Comments on: Justice Harrington gives Aga Khan resolute win in copyright case

By: zak

zak — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 04:22:41 +0000

30 K awarded to Agakhan

http://www.lawtimesnews.com/201104048370/Inside-Story/Monday-April-4-2011

Allahu Alim

By: News Editor

News Editor — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:49:31 +0000

I will give you my comments in person on Friday evening.

By: Sadrudin

Sadrudin — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 22:30:13 +0000

6. The defendants, Nagib Tajdin and Alnaz Jiwa, by whatever names known, their agents, employees, servants, associates, representatives and all other persons, personal or corporate, acting on their behalf or under their control, are ordered to deliver up all copies of the Golden Edition and the Farmans and Talikas contained therein, and MP3 audio bookmark in their possession, care or control, and all other wares, labels, packages, signage, advertising materials, plates or moulds or other materials or things in their power, custody or possession, which refer to all or any part of, or which are used to produce, the Golden Edition and the Farmans, Talikas and MP3 audio bookmark contained therein; such delivery up to be made to the appropriate ITREB authority as identified in the Ismaili Constitution in whatever country the Golden Edition and Farmans, Talikas and MP3 audio bookmark contained therein are located or as agreed by the defendants with the plaintiff’s representatives or solicitors.

Noticeably the word, “all other wares” – This is open ended for interpretation!!!

By: sadrudin

sadrudin — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 17:24:50 +0000

Judgment:
Judgment dated 04-MAR-2011 rendered by The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington Matter considered with personal appearance The Court’s decision is with regard to Motion in writing Doc. No. 120 Result: and further to Reasons for Judgment dated 7-JAN-2011, Plaintiff’s Motion doc. # 120 & Defendants’ Motion docs. 125-127 – Result:

“THIS COURT ORDERS AND ADJUGES THAT: 1. Copyright subsists in the Farmans and Talikas authored by the plaintiff and reproduced in whole or in part in a book entitled Farmans 1957-2009 – Golden Edition Kalam-E Imam-E-Zaman (the Golden Edition) and in the Farmans and Talikas contained therein (the Farmans and Talikas).

2. Copyright subsists in the MP3 audio bookmark accompanying the Golden Edition, being an audio reproduction of a reading of certain of the Farmans and Talikas (the MP3).

3. The plaintiff is the owner of the copyright in the Golden Edition and the Farmans, Talikas and the MP3.

4. The defendants, Nagib Tajdin and Alnaz Jiwa, have infringed copyright in the plaintiff’s Farmans and Talikas and the MP3 audio bookmark by the reproduction and distribution of the Golden Edition and the Farmans and Talikas contained therein.

5. The defendants, Nagib Tajdin and Alnaz Jiwa, by whatever names known, their agents, employees, servants, associates, representatives and all other persons, personal or corporate, acting on their behalf or under their control, are permanently prohibited, restrained and enjoined from producing, reproducing, copying, publishing, selling, giving away, promoting, translating, making and sound or video recording of, performing, communicating electronically, telecommunicating, making available or distributing any work that infringes the plaintiff’s copyright in the Golden Edition and accompanying MP3.

7. There shall be a reference to a judge or other person designated by the Chief Justice of the Federal Court for the determination of damages or profits owing to the plaintiff, with any such damages or profits to be payable to the plaintiff for use by the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) Foundation, or such other non-profit organization or purpose as he may see fit. Directions regarding the conduct of the reference shall be made by the referee designated by the Chief Justice.

8. Pre-judgement and post-judgement interest on any amount awarded in the reference for damages or profits shall be paid to the plaintiff as determined in accordance with the reference.

9. The costs of the proceedings to date, including the cost of the motion under rule 394 of the Federal Courts Rules are fixed at C$30,000.00, all inclusive, payable to the plaintiff forthwith.”

By: Imran

Imran — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 21:57:28 +0000

Can somebody confirm if the defendants have actually stopped distributing the book(s) involved the lawsuit…? Thanks for the information.

By: Soulmate

Soulmate — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 09:27:05 +0000

A classic example of warped logic! On February 27th, 2011 Alnaz (not verified) says: “Shree Krishna: Remember Parth (Arjun) the one who sides with the unrighteousness is a sinner himself. He is like you moving away from the path of duty, like you he does not support the ones fighting righteousness thus is considered supporting unrighteousness, becomes unrighteousness himself. (Arjun was refusing to fight with Duryojaan’s army when Shree Krishna delivered Geeta (Guidances to convince Arjun to fight, that it is the right thing to fight unrighteousness without worrying about the consequences of the fight)) and says the above to Arjun, telling Arjun if he did not fight Duryojan, then it would be like he is Duryojan as well. Ultimately, Arjun becomes convinced and commences the fight against unrighteousness.”

These screwballs have been trying to justify their court battle with the Aga Khan on the basis of the Mahabharata war between righteousness and unrigteousness. My question to Alnaz is: If His Highness the Aga Khan is the Plaintiff and you and NT are the Defendants, can you identify who the “Duryodhana(s)” are?

By: Alim

Alim — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 01:54:04 +0000

Coleslaw,

Just wait till AJ gets slapped yet again!

By: Soulmate

Soulmate — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 00:36:54 +0000

Bloglaw: I have asked you two simple questions requiring “Yes” or “No” answers. Your rseponse is that you will answer my questions only if I answer your question first, It’s a deal. I will answer any of your questions; but I also know that you will never answer my questions because you are disrespectful and hypocritical. Yes or No?

By: Bloglaw

Bloglaw — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 10:20:25 +0000

Panjebhai – the only question of yours you say I have not answered is have I read the on the record transcript on 15th October 10. You mean the one in which Imam started with may I make a suggestion and the suggestion is not recorded biut was made and directions given by Imam for 30 minutes. Yes I have and look at my and the many responses and questions? Regarding Soulmate he needs to answer a question before I answer his questions. Fair?

Regarding Editor not posting some comments from or others. That I have no issues with. He is the moderator like other moderators including Heritage.

September- look at my summary and many questions regarding the Talika which Editor did not post? heritage posted it.

By: PanjeBhai

PanjeBhai — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:46:46 +0000

Bloglaw: If you can’t even remember what and how much you have dodged, there may be a bigger problem. And, if you stay on the point, I do not believe the Editor would refuse your post. He has given you a longer rope than any other blogger would expect.
To avoid any overloads, start with answering September’s and fully answering Soulmate’s – you completely avoided his two simple questions in your response on heritage.
As far as what happened on Oct 15th – do you remember seeing the official transcript (same one that Umed/Nagib/Alnaz tried to sweep it under the rug; its still available on Vancouverite) and my step by step instructions on what/how to read; I recall telling you to print and taking the red bus to Harley street if you still had problems comprehending… Does that ring a bell !!