Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

vbAdvanced Gallery - Speculation No Longer

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ok, I've just read over the PDF files pertaining to the case.

    All I am seeing is the Notice of Removal, and the original complaint by AEI. I'm not seeing anywhere where Brian signed an agreement to the admission of guilt in this case. I'm not seeing any agreement, for that matter.

    I'm guessing, based on the documents I saw, that Plurplanet and AEI settled out of court, and vBa Gallery is what AEI settled for. However, there may be other documents I haven't seen yet.

    I have PACER access, but at work...I may run up there tomorrow and see what else there is on the system.

    Proskauer Rose seems to be a pretty big law firm. I'm sure they weren't cheap.

    And I think this would be a PERFECT time for Jelsoft to come out with something...

    Comment


    • What's needed is the defendent's counter-suit documents. That will balance out the one sided presentation. IIRC, there's two.

      Chris
      "Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to Authority
      is not using his intelligence, he is just using his memory."
      ~~~
      Leonardo da Vinci

      Comment


      • Well...I give

        Well, I've made attempts to play nice with the PP people. I even offered my help. I went into their forums and posted help to users, I PM'd and emailed them multiple times.

        Basicly I've gotten crapola in the way of a reply. I tried, really I did. So...expect a replacement for their stolen product soon...

        James

        P.S. I've got 17 years of professional programming experince and a heavy duty graphics background... What I'm writing is from scratch...I'd love to see Scott come after me.
        Last edited by James Goddard; Wed 23rd Nov '05, 8:26pm.
        http://www.thescubastop.com
        http://www.midwestdive.com
        http://www.divepros.org

        Comment


        • Originally posted by PBChannel
          Why? Because after Microsoft lost the suit in the United States, they filed suit in every other country they were in. They played dirty legal games. Lindows (now Linshare) finally threw in the towel and changed their name because they knew they could not afford to fight Microsoft in every other country in the world.
          MS did not lose the case in the U.S. courts. They settled with MS paying Lindows 24 million for them changing the name.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs_Lindows

          Comment


          • Originally posted by hankster
            MS did not lose the case in the U.S. courts. They settled with MS paying Lindows 24 million for them changing the name.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs_Lindows
            Holy a lot of money So, I wonder how much photopost paid Brian?
            So Cal Sportbike forum - So Cal Moto - Kawasaki Ninja 250R Forum - Custom vinyl decals - Southern California camping forum

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Vtec44
              Holy a lot of money So, I wonder how much photopost paid Brian?
              Unfortunatly, that's a question we'll never have an answer to.

              I figure it's about 50/50... Either they paid him a token sum like ($1) to settle the suit or they paid him a reasonable amount. From the facts presented Brian has taken in about 75k on VBAG so I figure a reasonable amount would be about 5 times that, based on future revenue projections.

              We'll never know, but I hope they compensated him properly...
              http://www.thescubastop.com
              http://www.midwestdive.com
              http://www.divepros.org

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ChrisLM2001
                Do you have $5,000,000 to spare? Because that's about how much a long dragged out court case will cost.
                You read the papers too much. Whilst it's expensive, those fees are astronomical, and completely out of proportion for this scale of lawsuit. This isn't MS sueing google over the period of two years... This is a small company, against a sole person.
                Last edited by Dean C; Wed 23rd Nov '05, 10:08pm.
                Dean Clatworthy - Web Developer/Designer

                Comment


                • Originally posted by BrentWilson
                  Nope because they would have to take on 100's of other websites including me at the same time.

                  If they want to do that... bring it!

                  Oh... and Mustang is not trademarked by Ford... Ford is My domain name does not include the word Ford as far as I am aware of.
                  Companies do it all the time, regardless of any financial, marketing benefit to them. A friend of mine ran a website for discussion related to the olympics a while ago, and a lawsuit was filed against him by the Olympic Commission (or whatever their full name is).
                  Dean Clatworthy - Web Developer/Designer

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Dean C
                    Companies do it all the time, regardless of any financial, marketing benefit to them. A friend of mine ran a website for discussion related to the olympics a while ago, and a lawsuit was filed against him by the Olympic Commission (or whatever their full name is).
                    It's a numbers game. The IOC is very proactive when it comes to protecting their trademarks. IIRC, the stadium Atlanta built for the olympics was called Olympic Stadum and the now infmaous park was called the Olympic Village. Both names had to be changed after the games.

                    As another example I used to work for ZSoft who did the only (at the time) imaging program for the PC. They trademarked the word PaintBrush as relates to imaging software. They aggressively defended the trademark. (Note that the Windows app "pbrush.exe" was sold to MS from ZSoft so ithe name is allowed.) Of course now ZSoft has been merged into oblivion and I don't think the TM is being defended anymore.

                    My searches to find the AEI vs Brian suit turned up a dispute over the registered domain "freephotopost.com", which some kid was using for a legit purpose unrelated to AEI's venture. As in this case they bulled him into submission. But it can be said they were defending their TM.

                    Some companies are more lax in their TM enforcement. Ford is a great example. Do a search. There are tons of sites with Ford in the name. Their lack of action actually diminishes their claim. If they decided to go after someone on a TM infringment case they could very well lose on the grounds that they have failed to properly enforce the TM.

                    James
                    Last edited by James Goddard; Wed 23rd Nov '05, 10:27pm.
                    http://www.thescubastop.com
                    http://www.midwestdive.com
                    http://www.divepros.org

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Zonex
                      You are leaving out the most damaging evidence. Brian turned over the software.
                      Is it 100% proof? No but cmon, it just makes sense.
                      The settlement agreement is currently unknown. All we know for sure is Brian handed over the software to AEI. We don't know how much it was sold far. In fact, I'm sure that Brian is still looking for a way to get back at AEI. The doors are there. He just need to choose the right one. He may very well use the same doors on AEI, but now with legitimate reason.

                      Also, Brian never signed anything. The signature in the PDF is from his lawyer, stating that as an authorized agent, his client approved the following action and the above provided is indeed valid.

                      Again, the Jury is still out on whether AEI's Photopost code was indeed taken by Brian, however the sooner we get the results, the better we can either hurt Brian or support him


                      No offense Zonex, but I think you may need to read the PDF documents a little more clearly and do some research before posting. Quite a few items you've posted in regards to this topic has been really really off.
                      Last edited by ManagerJosh; Wed 23rd Nov '05, 10:24pm.
                      ManagerJosh, Owner of 4 XenForo Licenses, 1 vBulletin Legacy License, 1 Internet Brands Suite License
                      Director, WorldSims.org | Gaming Hosting Administrator, SimGames.net, Urban Online Entertainment

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by James Goddard
                        It's a numbers game. The IOC is very proactive when it comes to protecting their trademarks. IIRC, the stadium Atlanta built for the olympics was called Olympic Stadum and the now infmaous park was called the Olympic Village. Both names had to be changed after the games.

                        As another example I used to work for ZSoft who did the only (at the time) imaging program for the PC. They trademarked the word PaintBrush as relates to imaging software. They aggressively defended the trademark. (Note that the Windows app "pbrush.exe" was sold to MS from ZSoft so ithe name is allowed.) Of course now ZSoft has been merged into oblivion and I don't think the TM is being defended anymore.

                        My searches to find the AEI vs Brian suit turned up a dispute over the registered domain "freephotopost.com", which some kid was using for a legit purpose unrelated to AEI's venture. As in this case they bulled him into submission. But it can be said they were defending their TM.

                        Some companies are more lax in their TM enforcement. Ford is a great example. Do a search. There are tons of sites with Ford in the name. Their lack of action actually diminishes their claim. If they decided to go after someone on a TM infringment case they could very well lose on the grounds that they have failed to properly enforce the TM.

                        James
                        In Companies letting trademarks be used, it also depends on how they are used. If you are running a giant fansite to promote/endorse the product, 99% of the time companies will leave you be. If they even dare attempt to protect their trademark in such instances, they run the risk of alienating their fans, but moreover, their customer base.

                        Exception to this is if you attempt to slander the product or just to discredit them. In that case, companies, if they feel it's a big enough threat, and has potential to hurt their image, will go after the trademark to protect their image.
                        ManagerJosh, Owner of 4 XenForo Licenses, 1 vBulletin Legacy License, 1 Internet Brands Suite License
                        Director, WorldSims.org | Gaming Hosting Administrator, SimGames.net, Urban Online Entertainment

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Zonex
                          You are leaving out the most damaging evidence. Brian turned over the software.
                          Is it 100% proof? No but cmon, it just makes sense.
                          No it makes no sense at all.

                          From what I understand Brian is a college student. Scott on the otherhand designed a website at the age of 16 that he sold at the age of 21. Do a search on his name, he got 7 figures in the sale...

                          Scott has deep pockets and is able to throw money around on frivilous lawsuits. Brian, on the otherhand does not have the money to properly defend himself. Look at the suit, Brian would have been forced to fly to and setup camp in a VERY expensive area of California to defend himself. Plus he would have had to pay multiple lawyers at huge rates to defend the claim.

                          So think about this for a minute....Scott filed a claim in his local court. It cost him a paltry $250 to file, plus whatever fees he paid to his attourneys. Brian on the otherhand (remember he's a student) would have to spend, at a minimum $100k to defend the claim.

                          So you are a student, you have 2 options:

                          1. Pony up money you don't have to defend your rights.
                          2. Take a cash settlment and walk away.

                          Any implication that Brian is guilty, based on the fact that he settled is not only conjecture, it's fantasy...

                          James
                          http://www.thescubastop.com
                          http://www.midwestdive.com
                          http://www.divepros.org

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by James Goddard
                            No it makes no sense at all.

                            From what I understand Brian is a college student. Scott on the otherhand designed a website at the age of 16 that he sold at the age of 21. Do a search on his name, he got 7 figures in the sale...

                            Scott has deep pockets and is able to throw money around on frivilous lawsuits. Brian, on the otherhand does not have the money to properly defend himself. Look at the suit, Brian would have been forced to fly to and setup camp in a VERY expensive area of California to defend himself. Plus he would have had to pay multiple lawyers at huge rates to defend the claim.

                            So think about this for a minute....Scott filed a claim in his local court. It cost him a paltry $250 to file, plus whatever fees he paid to his attourneys. Brian on the otherhand (remember he's a student) would have to spend, at a minimum $100k to defend the claim.

                            So you are a student, you have 2 options:

                            1. Pony up money you don't have to defend your rights.
                            2. Take a cash settlment and walk away.

                            Any implication that Brian is guilty, based on the fact that he settled is not only conjecture, it's fantasy...

                            James
                            Well put James.
                            ManagerJosh, Owner of 4 XenForo Licenses, 1 vBulletin Legacy License, 1 Internet Brands Suite License
                            Director, WorldSims.org | Gaming Hosting Administrator, SimGames.net, Urban Online Entertainment

                            Comment


                            • Sorry, don't buy into your theories. I will stick with mine....Brain stole, got caught, had no option but to give them the software and the customer base.
                              Maybe one day someone will slip and what really happened will come out. I'm betting my version will be more accurate.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ManagerJosh
                                In Companies letting trademarks be used, it also depends on how they are used. If you are running a giant fansite to promote/endorse the product, 99% of the time companies will leave you be. If they even dare attempt to protect their trademark in such instances, they run the risk of alienating their fans, but moreover, their customer base.
                                Yea, it's a catch-22. Taking my previous example of Ford, if I started an anti Ford site and they went after me on the TM, I could easily point out that they have failed to protect the TM. So does Ford risk losing their TM priveleges or do they upset their fans? Obviously Ford thinks that public image is more important, while the IOC thinks that protecting their TM's is most important.

                                Who's right? Hard to say...a lot of people hate the IOC. A lot of people also hate Ford, but a lot of people wouldn't by any other auto....

                                Originally posted by ManagerJosh
                                Exception to this is if you attempt to slander the product or just to discredit them. In that case, companies, if they feel it's a big enough threat, and has potential to hurt their image, will go after the trademark to protect their image.
                                I have to break this up... Slander means making false statments. To prove a slander/liable case you have to prove that a) the statment is really false and b) the intent was to cause harm and c) prove the monetary damages. Slander cases rarely win. There is also the whole "fair use" clause. If the anti-ford (continuing with the example) site is setup as a parody, then they are covered under fair use (assuming slander is not provable).

                                The whole parody site thing has been set up so many times it's silly. Usually for big companies. In almost all cases, the big company either scares the site into compliance or throws enough money the right way. They rarely stay but it's not for actual legal reasons.

                                But assuming you avoid slander and fair use. Ford would have trouble going after www.anti-ford.com when they allow www.pro-ford.com. Their failure to protect their TM
                                in one case limits their ability to protect it in the other. TM's must be protected to be valid.
                                James
                                Last edited by James Goddard; Wed 23rd Nov '05, 11:14pm.
                                http://www.thescubastop.com
                                http://www.midwestdive.com
                                http://www.divepros.org

                                Comment

                                Loading...
                                Working...
                                X