• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

"Violation of Intellectual property rights"?

Started by Darthdiesel,

223 posts in this topic

Darthdiesel

Darthdiesel

Posted
Posted

Thought I would share this and some thoughts. I'm reading the OCPR issue 12 (Sep 2004) and I came across this one ad page across from the "OS team welcomes New advisors" and it is just a blank page with this one line:

 

"Sometimes imitation is the highest form of flattery. Sometimes, it's a violation of intellectual property rights"

 

and at the bottom is Comiclink's logo.

 

So I'm just curious what was going on? Does that mean no one can start comic selling websites w/o fear of litigation? What about those that exist already? Pedigreecomics? Highgradecomics? the vault.com auctions? Heritage? Sterlingcomics new website? Ideal? Metro? What exactly puts one at risk of "crossing the line" of violating Josh's intellectual property rights?

 

I know I'm uninformed but the vagueness of the ad just made me pause. I posted hoping someone could spread some light on the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicmankev

comicmankev

Posted
Posted

Souns like a direct hit at pedigree confused-smiley-013.gif And he probably needs to, I know a few issues that were up on the link for months, then moved to pedigree and sold within days - wich one would you choose?

 

It's like they say about credit cards and banking, loyalty isnt everything - I guess Josh is hoping it counts for something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1407graymalkin

1407graymalkin

Posted
Posted

It seems like it’s a little late in the game for any internet retailer or auction site to claim that its business model or market niche is proprietary, right? If it wasn't, Ebay would be suing the living daylights out of every other auction site in the world. Sounds like a hollow threat to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted
"Sometimes imitation is the highest form of flattery. Sometimes, it's a violation of intellectual property rights"

 

Sounds like someone is all ticked off at the competition, and is using inflammatory (and highly illogical) statements to get their point across.

 

Very bad advertisement IMO, as it makes them look scared and highly unprofessional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Zipper

Mr. Zipper

Posted
Posted
"Sometimes imitation is the highest form of flattery. Sometimes, it's a violation of intellectual property rights"

 

and at the bottom is Comiclink's logo.

 

The money spent on the ad would have been better spent on upgrading his site and checkout system.

 

devil.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdiesel

Darthdiesel

Posted
  • Author
Posted
"Sometimes imitation is the highest form of flattery. Sometimes, it's a violation of intellectual property rights"

 

Sounds like someone is all ticked off at the competition, and is using inflammatory (and highly illogical) statements to get their point across.

 

Very bad advertisement IMO, as it makes them look scared and highly unprofessional.

 

Yeah, I get the poke at the competition too. Thoughts of CGC, CGG and 3PG's relationship also came to mind when reading the ad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foolkiller

Foolkiller

Posted
Posted

i'm not an IP attorney...

 

but I can't imagine Josh has too much recourse. What he's set up isn't exactly a novel business idea -- and the service he provides and his reputation are what drives his business... not his actual model for how the business is set up.

 

If he really had any shot at litigation, I think the wheels would already be in motion.

 

He's probably letting off some steam and shooting from the hip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdiesel

Darthdiesel

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Souns like a direct hit at pedigree confused-smiley-013.gif And he probably needs to, I know a few issues that were up on the link for months, then moved to pedigree and sold within days - wich one would you choose?

 

Since I sell mostly on and off ebay, I have never used a consignment website. I'd have to look more into what kinds of books each sold successfully, percentage cuts and fees and ease of use factors before committing to anyone, if I wanted to go that route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdiesel

Darthdiesel

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That's exactly what I was wondering about. Was a patent on the comic website ever filed? How many "violators" do we have already, why speak up now, how much weight does the threat of litigation really hold? I don't recall eBay suing yahoo auctions, lycos auctions, ubid...etc early on when they were fledgling ventures and could have been taken out by the big entrenched giant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Hook

Red Hook

Posted
Posted

If that is what the ad is really implying, it's an indefensible position to take. It's plain old competition....and it's a new world out there. Adapt or die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeffreykli

Jeffreykli

Posted
Posted

The only violation of IP rights that I think could be asserted by Josh is: 1) violation of copyright or trademark protections (which I can't see, since no one else uses Comiclink) or 2) someone copying the "look and feel" of his website. I'm not a big user of Comiclink, but it doesn't appear that anyone is copying his website directly. I think it's just a marketing tactic, and a bad one at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
Souns like a direct hit at pedigree confused-smiley-013.gif

 

I agree... and I can't imagine Doug is too concerned... I find it highly unlikely that as a lawyer himself he wouldn't have been aware if it was much of a concern. juggle.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chromium

chromium

Posted
Posted
Man I'm still trying to understand why he bother spending money on that add? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif Makes no sense. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

Well, it IS making people talk about Comiclink....and bad publicity is still publicity... confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted
I know I'm uninformed but the vagueness of the ad just made me pause. I posted hoping someone could spread some light on the issue.

 

If its a litigious angle Comiclink is exploring to protect their technological interests, they don't have a leg to stand on. To be quite honest, I don't even think you could patent any of the technology used on the site because its far too derivitive, and if one were to really examine the guts of the site, they would very likely end up with a hybrid of an auction site mixed with an ad placement system for selling comics on consignment.

 

Its also highly debatable whether one could successfully apply for a trademark name which uses the word "comic" within its name. The right to the exclusive use of the word comic would have to be disclaimed apart from the trade mark. The logo should be a no brainer, but the words "comiclink" -- well that's a seperate issue. A strong chance that the trademark office might have something to say, and will quote from verse to verse all the problems associated with your attempts at exclusivity, and the efforts in futility with using the word "comic" in a trademark.

 

As foolkiller and a few others have already pointed out, its very likely a marketing angle, and one that is not only poorly crafted, but conveys a message of self-admiration along with a pretty inflated ego.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing