ROR - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2970

Terminated.

Quote from: Kprawn on November 28, 2014, 04:02:28 AM

I said this on reddit too --- Sometimes it is just nice to see a bully being bullied. Grin

The unfortunate part is.... The bully, with the amount of money to their disposal, can easily change their business model, to accomodate for this competition, or invest in a competing technology, and become a bully again.

They already profitted hugely on their previous model, and they might just adopt to the change. Sad

With Bitcoin, not really. The problem still lies in the people more than in the technology (yes Bitcoin is not perfect).
Adopting Bitcoin would be the way forward, and later on some other currency to be the alternative. Companies like WU would go bankrupt very quickly.

btc123shares

newbie

Activity: 8

Merit: 0

it seems WU knows what will happen.

Kprawn

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1074

I said this on reddit too --- Sometimes it is just nice to see a bully being bullied. Grin

The unfortunate part is.... The bully, with the amount of money to their disposal, can easily change their business model, to accomodate for this competition, or invest in a competing technology, and become a bully again.

They already profitted hugely on their previous model, and they might just adopt to the change. Sad

darkmule

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1005

Quote from: bitbaby on November 28, 2014, 12:49:06 AM

Since when it is illegal to compare services/price of 2 companies and who exactly are they suing for it.

It isn't. And so far, they've just made a takedown notice and then made noises in response to media contacts. They're probably just used to bullying social media and YouTube and the like without anyone standing up to them.

darkmule

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1005

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 10:50:47 PM

They aren't backing away from Erin's decision though as their official company spokeswoman responded:

Kristin Kelly, a Western Union spokeswoman, told Ars in an e-mailed statement: "Western Union takes all brand matters seriously, and we take steps that we believe are necessary to protect our intellectual property interests."

She shows up here as a media contact.

You should consider contacting the Electronic Frontier Foundation, or at the very least submitting this incident to the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, which keeps track of bullshit like this (if you haven't already).

bitbaby

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1000

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 10:50:47 PM

They aren't backing away from Erin's decision though as their official company spokeswoman responded:

Kristin Kelly, a Western Union spokeswoman, told Ars in an e-mailed statement: "Western Union takes all brand matters seriously, and we take steps that we believe are necessary to protect our intellectual property interests."

This is ridiculous! Since when it is illegal to compare services/price of 2 companies and who exactly are they suing for it. I believe I saw it first on FB I think and since then it must have been posted all over the net.

inBitweTrust

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 501

They aren't backing away from Erin's decision though as their official company spokeswoman responded:

Kristin Kelly, a Western Union spokeswoman, told Ars in an e-mailed statement: "Western Union takes all brand matters seriously, and we take steps that we believe are necessary to protect our intellectual property interests."

darkmule

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1005

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 10:20:48 PM

Lets see if she gets fired for insubordination or not following company policy since you are insinuating she went rogue. If she was doing her job than w/u does indeed fear Bitcoin as they pay employees to file DMCA take downs against any perceived threats.

I'm not insinuating she went rogue, but that it is often a (bad) policy of corporations simply to send out shotgun notifications against anything that references their trademark in any way, often using inappropriate mechanisms like the DMCA (since you describe a DMCA notification).

If it's worth anything, the address on the LinkedIn address is in Colorado, there's an Erin Schol in Aurora, Colorado, and there is no "Erin Schol" listed in Colorado's directory of licensed attorneys, nor can I find anything online about her graduating from any law school in the period shortly before she got this job that would, if done by a law school graduate, have been an entry-level job.

Just because the WU address is in Colorado doesn't mean our Erin Schol is in Colorado, or that the Erin Schol in Aurora is our Erin Schol, or that Erin Schol may not be licensed somewhere else. But it seems like a good guess, and my initial guess is she isn't a lawyer, but just a DMCA notification agent.

inBitweTrust

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 501

Quote from: darkmule on November 27, 2014, 10:06:27 PM

Says on her LinkedIn she's an "assistant legal analyst." Sounds like a fancy name for scutwork. I forget what I called it when I did it. Something I made up.

Lets see if she gets fired for insubordination or not following company policy since you are insinuating she went rogue. If she was doing her job than w/u does indeed fear Bitcoin as they pay employees to file DMCA take downs against any perceived threats.

funtotry

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 250

Ever wanted to run your own casino? PM me for info

Quote from: darkmule on November 27, 2014, 10:06:27 PM

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 08:49:03 AM

The DMCA takedown was filed by Erin Schol who is a legal analyst for Western Union. S yes, some lawyers within W/U saw this ad as a threat.

Says on her LinkedIn she's an "assistant legal analyst." Sounds like a fancy name for scutwork. I forget what I called it when I did it. Something I made up.

She was the person who actually filed the request. This does not mean that she was the person who actually made the decision, or even did the research to determine that filing the takedown request would even be justified.

darkmule

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1005

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 08:49:03 AM

The DMCA takedown was filed by Erin Schol who is a legal analyst for Western Union. S yes, some lawyers within W/U saw this ad as a threat.

Says on her LinkedIn she's an "assistant legal analyst." Sounds like a fancy name for scutwork. I forget what I called it when I did it. Something I made up.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2970

Terminated.

Quote from: Aswan on November 27, 2014, 02:39:45 PM

Yeah but this time it's different. Bitcoin cannot be sued and if things go viral, some deletes won't even be noticed because it'll be everywhere

Yeah some deletes won't be noticed .. *cough* thread *cough* all over reddit and news sites *cough*.

Aswan

legendary

Activity: 1734

Merit: 1015

Quote from: Keyser Soze on November 26, 2014, 11:18:14 AM

Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on November 26, 2014, 11:09:07 AM

crazy that such a big company cares about that shit Cheesy

Large companies like this go after small firms all the time for things (ads, logos, ect) that may even be remotely similar.

Yeah but this time it's different. Bitcoin cannot be sued and if things go viral, some deletes won't even be noticed because it'll be everywhere

bf4btc

hero member

Activity: 568

Merit: 500

Smoke weed everyday!

Quote from: turvarya on November 27, 2014, 09:54:48 AM

Quote from: FattyMcButterpants on November 27, 2014, 09:10:33 AM

The attorneys are not the ones who make the decision on taking action against someone infringing on their trademark.

Company lawyers often work without consultation, especially in a big company. I think, the higher ups in an international company have better things to do, than to decide, if they should sue some small fry.

The company would likely have some kind of policy in place to sue in certain circumstances. The lawyers may have authority to make the conclusion that the criteria has been met, however they must follow the procedure, as it would be the higher ups who would ultimately be held accountable in the event a lawsuit would not be beneficial for the company

turvarya

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

Quote from: FattyMcButterpants on November 27, 2014, 09:10:33 AM

The attorneys are not the ones who make the decision on taking action against someone infringing on their trademark.

Company lawyers often work without consultation, especially in a big company. I think, the higher ups in an international company have better things to do, than to decide, if they should sue some small fry.

Biitcoin

sr. member

Activity: 353

Merit: 250

Zichain

If they responded to that AD , this means they simply think that Bitcoin is a real threat for them Roll Eyes

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2970

Terminated.

Quote from: FattyMcButterpants on November 27, 2014, 08:38:05 AM

Do you have any examples of this? Filing a DCMA complaint would only draw attention to themselves and the picture in question. If they were making an "attack" because of bitcoin's threat then they are doing it wrong because their "attack" is drawing attention to the comparison between bitcoin and WU

So you're here defending WU? Something smells, and it ain't me nor my Bitcoins.

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 08:49:03 AM

The DMCA takedown was filed by Erin Schol who is a legal analyst for Western Union. S yes, some lawyers within W/U saw this ad as a threat.

I'm pretty sure that they do things once they receive orders.

inBitweTrust

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 501

Quote from: FattyMcButterpants on November 27, 2014, 09:10:33 AM

The attorneys are not the ones who make the decision on taking action against someone infringing on their trademark.
How do you know that no permission was granted and how do you know the rationale behind their decision not to go after the creators of the movie?

In this case it was one of W/U legal advisors who filed the DMCA.

Quote from: FattyMcButterpants on November 27, 2014, 09:10:33 AM

How do you know that no permission was granted and how do you know the rationale behind their decision not to go after the creators of the movie?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088931/trivia?ref_=tt_trv_trv

This film was produced without the knowledge or consent of the international offices of the Coca-Cola Company. However, since both the company and its product were depicted so favorably in the film (as well as the film being free advertising), they took no legal action against the parties involved.

FattyMcButterpants

sr. member

Activity: 448

Merit: 250

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 08:44:26 AM

Quote from: FattyMcButterpants on November 27, 2014, 08:38:05 AM

Do you have any examples of this? Filing a DCMA complaint would only draw attention to themselves and the picture in question. If they were making an "attack" because of bitcoin's threat then they are doing it wrong because their "attack" is drawing attention to the comparison between bitcoin and WU

Yes, but you are ignoring the fact that the lawyers are getting paid for defending W/U trademark regardless of the Barbara Streisand effect or whether or not it is a wise tactical decision for W/U as a whole.

The attorneys are not the ones who make the decision on taking action against someone infringing on their trademark.

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 08:44:26 AM

There are too many examples to mention but here is a prominent one :

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088931/

No permission was granted , and Coca Cola was unaware of this project but decided to not sue or attack Dusan Makavejev because the movie didn't show Coca cola in a completely negative light.

How do you know that no permission was granted and how do you know the rationale behind their decision not to go after the creators of the movie?

inBitweTrust

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 501

Quote from: darkmule on November 27, 2014, 08:46:25 AM

Quote from: inBitweTrust on November 27, 2014, 08:08:04 AM

W/U is clearly making a calculated attack because of a perceived threat.

That's not necessarily the case. Nothing is even on legal letterhead yet. Noticing a Facebook post has all the hallmarks of some intern or other schlub doing busywork hunting down shit on social media and then notifying it with little to no more effort to it than that. A lot of paralegals or new lawyers do just this. A DMCA notifier need have no particular qualifications.

(Confession: I've done this myself though I hope I did a better job.)

I wouldn't take a mere takedown notification as meaning much if anything without more.

The DMCA takedown was filed by Erin Schol who is a legal analyst for Western Union. S yes, some lawyers within W/U saw this ad as a threat.

Topic: ROR - page 2. (Read 4972 times)