Names in Capitals?

[LesActive]

Oops.... IMO, Irene Maus has no legal basis to copyright a name to which she doesn't hold title. If she could somehow manage to give them a certified copy of an original registration form, say for a change of name, and retain the original or reclaim the original after submission (!) then she might be on firmer ground. But that doesn't happen. Also, if there is another Irene Maus Gravenhorst out there then complications could easily arise. Why would you bring a name you wish to keep private (so they can't use it against you) into the commercial sphere if you want to avoid commerce. To me, it seems she's going after the money as a way to hurt them but inevitably it is our energy that will get sapped for her benefit. She wants to play the game of commerce and that's her choice. I don't doubt her veracity one bit and her intelligence is unquestionable, I just don't agree with her approach. She's acting for herself.

Money, in all its wondrous forms acts as/is representative of our energy (labour) and is the lifeblood of the corporate body. Without our energy the body dies. What happens when the flow of blood is interrupted, leeched off or becomes concentrated in pockets of a living body? It decays and costs more energy to keep it in a semblance of health, weakening the value of the energy because more needs to be created to feed the specific concentrations. Conversely, what happens when the body is fed; when the energy is allowed to flow freely without blockage (hoarding)? It thrives. It's a simplistic analogy but it illustrates the point neatly.

[Zaniwhoop]

Money, in all its wondrous forms acts as/is representative of our energy (labour) and is the lifeblood of the corporate body. Without our energy the body dies. What happens when the flow of blood is interrupted, leeched off or becomes concentrated in pockets of a living body? It decays and costs more energy to keep it in a semblance of health, weakening the value of the energy because more needs to be created to feed the specific concentrations. Conversely, what happens when the body is fed; when the energy is allowed to flow freely without blockage (hoarding)? It thrives. It's a simplistic analogy but it illustrates the point neatly.

Most excellently expressed there Brien, and it is mainly the greedy hoarding by the elite and those that try to claim authority over others that is causing all the starvation and suffering on this planet. I hope that Irene isn't just in it for herself, I think it is more likely that she is doing it both for herself and to bring people's attention to the deception that has been played on us.

Love and Light

Si

[huntingross]

Its a good point about Irene and if she has title or not, of course it highlights the fact that no one else has stepped up to claim it to void her use of it, despite the authorities holding the certificate....to stop her would indicate that which they deny.

Without going off thread, it reminds me how Churchill had to keep sending boats to the german submarines because having spent all that time to crack the enigma, they couldn't let the germans know they had cracked it....twisted logic or what.

I like the idea of copyright trademark, it in debts those that seek to rule us, it redresses the balance, I wouldn't particularly seek the money, I just seek to live a life without their interference....i presume that once you have vigorously gone down this road the water should be clear on the other side.....no submarines to surprise you.

[LesActive]

I could see trademark/copywriting a name that you create, if you want to use it in commerce, just not the one that your parents gave you. Too late for that one. I don't know much about the concept other than the semantic gymnastics one had to perform to pull off the trademark thing seemed too complex and, I dunno, a little too shifty to feel comfortable contemplating it for long. I like to keep it as simple as possible, I'm not a lawyer, thankfully.

[huntingross]

I've maybe misunderstood the process, which seemed very simple, merely by claiming it, and therefore setting the penalty by claim also.

The bit I cant get to the bottom of is the User Agreement wording and the Notice which is also served....Irene is not responding to emails but I have someone else who said he will help when he returns from Asia

[albion]

Pardon a newbie butting in here: the word 'Title' in this thread appears to me to be critical. I'm relying on an online legal dictionary, so I hesitate to claim definitiveness, but for what it's worth:

"TITLE - The sum total of legally recognized rights to the possession and ownership of property."

"A doubtful title is one which the court does not consider to be so clear that it will enforce its acceptance by a purchaser, nor so defective as to declare it a bad title, but only subject to so much doubt that a purchaser ought not to be compelled to accept it.

At common law, doubtful titles are unknown; there every title must be either good or bad. "

"Title to personal property may accrue in three different ways. By original acquisition. 2. By transfer, by act of law. 3. By transfer, by, act of the parties.

Title by original acquisition is acquired, 1st. By occupancy. This mode of acquiring title has become almost extinct in civilized governments, and it is permitted to exist only in those few special cases, in which it may be consistent with the public good. First. Goods taken by capture in war were, by the common law, adjudged to belong to the captor, but now goods taken from enemies in time of war, vest primarily in the sovereign, and they belong to the individual captors only to the extent and under such regulations, as positive laws may prescribe. Secondly. Another instance of acquisition by occupancy, which still exists under certain limitations, is that of goods casually lost by the owner, and unreclaimed, or designedly abandoned by him; and in both these cases they belong to the fortunate finder. A negotiable instrument endorsed in blank is transferable by any person holding it, so as by its delivery to give a good title "to any person honestly acquiring it.

The title to personal property is acquired and lost by transfer, by act of law, in various ways. 1. By forfeiture. 2. By succession. 3. By marriage. 4. By judgment. 5. By insolvency. 6. By intestacy. "

"To the rule that possession is the criterion of title of property may be mentioned the case of ships, the title of which can be ascertained by the register.

To convey a title the seller must himself have a title to the property which is the subject of the transfer. "

"persons. Titles are distinctions by which a person is known. "

And finally:

"pleading, rights. The right of action which the plaintiff has; the declaration must show the plaintiff's title, and if such title be not shown in that instrument, the defect cannot be cured by any of the future pleadings. "

[source: http://www.lectlaw.com/]

So is our name, which is our legal title, and which belongs to the Government, our de facto bondage? Ie does the government own us by virtue of owning our name, or is it just the form of words making up the name itself it owns, power of attorney over which it grants us as agents?

[huntingross]

This may all be true albion, so it leaves me with two thoughts.....

1. Irene is scamming us all and her claims are hollow.
2. She's right.

Taking the second one first - You can't both be right, the copyright lawyers that set about her would have sunk this boat very easily that way, so I assume there is more to it.

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 Irene's there are as long as confusion between them doesn't exist.

For my own name, in all my puff I have only met one other namesake....I'm not going to worry about that aspect too much (read zero).