« First « Previous Comments 22 - 29 of 29 Search these comments
If anyone should be suing about the Red Cross, it should be Switzerland.
If anyone should be suing about the Red Cross, it should be Switzerland.
If you read the link thomas provided, it also is called the Geneva Cross, so it directly implicates Switzerland.
What is actually hilarious, not because TechGromit knows anything about IP law, but because of sheer coincidence, is that corporate copyrights for items published before 1978 actually do expire into the public domain 95 years after publication.
However, NAR is claiming realtor as a trademark, not a copyright. TechGromit doesn't know the difference and further doesn't know anything about trademark or copyright law. Anybody can lose a trademark! Xerox had a campaign back in the day to encourage people not to use "xerox" as a generic word, so as not to lose their trademark.
This is a nuisance action, and IrvineHousingBlog/Roberts should see if they have any relief under an Anti-SLAPP cause of action.
Survey says, ding ding ding:
Scott Sims, attorney for Larry Roberts, who writes the IrvineHousingBlog.com, says in a new letter to OCAR that Roberts' opinions constitute "free speech protected by California's anti-SLAPP statute.
I believe California's anti-SLAPP statute also mandates attorney's fees, so OCAR may have been off more than it can chew here in filing a frivolous suit.
Anti-SLAPP cause of action
Anti-SLAPP is a "defense" not a "cause of action." If you are going to be a prick to others, at least make sure you are always right.
Anti-SLAPP is a “defense†not a “cause of action.†If you are going to be a prick to others, at least make sure you are always right.
Wow, you didn't hold that for very long, and all because I told you there's no such thing as an "IPO option" when you were trying to argue with me about the substance of secondary exchanges and IPO lockups without knowing anything about them.
Yes, anti-SLAPP statutes allow you to write a motion to strike.
Yes, anti-SLAPP statutes allow you to write a motion to strike.
So, it is a defense, not a cause of action. Not sure you know anything about the law; probably should stop posting about it. Clearly someone should know the basic difference between a cause of action and a defense. We're not talking about a minor difference here.
And you were a prick above to TechGromit, not just me.
And you were a prick above to TechGromit, not just me.
Sure, and I owned up to the fact that I made a mistake in terminology, unlike TechGromit and you, ch_tah. Just to make it clear: I used the wrong terminology above, and ch_tah called me out on it.
The other difference is that my mistake made no substantive difference because I understood the concept -- you will note that IHB's lawyer actually did exactly what I said. In contrast, TechGromit's and ch_tah's mistakes showed that they didn't understand the concepts, and further questioning proved that with respect to ch_tah.
It's like if I said "X's lawyer filed the order." Technically X's lawyer *lodged* the order, but substantively, there is no problem. When you start talking nonsense about the secondary market for non-public stocks and don't understand 6 month lockups after IPOs and can't explain what each of those things mean and what they do, that's substantive, and using the wrong terminology was indicative of that in that case.
Speaking on a forum on the internet doesn't really connote tone, so maybe that's why you thought I was being a prick, ch_tah (you said you didn't understand something, and I agreed and provided the right terminology for you). As for TechGromit, if you read carefully above, you would see that he was being a dick ("Before recommending someone take a reckless action, perhaps you should educate yourself a little about copyright law"), so I responded similarly aggressively.
Sure, and I owned up to the fact that I made a mistake in terminology, unlike TechGromit and you, ch_tah. Just to make it clear: I used the wrong terminology above, and ch_tah called me out on it.
Okee dokee. Yes, using "cause of action" instead of "defense" is a mistake of terminology. Just like when I said you were being a "prick," I just used the wrong terminology and really meant "nice guy."
« First « Previous Comments 22 - 29 of 29 Search these comments
http://irvinehomes.ocregister.com/2011/06/06/realtors-complain-about-blogger-who-says-they-lie/18073/
"The Orange County Association of Realtors has filed a grievance against an Irvine real estate broker who writes a blog that takes critical looks at the housing crash, homebuyers and real estate agents. "
I'm sorry Realtors! I never meant any of it, don't sue me!
#housing