Trademark complaint via DomainsByProxy

Nope I just realised that you are an IDIOT...How about you ring an attorney and ask them if you can sue someone because they have breached your copyright regardless of whether its been formally registered. The legal right still exists...got it??

Now maybe its time you headed back to your "special" school...isnt that the lunch bell ringing??
 


How about you ring an attorney and ask them if you can sue someone because they ahve breached your copyright...
Click to expand...
Been there. Done that. Settled. Rinsed. Repeated. Now file everything I produce with the LOC simply so that I actually have the ability to sue right away instead of sending out idle threats.

Now, one more time, in hopes that the shit and puke mixture that you call your brain understands: you can't sue someone unless you can establish jurisdiction.

You can try, but the judge will tell you to fuck off. It doesn't matter that you own the work. That won't even come into play until later. First, the court needs to assert that it has the right to rule over the matter. A way to establish jurisdiction when it comes to copyright is to file with the LOC.

Got it?
 
bcc423;797431 you can't sue someone unless you can establish jurisdiction. [/QUOTE said:
Sure you can ... and BTW What I stated is true as other posters in this thread have tried to explain to you -- but in your desperate attempts to be a real fuckin' know it all you keep going back over your same lame ass defense...

...here is the definitive guide for you...

Intellectual Property Laws IN THE US

Although I'm pretty sure you are well versed in the subject matter.
Click to expand...
 
You know what. Let's settle it once and for all if you promise to grow some balls and admit that you got owned. Or will you try to weasel your way out of it? That would be amusing too.


U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright in General (FAQ)

Here is the relevant line from the "Copyright Registration" section:

Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration is necessary for works of U. S. origin.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking out of my ass here. I've had to deal with this shit. You, on the other hand, are just some random retard who got owned in a forum conversation and can't accept that fact.

Not just retarded, but also pathetic.
 
No I personally would never sue anyone under any circumstance (I prefer a more -- shall we -- "direct approach" to problem solving) , but I do know authors who have -- and yes it is expensive and no there is no guarantee you will win...

.. and yes You have a better chance if you register your copyright ( NOT CONCEEDING TO YOU BTW) but the simple FACT remains that a copyright exists the instant an author writes an original passage ( and anything over 50 words is almost certainly going to be original-- and probally a lot less than 50)...

And that is basically what I said -- though I type like shit when I drink... lol
 
but the simple FACT remains that a copyright exists the instant an author writes an original passage
Click to expand...

Try to wash the jizz out of your eyes and re-read my posts.

I never said that copyright protection doesn't exist the moment a work is created.

What I said is that to actually sue someone (to enforce that "protection"), you would have to register your work. You can register it long after it's been published. And even after it's been infringed upon. But in order to actually file a lawsuit and not have it thrown out, you would have to show the judge a receipt from the LOC for the registration of that work.

That's what I've been saying to you and the retard #2 over and over.

NOT CONCEEDING TO YOU BTW
Click to expand...

I don't need you to concede. You got owned. Congrats.

you == the chick in my avatar
 
You are the biggest tool in the entire fucking world. How about you shut yourcum recepticle and do a little research before you spout out your crap.

Court:U.S. Supreme Court
Topic:Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Copyright, Entertainment Law, Intellectual Property, Media Law
Title:Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick
Date:03/02/10
Case Number:08�103
Summary:In a class action alleging copyright infringement, a circuit court's ruling vacating a settlement class certification order for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is reversed where 17 U.S.C. section 411(a)'s registration requirement is a precondition to filing a copyright infringement claim, but a copyright holder's failure to comply with that requirement does not restrict a federal court's subject matter jurisdiction over infringement claims involving unregistered works.
Click to expand...

So lets have a look at the meaning of that because you seem to have a real learning difficulty.

copyright holder's failure to comply with that requirement does not restrict a federal court's subject matter jurisdiction over infringement claims involving unregistered works.

This means that the Federal Court still holds the ability to hear these cases even though they have faile to register a copyright etc. The right of copyright is not extinguised with the lack of registration.

what it DOES mean is that you cannot claim STATUTORY DAMAGES for the breach. What you can stil claim is the quantum of loss that you would need to prove in court...so you would get that rather than a statutorily set amount.

So there you have...case law from the supreme court to support that you CAN sue without copyright registration.

So how about you go fuck yourself...because its clear who the retard is.

OWNED
 
24 hours ago, you didn't even know that copyright registration is a requirement for filing a lawsuit. And now, in a pathetic attempt to not seem like an owned loser, you proclaim some profound knowledge about it... and with such attitude.

Mind you, the matter you referenced was decided 12 days ago... and my first post in this thread came one fucking day after the ruling.

Combine that with your attitude of trying to mock me while you are clearly the retard makes you even more pathetic. How hard you are trying... that's just sad.

That alone is enough to earn you the title of the most pathetic retard on the planet.

It's mega self-ownage in itself.

But you obviously suffer a serious lack of reading comprehension skills in addition to your other sad flaws.

You found a case where the Supreme Court ruled that in that particular case the lower court had the jurisdiction to decide on the matter. It was specifically stated that under certain circumstances (mainly that case) the registration requirement should be waived.

That in itself proves my point about registration of work being a requirement to sue.

In the case you pointed out, the whole issue was about whether or not to allow the settlement to proceed under class action because the people who didn't register their work got fucked over. It was not about the the registration requirement itself.

Yet, you somehow got the idea that the registration is no longer needed as a general rule? Even when it states that the court declined to make such determination in general and that the registration provisions of the Copyright Act still stand?

LOL.

Are you really that fucking stupid?

Seriously?

Do you have a hard time feeding yourself? Cause with such low aptitude, motor functions are also usually impaired.

The right of copyright is not extinguised with the lack of registration.
Click to expand...
I never said the right is "extinguished"(??) -- I said that in order to actually file a lawsuit, you would need to register your work.

Fuck. You are one dumb bitch. Try re-reading my posts above. Seriously.

Usually, I enjoy dragging retards through their own shit till the end, but you are just one sad mofo. I'm beginning to feel sorry for you. So I think I should stop.

OWNED
Click to expand...
You are trying too hard, dude. Just accept the fact that you got owned, and then double-owned yourself. Just move on with your life.
 
lol...fuck me this is some funny shit...you actually went to the trouble of writing that???

Nice try deflecting from the key issue anyway....THAT YOU WERE WRONG lol

Clearly one can pursue legal action as proved by the precedent that was set in my case citation above.

Talk aout grasping for straws lol

What a loser!
 
so, if someone gets owned that means that the person that owned them can sue the one owned if he uses his name ever again for braking copyright rules??
whuuuuuuuuut!!!
LOL
 
Clearly one can pursue legal action as proved by the precedent that was set in my case citation above.
Click to expand...
Dude. You are an idiot.

No, you cannot sue anyone for copyright infringement without having to register your work first.

Let me explain it to you in simpler terms:

Two weeks ago, if you tried to file a copyright suit without a registration, you would be told: Fuck off, this is not under our jurisdiction.

In the future, (if that ever becomes a precedent, which it probably won't for general cases), you'll be told: Fuck off, you have not complied with the pre-requisites of the Copyright Act.

You'll have to register your work before you can sue either way. Just like in the past.

At best, your reference is irrelevant.

So how about admitting that you are fucked in the head and lack the ability to understand what you are reading?

You tried to use a reference which shows that the Supreme Court upholds the pre-requisites of the Copyright Act (among other things) while arguing the opposing view.

This is beyond being a moron.

Since you have a hard time understanding words, let me use pictures to illustrate what you are doing:

tpnmC.gif



Talk aout grasping for straws lol
Click to expand...
That's the true testament to your stupidity.
You are still actually convinced that you are right.
This is amazing.
 
lol dude you seriosuly never quit.....admit that you were wrong and im sure this thread will die down along with your injured pride
 
Here is from the link you posted:

We also decline to address whether §411(a)'s registration requirement is a mandatory precondition to suit that--...(some cases references)...--district courts may or should enforce sua sponte by dismissing copyright infringement claims involving unregistered works.
Click to expand...
In other words: "to the lower courts: for all other cases do what you usually did before."

I don't know how else to explain it to you.

Are you really that fucking dumb or are you just pretending?
 
LOL you actually wasted the time to go and look up a case and read through the summary.

Fuck mate you really need to stop taking message board wind ups so seriously lol...go out and get laid.

I've enjoyed the sport
 
LOL you actually wasted the time to go and look up a case and read through the summary.
Click to expand...

You see, reading is easy when you are not a retard.

Fuck mate you really need to stop taking message board wind ups so seriously lol...go out and get laid.
Click to expand...

I'm not taking it seriously. I just enjoy owning retards. It's a hobby of mine.

I've enjoyed the sport
Click to expand...

I take it you realized that you fucked up, but don't have the balls to admit it.

It was nice owning you. We can close the thread now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom