pjroberge
-
Posts
459 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Posts posted by pjroberge
-
-
The update is as follows:
I talked to Bart Mills the news director for Fox and this is a 3 part series concluding tonight with TWI in all 3 segments. I will get a summary put together asap. cudos Doug!
-
Sorry, but the debate is over. I have a confidential informant that told me different. The lawsuit was only a pretense to get at the websites. Bye
-
quote:
PR Computer Services was thus just as guilty of the trademark infringement as you were as an individual.
The domain name thewayinternational.com was registered in my name only years before PR Computer Services...Try again?
-
Raf:
Ask yourself: Why did TWI sue PR Computer Services as well as me? Answer: PR Computer Services used to own the server lease for the websites, and the domain names. Duh!!
I know the real reason for the lawsuit, but to state it would betray a confidence. I am done arguing with you over this. I know what happened and you are making a sense knowledge evaluation of the situation.
-
quote:
Ex-cultworld was not the infringing website. thewayinternational.com was.
So why did TWI spend so much time building a case against the "infringing" websites ex-cultworld and the path of christ? Thewayinternational.com was not a website, but a re-direct page.
And why did TWI file a lawsuit 3 weeks after thewayinternational.com was disabled?
And why mention the other websites at all if those websites were not the reason for the lawsuit? Are you that naive to the evil of TWI?
You just do not want to believe I may be right, so you continue to dispute what was the real reason.
quote:
Consider what assets that I have to satisfy a judgement like stock in a magazine I used to own or other assets that TWI wanted. Ask yourself: Why did TWI sue PR Computer Services as well as me? Answer: PR Computer Services used to own the server lease for the websites, and the domain names.
The question was whether TWI sought to take down your web sites.
You need to think outside of the box of what is really going on versus outside appearances.
-
quote:
Again, TWI could have gone to the domain arbitration board and won their case (if they had one which they didn't) and the board would have had the domain name registrar transfer the domain to TWI. Very quick, efficient, done every day.
Pat continues to insist that this was not about the domain name, even though the lawsuit was settled as soon as the domain name was surrendered.
TWI also never approached me to settle the matter until the Neutral Evaluator session. If the domain name was the only issue, TWI would not have spent so much time showing how the websites were "infringers" or asking for injunctive relief (shut down the websites).
In my case, the settlement came after both parties presented their cases and met with the arbitator privately. I did not make an offer to settle.
I firmly believed in my case and its merits, and was willing to go to trial if need be to prove the merits of my case. TWI knew I meant business and was not afraid or intimidated by them or their lawyers, and that shocked them I am sure. After all, I am a "cop-out" and supposed greasespot versus the mighty prevailing household...
In a very similar case, taubman v. webfeats, the taubman company demanded at the end as part of the penalties/punitive damages that the man's infringing websites be taken down for the infringement.
The court ordered the man to take down his websites. Hank who owns webfeats is a computer programmer and represented himself also. He appealed and the higher court's decision is below:
"On February 7, 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that a "gripe site" devoted to complaints about a shopping center owner was afforded First Amendment protection for its use of trademarks to attract visitors to the website. Taubman Co. v. Webfeats, Nos. 01-2648/2725 (6th Cir. Feb. 7, 2003)."(Cited in 12 other cases)
The higher court reversed the lower court's injunction, and Hanks websites are back up and you can read about his case at: www.taubmansucks.com
-
quote:
Would you have me to believe that you and TWI presented briefs and oral presentations to the Evaluator, but did not get any feedback (frank evaluation) in return? Of course you did! That was the main purpose of the meeting. It is why it is called an evaluation.
Nope. Wrong again.
quote:
You may think you know more about proceedure than I do and you might be right. As far as trademark law however, I spent several hundred hours researching the subject and came to the same conclusions that several trademark attorneys did which I had consulted.
Pat, I often know more about your case than you seem to, because I know something about the law and legal process.
And I really don't care how superior your legal knowledge is. I would like to have seen you deal with these guys and see how you would have faired.
You probably would have run crying at the first brief they submitted as you seem to believe all the Bull that TWI's lawyers spewed in their pleadings.
-
TWI is not only into idolatry, but the fruit of this idolatry is the operation of witchcraft within the group by many members.
-
quote:
Wrong again. We presented our legal points in front of the evaluator.I was ready to go to trial, so I did not make the offer. The details of the session I cannot divulge other than what is in the public record. You weren't there. How can you continue to make dum*ss statements as if you know what happened.
You got a frank evaluation by a competent neutral evaluator of the legal merits of the dispute and promptly agreed to TWI's demands.
-
quote:
My use was the same as the case cited below in that the use of TWI's name to identify information about them:
It simply wanted Pat to stop infringing on its trademark(s), specifically through his ownership and use of the "thewayinternational.com" domain name.
"On February 7, 2003, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that a "gripe site" devoted to complaints about a shopping center owner was afforded First Amendment protection for its use of trademarks to attract visitors to the website. Taubman Co. v. Webfeats, Nos. 01-2648/2725 (6th Cir. Feb. 7, 2003)."(Cited in 12 other cases)
-
Since Long Gone was unwilling to answer these two questions, I will
1) What are the elements of trademark Infringement?
A. Someone has a valid trademark for specific goods and services that they sell
B. Someone else sells the same goods and services using the trademark holders trademark
C. There is enough customer confusion that the infringer's goods and services being sold are passed off as the trademark holder's goods and services
Example: The infringer sells blue jeans and puts Levies's trademark on those jeans which infringes on the trademark holder's rights.
2) Why are there laws against trademark infringement?
A. To protect the profits of the trademark owner
B. To protect the public from purchasing products or services that they thought were from the trademark holder's company but were not.
The Judge on my case previously ruled:
In HARLAND A. MACIA, III v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, 152 F. Supp. 2d 535; 2001, Vermont Federal Court: "... Unless and until Intuit uses the mark in the course of trade, to identify actual goods for sale or transport, it cannot be subject to suit for trademark infringement under § 1125(a). ...because Lanham Act was directed against false representations of goods in interstate commerce, motion to dismiss granted where no sales of goods in commerce took place...
The question then is, what goods and services are sold by The Path of Christ or ex-wayworld?
Answer: None which means no infringement
-
Abigail:
If a dispute is only about a domain name such as a few posters keep insisting, the proper proceedure would be to bring the dispute to the organization below. The judge would have also insisted on this as it would have been the correct venue to handle the dispute.
WIPO's resolution service offers highly qualified neutral panelists, thorough and expeditious administrative procedures, and overall impartiality and credibility. Dispute resolution at WIPO is much faster than normal litigation in the courts. A domain name case filed with WIPO is normally concluded within two months, using on-line procedures, whereas litigation can take much longer. Fees are also much lower than normal litigation. There are no in-person hearings, except in extraordinary cases. Minimal filing requirements also help reduce costs. For resolution of a case involving one to five domain names, with a single panelist, the current cost is US$ 1,500; for three panelists, the total cost is US$ 4,000. For six to ten domain names, the current cost is US$ 2,000 for a case involving a sole panelist and US$ 5,000 for a case involving three panelists.
What are the results of the procedures, and are they binding?
A domain name is either transferred or the complaint is denied and the respondent keeps the domain name. It is also possible to seek cancellation of the domain name.
There are no monetary damages applied in UDRP domain name disputes, and no injunctive relief is available. The accredited domain name registrars - which have agreed to abide by the UDRP - implement a decision after a period of ten days, unless the decision is appealed in court in that time. The panel decisions are mandatory in the sense that accredited registrars are bound to take the necessary steps to enforce a decision, such as transferring the name concerned. However, under the UDRP, either party retains the option to take the dispute to a court of competent jurisdiction for independent resolution. In practice, this is a relatively rare occurrence.
http://arbiter.wipo.int/center/faq/domains.html#5
quote:
How do you know this? A motion for summary judgement can be filed at any time if its basis is by law. TWI did not have a legal position that current case and statutory law recognized.
Yes, Pat filed a motion for summary disposition(prematurely)
-
quote:
Yes and it proudly posted at: www.twisucks.com
Have you picked up your Ex-TWI Purple Heart yet?
-
quote:
Liar. And how would you know what went on? Reading your crystal ball? You make all kinds of wild assumptions about my motives without a shred of evidence. Liar
It may have, if TWI had simply discovered TWIM, but that's not what happened. What happened was that Pat sought to cause trouble for TWI by informing TWIM of TWI's pending trademark applications.
-
quote:
That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but as LG said, they can also prevail by being on the right side of the law and the facts. Nothing you have said or done has established that they were wrong on either front, no matter how often or how loudly you insist that it's so.
Long Gone: Could you kindly answer the two questions below:
1) What are the elements of trademark Infringement
2) Why are there laws against trademark infringement
quote:
No. They were due in a few weeks if TWI hadn't settled.
Did you receive your answers to interrogatories and your request for production of documents?
-
quote:
Actually, I had consulted with several trademark attorneys over the years who had the same opinion.
It has not been established by anyone anywhere except you.
quote:
TWI can only enforce their trademarks by making it too costly to pursue justice.
There's also no question that TWIM could have pursued their case but chose not to.
TWIM most likely saw the tremendous waste of their time and resources which TWI was more than happy to spend, and decided that the battle was not worth the cost.
On trademark issues, TWI has lost in a few trademark cases I will be posting in the next weeks.
Again, if TWI's trademark "The Way" was so defensable, TWI would not have needed to register 4 new trademarks for "The Way International". Their trademark for "The Way" should have been sufficient without needing the new trademarks.
-
quote:
The judge's decision and order was dated July 7, 2004. The hearing as to the evidence was scheduled August 16, 2004.
You’re being more than a little presumptuous there, Pat. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
It is obvious that the judge made a decision before the evidentiary hearing was held.
-
From My ENE pleadings pages 2&3
1. TWI Has No Rights In The Mark "The Way"
R*berge has always been of the contention that TWI's trademark "The Way" has been invalid and unenforceable due to it being public domain. Whether TWI likes it or not, they are not the owners of the mark. The Christian church as a whole are the rightful owners with common law trademark rights. TWI used the legal process to try to obscure this reality, but TWI only has the same right as any other church group to the use of the mark.
B. TWI's Mark "The Way" is Generic in A Religious Context
And "The Way" Is Also a Generic Term in Society
A search of trademarks with the search term "The Way" yielded 3055 trademarks incorporating TWI's "mark." For TWI to represent to the court that their trademark "The Way" is famous or unique or any other description is beyond the truth of it being generic, and is not zealous representation of a client, but rather is misrepresentation.
A generic term is the genus or basis of a group of marks, and "The Way " is that genus. The term "The Way" is generic in religious circles, because it is the central theme or common denominator in the name of over 400 churches, 2700 religious books and over 100 websites. TWI has absolutely no way to defend against this very overwhelming reality. The Way is also a generic term in society as evidenced by so many trademarks.
Whether TWI's mark was generic at the time of the The Way International v. King's Way Center in 1984, it certainly is now twenty years later. There has been a resurgence / revival of church beliefs going back to earlier biblical roots. In earlier times, followers of Jesus Christ were called followers of The Way before they were known as Christians. This is even acknowledged by TWI in their court pleadings.
"To allow trademark protection for generic terms, i.e., names which describe the genus of goods being sold, even when these have become identified with a first user, would grant the owner of the mark a monopoly, since a competitor could not describe his goods as what they are."
CES PUBLISHING CORP., v. ST. REGIS PUBLICATIONS, 531 F.2d 11; 1975
"A "generic" term is "one that refers... to the genus of which the particular product [or service is a specie". McGregor-Doniger, Inc. v. Drizzle, Inc., supra, at 599 F.2d 1131"
-
From my ENE brief:
1. TWI Has No Rights In The Mark "The Way"
Roberge has always been of the contention that TWI's trademark "The Way" has been invalid and unenforceable due to it being public domain. Whether TWI likes it or not, they are not the owners of the mark. The Christian church as a whole are the rightful owners with common law trademark rights. TWI used the legal process to try to obscure this reality, but TWI only has the same right as any other church group to the use of the mark.
B. TWI's Mark "The Way" is Generic in A Religious ContextAnd "The Way" Is Also a Generic Term in Society
A search of trademarks with the search term "The Way" yielded 3055 trademarks incorporating TWI's "mark." For TWI to represent to the court that their trademark "The Way" is famous or unique or any other description is beyond the truth of it being generic, and is not zealous representation of a client, but rather is misrepresentation.
A generic term is the genus or basis of a group of marks, and "The Way " is that genus. The term "The Way" is generic in religious circles, because it is the central theme or common denominator in the name of over 400 churches, 2700 religious books and over 100 websites. TWI has absolutely no way to defend against this very overwhelming reality. The Way is also a generic term in society as evidenced by so many trademarks.
Whether TWI's mark was generic at the time of the The Way International v. King's Way Center in 1984, it certainly is now twenty years later. There has been a resurgence / revival of church beliefs going back to earlier biblical roots. In earlier times, followers of Jesus Christ were called followers of The Way before they were known as Christians. This is even acknowledged by TWI in their court pleadings.
"To allow trademark protection for generic terms, i.e., names which describe the genus of goods being sold, even when these have become identified with a first user, would grant the owner of the mark a monopoly, since a competitor could not describe his goods as what they are."
CES PUBLISHING CORP., v. ST. REGIS PUBLICATIONS, 531 F.2d 11; 1975
"A "generic" term is "one that refers... to the genus of which the particular product [or service is a specie". McGregor-Doniger, Inc. v. Drizzle, Inc., supra, at 599 F.2d 1131"
-
quote:
Actually, they didn't lose the case just getting a restraining order. They decided to back out at that time because their name did include International I would suspect.
The reason why TWIM lost it's suit is because they used the words
Long Gone: Your venomous rhetoric again leaves me wondering what your stake in this is, and why you are virtually silent on this board until I post about the lawsuit. You make a big deal out of my statement about the Judge not being a lawyer which I had been told and should have verified myself. Point well taken. However, the judge did prematurely come to a decision before having an evidentiary hearing on the matter to weigh the evidence. That was a mistake.
As far as legal precedent in my case, TWI used this case in their pleadings. I also pointed out to TWI's attorneys that this was not a full blown decision after a trial, but was for a restraining order. Further, most citations for court purposes are of appellate decisions and the ones that carry real weight are the appellate decisions from the same circuit, as any first year law student knows. TWI apparently lacked any "victories" in court over their trademarks as I know of 3 cases where they lost.
Oh, by the way, why did TWI feel the need to file for 4 new trademarks for "the way international" if their trademark "The Way" was not generic and was defendable? Did they just want to add to their collection of 128 other trademarks?
-
quote:
The elected judge who is not a lawyer made that ruling without reviewing the evidence. There was an evidentiary hearing scheduled in a few weeks. 6 trademark attorneys I consulted with said the way was unenforceable because it was invalid/generic.
unenforceable because it is generic," the U. S. District Court found it highly unlikely that a party making such a claim would prevail.
You may want to ponder why TWI has just registered 4 new trademarks for "The Way International". Answer as stated in TWI's pleadings: the combination of generic terms into a new trademark makes a non generic mark.
quote:
Yes they were.That is why they went through great trouble to try to build a case against the websites and asked for injunctions against the websites.
TWI never sought to shut down your websites. TWI's disputes with you have never been about anything but your infringement of their trademarks.
Again, the domain name was not the main issue. Why are you so thick headed about that. The domain name arbitration board would have resolved the issue for under $1000.00 if that was the case. Are you saying that 4 lawyers were too stupid to go the cheapest route?
quote:
The sale was a joke as most people understood except those that took twi's slant on it.
sell it, for a profit
quote:
That's what the new websites are for. By the way, you may consider the fact that despite a huge onslaught of paperwork and over 40 filings with the court, TWI only got the domain name when they politely asked me for it. They were not the ones who decided, I decided.
I hope you continue to use your web sites to expose TWI for the petty, vindictive, wannabe cult that it is.
-
quote:
Nothing to show for it...except for everything they wanted.
TWI didn't shut down the two websites, the reason for bringing the action in Federal Court instead of the arbitration board.
Believe what you want. You made up your mind without considering all the facts first...
-
I didn't spend @$50,000.00 to have virtually nothing to show for it....
And TWI wasn't able to shut down the two websites
-
quote:
On every principle he claimed to be fighting for: the domain name, the trademark infringement, the rights to the term "The Way," the ability to use "The Way of Christ" as a domain name and as a ministry name, Pat got spanked.
1. I was not fighting for the right to use the way of christ. I changed the name 4 years ago and it is now known by it's present name which means the same thing.
2. TWI had 4 new trademarks for specifically "The Way International" so in lite of that change there was no reason to keep the domain name I was getting rid of anyway
3. As far as being able to use the way, it has been well established that trademark of TWI's is unenforceable because it is generic.The information learned from this experience will be made available for free to every church that I find out about that TWI bothers about the way trademark.
4. Again, you wrongly assumed TWI really wanted only the domain name which was the reason for the lawsuit. If you were right (which you are not), TWI should have gone to the domain name arbitration board where the issue would have been settled months ago at about 1/50th the cost.
5. TWI wanted injunctive relief or in other terms to shut down the two websites that were "infringing" which they were not able to do.That was the real reason for the lawsuit. Your erroneous theory of a domain name being the issue would have had the court refer the issue to the arbitration board.
quote:
TWI knew my finances going into this and still insisted on keeping their costs at a minimum of @$50,000.00 Some minimum....
He wouldn't have been able to pay them anyway, and TWI knew that. So TWI did the next best thing: they kept their costs to a minimum.
Details about Pawtucket's dad's funeral
in Open
Posted
Paw,
Our condolences on your loss. Your father's passing sounds like it was with the comfort of those that loved him being there. Patrick and Wenda
:(-->