Jump to content
TPR

Coleco strong-arming homebrew publishers and fan sites

Recommended Posts

Again guys. I ask that you keep the character assassination out of this thread. By making posts like this, you are being no better than when Cardillo himself attempted to do this to Eduardo and myself. While I can appreciate what you're doing, let's try to keep things professional, deal?

 

No problem man, the whole situation has just left a bad taste in my mouth, it's just my way of venting...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem man, the whole situation has just left a bad taste in my mouth, it's just my way of venting...

 

Completely understood. I feel the same way. But someone has to be the "better party" in all of this, so let's show the world that it's the homebrew community and let Coleco Holdings LLC be the ones to stoop to the attempt at character assassinations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Completely understood. I feel the same way. But someone has to be the "better party" in all of this, so let's show the world that it's the homebrew community and let Coleco Holdings LLC be the ones to stoop to the attempt at character assassinations.

 

Don't they first need character in order to be a victim of character assassination?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Don't they first need character in order to be a victim of character assassination?

J Fontaine, better known as Chris Cardillo is truly a character

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again guys. I ask that you keep the character assassination out of this thread. By making posts like this, you are being no better than when Cardillo himself attempted to do this to Eduardo and myself. While I can appreciate what you're doing, let's try to keep things professional, deal?

Sure, but let's not confuse "character assassination" with 'helping him promote the image he's crafted for himself.'

 

'Got to help out where I can, get my homedog some coverage, yo.

I'm way mo' betta than those BS 'PR firm style' articles, 'cause I do it fo' frizzle.

An I get dem dope beats to those what matter.

We gots to get 'em to the peeps in the trenches, yo.

'All kinds of people lookin to get crunk on dem fat tunes.

 

 

 

Edited by Reaperman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If need to be, I might recycle myself as a MSX developer, or go back toying with the devkit for DS and PSP games, or even Android.

... will not have the same deep connection as with my first videogame system (special place in my heart), but I think I will survive.

 

Would the US trademark even affect you, since you are based in Canada?

 

Philipp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but let's not confuse "character assassination" with 'helping him promote the image he's crafted for himself.'

 

'Got to help out where I can, get my homedog some coverage, yo.

I'm way mo' betta than those BS 'PR firm style' articles, 'cause I do it fo' frizzle.

An I get dem dope beats to those what matter.

We gots to get 'em to the peeps in the trenches, yo.

'All kinds of people lookin to get crunk on dem fat tunes.

 

 

 

 

A ho.... fo sho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

[…] all homebrewers, fan sites, podcast owners, YouTube channels, etc, SHOULD be at least a bit worried that at any given moment, the same could happen to them.

 

So far, this problem seems to be restricted to Facebook. I'm not on Facebook, so I might underestimate the importance of Facebook pages to some people. But I guess other sites such as YouTube have different policies which might make it a bit harder to take content down. And taking down a real website would probably be much, much harder than that (I know http://opcodegames.com/is down, but that apparently was a decision on ocodes's side).

 

Philipp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but let's not confuse "character assassination" with 'helping him promote the image he's crafted for himself.'

 

'Got to help out where I can, get my homedog some coverage, yo.

I'm way mo' betta than those BS 'PR firm style' articles, 'cause I do it fo' frizzle.

An I get dem dope beats to those what matter.

We gots to get 'em to the peeps in the trenches, yo.

'All kinds of people lookin to get crunk on dem fat tunes.

Reaperman any help with what that all means? Google translate can't identify the language, and I don't speak jive...
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So far, this problem seems to be restricted to Facebook. I'm not on Facebook, so I might underestimate the importance of Facebook pages to some people. But I guess other sites such as YouTube have different policies which might make it a bit harder to take content down. And taking down a real website would probably be much, much harder than that (I know http://opcodegames.com/is down, but that apparently was a decision on ocodes's side).

 

Philipp

 

The CV Fan page has over 25,000 people that have liked it and i think most of the posts get seen by about that many people if not more. So the CV Fan page has a lot of reach and lots of eyes looking at it. So if facebook decided to take it down it would be a big loss.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"ONLY ONE DEMAND was made to this individual. ONE! And that was to stop posting lewd material."

post-41816-0-34399800-1495206490.png

Really suprised since they didn't really ask you to remove it before they gave the take-down request and BS the above

 

Chris Cardillo AKA J Fontaine

youneedme.jpg

Edited by enoofu
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reaperman any help with what that all means? Google translate can't identify the language, and I don't speak jive...

Clearly, the language originates from Turkey, a derivative of the Turkish language. Jive Turkey!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"ONLY ONE DEMAND was made to this individual. ONE! And that was to stop posting lewd material."

post-41816-0-34399800-1495206490.png

Really suprised since they didn't really ask you to remove it before they gave the take-down request and BS the above

 

Chris Cardillo AKA J Fontaine

youneedme.jpg

Rev. Lovejoy's wife: WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?!?!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We’ve all encountered clients who believe that when a mark is unregistered, or the registration lapses, the client can immediately start using the trademark and take advantage of its residual goodwill. Brand significance can live on for many years and a newcomer may see an opportunity to leverage the goodwill in an unused mark to its advantage.

It’s really a policy balancing that plays out in the trademark law of abandonment. Do we protect a company’s original investment, but one that is going to waste and may entirely dissipate, or do we allow another company to leverage from an asset it has not built? And what role should consumer protection have?

River West Brands LLC, profiled by the New York Times here, is one company that deliberately identifies unused trademarks that have strong consumer association and creates new product lines for them (see a River West PowerPoint that includes a case study for the Coleco brand here). River West’s business model is bold: it files intent-to-use applications for marks that are still active on the register and, after receiving an office action refusing registration, files a petition to cancel the mark on an abandonment theory. See River West application for BURGER CHEF and cancellation action against the Hardee’s Food Systems registrations for BURGER CHEF; River West application for MISTER DONUT and cancellation action against the Mr. Donut of America registrations for MISTER DONUT. Sometimes River West readily abandons its application upon proof that the mark is still used by the original owner (see HAI KARATE and GAINES). No River West action has yet been decided on the merits.

River West isn’t always so concilliatory. It was sued in federal court by the J.M. Smucker Co. when Smucker objected to River West’s attempted “revival” of the PURITAN brand of cooking oil (complaint here). The district court case was filed in May, 2008, after a contested cancellation proceeding against the Smucker trademark registration had been going on for some time. The district court case was provoked by a fair showing of hubris by River West, which had demanded that Smucker cease using the PURITAN brand. There’s nothing wrong with the River West legal theory as follows: Smucker abandoned the mark, River West filed an intent-to-use application giving it a constructive use date, and Smucker’s resumption of use after that date was an infringement. River West could not have gotten an injunction to force Smucker to stop until its mark was registered, but there’s no reason not to put a future infringer on notice. Nevertheless, arguing that a mark was abandoned and then protesting its use is pretty provocative. The district court case settled 11 days after it was filed (copy of docket here) and River West expressly abandoned its PURITAN application the same day.

Smucker found some interesting legal theories for its complaint, too. River West hadn’t started using the mark itself yet, so there was no straight infringement theory. Instead, Smucker’s allegation of infringement was “Defendant’s use of the PURITAN mark, in connection with its scheme to traffic in the marks and goodwill owned by others, is likely to deceive and cause confusion and mistake among consumers as to the source of origin of the goods provided by Smucker and the sponsorship or endorsement of those goods by Defendant.” (highlighting added). It’s an interesting theory, raising the same problem currently causing disarray in the internet world “keyword” cases, which is whether and when there is “use” of a mark qua mark.

There are some other interesting points in the Smucker complaint. It alleges a dilution theory, at first blush an odd theory for a potentially abandoned mark, but one that makes sense since River West picks marks exactly because they are arguably famous. Smucker also argued fraud, caused by River West’s execution of a declaration stating that to its knowledge no other entity had the right to use the mark. Presumably River West had plenty of evidence that it believed the mark was abandoned; one assumes it does a lot of investigation before taking on this kind of challenge. The documents it files when dismissing petitions to cancel often have self-serving language that mentions how little use the trademark owner has made of a mark, e.g., “After discussions with the Attorney of Registrant, Registrant provided invoices showing the T.V. Time mark has been discontinued, but was sold within the last three years.” (Available here).

Smucker also makes the argument that River West can’t even fundamentally be a brand owner (all emphasis in original):

24. Upon information and belief, RWB does not have any manufacturing or production facilities.

25. Upon information and belief, RWB does not actually make, sell, or distribute any goods.

26. While it maintains no capacity to make, sell or distribute anything, since 2002 RWB has filed no fewer than
121
intent-to-use trademark applications according to records maintained by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”).

27. An intent-to-use application permits a company, or individual, to seek protection for a trademark even though that person or company has not yet sold a product in commerce in connection with the trademark. Significantly, a required element of every intent-to-use application filed with the federal government is a sworn statement that the party seeking it has a “
bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce
.” Prior to the actual registration of an intent-to-use trademark, the party must also submit a sworn statement attesting to its actual use of the mark in commerce.

28. While RWB has submitted a sworn statement regarding its intent-to-use trademarks no fewer than 121 times, it has failed to file any statement of actual use in connection with more than half of those applications [ed. comment – this doesn’t strike me as a particularly low percentage for many companies regularly filing ITU applications].

The River West web site shows that, if doing what it claims, it may well be performing all the acts of a trademark owner. It has several brand-specific joint ventures (see third slide here) and appears to be no different from any other trademark holding company that we find legitimate. The real controversy about River West is the origin of the trademarks it is exploiting, not what it does with them.

But Smucker saved it strongest language for its vehement disagreement with River West’s business model:

29. Upon information and belief, unlike Smucker, RWB core beliefs have little to do with either quality or ethics.

30. Upon information and belief, RWB’s entire business model is premised upon the pirating of the goodwill developed by others in an attempt to deceive the consuming public.

31. As stated on RWB’s website, the company’s sole purpose is to:

[A]cquire rights to dormant consumer brands, revitalize them for modern relevance, reconstruct the business model for today’s marketplace, and ultimately return these brands to the consumer.

32. RWB admits on its website that its business model is premised on using the previously developed goodwill in these “dormant” brands to sell new products to unsuspecting consumers:

If you’re a manufacturer and are developing a better mousetrap, and you think that a base of consumer awareness and excitement can help your product launch and line extension, or if you are a retailer or distributor or you think that a proven credible real brand can help you drive pricing, turns and consumer loyalty, we look forward to hearing from you.

33. The RWB business model is contrary to the very purpose of the Lanham Act. The Lanham Act was enacted to protect consumers and competitors from a wide variety of misrepresentations related to products and services in commerce. Indeed, as specifically set forth in the Lanham Act:

The intent of this chapter is to regulate commerce within the control of Congress by making actionable the deceptive and misleading use of marks in such commerce…to protect persons engaged in such commerce against unfair competition; to prevent fraud and deception in such commerce by the use of reproductions, copies, counterfeits, or colorable imitations of registered marks…

34. Indeed, RWB has admitted on its website and in numerous interviews to the press, that its business model is premised on deceiving the public as to the source and nature of new, unrelated goods sold in connection with famous brands. As RWB’s own Founder and President, Paul W. Earle, Jr., admitted in an interview in 2004, “you can uninstall software from a computer but you can’t uninstall a brand name from someone’s head.”

If River West stays around long, it could generate some interesting new case law on trademark rights and abandonment.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been singing the red part for days.... Have you checked the specimens, can you imagine the implications. Believe, I got quite versed on this shit since last year

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find these web articles a little confusing:

 

https://www.colecoexpo.com/home/coleco-officially-releases-exidys-sydney-hunter-on-cartridge

 

 

http://reviewfix.com/2017/04/coleco-officially-releases-exidys-sydney-hunter-sacred-tribe/

 

 

http://reviewfix.com/2017/04/review-fix-exclusive-inside-sydney-hunter-sacred-tribe/

 

At least one of the commenters at the bottom of the page seems to have figured it out. Is this why RWB/CH is freaking on the puritanical, because they are selling this game at coleco expo but didn't bother to find out about the mature games first? It is hard to believe after all these years.

Edited by Swami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find these web articles very confusing:

 

http://reviewfix.com/2017/04/coleco-officially-releases-exidys-sydney-hunter-sacred-tribe/

 

 

http://reviewfix.com/2017/04/review-fix-exclusive-inside-sydney-hunter-sacred-tribe/

 

At least one of the commenters at the bottom of the page seems to have figured it out. Is this why RWB/CH is freaking on the puritanical, because they are selling this game at coleco expo but didn't bother to find out about the mature games first? It is hard to believe after all these years.

 

Woah.... Coleco DID NOT make this game..... They simply bought a bunch of copies for their expo

That's it.

 

I've also seen somewhere.... Sydney Hunter has been liscenced to Coleco Holding

Again, not true

We didn't liscenced the character at all

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...