9000maps Lawsuit Threat - EtQ - They ask for a favour and they complain 9 years later

Status
Not open for further replies.

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Leader
Super Moderator
wow. feels like I'm back on the f*ckedcompany.com bbs where I used to indulge my occasional desire for schadenfreude.
you go Marc.
 
E

etqglenn

The Facts About the Miss Use of EtQ's Intellectual Property

Our independent research of the posting of our material by Elsmar concluded the posting occurred on May 10th of 2004, not 9 years ago, and was updated four times since that original posting. This fact was determined from a search on the Internet Archive machine, www.archive.org, please see the attached report. The Internet Archive machine is the leading authority on web page archives. It offers 55 billion web pages archived from 1996 to a few months ago.

As a check to verify the Internet Archive machine was browsing Elsmar’s site for postings prior to 2004, we tested another url link to a different product download on Elsmar’s site, https://elsmar.com/Imp/sld004.htm. The report indicated THAT product was initially posted in Dec. of 2002. This tells us that the Internet Archive machine was browsing Elsmar site at least as far back as 2002. If EtQ’s material was posted 9 years ago on Elsmar, why wouldn’t the Internet Archive Machine have a report indicating such? The Internet Archive machine concluded the posting of our material by Elsmar occurred on May 10th of 2004, not 9 years ago.

Our interest is to protect our material... that is it. Our investigation concluded we did not permit Marc to publish our material nine years ago nor two years ago.

We appreciate Marc’s removal of the material. Based on the above we suggest Elsmar review the product downloads available on the site. We also suggest Elsmar reviews its process for posting material on its site. We would offer to participate and provide a suggested form that Elsmar may choose to use when members submit material for posting. We would also suggest the completed form be included with the each posting of material as this would abate any confusion for Elsmar, its members and its guests.

We appreciate your cooperation and wish you the best in all your endeavors.

Sincerely,
Glenn McCarty
CEO
EtQ, Inc.
 

Attachments

  • 9000maps Lawsuit Threat - EtQ - They ask for a favour and they complain 9 years later
    elsmar&com$9000maps.JPG
    92.5 KB · Views: 263

Jim Wynne

Leader
Admin
etqglenn said:
Our independent research of the posting of our material by Elsmar concluded the posting occurred on May 10th of 2004, not 9 years ago, and was updated four times since that original posting. This fact was determined from a search on the Internet Archive machine, www.archive.org, please see the attached report. The Internet Archive machine is the leading authority on web page archives. It offers 55 billion web pages archived from 1996 to a few months ago.

As a check to verify the Internet Archive machine was browsing Elsmar’s site for postings prior to 2004, we tested another url link to a different product download on Elsmar’s site, https://elsmar.com/Imp/sld004.htm. The report indicated THAT product was initially posted in Dec. of 2002. This tells us that the Internet Archive machine was browsing Elsmar site at least as far back as 2002. If EtQ’s material was posted 9 years ago on Elsmar, why wouldn’t the Internet Archive Machine have a report indicating such? The Internet Archive machine concluded the posting of our material by Elsmar occurred on May 10th of 2004, not 9 years ago.

Our interest is to protect our material... that is it. Our investigation concluded we did not permit Marc to publish our material nine years ago nor two years ago.

We appreciate Marc’s removal of the material. Based on the above we suggest Elsmar review the product downloads available on the site. We also suggest Elsmar reviews its process for posting material on its site. We would offer to participate and provide a suggested form that Elsmar may choose to use when members submit material for posting. We would also suggest the completed form be included with the each posting of material as this would abate any confusion for Elsmar, its members and its guests.

We appreciate your cooperation and wish you the best in all your endeavors.

Sincerely,
Glenn McCarty
CEO
EtQ, Inc.

1) You have now misspelled "misuse" about 12 times.

2) Seems like you went to an awful lot of trouble to verify something that could have been rectified much easier--person to person--while still maintaining a record of your defense of your material. Instead, you chose to "miss use" the opportunity to make your point amicably. Poor choice, imo, and reflects poorly on you, your protected material, and your business.
 
J

jaimezepeda

etqglenn said:
Our independent research of the posting of our material by Elsmar concluded the posting occurred on May 10th of 2004, not 9 years ago, and was updated four times since that original posting. This fact was determined from a search on the Internet Archive machine, www.archive.org, please see the attached report. ...
Sincerely,
Glenn McCarty
CEO
EtQ, Inc.
I seem to recall that before this forum was hosted at www.elsmar.com it was hosted at a different URL, (www.qs9000.com)

The report included by EtQ does not reflect this.

Here is a link to The Cove's name history:
https://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=4599

Jaime
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Leader
Super Moderator
Is "waybackmachine" submissible in court?

just askin'.

oh - yeah... and Glenn, is your lawyer OK with you posting here? I've been a plaintiff PM on a defective product remediation lawsuit and the lawyers I was the liason for would have kicked my butt up and down the street for directly contacting the opposition.
 
Last edited:

Randy

Super Moderator
One thing I am seeing here is commitment to the "continue to beat the horse after it's dead" process:applause:

The plaintiff talking to the defendant in a public forum about specifics of the case, possibly without the attorney of record being involved or having knowledge?:nono: Pretty good scenario.:uhoh:

An additional possible solution could be to refrain from using or referring to the organization in question in any Thread or converstaion here in the Cove due to the fact that's it's legal name or the name it advertises under) may in itself be copywrited (remember the hassle with the ISO usage?).

Seeing as the Cove is only reaching 20,000+ registered Quality Professionals and visitors worldwide, extra care and consideration should be undertaken to ensure this injured organization is not infringed upon further and that those seeking products or services would have to locate them on their own because the usage of the name could be construed as a copywrite issue as well and possibly cause greater damage. Unless of course written permission was obtained allowing the referencing of this particular company in question as a source for products or services.

Seems only fair to me.

How about a worldwide poll?
 
Last edited:

CarolX

Trusted Information Resource
etqglenn said:
We would offer to participate and provide a suggested form that Elsmar may choose to use when members submit material for posting. We would also suggest the completed form be included with the each posting of material as this would abate any confusion for Elsmar, its members and its guests.

Well...there it is.

Glenn, is this something you would offer as a free service to the Cove?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom