This just in:
Awesome !!! and thanks or the laughs Nick, much appreciated.
Nick, do you think this is a good ruling, or should it have gone the other way ? what’s your personal opinion?
Jim
This is great to hear. At least some of Nathan’s scare tactics have been proven by law to be worthless.
Welcome back Chris 
Not nice to sue home inspectors.
Chris, I’m sorry for your loss.
It’s good to see you back.
What did I loose? Back from where? I haven’t been anywhere lately.
It takes a sorry individual (or business) to have to use clauses in their client agreements that threaten them with lawsuits if they want to improve their businesses by using a competitors similar products. It seems to me that tactics like this hurt the industry and any inspectors that might have fallen prey to this type of strong arming tactics. At least now the courts have said No Way to this type of B.S. garbage… Oh The Irony of it all…LMAO
Jim
I’m always on the side of InterNACHI members. The defendants are InterNACHI members and so I’m very pleased that the plaintiff (Nathan) lost.
Good outcome. I guess the non-compete clause was worth about as much as the products.
Thanks Nick or a quality/truthful reply.
NACHI Rocks !!
Jim
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
The quality of a product/service should be strong enough to maintain brand loyalty in any business.
I agree completely with you. In this case however I don’t consider Nathans products even close to having a Brand or being Branded. Lets get real only a very small percentage of the total Home inspectors worldwide even know of him or is widgets let alone use them, a far cry from a Branded product or service. Maybe in a few peoples heads, but not in reality.
Well that’s just my opinion bases on what I read on the internet, and you know, if it’s on the net it must be real…LOL
Jim