Can they do this?

[Flamebo]

Ebay, E-mag sticker:

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1183450885

[emaggot4life]

I don't know , but i kinda like the design.

[shartley]

I think Tom and his legal staff should take care of this. And if I say that, you know my answer to your question.

But on a personal note... would anyone pay over $1.00 for that crap? I have seen FREE stickers that looked better than that.

How much would you bet that they may be in direct copyright violation with many of their stickers?

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

[This message has been edited by shartley (edited 08-29-2001).]

[zvanut]

www.paintballstickers.com (http://www.paintballstickers.com) sells all sort if stickers like that

------------------
My Mag can beat your spyder w/ no paint.~~~me

Dont worry if it wasnt for losers like u, There couldnt be winners like me.~~~me

My mag is my mag, not yours, so go get your own one and be happy like me. ~me

[shartley]

Oh yeah, selling them on a website makes it all legal now doesn't it? http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

Next we will hear the classic... "Hey, everyone else is doing it, so it MUST be okay." http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

If Tom did not give his written consent, I would bet it is not legal. But then again, I have not looked into this situation personally.

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

[zvanut]

dont get me wrong, not all the stickers on there r like that. shartley, i didnt say anything about the site makin it legal http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif http://www.automags.org/ubb/tongue.gif http://www.automags.org/ubb/rolleyes.gif heh gotta love the smilies

------------------
My Mag can beat your spyder w/ no paint.~~~me

Dont worry if it wasnt for losers like u, There couldnt be winners like me.~~~me

My mag is my mag, not yours, so go get your own one and be happy like me. ~me

[shartley]

zvanut:
I know. I was just typing... typing.... typ.. ty.... too tired. I still think the sticker isn't worth the material it is made from.

Need rest......

Oh, I almost forgot... http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

[zvanut]

a bit ot, but like my sig says... gotta love the smilies http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif have a nice day LOL

------------------
Gotta Love The Smilies :) have a nice day

[Puckz]

Actually yes, they can do that...

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[shartley]

Can do what? http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif Sell an EMag sticker? Do you know for a fact that they have authorization to do so?

I suppose you could also sell a Beretta Centurion sticker without getting approval first too? How about a Ford Mustang sticker?

I think what CAN be done, and what can be done legally is often far from the same. And who makes the EMag? And who has rights to that name?

So, like I said... do you know for a fact that Tom gave them permission to do this? Until I hear from TOM that it is okay, I will assume it is not.

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

[This message has been edited by shartley (edited 08-29-2001).]

[Puckz]

They do sell Ford Mustang stickers... you can get them just about anywhere.

Also that sticker can be interpreted as not saying "Emag". And there are no copyrighted images used anywhere in it.

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[Puckz]

They do sell Ford Mustang stickers... you can get them just about anywhere.

Also that sticker can be interpreted as not saying "Emag". And there are no copyrighted images used anywhere in it.

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[shartley]

Please visit the US Copyright Office's Site and read a little about Copyright Law(s).

You will see that not only Images are protected, and the fact that no IMAGE was used causing it to be in violation of THAT, it does not mean it is NOT in copyright violation. According to AGD materials, E-Mag is a trademarked term, so no matter how you use it, if it is representing the E-Mag Marker... guess what? See my point?

And your stating that you can buy Ford Mustang stickers all over the place AGAIN does not prove they are all selling the stickers LEGALLY. I could list too many cases where large companies who were NOT getting their cut of sales derived directly from the sale of items displaying their product names, subsequently shut down the other company's operations.

The same has even happened to PRIVATE use of similar material. VIACOM and other such companies have been notorious for shutting down web sites for even the slightest infraction(s). And Jack Daniels is famous for changing royalty fees to any Artist that wants to even use their NAME in a song.

I could go on listing these types of things all day. My point is simple, just because it is being DONE, does not mean it is LEGAL. The infringed upon party must weigh the cost involved in pursuing any actions against the violators. And in most cases the decision is made to NOT pursue any legal action.

There are several reasons for this, one being the fact that often times the offender is actually assisting the other party by advertising for them. Another reason is that any litigation could possibly cause the larger company to LOOK bad in the public eye. And one more is the money spent pursuing the matter, VS just pretending you didn't see the violation.

But I will say it AGAIN, just because you do not see these typed of cases actively pursued on a regular basis, does NOT mean laws are not broken, and people's right are not being violated. The street I live on is posted as a 30MPH Zone... but the average flow of traffic is 40MPH. Does that mean that the actual speed limit is 40MPH simply because that is what most of the people drive? Not by a long shot.

So again, please do not mistake the facts. I am sure Tom could care less about those stickers, but that being the case does not mean that his actual rights were not violated.

And I will state again...do you know for a fact that Tom gave them permission to do this? Until I hear from TOM that it is okay, I will assume it is not. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif Once Tom says it is okay, it suddenly BECOMES legal. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

[beam]

that ebay user has been selling those kinds of stickers for a while now. I laugh every time i see them for sale....must be a young kid designing them. most look like they were made with MS Paint. hahaha http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Intricate are you among the masses.... PAX217

[Puckz]

I've studied copyright and trademark law before.

Assuming the name "Emag" is the registered trademark. That sticker does not exactly copy the name. A court can rule that the sticker is close enough to the trademark to be in violation, but until it a court does so... that sticker is perfectly legal.

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[shartley]

LOL You are too funny.

So unless a court rules on something NO crime has been committed? Then why would anyone be arrested? I think your thinking is a bit backward, and this is odd considering what your Major is.

You are in essence saying that if someone was to break into your house, and take things, it is perfectly legal until a court says it isn't. And in fact this would apply to any Laws under your way of thinking. However, this could not be farther from the truth. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

And the INTENT of the sticker is perfectly clear. Poor execution of a rights violation is STILL a rights violation. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

And with most Laws, the punishment for attempting the crime (excluding capital murder) is the SAME as if the crime was successfully committed.

No matter how much you want to slightly change your words, you will still not be correct on this issue. And if you HAVE studied Copyright and Trademark Laws, I would suggest a refresher course.

I don't mind people disagreeing with me, but please do so with a logical and factual standpoint. Both your statements were proven wrong with absolutely NO effort. http://www.automags.org/ubb/frown.gif

Oh, and I agree with BEAM on the looks issue. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

[cphilip]

Hey, everyone else is doing it, so it MUST be okay... http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

[Puckz]

I thought in the US you were innocent until proven guilty.

Same thing here...

AGD decides they want to pursue this so they ask the person to stop. This person tells them to screw off and can continue making and selling them. AGD takes it too court and a judge must decide that it is in violation. At that point the sticker in question is illegal and the person making them has to stop. Until that point the sticker is perfectly legal.

And if the sticker in question is ruled to not be in violation of the trademark, than in essence, no crime has been committed.

Thats how the law works. You gotta love it.

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[This message has been edited by Puckz (edited 08-30-2001).]

[cphilip]

Nope...crime has already been committed...Too late for sorry. Will AGD want to pursue it? I dunno....

[shartley]

Actually, you can commit a crime and still NOT be convicted of it. THAT is how the Law works. And to say that until you are convicted of a crime, you did not commit it, is a gross misstatement.

In fact, under your way of thinking, no police officer could arrest anyone for anything until AFTER the trial. Why? Because you have not committed the crime until the Judge says you did.

You see, you are WAY oversimplifying the legal system. And this makes me ask.... what year of study are you in?
What a court does is PROVE that a Law was broken, and provides the appropriate punishment.

Again...Under your way of thinking, anyone can do anything and no laws are broken until a Judge says they are. But that is CLEARLY not the case. But good try on the "Innocent until proven guilty" thing. Being convicted of a crime is NOT the same thing as committing a crime. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

[shartley]

VERY GOOD! Phil hit the nail on the head.

And if Tom does NOT want to peruse the issue, it does not mean that the Law was not broken... It WAS... It was just not enforced. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

[cphilip]

I am the master of succinct...

[martlet1]

Correct, you can commit a crime, but you are assumed innocent by a court of law until you are convicted of it. You must have something called probable cause of crime to arrest someone. AGD would have probable cause that someone has infringed on a trademark. It makes it illlegal to do so, but does not neccesarily make it a criminal action. It does however make it a definate CIVIL violation that could be compensated by monitary means. This would be a civil complaint.

[Puckz]

I'm not over simplifying, you're over complicating http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

And it's my 3rd year of study to be exact, but no need for personal attacks here.

Let me ask you this question...

Did OJ Simpson commit a crime?

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[shartley]

Actually that is a good question (about OJ), but rather irrelevant. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

However, the answer is, "He committed a crime."

Now, with that in mind, he was not CONVICTED of that crime in a Criminal Court, he was found "Not Guilty" (which is FAR from saying he was "innocent").... But he WAS found guilty in a Civil Court.

And guess where Tom would take this case to? Ahhhh... Civil Court. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif (as martlet1 pointed out)

And I am sorry if you thought I was attacking you personally, I was only attacking the information you used, and your own statement of study. No personal offence was intended.

But I am not over-complicating the issue.. I am telling it like it IS. No matter how much you would like to say that nothing wrong (or illegal) was done... it simply WAS. And no amount of banter, and twisting of words will change that fact.

I think we all understand quite clearly now. And Tom will more than likely NOT take action anyway. LOL And if Tom came online and said, "Yes, they had my permission." It would be over as well. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”

[Bailey]

jezz,its a sticker fer' cryin out loud

p.s. a $1.00 sticker http://www.automags.org/ubb/rolleyes.gif

[dansim]

wellseeing as thats not really the emag logo i dont see anything wrong w/ it i mean if i wrote emag on my angel would that be a copyright violation? and i belive emag the phrase was around much longer than the gun as in the under ground web magizines emags

[irbodden]

That is so ugly.

[shartley]

No, if you wrote EMag on your Angel it would not be a Copyright Violation.... but he is SELLING the stuff. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

I think you missed that point. And Copyright Laws do not distinguish selling for $1 each (which is $1,000,000 if 1,000,000 are sold) or if it is $1,000,000 each. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

Now think about it this way... first off, I could care less. Second, it is not a huge deal. Third... but if it was YOUR property and someone was making money off it, how would YOU feel? hmmmm

And our discussion was pretty much not relevant anyway since we all agree that more than likely nothing will be done.. therefor it was more a basic discussion about copyrights in general. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

The sticker is ugly, and not worth the money it takes to print it or ship it. Let alone all this time spent discussing it. LOL

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”
http://www.gbsu-usa.net/boss/shartley.gif

[Puckz]

Hey I never said the sticker wasn't "wrong". http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

Right and wrong and legal and illegal are two totally different things.

And on the OJ thing. According to the law, he didn't do it. He was found not guilty beyond a resonable doubt by a jury of his peers. In other words legally he didn't commit a crime. (legally)

You gotta think about this legally, not logically. Because the law is not logical. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

And with that I will say this is probably one of the best law threads you will ever see on a paintball message board http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[This message has been edited by Puckz (edited 08-30-2001).]

[Bailey]

Exactly http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

[shartley]

Am I the only one who sees that you fail to read what was actually written? LOL

OJ was found BOTH Not Guilty AND Guilty. One was a criminal trial, and the other was a civil trial. BOTH dealt with the LAW.

I give up. LOL

You win.. and simply because you refuse to actually READ what I wrote, and look at FACTS and LAWS. And I don't have the time nor patience to repeat what I already told you. I wish you all the luck in your classes because you would have failed this one. LOL http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

I would advise not becoming a Lawyer. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

I am through with it. LOL

(note: No I am not upset. In fact I think it is rather funny. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif )


------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”
http://www.gbsu-usa.net/boss/shartley.gif

[pumpamatic]

Hey wait, this isn't the only sticker that could be taken to court. Has anyone seen those pee on automag stickers? I doubt AGD gave up rights to the Automag name. And what about pee on Chevy, etc, etc. I don't think any corporation would allow their product to be urinated on. I am now confused thanks to Shartley though.

[dandy]

So where does your Yosemite Sam sig fall? Not flaming, just curious. Is it public domain clipart, no compensation so no violation? I'm fuzzy on copyright law, so does it take using someone's copyrighted property for gain to create a violation.

Again, this isn't a flame, I am genuinely curious.

[AGD]

Man o Man I never know when you guys are going to go crazy! We don't like the piss on "xx" stickers but we are also not going to go spend a boat load of money to do anything about it. You will piss me off if you use our names or images to decieve our customers. Like calling your aftermarket e-frame and Emag. Some other manufacturer is suing for that very problem right now.

In general if it doesn't hurt us our our rep. we take the stuff pretty lightly. Besides that I think it's a pretty crappy sticker.

AGD

[tupac14510]

Even if it isn't exactly legal, it would take money and time in court to do anything about it, and who knows, the legal system is kinda messed up, i mean they could say E-mag is copywrited or whatever but not E mag or Emag, so there are tons of technicalities

[shartley]

dandy:
Good question. Actually, you are pretty close, but as with all things, a good lawyer can twist in some complications. My Signature "Yosemite Sam" is a spoof on Paintball and my name "Sam". It is also being used for personal use where (as you put it) there is no compensation or monetary gain on my part.

But even if I was in BLATANT copyright violation with it (which I am not) since I am not gaining from its use, all that would happen is a Cease and Desist Use notification would be sent to me.

My private use is what set it apart from the other Sticker in question. Now if I was to make Posters, Cards, Stickers, etc. of my Signature image, THAT would be in direct Copyright violation. And depending on how much money I made off if it, or how upset the rights owner was about it, I may find myself in court and paying actual monetary compensation. But, like was mentioned, most of the time these things are NOT pursued.... and not because they CAN'T, but because it is not worth it.

I hope this answered your question sufficiently.

Now, I think everyone should read what Tom wrote:

<font face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Man o Man I never know when you guys are going to go crazy! We don't like the piss on "xx" stickers but we are also not going to go spend a boat load of money to do anything about it. You will piss me off if you use our names or images to decieve our customers. Like calling your aftermarket e-frame and Emag. Some other manufacturer is suing for that very problem right now.

In general if it doesn't hurt us our our rep. we take the stuff pretty lightly. Besides that I think it's a pretty crappy sticker.

AGD </font>

There you have it! Tom is not going to pursue this matter... BUT he also thinks the sticker is crappy. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif He also mentioned the cost VS benefit issue, and the damage to a company's image VS a benefit issue.

Sounds like everything I said. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

Tom has spoken.... issue is resolved.

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”
http://www.gbsu-usa.net/boss/shartley.gif

[Puckz]

Actually I'll make a good lawyer...

How many people here think "beyond a resonable doubt" that you are right and I am wrong?

http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Mikey Smith
About Paintball Dude
http://paintball.about.com
paintball.guide@about.com

[cphilip]

Well puckz...I think you will make a good one. You would argue with a fence post!! Exactly what it takes to make a good Lawyer! (j/k http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif)

Heard the one about why all Lawyers where neck ties haven't you?

[shartley]

Puckz:
Actually you could very well be right about that (making a good lawyer), but it does not have anything to do with "beyond a reasonable doubt".. because that is not the standards needed in Civil Court. And this Rights issue would be tried IN Civil Court. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

That is why Lawyers tend to specialize in one or the other (Civil or Criminal), because what is needed to convict (or be granted a judgement) is FAR from being the same (and THAT is a major understatement).

With that in mind... Want to be a Lawyer and make the BIG BUCKS? Look into Business Law. Now that is where the sharks play! And they are fed VERY well (if they are any good).

But your arguments do sound like some Lawyers that I have dealt with.... however, they all lose, but it sounds like them. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif (Just ribbing yah)

Lawyers are a self propagating profession..... you need two lawyers to make a case, the defending, and the prosecuting. And we all know that it is often NOT the facts and the LAW that decides a case, but how well the Lawyers can TWIST them. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

This has been an interesting discussion, and you are correct... It more than likely IS the best Law discussion on any Paintball Site. LOL But anything past this point would be beating a dead horse.

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”
http://www.gbsu-usa.net/boss/shartley.gif

[cphilip]

....To keep their foreskins from riding up over their faces... http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/cheesy.gif

[shartley]

LOL Good one!

How about this one?

What is the difference between a Lawyer and a Catfish?

One is a scum sucking bottom dweller....

And the other is a fish.

http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”
http://www.gbsu-usa.net/boss/shartley.gif

[TheTramp]

As someone who works at a law firm I have a question. What is the difference between someone who is pompous and someone who... well lets just forget about that joke. I'm not easily offended but you just did it.

------------------
"Relax. Don't worry. Have a Home Brew."
-Charlie Papazian

[shartley]

TheTramp:
I am so very sorry for offending you. That was NOT my intent.

I have a friend who is Polish, and he owns the Official Polish Joke Book. He is not offended, and in fact thinks the jokes are PRETTY DARN FUNNY... that is because they are JOKES. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

I also joke around with Accountants all the time with similar jokes. And they usually tell ME some good ones.

I am confused that you would say that you are not easily offended, and then at a simple joke that is almost as old as the Lawyer Profession itself, you become offended. Or was it the foreskin joke? I am not sure.... Are you offended by Lawyer Jokes or Foreskin Jokes?

And as for working AT a Law Firm... Heck, I know Lawyers that could tell us ALL some pretty good Lawyer Jokes. In fact, almost EVERY profession has the same type of jokes. And I find that in most cases the actual person IN the profession tends to find them the funniest.

Once again, I am sorry if we have offended you in any way..... if it was intentional, I can assure you that we would have come up with some better ones. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif I personally think you are taking this a bit too seriously. http://www.automags.org/ubb/smile.gif

But I WILL apologize... I apologize. http://www.automags.org/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
“The richest man is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.”
http://www.gbsu-usa.net/boss/shartley.gif

[dansim]

i just dont read that much of your posts shartley i dont have much time and you jsut write so much..good stuff but still alot

[cphilip]

Sorry TheTramp. I didn't mean to offend you at all. I thought lawyer jokes were pretty common and acceptable. I happen to know a few and they actually gave me my lawyer jokes. Most of the lawyers I know are real open minded and jokesters. But they always cut each other to the bone too! But sorry if you feel that way. I apologize.