you are charging folks for nothing at all
Hey, if Seinfield and Larry David could become 100 millionares with a show about nothing, then I hope the SI owners become wealthy providing a place for others to blather about nothing LOL....... Maybe they'll be bought out ala Marketwatch.
It's understandable how many times this issue gets raised. Legally, I doubt anyone would be successful unless the sale from INSP to Ihub was of the corporation's shares. I suspect it was assets, not corporate shares and not "substantially all of the assets" of the seller. In the latter cases, creditors rights usually travel with the asset to the new owner. (very simplified statement of an extremely complicated and varying statutory and common law area of law).
If the situation is as I described, and if one could prove that he is a creditor, he could sue the seller, not the buyer, for breach. Difficult proof of contract, obligations, breach of same, extent of obligations and breach, etc. Even assuming one got that far, one has to prove that there is more than a de minimis breach of a contract. To me, it seems that subscribers have gotten the substantial benefit of the bargain and that changes in form or format are not a breach.
In real life, not worth the effort. Of course, with so many lawyers around, I'm always amazed that there are lawyers that will take just about any case, no matter how unlikely actual recovery may be. Law has become a "shakedown cruise," and we need drastic changes in our civil (and criminal) systems, but that's for another rant LOL.
But, I have to seriously doubt that any lawyer would take the case.
For my part, I think the current owners have done a great job in revitalizing the site and I was happy to pay up. I did that despite a nasty note from Dave when I posted a very slightly off-color nasty post. LOL |
