Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
> have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan
> isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then
> Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of
> you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>
>> Jerry
>> --
>> Jerry Bransford
>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
> have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan
> isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then
> Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of
> you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>
>> Jerry
>> --
>> Jerry Bransford
>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
James, I stated my opinion, stand by it, and I won't debate it with you.
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
> have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan
> isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then
> Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of
> you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>
>> Jerry
>> --
>> Jerry Bransford
>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>
Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
> have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
> Dennis or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan
> isn't involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then
> Bill has more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of
> you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
>> True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
>> in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
>>
>> Jerry
>> --
>> Jerry Bransford
>> PP-ASEL N6TAY
>> See the Geezer Jeep at
>> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
--- Personally, I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
--- That is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. --- Regards --- D.J.
www.SpecialOps4x4.com
because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
--- That is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. --- Regards --- D.J.
www.SpecialOps4x4.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
--- Personally, I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
--- That is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. --- Regards --- D.J.
www.SpecialOps4x4.com
because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
--- That is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. --- Regards --- D.J.
www.SpecialOps4x4.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome)
--- Personally, I am of the opinion Nathan was attacked by D.C. lawyers
because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
--- That is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. --- Regards --- D.J.
www.SpecialOps4x4.com
because of Lloyd R. Parker. The babes excuse was just a smoke screen.
Nathan got into Parker's face, here in this group, and Parker called his
old student at the law firm, in Atlanta, that represented D.C. She,
being a fellow tree-hugging liberal, used her position, and D.C.'s money
and power, to attack Nathan as a personal favor to her old professor.
--- That is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. --- Regards --- D.J.
www.SpecialOps4x4.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
Where exactly did you get the idea that what JB said was that the results
for Dennis would have been different? You're the only one that said that.
All JB said was he would have sued Nate over the ---- if he had been DC.
Shoot, he's not even the one that pulled Nate into the thread. That was
mabar and you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
> > True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
> > in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
> >
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
Where exactly did you get the idea that what JB said was that the results
for Dennis would have been different? You're the only one that said that.
All JB said was he would have sued Nate over the ---- if he had been DC.
Shoot, he's not even the one that pulled Nate into the thread. That was
mabar and you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
> > True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
> > in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
> >
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
Where exactly did you get the idea that what JB said was that the results
for Dennis would have been different? You're the only one that said that.
All JB said was he would have sued Nate over the ---- if he had been DC.
Shoot, he's not even the one that pulled Nate into the thread. That was
mabar and you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
> > True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
> > in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
> >
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
1. Dennis sued D-C, not the other way around.
2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't reflect
the facts.
Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he just has
some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement. Although
having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because that's
how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter that
he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an trademark in
his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's to
D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
cybersquatting.
I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter infringing
on my business's name this past summer.
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
Dennis
> or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan isn't
> involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then Bill
has
> more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
> > True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
> > in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > PP-ASEL N6TAY
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>
2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't reflect
the facts.
Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he just has
some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement. Although
having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because that's
how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter that
he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an trademark in
his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's to
D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
cybersquatting.
I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter infringing
on my business's name this past summer.
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
Dennis
> or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan isn't
> involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then Bill
has
> more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
> > True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
> > in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > PP-ASEL N6TAY
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Showdown on the Rubicon (outcome) <--Jerry here..
1. Dennis sued D-C, not the other way around.
2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't reflect
the facts.
Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he just has
some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement. Although
having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because that's
how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter that
he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an trademark in
his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's to
D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
cybersquatting.
I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter infringing
on my business's name this past summer.
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
Dennis
> or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan isn't
> involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then Bill
has
> more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
> > True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
> > in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > PP-ASEL N6TAY
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>
2. The question is irrelevant, because it's speculative and doesn't reflect
the facts.
Nathan's a good guy, and for the most part has good intentions, he just has
some interesting ideas on copyright and trademark infringement. Although
having naked chicks on his website proved to be his undoing because that's
how D-C found out about it, from a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter that
he had naked chicks on his website. The issue was he used an trademark in
his URL's that he should not have. Later he offered to sell the URL's to
D-C to settle the matter, but that is one of the definitions of
cybersquatting.
I know something about this, I had to deal with a cybersquatter infringing
on my business's name this past summer.
"RocknTJ" <jetowle@***.net> wrote in message
news:T0_gd.195072$a85.138927@fed1read04...
> Here Jerry I'll ask it again:
>
> "So Jerry,
>
> You think the outcome for Dennis would have been different if he would
have
> had topless chicks painted on his trailers?
> That is interesting.
>
> I don't think so, but I am not a lawyer.
>
> --James
>
> Oh and BTW Jerry,
>
> There were NO nude girl pics on jeeprubicon.com and they still took it."
>
> Now answer the question.
>
> The way I see it is, one you think the outcome would be different for
Dennis
> or two you are just taking "pot shots" at Nathan. Seeing how Nathan isn't
> involved in this conversation personally, if it is option two then Bill
has
> more than one leg to stand on, with regards to his opinion of you.
>
>
> "Jerry Bransford" <jerrypb@***.net> wrote in message
> news:E8Rgd.68272$bk1.5156@fed1read05...
> > True but he was also posting ---- pics on his site that used Jeep's name
> > in the URL. I would have sued him too if I were Jeep.
> >
> > Jerry
> > --
> > Jerry Bransford
> > PP-ASEL N6TAY
> > See the Geezer Jeep at
> > http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
>
>