Jump to content

Photo

Coleco strong-arming homebrew publishers and fan sites


2416 replies to this topic

#126 Ikrananka OFFLINE  

Ikrananka

    River Patroller

  • 2,456 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 12:18 PM

Here are the comments on ColecoVision Fan that were removed due to blocking this user. These were the *ONLY* comments made by Coleco on our page.  

attachicon.gifmore chris lies.png

 

So in this discussion Cardillo states that the so called infringement was the context within which the "logo" was used.  From reading this thread, and Opcode's related thread, my understanding is that Coleco Holdings or RWB or whatever they're now called have absolutely no rights to the logo whatsoever, or am I mistaken?


Edited by Ikrananka, Sat May 20, 2017 12:42 PM.


#127 Clay Cowgill OFFLINE  

Clay Cowgill

    Star Raider

  • 96 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 12:34 PM

 

You are assuming here that the new Coleco is the same as the old Coleco, or that the new bought all the old assets, which they never did AFAIK. In fact I would claim the same, since I have been using the logo before RWB did, and can provide specimen to prove.

 

As for their trademark, please refer to Bmack36 post. That is what we have people investigating right now.

 

I did see that post (partly why I replied, actually). My point is that they don't need the protection of a registered trademark, per-se. Under trade dress they can open up the 'likelihood of confusion'. If you have a license from the legal owner to use that logo, you're golden. If you purchased the rights to that logo from the prior rights holder, you're good to go, obviously. If you can prove that 1980's Coleco never legitimately had claim to the logo originally (e.g. didn't pay for it under a work-for-hire inconsistency or whatever), you could try to make a case. However, if someone else owns the rights to that brand (regardless if they specifically called out the logo) they can say that it's likely a consumer would be confused as to which is the 'legitimate' one when they see it on the shelf or online. (Who was using a logo first wouldn't matter as much as the legal ownership of the rights that control it.)

 

(e.g. if someone starts making "Atari" branded stuff with a different logo, font, etc. there's still an issue because of the likelihood of confusion. Who is the "real" Atari?)

 

Now, I doubt they'd ever bring a lawsuit-- it'd be expensive and time consuming and at most they'd be able to take all the profits and maybe recover legal fees-- likely not worth it to them, but at a minimum it'd be expensive to defend.  

 

IMHO, YMMV, IANAL, etc. ;-) I would definitely consult with a patent/trademark/ip attorney. Provide them with all the information and if they say you're in the clear, then don't worry about it. (But keep in mind you might need to pay to defend that claim were it ever to wind up in court or arbitration!)



#128 jblenkle OFFLINE  

jblenkle

    River Patroller

  • 4,185 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 1:02 PM

I'm rebellious in my old age, but my 2 cents...which doesn't count for much:

 

* Screw River West

* Screw Coleco Holdings - they are a piss-poor imitation of the original Coleco.

* What has Coleco Holdings done for the ColecoVision community - nothing.

* What games have they produced for the ColecoVision - none.

* They can say they support homebrewers and the ColecoVision, but they don't (again, what have they done for CV except for basically stealing the name?)

 

At this point, they could release a new CV compatible and I wouldn't buy it or support them in any way. The damage is done. They messed with the wrong classic video game community.

 

I will support Opcode, CollectorVision, Team Pixelboy...but not Coleco Holdings. I don't trust a company that swoops in and revives "Coleco" when in fact years have gone by and they haven't done anything for us.



#129 jblenkle OFFLINE  

jblenkle

    River Patroller

  • 4,185 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 1:08 PM

OpcodeVision? Or go with your console name PrometheusVision.

 

 

Not a bad idea. Come up with a name, we will register it and make it available for the community.



#130 enoofu ONLINE  

enoofu

    Dragonstomper

  • 877 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 1:19 PM

This post is funny

 

post-41816-0-21309100-1495297296.png

 

Since Chris was using this to promote 

post-41816-0-13243400-1495217190_thumb.p

 

Plus his webpage is full of these trademarks

http://colecotoys.com/

 

Plus https://www.facebook.com/ColecoToys/


Edited by enoofu, Sat May 20, 2017 1:23 PM.


#131 TPR OFFLINE  

TPR

    Stargunner

  • Topic Starter
  • 1,652 posts
  • Location:Orlando, FL

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 1:29 PM

This post is funny

 

Since Chris was using this to promote 

post-41816-0-13243400-1495217190_thumb.p

 

 

The key word here being "was" because oddly enough they changed their header image yesterday just after all this news broke from that image above using a Nintendo property to this:

18623379_1912024219074540_17735199648513154_o.jpg

Did they honestly think we wouldn't notice the hypocrisy of this?  I'd place a Las Vegas bet they do not have the rights to use an image of Donkey Kong in their promotions.  Do we have any lawyers in the house who would like to do some pro bono work for the satisfaction of proving this?



#132 Bry OFFLINE  

Bry

    Space Invader

  • 16 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 1:43 PM

Anyone who owns the Coleco book published last year (Coleco - The Official Book), which per the back cover was "fully endorsed by Coleco," flip to page 160... that page discusses and praises OpCode, and specifically mentions OpCode's version of the now-problematic Donkey Kong.

So much for being "fully endorsed by Coleco."

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Edited by Bry, Sat May 20, 2017 1:44 PM.


#133 enoofu ONLINE  

enoofu

    Dragonstomper

  • 877 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 1:48 PM

He is still using those images and apparently that expo cost money

and he is using the event with those trademarks to promote his other businesses

$ 20 USD
Standard Pass - Day 1
Standard Pass- Day 1: Valid only on day 1 of COLECO RGCE, 08/05/17. Entry access only. All add ons must be purchased separately.
$ 20 USD
Standard Pass - Day 2
Standard Pass- Day 2: Valid only on day 1 of COLECO RGCE, 08/06/17. Entry access only. All add ons must be purchased separately.
$ 35 USD
Standard Two Day Pass
Standard Two Day Pass - Day 1 and 2: Valid entry on 08/05/17 and 08/06/17 for Coleco RGCE 2017. All add ons must be purchased separately.

Edited by enoofu, Sat May 20, 2017 1:48 PM.


#134 newcoleco OFFLINE  

newcoleco

    Stargunner

  • 1,268 posts
  • Always Tired
  • Location:Quebec

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 1:48 PM

A Coleco and retrogaming convention, sounds like a good idea, and I've already that with the ADAMCon group.

 

Shameless plug: The Coleco ADAM users group called ADAMCon do annual conventions and I've participated to it for nearly 15 years already. July 20-23, 2017, Guelph (or Milton?) in Ontario, Canada. And next year the ADAMCon convention will celebrate their 30th anniversary in New York state, with a key moment of visiting what's left of a Coleco facility.

You can contact Dale Wick and visit ADAMCon official websites for more informations.


Edited by newcoleco, Sat May 20, 2017 1:49 PM.


#135 shawnphase OFFLINE  

shawnphase

    Chopper Commander

  • 195 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:04 PM

at this point, im hoping to see chris cardillo banned from AA and 'colecovision' wordfiltered to 'super game module'....



#136 CPUWIZ OFFLINE  

CPUWIZ

    Sheriff

  • 32,197 posts
  • Cartridge Recycler
  • Location:SoCal

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:13 PM

LOL, here is what comes up on google, when you do a physical image search of the new logo for the show. :lol:

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • Screen Shot 2017-05-20 at 1.11.24 PM.png


#137 opcode OFFLINE  

opcode

    River Patroller

  • 4,112 posts
  • Bringing new life to your ColecoVision!
  • Location:MA, USA

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:37 PM

Well, at this point I am sick of fighting 6th graders. I have more important things to do.
Nothing will come from this, so I prefer to be practical. As I announced (and communicated to RWB) a couple of days ago, I am removing all the references to Coleco and ColecoVision logos and names from my games and will identify my platform as the Super Game Module. All homebrewers are welcome to use the SGM logo and I will provide licenses at no costs and no strings attached under request. Please contact me so we can do this in a ordered way.

As for the accusation of taking advantage of the licensing deal, I will just say I am still waiting for my many many hours of consulting fee to arrive in the mail.
And I was for the accusation of using the SGM licensing deal on subsequente runs without Coleco knowledge, I will post some of the exchanges showing they were pretty aware and ok with that once I have the time to go through the archives.

#138 GoldLeader ONLINE  

GoldLeader

    Stargunner

  • 1,329 posts
  • Location:Cheyenne, WY

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:37 PM

While I don't think a new name is a bad idea,...Neither is just saying, "This game for play on ColecoVision", (along with all the legalese that follows about not being endorsed by, affiliated with blah, blah, blah,etc,)...

 

Perhaps call it CoolecoVision...Because it's like ColecoVision but COOL,  OK I'll shut up now...

 

Seriously, at this point I envision myself buying future homebrews that say PROMETHEUS* on the box, perhaps with an asterisk, or fine print that says, "This game will also play on ColecoVision consoles"...

 

 

 

*Prometheus console is not associated with that semi-awful Alien movie people go on and on about...Admit it, you didn't hate it That much when you saw it in the theater...It was just OK...Well  maybe a little below average...



#139 TPR OFFLINE  

TPR

    Stargunner

  • Topic Starter
  • 1,652 posts
  • Location:Orlando, FL

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:40 PM

Coleco have posted the following to their page which I will address here:

 

https://www.facebook...912553615688267

CLARIFICATION:

 

You may have noticed over the past few days attacks made against this page and throughout the Internet. We would hate to give any type of validity this, but we have been receiving messages that are both positive and negative so we will attempt to clarify.

 

These attacks come from a prior license holder who has improperly and illicitly taken advantage of our goodwill.

 

 

They are referring to Opcode here, and I'll let them be the ones to respond, but I wonder just who actually has "taken advantage of goodwill" here.

 

Several years ago in an act of community goodwill, a Coleco license was given to an independent developer (for $1) to make 'one run' of a device that is used in conjunction with the retro Coleco console. The item was created and sold. Coleco looked the other way after the 2nd and 3rd runs. Coleco looked the other way as unlicensed games were made bearing the mark by this same developer. Most recently, this developer announced that they would be re-creating or re-porting and selling games such as Donkey Kong, and other well known games bearing the ColecoVision mark. Coleco asked this developer to cease the use of the ColecoVision marks on these games. They initially agreed to drop the Coleco trade marks and produce the games on their own. About a month ago, this company began an advertising campaign on a well respected fan blog site (Atari Age) as well as Facebook. The campaign showed games, boxes and devices carrying the ColecoVision mark. When asked about the items, the development company became defensive. An offer was made by Coleco for the company to either drop the marks from the games OR agree to a updated licensing agreement in which they would not be permitted to create new games based on third party intellectual property rights. Coleco has been in communication with Nintendo, Namco/Bandai and other companies and does not wish to damage those relationships or place itself in the middle of an intellectual property dispute.

 

 

Again, this is for AtariAge and Opcode to respond to especially in regards to the 2nd and 3rd run, but if they are referring to posting the SGM 4th run in the AtariAge store or on their Facebook page simply letting people know it's available as an "advertising campaign" then I would question if they actually know what an advertising campaign is.

 

In a separate matter, the producer of the same developement company began promotions of a series of lewd video games called "Strip Poker" and "Bustin'-Out" The box of the latter featured a woman's breast. The boxes of these games also featured the ColecoVision logo. The producer refused to take down the promotions, but agreed that he would not continue them in the future. The producer then increased the promotion of the game even referring to it as 'Soft Porn' on one of his sites. We continued to express our displeasure to no avail.

 

 

This is where they are referring to me.  Let me make it very clear that I am *NOT* the "producer" for any homebrew developers.  While I may have spent 22 years of my life in the video games business as a producer in the video games business, and I have offered my advice and recommendations to some of the homebrew publishers, I am not the "producer" for any homebrew companies or titles developed by any homebrew companies.  And I have communicated this with Chris Cardillo on many occasions.  If I wasn't clear on that point, I do apologize and I am making it clear right now.

 

That being said, FULL DISCLOSURE: The only confusion here was that at one point, for a very short time, when I helped CollectorVision get their website back online last year, they listed me as a "producer" for their website out of kindness, which I then had them take down to not create any confusion because I was not their producer for any games in development.  I received no payment for the work that I did, but they wanted to credit me in some ways, and for that I thank them even though it was not necessary.  I did the work because I wanted to help them get their website back online again so that the fan community could start ordering games from them.  You all remember when the CollectorVision site was down last year?   That was a collective team of myself and others who helped get it back online, and we did it for the community.

 

Back to the points at hand of the "lewd video games." We featured these games on our ColecoVision Fan Facebook page.  Here is the post in which we featured them in:

Screen Shot 2017-05-16 at 09.44.09.png

 

This is no different than any other fan page posting about new homebrew games being released. We were just sharing the news like we would any other game.  And yes, I was contacted by Chris via FB Messenger and text message in February to which I disagreed with them (am I not allowed to have an opinion or stand up for what I believe here?) and these are the messages and the discussion that was had:

Screen Shot 2017-05-20 at 15.57.31.png

chris text.png

 

So if me posting a news item about a new game is the same as "promoting" something then I think Chris needs a lesson in Facebook 101.  At no point did I "increase the promotion" as I don't even understand what he means. There was no "continued to express displeasure" in fact, two months later I received another message from Chris asking me to help them with their website!  So at this point I would have NO IDEA there was any issues with anything we are doing because I am currently being asked to do work for them, and why would they make this request of someone they are upset with?

Screen Shot 2017-05-20 at 15.57.10.png

 

Coleco could no longer look the other way. We began a campaign to stop these illicit use of the marks on third party IPs and prevent the spread of the perverted games.

 

If "filing trademark claims out of the blue on a fansites Facebook page" is what you mean by "began a campaign to stop these illicit use of the marks..." then you are going about it the wrong way, and that is what THIS ENTIRE THREAD IS ABOUT!

 

Instead of going to the publishers of the homebrew games, you attacked a fan site to take down images of games you don't approve of while at the same time those games were still for sale on the publisher's website who only found out that this was an issue because they read this thread!  Do you really not understand how insane this all is?

 

Upset, the developer and their 'producer' began a smear campaign to create the illusion that Coleco has begun attacking ALL independent developers.

 

First of all, I'm not anyone's "producer."  Secondly, this was not a "smear campaign" and finally you DID attack all the independant developers! The original post in this thread shows exactly that.  

 

Although we obviously cannot provide a blanket fair use agreement (as one can see, inches quickly turn to miles), over the past several years our company as remained lax and accommodating when it came to what is referred to as home brewing. In fact a number of 'home brew' companies grew into legitimate game development companies. We have expressed our support in the independent community and offered a number of times for independent developers to submit their work for official licensing.

 

So you went from "lax and accommodating" to "let's remove and take down images without warning of ALL homebrew publishers" in the course of a few hours?  How is this acceptable?  

 

Our attempts to discuss this on the so called 'fan' page were met with deleted comments and the blockage of our employees.

 

Your "attempts to discuss" was mediocre at best.  You responded to someone else's comment, not to us, and at no point on our page did you make any valid attempt to discuss this situation with us. You tried to have our page removed, so why should it come as a surprise that we blocked you from the page.  We do not feel we were doing anything wrong.  If you are at a disagreement with the homebrew publishers using the ColecoVision logos, or you do not agree with the content contained within products made by homebrew publishers the correct course of action is to TAKE THAT UP WITH THE HOMEBREW PUBLISHERS!

 

And this is exactly what I tried to discuss with you prior to bringing this public.  I asked for the trademark claims to be retracted since we were not the ones that were using your trademarks nor were we the ones that created the content that you do not approve of.  But instead of retracting those claims, you came into this thread and went down a completely different route that included defamation of character!  Which is why I question how supportive you are of the homebrew and fan community.  

 

We are all here to support the classic ColecoVision, the fan community, and the homebrewers.  I'm sure many of us, including myself, would also like to support Coleco Holdings and whatever future products they develop.  But everything I've displayed in this post is why it is difficult for us to do that.  Had you simply issued the retraction to the claims none of this would have ever happened.  This is not our fault and please do not try to make myself, Opcode, AtariAge, CollctorVision, or anyone else who is directly involved in the products that you had removed from our page the victim of your poor judgement.

 

I'm sure all of us would be more than happy to have a rational, logical discussion with you.  But so far that hasn't happened.

 

So... are you going to email Facebook and retract those claims you made against our page?  Because that was all I asked of you and that has not happened yet. Your move.



#140 opcode OFFLINE  

opcode

    River Patroller

  • 4,112 posts
  • Bringing new life to your ColecoVision!
  • Location:MA, USA

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:44 PM

In case the 6th grader didn't get it by now, I am basically saying this: you leave me alone and I will leave you alone. As I said, no desire to spend the rest of my life discussing this shit, nothing good or practical will come from this, and I have no further desire to discuss, work with or for or have any dealings in general with Coleco.
How you are going to spend your time is your problem. However false accusations will be answered. Enjoy the community! ;)

#141 opcode OFFLINE  

opcode

    River Patroller

  • 4,112 posts
  • Bringing new life to your ColecoVision!
  • Location:MA, USA

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:49 PM

While I don't think a new name is a bad idea,...Neither is just saying, "This game for play on ColecoVision", (along with all the legalese that follows about not being endorsed by, affiliated with blah, blah, blah,etc,)...
 
Perhaps call it CoolecoVision...Because it's like ColecoVision but COOL,  OK I'll shut up now...
 
Seriously, at this point I envision myself buying future homebrews that say PROMETHEUS* on the box, perhaps with an asterisk, or fine print that says, "This game will also play on ColecoVision consoles"...
 
 
 
*Prometheus console is not associated with that semi-awful Alien movie people go on and on about...Admit it, you didn't hate it That much when you saw it in the theater...It was just OK...Well  maybe a little below average...


After all that have happened, it would be stupid for me to keep working on promoting their brand, no matter how. Any similar name is still a violation. I am pretty sure someone with the resources can cancel the registration based on what I pointed out. No worth the time and effort for me though, as I can use that time and money doing something more productive for the community. Let them profit of their trademark, for what it is worth.

#142 CPUWIZ OFFLINE  

CPUWIZ

    Sheriff

  • 32,197 posts
  • Cartridge Recycler
  • Location:SoCal

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:51 PM

prevent the spread of the perverted games.

 

 

Boobies are perverted? :-o

 

crybaby2.gif

 

Is the finger on the iPhone offensive too? 

 

CCaR3u5XIAILcNM.jpg



#143 5-11under OFFLINE  

5-11under

    River Patroller

  • 3,218 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 2:54 PM

crybaby2.gif

 

 

It looks like that baby needs a booby or two.



#144 Ikrananka OFFLINE  

Ikrananka

    River Patroller

  • 2,456 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 3:47 PM

Can I just ask that when anyone is referring to the company that Cardillo etc. works for that they from now on refer to it by the proper name of "Coleco Holdings LLC".  Referring to it as Coleco infers that they have a genuine link to the original Coleco company, which they do not.  Coleco were the manufacturers of The Cabbage Patch Kids and the ColecoVision and NOT Coleco Holdings which is a pathetic shell living off the hard work and original creations of others.  What is sickening is that their website infers to anyone reading it that they are indeed the same company as the original Coleco ("Est. 1982" - ermm they were established a long time before that) and that they created the IP (which in fact they have no rights to).  Does owning a trademark really allow you to claim that you are the original company that created a product?  I think not.


Edited by Ikrananka, Sat May 20, 2017 3:48 PM.


#145 enoofu ONLINE  

enoofu

    Dragonstomper

  • 877 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 3:49 PM

"Coleco has been in communication with Nintendo, Namco/Bandai and other companies and does not wish to damage those relationships"

 

Who actually believes Nintendo or Namco/Bandai knows anything of this Coleco???



#146 Keatah OFFLINE  

Keatah

    Quadrunner

  • 17,967 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 3:59 PM

All this is putting a sour taste in my mouth when I think of the "Coleco" name. I don't see the fun company of the 1980's. Instead I see a totally different organization now. Dreary. I don't see them demonstrating in-depth knowledge about the classic gaming scene. Let alone social media.. If they are, someone please enlighten me.

 

First it was bad judgment and lack of vetting during the Chameleon Circus. How they let the name get on fake project is beyond my simplistic understanding of common sense. And now this dust-up. So, yeh, color me unimpressed.



#147 ColecoFan1981 OFFLINE  

ColecoFan1981

    Moonsweeper

  • 353 posts
  • Location:Milwaukie (Oak Grove), OR

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 4:01 PM

I am still hoping this drama will end in our favor...

 

~Ben



#148 Keatah OFFLINE  

Keatah

    Quadrunner

  • 17,967 posts

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 4:05 PM

Someone want to post the "Coleco Toys & Games Toy Fair 2016 Guide" pdf. And that video with the funky-ass circus music? For the newcomers.

 

---

Attached File  Coleco_Brochure_Final_01-30-16.pdf   4.43MB   99 downloads

I found it! Yikes! That front cover is enough to scare any little kid away. Maybe even make them cry.


Edited by Keatah, Sat May 20, 2017 4:14 PM.


#149 retroillucid OFFLINE  

retroillucid

    Facebook.com/Collectorvision

  • 7,424 posts
  • CollectorVision Games - Publishing Homebrew
  • Location:Montreal, Canada

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 4:08 PM

Time to express my thoughts..... 

 

 

First, yesterday was a dark day for the Colecovision Homebrew Scene

Even though, I knew this was going to happen since I've been in touch with Eduardo (Opcode) and Robb (TPR)

 

I knew our ''soft porn'' games was in cause (too) 

But I honestly didn't gave a F&?k 

 

I didn't want to post before simply because I wanted to take the time to think about it and not just post my personal feelings on this

I have to admit when I woke up yesterday, I was PISSED OFF!

 

I didn't know 100% what was going on honestly, since CollectorVision sold 150 copies of Sacred Tribe to Coleco Holdings (about a month ago) 

The thing is the Sacred Tribe box still have the Colecovision logo on it!

So I immediately contacted Chris to know the details, and why we were allowed to use the CV logo

He told me, as long as you've the rights to the game, Coleco Holdings don't see a problem if we're using the CV logo on our boxes.......well.....of course except for those ''soft porn'' games

Oh, and mentioning the legal stuff:  Colecovision™ is a registered trademark of...etc...) 

 

Eduardo told me there was something weird about how they (River West) aquired the logo

I'll skip details, as I'm sure Ed already mentioned all this

So, we've asked our lawyer to investigate the case and if it still possible for CollectorVision to get the CV logo

 

Now, where CollectorVision Games stands you may ask?

We're fully supporting the CV Scene, and we'll keep doing that!

 

So wich options we've here?

Well, I guess the simpliest thing to do is to simply not use the CV logo anymore so we avoid any troubles or concerns from Coleco Holdings

 

See, I'm getting to old for drama, I know for fact that a few people here are only posting to put fuel on the fire 

Just take a look at all people on the CV section right now!

We RARELY or NEVER see those people posting here

Anyways....

 

So, for all our upcomming games, this is what we're going to use (see below)

 

 

 Cheers!

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • ripcord3d.png


#150 cybercylon OFFLINE  

cybercylon

    River Patroller

  • 2,036 posts
  • Location:SW PA

Posted Sat May 20, 2017 4:08 PM

Can I just ask that when anyone is referring to the company that Cardillo etc. works for that they from now on refer to it by the proper name of "Coleco Holdings LLC".  Referring to it as Coleco infers that they have a genuine link to the original Coleco company, which they do not.  Coleco were the manufacturers of The Cabbage Patch Kids and the ColecoVision and NOT Coleco Holdings which is a pathetic shell living off the hard work and original creations of others.  What is sickening is that their website infers to anyone reading it that they are indeed the same company as the original Coleco ("Est. 1982" - ermm they were established a long time before that) and that they created the IP (which in fact they have no rights to).  Does owning a trademark really allow you to claim that you are the original company that created a product?  I think not.

 

Just check out Cardillo's linked in page. He seems to think differently when it comes to them being the originator to the Cabbage Patch Kids and the ColecoVision.  :roll:






1 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users