Do MGP owners need to pay Acacia? - GoFuckYourself.com

Quotealex · 10-23-2003, 09:22 AM

Will MGP owners have to pay Acacia a lincense fee to continue operating their site(s)?

johnbosh · 10-23-2003, 09:55 AM

Then there are a LOT of webmasters that have to pay, most tgps have movies, specially with programs like chocker

Kwasi · 10-23-2003, 09:59 AM

I admit I don't know the deep down facts about the patent etc.
BUT

Why isn't Microsoft or RealMedia or Quicktime or similar being chased by Acacia . . .

Aren't all these so-called violating sites using their stuff one way or another??

Juicy D. Links · 10-23-2003, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kwasi
I admit I don't know the deep down facts about the patent etc.
BUT

Why isn't Microsoft or RealMedia or Quicktime or similar being chased by Acacia . . .

All all these so-called violating sites using their stuff one way or another??

I would pay money to see Acacia go after Microsoft on pay per view

Fabuleux · 10-23-2003, 10:02 AM

MGP's don't link to movies directly. But they link to a page with links to movies which are not on the MGP server/URL itself. So I don't see why MPG owners should pay tha ACASIA fee.

Fabuleux · 10-23-2003, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by juicylinks

I would pay money to see Acacia go after Microsoft on pay per view

Me too, I doubt any company has more lawyers and experience with such cases as Microsoft.

NetRodent · 10-23-2003, 10:16 AM

Is there money involved? If so, Acacia wants it.

JSA Matt · 10-23-2003, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kwasi
I admit I don't know the deep down facts about the patent etc.
BUT

Why isn't Microsoft or RealMedia or Quicktime or similar being chased by Acacia . . .

Aren't all these so-called violating sites using their stuff one way or another??

Because they can't threaten Microsoft with companies like Platinum Bucks, and Matrix Content.

Kwasi · 10-23-2003, 11:57 AM

OK, but is the violation then "using" software somebody else made?

Why would I be in violation beause I'm iusng a Microsoft product or whatever that would be the real patent infringer.

All I'm doing is using it on my website.

I didn't design it or code it or market it.

Why oh why me??

Because I'm an easy target??

That seems like a raw deal for the easy targets.

Ross · 10-23-2003, 11:57 AM

I should hope not. Otherwise we're all fucked.

sexeducation · 10-23-2003, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kwasi
I admit I don't know the deep down facts about the patent etc.
BUT

Why isn't Microsoft or RealMedia or Quicktime or similar being chased by Acacia . . .

Aren't all these so-called violating sites using their stuff one way or another??

It appears they are ...
if you keep Acacia on page one of GFY ("the worlds busiest adult webmaster board") and which is hosted by Adult.com and which AdultPlatinum.com has settled with (?) ...

Acacia must report this event to it's shareholders.
When will Acacia admit that the adult industry is "NOT fragmented"?

FightThisPatent · 10-23-2003, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kwasi
Why would I be in violation beause I'm iusng a Microsoft product or whatever that would be the real patent infringer.

You would be infringing upon their patents because M$ didn't have a license for it.

Somewhere buried in M$ EULA for Windows Media (and all other streaming servers) probably mentions about no liability for any patents that might cover all or parts of their technology.

Why would Acacia want to target companies that could tie them up in court for years and burn through their cash?

Why not pick on smaller companies that use technology like from M$ and just sue them for infringement?

If 100,000 websites had audio or video, licensed their patent for the mimumum fee of $1,500/year, they would make $150M.. this is exactly the kind of stuff that patent-ignorant attorneys and shareholders think of.

Another thing to keep in mind, what Acacia INTERPRETS or WANTS their patent to mean, is DIFFERENT than what the USPTO granted.

This very point is what 11 defendants are contesting by going to court and defend against the patent infringement claims.

You don't need to be using a streaming server to be violating their patent claims... any HTTP (web) server, FTP server used to transmit audio or video, counts!

Fight the Patent!

FightThisPatent · 10-23-2003, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ross
I should hope not. Otherwise we're all fucked.

If you have audio or video on your website, you are almost in that f*cked position if it weren't for 11 of your peers going to court to defend their companies (and YOUR rights to have audio/video on your website).

The Patent shall be found invalid, sayeth Mr. Prior Art.

Fight the Patent!

Kwasi · 10-23-2003, 12:05 PM

now its starting to make sense.

thanks

Theo · 10-23-2003, 12:07 PM

fuck em

Fabuleux · 10-23-2003, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent

If you have audio or video on your website, you are almost in that f*cked position if it weren't for 11 of your peers going to court to defend their companies (and YOUR rights to have audio/video on your website).

The Patent shall be found invalid, sayeth Mr. Prior Art.

Fight the Patent!

Thank you for jumping in. I posted this question before, but no one was able to answer it. Most MGP's or TGP's don't have any video or audio on the site, but they are just linking to pages that do have audio/video. IMO this is not a patent infrigment. But most people think it is. Can you give the "real" answer?

sexeducation · 10-23-2003, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Soul_Rebel
fuck em

I agree ...
GFY'ers should ensure Acacia stays page one news until it breaks all records on the world's busiest adult webmaster board ...
have at it ...
it's all fun

steffie · 10-23-2003, 12:16 PM

You cannot double dip in the US

And they are double dipping.

If you bought a license with lets say Webcam32 or Quicktime than Acacia needs to go after those guys, because you have a license.

Anybody remember the mess with gif?

Photoshop and companies who make gif animator had to pay a license fee which they ulitmatly pushed on to the consumer. Basically that happens here.

Acacia bought the patent for streaming
however, we the end consumer bought a license from the company who sold the finished product (webcam32 etc)

We are the end consumer of the product and not the reseller. We purchased a licensed software and its the companies (Seller of such software) to make sure that they are no infringments on patents etc.

To speak in laymans terms.

Lets say you buy a car with tires who don't go flat

After 10 years the inventor of the no flat tires sends you a letter and tells you that you owe him royalties.

It doesnt work like that, because the Inventor of the Tire has to sue the company who has resold his idea without his ok.

Thats the same situation here.

So Acacia is suing the wrong people, asking royalities from the wrong people, they need to sue the reseller or the person who offered the technology.

It happend with the gif patent.

FightThisPatent · 10-23-2003, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux

Most MGP's or TGP's don't have any video or audio on the site, but they are just linking to pages that do have audio/video. IMO this is not a patent infrigment. But most people think it is. Can you give the "real" answer?

If you are linking to video and you are deriving revenue for such activities, than they could consider you to be a 'contributory infringer'....

Check out their page just for Adult Entertainment industry that includes the Webmaster License Agreement:
http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/te...t_adultent.htm

From the page:
"Our Webmaster license covers audio/video content that is accessed via the Webmaster?s web site, regardless of where the content is hosted. The royalty is based upon subscription revenues from the Webmaster?s pay sites, and exit traffic revenue from the Webmaster?s free sites that contain audio/video content. "

Fight the Patent!

Fabuleux · 10-23-2003, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent

If you are linking to video and you are deriving revenue for such activities, than they could consider you to be a 'contributory infringer'....

Check out their page just for Adult Entertainment industry that includes the Webmaster License Agreement:
http://www.acaciatechnologies.com/te...t_adultent.htm

From the page:
"Our Webmaster license covers audio/video content that is accessed via the Webmaster?s web site, regardless of where the content is hosted. The royalty is based upon subscription revenues from the Webmaster?s pay sites, and exit traffic revenue from the Webmaster?s free sites that contain audio/video content. "

Fight the Patent!

Thanks, it's all clear to me. TGP/MGP owners are safe.

FightThisPatent · 10-23-2003, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by steffie

So Acacia is suing the wrong people, asking royalities from the wrong people, they need to sue the reseller or the person who offered the technology.

They are suing the right people from their standpoint....(and it's legal).

The huge problem with Acacia is this: (to use a car analogy).

They patented a personal transport with 4 wheels.

Someone else cited them in their own patent, but called it a car with low ride suspension.

Acacia comes out to sue the auto dealers for patent infringement of selling cars with wheels, which they say is the same as a personal transport. They could sue the manufacturer, but they have deep pockets, so they pick on the smaller dealerships that have tight margins and high overhead (ie. inventory).

In this simple example, Acacia is looking to sue everyone for a broad patent claim... the problem is that so many companies were making "personal transports" prior to their patent, that the patent claims should be invalid.

But why would the USPTO grant this fictiious patent then if there was prior art? The language in this patent was so obscure and science fiction like, talking about the ability to turn invisible, transform into a robot,etc.. that the patent office thought it was novel and new. but acacia decided to just focus on the broader claim of a car with wheels.

But some auto dealerships decided to fight..they didn't want to pay someone a licensing fee for the sales of their pimp-mo-biles. So these dealerships fight back by challenging the big bad patent.

Hope you have enjoyed this analogy to explain how absurd this Acacia patent is.

Fight the Patent!

sexeducation · 10-23-2003, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by steffie
... text deleted ...

Anybody remember the mess with gif?

.. text deleted ...

Yes ...
what happened is ...
the stock market "bubbled" and now the institutions are catching up ...

The patent office could not have kept up to the explosion of the internet ... 200%-400% growth per year ....
Acacia is a symptom of that ....

Fabuleux · 10-23-2003, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent

They are suing the right people from their standpoint....(and it's legal).

The huge problem with Acacia is this: (to use a car analogy).

They patented a personal transport with 4 wheels.

Someone else cited them in their own patent, but called it a car with low ride suspension.

Acacia comes out to sue the auto dealers for patent infringement of selling cars with wheels, which they say is the same as a personal transport. They could sue the manufacturer, but they have deep pockets, so they pick on the smaller dealerships that have tight margins and high overhead (ie. inventory).

In this simple example, Acacia is looking to sue everyone for a broad patent claim... the problem is that so many companies were making "personal transports" prior to their patent, that the patent claims should be invalid.

But why would the USPTO grant this fictiious patent then if there was prior art? The language in this patent was so obscure and science fiction like, talking about the ability to turn invisible, transform into a robot,etc.. that the patent office thought it was novel and new. but acacia decided to just focus on the broader claim of a car with wheels.

But some auto dealerships decided to fight..they didn't want to pay someone a licensing fee for the sales of their pimp-mo-biles. So these dealerships fight back by challenging the big bad patent.

Hope you have enjoyed this analogy to explain how absurd this Acacia patent is.

Fight the Patent!

I just pledged $100. If however the goal cannot be reached, ofcourse I hope it will, I will donate this amount to ASACP. I hope a lot of people will do the same.

FightThisPatent · 10-23-2003, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux

I just pledged $100. If however the goal cannot be reached, ofcourse I hope it will, I will donate this amount to ASACP. I hope a lot of people will do the same.

Thanks! You rock!

I also just got a great prior art lead sent to me in email involving digital video that was viewed on Amigas.... dated to 1989, looks really good... i will post it on my Prior Art page later on (giving the defense side a chance to digest it first).

Fight the Patent!

basschick · 10-23-2003, 01:02 PM

steffie (or anybody else) do you have a link to any law that says you cannot "double-dip?"

acacia is demanding licensing from the site owners, the sponsors, sponsees, leasers, content providers. this sure seems like it should be illegal, but it doesn't mean that it is.

FightThisPatent, i am still not sure what you are actually doing that is useful - not what you WILL or would be doing, what you are doing now that is useful. i read your thread yesterday and it wasn't in any way clear to me after reading what you said.

Quotealex · 10-23-2003, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux

Thanks, it's all clear to me. TGP/MGP owners are safe.

This is not my understanding!

directfiesta · 10-23-2003, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by juicylinks

I would pay money to see Acacia go after Microsoft on pay per view

In fact, it would be Microsoft buying out Acacia just to take them out.

Acacia, by focusing on adult business ( who have no sympathy from the public, so no outrage) is building up it's war chest and hopes to see it's stock go way up.

Then they will hit the "microsoft's" and sell out for a much higher price.

Don't forget, these guys are lawyers, not business operators. They are in it for the short term.

Fabuleux · 10-23-2003, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alex from Montreal

This is not my understanding!

Please explain Alex.

I do not have any video on my site. I do not link to video files. I link to HTML, so they can suck my dick.

- edit -

These video files are not mine, they are not even on my server.
If however I hosted the gallery, we have a different case.

Fabuleux · 10-23-2003, 03:10 PM

From other thread:

Quote:

Originally posted by basschick
i just talked to someone at acacia on the phone. she said that as long as you link to any site with streaming media on it - trades, sponsors, etc - that you are causing the patent to be infringed upon.

they contacted me because a site i trade with links to galleries with movies on them.

in their view, you are violating their patent if you link to a sponsor with streaming media unless you license from them.

You must have smelled bullshit thrue the phone line.

Rodent · 10-23-2003, 03:42 PM

Anyone know why they ahve different sections, adult/onlinevideo/onlinemusic. Why would it matter if its adult or nonadult, nonadult it looks like they are only going after fee based programs for music or video? So free sites(with banners) dont have to pay them if I read their page right since they dont charge a fee and just have banners(still revenue...just like galleries).
Shoutcast is free, all the streams are Free, but they have advertisements in the streams but reading acacias page they are ok since they dont charge a fee....anyone have any info on this?

Quotealex · 10-23-2003, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux

Please explain Alex.

I do not have any video on my site. I do not link to video files. I link to HTML, so they can suck my dick.

- edit -

These video files are not mine, they are not even on my server.
If however I hosted the gallery, we have a different case.

It says:
"If you are linking to video and you are deriving revenue for such activities, than they could consider you to be a 'contributory infringer'...."
So basically since a MGP are linking to videos and profit from it, they may have to pay up licensing fees!

FATPad · 10-23-2003, 05:55 PM

Apparently, if you've ever heard the word "video" spoken or used it yourself in a sentence, they think you owe them.

Mr.Fiction · 10-23-2003, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by basschick

FightThisPatent, i am still not sure what you are actually doing that is useful - not what you WILL or would be doing, what you are doing now that is useful.

Homegrown has said that Fight The Patent is doing work that is helpful. He is coordinating and tracking down prior art that could be used to invalidate the patent.

The more people that are working on this, the better it is for those who believe the patent is invalid.

Quotealex · 10-24-2003, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FATPad
Apparently, if you've ever heard the word "video" spoken or used it yourself in a sentence, they think you owe them.

PimpMeNot · 10-24-2003, 06:06 PM

I am preparing a press release to be sent to all major news networks as well newspapers and news agency. Sure, no one gives a fuck about the adult industry, but they might give a fuck about unfair business practises if it is explained to them the kind of world we will be living in if companies such as Acacia are left alone.

chemicaleyes · 10-24-2003, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by juicylinks

I would pay money to see Acacia go after Microsoft on pay per view

HS-Trixxxia · 10-24-2003, 06:20 PM

Alex from Montreal, did you get one?
Please let me know if you do.
I had an account with them M-x and I'm waiting to see if I get one. Once I do, I'd like to meet with everyone from Montreal who got it. They have to come sue us on our turf...
So we could try to work together on this (all Montrealers) owning a TGP or MGP.

Quotealex · 10-24-2003, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Trixxxia
Alex from Montreal, did you get one?
Please let me know if you do.
I had an account with them M-x and I'm waiting to see if I get one. Once I do, I'd like to meet with everyone from Montreal who got it. They have to come sue us on our turf...
So we could try to work together on this (all Montrealers) owning a TGP or MGP.

No I haven't. I'm not even sure if TGP webmasters are getting letters from Acacia!

JDog · 10-24-2003, 06:38 PM

Yes, and this is a fucked up thing. Sure, I like my site to many movie galleries, but I'm not fucking hosting them. Why should I have to pay the license. Considering one of the sites I have running, does no traffic right now! It's all bullshit in my view tho!

jDoG

Quotealex · 10-24-2003, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alex from Montreal

No I haven't. I'm not even sure if TGP webmasters are getting letters from Acacia!

I mean tgp webmasters outside of the USA...

Goatse · 10-25-2003, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kwasi
Why isn't Microsoft or RealMedia or Quicktime or similar being chased by Acacia . . .

Because they would get their asses handed to them, laughed out of court, and countersued. Bullies never try to beat up the toughest guy in school.

chowda · 10-25-2003, 09:28 AM

as a serious post.. why dont they go after yahoo. now that would be something

Scootermuze · 10-25-2003, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by chowda
as a serious post.. why dont they go after yahoo. now that would be something

For the same reason they don't go after other large internet corporations..

These guys are right down there with the ambulance chasers..
Lazy and greedy..

They don't want to have to work too hard for their money.. Just go for the easy pickings.. Those that are the easiest to work a settlement with.

Splash · 10-25-2003, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JDog
Yes, and this is a fucked up thing. Sure, I like my site to many movie galleries, but I'm not fucking hosting them. Why should I have to pay the license. Considering one of the sites I have running, does no traffic right now! It's all bullshit in my view tho!

jDoG

jDoG,

You might as well just consider that they don't care what they have stirred up. This is one of those last resort things that every corporation does when they are losing a ton of money and will do anything to try to survive. I don't per-say make any money off of vids, but I link to links that have them. What little I see of the mentality of these letters you could probably call(or write them) and say you have no video content and they will click through a link that DOES have it somewhere on the site and end of arguement as far as they are concerned. You are linking to vids. Now pay up!

10-23-2003, 09:22 AM	#1
Quotealex Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: The Global Digerati Village Posts: 6,265	Do MGP owners need to pay Acacia? Will MGP owners have to pay Acacia a lincense fee to continue operating their site(s)?

10-23-2003, 10:02 AM	#5
Fabuleux Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,543	MGP's don't link to movies directly. But they link to a page with links to movies which are not on the MGP server/URL itself. So I don't see why MPG owners should pay tha ACASIA fee. __________________

10-23-2003, 10:16 AM	#7
NetRodent Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: In the walls of your house. Posts: 3,985	Is there money involved? If so, Acacia wants it. __________________ "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." --H.L. Mencken

10-23-2003, 12:16 PM	#18
steffie Confirmed User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Somewhere in the Mountains, far far away Posts: 2,422	You cannot double dip in the US And they are double dipping. If you bought a license with lets say Webcam32 or Quicktime than Acacia needs to go after those guys, because you have a license. Anybody remember the mess with gif? Photoshop and companies who make gif animator had to pay a license fee which they ulitmatly pushed on to the consumer. Basically that happens here. Acacia bought the patent for streaming however, we the end consumer bought a license from the company who sold the finished product (webcam32 etc) We are the end consumer of the product and not the reseller. We purchased a licensed software and its the companies (Seller of such software) to make sure that they are no infringments on patents etc. To speak in laymans terms. Lets say you buy a car with tires who don't go flat After 10 years the inventor of the no flat tires sends you a letter and tells you that you owe him royalties. It doesnt work like that, because the Inventor of the Tire has to sue the company who has resold his idea without his ok. Thats the same situation here. So Acacia is suing the wrong people, asking royalities from the wrong people, they need to sue the reseller or the person who offered the technology. It happend with the gif patent. __________________ Partying since '96 and not going anywhere Anna's Dorm

10-23-2003, 01:02 PM	#25
basschick Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: el lay, ca usa Posts: 2,540	steffie (or anybody else) do you have a link to any law that says you cannot "double-dip?" acacia is demanding licensing from the site owners, the sponsors, sponsees, leasers, content providers. this sure seems like it should be illegal, but it doesn't mean that it is. FightThisPatent, i am still not sure what you are actually doing that is useful - not what you WILL or would be doing, what you are doing now that is useful. i read your thread yesterday and it wasn't in any way clear to me after reading what you said. __________________ Got Gay and For Women Traffic?

10-23-2003, 09:55 AM	#2
johnbosh Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: The Netherlands, Rotterdam Posts: 8,965	Then there are a LOT of webmasters that have to pay, most tgps have movies, specially with programs like chocker

10-23-2003, 09:59 AM	#3
Kwasi Registered User Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 17	I admit I don't know the deep down facts about the patent etc. BUT Why isn't Microsoft or RealMedia or Quicktime or similar being chased by Acacia . . . Aren't all these so-called violating sites using their stuff one way or another??

10-23-2003, 11:57 AM	#9
Kwasi Registered User Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 17	OK, but is the violation then "using" software somebody else made? Why would I be in violation beause I'm iusng a Microsoft product or whatever that would be the real patent infringer. All I'm doing is using it on my website. I didn't design it or code it or market it. Why oh why me?? Because I'm an easy target?? That seems like a raw deal for the easy targets.

10-23-2003, 11:57 AM	#10
Ross Ik ben een aap Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Traffic Force Towers, Canada! Posts: 18,874	I should hope not. Otherwise we're all fucked.

10-23-2003, 12:05 PM	#14
Kwasi Registered User Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 17	now its starting to make sense. thanks

10-23-2003, 12:07 PM	#15
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	fuck em

10-23-2003, 03:42 PM	#30
Rodent Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: ReliableServers.Com Posts: 1,462	Anyone know why they ahve different sections, adult/onlinevideo/onlinemusic. Why would it matter if its adult or nonadult, nonadult it looks like they are only going after fee based programs for music or video? So free sites(with banners) dont have to pay them if I read their page right since they dont charge a fee and just have banners(still revenue...just like galleries). Shoutcast is free, all the streams are Free, but they have advertisements in the streams but reading acacias page they are ok since they dont charge a fee....anyone have any info on this? __________________ Choopa.com Colocation \| Cloud Servers \| Dedicated Servers \| CDN 1000 Gbps Network \| NJ DataCenters

10-23-2003, 05:55 PM	#32
FATPad Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,693	Apparently, if you've ever heard the word "video" spoken or used it yourself in a sentence, they think you owe them. __________________ <a href="http://www.adultcontent.co.uk">Adult Content UK - Great British Content</a>

10-24-2003, 06:06 PM	#35
PimpMeNot Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Pimp Land Posts: 342	I am preparing a press release to be sent to all major news networks as well newspapers and news agency. Sure, no one gives a fuck about the adult industry, but they might give a fuck about unfair business practises if it is explained to them the kind of world we will be living in if companies such as Acacia are left alone. __________________ yes

10-24-2003, 06:20 PM	#37
HS-Trixxxia Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Montreal Canada Posts: 2,946	Alex from Montreal, did you get one? Please let me know if you do. I had an account with them M-x and I'm waiting to see if I get one. Once I do, I'd like to meet with everyone from Montreal who got it. They have to come sue us on our turf... So we could try to work together on this (all Montrealers) owning a TGP or MGP.

10-24-2003, 06:38 PM	#39
JDog Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Canby, OR Posts: 7,453	Yes, and this is a fucked up thing. Sure, I like my site to many movie galleries, but I'm not fucking hosting them. Why should I have to pay the license. Considering one of the sites I have running, does no traffic right now! It's all bullshit in my view tho! jDoG __________________ NSCash now powering ReelProfits.com ALSO FEATURING: NSCash.com :: SoloDollars.com :: ReelProfits.com :: BiminiBucks.com :: VOD PROGRAMS COMING SOON: Greedy Bucks :: Vengeance Cash NOW OFFERING OVER 60 SITES CONTACT :: JAMES SMITH :: CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER :: ICQ (711385133)

10-25-2003, 09:28 AM	#42
chowda Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Gooch city Posts: 9,527	as a serious post.. why dont they go after yahoo. now that would be something __________________ Someone finds you... 2007 PS: Nationalnet is the best host I've ever had. And i tried alot of them.