Welcome to Banzore!

Be part of something great, join today!

OFFICIAL NOTICE: Admin RogaineFoam in violation of Johnson & Johnson Copyright with his Avatar (which must be removed/changed)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think there's a big lack of understanding about how DMCA works here.
Not at all, as I informed your 2 Admins who disrespected me when I was respectful, I run various internet sites and Forums as well (that's how I know about XenForo's silent edits feature) and have been doing so for over 15 years. I'm intimate with my sister and familiar with the laws surrounding forum communities, web hosting, and Section 230. When a site is violating copyright, the copyright holder files a DMCA with that site's host. The host then gives the site owner a relatively short period of time (usually 48 hours) to remove the copyright violations from their site or they take action against the site. This is simplified, of course, but that is the gist of it. I know as I've dealt with many DMCA take down requests for copyright violations done by my users. I always took action immediately and never had any problems.

Then you have Section 230 which actually protects sites from liability for such copyright violations done unbeknownst to them by their users. That liability protection goes out the window, however, when the site is made aware of such copyright violations and takes no action. This becomes very clear cut when an actual Admin of the site uploads stolen content, and doubly so after being informed of it, which is what makes RogaineFoam's actions in this thread so damaging as it makes him and the site lose their only legal defense beyond any shadow of a doubt.
 
Actually there are logs.
I'll take your word for it that there are logs the public cannot access, but that does not change the fact that it is now proven that an Admin on this site actually used the silent edit feature to change the contents of the post of another user without leaving any public evidence of such an edit, thus proactively misleading readers into believing that OP said something they never said. Needless to say, that puts into question the integrity of every post on this site, and if they can do it to me, then they can do it to me any time.
 
So you're a legal representative for J&J?
No, I never said I would be the one filing the DMCA. As I mentioned to RogaineFoam in private, I have the Hershey Squirts. If he did not remove from his Avatar the image that he stole, then l'd be reporting his copyright violation to J&J.

There is a lot of copyright violation on the internet as I'm sure you are aware. The reason we see so many violations that aren't acted upon is simply because the companies are not aware of the majority of the violations since the internet is so massive. But company's go out of their way to protect their trademark and copyrights when made aware of such violations because not defending their marks and rights can be considered tacit (and legal) acceptance that they no longer hold the rights.
 

neonardo1

Staff member
Senior Admin
If he did not remove from his Avatar the image that he stole, then l'd be reporting his copyright violation to J&J.

Please do.

By the way, unless you (or they) can definitively prove that they took/created the image that is his avatar then they cannot claim DMCA on it. The photographer/creator of the image owns the copyright to the image, not the person who's product was photographed.

Trademark infringement is a whole nother ordeal, which this is also not.

Basically, stop trying to sound all big and bad. You really have no clue what you're talking about.
 
I just want to know how many pounds of Adderall this dude snorted, I wonder if he'll share
I think this part of what I wrote to Angrysalsa (a Staff member here) in private after this absolute chad insulted me is relevant:

I have the money, the time, the knowledge, the experience, the connections, and the resources to use the full extent of the law to ensure you run your site lawfully, something you are not currently doing and have not been for a while from the looks of things.

Karma is not some mystical force that makes bad things happen to people that do bad things. It's just human nature that when you treat someone badly, you give them an incentive to return the disfavor, which means if you are going to cast stones, you better be squeaky clean (which you are not) lest the skeletons in your closet be laid bear for all to see, including corporations whose copyright you are violating repeatedly.

Since appealing to reason has failed, you have left me no choice but to use my resources to appeal to the law.

LordOfTheWhine you said? You are about to meet LordOfTheLaw. I suggest you start cleaning out all the skeletons on your site as you are about to start receiving DMCA requests for every single violation. Prepare to either spend money on a lawyer, or spend a lot of time cleaning up your site. Either way, mocking me is going to cost you significantly and you will wish you had made a more respectful decision.

If you keep mocking me, you'll just be giving me an incentive to find more skeletons that will quite literally come back to haunt you.

It was so foolish of you to choose to go to war with someone that literally uses the nick LordOfTheWin and who wins 80% of his battles. Do you think a person who wins that much is the kind of person that is simply going to put his tail between his legs and walk away from being publicly mocked after making a respectful and reasonable appeal? I mean, if I TK my own teammates who are costing my team victory in order to win a virtual game, what do you think I will do with people who publicly mock me in real life?

TL;DR: You are fucked.
 

Mobius.jpeg

-bZ- Member
Donator
I would say this dude needs to shut up and take the L, but he already has the L, proudly on display as his profile pic. It's definitely his, too. No copyright or trademark infringement there.
 

Angrysalsa

Staff member
-bZ- Member
Donator
BF4 Admin
1617839994830.png
1617840034232.png
 
Please do.

By the way, unless you (or they) can definitively prove that they took/created the image that is his avatar then they cannot claim DMCA on it. The photographer/creator of the image owns the copyright to the image, not the person who's product was photographed.

Trademark infringement is a whole nother ordeal, which this is also not.

Basically, stop trying to sound all big and bad. You really have no clue what you're talking about.
Remember this post.

Perhaps you did not know that copyright is transferrable and it is common for that to be a clause in product photos. Do you honestly believe a multi-billion dollar company like J&J would just let some random photographer keep the copyright of the images of their products and brands worth 7 to 8 figures? Don't be naïve.

And if J&J is not the copyright holder, then I'll find out who is (it's not hard since he stole it from the internet, after all). RogaineFoam should pray the original is not from a stock image website, because they are notorious for going after copyright violators very aggressively since they screw with their bottom line, and the liability can be up to $150,000 per image for willful copyright violations, which RogaineFoam's Avatar so very much is (especially after he foolishly reuploaded it in this thread).

What we know for sure is that RogaineFoam is not the copyright holder, but feel free to continue underestimating me and to assume I have no idea what I'm talking about and am just making things up as I go along.
 

Pope Alexander VI

-bZ- Member
What we know for sure is that RogaineFoam is not the copyright holder, but feel free to continue underestimating me and to assume I have no idea what I'm talking about and am just making things up as I go along.
Do you have a brain? This is an honest question here. J&J would never pursue litigation against someone that is using a copywrite image for non commercial purposes. I'm going to lay down the basics of how this lawsuit would playout if it did however (this is not legal advice and I do not represent either parties). If J&J were to file suit against RogaineFoam there would months of discovery and court dates before anything would be presented at trial. During that time period J&J is hemorrhaging a significant amount cash due to legal fees (lawyers and paralegals don't work for free) and so would RogaineFoam. They go to trial and a few things could happen.

1) Rogaine violated the copywrite and will have to appeal to a higher court
2) The case is dropped
3) The settle the deal outside of court with a small slap on the wrist (most likely option).

If Rogaine appeals to a higher court he'll be spending more money on legal fees and so would J&J. The trial would eventually climb to the supreme court where it'll most likely not be looked at. So now what? Rogaine has to pay for all of J&J's legal fees on top of damages? Well not exactly. Rogaine can file for bankruptcy, which he could do with no issue really since he is rather young, and he'd recover in 10 years or so. J&J will never see any of the money they spent trying to crack down on a individual that didn't affect their bottom line. Thus, J&J looks like an ass in front of investors and the public eye causing poor relations.

One might ask how I could possible know this, and that it is easy to answer, the music industry did the same exact thing over a decade ago with Kazaa, Napster, and Limewire users. You might have been too young to remember this (I know I was), but what you are describing is a PR disaster with zero benefit. You may think you are smart in a legal sense, but you are dumb as hell when it comes to business and reputation side of things. I can too recite copywrite laws, but to interpret and apply them to best case well that takes a little more brain power than you can handle. Copywrite lawyers exist and there is a reason why you aren't one, and if you are one, you should be disbarred immediately for your incompetency in threats of pursuing legal action.
 

CR8Z

Bald fat guy.
-bZ- Member
I actually got a call from Bruce Willis last week asking me how I got that sick avatar.

1617848814805.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top