Re: Alarm/security related domains for sale

[Frank Kurz <tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 14/05/2012 7:22 AM, G. Morgan wrote:
> Frank Kurz Wrote:
>
>> Seeing as how "Honeywell" is a registered trademark, I should think that
>> using this domain might just infringe on that.  They've got even deeper
>> pockets than Brinks and we all know the kind of trouble Jim R. wound up
>> in.  I wouldn't wish that on anyone!
>
> BTW Frank,
>
> Jim disrespected the court, that is why he lost.  He felt he
> couldn't be bothered with the requests to show up.  When he first
> got the cease&  desist letter from Brinks he showed it to me
> (before it was posted!) lol...
>
> Anyway, IIRC there were 10 demands and I advised him to willingly
> abide by a few of their requests.  I enumerated the ones I thought
> were real 'sticky' ones, and ones I thought were reasonable (like
> not selling panels).  It was an all-or-nothing deal for him, he
> didn't want to even try to be reasonable.  His response to Brinks
> was to 'shove it', or something like that.
>
> I think had he handled the case better, he may have won.  You
> don't tell a district judge that she has no jurisdiction either!
>

Yes, as I recall Jim was rather "unprofessional" in his dealings with
the court.  You definitely don't tell a Federal Court Judge that she has
"no jurisdiction" or thumb your nose at her when your IN court.  I think
he had a good case but some of the things he wrote telegraphed his total
disdain for the process (words best "thought" than "said").  Granted,
Brinks really didn't have a leg to stand to begin with.  They DON'T (and
never have) manufactured their own panels.  Every user and installer
manual I saw had the Honeywell logo on it!



--
Fire Protection Technicians Network
www.firetechs.net