Karaoke Forums

Lonman....if you read the docs provided Karaoke Miami did some very stupid things such as requesting a dissolution of the LLC backdated(and stated no legal suits in the paperwork ect)....continuing to run shows after service so I dont think they are thinking about anything. I hope CB gets in their judgments against them too. I am awaiting the 3 defaults on known pirates in our little part of the state....will post here when I have firm info.

With the judges ruling SC can now turn the matter over for collections. They can take equipment, non homesteaded property, garnish wages,attach windfalls(winnings inheritances ect) and cause the matter to be reported to credit reporting agencies (poor credit ratings effect everything from auto insurance to some jobs as well as what you pay for credit)as well as other actions here in Florida....in other words cause the pirate much grief for a very long time (Judgment cant even be discharged in bankruptcy) I hope SC gets the chance to collect a good percentage of the judgment.

To anyone still on the fence can you imagine loosing your inheritance or property because you were a pirate ? Or not getting a decent job you want ? I believe most people will look at all the info available and make the right decision for themselves.

Then why would the government require grinding a HD up that holds classified info if these utilities are available?

Also can this utility just delete certain files or does it kill the whole drive?

Depending on the structure of an LLC or Corporation, the KJ may well be protected from ANY involvement of personal property and/or funds.

Then why would the government require grinding a HD up that holds classified info if these utilities are available?

Yes. I believe you are correct.

Perhaps SC should go back to the judge & see if they can "smash" or "grind" since it is a fact that deleted data can be recovered off of these devices.

The pirates can hope all they want that “it means nothing”, but it’s likely that all other defaulted cases are going to end the same way – in SC's favor.

Are any of the pirates willing to spend their money to test the case – or are they just hoping some other poor sucker does while they sit back and play armchair quarterback?

Not sure what pirates you are referring to that are "hoping it means nothing" or where you got that information. Care to share, or are you insinuating, again, albeit rather subtly, that some of us here are pirates? Just checking.
It IS my belief that some here MAY be pirates...this belief is due to KNOWN pirates in my area having print copies of this board posts

Personally, I don't want any "pirates" to test the case. I want someone they've named but already have the discs and refuse the SC audit!

Are any of the pirates willing to spend their money to test the case – or are they just hoping some other poor sucker does while they sit back and play armchair quarterback?

Personally, I don't want any "pirates" to test the case. I want someone they've named but already have the discs and refuse the SC audit!

Diafel... I'm not sure what you are wishing for here. Wouldn't your scenario (as kjathena replied back to in RED) just make the Judge say, "Case Dismissed."?

Diafel... I'm not sure what you are wishing for here. Wouldn't your scenario (as kjathena replied back to in RED) just make the Judge say, "Case Dismissed."?

Not at all. They would then have to go to court and have a trial (judge or jury, doesn't matter which) if a settlement can't be reached. The problem is, once it gets to that point, it seems SC walks away. They don't want to go to an actual trial. Can we say "bluffing"?

Not to mention the Defendant would have to show their discs at the Discovery. Once the discs were shown, then the case would be dropped.

Cue, on what grounds? Are you alleging that a manu's request for an audit is illegal? If so, under what rule of law? If not, then the host is just prolonging the inevitible.

I think you're looking for a little bit more than that. After all, that scenario (above) is SC's case... SC vs Mr. KJ.

I would think that in this case (SC sues Mr. KJ, and Mr. KJ has all his discs, but refuses to have an audit), once it is presented in Court (with both parties standing in front of a Judge), obviously there is NOT going to be any settlement because Mr. KJ is going to say/claim he has all of the original discs. After that is stated, wouldn't the following be true?



Wouldn't Mr. KJ have to make a counter-suit against SC after that (if he chooses to spend the money and time in doing so), and that would then be Mr. KJ vs SC?.... Or, can Mr. KJ make a counter-claim against SC in that very same case (before they appear in Court)?

The problem is, when a KJ indicates he wishes to fight, it NEVER gets that far! SC walks away!

Wouldn't that have to happen in Court? If Mr. KJ says to SC, "I'm going to fight you on this," and SC decides to "walk away," wouldn't that be the equivalent of SC saying, "We wish to drop the lawsuit against this party." as vs the Judge saying, "Case Dismissed."?