Home  |  Gallery  |  Forum  Register  |  Sign In  

You are not logged in.

#1 2010-01-27 05:13:15

From: Fayetteville,Arkansas.USA
Registered: 2004-05-30
Posts: 15

Thirty-five million for a copyright and trademark violation....?

I believe that is actually almost nothing against these defendants.
A domain that is used in commerce creates a common law trademark and any website that is used to sell a product or service is immediately a trademark regardless of what the USPTO thinks.
When 5:2009-cv-05151-JLH resolves copyright and trademarks will not need to be registered for anything!  They already do not for most use by common folk.

Copyright and trademark rights have been rights only sold to those who could buy them.

Copyright was introduced into law in the US by Benjamin Huntington as first written by Noah Webster. 
Mr Webster paid attention to words.  His namesake is known even today as one of the greatest dictionaries. 
On June 23, 1789 Benjamin Huntington introduced the HR 10 that was finally amended till accepted as HR 43 and signed by George Washington on May 31, 1790.  Copyrights were discussed in the very first State of the Union Address.  The lawyer who was first involved with them in the United States was very conscientious.  He felt his study of life-long law was so important that he felt his value early in life to pursue law school took precedence on military service.  He graduated at Yale in 1761.  The first lawyer felt that his legal profession studies took priority over fighting a revolution.  Looking back we see that his wife donated clothing to revolutionary troops while Mr Huntington served as Judge Huntington.
Copyright has always been a right only summarily recognized and sold by lawyers and Judges.

It has always been a right although it was warped into a license instead of a right initially by a lawyer.
It has been about lawsuits since it began and will not be after this Court case will finally allow the fundamental right to finally be recognized.


The defendants?
Google Inc
Network solutions Inc.

The are violating my copyrights to nude photographs every day.
Google image search
Oh my GOD!
They removed the nude photographs from the site.

How much should I require now!
It is all over but the jury verdict although I am relieved they removed the nude photos they said I did.


#2 2010-04-12 00:57:28

From: Fayetteville,Arkansas.USA
Registered: 2004-05-30
Posts: 15

Re: Thirty-five million for a copyright and trademark violation....?

Well NAMEMEDIA INC who owns photo.net finally deleted my original nude art after I sued them and notified the second DMCA agent.  They were gone as first noticed by me during this post above.

I have added Google and have applied to add every search engine as well as the FCC and the US.

I will not settle for any amount of money at this point.  I seek a billion from Google alone.



Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

Artring.com | Artring.de