this day. __________________ For rent - ICQ 127-027-910 Click here for more details

08-24-2006, 02:24 PM	#132
Manowar jellyfish Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 71,528	mad sig drama

08-24-2006, 02:28 PM	#133
PMdave Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,517	Now on the other hand... I know what I make with my sponsors. If some software developper came along telling me the sponsors I use are shaving I just couln't care less. I know my income. I tried other sponsors and I know what does best for me. Even if that means the sponsor making me the most $$ is shaving me. $$/ unique click (according to my own tracking) is all I care about.

08-24-2006, 02:31 PM	#135
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	158. On or about August 2004, Naked Rhino and TMM entered into oral agreement concerning NATS. so lets get this straight,there's no written agreement?

08-24-2006, 02:39 PM	#139
Some Guy Affordable Content! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tucson, Arizona Posts: 1,750	$500,000.00 gross for two sites isn't anything to scoff at. That's pretty decent, actually. __________________ Need a Cheap Design? - Cheap Quality Content Available! Fuck you Michelle Malkin and Fox News

08-24-2006, 02:40 PM	#142
TheSenator Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 13,336	"XclusiveCash will also launch its own proprietary back-end tracking system, which has been in development for the past year, in the next two months. But can they recover?" ----- SHAVE ALERT SHAVE ALERT SHAVE ALERT __________________ ISeekGirls.com since 2005

08-24-2006, 02:53 PM	#145
Quick Buck Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Free-Trials.......... Weekly-Payouts..... 100+Sites Posts: 1,026	no written agreement it would seem. Just a check that paid for a license up through (i assume) the end of august, perhaps longer. who knows. I'm pretty sure the oral agreement never included "if you don't behave in a way that I feel is polite I'll terminate your license before it expires". nats could have saved themselves a huge headache by just refusing to renew the license on sept 1st...or having a written contract that allowed them to terminate for any reason. 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. Sell me a car, I pay cash, and then make my car stop in the middle of the road every 3 months unless I get a tow into the dealer to reactivate my car? No thanks. hey at least the good news is that if xc wins and nats goes under, all the source code is on file with nats attorney... they said so at least... right? __________________ $50 FREE TRIALS! Every Day til 2008!!! Only at QuickBuck

08-24-2006, 02:57 PM	#146
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	so Hooper, how do you specify the terms of an oral agreement, therefore determine the breach of them? It seems to me each party can claim anything at this point. Thats an interesting case to watch.

08-24-2006, 03:05 PM	#150
karlm Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: UK Posts: 4,194	Shame it has to go to the courts __________________ ICQ 584665926