Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on November 07, 2007, 07:26:54 PM
-
Check out all the Sue Scheff (TM)'s on one of her blogs.
http://www.suescheff.net/ (http://www.suescheff.net/)
-
The publishers of the beloved Chicken Soup for the Soul
book series now bring you:
“Wit's End!â€
-
Looks like Sue is going to have to go after all the other Sue Scheff's regarding trademark infringement.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
September 26, 2007
Trademarks Can Protect Your Good Name
By ERIC A. TAUB
GRUPO Montéz de Durango, a Chicago band specializing in a style of Mexican music called Duranguense, spent nine years building up its good name. But in 2005, on a tour of Mexico, five of its members ended up in jail for two months — for nothing more than using the band’s name.
Unbeknown to them, the group had run afoul of a Mexican law that grants rights to a trademarked name to whoever registers it first, whether or not that is who used it first. That right went to their previous manager, who left the group after a business dispute and secured a Mexican trademark.
Grupo Montéz had to change its name and is now known by the unwieldy Los Creadorez del Pasito Duranguense, or the Creators of the Durango Rhythm. It’s a moniker the group could have avoided if it had understood trademark law.
“We knew about trademarks,â€
-
Swe-list] Fw: Lexmark: Current AYPT Opportunities
Sue Scheff SScheff at engr.uky.edu
Tue Aug 10 08:36:11 EDT 2004
Next message: [Swe-list] (no subject)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SWE students: Lexmark is offering our students the opportunity to work
parttime while attending school this Fall 04. You must be enrolled full
time here in engineering and have a 3.0 or higher cumulative gpa. Working
while attending school full time can be challenging, so I caution you to
consider this option carefully. See below information on how to apply for
these jobs. Hope your summer is going well. Sue
Sue Scheff, Director
Women in Engineering
College of Engineering
University of Kentucky
379 R.G. Anderson Bldg.
Lexington, KY 40506
(859) 257-4178
(859) 323-4922 (FAX)
-
PURE Night Club, Las Vegas
http://www.vegas.com/nightclub/pure/ (http://www.vegas.com/nightclub/pure/)
NightclubsRESERVE ONLINE OR CALL 1-866-80-SHOWS Pure
3570 S. Las Vegas Blvd.
Las Vegas, NV 89109
(702) 731-7873
Map it
Pure DetailsHours of operation: Open Friday-Sunday, Tuesday, 10 p.m. - 4 a.m.
Cover price:
$30 for men
$20 for women
Prices for special events may vary.
New Year's Eve: $200, includes front-of-the-line admission and champagne toast at midnight.
Payment information: All major credit cards are accepted.
Location: Inside Caesars Palace.
Music: House, re-mix, rock and hip-hop. There is a different DJ and sound system in each of three different environments.
Resident DJs: DJ AM, DJ Hollywood.
Clientele/Age Group: 21 and older.
Attire: Proper attire required.
Occupancy: TBA.
Parking: Self parking and valet both available at Caesars Palace hotel-casino.
Reservations: Reservations for bottle service only.
Seating: Yes.
Handicapped accessible: Yes.
ATM: ATM available inside the casino.
Special events:
Tuesdays:Pure Tuesdays feature complimentary admission for locals.
New Year's Eve (Dec. 31): Celebrate New Year's at Pure with a champagne toast at midnight.
Pure ReviewMaybe the success of Pure was preordained. Launched by a consortium of celebrities, the 36,000-square-foot Las Vegas nightclub has been an unstoppable success since opening night, drawing thousands into its center-Strip location and garnering the acclaim of the international nightlife community.
Offering three distinct environments over two stories, Pure is almost always packed with locals, visitors and a considerable number of celebrities, many of whom call the main room's raised VIP area a second home. Decorated in shades of white, ivory, cream and silver, the main room also features three bars and a dance floor surrounded by oversized bed seating.
Located just off the main entrance hall is the Red Room, a VIP haven secluded from the main club – and often separated by velvet ropes – which offers its own bar and VIP restrooms. Decorated in rich red and champagne colors, the Red Room features lush draperies, chandeliers and upholstered walls. There are cocoon-like private booths to offer the utmost privacy.
A bottleneck often develops at the twisting staircase that leads up to the 14,000-square-foot Terrace, but it’s a shoulder-to-shoulder trek worth making, as this outdoor enclave offers some of the most dynamic views of the Las Vegas Strip. The Terrace also features an oval dance floor, private cabanas and a bustling bar scene.
If a low-key, relaxed evening is your idea of a good time, avoid Pure at all costs. But if partying with Hollywood royalty, the country's hottest DJs and a few thousand of your closest friends sounds like a night on the town, there is no better place to be.
-- Review by Pj Perez
-
WTF does it matter if her name is trademarked or registered. It doesn't mean people have to stop using or saying it. It is not like anyone, other than Sue herself, is trying to sell something using her name. Hell, Julia Roberts name is trademarked. Doesn't mean people can't talk about her. It just means you can't try and make money from the use of it.
-
PURE - Public Urban Ritual Experiment
http:www.puredance.org/
PURE is collective of dancers and drummers who take music and dance out into the streets for the purposes of healing and peace. Movements from ancient sacred world traditions including Middle Eastern, Chinese, Romani gypsy, Israeli folk, Flamenco, Indian dance and drumming will be incorporated into the PURE experience.
Dance and ritual create community, drawing people together both emotionally and physically into a shared sense of the divine. As the community participates, no one is a stranger any longer.
Dancers and musicians will be travelling down the sidewalks and into subways and public spaces to share their love of dance and music with the public and to pay homage to specific sites.
Visit http://pure-dance.tribe.net (http://pure-dance.tribe.net) to participate in online discussions and to see more photos.
PURE (Public Urban Ritual Experiment) is a sponsored project at "The Field", a not-for-profit, tax exempt, 501(c)(3) organization. Gifts made through that organization are tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.
-
PURE
http://www.puretrust.org.uk/ (http://www.puretrust.org.uk/)
PURE is committed to meeting the proposed new UK Government standards for carbon offsetting
Your donation made via this website will be used to buy and cancel carbon credits from emissions reduction projects that meet the high quality international standards of the Kyoto Protocol.
At least 100% of your net donation will be used to buy and cancel carbon credits if you are a UK taxpayer claiming Gift Aid.
-
How can anyone Trade Mark the name "PURE" which is used by many other businesses and organizations?
-
Why are you obsessed with this woman so much, are you a stalker?
-
Check out all the Sue Scheff (TM)'s on one of her blogs.
http://www.suescheff.net/ (http://www.suescheff.net/)
They're recently added. When she first raised trademark concerns a while ago, I made sure to note how many instances of so-called "common law" trademarks I could find. I found only a single instance (on suescheff.net). I also made sure to archive that one instance as well as her other sites (including her main business) that did NOT have a TM symbol after Sue Scheff.
It looks like she's been busy recently with the TM symbol, though. Who cares. She's given up on threats of libel suits and moved on to another frequently abused angle: IP law.
-
What is IP law?
-
What is IP law?
Intellectual Property (the antithesis of free speech, owned speech)
-
Why are you obsessed with this woman so much, are you a stalker?
most people are amused by her :rofl:
there are not too many people who blog about themselves as much as she does
-
Guest wrote:
What is IP law?
Intellectual Property (the antithesis of free speech, owned speech)
How is she using IP law - I don't get it.
-
Guest wrote:
What is IP law?
Intellectual Property (the antithesis of free speech, owned speech)
How is she using IP law - I don't get it.
She is claiming trademark infringement on people who use her name in a way she doesn't approve of (which means pretty much everybody).
-
Because as we all know, putting (TM) after your name is a REALLY good way to let parents know how sane you are.
(SSSH! Maybe I shouldn't have told her! :rofl:)
BTW, anyone else lol'ing that she can't make the â„¢ symbol?
-
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
This is just ridiculous, IMO.
I'd like to know what a lawyer would have to say about Cheff and her Intellecutal Property Rights.
This woman has been sued by a parent. That is not private information, it is public.
Several of the programs she refers children to have had problems (Whitmore, Red Rock Ranch Academy, Sorenson's, Harbor Oaks, Focal Point Academy).
Who else besides Fornits has been the target of one of these letters?
-
Err .. didn't PURE refer to WWASPS programs originally? I thought I saw a testimonial or reference from Randall Hinton that was posted on PURE in the documents thread on Fornits.
I have a feeling there are going to be books written about this industry and the referral side of it which needs to be exposed for what it is, IMO.
Critical mass is building. No use crying about it. What goes around comes around.
-
If a person trademarks their name, is that not further evidence that they are a public figure? Public figures have fewer privacy rights and a much more difficult burden of proof as plaintiffs in libel cases than regular citizens.
Do a quick search on the public figure doctrine in libel and slander law. Public figures do not have to be governement officials or celebrities. A person can be considered a "limited-purpose public figure" -- one who voluntarily injects himself or herself into a public controversy and becomes a public figure for a limited range of issues.
False statements about limited-purpose public figures that relate to the public controversies in which they are involved are not considered defamatory unless they meet the actual-malice test -- a more difficult burden of proof than is required of non-public figures.
One must wonder what kind of legal advice this woman is getting, if she's really that concerned about her reputation and suing people.
-
http://www.expertlaw.com/library/person ... ation.html (http://www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html)
Public Figures
Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1964 Case, New York Times v Sullivan, where a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation, the public figure must prove an additional element: That the statement was made with "actual malice". In translation, that means that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth. For example, Ariel Sharon sued Time Magazine over allegations of his conduct relating to the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Although the jury concluded that the Time story included false allegations, they found that Time had not acted with "actual malice" and did not award any damages.
The concept of the "public figure" is broader than celebrities and politicians. A person can become an "involuntary public figure" as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention. For example, people accused of high profile crimes may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even after their innocence is established, on the basis that the notoriety associated with the case and the accusations against them turned them into involuntary public figures.
A person can also become a "limited public figure" by engaging in actions which generate publicity within a narrow area of interest. For example, a woman named Terry Rakolta was offended by the Fox Television show, Married With Children, and wrote letters to the show's advertisers to try to get them to stop their support for the show. As a result of her actions, Ms. Rakolta became the target of jokes in a wide variety of settings. As these jokes remained within the confines of her public conduct, typically making fun of her as being prudish or censorious, they were protected by Ms. Rakolta's status as a "limited public figure".
-
Libel, Slander and Defamation
Libelous statements, whether against persons or products, are published statements that are false and damaging. Slander is the same as libel in most states, but in spoken rather than written form.
The terms "libel" and "slander" are often subsumed under the broader term "defamation." It is a tort (a wrongful act) to harm another's reputation by defaming them.
There are three tests which the defamatory statement must meet in order for a plaintiff to prevail in a suit against you and your publisher:
Untrue. In order to be defamatory, the statement must be untrue. If the statement is true or substantially true, then it is not defamatory, and the case is over.
Damaging. In order for the plaintiff to prevail, the statement must have caused real and substantial harm to the person or business. The plaintiff must present evidence of the substantial harm done.
Knowingly false. The plaintiff must also show that the defendant knew the statement was untrue, but published or broadcast the statement despite that knowledge.
You can say or publish just about whatever you wish in our open society--so long as it is true.
Public Official vs Public Figure
The same liberal rule applies to both categories: To prevail in a libel case against you, in addition to showing that your statement is untrue and caused significant harm, a public official or a public figure must also prove "malice" -- that you acted in reckless disregard to the facts known to you and with intent to harm.
Obviously, because of this stipulation, you enjoy considerable protection when it comes to public personages, since proving malice (intent to harm) places a heavy burden on the prosecution.
Who are these public people? The status of "public official" is relatively easy to determine from public records.
The courts have determined that there are two types of public figures:
A "general purpose public figure" is someone who enjoys social prominence. Entertainers are in this category.
A "limited purpose public figure" -- someone who has intentionally placed themselves into prominence, such as a vocal activist on a given issue.
The reasoning is that the press has a First Amendment duty to report on such newsworthy people, and therefore published statements warrant such protection.
Who is a private person? None of the above. Now you see why lawyers get the big bucks.
-
non-commercial fair use purposes[/color]