Ismaili.NET - Heritage F.I.E.L.D.Copyright Lawsuit: Defenses Glorifying the Aga Khan filed in federal Court - 2010-04-29
In a surprisingly rapid twist of events, both Mr Tajdin and Mr Jiwa have filed their respective statements of Defense this 29th of April 2010. They affirm to being devoted followers who will unconditionally abide by the wishes of the Aga Khan, whom they glorify in their defense.
Mr Tajdin declares that:
He has not been served yet but the ethics imposed upon him by his faith demands that he should not keep in ignorance the public by being silent on the issue and should clarify all of the facts, pertaining to this lawsuit, of which he is aware.
He reaffirms his allegiance to the Aga Khan, is willing to submit to any of his wishes, and is ready to surrender himself and all his possessions to the Imam.
He has been printing Farman books since 1992 with approval and instructions from the Imam received on August 15, 1992 in Montreal.
He has not received any communication from the Imam from 1992 to 2009 instructing him to stop publication.
He cannot stop publication without instruction from the Imam as this would be a breach of his oath of allegiance to the Imam.
All Farman publications were financial deficit projects done as a volunteer service and large numbers of books were distributed free of charge.
Farman sharing is a historic Ismaili tradition which still continues today.
The current Ismaili Constitution does not restrict the right to publish Farmans
Mr Tajdin concludes that:
He has no choice but to await further direct instructions from the Imam.
He reaffirms his allegiance to the Aga Khan, is willing to submit to any of His wishes, and is ready to surrender himself and all his possessions to the Imam.
Mr Jiwa states that:
"This action does not appear to have been authorized personally by the Aga Khan .."
"In distributing Farman books obtained from Tajdin to other Ismailis, he has not violated either the Ismaili Constitution or any Farmans"
He has not violated the copyright act as "Tajdin was given express authority by the Imam" and regardless of the fact that "the limitations period provided for by the Copyright Act also bars this action as the books containing the Farmans were commenced publication in the year 1992", he will still do whatever the Imam tells him to do.
Mr Jiwa clarifies finances:
He "obtains these books for C$50.00 and sells them for C$50.00 or gives them free, without any profit.
"All monies received by him from the sale of (other) books after 2005 were delivered to the Jamatkhanas"
Mr Jiwa further states that:
"If the Imam edited the Farman before releasing to the Jamats, in effect he is superceding the Farman he made orally previously."
He "unconditionally reconfirms his oath of allegiance to his Imam" and "if the Imam does not desire his Farman books to be distributed to the Jamats (...) this defendant will submit to the instructions of His Imam without reservation whatsoever"
Replies From the Plaintiff are due within 10 days, and Affidavits of Documents are due 30 days later.
[Update from May 6: Ogilvy Renault, the law firm which launched the case has asked for an extension of 15 days to reply to the Defense. They claim delays due to breakdown of email servers, blackberry communication, travel of senior lawyer, time difference with Paris etc...The more delays in this file, the more damage it creates to the reputation of the Ismaili community, the Imam and the defendants. It is to the advantage of all parties that this case be withdrawn from the courts.]
[Update from June 22: Defendants have filed a Motion for summary Judgement to have the case dismissed.]
[Update from September 5:
Online Book that gathers court materials as well as articles that are currently available for the ongoing 2010 Lawsuit:
Copyright Lawsuit 2010: Online Book of All available Materials
News on cross-examinations:
Copyright Lawsuit: CROSS_EXAMINATIONS Table of Contents - 2010-09-04
Latest Development
Copyright Lawsuit: Imam Appears for Discovery and Ends the Case - 2010-10-15
As users are asking to read the letters from Nagib and Alnaz on the court docket, the latest have been attached on the following link:
A. Various Court Filings
Revised Factums have been posted Here:
2010-11-29 Summary Judgment : Plaintiffs Revised Combined Factums of Reply and of Motion
2010-11-29 Summary Judgment: Defendants' Revised Factums of Motion and of Reply
There has been proven fraud in the recent past in the Aga Khan's domain by the Aga Khan's agents:
Aga Khan Lawsuit: Fraud at Aga Khan Studs - 2000-02-22
2011-05-25: A Jamati Member who has never met the Defendants volunteered as his brotherly duty to pay the $30,000 that was demanded in the Plaintiff''s submissions and that was accordingly ordered by the judge.
Read the full details of the $30,000 payment directly to H.H. The Aga Khan.
2011-06-16: The Appeal Memorandum of Fact and Law against the Summary Judgment has been filed in court by the defendants on June 16th, 2011.
Read the Full Appeal Memorandum of Fact and Law
Link to Court Docket Case T-514-10
Link to Court Docket Appeal A-60-11
Link to Court Docket Appeal A-59-11
Link to Court Docket Appeal A-156-13
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Tajdin Defence Apr 29.10.pdf | 491.02 KB |
| Jiwa AK Defence Apr 29.10.pdf | 543.82 KB |
- Printer-friendly version
- Login to post comments
- 1333239 reads
Comments
AIM SAME ! - WITH or WITHOUT BAYAH , ANY DIFFERENCE ?!
Dear Alibhai Jiwani U.S.A. and All , Ya Ali Madad , .....Alibhai , i refer to your comment below , and reply accordingly ,
Is he the same Dharamsey?
On November 9th, 2012 alibhai Jiwani USA (not verified) says:
Sometimes ago I read on this blog site that a man named Dharamsey broke the Bayah from the Imam of the time because of certain unthinkable reason?
How can he be friends with Imamat 's leadership? what is going on?
If the case is over what are the motions doing now? Can they introduce motions after the case is over? Or these are new cases to follow the first? How does the law work? Can some lawyer explain?
reply United State
, ....(1) Doubt is now cleared , by Aiglemont At dministrators themselves only ,
,.....and , We did not need to do any investigations in the matter ,
that , whether , Aiglemont Administrators are with Bayah ? ...or with Revocated Bayah , but , UNDECLARED the REVOCATION ?,
..... some can be ISMAILIS by BIRTH , but , same may be NON ISMAILI by WORKS ,
.....some ISMAILI may be NON ISMAILI by REVOCATION of BAYAH , but , some ISMAILIS can be NON ISMAILI by their WORKS , without DECLARING REVOCATION of BAYAH ,
....by Joinng Hands , with , who has Revoked his Bayah , They gave Crystal Clear Evidence , that , out side of curtain , we may seem , with Bayah , ....but , in side of Curtain , our works are like of those only , who have revoked their Bayah . ......as per submissions of A J Dharamsey himself , Aiglemont Administrators , by Joining Hands , with A J D haramsey , in the Matter of Our Faith - Ethics , have proved , that ,....yes , we are in and on the Line of A J Dharamsey only ! , on the Same Way , whether it may be Matter of Filing Case or Matter of Searching Woman !
......whether WAY is SIRATAL MUSTAKIM or that of GAYARIL MAGZUBI ? , ....is to be decided by JAMATS only !,
....such works done by both of them , are same , ....one is doing , after declaring revocation his Bayah , ( filing complaint , against NAGIB - ALNAZ in ICAB ) ,
......another has not declared only , their revocation of bayah , but , got to get done , filing case against NAGIB - ALNAZ , in Hon. Court ,
.....now , it is We - Jamats only , to decide , comparatively , who is better ?!
.....at least , Mr . Dharamsey , being that much HONEST ,..that , he declared his Revocation of Bayah , and , TRIED , what he wanted to do ! ,
....but , Aiglemont Administrators , did same thing , rather WORST thing , that , got to get done , case filed , against Same Persons , NAGIB - ALNAZ ,.....as if , They have Disconnected their Bayah ! ,
.....So , comparatively , who is better ? , .....One with Remarks of NOT GOOD , or , Another with Remarks of WORST ? ,
......there is a saying in Gujarati , .....Dagabaaj Dost Karta , Dano Dushman Saro ! ,
.....( 2 ) So far as the procedure of law in general , is concerned , .....any party of the suit , or , any third party even , having interest in the said matter , can make any application , any time , in connection of concerned matter , before same Hon . Court , and , prima facie , Hon Court , after issuing notice to other side , and , then after hearing both sides , decides whether to admit the application or reject ? ,
....and , if admitted , then , again it is heard , in full submissions , by both sides , for final order ,
....after such final hearing , the same application is decided , whether , to allow the said application or not to allow ! , and necessary order/s in the matter is passed , thank you ....ya ali madad ....!