Brivium at it again

Robust · Oct 30, 2015

Chris D said:
We obviously can't disclose information about people who may or may not be licensed.

Oh damn, that was funny.

Robust · Oct 30, 2015

PoetJC said:
Totally agree. Someone mentioned earlier that if their licenses were revoked - they'd simply run a nulled instance. But at the end of the day - the proverbial f-you says a lot. In my mind anyway - if Brivium's licenses aren't revoked - it's them giving XF the proverbial f-you. It seems to me that XF has already had enough of that with what most in the admin world saw as IB's bogus lawsuit. I support XF standing up and giving Brivium the big View attachment 38211

Yep.

J.

I see what you did there. You must've studied psychology.

VICE · Oct 30, 2015

Chris D said:
We obviously can't disclose information about people who may or may not be licensed.

It doesn't really matter though.
This can be independently deduced within around a month since the event.
And it's going to be amusing to see the reactions that will transpire here when the day comes.

PoetJC · Oct 31, 2015

Robust said:
I see what you did there. You must've studied psychology.

Ha. Yay reverse psychology of a sort ... I assume you mean hehe. But I wish. I'd planned to do a double major in poli-sci and music education/performance. Don't ask how the two could possibly have worked as a career option. I'm not even sure. A few psyche classes were definitely on the tentative schedule as well. But naw. Due to RL taking prominent stage - I was lucky to make it out of highschool unscathed. In fact = proud owner of a GED here. Shhhhh. Don't tell anybody LOL

J.

ozzy47 · Oct 31, 2015

Chris D said:
We obviously can't disclose information about people who may or may not be licensed.

Let's say there was someone running a nulled version, and their site was hosted in Vietnam, would you guys be able to go after their host and have the site taken down? Or would they just ignore the requests because of where they are at?

Kevin · Oct 31, 2015

WD · Oct 31, 2015

ozzy47 said:
Let's say there was someone running a nulled version, and their site was hosted in Vietnam, would you guys be able to go after their host and have the site taken down? Or would they just ignore the requests because of where they are at?

Brivium's main site is hosted in the USA on: 198.89.123.158 The host is: http://asmallorange.com so if Brivium does decide to use nulled XenForo US law will apply meaning that DMCA rules apply, If he ignores or the host ignores they're no longer protected by the safe harbor rules meaning the host can be taken to court.

ozzy47 · Oct 31, 2015

That's cool, so only time with tell.

VICE · Oct 31, 2015

WD said:
Brivium's main site is hosted in the USA on: 198.89.123.158 The host is: http://asmallorange.com so if Brivium does decide to use nulled XenForo US law will apply meaning that DMCA rules apply, If he ignores or the host ignore they're no longer protected by the safe habor rules meaning the host can be taken to court.

Yeah, that's why I said this is going to be amusing to follow.
But not only that, Brivium also subscribe to dmca.com.
Whatever path Xenforo chooses will have some serious implications that may includes their official [forced] statement about Brivium.

wEbAddEr · Nov 2, 2015

The only thing that i find a shame is that he have some good addons that i would love to buy but i can't because his callbacks with the option to install stuff at my server without my knowing. (or did he removed that stuff from all his mods ? )

ozzy47 · Nov 2, 2015

Tracy Perry said:
Whether he did or not really doesn't matter to me... because I'd have to be checking his code after any update to see if he integrated it back in even if he had removed it.

Agreed. Now that there in no checks and balances in place, they could do anything they want, even back door the server.

VICE · Nov 2, 2015

As it appear to me that at least for the moment, notwithstanding the 17 pages of ooga booga in this thread, Brivium remain unaffected.

The sheer balls that they have...

WoodiE55 · Nov 3, 2015

The Sandman said:
Allegedly, Brivium charged the op for creation of an exclusive add-on (where the purchaser retains the copyright), then used the add-on idea and code in their own product.

View attachment 38085

I certainly don't care for Brivium myself, but is there any proof of these other than a conversation? What was the add-on? What was the theme that brivium included it in?

The Sandman · Nov 3, 2015

I believe the theme in question was Tellerium or something similar. Thats really all I can say since the thread on XF.com was removed.

feldon30 · Nov 3, 2015

Let's see. We have...

One person who wants a TRIAL before they will believe that any wrongdoing has occurred and believes that Brevium underwent extraordinary rendition and/or torture before they posted their apology and thus consider it a conspiracy and/or non-credible.

One person has zero information yet is continually flinging themselves at the thread trying to get people to "see both sides".

And several people are perfectly ok with the whole topic of Brevium being sanitized from XenForo.com, denying users the right to be aware of shady practices by a XenForo plugin and theme author. Some of these people are the same who are demanding evidence that has now since been deleted and thus cannot be confronted.

awww.feldoncentral.com_forumpics_man_screaming.jpg

Brevium has been repeatedly caught red-handed. Both XenForo.com and TAZ have sticky threads warning users about this individual. The fact that much of the evidence has now been deleted from XF by overzealous misguided moderators does not transfer the burden to the accuser.

VICE · Nov 3, 2015

feldon30 said:
The fact that much of the evidence has now been deleted from XF by overzealous misguided moderators does not transfer the burden to the accuser.

This just shows beyond doubts how warped people's mindset here are. By any logical standard, the burden of proof is and has always been in the hand of the accuser but not in this thread. Here, the burden of proof is in the hand of the accused. Not to mention that there is still no indication at all that Brivium Xenforo license has been revoked.

feldon30 · Nov 3, 2015

VICE said:
By any logical standard, the burden of proof is and has always been in the hand of the accuser but not in this thread. Here, the burden of proof is in the hand of the accused.

So the only thing required to absolve someone of wrongdoing is to remove all the evidence? Eyewitnesses who saw the evidence are not allowed to testify? Talk about warped.

Digital Phoenix · Nov 3, 2015

feldon30 said:
So the only thing required to absolve someone of wrongdoing is to remove all the evidence? Eyewitnesses who saw the evidence are not allowed to testify? Talk about warped.

You're wasting your time arguing with him. he's a typical "knowitall"

VICE · Nov 3, 2015

feldon30 said:
So the only thing required to absolve someone of wrongdoing is to remove all the evidence? Eyewitnesses who saw the evidence are not allowed to testify? Talk about warped.

Wrongdoing? How do you know a wrongdoing happened?
Are you saying that an unverified screenshot is enough evidence for wrongdoing?
And who are these eyewitnesses you're talking about?
Have you done a cross reference with them?

feldon30 · Nov 3, 2015

I give up.

Brivium at it again

Developer

Developer

tool

⚧ Jacquii: Kween of Hearts ⚧

Tazmanian Master

Oooh, something shiny!

Enthusiast

Tazmanian Master

tool

Enthusiast

Tazmanian Master

tool

Enthusiast

Tazmanian Addict

Fan

tool

Fan

Coffee Ninja

tool

Fan