Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

TWI sued me, I sued back


pjroberge
 Share

Recommended Posts

That site of pat's wasn't bad at all...I can't figure out why the heck anyone would want to sue him for that...I just checked it out...is there another reason I'm not seeing? I can see this is controversial but after looking at the sight I can't figure out why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 310
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

This thread is definitely monitored by TWI, so they may bring ideas from it to their attorneys who may check them out to see if they are valid, and if so...use them against Pat. I can bet there are some on this thread with some legal experience. Then again, maybe not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eagle,

Their attorneys aren't idiots. They've looked into these things with a lot moe scrutiny than any of us armchair legal buffs. While I'm sure Long Gone appreciates the compliment, you give him too much credit if you think he's coming up with something TWI's lawyers have overlooked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vickles,

Imagine this.

You are incorporated under the name, Victoria Lee Services, Inc. (inspired by your nick). I am one of your former low-level managers, who participated in your management training program.

I have registered the domain name victorialeeservices.com and have incorporated under the name, Victoria Lee Genuine Services, Inc. (Pat did incorporate under the name, The Way of Christ Ministry.) I use victorialeeservices.com as the website of my corporation and place in large letters at the top of each page, Victoria Lee Genuine Services, with "genuine" underscored. One page on my site is entitled, "To Current Victoria Lee Customers." That page links to other pages. One is entitled, "Is Vickles the Service Queen?" Another is entitled, "About Ex-Vic Sites."

Is this acceptable to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
That Pat acceded to TWI’s demands in 2000 and stopped using both the name “The Way of Christ Ministry” and the domain where its site was located supports TWI’s claims. That Pat abandoned his trademark application in 2002, after TWI opposed it, also supports those claims.

For the record, I ceased using the name temporarily because it was only $300 for a trademark application versus thousands to fight TWI.

This does not support TWI's claims. What fantasy world are you from. The fact that I filed a trademark application shows that I did not agree with TWI's interpretration.

And my withdrawing the application was because of $ not that TWI was right. Get serious. They are full of crap in their assertions.

I was going to respond to some of your other similarily twisted interpretations, but it is not worth the time. I will spend my time writing instead of responding to anymore of such sillyness.

Commercial means the exchange of goods and services for money or some other consideration. No exchange, no goods and services.Try walking out of a store with goods and services without paying for them.

Receiving donations is not that. People have access to Ex-Cultworld whether or not they ever make a donation. And by the way, The Way Of Christ and the current site never had a donations link...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat,

I could post a detailed and thoroughly documented explanation of why you don’t stand a chance of prevailing on Count III, but to be brutally frank, I don’t think you’d understand it. Just yesterday, you demonstrated that you don’t understand the relatively simple matter of the District Court’s jurisdiction.

The reason I have concentrated on Count III is because it is the most straightforward, and the easiest to understand and prove. It is also the count for which the consequences are most clear.

Pat, even if you were represented by a competent attorney, the best outcome you could reasonably expect, based on Count III alone, would be to lose the domain and pay TWI $1000.00 statutory damages. The actual outcome could be much worse.

If you persist, TWI’s attorneys will put you down hard. You will lose the domain. You will lose thousands of dollars. You may end up bankrupt. I don’t know how solid your marriage is (don’t tell me) but such things can destroy a marriage. The combination of bankruptcy and a ruined marriage can destroy a man’s life.

You have nothing to gain by this. You have much, possibly everything, to lose. For your own good, settle this thing, even if you have to get down on your knees and beg for mercy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Longone posted:

quote:
Vickles,

Imagine this.

You are incorporated under the name, Victoria Lee Services, Inc. (inspired by your nick). I am one of your former low-level managers, who participated in your management training program.

I have registered the domain name victorialeeservices.com and have incorporated under the name, Victoria Lee Genuine Services, Inc. (Pat did incorporate under the name, The Way of Christ Ministry.) I use victorialeeservices.com as the website of my corporation and place in large letters at the top of each page, Victoria Lee Genuine Services, with "genuine" underscored. One page on my site is entitled, "To Current Victoria Lee Customers." That page links to other pages. One is entitled, "Is Vickles the Service Queen?" Another is entitled, "About Ex-Vic Sites."

Is this acceptable to you?


A weak analogy IMO. It also leaves out how this all got started.

Here how it got started.

A religious group takes a commom phrase from the Bible like "The Word" and then incorportates itself as "The Word Inc."

Later this group apllies for and gets a US Trademark for "The Word". But they fail to disclose to the U.S. patent office that "The Word" is already used in the name of hundreds of corporations, churches. etc. They also fail to disclose that "the Word" is a biblical term synonymous with Jesus and also with the Bible . It also amounts to a "religious belief". Millions of folks believe in "The Word" but of these millions only a scant few believe in "The Word" as a corporation out of Ohio. They also fail to police this trademark.

Next as they recruit a few followers in other countries, they think of themselves as being global in nature and change their name to "The Word International"

This organization becomes entrenched in scandal with charges of plagairism and sexual harrassment against it's leaders. Many of their followers leave thier ranks. They dwindle to 1/5 of their peak membership of less. While witholding details or thier scandals to thier own followers.

I, being a former follower start a Website Called former-wordworld.com to expose this group, then becoming aware of other groups like this register and use former-cultworld.com.

I also start a little Ministry and name it "The Word of Jesus Ministries" I Incorporate under that name. I also apply for a trademark.

Then I get a letter one day from the attorneys of "The Word International" claiming that "The Word Of Jesus Ministries" is a trademark infringement against "The Word International's" trademark "The Word". They say that people will confuse "The Word of Jesus Ministries" with "The Word International". They demand I Stop using the Word of Jesus Ministries.

However, they have never and do not now take any action againt hundreds of other ministries and churches (legally incorporated) all over the United States that have "The Word" in their name, Like:

The Word of Life Ministries , The Word of Truth, Christ is the Word, Church of the Word, The Word Tabernacle, The Word of the Apostle, ad infinitum.

For lack of financial resources to hire competant legal help, I abandon my Trademark application and change my name.

This is kind of how it all got started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goey,

Isn’t there some history where TWI did go after some groups using what they considered their mark? Thought at least one was mentioned on this thread.

The biggest threat to TWI has come in the form of the internet by ex-members placing in plain view what all should know about that group. WayDale brought them to their knees and almost hit them with a fatal blow. Now the funny thing with religious groups is that tendency they seem to believe they are right and superior to their competition. Got to stop the devil from taking them down you know!

They start searching for any possible way to stop the continuous *griping* placed out there for all to see. Then there it is, a simple mark dispute! Weak, possibly; but there is a chance too win and set some sort of legal precedence that will aide them in shutting down all the others! Despite reasons and excuses, the first mark complaint is dropped as the offending mark is changed.

Yet, low and behold an even stronger mark infringement appears and it’s the same dude! Eureka!

Now the defense is based on the mark being invalid. Can that really be used as a defense in this setting? Can the district court declare it invalid? Or is it going to see the dispute between to parties that has a long history and that the defendant has decided to act by his own law, obtaining the domain name to use against the mark owners?

I can see losing this case and then with the time and resources getting the mark declared invalid through the proper channels. Once that is done, appealing and getting the first judgement overturned. But, then how far ahead has anyone looked? If TWI some how would lose this, they have everything to gain by making the proper and legal appeals. They got the time and the $$$$ to drag the final judgement out for years.

That is why I don’t think Long Gone’s final outcome of all this is that far fetched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
You have nothing to gain by this. You have much, possibly everything, to lose. For your own good, settle this thing, even if you have to get down on your knees and beg for mercy.
Oh be serious. This is the last time I will respond to your attempts to frighten me with your twisted and demeaning words. I have not been swayed one bit by your silliness.

quote:
Now the defense is based on the mark being invalid. Can that really be used as a defense in this setting? Can the district court declare it invalid?
Yes it is a very real defense and yes the district court as well as the trademark office can cancel TWI's trademarks.

TWI should be the one concerned. I am writing to the 300+ churches that they can go after next if I lose, and see if they wish to do a class action against TWI. TWI like a rabid and viscious dog are the ones who will be put down hard by the courts. Oh,perhaps I may get a little bloodied in the process, but TWI will fare a lot worse because of the publicity among other factors....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grizz,

quote:
Now the defense is based on the mark being invalid. Can that really be used as a defense in this setting? Can the district court declare it invalid?

I think the countersuit is a plausible defense and that it has quite a bit of merit actually. Tell me why it can't be used? Tell me why it will fail?

And yes the District Court, can cancel a Trademark if it can be proven that the owner/agent withheld relevant information, was fraudulent, or failed to police a Trademark.

quote:
Or is it going to see the dispute between to parties that has a long history and that the defendant has decided to act by his own law, obtaining the domain name to use against the mark owners?
We wont know that till it happens will we?

While some of you guys are solely speculating a negative outcome and trying to find reasons why Pat is gonna lose this thing, I am trying to figure out and find ways that he can beat it. But I am not so naive as to think that it's gonna be a slam dunk. This is a very complicated case and I certainly don't think that I am smart enough to predict the outcome.

Heck, it hasn't even gone to discovery yet for crying out loud - and some of y'all have Pat making license plates already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
Originally posted by Grizzy:

Can the district court declare [TWI’s marks] invalid?


The District Court has that authority, but it won’t happen. That counterclaim will be dismissed. THIS sets forth the standards for cancellation of registration. First of all, Pat is not and will not be damaged by TWI’s marks being registered. Secondly, TWI’s marks are not generic, not functional, have not been abandoned, and their registration was not obtained fraudulently. Read THIS, if you’re interested. Go down about halfway, to "Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss the Federal Counterclaim." There simply are no grounds for canceling the registration of any of TWI’s marks. Even if there were, Pat would still lose on Count III, because TWI’s name, The Way International, would qualify as a name protected as a mark for the purposes of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d).

Pat’s other counterclaims will be dismissed too. At best, the first count addresses a few errors that can be corrected with an amended complaint. The second count is nothing but complaining about TWI exercising their rights, in accordance with accepted business and legal procedures. The third count is essentially the same thing, regarding the current suit. The fourth count I addressed above. TWI has nothing to lose in this, except the difference between their costs of prosecuting it and whatever damages they are awarded and manage to collect. TWI won’t even suffer any significant negative publicity because nobody is going to care, except for a few ex-TWI folks and whoever Pat might get excited with his letter-writing campaign, none of whom are of any consequence to TWI.

quote:
That is why I don’t think Long Gone’s final outcome of all this is that far fetched.
It’s not far-fetched at all. It’s the best-case outcome for Pat. TWI will prevail on Count III, if not all counts. The minimum consequence to Pat is loss of the domain and payment of $1000.00 statutory damages. The damages could be more (up to $100,000.00, as the court considers just) and that’s only considering Count III. (TWI is currently requesting Pat’s profits, TWI’s damages, costs, and attorney’s fees but I suspect they’ll exercise their right to elect statutory damages. Either way, it will be at least $1000.00.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goey,

If you and I were in a bank and you wanted to put on a mask and run out, pointing a gun at some police officers in the parking lot, I would probably try to get you to consider the likely problems with that plan. If you were still determined to go through with it, I’d try one last time, by saying something like, “ “Don’t do it! You’ll be killed!” That wouldn’t be claiming omniscience, it would be stating an opinion, rather forcefully, as a warning. Not a perfect analogy, but not much different than I’ve done here.

I’ve looked hard for a way for Pat to come out of this unscathed, or relatively so. I simply can’t see any reasonable expectation of a better outcome than the one I presented above. Rather, I see the likelihood that this could get much worse than Pat imagines. I decided to drop the niceties and try to warn him one last time. I won’t again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you were a member of a family and someone went and trademarked your family's name saying they owned it and no one else was authorized to call themselves by that family name what would you do?

And registered domain names of many different variations of your family name, what would you do?

Do you think it would be right if you used your family name for a website or wrote a book about your family that the people who trademarked your family name could sue you for doing so?

If you think this is a fantasy, welcome to the TWI v. Pat lawsuit. Forget about all the legal jargon and ask yourself if TWI had the right to say they owned Jesus Christ's name The Way and whether TWI was the only group that was authorized to use that name in commerce?

Edited by pjroberge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I don't find Long Gone's arguments to be malicious, vindictive, or anything other than his fair assessment of the situation. Even if LG is not a licensed attorney, he has researched and backed up all of his points quite well.

I also don't think Long Gone has done anything to deserve the personal attacks leveled at him. While I can't speak for him, I feel that he would genuinely like to see TWI lose, but with the resources available to any layman, he's convinced that Pat cannot prevail. It's not spite, not argument for argument's sake, and not personal. (Pat, if LG had it in for you, do you honestly think he'd take the trouble to tell you any of this at all?)

I've gone back and forth on the issue myself. The case Goey presented showed that some of the obvious apparent strengths of TWI's case weren't necessarily viewed that way by that court. Long Gone has made some very relevant observations about the particulars of Pat's case that undermine its apparent strong points, too.

Right now, I'm of the opinion that if Pat wins at all, it will be on a technicality, not on merit. His countersuit has virutally no chance at succeeding. Would I like to see TWI take the hit on this one? Of course. I just don't see it happening.

Long Gone's best-case scenario is an award to TWI of $1000. Personally, I would place the chances of that happening at less than an acquittal. If TWI wins, it won't be for any piddling $1000. If I had to put numbers to my wild-*** guess on the odds, it would be:

Pat successfully defends -- 20%

TWI wins a bankrupting settlement -- 65%

TWI wins a small settlement -- 10%

Pat recovers anything on his countersuit -- 1%

Unforeseen outcome -- 4%

I'm not trying to be mean to Pat, either. The odds just honestly don't look too good from where I sit. It would be a disservice to Pat to sugarcoat it to spare his feelings. I can't for the life of me see why Pat won't get some professional legal representation, but that's his choice. Perhaps he's thinking of filing bankruptcy anyway, so it doesn't really matter if TWI wins big. I have no way of knowing.

I do know that personal feuds have NO place on this thread, though. Most of the time, personality conflicts arise from differing viewpoints, and that's unavoidable. This thread, however, is about fact and law. A person's love or hatred for another won't change the law or the facts one iota. Bringing needless emotion into the discussion does not help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
I can't for the life of me see why Pat won't get some professional legal representation
As I have said numerous times, I have no choice. I do not have the $ for an attorney and TWI knew this going into this lawsuit. They were hoping for an easy "victory" against an opponent who has about $20,000 in assets to their $40,000,000.

Then TWI could have something for Rosie to brag about. I however will not go quietly and will use every bit of the law in my favor to defend against TWI's lawsuit. Why can't people understand what is really at stake?

It isn't a stupid domain name or any real infringement. It is about their having power over someone else using the legal system.

Then as part of the nice big settlement if they win, they require I sign over my shares of Ex-Cultworld Magazine and then TWI can have another puppet group like their buddies do with the former cult awareness network.

Next time when one of you wants to put up a TWI satire site or decide to post something on a website TWI doesn't like that mentions The Way tm, they sue you too.

It is unfortunate that Long Gone and others who have spent so much energy showing how TWI will win haven't spent that same energy in researching tactics to win against TWI....

I have asked for a jury trial for a very good reason. A judge may take a very narrow legal view of things and my lack of legal skill is to my disadvantage.

But, a jury is comprised of everyday folk who may not appreciate the legal points but will see the ethical side. Sure, maybe TWI wins, but the jury decides on an amount of damages of $1.00 as being fair for what was really done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat, it's posts like that one that raise serious doubts about your grasp on the reality of the situation. TWI has no power over you except that which your actions allow. You knew going into this that they could afford to be nitpickingly litigious, so they certainly would take every opportunity to do so.

quote:
It isn't a stupid domain name or any real infringement. It is about their having power over someone else using the legal system.
Intellectual property has been established as defensible as any other property by the courts. Refresh my memory, but wasn't it you who complained loudly when Paw posted a copy of something on which you claimed copyright, even though you were not the original author? (edited) Don't you think the TWI lawyers have printouts of every single bit of that? Do you think they'll hesitate for a second to bring it up in court to impeach your testimony? Now you claim that your whole strategy rests on being able to sweet-talk a jury of complete strangers? We're the most anti-TWI group of folks around, and you can't even convince a mojority of US that you're right! Documentable hypocrisy on your part is going to make their case that much easier to prove to those strangers.

Pat, there's right, there's wrong, and there's stupid. Settling this out of court may stick in your craw, but it's the smart thing to do. If it goes to court, no one outside this forum will probably even hear about the outcome, much less care about it. This is not some widely-watched landmark case. The possibility of a positive outcome from a trial is slim, and there is a real danger that you could lose your shirt. Please don't overestimate your chances.

Edited by Zixar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
but wasn't it you who complained loudly when Paw posted a copy of something on which you claimed copyright, even though you were not the original author?
I never claimed copyright. I said that we had spent the time and money to procure the information and that it was not ethical to just copy it off the site.

And, there is no documented hypocracy on my part at all. There is a twisted interpretation of facts and events by certain critics of what I do.

Edited by pjroberge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
Next time when one of you wants to put up a TWI satire site or decide to post something on a website TWI doesn't like that mentions The Way tm, they sue you too.

Pat,

Since this seems to be, to you, the main reason that they are going after you, then answer the following queston if you will:

Why then, have they NOT gone after, nor even attempted to go after, Waydale, Greasespot Cafe, John Juedes anti-way site, and other sites that were clearly anti-Way? If your theory hold true, this clearly wouldn't be the case, ... would it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
Why then, have they NOT gone after, nor even attempted to go after, Waydale, Greasespot Cafe, John Juedes anti-way site, and other sites that were clearly anti-Way? If your theory hold true, this clearly wouldn't be the case, ... would it?

Answers:

Waydale is closed

Greasespot is a source of info for TWI

John Juedes has the wherewithal to rip TWI a new one if they tried

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat: Then why do you put a copyright notice in your signature? You cannot vigorously assert your intellectual property rights while ignoring those of others without being guilty of hypocrisy. And that's just one example. If a bunch of ALBs can track this stuff down in an hour, you can bet the farm that any law intern could mine the Net for far more damaging material. Even though this is not really a criminal case, everything you say still can and will be used against you in a court of law. I'm afraid all your grandstanding has already tied your own noose without TWI's lawyers having to lift a finger. All they'll have to do is quote selected bits of this thread back to the jury in their closing argument and you won't have a prayer of defending "bad faith", and you won't have a hope of convincing the jury that you aren't just doing a song and dance in front of them--because you've already admitted as much here!

(edited)

Look, Pat, I'm not trying to jump in your mud puddle, but if you take no other piece of advice I give you, for God's sake take this one: Shut The Hell Up Already! You can't say a single thing here that will help your case, and accidentally letting another gaffe slip just does their work for them. Honestly.

Edited by Zixar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said I wouldn’t try to warn Pat again. I didn’t say I’d shut up.

Zix, I’m sure you know this, but I want to clarify that “best case” does not mean “most likely.” I believe that there is virtually no chance of a better outcome for Pat, but a high probability of a worse one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...