Canadian Airgun Forum

The #1 Community for Airguns in Canada!
It is currently Fri Apr 26, 2019 5:34 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


The Canadian Airgun Forums are a place for people to discuss and learn about airguns and the airgunning sport in Canada. There are lots of discussions about airguns, airgun accessories, reviews, modification and repair information, airgun events, field target and free classifieds!

 

You need to register before you can post: click the register link to proceed. Before you register, please read the forum rules. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own pictures, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free! To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.






Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 7:23 am
Posts: 2513
Location: Somewheres near the Atlantic
This is why we cannot work together for the same goal.. One gun group, suing another. At the worst possible time for Canadian gun owners. Check out the video.

https://youtu.be/1430DEYyZTY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:52 am
Posts: 191
Location: Niagara Falls, Canada
When I just saw the title, I just thought "now, really? can't you wait until after?!?".

I was never an NFA member, but now I never will be for sure in future either.

I heard that one of their major figures, Shawn Bevins got in some hot water once, I also heard that he made some comments on his facebook page about "killing all muslims", I went on his page to investigate, and it was true, I saw comments directly to that effect.

Because of that, I never associated with them, but this just makes it more permanent.

I just watched the video now, and well, honestly the logos don't even look anything alike, whatsoever, and I highly doubt the NFA will win any suit, if they actually go through with it.

Also, doing this now just let's everyone know how big of a f*cking moron Sheldon Clare is, causing more problems now, when we already have a ton to fight against, and over what, a logo that only has very vague similarities?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 9:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 7:23 am
Posts: 2513
Location: Somewheres near the Atlantic
Twiggy wrote:
When I just saw the title, I just thought "now, really? can't you wait until after?!?".

I was never an NFA member, but now I never will be for sure in future either.

I heard that one of their major figures, Shawn Bevins got in some hot water once, I also heard that he made some comments on his facebook page about "killing all muslims", I went on his page to investigate, and it was true, I saw comments directly to that effect.

Because of that, I never associated with them, but this just makes it more permanent.

I just watched the video now, and well, honestly the logos don't even look anything alike, whatsoever, and I highly doubt the NFA will win any suit, if they actually go through with it.

Also, doing this now just let's everyone know how big of a f*cking moron Sheldon Clare is, causing more problems now, when we already have a ton to fight against, and over what, a logo that only has very vague similarities?


If anything CCFR should be suing NFA. Since Rod logo was first. 3 years before LOL

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 1:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 5795
Location: P.G. B.C.
The truth of this whole matter, will come out.
For now, I watch.
The question is, is this a counter suit?
The NFA logo is older than the CCFR, seems to me.
Daryl


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 2:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:52 am
Posts: 191
Location: Niagara Falls, Canada
The "civil advantage" (what Rod Giltaca used to do before the CCFR) logo is older than the NFA's logo, and it is much more similar to the current CCFR logo than the NFA's is, so leadslinger is right, if anyone can sue, it's the CCFR.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 3:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 5795
Location: P.G. B.C.
Twiggy wrote:
The "civil advantage" (what Rod Giltaca used to do before the CCFR) logo is older than the NFA's logo, and it is much more similar to the current CCFR logo than the NFA's is, so leadslinger is right, if anyone can sue, it's the CCFR.


YES - absolutely, you are right, but only if the logo was copyrighted before the FNA copyrighted it.

_________________
Best Wishes
Daryl

Air Force Condor .25
Umarex Gauntlet .22
Air Force Talon .177
HW97 KT .177
HW98 .22
Brocock Concept .22
Artemis PP700S-A Reg. .22
Artemis PP800 Rebel Reg. .22


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 3:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 7:23 am
Posts: 2513
Location: Somewheres near the Atlantic
Daryl wrote:
Twiggy wrote:
The "civil advantage" (what Rod Giltaca used to do before the CCFR) logo is older than the NFA's logo, and it is much more similar to the current CCFR logo than the NFA's is, so leadslinger is right, if anyone can sue, it's the CCFR.


YES - absolutely, you are right, but only if the logo was copyrighted before the FNA copyrighted it.


And get this... HK used the no compromise slogan before NFA did.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 6:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 5795
Location: P.G. B.C.
We will get to the bottom of this: I have been in contact with the NFA president.
I gave him litter about this whole mess. This is what I got back.

Daryl,

You are buying into FB koolaid, and you are not correct.

They are suing us, and they are going to lose.

I would be happy to discuss it when I get home.

Sheldon "

_________________
Best Wishes
Daryl

Air Force Condor .25
Umarex Gauntlet .22
Air Force Talon .177
HW97 KT .177
HW98 .22
Brocock Concept .22
Artemis PP700S-A Reg. .22
Artemis PP800 Rebel Reg. .22


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 6:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 7:23 am
Posts: 2513
Location: Somewheres near the Atlantic
Daryl wrote:
We will get to the bottom of this: I have been in contact with the NFA president.
I gave him litter about this whole mess. This is what I got back.

Daryl,

You are buying into FB koolaid, and you are not correct.

They are suing us, and they are going to lose.

I would be happy to discuss it when I get home.

Sheldon "


Man I smell the lies all over Sheldon reply..

CCFR in fact, took it to court ASAP.

Quote:
Re: CCFR v NFA

For a better understanding of how we got here and the steps we’ve taken, I'd like to provide a couple of general comments.

First, we didn't ask for this, we didn't want this, and we're not happy this has been visited upon us. That said, the NFA brought this to us and we need to deal with it.

Specifically, the NFA wrote to us on April 2, 2019 and, after all their outrageous demands including that we pay over to them all of our net-of-expense revenues, they said: "Please be advised that failure, in whole or in part, to comply with any of these demands in a timely manner will result in legal action against the CCFR for intellectual property infringement without further delay or notice."

We took them at their word and believed them. This was an express promise to sue the CCFR if we didn't give in to their demands, in writing, made by their lawyer, on behalf of the NFA. It doesn’t get any more clear than that.

We will not be extorted and will not give them the CCFR money; that’s your money, not theirs.

Therefore we did the only thing we could do. We did the right thing, as we always do, and immediately put the matter before the Federal Court for a quick and final determination of who is right: the NFA or us. This is just as Rod explained in his video.

We are not interested in waiting. As a "law and order" organization, if there is a claim that we are doing something improperly or illegally we must get a judicial determination on that immediately.

As to the question, did the CCFR file in court first? Yes, of course we did. Because of the NFA’s demand, claim and promise to sue us over this logo issue we did not wait, and we put the matter in the hands of the Court immediately, to properly, quickly and finally determine the legal claims they made. We need certainty.

That’s how the civil justice system works in Canada. If you want to have certainty that you are operating legally and fairly, as we must have, when you are presented with a claim at law and a lawyer’s demand you take it to Court. That’s what we did. This situation is not good for anyone and the sooner we can dispose of this the better. These are the steps required to do that.

All of that has something to do with a dedication to truth and justice.

We didn’t ask for this fight, but since it has been visited upon the CCFR involuntarily we’ll do the right thing and have it resolved, properly. The sooner we can dispose of this, the sooner we can get 100% of our resources focussed back on firearm rights.

No one needs this distraction, especially now. I can’t imagine what motivated them to start this, or why they thought it would be a good idea, but here we are.

Michael Loberg
General Counsel
Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 5795
Location: P.G. B.C.
One of them certainly is. I also smell excrement
in this.
I personally know Sheldon & know his background, too.
I also know he is the only one standing up for us at UN
conferences as a recognized speaker, whereas the other
two outfits are not.

_________________
Best Wishes
Daryl

Air Force Condor .25
Umarex Gauntlet .22
Air Force Talon .177
HW97 KT .177
HW98 .22
Brocock Concept .22
Artemis PP700S-A Reg. .22
Artemis PP800 Rebel Reg. .22


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 7:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 7:23 am
Posts: 2513
Location: Somewheres near the Atlantic
Daryl wrote:
One of them certainly is. I also smell excrement
in this.
I personally know Sheldon & know his background, too.
I also know he is the only one standing up for us at UN
conferences as a speaker for us, whereas the other two
outfits are not.


But that doesn't make up for stabbing other group in the back. Some do things different. CCFR deals with the people better. But NFA in the last few years did a good job at making their membership lower and lower.

But from the looks of the lawyer email... They filed first, because they were threatened to be sued. So they were like fine. Let the courts settle. Still it was a lame blow from Sheldon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 7:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 5795
Location: P.G. B.C.
We'll see what happens, won't we.

The end result will be that either I remain a member of the NFA, or join the other two.

I may join CSSA anyway. Too many organizations spoil the efficiency of having this lobbying group.

That is why the NRA in the States is so strong & remains the nemesis of the Democrats.

No NRA member has ever committed a mass shooting. Those shooters have always been Democrat members,
the offspring of Democrat members.

_________________
Best Wishes
Daryl

Air Force Condor .25
Umarex Gauntlet .22
Air Force Talon .177
HW97 KT .177
HW98 .22
Brocock Concept .22
Artemis PP700S-A Reg. .22
Artemis PP800 Rebel Reg. .22


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 9:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 5:15 am
Posts: 3411
Location: Edmonton
Kinda falls into my occupational experience. First off, copyright is not something you register for; it belongs to you automatically as soon as you release an "original work," publicly in this case. What you are talking about is a trademark, identified by a TM, or more frequently in Canada, a circle-R (registered). None of these logos/"tradespeak" bear such a mark. A lawsuit involving any of these organizations would be financially infeasible and just plain stupid. Regarding the visual resemblance issue in particular, there is a good chance there is one source of "public domain" clip art that was the basis for all of them.

Gentlemen, and members of the airgunning community, you are being misdirected by a non-issue because neither of these organizations has the power/funding to deal with the real issues going on right now. If you're a member of either group, send it/them a message saying, "Quit pissing around and tell me what advocacy powers you are going to demonstrate on my behalf, this moment, to remove the political threat to our hobby/sport.

This is a personal opinion, which will not be influential in the moderation of this topic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 9:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 7:23 am
Posts: 2513
Location: Somewheres near the Atlantic
And I said last week, sure these orgs would help air gunners if needed.

.....And.......

Then this happens, fight against each other, over something stupid.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2019 10:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:52 am
Posts: 191
Location: Niagara Falls, Canada
The CCFR does a ton, they are "in the ring" everyday especially Tracey.

but, Edmonton<500, if I understand you correctly, if I write my own song for example, I would automatically have the copyright to it, and if someone copied it without my permission I could file against them for copyright infringement?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
News News Site map Site map SitemapIndex SitemapIndex RSS Feed RSS Feed Channel list Channel list

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

phpBB SEO