[free-sklyarov] The evil Scame of Adobe Must be stopped (fwd)

Mon Jul 23 16:12:09 PDT 2001

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Monday, July 23, 2001 10:31 AM -0700
From: jacob DROR <jacobdror98 at yahoo.com>
To: "nicehair at boycottadobe.com" <nicehair at boycottadobe.com>
Subject: The evil Scame of Adobe Must be stopped

> JACOB DROR
> 14141 TIARA ST. APT 4
> VAN NUYS, CA 91401
>
>
> July 23, 2001
>
> Next hearing Case Management July 30 10:30am San
Jose Federal court.
Case No: C-98 20617 JF EAI
Looking for all the support so we can stop Adobe
missuse of the law, the court in San Jose, in
destroying many good people.

> I would like to bring to your intention the
> following and request your
> help.
>
> My life, my family, my health and my company has
> been destroyed by Adobe
> systems. Since 1987 I owned a California corp , AIP
> Group Inc. AIP was a
> distributor of educational software to the
> educational market including
> Adobe software. The company was driven to bankruptcy
> by Adobe unfair and
> bogus actions.
>
> On March 27, 1996 Adobe and AIP Group, Inc. entered
> into an agreement
> authorizing AIP to sale current educational Adobe
> software to Educational
> End users. The agreement was sent via Fax to AIP and
> was unreadable. The
> main points of the agreement were explained by Adobe
> to AIP and AIP has
> signed the agreement and became an Adobe's
> authorized Educational
> reseller. Both parties honored the agreement until
> the third quoter of
> 1997. In the third quoter of 1997 Adobe Management
> did not preform
> financially and was under attack by its share
> holders. Adobe has blamed
> market conditions and the resellers for it's bad
> results.  At this period
> of time as per the agreement, when Adobe released a
> new version of
> software, it took the old versions inventory from
> the resellers and charge
> the reseller 5% to cover shipping and handling
> expanse. This transaction
> took place with Ingram Micro Adobe's main
> distributor and the world's
> largest distribution of computer products including
> software. In its
> reseller agreement Adobe never mention an old
> outdated versions, sales and
> inventory reports were required as per the agreement
> only of CURRENT
> version software. The definition of Educational
> software products in
> section 1. (d) of the agreement mention only the
> current Adobe products
> that are listed in the current price list. The issue
> of an old version did
> not exist. In the third/fourth quoter of 1997 Adobe
> management without
> notice refuse to replace the old versions in order
> to improve its profit
> causing the resellers to lose there investments. AIP
> has called Adobe and
> Ingram Micro and complained. Adobe sales
> representative and Ingram Micro
> RMA department told AIP to "do what ever you want ,
> get rid off the old
> versions we do not want them back." Left without a
> choice AIP decided to
> sale the old versions to who ever was willing to pay
> some money for it, in
> order to cover some of its investment and get rid
> off the worthless and
> unwanted products. Adobe did not offered an upgrade
> to the old versions of
> educational software. Few months later Adobe preform
> an Audit taking AIP
> customer list, and months later stole its customers
> by offering directly
> its products. In same time Adobe has filed a suit
> claiming AIP action of
> selling the old products constitute copyright
> infringement, federal trade
> mark infringement, etc. NO ONE CAN FIGHT ADOBE IN
> SAN JOSE FEDERAL COURT.
> AS ADOBE CLAIM " WE OWN THIS TOWN, WE NEVER LOST A
> CASE, AND IT IS ALL
> ABOUT WINNING." ADOBE HAS PROVED THAT THEY DO OWN
> THE COURT AND THE SYSTEM
> IN SAN JOSE, AND NO ONE CAN RECEIVE A JUST TRIAL.
>
>
> ENCLOSED JUST FEW OF THE FILING THAT AIP DID WITH
> THE COURT AND ADOBE
> MANAGED TO KEEP AWAY FROM THE JUDGE AT THE CLERK
> OFFICE.
>
>
>
> THE NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE SUPPORTS AIP'S OUTLINE
> OF ADOBE'S EVIL
> SCHEME AGAINST IT'S RESELLERS AND COMPETITORS.
> 	Attached hereto is a January 16, 2001, public
> announcement by Adobe's
> Chief Executive Officer, BRUCE CHIZEN, which
> defendants discovered on
> January 19, 2001.  The Adobe public announcement
> supports AIP's version of
> Adobe's evil scheme to first drive out its
> competition and then defraud
> their resellers, when Adobe refused to take back
> obsolete and useless
> versions.
> 	In the public announcement, a true and correct copy
> attached hereto as
> Exhibit "A", Adobe's CEO, BRUCE CHIZEN, states:
> 	I can sit here comfortably and say we are going to
> win against Quark.
> 	This was in response to Adobe's self admitted
> "missteps" and its
> "overdone" "effort to oust Quark's QuarkXpress."
> 	Obviously, one misstep is the instant lawsuit.
>
> Attached hereto is page 27 of  Form 10-K, a true and
> correct copy attached
> hereto as Exhibit "B", as filed BY ADOBE, with the
> United States Security
> and Exchange commission for the fiscal year ended
> December 3, 1999, of
> which the court is respectfully requested to take
> judicial notice. It
> state the follow: "We distribute our application
> products primarily
> through distributors, resellers, and retailers
> (collectively referred to
> as "distributors"). A significant amount of our
> revenue for application
> products is from a single distributor."  " WE ARE IN
> THE PROCESS OF
> REVISING OUR CHANNEL PROGRAM TO REDUCE THE OVERALL
> NUMBER OF OUR
> DISTRIBUTORS WORLDWIDE AND FOCUS OUR CHANNEL EFFORTS
> ON LARGER
> DISTRIBUTORS." "ADDITIONALLY, OUR GOAL IS INCREASE
> OUR DIRECT DISTRIBUTION
> OF OUR PRODUCTS TO END USERS THROUGH OUR ONLINE
> STORE LOCATED.." "While we
> anticipate that the restructuring and streamlining
> of our product
> distribution channels and the increase in the SCOPE
> OF OUR DIRECT
> SALESEFFORTS WILL EVENTUALLY IMPROVE OUR BUSINESS BY
> DECREASING DISCOUNTS
> OR REBATES PROGRAMS PROVIDED TO DISTRIBUTORS,
> DECREASING PRODUCT RETURNS
> AND...
>
>
> THERE IS MANY EVIDENCE THAT ADOBE CONTROL THE COURT
> IN SAN JOSE AND
> SUCCESSFULLY ELIMINATE MOST OF ITS RESELLERS AND GOT
> PAID FOR IT.
>
> IT IS TIME TO INVESTIGATE ADOBE FOR THE FOLLOWING:
>
> * Whether Plaintiff Adobe's actions constitute a
> breach of contract.
> * Whether Plaintiff Adobe's actions breached the
> covenant of good faith
> and fair dealing and engaged in unfair business
> practice by making the
> inventories of its resellers, including defendants
> virtually worthless. *
> Whether Plaintiff Adobe's actions suddenly refusing
> to accept or offer a
> return/buyback policy of the old versions constitute
> a
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------

--
Pablos Kadrevis
pablos at kadrevis.com
415.420.3806
www.shmoo.com/~pablos