A good Judge will know what that means.

Kazaa Lite (and any site that hosted it)
Google (for showing K-Lite sites)
KCeasy (for using GiFT plugin that connects to Fasttrack network)
Oldversion.com (for hosting OLD versions of Kazaa)

Although KazaaLite (a spyware-free version of Kazaa) might have been considered copyright infringing, many of these other attacks were over completely legal, non-infringing issues.

It’s worth noting that Shawn Fanning did not sue or threaten to sue the people who reverse-engineered the Napster protocol. Neither did Jed McCaleb threaten the people who reverse-engineered eDonkey. The list goes on … Soulseek, Ares, WinMX, Direct Connect … all were reverse-engineered, but there was not one single lawsuit threat over any of these.

But then none of those other P2P companies had Nikki Hemming at the wheel. To be carrying on a lengthy lawsuit halfway around the world over a few anonymous comments (that were immediately deleted upon request) demonstrates her true vindictiveness.

Jon, is there a legal defense fund set up where we can donate? Defenders of free speech (as rare as they are) should not be left to fight the wolves alone.

And that includes the items in question as they ran on p2pnet, or parts of them.

So please don’t.

Cheers! And thanks …

In December 2004, with a new swimming pool she was having built still not finished, Hemming sold the house to John Myers, an accountant who worked for Sharman, for 2.1 million Australian dollars ($1.58 million) and paid back the loan to Vanuatu.

Cobden said to Hemming she appeared to have rushed through the sale because the Kazaa trial was close to ending “and you had formed a pessimistic view about your prospects in that trial.”

source: washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/28/AR2006042800678.html

The facts in this case might lead observers to conclude that Nikki Hemming clearly broke the law. As the saying goes, “the best defense is a strong offense”

‘Judge, we submit motion to quash under freedom of speech and thus protection from prosecution’ and also argue that you run a news service and you never intended to defame her

Not in Canada.

A lawsuit over an offhand remark posted by an anonymous user over 2 years ago, that otherwise would have been long forgotten.

I have a feeling that anonymous user was an insider who knew what he was talking about, and Hemming just wants his identity. Why else would this still be ongoing?

This would be a great opportunity to spit out a lot of discovery motions to try to find out what was really going on behind the scenes.

Jon, does this mean that you now get to meet Nikki in person?

Please make sure that the whole of the ‘offending’ post is read out as part of the deposition. It will eventually fall into the public domain as part of the court papers and we can then all quote it with impunity.

Dave