Welcome to F.I.E.L.D.- the First Ismaili Electronic Library and Database.

Copyright Lawsuit

2012-05-14 Refusals Hearing in Copyright Lawsuit

As reported to us by an observer who attended the hearing (Hearings are open to the public)

2012-03-28 - Defendant Alnaz Jiwa Offers to Double-Pay his 96 books to end the Reference for Profits


Extract from attached letter to the Referee by Mr Jiwa:

2011-07-18 Reply to the Requisition

On July 18th, 2011, the defendants replied to the Requisition and statement of issues served by the Plaintiff's Counsel in March.

Although the Plaintiff party has implied that they want the proceedings to end, the Plaintiff's counsel is continually showering the defendants with proceedings. They continue to insist for a private discovery apart from the reference that was ordered.

Copyright Lawsuit Cost: A person unknown to Defendants pays $30,000 to Aga Khan - 2011-05-25


The latest occurrence in the Copyright Lawsuit is that 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.

Mr Chatur wrote to the Imam: "I am making this payment from my own personal funds, and on behalf of my two spiritual brothers, out of love, brotherhood and affection. I do not know Alnaz Jiwa or Nagib Tajdin personally nor have I ever met them. I shall look forward to meeting them."

2011-06-16 Appeal Factum Against Summary Jugment - Filed by Defendants.

On June 16th 2011, The Defendants filed, in the Federal Court of Appeal of Canada, the Memorandum of Fact and Law for the Appeal against the Summary Judgment.

Inexplicably, on June 14th, immediately after the defendants served him with the document, the Plaintiff's Lawyer, Mr Gray, leaked the information to a newspaper dedicated to demeaning the defendants, two days before it was filed in court.

2011-05-19 Stay of Order (Motion)

On April 4, 2011, a Motion for Stay had been filed by Defendants
2011-04-21 Defendants file Motion for Stay of the Order
See the article linked above.

On May 3, 2011, the Plaintiff's Counsel filed a response to the Stay motion.

2011-05-03 Plaintiff's Response to the Stay Motion
- It contained no new affidavit
- It attempted to portray the Appeal as frivolous

2011-04-21 Defendants file Motion for Stay of the Order

Context for this motion

The final order is quite broad and involves accounting and document disclosure that may be lengthy.

This final order is being appealed by the defendants.

The Plaintiff's counsel is insisting on applying the order without awaiting the appeal resolution.

Defendants therefore filed a motion to stay the Order pending the Appeal of the Summary Judgment.

The Motion for Stay of the Order, Pending Appeal

On April 21, 2011, the defendants filed one motion to Stay the Order pending Appeal with:

2011-03-29 Requisition by Plaintiff

On March 29, Plaintiff's counsel sent a Requisition to the Federal court in order to proceed with the fulfillment of the Summary Judgment Order, in particular the Reference discovery.

Even though an appeal is in process, and the order may get overturned, the Plaintiff's counsel is insisting on proceeding with lengthy procedures to find out who bought books.

2011-03-29 Requisition From Plaintiff

2011-04-13 Revised Notice of Appeal by Defendants

On April 11, upon submitting a motion, and with the consent of all parties, it was ordered that the Defendants may amend the Notice of Appeal, and also consolidate their two appeals.

Text of Order allowing Amending of Notice of Appeal

On April 13, Tajdin filed an amended notice of Appeal. The amendments are 6 additional paragraphs added to deal with additional causes of appeal that came up once the Final Order was issued.

2011-02-14 Plaintiff Unsuccessfully Pursues Motion to Dismiss the Appeal


Text of the Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss the Appeal

On Feb 14, 2011, Plaintiff's counsel filed a motion to dismiss the Appeal filed by Tajdin and Jiwa on Feb 7 in response to the Reasons for Judgment delivered on January 7, 2011.

Canadian Law provides for the right to Appeal for everyone.

Plaintiff's counsel claimed that this Appeal is premature and should be dismissed because the Judgment did not contain a final order.

2011-02-08 - Motion for Judgment by Plaintiff


Text of Motion for Judgment by 'plaintiff' 2011-02-11

On February 8, 2011, After refusing to discuss any of the terms of the proposed Order, The 'Plaintiff' filed a Motion for Judgment. This means that the parties will not agree to a draft of an order, and want the Judge to draft the Order.

REPLY by Defendants

2011-02-07 Summary Judgment: APPEAL filed by Defendants

If left unchanged, Gray's draft order paves the path to prolonged additional discoveries and witch-hunts of any person, who, like the Defendant Jiwa, had only given a few copies of the Golden Edition to some family or friends, and it allows SS to continue suing Murids of the Imam in Imam's name for "loss of profits" and "damages", which is obviously against Imam's wish.

As a result,Tajdin and Jiwa both filed Notices of Appeal on Monday February 7, 2011.

Dignified Consent Judgment refused to Defendants - Appeal filed! - Aga Khan Copyright Lawsuit -2011-02-08


The Aga Khan Copyright judgment in January was the first Intellectual Property judgment of 2011. Attempts were made by defendants to bring back to the table the ideas put forth by the Imam in October 2010.

Defendants were told categorically by Gray that their input about aligning his drafted Order with what the Aga Khan said on October 15th was not welcome, no discussion would happen, and that they could make any comments to the Judge Himself.

Who Must Show Consent in an Intellectual Property Infringement Case? - 2011-01-31


Professor David Vaver is a member of IP Osgoode, a Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, an Emeritus Professor at the University of Oxford, an Emeritus Fellow of St. Peter’s College at Oxford and former Director of the Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre.

Proof of consent - The Judge erred in Aga Khan Copyright Case, says Oxford Professor and IP expert - 2011-01-31


Who Must Show Consent in an Intellectual Property Infringement Case? Is the question asked by Oxford Professor and Intellectual Property Expert David Vaver.

Purported "Talika" in JK Tonight - 2011-01-21


A purported Talika is being read out JK's around the world Tonight:

- With reference to Summary Judgment

- With strong language resembling Sachedina's , but not resembling any previous Talika of the Imam.

- With wordings of the January 24, 2010 Letter purportedly by Hazar Imam (Recall that questioned letter where it is said that His signature, which had remained steady for decades had now become very tentative and distorted because of old age and an old healed injury.)

Copyright Lawsuit: Defendants are continuously attacked, assaulted - 2010-12-31

Defendants Nagib Tajdin and Alnaz Jiwa have been continuously attacked and assaulted since the beginning of the Lawsuit.

Verbal and printed attacks against the defendants in Public and in Jamatkhanas are well-known. Reports of physical attacks are now coming to light.

Again, these attacks go against all of Hazar Imam's teachings. In light of the stand of the Imam during the Discovery in October 2010, there is no valid reason for these senseless attacks to continue.

Comments on Attacks

2010-12-07 Summary Judgment Motion Hearing for Copyright Lawsuit Lasted 2-Days

The Hearing for the Plaintiff's and the Defendants' Summary Judgment Motions was Held in Toronto On December 7 & 8.

Here is the entry in the Court Docket:

Toronto 07-DEC-2010
BEFORE The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington
Language: E
Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 20 on behalf of Defendant (Jiwa)
Result of Hearing: Matter reserved
Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 28 on behalf of Defendant (Tajdin)
Result of Hearing: Matter reserved

Syndicate content

Back to top