Home  |  Products  |  Downloads  |  Registration  |  Forums  |  Support  |  Database  |  My Profiler  |  T-Shirt Contest
Forums

The InterVocative forums are now closed to new postings.

Please visit the Invelos forums at www.invelos.com for DVD Profiler and related discussion.

These forums will remain available for reading indefinitely.

IVS Forums->General: General Discussion Page: 1 2 3 4  Previous   Next
So, what do we know? (Locked)
Author Message
FunkyLA
Will you remove your hat?
Registered: July 27, 2004
Posts: 377
Posted:
Visit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collection
So far I have read many posts speculating on what the court case might be about, do I thought I would do a re-cap.

1) We know that Intervocative Software, LLC, has taken Invelos Software, Inc to court, for "unknown" reasons.

2) We know that the Invelos Web site is down. This is due to the injunction we know that is in place.

3) We thought that Ken Cole did the majority, if not all, of the work on 2.4/5, and that he did do all of the work on 3.0

4) We thought we knew that this was an amicable split, it seems in this we were incorrect.

5) We know that LLC's can be messy when they end.

6) We know that Invelos gave "free" premium keys to the version of DVD Profiler that their website was running.

7) We know that Ken Cole publically dissaproved of "Data Mining" - the act of adding a DVD you didn't own from 2.4/5 to 3.0 just to add to the Invelos Online DB

8) We know that Jesse Slicer did post a message about the legal matters, but is unable to go into more details.

9) We know that this only happened after "the.truth" posted a link to a Missouri Court web site, with a ref: # 07CY-CV03512

10) We know that until this is resolved, there is not much happening in the way of "New DVD" information being worked on

11) We w that the user base is not happy - and some will refuse to use the Intervocative version of the software again, and might even try to spike it's database.

What don't we know?

a) We don't know what this is all about, nor will we until it is settled

b) We don't know the terms of Ken Cole's "contrat" with Intervocative

c) We don't know how much work the other members of Intervocative have put in.

d) We don't know if the name is "Owned" by Intervocative, thougg they have registered the name as a TradeMark (Mind you, only in the last few weeks)

e) We don't know how long this will take to sort out

f) We don't know who is at fault (I personally side with Ken, but... I recall that Jesse did most of the "online" interaction up until Invelos appeared.)

g) We don't know why it had to go to a court room to relsolve.

OK, so that is what we do, and don't know.

So, what can we infer?

Well, we have to just sit and wait

Or, we have to go find some "other" DVD collection soe

Or, we can hurll abuse at all the people involved. (This does not help - and hats off to Jesse for at least not cutting the forums off - thought this may be a legal requirement)

Or, we can offer support to all sides, asking that, for the sake of US, the userbase, please, Please, PLEASE, sort this out in the next few days.

Like Skip, I am n sweating (Well, I am, but you get my point). There is nothing I can do, I cannot find out more information, as I am in the United Kingdom. I cannot sway the Judge's thoughts, I cannot make the members of the LLC sit down and talk.

I can do the following.....

I can keep adding DVD's to "My own" version of 3.0 that I have installed, but just the UPC's for now, in the hope that 3.0 is supported again by "whoever"

I can add the DVD's that I got since moving to 3.0 to my 2.5 version, in the off chance that we have to "go back" again.

I will just waiit - I will still watch what is going on, but there is not much more to do.

Wil I stay with Intervocative? To be honest, I don't know. I will make that decision when the full story is out.

Will I be upset if 3.0 is a dead duck? Yes, but it is not the "end of the world"

Do I hope that I will not have to "find another way"? Of course. But again, these are "Just DVD's" (I know... I should be skiinned alive)

I just want both sides to know, we want you to solve this. I don't think there is anything wrong with that feeling

I hope that the users will be kept informed.. maybe by "the.truth" whoever they are.

So, to sium up. Ken, Ken and Jesse.... please sort this ouit ASAP, as if it itakes too long, the user base will go.

Now, can everybody please stop worrying about this. I mean, it is only a DVD collection manager, not Vista 

[Edit for spelling]
Signature? We don't need no stinking... hang on, this has been done... blast
 Last edited: by FunkyLA
Srehtims
Registered: May 19, 2000
Posts: 1,196
Posted:
Email this userView this user's DVD collection
Quoting FunkyLA:
Quote:
I can keep adding DVD's to "My own" version of 3.0 that I have installed, but just the UPC's for now, in the hope that 3.0 is supported again by "whoever"

You can add by disc ids also to your db. .
That's what I'm doing, adding profiles to my 3.0.2. I just added the five years of "Ballykissangel"
and finish watching the third year, series three of Ballykissangel.
I'm sure you all have or can find a profile that needs improvement.
It's better then stewing about something can't do anything about.
As I've said before I will not contribute to this site and if the other one doesn't back it was nice knowing you.
My first computer was a UNIVAC I, and there aren't many of us left.
FunkyLA
Will you remove your hat?
Registered: July 27, 2004
Posts: 377
Posted:
Visit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collection
Quoting Srehtims:
Quote:
Quoting FunkyLA:
Quote:
I can keep adding DVD's to "My own" version of 3.0 that I have installed, but just the UPC's for now, in the hope that 3.0 is supported again by "whoever"

You can add by disc ids also to your db. .

As I've said before I will not contribute to this site and if the other one doesn't back it was nice knowing you.

I meant that I wasn't going to add all the actors etc, for now, just the basic UPC and title

If you do go, then be well.
Signature? We don't need no stinking... hang on, this has been done... blast
 Last edited: by FunkyLA
schultzy
Fear is Knowledge
Registered: November 29, 2006
Posts: 241
Posted:
Email this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collection
But are there still going to be database updates to 2.4/2.5 now?  If I recall, wasn't Ken doing those for IVS beofre all this happened?
skipnet50
It all began with a mouse
Registered: October 4, 2000
Posts: 33,731
Posted:
Email this userView this user's DVD collection
I say we pass the time as we wait....by pitching pennies.

Skip
skipnet50's collection
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
InterVocative Chat
I'm Not Blockbuster...!
[a href="http://www.ya-shin.com/pages/posting.html&q
Sertified
Registered: July 10, 2002
Posts: 36
Posted:
View this user's DVD collection
How's the weather there Skip?
skipnet50
It all began with a mouse
Registered: October 4, 2000
Posts: 33,731
Posted:
Email this userView this user's DVD collection
LOL, actually finally starting to warm up finally. I actually got out and mowed the spring onions in the yard, the grass didn't need it yet but the onions did.

Skip
skipnet50's collection
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
InterVocative Chat
I'm Not Blockbuster...!
[a href="http://www.ya-shin.com/pages/posting.html&q
Sertified
Registered: July 10, 2002
Posts: 36
Posted:
View this user's DVD collection
Starting to cool down here!  Don't have to worry about mowing as I believe you need rain to make the grass grow, something we haven't had much of for a few years now.  At least the wife is not on my back about that at least lol
pauls42
the computer did it..
Registered: January 31, 2003
Posts: 1,171
Posted:
Email this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collection
Quoting FunkyLA:
Quote:
So far I have read many posts speculating on what the court case might be about, do I thought I would do a re-cap.

6) We know that Invelos gave "free" premium keys to the version of DVD Profiler that their website was running.


No they didn't. You had to already have a premium key to version 2.4 and this then entitled you to use the latest version of dvd profiler (v3) - which was done by giving you a Invelos premium key.

(since when you bought dvd profiler you were promised free upgrades.)

Arguably one of the problems may be that Invelos gave out the new keys to existing premium holders. This meant that there was no reason fro everybody not to go to v3. With everyone moving over the number of contributions would drop to v2 and suddenly the Business model that IVS relied on - i.e. plenty of new contributions/updates and therefore new subscriptions began to fall apart.

They wouldn't be in a healthy situation with having to maintain a aging database on a server whilst getting no new registrations.

I would imagine that it was this prospect which has caused the current situation.
Paul
liorb22
Knight Industries 2000
Registered: November 26, 2004
Posts: 451
Posted:
Email this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collection
Well said, FunkyLA.
Personally? I'm pissed off at Intervocative. Jesse could easily settle his dispute with Ken in private, and spare us, the poor loyal users, from all of this.

P.S: I've just noticed that Ken is still the administrator in here... how come?     
K.I.T.T: I am the voice of Knight Industry 2000's Micro processor, K.I.T.T. for easy reference, KITT if you prefer
 Last edited: by liorb22
Lithurge
Registered: January 2, 2002
Posts: 4,125
Posted:
Email this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collection
Quoting liorb22:
Quote:
Well said, FunkyLA.
Personally? I'm pissed off at Intervocative. Jesse could easily settle his dispute with Ken in private, and spare us, the poor loyal users, from all of this.

:


How do you know it wasn't tried and Ken refused to sit down and sort it out?

To put another angle on it Ken chose not to speak to us for a year and a half and we do not know who chose to not release 2.5 as a final product.

My point being we simply do not have a clue what the relevant facts of the case are and have no grounds for placing blame on either side.
Nick

Not to understand a man's purpose, does not make him confused.
EricvOmmen
DVD nerd
Registered: January 24, 2004
Posts: 1,638
Posted:
I am not sure the Invelos business model is a valid point for IVS.

As far as we know Jesse represents IVS. Ken and Jesse were both very much active with the DVDP, with Jesse, as far as I noticed, watching over the forums and doing some (or all) of the web site.

Up to 2.x they both knew the business model, i.e. the lifelong usage guarantee. Ken/Invelos stated (and I haven't seen a contradictory posting so far from IVS) that Invelos had the right to go on with DVDprofiler 3 and IVS continuing to exploit 2.x. By implication IVS was aware (or could reasonable have been aware) that existing users would change flags ASAP.

Also, by implication, Ken/Invelos has the right to use the name "DVDProfiler". Unless there is a specific item in the separation agreement that orders a renaming, IMO. And did the agreement attach a price to using that name or, by implication, is it free for Invelos?

So the IVS drain of income from new registrants and the existing user base was to be expected. However, the speed of it may have taken IVS by surprise. Remember, the other income is from the ads that show up when you're not a premium user. That must have drained as well.
For all we do not (!) know, someone may have a sudden problem paying the mortgage (just an example).

Now history is littered with cases were the "seller" had a low price and subsequent owners had big gains. The question would then be, does the separation agreement attend to it. Does IVS has a case or has it lost out?

Financially, IVS seems to have little to lose. Income has (presumably) drained, customers alienated, etc. IVS may have requested (my assumption) to get a better deal, but if so, apparently to no avail. As far as I understand the posts on the restraining order, it has been presented one-sided to the court and now Invelos has the burden to counter. I perceive it as just an action to force Invelos to a better deal for IVS.
In webtime it seems to take ages to get the matter settled, but in legal time, any settlement within a few weeks would be fast.

Of course, in the final act, IVS has to prove it either got a bad deal that Invelos knew beforehand (deception) or it has to prove some parts of the program have not been catered for in the separation agreement.

As for the bad deal, Jesse/IVS was active so he knew or could have known the downside for IVS. I don't think it is a winning argument.

As for the program, it all depends on the ownership of the program (mentioned in many posts, the LLC-issue, is code from a partner the same as code from an employee, etc. etc.), the details of the separation agreement, and perhaps other legal details. I can only speculate, but there are already a lot doing that and the above is good enough for now...
Eric

If it is important, say it. Otherwise, let silence speak.
 Last edited: by EricvOmmen
EricvOmmen
DVD nerd
Registered: January 24, 2004
Posts: 1,638
Posted:
Quoting Lithurge:
Quote:
Quoting liorb22:
Quote:
Well said, FunkyLA.
Personally? I'm pissed off at Intervocative. Jesse could easily settle his dispute with Ken in private, and spare us, the poor loyal users, from all of this.

:


How do you know it wasn't tried and Ken refused to sit down and sort it out?

To put another angle on it Ken chose not to speak to us for a year and a half and we do not know who chose to not release 2.5 as a final product.

My point being we simply do not have a clue what the relevant facts of the case are and have no grounds for placing blame on either side.


About the 1 1/2 year silence:
Some post somewhere mentioned that Invelos is already in existence for over a year. Combine that with the silence at the IVS site and it brings recollections to my mind of a separation agreement barring the leaver from doing related (meaning DVDP) activities publicly in the same area for a specified time, i.e. a year or so.

Such a clause would give IVS at least a year's worth (=2006) of revenue from buys and ad revenue.

Speculation of course, I admit.
Eric

If it is important, say it. Otherwise, let silence speak.
EricvOmmen
DVD nerd
Registered: January 24, 2004
Posts: 1,638
Posted:
Quoting FunkyLA:
Quote:
So far I have read many posts speculating on what the court case might be about, do I thought I would do a re-cap.

...
3) We thought that Ken Cole did the majority, if not all, of the work on 2.4/5, and that he did do all of the work on 3.0
...
b) We don't know the terms of Ken Cole's "contrat" with Intervocative

c) We don't know how much work the other members of Intervocative have put in.
...
So, what can we infer?


Well, in my perception DVDprofiler has many parts:
i. The local program running on a PC
ii. The database contents on Invelos / IVS servers
iii. The database software maintaining the data on the server, providing the server end of the program functions (refresh profiles, upload / download profile(s), obtaining currency rates, exchanging those rates, etc.)
iv. The web site in general (Invelos has a design looking a lot --in structure, not the pics-- like that of IVS, apart from lost or new functionality in 3.0)
v. Web site specifics like the voting-on-profiles, the locking-of-profiles
vi. The database server applets matching the (v.) functionality.
vii. (at least) The initial work on the DVDP mobile application
viii. All the interfaces to communicate standardized between the program parts above.
ix. Whatever I may have missed.

On the name I posted already in this thread, so I didn't include it.

Before the Invelos days, it was at least suggested that Jesse did the website part. How much from the above components I, of course, cannot know.

As has been presented in posts already, the ownership of the code by Ken/Invelos may be an issue. But if Jesse put in a substantial effort too, the same applies to him.

One of the questions then becomes: what did the separation agreement cater for? Just a generic "DVDprofiler" or was it specific about the parts? If Jesse "owns" some of the program, had IVS the right to speak for him? Or, because he apparently signed on behalf of IVS he implicitly or explicitly gave consent?

If it was genericly "DVDprofiler" my guess is IVS has a difficult case to win, since it is obvious that DVDprofiler are all components together.
If not, it depends on the documents, the court system and the legal system.
Eric

If it is important, say it. Otherwise, let silence speak.
 Last edited: by EricvOmmen
Mithi
Sushi Annihilator
Registered: January 28, 2000
Posts: 623
Posted:
Visit this user's homepage
Quoting Lithurge:
Quote:
To put another angle on it Ken chose not to speak to us for a year and a half...

Well, that one is simple, it would have been very bad style to announce his plans for Invelos in the Intervocative-Forum.

cya, Mithi
liorb22
Knight Industries 2000
Registered: November 26, 2004
Posts: 451
Posted:
Email this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collection
Quoting Lithurge:
Quote:
Quoting liorb22:
Quote:
Well said, FunkyLA.
Personally? I'm pissed off at Intervocative. Jesse could easily settle his dispute with Ken in private, and spare us, the poor loyal users, from all of this.

:


How do you know it wasn't tried and Ken refused to sit down and sort it out?

To put another angle on it Ken chose not to speak to us for a year and a half and we do not know who chose to not release 2.5 as a final product.


The same can be said about Jesse.
He had a year+ to find a replacement for Ken.

All this legal mess is really not necessary, not for them and certainly not for us.
K.I.T.T: I am the voice of Knight Industry 2000's Micro processor, K.I.T.T. for easy reference, KITT if you prefer
IVS Forums->General: General Discussion Page: 1 2 3 4  Previous   Next