Stolen business name?

The discussion is not about the quality of Furniture....one of them might sell a pile of crock whilst the other is top of it's range. The issue here is simply a new business piggybacking on an established business name in precisely the same market sector......it wouldn't have been so bad if Floyd was selling Boots ....as both businesses would be using entirely different keywords (incl. Classified Adverts) and unlikely to ever appear in many of the same searches. (apart from Company names)

As an aside..Phil has done pretty well in real terms in selling in what you call "simple simon" Furniture. Your "doing well" might mean covering Land Tier payments despite what you might describe as selling "awesome" products. (subjective)

No one sucked you into this "Black Hole"....you desperately wanted to appear here and get your 2 cents worth whilst using an ALT name. Hoorah!! Boorah!!


**I just saw a thread you started, stating you had accumulated 1/2 mill Lindens over time,...from what i have seen and read and know, Phil's business in it's prime was doing triple that amount in a single month! .....so much for "simple simon" furniture eh?
.

Don't go there.

There is no indication that I am mistaken unless you do something to prove otherwise.

Then you're not in "business" here. You obviously do not have a successful business, so you can hardly grasp the concept being discussed.

you have nothing on me. Lady knows this.

I'm still trying to figure out what right and wrong means in Phil's universe...

You sell copyrighted art you did not create. That's illegal, right? You've said violating the law is "wrong", right? Would you be willing to say that your selling copyrighted art is "wrong"? Or do you have to be caught before it becomes "wrong"?

Would "do the right thing" be selling copyrighted art or not selling copyrighted art?

LOL!

Is that the in thing for everyone to reference Lady Dawson when referring to me, as if i care?

LOL!

So basically you're nobody, in here slumming with the rest of us losers who actually choose to be here unlike you who was sucked in, but is yet pretty serious about replying to how serious everyone is.

Ok, Chet.

Later.

That is pretty funny skippy. I do not have to prove a thing. On the other hand, it is time to go inworld I think. Do a little exploring, spend some money. Have fun playing with your thread here. I am sure it will be 35-36 37 omgosh! It just won't die!
LOL
To funny.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out!

Ya'll come back now real soon, ya hear?!

haha, What LULZ
I have to take it serious to be successful? I must have missed that memo then somewhere. I rarely stop into this place but I had a question today which I needed verified. I got my answer and it is what I thought it was, Hence I really never have taken it seriously since I assumed that all along. It is all play money.

later dooods Iza gots stuffs to doooz.

You go on with your bad self there Donald Trump and have a great day. You really cut me down to size by calling me Skippy. I'm in awe of your forum skillz.

Sure thing stumpy!












Lulz! I kill me!

Don't tease.

You don't know the arrangement. How do you know, he didn't get a users license, from wherever the art originated?

Until you know either way, you can't be throwing around accusations on a Forum. This thread has been de-railed enough times already.

The clue starts here....with your post no.16.
/327/db/346455/1.html

I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to link all the dots together, it anyone could be bothered finding out who the "InterNetz kid" is!!

Keep on figuring

The problem is, though, that if I go on to say, "That furniture looks really great, Kitty, and it's low prim too. I want some for my house; do you mind telling me where you got it?" we're likely to end up rather confused unless you're careful with the typing and I take a careful note of what you say.

I guess the only way round it will be for you to inspect it and, say, "Oh, I got it from Phil Deakins' (or Floyd Mistwalker's) shop -- look for it in their picks or let me find you the LM."

Looking at this just as a potential buyer of furniture which is low in prims, I have to say that I am, again, confirmed in my view that search ratings are of interest only to merchants (who should be more interested in sales, to my mind) and very little help to their customers, and that search is a pretty hopeless tool other than for finding out where a place is if you already know what it's called.

Kitty: To respond to your latest post, I'll go back to your post where this little bit started:-

The link from Prim Savers (a seller of furniture) to temp rezzers to furniture (as in temp rezzers are sometimes used to temp rez furniture) is tenuous enough as to be irrelevant.

As I've said through most of this thread, the phrase "Prim Savers" is far enough removed from every day language that I am certain it is registerable as a trademark. I haven't claimed any more than that concerning its registerability.

This guy just alted to get the thread closed so Floyd's 'reputation' does not suffer anymore than it already has. But do not fret - you can continue to add updates on this bottom feeding here:
http://www.secondcitizen.net/Forum/showthread.php?p=120929#post120929

have you thought of adding a disclaimer -to explain to your customers that your the original and dont have a shop in-world or perhaps making a group so that your customers are directed to you instead of the other place

It did cross my mind, but it would draw attention to Floyd's place.

What seems to matter for a descriptive mark is what a consumer will think it means: if "prim savers" in that sentence and context is taken to mean "they saved me a lot of prims" then it might not be a trademark because it doesn't identify a brand. If it means "bought at the Prim Savers" store to the average person then it can be.

"I just bought a bed, it's a sexgen". Would that be followed by a "where did you get it?" or just the assumption that it's one of Stroker's beds? (There was some time where "sexgen" was more or less synonymous with "sex bed" regardless of brand but Stroker seems to have succeeded in putting a stop to that)

Or a different example: other low prim furniture stores using phrases like "these are real prim savers" to describe their products. If people take that to mean "these are low-prim/these save me prims" then "prim savers" can be a mark but since it doesn't distinctively identify Phil's store and nothing else it apparantly wouldn't qualify as a trademark (in the US).

Or in reverse: *if* "Prim Savers" is a trademark then the previous example would very likely be an infringement because it redefines the meaning of "prim savers" into something that does not identify Phil's store (or tries to pass off things Phil didn't create as "a genuine Prim Savers creation".

Not only did you suddenly change your objection (you were objecting to the partial quote because you specifically brought up "low prim", you also didn't bother to read (see above two examples).

“. But the absense of a court judgement doesn't mean that the law has not been broken”
Absence of a court judgement does not mean that the law *has* been broken.
Absence of a court judgement means that the matter remains to be decided.

.


The time at which the law has been broken *only* becomes relevant if a court rules that the law has been broken.
Furthermore, it depends on the basis of the court’s ruling.
If for instance, the deciding factor were to be that one party had a registerd trademark accepted in the USA, the breach can only go back to that event.
That’s all by-the-by anyway.

Because…..



So the situation is:
It seems that Floyd has not broken the TOS.
Whether or not he has broken some law that reaches into SL remains to be decided by an independent legal process.

Therefore, by your long-stated position on right and wrong, Floyd has done nothing wrong.

Double standards – one for you, another to be applied to someone else.

Your own stated position on the right and wrong of running a business suddenly crept up behind you and bit you in the ass.

Phil runs 10 bots apparently. At 24/7, these would account for 14,400 of his traffic.
Right now, his traffic shows at 17,156 - implying a non-bot traffic of 2,756

Floyd runs 1 bot apparently. At 24/7, this would account for 1,440 of his traffic.
Right now, his traffic shows at 4,426 - implying a non-bot traffic of 2,986

What I almost always do is to pass the person a LM.
If the item in question didn't come with a LM automatically, I would have made one.
It saves me typing and it saves them having to make a note and do a search later.