Topic: VERITASEUM DISCUSSION THREAD - page 30. (Read 251052 times)

From Reggie Middleton today:

Sitting back after my Keynote Speech at #cryptocon2018 #fintank. I will post full videos of both my presentation & that of an energetic Northwestern Law professor who really, really gets it.
Fascinating viewpoints.
Oh yeah, I will get that PayPie research report out this week too.

The problem with you is that you can't even admit you're wrong when you are proven wrong. Your inflammatory comments were completely incorrect and out of line regarding the real nature of the true severity of the issue. Should the trademark be registered? Of course it should. It is catastrophic for the future of the company? Not one bit. Is VERI at risk to cybersquatters? Not at all, they can easily win a claim against a cybersquatter with or without the registration.

It's one thing to make a suggestion, it's quite another to start calling names and accusing incompetence when the reality as I have already clearly shown is that lack of trademark registration is no big deal and quite frankly, not even worth discussing.

My point is simple: Why give a leeway for anyone to cause any legal hassle/trouble by not registering your own trademark? Why avoid taking the advantages that naturally come with registering your trademark as soon as possible? If not registering a trademark is equally the same as registering it, then what advantages are you talking about?

You are actually coming into defense of an act of incompetency. I bet if another company that you have no financial conflict of interest in that does not register its trademark, you would criticize it. But with Veritaseum, you continue to give positive judgment despite some incompetency. Not saying that incompetency is a big thing, but you certainly are showing very strong bias. But right, you should be fully aware of your biasness, because I am really honestly and sincerely getting really sick of it. You are not showing any sign of good reason and logic in your judgment. To me, you are someone that would say everything good about something that you have interest in. If you were to have a son (your own biological son) you would always say he is a good person, a right person, a noble person, etc etc goodness, even if this son of yours have committed wrongdoings or misconducts. You would find whatever justifications to justify your son's misconducts as good conducts. Here is where I am different from you. I have substantial ownership in VERI, but I still criticize it when I think it is wrong. I am not afraid if I suffer some short-term market loss as a result. That, I believe is a level of objectivity that a great majority of people (including you) do not have.

Your extreme subjectivity is very clear to me, and keep disagreeing with almost everything I say, even those things I sincerely and honestly believe is very objective and obvious to any impartial + reasonable 3rd person. I would say a white paper is white and whiter than a black paper. You, on the other hand, having a financial conflict of interest in that black paper business, would argue why a white paper can actually be blacker than a black paper. If you think I am being rude and rough on you, that is because you 100% deserve it.

I bet I am not making any sense to many people here. I bet if I say the sky is blue, you would say that doesn't make sense. If I say water is vital to health, you would say that doesn't make sense. If someone else (not me) were to say the exact same things, you would say that makes a lot of sense. Ultimately it is not what I say. It is what your prejudice is.

Update:
Are you a paid shill?
You don't even know what you are talking about, and yet you have the audacity to say I am doubling down on not knowing what I'm talking about.
You are not making any sense at all.
You, on the other hand, are doubling/tripling down on what you don't know about, and I will continue to make you lose.

You're really going to double down on not knowing what you're talking about?

A trademark is protected by virtue of being put into use. Reggie's protected. Yes there are advantages to registering and it probably should be done. But Reggie will not see any consequences of failing to do so.

Further, Reggie's claim against the domain squatter is just as strong as if he had registered.

thanx for this info...was not aware....and was sitting here thinking I knew it all....like dorkie

.... and they're off!   

Google, Coca-Cola and Walmart have registered trademarks.
Are they run by stupid fucktards?
If they registered their trademarks, then why do you still consider them as some stupid fucktard potential?
And if you don't, then why do you bring them up?

Nobody asked for your opinion anyway.

Anyone with average intelligence would ask why Reggie didn't register his trademark for so many years.
You, on the other hand, are so corrupt you don't even bother to question.
Instead, you criticize those that do.

Wow you like to talk about stuff you have no idea about.
There's an endless combination of domain names Reggie could register for Veritaseum. Where should he stop? There are numerous Google and Coke and Walmart domains I can register right now. Are those companies run by stupid fucktards too?

The reality is, ThesisFun is guilty of violating the cybersquatting act. Educate yourself at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act

Reggie can get those domains any time he wants by filing a dispute with ICANN.

From Reggie Middleton today:

ICOs are obviously a very important source of startup financing, whether the old school likes it or not. We've hired yet one more analyst (that's 3 in all) to review and analyze each & every ICO launched to gauge worthiness for inclusion in the VeADIR https://veritas.veritaseum.com/veadir-platform

Stupid fucktard Reggie didn't bother to register his own company.
Even the Ethereum foundation registered its own.

Update:
I apologize for using strong words.
It's none of my business anyway.

No it’s not an infringement.  The copyright as you have it refers to written materials.  A quick search on the USPTO would show that there are No trademarks associated with Veritaseum.  I imagine things could be difficult with cryptos attempting to use the legal system typically while operating outside.  There are a variety of hits on the Veri and veritas on the TESS search engine.  But that takes a bit more than cut n pasting.  Cryptos wouldn’t want to interfere with exchanges etc as they are beneficial.  Trademark also covers against infringement in a particular area and I don’t know if cryptocurrencies have a particular official recognition other than as a commodity.  So to answer your question there is no problem with selling this as it doesn’t relate to copyright being that it is a word and domains can’t typically be trademarked.
It’s best to read up on copyright and Trademark.
If you are knowledgeable then you would know where copyright could potentially be applied to Veritaseum

I am not a friggin nut, but you are.

unfortunately for the world...forever is a long time...and I don't agree with anything reggie says (im still researching this token) except that its his decision...either way, I think I can finally put this issue to rest once and for all....with all of the logic and reason I can muster, let me say....youre a friggin nut

Are we able to rent out our veri coins yet?

Too bad for you, I don't see each and every ICO participants as idiots. Hah!

There's an old saying...
If you think the whole world is full of idiots, chances are, you're the idiot!

You are not forced to assume.
The stranger could be wrong.
But he could also be right.
I, as a business owner, could be right or wrong.
I never said I am absolutely right.
Most, if not all, people think himself as the smartest or most right, and thus does not listen to feedback.
When I give opinion/suggestion, I have the sincere intention to help make things better.
Reggie said he is not the smartest person in the world, but if he also happen to think there is no one smarter than he is by the way, then he is indirectly implying he is the #1 smartest (i.e. ego, pride, and arrogance).
I am not saying I am smarter than Reggie.
I am saying that we should be humble and open to suggestions and opinions that seek to improve.
And suggestions and opinions should be made reasonably and logically.
If you do not understand me, that is not because I have no reason nor logic; that is because you are somewhat not mature enough yet intellectually.

Update:
Ask yourself why do you agree with everything Reggie says.
Is it because you are as intelligent as Reggie (bravo!)?
Or is it because you are stupid, and so look up to Reggie as a flawless benchmark?
And so end up agreeing to everything he says?
Now I am not saying Reggie is wrong all the way.
So far I understand he is doing everything right and professionally.
But that doesn't mean I have no suggestion to improve things.
And seeing that human nature is such that ego and pride usually stops progress, I tend to habitually force my suggestion thru to a very stuffy ear.

Update #2:
Regardless, I am a flexible man.
If I found out that stuffy ear will remain stuffy forever, I will stop giving anymore suggestion.
And frankly speaking, Reggie has extremely stuffy ear.

Update #3:
It is not hard for me, or you, or a business owner to tell a stranger that he is wrong.
Because ultimately our ego and pride prevail over reason and logic.
The fact that you are "telling me to give you my veri" means you don't really understand, but pretend that you do, which is false.
My suggestion for Reggie to burn unsold token is not the same as giving anyone his token.
His economic return comes from selling the token.
And the token can be sold either in bulk or thru recycling used token.
Bulk purchase may introduce more supply into the circulating, and assuming the supply is fixed, will depress potential price and price gain, which hurts you and me, but does not hurt Reggie.
Recycling used tokens in which Reggie can resell them means the economic profit goes to him, and not to you and me, despite being OWNERS.
Bulk purchase in combo with recycling used token may end up hurting you and me, without any impact on Reggie while he continue to earn his economic profits.
Am I wrong in my analysis?
If so, please educate me, Reggie, the way you would educate your own sons and daughter.
But then he makes sense when he said that the business would not be sustainable if nobody wants redemption.
Thus it may be harmful to burn all unsold token.
And risk may be introduced with the burning of any amount of token.
That's why I also suggested if there is any assurance that tokens obtained through bulk purchase will be used almost immediately for exposure.
Bulk purchase to be used almost immediately means the buyer is the direct end user buying the token for actual use, not for trading nor speculation.
That is to prevent them from being introduced into the circulating supply.
If there is no such assurance in place, then it is still possible that all the 100 mil supply will eventually be sold out and nobody wants redemption.
Which means the business would still not be sustainable.

From Reggie Middleton today:

Veritaseum issued research predicting significant margin calls in the yet to be launched bitcoin futures market. 2 months into trading, we get to boast, "We told you so", as well as  show how we enable investors to gain exposure to BTC via VeADIR.

This guy

are we forced to assume that this stranger DOES know everything in the world?...and, if you DID run a business, would you be forced to assume that the stranger could not possibly be wrong?...in spite of the fact that you repeatedly told the stranger that you (as the owner) believed he was wrong...how about this....you own veri...I don't...I am a stranger....I am telling you to give me your veri...it will end up being best for both of us....there...now you must agree, or perhaps you should learn to accept contradiction