On 2/3/2011 11:24 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
RJack wrote: [...]
All this ruling really says, is that Hoops as a counter-claimant
has the status of a plaintiff (not defendant) and carries the
burden of proof and must plead facts to establish ownership of the
copies in order to defeat a Motion
RJack wrote:
[...]
> All this ruling really says, is that Hoops as a counter-claimant has the
> status of a plaintiff (not defendant) and carries the burden of proof
> and must plead facts to establish ownership of the copies in order to
> defeat a Motion to Dismiss.
I disagree. The court ruled:
