I’m sure the Tabora ruling was brought up in discussions and the likelihood that if Randazza didn’t dismiss Mastron, Plaintiff would stand to lose a substantial amount of money (I’m sure Mr. Gutierrez is not cheap). Randazza made his calculations and rightly so determined that folding the case was the smartest thing to do. Randazza will not like that this information is making it out to the masses, but it is sure better than a trial where the depositions of his technical monitoring company and other aspects of his operation are disclosed. "
"As Tabora and other negligence claims have begun to fail for the obvious reason of Copyright law preemption and lack of any legal duty to the Plaintiff or society, I figured this one would eventually go away. Well in true Randazza style, Mr. Mastron was served with a complaint on 8 Jun 12. Served_03425(CA) On 3 Jul 12, Mr. Mastron filed his answer to the complaint Pro se. Answer_Complaint_03425(CA) I was a bit shocked that Mr. Mastron filed the answer Pro Se and had not employed a lawyer. The answer to the complaint was straightforward and stated
Source and Full Article