Creating a copyright of ones name is in fact original. Sign my name to a document and find out why.
Yes I know it is fraud but using my name on a document I have no knowledge of infringes my rights. It goes hand in hand with (TM) My name is being used as a corporation and as such is a creation that 'I' can copyright.
What is the meaning behind the ALL CAPS name?
We have computers and the typeset is not limited, neither is the written script so WHY do they insist on ALL CAPS?
TPTB insist that ALL CAPS be utilised or they will NOT accept certain documentation, this is a big give-away.
The ,Designs and Patents Act 1988, is an ACT and is therefore a suggestion and is not set in concrete. We have the ability to (C) however not for reasons set in this act, so it doesn't apply.
For example?Plus there are many affidavits that have created this common procedure through acquiescence and tacit agreements.
UK's 'Bill of Rights' wrote:And they do claim, demand and insist upon all and singular the premises as their undoubted rights and liberties, and that no declarations, judgments, doings or proceedings to the prejudice of the people in any of the said premises ought in any wise to be drawn hereafter into consequence or example; to which demand of their rights they are particularly encouraged by the declaration of his Highness the prince of Orange as being the only means for obtaining a full redress and remedy therein
Blacks Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968 wrote:
Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization) In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications.
Capitis Diminutio Minima (meaning a minimum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John Doe) - The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man's family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation [pride] of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) [of his own right, not under any legal disability] or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. [Parental authority] It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom.Law, 144.
Capitis Diminutio Media (meaning a medium loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John DOE) - A lessor or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man loses his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights.
Capitis Diminutio Maxima (meaning a maximum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. JOHN DOE or DOE JOHN) - The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man's condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.
First Directive 89/104/EEC of the Council, of 21 December 1988 wrote:Article 2 wrote:
A trade mark may consist of any sign capable of being represented graphically, particularly words, including personal names, designs, letters, numerals, the shape of goods or of their packaging, provided that such signs are capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings.
No free man shall be captured, and or imprisoned, or disseised of his freehold, and or of his liberties, or of his free customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor will we proceed against him by force or proceed against him by arms, but by the lawful judgment of his peers, and or by the law of the land.
For a trivial offence, a free man shall be fined only in proportion to the degree of his offence, and for a serious offence correspondingly, but not so heavily as to deprive him of his livelihood. In the same way, a merchant shall be spared his merchandise, and a husbandman the implements of his husbandry, if they fall upon the mercy of a royal court. None of these fines shall be imposed except by the assessment on oath of reputable men of the neighbourhood.
Rev wrote:Plus there are many affidavits that have created this common procedure through acquiescence and tacit agreements.BenOfEtc wrote:For example?
You say that a name cannot be copyrighted for the reasons you state ben, but what if i created a whole new name?
What if i went to all the trouble to ensure that no other person or human in the world had the same name as me, i actually create a whole new word and call myself that.
Would this not satisfy the criterea of effort that has gone into the creation of something, thus if i created it, i must be able to protect it.
I very vagually remember the joe bloggs company (made jeans wear) attempting to copyright the name or brand, cant remember the outcome though.
Now I would like to state this quite categorically, on this site we discuss the points that are relevant to the thread 'OWNER' and I apologise here to chomerly for any disruption my post earlier may have caused.
I will not be pulled into a session that is fast entering the realm of TROLLING.
There are guidelines and consequences for trolling and I am not afraid to use them. Please stick to the topic and provide all the information regarding chomerly's request.
Trademarks and Copyright don't have to be exclusive within the world, just within your sphere of operation. Actions to enforce them are where confusion to the 'consumer' could damage the TM (C) so declared by the owner. So it doesn't matter how many 'same names' there are as long as confusion between them doesn't exist.
Trademark (TM) is common law, a Registered Trademark (R) is commerce...so TM is established because i claim it.....very simple
Copyright can also be claimed under common law in the UK, but the UK has suggested a single name is unlikely and that 'skill' should be involved
Return to The Person (legal fiction)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest