A C & D letter–You’ve GOT to be Kidding.

Personally, I don’t trust a site which claims to be facts of any kind. I had a link to www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm that has the page title of “Gun Facts”. This elicited the following response from Guy Smith, who claims to have a copy right on that term.

For lack of a contact address on your “about” page, I need to leave this message here.

“Gun Facts” (in that capitalized form) is copyrighted, and I own the copyright. As such, your link in the left margin pointing to a web site that is _not_ http://www.GunFacts.info is a copyright violation.

This is a polite request (before demand and action) to change the anchor text to anything besides “Gun Facts”. Please email me once this change has been made so I can remove you from my action list.

Thanks in advance for your time and understanding.

Actually, I don’t want to get into the battle with the man, but I did send two responses in pretty quick order:

First response

Per your request, the tag has been changed from “Gun Facts” to “gun statistics from the gun control network”.

While I sincerely doubt that you would prevail in a copyright infringement based on Gun Fact being a copyrighted title, I personally am not interested in dealing with that.

I am happy to change the tag.

Personally, I think that if you are so oversensitive about such an issue, you are probably not the type of person who should be able to own a firearm. Since I’d hate to think of what sort of thing would set you off

Second response

Given that the page I was referring to is listed in Google as:

Gun Facts
Over our Dead Bodies. Port Arthur and Australia’s Fight for Gun Control by Simon Chapman. Pluto Press. 1998. Updated: October 2007. FACTS ABOUT GUNS …
http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm – Cached – Similar

Have you contacted that group?

To be quite honest, I seriously doubt you would prevail on a copyright action since (a) that isn’t my page and (2) the other groups is responsible for it.

As I said in my previous message, if you are that sensitive to keeping the title Gun Facts, you probably shouldn’t own a firearm. Likewise, you will have your work cut out keeping people from infringing upon your “copyright”.

Anyway, I would prefer to change the link just to make you happy. Although, if I were really slime, I would keep it up just to bankrupt you in copyright suits.

Have fun.

I’m not sure why Smith Contacted me since if he clicked to the linked page, he would have found it wasn’t owned by me, but by the Gun Control Network, PO Box 11495, London N3 2FE. It’s a waste of his time and money to chase after me to change the link title since I have absolutely no connection to the Gun Control Network.

IN fact, Smith should google the phrase Gun Facts and start threatening to sue everyone who uses that term without his permission, beginning with the Gun Control Network in London. I am curious as to how long it would take to bankrupt him. In fact, my response to his law suit would have been to deny everything since the title I used was the title used by the Gun Control Network.

Likewise, the title is published by google as my comment pointed out: has Mr. Smith contacted Google and threatened to sue them since they have a link titled “Gun Facts” that points to the Gun Control Network?

And thinking about it, given his request was that I change the link title “to anything besides “Gun Facts””, I could have changed it to “gun facts”.

I’m curious as to Smith’s response regarding his suing the Gun Control Network and Google.  The picture to the above right is the British Court’s response to his suit regarding “Gun Facts”.  Anyway, that’s his battle and not mine as of now.

I will add that I have contacted an intellectual property lawyer for his opinion on this matter.  If he says that Mr. Smith has no legal basis for his claim, the title may return to “Gun Facts”. On the other hand, it may not since I can appreciate Guy’s concerns about people being confused since I have to admit I made that mistake on my own prior to receiving his message. And he’s been nice enough.


Posted 26/10/2010 by lacithedog in gun cretins, gun loons

%d bloggers like this: