Author: Marcus Kaestner
Date: 00:24:20 12/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 02, 2000 at 15:08:23, Amir Ban wrote: >On December 02, 2000 at 04:00:02, Marcus Kaestner wrote: > >>chessbits newsticker: >> >>Dec. 12th, 2.000 - New lawyer claims by Millennium >>Just now we received two new lawyer claims by Millennium 2000. Issue this time >>is our note in the newsticker dated from 11-30-2000. The gents question these as >>slanderous and insultating. >>It ain't that clear to us where one could insist an insult. Even more ridiculous >>is to maintain any kind of slander. We abstain at this time to repeat the >>statements, given a few weeks ago, by the gents Schroeder, Noomen and Theron, >>who, at that time >>made in quite undoubtful, that they expressed it towards Mr. Meyer-Kahlen >>without any possible irritation, that Mr. Kaestner had had no influence at all >>concerning the opening book. >>We'd only like to quote Mr. Jeroen Noomens message up on CCC : >>"What is said in the Weiner/Stefan Meyer-Kahlen vs. Kästner case to the judges >>is an UTTER LIE. I find it disgusting to read that they use my phrases to turn >>this case into the wrong direction. Yes, Marcus called me. Yes, there was a >>decision to use a secret weapon. But I MADE THAT DECISION. Nobody else. I was >>responsible for the books in London, and the choice of opening in this game. >>Dear judges, you have been cheated." >>"Nobody to wonder, the opposite side this time only states "just" a supposed >>worthyness for this new event for $11,000. >>A caliber of a different kind surelly is the 2nd claim of these lawyers. Herein >>they state annother $22.000(!) and one really has the impression in advance, >>this must be something really terrible or relevant. We quote : >>"..also your client offered a rating list on the Internet within his newsticker, >>which shows a computer chess program, ranked on No 2, named Shredder X.There is >>no program like the named one actually existing. We have to urge you by wish of >>our client to provide furthermore presentations of rating lists, wherein a >>computerchess program of the named one is listed...." >> >>Now, ain't that an insult! $22.000 seem more than needed to claim for such an >>evil minded error. After we've been forced to prevent the name Shredder 5 beta >>and now don't seem to be "allowed" to use even a thing called Shredder X, all >>this is highly missleading for the customer. We've now decided to rename the >>program, as it is called correct, just plain and simple : Shredder. Obviously >>this seems to be less missleading, undoubtful and whatsoever more. Certainly >>these two sensefull, new claims create new lawyer costs, this time only >>$1,000. Ain't that truelly balanced ? >>We deeply congratulate Millennium 2000 to this newly invented "business >>strategy" and continue with the count : Legal case No 2 and 3..... >> >>for more informations visit regularely the following site: >> >>http://mitglied.tripod.de/ChessBits/index.html > >This is a reaction to something that you received, but I didn't quite understand >what that was. Can you please tell us as simply and objectively as you can what >the complaint is, before giving us your reaction ? > >By the way, lawyers are not famous for being polite. > >Amir ok, very short, only topics: first step: chessbits wanted (for a short time) to publish a shredder 5 beta-test in issue 9 second step: weiner/meyer-kahlen went to court to prohibit this article. third step: the new cases above. in general they forbid me to say shredder x or shredder 5 beta. and they forbid me to say that they are cheating the judges. for me it looks like a personal war because after the wcc i said that shredder is top at the moment but will be topped by others end of the year. marcus
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.