• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

The General Musings of Falkie2013 (George Senda, The Guy From Pittsburgh)

Started by heater, December 19, 2013, 09:37:40 PM

Should this thread be removed from the forum?

Yes
1296 (66.7%)
No
647 (33.3%)

Total Members Voted: 1937


Quote from: Billy Joe Mulgreavey on October 15, 2017, 03:34:58 PM
I'd like to know what Mr. Chefist's foul intentions are with George's intellectual properties.
George and intellectual ?
in the same sentence ?
is that allowed ?


George,
you might have to pay a LARGE SUM to purchase your "rightful" domain name...
Below, we list down the top 10 most expensive domain names recorded in history.
Sex.com â€" $13 million (2010) ...
Insure.com â€" $16 million (2009) ...
Internet.com â€" $18 million (2009) ...
Privatejet.com â€" $30.1 million (2012) ...
Vacationrentals.com â€" $35 million (2007) ...
Insurance.com â€" $35.6 million (2010)

just sayin'...

Quote from: jason.callan on October 15, 2017, 05:10:19 PM
I'm in a movie. Here is the trailer for it.

Cool. As long as the filmmakers obtained all rights to use clips from the sources seen ("Tales From The Darkside", for example; CBS Television Distribution, if applicable) and from those holding any rights to any music used in the soundtrack. If not in the public domain. Obvious satire is one thing. Perhaps that is what is being published with the work under "fair use."




Quote from: Happier Times are Coming on October 15, 2017, 05:51:04 PM
George,
you might have to pay a LARGE SUM to purchase your "rightful" domain name...
Below, we list down the top 10 most expensive domain names recorded in history.
Sex.com â€" $13 million (2010) ...
Insure.com â€" $16 million (2009) ...
Internet.com â€" $18 million (2009) ...
Privatejet.com â€" $30.1 million (2012) ...
Vacationrentals.com â€" $35 million (2007) ...
Insurance.com â€" $35.6 million (2010)

just sayin'...

Exactly. Back in the early days of the Internet, who knew that spending anywhere between $150 to $300 "back then" for a domain name could be an investment worth millions today. Hindsight on some of our parts is also 50/50. Where's that "Time Machine" thing when you need it?

If I recall correctly, someone bought the domain name "men.com" for roughly $300 in the early days of the internet. Then resold it for roughly $15,000 years later. Then someone came along and bought that URL from the second party for roughly $750,000. My, how a little investment can become a lot if you have the vision to plan ahead.

And I understood even Apple Computer itself ran into a trademark issue with the use of "apple.com." Tying into, of all people, the rock group "The Beatles." Who, with others, had the registered trademark "Apple" from its "Apple Records" label. The computer company came to a agreement with the trademark holders, from what I recall, but the licensing of that domain name didn't come cheap. How many millions do you think were exchanged then over one simple word like "Apple"? I bet, a lot more than us slobs would ever know.

Yes, if we only had the wits back 25 years ago to act. Those domain names are appreciating more than the best stocks on the market -- and yes, someone with wits and a relatively meager budget can "clean up" by sitting around doing nothing but buying and selling domain names.


Quote from: Fyodor Gutman on October 15, 2017, 02:22:45 PM
Senda may have the rights to georgesenda.com and The Guy From Pittsburgh(tm) in exchange for an unrestricted interview with a round table on Martinez Tonight.

Seems simple enough as a bargaining ploy.

A daily BellGab post of at least 50 words, and a 10 minute weekly call with Martinez Tonight - which could be recorded in advance?

Quote from: Billy Joe Mulgreavey on October 15, 2017, 03:48:45 PM
Someone suggested a new direction. 

This is George Senda, the guy from Cleveland (tm).

OR:  Jorge Senda, the guy from, say, Tijuana

chefist

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on October 15, 2017, 06:31:23 PM
A daily BellGab post of at least 50 words, and a 10 minute weekly call with Martinez Tonight - which could be recorded in advance?

Once George recovers from the shock of his current legal quagmire, and cooler heads prevail, we may have a discussion regarding a sensuous path forward.

Quote from: Here We Go Again on October 15, 2017, 05:02:10 PM
... I recall that one early morning years ago listening to a syndicated sports-talk radio program. One of the hosts mentioned he just read in the news that the recording artist John Fogerty was being sued for copyright infringement by his former label for his late 1980s-hit song "The Old Man Down The Road." One he wrote.

"How can someone be sued for using their own work?," the host asked. Then I called them, got through and explained. The reason, I think, that "The Old Man Down The Road" sounds just like Creedence Clearwater Revival is because...it was written and a rough studio cut made of that song by the group in the early 1970s. No doubt under contract, the label owns all rights to any works written and produced while under such employ.

So, even though CCR never released that track, Fogerty's agreement called for that song to the intellectual property of the record label. Not him. Then years later, he felt he could finally record and release it under his solo career. Um, looks like he thought wrong. He'd lost his rights legally and I admit I never knew the disposition of the case...

John Fogerty was the core guy in CCR, but his bandmates - including his brother - sold out, sold the rights to the band's material behind his back. The lawsuits over that went on for decades and he lost.  He did ultimately win the lawsuit regarding ''The Old Man Down The Road'', and he went on to write songs trashing the head of the studio that launched that lawsuit (for example ''Zantz Can't Dance''). 

Only fairly recently has be been able to get past his anger about everything and move on. 

Even the biggest and the best can fall under copyright laws. Recall the infamous George Harrison "My Sweet Lord" (copyright 1970) vs. The Chiffons "He's So Fine" (copyright 1963) music-copyright infringement lawsuit years ago. By the time it was done, Harrison admitted he never "consciously" meant to steal a copyrighted song and another's work, but had some rhythm he'd heard on the radio apparently "stuck in his head" and he sat down an composed a song similar -- albeit faster.

From what I recall, Harrison got "made" but had his lawyers make a less-costly settlement. He would just "buy out" the rights to "He's So Fine" from the label-rights holder rather than pay a larger sum for "stealing it." I could be wrong after all these years, but I think that's how that case played out -- OK, some "intellectual-property theft" of copyrighted material went on, but how about buying the rights to the original and calling it even? After the jury decided something "fishy" went on and those who held the earlier copyright were justified in the lawsuit.

LOL. My Sweet Lord. What goes on with intellectual property rights is a major discussion all on it own. My Sweet Lord, what happens is on another level...Hare Krishna...Hare, Hare...Listen and decide...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYiEesMbe2I

chefist

Quote from: Here We Go Again on October 15, 2017, 06:52:52 PM
Even the biggest and the best can fall under copyright laws. Recall the infamous George Harrison "My Sweet Lord" (copyright 1970) vs. The Chiffons "He's So Fine" (copyright 1963) music-copyright infringement lawsuit years ago. By the time it was done, Harrison admitted he never "consciously" meant to steal a copyrighted song and another's work, but had some rhythm he'd heard on the radio apparently "stuck in his head" and he sat down an composed a song similar -- albeit slower.

From what I recall, Harrison got "made" but had his lawyers make a less-costly settlement. He would just "buy out" the rights to "He's So Fine" from the label-rights holder rather than pay a larger sum for "stealing it." I could be wrong after all these years, but I think that's how that case played out -- OK, some "intellectual-property theft" of copyrighted material went on, but how about buying the rights to the original and calling it even? After the jury decided something "fishy" went on and those who held the earlier copyright were justified in the lawsuit.

LOL. My Sweet Lord. What goes on with intellectual property rights is a major discussion all on it own. My Sweet Lord, what happens is on another level...Hare Krishna...Hare, Hare...Listen and decide...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYiEesMbe2I


The infamous case where Ray Parker Jr loses to Huey Lewis and the News over Ghostbusters/I Want a New Drug.

with all these recent posts, it would appear Falkie and his "crack team of pro bono students wanna be lawyers" will have their hands full...

as Falkie has mentioned repeatedly...
can't touch my welfare...

but could have his ass thrown OFF THE INTERNET !

hahaha

Quote from: chefist on October 15, 2017, 07:00:44 PM
The infamous case where Ray Parker Jr loses to Huey Lewis and the News over Ghostbusters/I Want a New Drug.

Yes, such things have happened in the course of intellectual property. Sometimes, the "artist" types think nothing about the business end and then they get burned by multi-million or even multi-billion dollar companies.

Recall the pirated song allegation about Mick Jagger's solo song "Just Another Night With You." A poor, struggling reggae artist had written and recorded a song very similar to it. But he never got the legal documentation on it and, yes, got punked in the end when a major-recording artist no doubt "stole it" from him. But from what I recall, the plaintiff lost out in court.

Then in recent years over a "trademarked" name. In this case, a business or organization. From what I recall years ago, the former wife of the rock-group "Van Halen" -- once married to drummer Alex Van Halen -- opened a beautician business after their divorce named "Van Halen Salon." But was served with a "cease-and-desist" order since the name "Van Halen" in any way was a registered trademark of a business -- the rock group -- and in the United States, it couldn't be used or included in a business name of any type. Supposedly, although I cannot vouch for that.

Um, not even mattering that yes, it was the business owner's married name -- but she was being ordered not to use it. I don't know how that case worked out, but laws are laws. Like that singer Gene Simmons of the group "Kiss" noted years ago.

For years before his own band, there were other music groups named "Kiss." But, unlike his group, they failed to obtained the trademark on the name. He invested heavily in the rights to that trademark -- and noted he lives well off all the royalties that legal trademark "Kiss" allows him. Recall that bit on reality television when he went into some store in Los Angeles with his adult son and bought himself a "Kiss" rock group T-Shirt off the rack? Bragging that he'll make royalties off that sale. What he called "licensed apparel." And you know, that old rock-and-roll weirdo may just be right as rain.

Trademarks, trademarks. That's all that matters, Simmons advised. Get that first-and-foremost as part of a business -- then let the creative work take care of itself. I agree. Always protect yourself.

chefist

Quote from: Here We Go Again on October 15, 2017, 07:29:08 PM
Yes, such things have happened in the course of intellectual property. Sometimes, the "artist" types think nothing about the business end and then they get burned by multi-million or even multi-billion dollar companies.

Recall the pirated song allegation about Mick Jagger's solo song "Just Another Night With You." A poor, struggling reggae artist had written and recorded a song very similar to it. But he never got the legal documentation on it and, yes, got punked in the end when a major-recording artist no doubt "stole it" from him. But from what I recall, the plaintiff lost out in court.

Then in recent years over a "trademarked" name. In this case, a business or organization. From what I recall years ago, the former wife of the rock-group "Van Halen" -- once married to drummer Alex Van Halen -- opened a beautician business after their divorce named "Van Halen Salon." But was served with a "cease-and-desist" order since the name "Van Halen" in any way was a registered trademark of a business -- the rock group -- and in the United States, it couldn't be used or included in a business name of any type. Supposedly, although I cannot vouch for that.

Um, not even mattering that yes, it was the business owner's married name -- but she was being ordered not to use it. I don't know how that case worked out, but laws are laws. Like that singer Gene Simmons of the group "Kiss" noted years ago.

For years before his own band, there were other music groups named "Kiss." But, unlike his group, they failed to obtained the trademark on the name. He invested heavily in the rights to that trademark -- and noted he lives well off all the royalties that legal trademark "Kiss" allows him. Recall that bit on reality television when he went into some store in Los Angeles with his adult son and bought himself a "Kiss" rock group T-Shirt off the rack? Bragging that he'll make royalties off that sale.

Trademarks, trademarks. That's all that matters, Simmons advised. Get that first-and-foremost as part of a business -- then let the creative work take care of itself. I agree. Always protect yourself.

Lawyers biggest responsibility is justifying their own career...same with patent law...frivolous suits are a business model, just another form of ambulance chasing.

Quote from: chefist on October 15, 2017, 07:32:37 PM
Lawyers biggest responsibility is justifying their own career...same with patent law...frivolous suits are a business model, just another form of ambulance chasing.

Agreed. That's why I never went into practicing law. I never met such miserable people in my life. Not a career path I wanted to take. Maybe said best by the writer Woody Allen in one of his films: "Um, there are people who don't even think about enjoying the good and simple things in life. Like honesty and sex. They, instead, become attorneys."

Comedy, yes, but maybe with a ring of truth.

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on October 15, 2017, 06:32:27 PM
OR:  Jorge Senda, the guy from, say, Tijuana

I think Senda should stick to The Mooch from Martinez. That's how everyone already thinks of him anyway.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: Inglorious Bitch on October 15, 2017, 08:08:34 PM
I think Senda should stick to The Mooch from Martinez. That's how everyone already thinks of him anyway.

How about The Artless Dodger?



chefist

Quote from: Walks_At_Night on October 15, 2017, 08:13:53 PM
Senda could be on Mexican Radio  eh?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyCEexG9xjw

I'll be playing that on the pre-show tomorrow night. My local commercial free FM station plays it a couple of times a week. lol


Quote from: chefist on October 15, 2017, 08:17:15 PM
I'll be playing that on the pre-show tomorrow night. My local commercial free FM station plays it a couple of times a week. lol

Awesome!   it's a classic............

chefist

A classic from the past...Drone is going to capture Orangey, abuses Scotch tape and steal all George's cats...lolz!

https://youtu.be/e3wr_t-hIAQ


chefist

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on October 15, 2017, 08:25:15 PM
I wonder if Kathy is also a conservative

She definitely conserves personal feminine hygiene products and women's undergarments....

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod