JeffB apparently doesn't like me having KINGSNAKES.COM...

[Double "D" Reptiles]

Let's Kick some Booty!!!

Rich (and others),

I've got an idea and will pitch the more complete version to Rich via e-mail. In a nutshell, it revolves around the precept that General Business Models are not individually owned/protected as intellectual property but rather are based upon general knowledge of business and thus public domain.

Kingsnakes.com, named after the most common name of reptiles found in the Lampropeltis genus, should become an "Information Gateway" for all things related to kingsnakes and the genus to which they belong. (Please note that Jeff B's catch-phrase of "information portal" is avoided by calling it a "gateway.")

Some parts of this model might cost a small nominal fee to users of specific aspects, such as script/banner advertising, but I think that everyone concerned who has ANY connection to kingsnakes/milksnakes and is concerned about the issue on Rich's side would gladly pay to support a site like I'm suggesting and, to make it even more hilarious, because of the nature of Jeff B's site and content available on it, a business letter could be sent inviting him to pay to have his Kingsnake.com site advertised and linked to from this "Lampropeltis ssp. information Gateway." Don't you know he'd just "shift" in his pants to get a nice, polite business letter like that.

David

p.s. Rich, give me a bit longer and I'll send you my concept(s) on this.

 

[Wraith]

Out of curiosity, is the fact that his initial, non-civil complaint was tossed out of any value in a civil case?

The arbitration was not a court of law so it's not like the courts would be required to consider or uphold that ruling.

Adrian

 

[dwedeking]

I would think that since it was by overseers of the domain name system and the main contention involves the domain name then it would carry some weight with a judge (but your always rolling the dice when in court). Didn't he process the trademark paperwork after the domain was aquired by Rich?

 

[Ken Harbart]

I think it's about time to contest Jeff's trademark application with the USPTO.

 

[KNOBTAIL]

Whether Rich will be

in the drivers seat in this type of litigation, remains to be seen. The problem as I see it, is the wearing down of the finances involved. Who is willing to put up more money and how long is this going to take?

Apparently Jeff is looking to set an example. Not only in causing a major financial drain on Rich, but on anyone else who shakes the Kingsnake tree. Having to hire an attorney that specializes in these matters, having to be present and having to participate in federal court is not to be taken lightly. Aside from the punitive damages that could be rewarded, this may depending on how the wind blows, put an end to the BOI and all the other Fauna related sites by Rich.

It would be better for those interested in continued postings to refrain from attacking Jeff and find more constructive methods for helping Rich.

 

[JungleHabitats]

What are you willing to do to help rich Jerry?

Just wondering here ?

 

[odatria]

I'll tell you what I am willing to do to help Rich...

I'm willing to keep my opinions of Jeff to myself. There is no doubt at all that much of this thread is going to end up being used in court. As much as we admire the fact that we have a place like Fauna to come and speak our minds, I think it would be in our best interest to keep a low profile in this. The reason Jeff doesnt want it mentioned ofer at KS is he doesnt want to give Rich any ammo to use against him. Right now Jeff benefits from each and every remark posted in this thread whether it is in favor of him or against him! The way I see it is Im not the one getting sued and Im not going to give the other guy anything he can use against Rich. This is not going to be a popular opinion, but it is my opinion. There are some people who cannot refrain from posting every day in a controversial thread like this. I would just ask that if that is the case, use common sense and refrain from calling Jeff some of the names I have seen in the last 2 days. Like I said we are not the ones getting sued. The livelihood of a great man is at stake here, lets try not to forget that.

Respectfully,

Michael Durbin.

 

[John Albrecht]

My speculation is that Jeff is doing this out of desperation. I think he has seen a decline in advertising as of lately and that is why he felt it necessary to dramatically raise the fees. He might feel that he needs to do this not just to enhance the growth potential of his site but to insure his very survival. I remember reading something in the trades about how Jeff's site was basically managed out of his house which is the only way that they could actually afford to do it. That doesn't sound like commercial success to me.

 

[Sasheena]

I do agree that coming up with all sorts of "schemes" to poke JeffB in the face can only backfire. I see it now:

"Mr. JeffB, how is RichZ deliberately trying to hurt your business?" says the laywer in court.

"Well you see," says JeffB, "here on his forum he incites people to dream up thousands of way to hurt me, hurt my business, and otherwise pull every penny out of my pocket" He points to the transcript of this forum "See here how they are planning to use KingSnakes.com to mimic my business and steal my income."

Judge/Jury think to themselves, "This case is screwy, but he does have a point."

As far as declining revenue, etc for JeffB, in a way he could say that RichZ is responsible... Because Rich has a site where the name kingsnake.com is NOT CENSORED, I prefer his site to kingsnake.com. It is JeffB's fault that his advertising dollar is dropping. The more he persists in ridiculously punitive censoring, the less desireable his site is. I was saving up money to pay for advertising on his site, increased photohosting, etc. Once he started [bleep]ing things, I realized my dollar was better spent on a company that is more mature AND that has a better ability/desire to grant freedom of speech.

 

[Double "D" Reptiles]

clear the muddy waters

The real issue is based upon percieved loss of revenue from the URL, which was legally obtained and the lost arbitration. The 2 sites have nothing in common other than the close similarity in names and now being owned by individuals who operate somewhat similar sites, whether for profit or non-profit use.

First of all, regardless of how the one party may have registered the business in the state of TX, where the current suit has been filed, the name derives from the common name of a large segment of an even larger genus of wild and captive animals. This common name was first used by the scientific and lay communities long before either site owner registered their claims. While a business may register it's name and block all other persons/businesses from using that name, it does not, even in the state of TX disavow other parties from using similar looking/sounding/misspelled versions of said business name.

2nd, the never ending possibilities of this suit being found in favor of the plantiff opens up a lot of issues that the courts will never want to face in the future and opens up a plantiffs verdict for never-ending review and appeals. That said, I am not certain, but feel positive that similar suits have been filed before with or without appeals that have already been settled in the past. If a suit such as this landed in the US Supreme Court, it wouldn't get a favorable hearing due to the bad precidence it would set. Recent court rulings have shied from favorable outcomes on these things because they try to firm up the laws and not make them more open-ended to interpetation.

3rd, I firmly believe that by showing the already documented malicious behavior by the plantiff towards the defendent and anything/anyone associated with him and his businesses will have any halfway competent judge tossing the case fairly quick or have him/her listening to the plantiff dig himself deeper and deeper before handing down a ruling that will be nothing short of a tombstone on the grave. Read (and process) the entire chain of events and postings by both parties in regards to how things have been handled and you can see why I state these possibilities. Regardless of what is and is not allowed to be entered into evidence at the beginning, once the entire chain of events and correspondence is brought up in court, the whole mess will have to be admitted and, to be honest, while the views of outsiders (and their opinions) may not be favorable at all times to the plantiff, his own actions and reactions overshadow the defendents. Once this flow of information is allowed, it's over.

So relax. Censorship is the death of civilized society and the owner of this site has chosen to avoid censorship except where specifically called for by current laws as best he can. Opinions of others not under his control, provided they do not breech current standards of morality as defined by law, should be perfectly admissible, even in a conversational thread such as this one. The owner of the other site has shown himself, through past actions, to censor without cause in such a manner as to appear tyrannical to some (their words.)

If nothing else, this thread has allowed the positive exchange of ideas and caused individuals to engage in thought-provoking debate. There is nothing wrong with this. Besides, I've never paid for the other service but have used it for reference and once purchased from somebody selling there. I've used this site's services as well. Do I think one is currently better than another...sure. But it's just my opinion.

David

 

[Brian Oakley]

I was wondering, if he (Jeff B.) going after the owner/s of http://kingsnake.net/? You can buy it for $1288, so someone has to own it or it would just say how you can go and register the name.
Is this a case (by Jeff) of loss revenue OR a personal attack towards someone he apparently does not like and this was the only thing he could think of? For all of you that have classified accts.....have you ever thought that the prices went up over the last year because this lawsuit was all in the infant stages and Jeff needed money to pay for it without going into his own pocket? In other words, you all (those that have classified acct. memberships) are paying for the lawsuit and Jeff takes the a percentage of each to put towards it and the rest goes in his pocket. So now he can make money and use others to do his dirty work. Just glad I do not have an acct. there. Once the prices went up like they did, I said I would not pay for another acct...........and I have not for over a year now.
I would really like to know how Kingsnakes.com costs Jeff anything. The only thing you can sell there are Kingsnakes. Other than that, it is just a bunch of forums. Compare the two sites. One gets very little traffic and the other gets tons. How could that hurt business?
How TACKY it is that Jeff has actually posted a link at the top of each page taking someone to the lawsuit info.
Someone mentioned that Rich allows people to speak about Jeff. That is a GOOD thing if you ask me. This shows he does not censor his users like Jeff does.

JUST MY OPINIONS!!!!!!1

 

[KNOBTAIL]

ALLEN, to answer your

question as to what I would do to help Rich................as it stands
right now, I am not to sure! This is certainly a novel case that may have ramifications that we dont know about yet.

Secondly, as Mike Durban pointed out, I never provide my enemy with verbal thoughts as to what I would do or should do!
If I decide to participate it will be done without any fanfare and maintaining some anonimity does have its strenghts. I know their are alot of people out their that dislike Jeff, his policies, and the fact that he can certainly stir a hornets nest. But a smart advesary is NOT going to become abusive as some of these posts have been.

As you can clearly see, the webmaster has maintained his silence and their lies his strength. I am sure Rich will know what course of action to persue and possibly notify members quietly if he desires to do so whether its for financial support or otherwise. But until then its best to keep down the rhetoric and not allow it to perpetuate an inflamed situation as it stands now. JERRY

 

[John Albrecht]

...

"I would really like to know how Kingsnakes.com costs Jeff anything. The only thing you can sell there are Kingsnakes. Other than that, it is just a bunch of forums."

According to the documents posted by Jeff the defendent would be under the obligation to divulge their finances to the point that the defendent himself would show to the court the amount of damage he has supposedly done to Kingsnake.com by owning kingsnakes.com.

If you really read through those documents the extent to which they are claiming injury and the responsibilities they place on the defendent to demonstrate it are pretty amazing. There is so much redundancy and triviality in it that I can't image a judge not seeing it for the petty bickering that it is. If it isn't dismissed out-of-hand within the 1st five minutes in court I would be pretty amazed. But of course, I'm no lawyer so I only have common sense to go by.

 

[KNOBTAIL]

JOHN, you are absolutely correct,

and that is why I said their may be other ramifications involved once you read between the lines a bit. Jerry

 

[cyberfrog]

Dunno if it's been posted on this thread yet, but Rich has made the Kingsnake front page. Grats man, you REALLY pissed that jizzbag off!
Adam

 

[Mustangrde1]

PetPress is owned by PetHobbiest .. Now how much more self serving can one be to post it to his own err um Newpaper. Now he is using his own {PRESS} to make him look like the poor hurt man... I did not see anyplace about the Arbitration report and its findings. I wonder if he just does not want it know he already lost once and now is VENDICTIVELY going after Rich.

Scott Bice

 

[Brian Oakley]

You know something. I have NOT read the paperwork in the lawsuit. NOT interested in doing so either. I think this is the most rediculous thing I have ever heard of.
Companies have similar names all the time. Maybe Jeff should have thought about registering Kingsnakes.com if he is so worried about it. Didn't seem to bother him then, so what is the problem now? Just because someone beat him to it!
Maybe I am being silly about this, but I feel the way I feel.
Anyone who knows of Kingsnake.com and mistakenly went to KINGSNAKES.COM would know the difference right away. Even if they heard about Kingsnake.com and all it has to offer would kow that they obviously went to the wrong site when they see only forums and classifieds for Kingsnakes. Please, give people a little more credit. I think the lawsuit is offending to the public as well. Like people do not have brains of their own.
Awesome, show the finanances, he (Rich) has gained nothing. Hell, he does not even charge much less rape people like Jeff does. On the other hand, people pay it so more power to him.
I just feel Kingsnake was a MUCH BETTER place before these rediculous fees for EVERYTHING. Hell, you cannot even post a pic unless you have a photo page with him. The first 12 pics or so are free, then there is ANOTHER charge. The site was better before you had all these big headed people telling people what they can and can't say. OPINIONS are even deleted. I can understand if someone was posting 'facts' that were incorrect, but I cannot even say I like sunsets as opposed to sunrises without worrying about it being deleted.
Has anyone REALLY payed attention to the drop off in activity by the larger breeders? I HAVE. The forums are nothing more than a chatroom now with a bunch of children.............yes there are some good people there, but NOTHING like it was 5 years ago. MANY people have quit using the classifieds for whatever reasons. All they do is use the hosting to get their name on the front page under the breeders. I don't blame them. The site has just gone down hill over the last couple years and I think it is all due to GREED. Sure, there are times where price increases are needed. What additional expenses does Jeff have? He does not pay the moderators, so no payroll there. The site has had no overhall in the many years it has been around. No additional costs there. Yes, it costs money to actually run the site, but that could not have possibly gone up that much or he would have charged these prices to begin with.
Think about it folks, it is not rocket science.
In closing, I like Kingsnake. Their business ethics leave A LOT to be desired.
Just remember, I would bet my house that the prices went up over the last year or so when Jeff knew he was going to take legal action. He had to gather the money, lord forbid if he had to pay for something himself he so strongly believes in. The people that pay the INFLATED fees to post ads are paying for this lawsuit.

I will not repsond to this anymore. No disrespect to anyone here, just what I choose to do.

The above are JUST MY OPINIONS!

 

[WebSlave]

Please note that while a lively and interesting discussion is certainly welcome here, name calling and derogatory statements directed at anyone are not. I appreciate the support some have shown, but inflamming the situation will certainly not help matters.

Thank you.

 

[cyberfrog]

Sorry Rich, I'll edit my post.
Adam

 

[cyberfrog]

Says I don't have permission to edit. You can feel free to edit or delete my post if you want Rich, cool with me. sorry to cause any problem.