Looks to me like that prohibition is only against the quotation or publication of the mark by a legitimate news site. In other words, if a news commentator wanted to comment negatively on Coca-Cola, he could not be held liable for using the term "Coca-Cola" in his article, even though it might negatively impact Coke sales.
Registering the domain name in bad faith is clearly prohibited. You might be able to claim using the mark on your site in commentary or reporting, but the site name itself has no innocuous news use.
I think you're going to lose and lose big on this, Pat. That's your right, of course, but it's going to make all ex-TWI sites and organizations look bad in the process.
PJRoberge is correct, I believe, in his position he has the winning edge on this case. TWI did not go after the domain name, they criticized heavily any use of the internet and even forbid us to use it, lest we be marked and avoided. He used the .com as a tool to speak about the Way, so the reality here is that a dot.com called wayinternational.com or thewayinternational.com can be ABOUT the Way International, and not at all belong to them. I don't think TWI has a very solid case. I do believe it is harassment, and I wonder if there will be enough evidence of that to countersue TWI. I have used PJRoberge's sites for years and it helped me emotionally and mentally. I give the deciding and logical edge to PJRoberge.
quote:(III) is a trademark, word, or name protected by reason of section 706 of title 18, United States Code, or section 220506 of title 36, United States Code.
quote: B) (i) In determining whether a person has a bad faith intent described under subparagraph (A), a court may consider factors such as, but not limited to--
(I) the trademark or other intellectual property rights of the person, if any, in the domain name;
Pat isn't the registered trademark of the way in the domain name?
It took me five minutes to research this topic briefly and I will tell you this. It is common practice for the lawyers to send you a registered letter asking you to stop using and close down the domain name. If the person refuses (like you did) then a law suit is filed in federal court of the state the domain was purchased. It does not matter that they did not think to buy it at the time and that you did and you certainly cannot sell it to anyone else including TWI.
Pat, I think they can really win this and the loss to you can be great. Please rethink this. I am not saying this to you out of any malice, but out of concern for you. Just give it to them.
For those who argue that the Mormons don't sue anyone who uses "Church of Jesus Christ," why don't you try this: register: "churchofjesuschristoflatterdaysaints.com" and see if you don't get sued.
Yes, the amateur lawyering is the same thing for which Pat is being criticized. The difference is that we're not being dragged into court, he is. I could spout off legal theories and strategies until the cows come home and it makes no difference. This man is going to court, but before doing so, insists on arming his enemy with as much ammunition as possible.
Don’t forget to mention to have a history of having anti-Mormon sites and stating your intent was to draw people away from them!
The claim of being a (cough) news group would hold up in this case if there hadn’t been such a history to show intent. To become one after the fact I think will work to their advantage.
"However, Pat would have prevailed on "the Way of Christ".
*****
Maybe Pat would have prevailed.
A case involving use of the words "The Way" in the name "The Way of Christ Ministry," however, would have involved questions about the use of a phrase that is quite more arguably generic than the phrase "The Way International."
Not only does the phrase "The Way International" less mistakably (than the phrase "The Way") have the New Knoxville group as its referent, the domain www.thewayinternational.com has, in limit and extent, the exact wording of the heretical sect's trademark (less spacing and capitalization).
There is only so far that TWI can go on cornering the phrase "The Way". Darn phrase came straight out of the Bible. Why are they not suing churches in Ohio that are not at all associated with them called "Church of the Way" or "The Way of Jesus Christ" or some other phrase?
Hey, Can PJRoberge sell his domain name to an overseas internet freak (outsource it) and let the Way track that down? PJ gets rid of it, says he doesn't have it, and the name gets sold all around for like a buck a person. When the Way catches up with that guy, he sells it, and so on. Would they still hold PJ responsible?
Can we all sue TWI individually, one at a time, for all the mental torture and abuse we suffered under this organization? I know it was "our choice", but the deception in the beginning fooled all of us, didn't it? I mean, there is still a lot of mental torment these people are handing out to ex-Wayers, like those who just want to visit the cemetary there.
Touche Eagle. Normally, when you have a trademark of such a generic and very undistinctive phrase as, "The Way". You have this trademarked with distinctive graphics and you can only use this phrase as a trademark with these distinctive graphics.
no not amateur attorney, more like armchair lawyers. We are not the ones being sued, he is. If someone was suing me, I would NOT post it on the internet. I WOULD hire an attorney.
It would not surprise me if TWI went in front of Judge Judy after they pay out for all these lawsuits. At least I don't think wayfers have been told not to watch her yet. She is one that would tear their *** up.
Diazbro: the term "being dragged into court" is a colloquiallism which means you're the one getting sued. Pat didn't initiate the lawsuit, he's the defendant. Therefore he's getting dragged into court. That he decides to walk in rather than get dragged in is inconsequential to my point: We're not going to court. Our legal theories cannot be used by our courtroom adversaries because... we don't have courtroom adversaries.
Pat doesn't need to listen to our amateur legal theories. That is very true. But he also doesn't need to go online and announce his legal theories to the whole world, especially knowing that his courtroom adversaries are observing every word. This isn't a game. This isn't just a thread. This is a lawsuit that in some way threatens this man's livelihood. And for what? A domain name? Give up that issue and what has TWI got on him? NOTHING. Why do you think TWI has not gone after Paw? Because they CAN'T!
Pat can continue his fight without thewayinternational.com.
The point of telling Pat to knock off the amateur lawyering is not about disagreement with his position (some agree and some don't). It's about encouraging him to do the smart thing and not hand ammunition to the enemy.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
24
16
22
47
Popular Days
Apr 6
37
Apr 2
37
Apr 3
35
Apr 5
31
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 24 posts
Mark Sanguinetti 16 posts
LG 22 posts
pjroberge 47 posts
Popular Days
Apr 6 2004
37 posts
Apr 2 2004
37 posts
Apr 3 2004
35 posts
Apr 5 2004
31 posts
pjroberge
Many of you have expressed concern about my giving TWI's lawyers my strategy.
I have discussed only the points of law that I have discussed with them already. The rest will only be revealed at the right time. Don't worry...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
No Way
think about all the churches that call themselves, the church of jesus christ..........then look at the mormons, do you think they go after everyone?
i would love to see the way try to have a copyright symbol after "the" and "way" in the merriam webster dictionary.
they seriously need to get off their high horse and realize that they are a cult and inflict nothing but despair on people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pjroberge
Thank You no way
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Looks to me like that prohibition is only against the quotation or publication of the mark by a legitimate news site. In other words, if a news commentator wanted to comment negatively on Coca-Cola, he could not be held liable for using the term "Coca-Cola" in his article, even though it might negatively impact Coke sales.
Registering the domain name in bad faith is clearly prohibited. You might be able to claim using the mark on your site in commentary or reporting, but the site name itself has no innocuous news use.
I think you're going to lose and lose big on this, Pat. That's your right, of course, but it's going to make all ex-TWI sites and organizations look bad in the process.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
PJRoberge is correct, I believe, in his position he has the winning edge on this case. TWI did not go after the domain name, they criticized heavily any use of the internet and even forbid us to use it, lest we be marked and avoided. He used the .com as a tool to speak about the Way, so the reality here is that a dot.com called wayinternational.com or thewayinternational.com can be ABOUT the Way International, and not at all belong to them. I don't think TWI has a very solid case. I do believe it is harassment, and I wonder if there will be enough evidence of that to countersue TWI. I have used PJRoberge's sites for years and it helped me emotionally and mentally. I give the deciding and logical edge to PJRoberge.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AdiosMiCorazon
Pat isn't The Way a trademark?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AdiosMiCorazon
Pat isn't the registered trademark of the way in the domain name?
It took me five minutes to research this topic briefly and I will tell you this. It is common practice for the lawyers to send you a registered letter asking you to stop using and close down the domain name. If the person refuses (like you did) then a law suit is filed in federal court of the state the domain was purchased. It does not matter that they did not think to buy it at the time and that you did and you certainly cannot sell it to anyone else including TWI.
Pat, I think they can really win this and the loss to you can be great. Please rethink this. I am not saying this to you out of any malice, but out of concern for you. Just give it to them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Pat,
Zixar's interpretation of © is correct. Yours is not. The reason TWI cannot go after Pawtucket for having an "About The Way" forum is precisely because of ©. But there is a substantial difference between that and registering "thewayinternational.com" as a url. If you called it "thetruthabouttheway.com," you would be on stronger footing. Any reasonable person who goes to "www.thewayinternational.com" has a reasonable expectation to access a web site owned and operated by The Way International. You are deliberately capitalizing on that expectation in order to provide information that would lead people AWAY from TWI.
Under your interpretation of ©, I would be able to start a website called "thewaymagazine.com" and specifically use that site to provide information against the interest of The Way International. They would sue me if I did so. And I don't know if they would win or not, but they should win, because I am deliberately capitalizing on their trademark in order to defame them.
For those who argue that the Mormons don't sue anyone who uses "Church of Jesus Christ," why don't you try this: register: "churchofjesuschristoflatterdaysaints.com" and see if you don't get sued.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
No offense to anyone but isn't all the amateur lawyering going on the same thing for which PAt
is being criticized ? At least partly ?
Its like "The Peoples Court" at Gspot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Bring in LarryP, and then it'll be like Night Court.
:D-->
I wanna play Bull!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Diazbro,
Yes, the amateur lawyering is the same thing for which Pat is being criticized. The difference is that we're not being dragged into court, he is. I could spout off legal theories and strategies until the cows come home and it makes no difference. This man is going to court, but before doing so, insists on arming his enemy with as much ammunition as possible.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
Now Raf,
Don’t forget to mention to have a history of having anti-Mormon sites and stating your intent was to draw people away from them!
The claim of being a (cough) news group would hold up in this case if there hadn’t been such a history to show intent. To become one after the fact I think will work to their advantage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
Mark Sanguinetti wrote,
"However, Pat would have prevailed on "the Way of Christ".
*****
Maybe Pat would have prevailed.
A case involving use of the words "The Way" in the name "The Way of Christ Ministry," however, would have involved questions about the use of a phrase that is quite more arguably generic than the phrase "The Way International."
Not only does the phrase "The Way International" less mistakably (than the phrase "The Way") have the New Knoxville group as its referent, the domain www.thewayinternational.com has, in limit and extent, the exact wording of the heretical sect's trademark (less spacing and capitalization).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Rafael that was a reasonable post dated April 06, 2004 20:15. This is something that Pat should consider.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
There is only so far that TWI can go on cornering the phrase "The Way". Darn phrase came straight out of the Bible. Why are they not suing churches in Ohio that are not at all associated with them called "Church of the Way" or "The Way of Jesus Christ" or some other phrase?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Hey, Can PJRoberge sell his domain name to an overseas internet freak (outsource it) and let the Way track that down? PJ gets rid of it, says he doesn't have it, and the name gets sold all around for like a buck a person. When the Way catches up with that guy, he sells it, and so on. Would they still hold PJ responsible?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Can we all sue TWI individually, one at a time, for all the mental torture and abuse we suffered under this organization? I know it was "our choice", but the deception in the beginning fooled all of us, didn't it? I mean, there is still a lot of mental torment these people are handing out to ex-Wayers, like those who just want to visit the cemetary there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Never been to Law school. Can you tell?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Touche Eagle. Normally, when you have a trademark of such a generic and very undistinctive phrase as, "The Way". You have this trademarked with distinctive graphics and you can only use this phrase as a trademark with these distinctive graphics.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AdiosMiCorazon
no not amateur attorney, more like armchair lawyers. We are not the ones being sued, he is. If someone was suing me, I would NOT post it on the internet. I WOULD hire an attorney.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadie
Hey Pat, I would, I would, I would
:)-->
It would not surprise me if TWI went in front of Judge Judy after they pay out for all these lawsuits. At least I don't think wayfers have been told not to watch her yet. She is one that would tear their *** up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vickles
Oh my, I wonder what judge judy would have to say about all this?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
Raf said:
Yes, the amateur lawyering is the same thing for which Pat is being criticized. The difference is that we're not being dragged into court, he is.
>>
Is this accurate ? I mean I don't think he
is being "dragged" into court. In fact
he appears to be welcoming it.
>>
I could spout off legal theories and strategies until the cows come home and it makes no difference.
Well I guess thats part of my point. Since
no one here is a lawyer aren't all the references to various statutes, and laws just
an exercise ? If I were Pat I don't think
I would take someone's interpretation of the
various laws as gospel. On the other hand I
think the point has been made that people here
don't take Pat's interpretation of the laws
as gospel either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Diazbro: the term "being dragged into court" is a colloquiallism which means you're the one getting sued. Pat didn't initiate the lawsuit, he's the defendant. Therefore he's getting dragged into court. That he decides to walk in rather than get dragged in is inconsequential to my point: We're not going to court. Our legal theories cannot be used by our courtroom adversaries because... we don't have courtroom adversaries.
Pat doesn't need to listen to our amateur legal theories. That is very true. But he also doesn't need to go online and announce his legal theories to the whole world, especially knowing that his courtroom adversaries are observing every word. This isn't a game. This isn't just a thread. This is a lawsuit that in some way threatens this man's livelihood. And for what? A domain name? Give up that issue and what has TWI got on him? NOTHING. Why do you think TWI has not gone after Paw? Because they CAN'T!
Pat can continue his fight without thewayinternational.com.
The point of telling Pat to knock off the amateur lawyering is not about disagreement with his position (some agree and some don't). It's about encouraging him to do the smart thing and not hand ammunition to the enemy.
Greetings from Chicago.
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.