Supporting Sponsors Who Settle = MORE PATENT LAWSUITS! Others have patents too! - GoFuckYourself.com

Ron Bennett · 10-29-2003, 12:21 AM

I'm posting this message based upon an article (url below) I saw linked on another sponsor's message board...

http://xbiz.com/articles/index.php?article_idp=778

...some webmasters may be hoodwinked into supporting sponsors which settled, thinking that solves the problem...

If the sponsors fighting Acacia give in, they'll regret it later...no I'm not talking because of us webmasters, but rather because Acacia is *NOT* THE ONLY COMPANY WITH METHOD PATENTS READY TO POUNCE!

Those sponsors which settled with Acacia, *and* those webmasters who support them, are under the mistaken belief that settling makes the problem disappear...nope, not exactly...other companies are ready to file patent infringement suits as well, if they see Acacia is sucessful.

Sponsors which haven't settled must be persistent and aggressively FIGHT BACK...for if sponsors give in now, they are doomed to a future of constantly fighting more patent infringement lawsuits on many fronts brought by numerous other parties...

Acacia needs to be stopped hard right now!

If sponsors and/or others are short on cash to fight the case, I'm sure a bunch of us can forego some sales and/or donate money to assist...

Ron

SleazyDream · 10-29-2003, 12:25 AM

Why · 10-29-2003, 12:37 AM

amen!

The Truth Hurts · 10-29-2003, 12:42 AM

So are you suggesting we boycot the settlers?

Lets say we all do that... how do I know that the next company I send my traffic to isn't one of the mystery 90%?

Because they said so?

ROFL.

SleazyDream · 10-29-2003, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Truth Hurts
So are you suggesting we boycot the settlers?

Lets say we all do that... how do I know that the next company I send my traffic to isn't one of the mystery 90%?

Because they said so?

ROFL.

mystrey NOTHING - i think that acacia wants as much publicity as it can get - and as such they are posting EVERYONE that settles and then letting you think that they are getting more than they really are. I don't think they're hiding ANYONE.

Dravyk · 10-29-2003, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SleazyDream
mystrey NOTHING - i think that acacia wants as much publicity as it can get - and as such they are posting EVERYONE that settles and then letting you think that they are getting more than they really are. I don't think they're hiding ANYONE.

Exactly.

Irony. The mass mails that went out last week are a pressure tactic to get webmasters to turn their traffic only to those who have settled.

a) It's backfiring -- big time!!!!

b) They don't know the industry. Few webmasters put their eggs in one basket (a single sponsor or even a handful). Most of us niche, and not just a single niche, and again not a single sponsor in a single niche.

So Acacia thinks we're going to take the time to change out all our banners and links and switch them over to a couple companies? ROTFL!!

... The time and effort and lost revenues that would create for many of us suddenly makes it a better and cheaper choice to put that money into court costs (and IMPA donations) and fighting Acacia's stupid ass!!

Smart fucking move, Acacia! Keep up the good work!!

Mr.Fiction · 10-29-2003, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Truth Hurts
So are you suggesting we boycot the settlers?

Lets say we all do that... how do I know that the next company I send my traffic to isn't one of the mystery 90%?

Because they said so?

ROFL.

How many shares of Acacia did you buy at $8?

FightThisPatent · 10-29-2003, 07:04 AM

One company that settled said they didn't get a sweetheart deal and that they don't believe there was ever a sweetheart deal with anyone.

If there were sweetheart deals, it would be a no-no for Acacia since that would violate some antitrust laws.

These come to mind:

Sherman Anti-trust Act (1890)
Section 1 outlaws contracts and conspiracies in restraint of trade

Clayton Act (1914)
Section 2, amended by Robinson-Patman Act (1936), bans price discrimination that substantially lessens competition

Section 3 prohibits certain practices that might keep other firms from entering an industry or competing with an existing firm

Section 7, amended by the Celler-Kefauver Act (1950), outlaws mergers that substantially lessen competition

Federal Trade Commission Act (1914)

Section 5, amended by the Wheeler-Lea Act (1938), prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts

If you are a sponsor and you feel that other sponsors got sweetheart deals, you are able to make a complaint at:

https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU01

Fight the Patent!

Veterans Day · 10-29-2003, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction

How many shares of Acacia did you buy at $8?

NO i got in at 1.58 sold at 7ish

Probably sold them to someone around here

ElvisManson · 10-29-2003, 07:23 AM

Brian Shuster just got the patent for pop ups if I remember correctly.

He won't go after WM's...but I'll bet any amount of money that he will sell the patent for a 7 figure sum to a company just like Acacia.

crockett · 10-29-2003, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
One company that settled said they didn't get a sweetheart deal and that they don't believe there was ever a sweetheart deal with anyone.

If there were sweetheart deals, it would be a no-no for Acacia since that would violate some antitrust laws.

These come to mind:

Sherman Anti-trust Act (1890)
Section 1 outlaws contracts and conspiracies in restraint of trade

Clayton Act (1914)
Section 2, amended by Robinson-Patman Act (1936), bans price discrimination that substantially lessens competition

Section 3 prohibits certain practices that might keep other firms from entering an industry or competing with an existing firm

Section 7, amended by the Celler-Kefauver Act (1950), outlaws mergers that substantially lessen competition

Federal Trade Commission Act (1914)

Section 5, amended by the Wheeler-Lea Act (1938), prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts

If you are a sponsor and you feel that other sponsors got sweetheart deals, you are able to make a complaint at:

https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU01

Fight the Patent!

so would that mean their current threat of Nov 30th could be considered a violation of anti trust laws? If they only raise the rates for companys that sign up later and not the ones pre nov 30th?

FightThisPatent · 10-29-2003, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crockett

so would that mean their current threat of Nov 30th could be considered a violation of anti trust laws? If they only raise the rates for companys that sign up later and not the ones pre nov 30th?

I don't think so, because there letters are not threatening.

Some posters in other threads were advocating filing complaints to FTC over the harassment issue.. i don't think that will go anywhere, but hey, it's their time and energy and you never know what happens when lots of people keep saying the same thing.

If they said something like pay us the license or we will sue you, that's threatening, and that''s where you could have the option of going after Declaratory Judgement.

Fight the Patent!

10-29-2003, 12:21 AM	#1
Ron Bennett Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,653	Supporting Sponsors Who Settle = MORE PATENT LAWSUITS! Others have patents too! I'm posting this message based upon an article (url below) I saw linked on another sponsor's message board... http://xbiz.com/articles/index.php?article_idp=778 ...some webmasters may be hoodwinked into supporting sponsors which settled, thinking that solves the problem... If the sponsors fighting Acacia give in, they'll regret it later...no I'm not talking because of us webmasters, but rather because Acacia is NOT THE ONLY COMPANY WITH METHOD PATENTS READY TO POUNCE! Those sponsors which settled with Acacia, and those webmasters who support them, are under the mistaken belief that settling makes the problem disappear...nope, not exactly...other companies are ready to file patent infringement suits as well, if they see Acacia is sucessful. Sponsors which haven't settled must be persistent and aggressively FIGHT BACK...for if sponsors give in now, they are doomed to a future of constantly fighting more patent infringement lawsuits on many fronts brought by numerous other parties... Acacia needs to be stopped hard right now! If sponsors and/or others are short on cash to fight the case, I'm sure a bunch of us can forego some sales and/or donate money to assist... Ron

10-29-2003, 12:25 AM	#2
SleazyDream I'm here for SPORT Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phone # (401) 285-0696 Posts: 41,470	__________________ This dog, is dog, a dog, good dog, way dog, to dog, keep dog, an dog, idiot dog, busy dog, for dog, 20 dog, seconds dog! Now read without the word dog.

10-29-2003, 07:04 AM	#8
FightThisPatent Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 4,090	One company that settled said they didn't get a sweetheart deal and that they don't believe there was ever a sweetheart deal with anyone. If there were sweetheart deals, it would be a no-no for Acacia since that would violate some antitrust laws. These come to mind: Sherman Anti-trust Act (1890) Section 1 outlaws contracts and conspiracies in restraint of trade Clayton Act (1914) Section 2, amended by Robinson-Patman Act (1936), bans price discrimination that substantially lessens competition Section 3 prohibits certain practices that might keep other firms from entering an industry or competing with an existing firm Section 7, amended by the Celler-Kefauver Act (1950), outlaws mergers that substantially lessen competition Federal Trade Commission Act (1914) Section 5, amended by the Wheeler-Lea Act (1938), prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts If you are a sponsor and you feel that other sponsors got sweetheart deals, you are able to make a complaint at: https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU01 Fight the Patent! __________________ http://www.t3report.com (where's the traffic?) v5.0 is out! \| http://www.FightThePatent.com \| ICQ 52741957

10-29-2003, 12:37 AM	#3
Why MFBA Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: PNW Posts: 7,230	amen!

10-29-2003, 12:42 AM	#4
The Truth Hurts Zph7YXfjMhg Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: In Your Skull Posts: 15,388	So are you suggesting we boycot the settlers? Lets say we all do that... how do I know that the next company I send my traffic to isn't one of the mystery 90%? Because they said so? ROFL.

10-29-2003, 07:23 AM	#10
ElvisManson Looking California Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 5,476	Brian Shuster just got the patent for pop ups if I remember correctly. He won't go after WM's...but I'll bet any amount of money that he will sell the patent for a 7 figure sum to a company just like Acacia.