loan shark / drug dealer / whore house / floor wax / desert topping

[David Nicol]

A quick poll: Do you think that

if someone were to reply to the question

"I heard Bank of America was a loan shark"

with the response

"They're not a loan shark, they're the loan shark"

or reply to the question

"I heard Bayer was a drug dealer"

with the response

"They're not a drug dealer, they're the drug dealer"

or reply to the question

"I heard Bazookas was a whore house"

with the response

"They're not a whore house, they're the whore house"

would there be as much confusion on the part of employees of said
model ventures in regulated industries as I have encountered in
response to my quip in response to Kit's question?

[Adrian Griffis]

David,

You're trying to cast the issue as a question of linguistics, where it
appears to me that the matter is a question of evidence. I believe
the initial objections where about whether your statement was
justified and not, and not about whether you phrased the statement you
meant to make correctly.

Adrian

[Christofer C. Bell]

To add to what Adrian has said, the companies you mentioned aren't conducting legitimate business in an otherwise shady industry.  There is no sub-context in which to confuse the humorous, tongue-in-cheek nature of the answer.  What you said about AdKnowledge sounds like a backhanded accusation of unethical and illegal behavior.  We asked for supporting evidence.  There doesn't appear to be any.

--
Chris

[Legatus]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 13:14, Christofer C. Bell <christof...@gmail.com> wrote:

To add to what Adrian has said, the companies you mentioned aren't conducting legitimate business in an otherwise shady industry.  There is no sub-context in which to confuse the humorous, tongue-in-cheek nature of the answer.  What you said about AdKnowledge sounds like a backhanded accusation of unethical and illegal behavior.  We asked for supporting evidence.  There doesn't appear to be any.

I agree, it is also a question of audience. You know that in the audience you had an employee of AdKnowledge. If you were to make the accusation about Bayer in the presence of a Bayer employee, it could easily be taken as an accusation and not a humorous quip, but in a general audience familiar with the companies persona, it would more likely be taken in the spirit of a whimsical jab.

--
JD Runyan


Samuel Goldwyn  - "I'm willing to admit that I may not always be right, but I am never wrong."

[Christofer C. Bell]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Legatus <li...@runyanrants.net> wrote:

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 13:14, Christofer C. Bell <christof...@gmail.com> wrote:

To add to what Adrian has said, the companies you mentioned aren't conducting legitimate business in an otherwise shady industry.  There is no sub-context in which to confuse the humorous, tongue-in-cheek nature of the answer.  What you said about AdKnowledge sounds like a backhanded accusation of unethical and illegal behavior.  We asked for supporting evidence.  There doesn't appear to be any.

I agree, it is also a question of audience. You know that in the audience you had an employee of AdKnowledge. If you were to make the accusation about Bayer in the presence of a Bayer employee, it could easily be taken as an accusation and not a humorous quip, but in a general audience familiar with the companies persona, it would more likely be taken in the spirit of a whimsical jab.

To provide yet more context for our comments (and I shamelessly stole this from someone else):

"Tipjar isn't just a PayPal ripoff, it's *the* PayPal ripoff."

Does that make our point more clear?

--

Chris

[David Nicol]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Christofer C. Bell

>
> "Tipjar isn't just a PayPal ripoff, it's *the* PayPal ripoff."
>
> Does that make our point more clear?

I'm not offended, but you've got it backwards.

[Christofer C. Bell]

This website may be helpful to you then:

Welcome to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
http://www.txed.uscourts.gov/

Please also see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Texas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_troll

Good luck in your litigation.

--

Chris

[David Nicol]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Christofer C. Bell
<christof...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Good luck in your litigation.
>
> --
> Chris

What the hell are you talking about?

[Christofer C. Bell]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:04 PM, David Nicol <david...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Christofer C. Bell

<christof...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> Good luck in your litigation.

What the hell are you talking about?

If PayPal is *the* Tipjar ripoff as you claim then you stand to reap substantial financial reward for defending your intellectual property in a United States court.  The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas is particularly friendly to folks in your position.  You may seek legal redress for the harm PayPal, Inc., has caused you by using your intellectual property, without your permission and without compensation to you, in the for-profit service they provide.

If you have no intention to defend your invention in court, then I guess your company will forever remain "volunteer operated" while you seek "a suitable collaborator to help with the operation of the company."[1] 

Or was it to get the flying monkeys some t-shirts?

In any case, best of luck to you, David.

[1] http://www.tipjar.com/
 

--
Chris

[David Nicol]

No, there is no grounds for any kind of litigation, the invention in
question was obvious at the time, and even if it wasn't, I didn't file
for any kind of IP-protection. I stand amused that the current
state-of-the-art in paypal interface, the wordpress tipjar widget,
looks EXACTLY like a 1996 tipjar.com "give" form.

Yes, the flying monkeys still need t-shirts. And a new name, for that matter.

Thanks for your blessing, Chris.

[Christofer C. Bell]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:30 PM, David Nicol <david...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, the flying monkeys still need t-shirts. And a new name, for that matter.

Thanks for your blessing, Chris.

With this post, you, sir, win this thread!  ;-)

I need to log off the Internet...

--
Chris