This illustrate the destructive effect of the majors-generated, anti-constitutional law (the DMCA) on our society.

You have read before on this web site the story of Nissan (the car maker) trying to steal the Nissan.com and Nissan.net domain name from Mr. Uzi Nissan and Nissan computers and also persecuting him while in the exercise of his freedom of speech right. All of this was done in the name of the DMCA.

Here we go again! The felon this time is "Traffic Power"

An unhappy customer of traffic power go to the front and denounce publicly the illegal and ineffective practices of "traffic power" on his web site at: http://trafficpowersucks.com/

Traffic power is suing him to have it web site shutdown and his domain name "trafficpowersucks" confiscated.

For more details pay a visit to his site and make a donation.

It makes sense if someone takes a domain name and builds a porn site around it, but this is ridiculous. If Traffic Power wins this, then I guess we can expect the RIAA and MPAA to come after the Boycott-Riaa and Boycott-Mpaa domain names next.

God pray that the Senate doesn't confirm John Roberts to the Chief Justice role.

Walmart, Uhaul and other companies have done the same thing. only it didn't get to court. just threats. the sites were shut down I believe.

That's probably because they didn't have or didn't want to pay the money for the lawyers to dissolve said threat. When threats use the 'guilty until proven innocent' tactic, there's not much you can do without a lawyer or good knowledge of the legal system and laws. With all that said, GO DUDE!

I'm sure Leflaw would love for the Riaa to come after boycottRiaa. He would Kick their ASS in court!!!!!! and countersue the Shit out of them!!!! Let's hope their that stupid!!!!!

Traffic Power would probably win this one. While copyright law includes a fair-use exception for parody and criticism, trademarks do not. There have been many similar incidents before, and the trademark holder always wins, usually by threat of legal action alone.

Besides, Traffic Power is hardly a reputable company, so what can trafficpowersucks do? No reputation to damage.

goldenpi,

"Traffic Power would probably win this one. While copyright law includes a fair-use exception for parody and criticism, trademarks do not."

Careful; Your not following the status quo. You might be labeled as a Troll soon if you continue.

"It makes sense if someone takes a domain name and builds a porn site around it, but this is ridiculous. If Traffic Power wins this, then I guess we can expect the RIAA and MPAA to come after the Boycott-Riaa and Boycott-Mpaa domain names next."

They are commiting trademark infringement, no fair use concerning that. Traffic Power will most likely win this, yes.
And I doubt the riaa or the mpaa will be coming after anyone for this site.

Next time, before counting yourself among the village idiots, think before you post.

Good Day!

"That's probably because they didn't have or didn't want to pay the money for the lawyers to dissolve said threat. When threats use the 'guilty until proven innocent' tactic, there's not much you can do without a lawyer or good knowledge of the legal system and laws. With all that said, GO DUDE!"

They are commiting trademark infringement, no fair use concerning that. Traffic Power will most likely win this, yes.

Next time, before counting yourself among the village idiots, think before you post.

Good Day!

RaidHHI is an RIAA Agent. Ignore him.

"Besides, Traffic Power is hardly a reputable company, so what can trafficpowersucks do? No reputation to damage."

Trafficpowersuck.com did most of the damage allerting many businesses about their nasty practices. This is why they got so made. So don't say that what this guy did was useless. Of course Traffic power would have run into trouble eventually but it would have take a lot longer. This guy is a hero and is defending our country against bad business. He is doing is duty as a US citizen and you should be doing yours!
The supreme law of the land is the constitution not the DMCA, not the corrupted judges and lawers.

Second you guys need to go back to school and learn about the US constitution. Freedom of speach, right to bear weapons, right to peacful assembly, right to privacy.

Setting a web site such as Boycottriaa or Vivendisuck or cingularsuck is RaidHHIsuck (same thing as RIAAsuck) or bushsuck is a constitutional right: Freedom of speech!

Copyright law TrademarkSuck.com= Parodie!

MajorTreat,

"Trafficpowersuck.com did most of the damage allerting many businesses about their nasty practices. This is why they got so made. So don't say that what this guy did was useless. Of course Traffic power would have run into trouble eventually but it would have take a lot longer. This guy is a hero and is defending our country against bad business. He is doing is duty as a US citizen and you should be doing yours!"

You really should cut down on the anarchy sites you visit. They're warping your view of reality. TrafficPower has him by the balls. In his haste to create his website, he got some of their trademarks reprinted without permission. He'll have to remove them. Had he checked it before going online, he'd be okay now. And wouldn't be getting nearly the traffic.

"The supreme law of the land is the constitution not the DMCA, not the corrupted judges and lawers."

As I said above, anarchy... not

"Second you guys need to go back to school and learn about the US constitution. Freedom of speach, right to bear weapons, right to peacful assembly, right to privacy."

it's speech. and peaceful.. ugh, talk about going back to school.. Incidently:

Is the right to own a gun based on the second amendment?

No. The right to own guns is not based on the second amendment. If there were no second amendment in the U.S. Constitution, one would still possess a right to own a weapon of self-defense, which in today's context, means a firearm, i.e., a gun.What is the basis of the right to own a gun for self-defense?

The right to own a firearm, is based on the right to self-defense, i.e., the right to those means to defend oneself against those who wish to destroy one's life. The right to self-defense is itself is a corollary of the right to life (a corollary is here defined as a self-evident implication of a general principle).

It would be absurd to say one has the right to life, but does not have the right to the means necessary to protect that life. It would be like saying one has the right to life, but not the right to purchase food. Yet, this is what opponents to the right to own a gun are really against: the right to life.

"Setting a web site such as Boycottriaa or Vivendisuck or cingularsuck is RaidHHIsuck (same thing as RIAAsuck) or bushsuck is a constitutional right: Freedom of speech!"

True, so long as you don't tread into the area of slander or libel. It is your right to say what you want, but if what you say is untrue and causes another financial harm or otherwise, you can be held responsible for it.

This would fall under the responsibility catagory. Being as your likely a teenager still, you probably don't fully understand the word responsibility yet. Hopefully with time, you will learn.

It probably wouldn't hurt to learn a bit of english either. I'm guessing it's not your first language?

This is mostly a libel issue, I think...though invoking the DMCA scares me. A lot.

Do I believe Traffic Power is right in this case? No. This definitely falls under various worldwide consumer protection acts. This guy has a right to speak out, and if TP wins, we're right fucked on quite a few fronts, at least in the US.

Up here? Don't know what'd happen. Europe? Probably wouldn't even see court.

TRAFFIC POSER IS TOTALLY WRONG

This "illustrate" the willingness of the judgmentaal to spew and indoctrinate without true meaning.

An unhappy consumer of infotainment "go" to its head in search of a rod with which to beat back those degradations of statute allowed to be imposed on it. And finds jealousy.