The Coffee God wrote:


And to put it in a nutshell, that is the crux of the issue. Since none of us here seems to know what the statute of limitations is for the case we can't even guess as to when it ends/ended. The more important factor is how long the statute of limitations is, as even a 3 year statute of limitations would've expired around mid-2011 if you go by when the deal between Funimation and ARM was made. As a statute of limitations is always in whole years, and it was the tail end of December 2011 the lawsuit was filed (I think, I don't think it was filed in January 2012) I've got a feeling that the statute of limitations is 4 years, as otherwise it would be thrown out of court before the judge has even given everything a complete initial look through.

I was reading some of the ADV v Sojitz documents. As others have said, ADV had at least 3 Sojitz employees working in their office. One was appointed to Chief Strategic Officer of ADV ( Mizushima), Hada assumed the role of CFO, and Ueda assumed the role of business analyst for ADV. ADV claimed "By virtue of the actions of these Defendants, as employees of Sojitz, Sojitz effectively assumed control of ADV, including its day to day operations...Sojitz/JCI/ARM employees analyzed, solicited and substantially directed acquisition of ARM Titles from within ADV while at the same time, under the guise of ARM. Sojitz/JCI/ARM employees approved those acquisitions and the purchase prices of each. Higher purchase prices and a higher ARM balance necessarily increased facility servicing fees ARM charged to ADV and, by extension, the potential profit of ARM under the Agreement and leverage of Sojitz/JCI/ARM over ADV. Despite Sojitz/JCI/ARM 's declaration of ADV's default of the Agreement, Sojitz/JCI/ARM has failed to pay millions of dollars of outstanding balance they agreed to pay to content owners under many of the license agreements as inducement for those content owners entering into agreements with ARM and ADV."

It also says
*Sojitz tried to make a deal with another company when they didn't get paid, they took the lead, and would not let ADV have any say.
*Sojitz made ADV sign off of term-sheets, while stating Sojitz had control over any of these deals being made
*Sojitz made threats saying it would withdraw it's support for ADV if ADV did not agree to the deals Sojitz wanted.
*At the same time ADV was negotiating loan payments with a bank
*The deals "went away and were not consummated"
*ADV could not make the payments to the bank, notified Sojitz of this

So yes, actually. ADV is claiming Sojitz got into this all just to make a quick profit. They did everything they could, including overpaying for titles in order to squeeze every penny they could out of ADV. By overpaying and licensing a lot they were able to charge ADV fees, in addition to geting a large library of shows to then sell.

Razmoudah wrote:


Statue of limitations is a defense you make. So unless it's crystal clear the judge may not throw it out immediately. It would be up to ADV and the others to prove that the statue of limitations is truly up, which shouldn't be too hard to do. if that is proven, they cannot be found guilty for the crime.

All I can figure is Funi is maybe trying to merge with Sentai... but that can't be it.

Just remembered that.
www.icv2.com/articles/news/13545.html