Seller dayecon threating legal action against The Acaeum
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 51, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 7949
Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 15, 2021
Location: DFW TX

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 1:28 pm 
 

Kingofpain89 wrote:
Did he already pull his auctions?  I can't find any under his seller ID.


Dayecock didn't have any auctions going; however he's bidding on a few things, mostly magic cards and strap ons.  BC's theory is that he's about to once again offer the same group of modules that keep getting "lost" in the mail and thus is trying to clear his plate by shutting down our "Shady Dealers" thread.

Mike B.


"THE MORE YOU THINK ABOUT WHY i DONE WHAT i DONE THE MORE i LAUGH" Cougar
"The Acaeum hates fun" Sir Allen
"I had a collecting emergency" Nogrod
Co-founder of the North Texas RPG Con
http://www.ntrpgcon.com

 WWW  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 1:34 pm 
 

Badmike wrote:I'd join you, but I might accidentally win some of that crap.

Right, that's always the big worry when these vigilante-types take it upon themselves to mess with other people's bids.

I mean, what the hell would I do — wait! I mean, what the hell would that other guy do — with 4,000 Magic cards?  :wink:

 WWW  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3066
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 30, 2015

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 3:02 pm 
 

Contrarian wrote:You can't block a seller, actually, but I wish you could.

Nonsense.  Just add "-VGC -titanium" to your search.  :lol:

 YIM  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6463
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 04, 2021

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 3:33 pm 
 

You know it still utterly amazes me the new and inventive ways people keep thinking up to prove to everyone that they are total and complete asshats.

Seriously, where the hell do these people come from and what goes on in their tiny brains that makes them think pulling this sh*t is somehow a good idea?  I just don't get it. :?


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  


Active Collector

Posts: 56
Joined: Sep 25, 2005
Last Visit: Mar 24, 2008

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 5:54 pm 
 

Seriously, where the hell do these people come from and what goes on in their tiny brains that makes them think pulling this sh*t is somehow a good idea?  I just don't get it.



Hell look at for the entertainment factor BC. With out the likes of Dayecock and Cougartard think how boring life really would be.  :twisted:


Maraudar


Every cat should have an AK-47.. How else will we defeat the evil hordes of mice?

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3593
Joined: Dec 20, 2003
Last Visit: Apr 18, 2021
Location: Canada

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 7:28 pm 
 

Maybe we can sue him for being a nob :lol:

Dayecon or cock whatever you are, get a life :evil:


Games can get you through times of no money but money can not get you through times of no games!!

 WWW  


Active Collector

Posts: 10
Joined: Apr 26, 2007
Last Visit: Jun 13, 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 7:37 pm 
 

Kingofpain89 wrote:Our ridiculously flawed legal system allows morons like this to sue their neighbors for thousands of dollars because of retarded reasons like their dog pooped in their yard and the neighbor didnt clean it up.

Just from the top of my pointy li'l head; wouldn't a lot of your problems go away if the punitive damage was paid to the state, instead of being split up by the lawyer and the plaintiff? If the plaintiff were only awarded compensation for the actual damage, and then had to pay some ungodly percentage to the lawyer, maybe the incentive for crazy-ass lawsuites would go away.

just pondering -- MW

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 07, 2021

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 8:21 pm 
 

One word: SLAPP.

SLAPP lawsuits are illegal, and this is a blatant one.  Which means Dayecon is an idiot, especially if Dayecon believes that people will cave in under the least pressure simply because Dayecon believes he is right.

Oh wow, look at that!  Dayecon used three times in this post.  Wait!  Now it's four times.  *gasp*  I'm so f***ing scared here...NOT!

Dayecon (5th time), you're dismissed.



  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 8:24 pm 
 

Traveller wrote:Oh wow, look at that!  Dayecon used three times in this post.  Wait!  Now it's four times.  *gasp*  I'm so f***ing scared here...NOT!

It's like the Knights Who Say Ni routine: "Oh, no, I've done it again!"  :)

 WWW  

User avatar

Verbose Collector

Posts: 1881
Joined: Mar 26, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 22, 2021
Location: UK

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 8:28 pm 
 

'Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!'

(gratuitous Monty Python quote!)


You can never have too much of something you didn't need in the first place.

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 07, 2021

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 8:40 pm 
 

Xaxaxe wrote:It's like the Knights Who Say Ni routine: "Oh, no, I've done it again!"  :)

<King Arthur>Not ANOTHER shrubbery!</King Arthur>



  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 474
Joined: Nov 25, 2006
Last Visit: Apr 21, 2021

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 9:19 pm 
 

Thanks for the laugh guys.

Brute

 WWW  

User avatar

Verbose Collector

Posts: 1881
Joined: Mar 26, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 22, 2021
Location: UK

Post Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 10:56 pm 
 

sorry, can't help myself....

'he wanks very highly in Wome.'


You can never have too much of something you didn't need in the first place.

  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 12:06 pm 
 

The Acaeum is still here this morning! Thank the gods! I thought for sure that DAYECONDAYECONDAYECONDAYECON's â„¢ lawsuit would have shut us down by now.

And, yes, you should picture lots of little rolly-eyes icons right about here. What a tool.

 WWW  


Active Collector

Posts: 92
Joined: Feb 15, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 07, 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA

Post Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:17 pm 
 

FoulFoot wrote:Hi folks,

I thought you should all be aware that seller "dayecon" on eBay (who purports to be Stephen Dayton at [email protected], and who allegedly represents Dayecon Inc, LLC), has informed us of his intent to sue this website for infringement of copyright.

Specifically, he charges that his company name, "dayecon", is used on this website without permission.  I checked, and his name has been used in several forum postings, most notably the "Shady Dealers" thread.  Seeing no violation of copyright in any of the postings, I told him that his name would not be redacted from any messages.

He replied today with the following:


Therefore, I'd simply like to let all of you know that I intend to stand by my position that his name will not be removed from the site.  Furthermore, I urge all of you to take the above into consideration when considering whether or not to deal with seller "dayecon" on eBay.

Regards,

Foul


Hey Foul -

I'm not sure how he thinks you are violating his trademark, but what I would be more concerned about would be a defamation claim.  Of course, truth is a 100% defense to defamation, so I'm sure your forums are fine!  For example, these cases that he mentions - do not show up on a google search and are not in Westlaw's database.  Others have already pointed out that his legal theory doesn't work because he doesn't have a trademark and copyright doesn't apply.  If you do get anything in the mail (not friggen likely) you can threaten the attorney will loads of sanctions and ethics complaints.  Let me know if you need more information on that.

Hilarious avatar, Xaxaxe.

In addition, if you guys need any detailed legal information more than you can find on Google, feel free to shoot me a PM; I am a law student and have free access to all the online resources (at least until I graduate in Dec.).  


As a small caveat, I'm not (yet) an attorney so don't go getting me in trouble!



 WWW ICQ  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3795
Joined: Feb 23, 2005
Last Visit: Apr 15, 2021

Post Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 6:00 pm 
 

I guess the "small caveat" explains her facial expression in your avatar, eh?


Let mirth prevail!

  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 6:20 pm 
 

Seriously, you've got to love an aspiring attorney who uses the greatest sexual-harrassment picture of all time for his avatar!  :)

(And, really, she doesn't look too pleased. I think she's got a case. :wink:)

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6720
Joined: Jul 16, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 02, 2021

Post Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 3:19 am 
 

So...dayecon wants to sue because his anonymous name has been used in print?

By the same logic, wouldn't it then be possible for any company to sue any print media source for printing anything said company does not like.

For instance, if I were to write that I dislike Ford automobiles or Time magazine or Shell Oil or Sears...then they could sue me because it is illegal to write down their names?

Under that interpretation, for instance, Consumer Reports could be sued for saying that one brand of pancake mix tastes better to them than another.

It would also be possible to sue for complaining that Winston cigarettes cause cancer or that my Wonder Bread wasn't all that wonderful.

Under that interpretation of the law, it would be impossible to mention the name of any company at all in any sort of written media without infringing a trademark.

I imagine that it might be possible to sue for libel if someone made false statements online that damaged another person's reputation.  In that case, the complaintant would have to prove that the statement was false.  In the case of a newspaper, the compaintant would also have to prove not only falsehood but also malicious intent.

Remember when Hustler magazine was sued by Jerry Falwell (of the Moral Majority) for using his picture and some heinous text in their porn magazine?  Specifically, Hustler published a fake advertisment in which Jerry Falwell confessed to having his first sexual experience as a boy, in the family outhouse, with his mother.

Despite the fact that Hustler used Falwell's name and image...and printed outlandishly false and grotesque things about Falwell...and did so in an advertisment claiming to directly quote Falwell...Hustler won the resulting libel suit.  They argued that anyone reading Hustler magazine was already likely to have a negative opinion of Falwell.  They also argued that their spoof ad was over-the-top and not likely to be mistaken for reality by any sensible person.  Falwell lost his suit.

In the 1980's, Time magazine printed a false report about (then) Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon.  There were two versions of the lawsuit...one in Israel and one in the United States.  The Israeli version of the suit lasted two hours and resulted in a victory for Sharon...since the Israeli definition of libel only required that the information be a deliberate falsehood.  (In point of fact...and by their own admission in court, Time knowingly fabricated details in a printed news report.)

Sharon's American lawsuit dragged on for months.  Although Sharon was able to prove that Time knowingly printed false information...and that the article falsely impugned his character...he lost his case.  In America the complaintant in a libel case has to prove malice.  Sharon could prove that Time lied out of thin air...but he could not prove that they deliberately and maliciously tried to damage his reputation.

(For the truly interested...and I realize I am way off topic...follow the link below for  details about the 1735 libel trial of Peter Zenger.  Zenger had printed negative editorials about William Cosby, the British governor of New York colony.  Under British law, all that needed to be established was that Zenger had printed something negative about a representative of the British government.  Zenger won his case and was found innocent because the American jury refused to follow British law.  They ruled that Zenger was innocent because the things he printed about Cosby were true. The case is still considered to be a landmark both for its establishment of a distinctly American legal precedent and because it was one of the first glimmerings of what would eventually become the American Revolution.)

http://www.founderspatriots.org/article ... zenger.htm

So, anyway...good luck dayecon.

It would be wise, however, to confine online statements about Ebay sellers to straightforward statements of fact.

Mark   8)


"But I have watched the dragons come, fire-eyed, across the world."

  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 3:59 am 
 

^^^ Well, that one is going to be difficult to follow.  :)

A brief bit of DAYECON humor: in an email exchange I had with him, he referred to his (alleged) "slander lawsuit." There's only three problems with this:

1. In his original email to Foul, he is (allegedly) bringing suit for some form of copyright nonsense, not slander. So he can't even keep his make-believe lawsuits straight.

2. Slander is generally considered to be spoken. The word he was looking for was "libel."

3. Despite a direct challenge, he was unable to provide me with a single shred of proof that a company or a lawsuit even exists. Not one single link to one single webpage. Not an address. Not an email address. Not another person in the company I could contact (he said it has "16 employees"). Not a fax, photocopy, or PDF of any legal documents. No proof of incorporation. No proof of ever having registered a trademark.

His only response was to "check with the county clerk." I'm not sure if he meant the county clerk of Middle-Earth, or Narnia, or the 100-Acre Wood, or whatever other make-believe land this legal action exists in.

It's beyond pathetic, really.

+++++

Anybody have next Monday off from work? If so, you could kill 15 minutes by calling the Clerk of the Court for Spokane County and seeing if they'll give you any information. :)

(509) 477-2211

http://www.spokanecounty.org/clerk/

 WWW  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6463
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 04, 2021

Post Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 8:35 am 
 

First off, its obvious that this asshat is still monitoring the site as eveidenced by his change in legal tactics. If his attempt to get his name removed from the shady dealers thread was not so absolutely pathetic, it might actually be funny, then again what else would you expect from an whining, crying Emo kid.   Sorry Emo kid, you don't have a legal leg to stand on, maybe you should go cry now like all the other Emo kids do.

Moving on to my point though, despite his now moving target legal tactics(boy that was a surprise wasn't it), he has no more legal chance with a libel suit than he would with his "copyright infringement" & "trademark infringement" lawsuits.  The fact of the matter is, as Beemotor points out above, that in order for him to successfully sue for libel, what was said by people on the site about has to false. If what is being said by people is true, it doesn't matter one iota how nasty or vile it is, it's not libel(or was it slander according to the moronic crying Emo kid :roll: ).  Additionally, it has to be a direct attack on him by the people involved with intention of him losing out finacially because of it.  That's why you can't get sued for slander or libel for calling someone a name, it has to be more than that.  

Sorry, dayeCON, you lose again. :D


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  
PreviousNext
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 51, 2, 3, 4, 5