Dear Khurram,
I'm less interested in how things ought to be,
then how they really are.
You seem disinterested in information if it does not
fit into your preconceived notions. The common law
is how things really are. Legislation is mostly a
lot of nonsense.
I have no interest in starting a revolution.
That's too bad. If you don't take a revolutionary
view of this business, you're missing the point.
Since, the trademark is registered with the US
government, then the owners obviously want to
abide by the authoritarian statist approach or
else they wouldn't have registered it and just
plainly used it in trade.
I think that's a widespread but thoroughly mistaken
idea. Registering the trademark with the USA
feral gummint may add something by way of future
legal recourse without subtracting more than a
few dollars. It is a form of self-defense to do
so. Since a business entity with established
standing is the "owner of record" and can defend
the trademark, why do you care whether they've
"unofficially" transferred it to the Nevis entity?
So you agree with me that the trademarks are actually
owned by G&SR and there is a plain black and white
lie on the e-gold website?
No, of course not. You aren't a revolutionary. I
would avoid agreeing with you. In this case, it
is quite clear that G&SR has registered the trade
marks and provided them to e-gold, Ltd. If G&SR
disputes the ownership of these trade marks as being
something e-gold, Ltd. does not own, then that
would be worth watching. But you disputing the
ownership is just silly, goofy nonsense. You are
saying that you can detect a lie when you are
not the owner of "official" record nor the
putative owner by off-the-books transfer.
If you are saying that there is a lie on the
e-gold web site, that's fun. If you said something
like that about the GoldMoney.com web site, you'd
already have been served papers, judging by earlier
events. Do you really mean to defame e-gold with
this assertion?
It's not my site but I have a vested interest in
its success because I own businesses that rely on it.
Then why aren't you spending your time chasing
something that has meaning? How can it possibly
cause a disruption in service if G&SR has the
"official" standing to defend the various trade
marks, while e-gold, Ltd., "gets away with"
claiming ownership of them on their web site?
I mean, if you want to slam e-gold, ask them
where their audits have been since Feb 2001.
<voice="Rogue Leader">Stay on target!</voice>
And I don't like to file lawsuits when they
might not be needed.
Okay. Maybe you should avoid litigation by not
saying that you think there is a lie on the e-gold
web site. But, don't take my advice. I'm one
of them revolutionaries who has ideas about the
common law! For goodness sake, I've read the USA
constitution, and used to take it seriously.
Who knows, maybe Barry will read this
What are the chances? Isn't Barry busy trying
to fix Standard Reserve? That's a task much like
Hercules at the Augean stables. (You could look
it up.)
and think to himself that this situation might
hurt them in any future lawsuits where they need
to prove the seperations between G&SR and e-gold.
Separations. Separate has "a rat" in it. Anyway,
why would there be a lawsuit about that?
And how does the fact that G&SR has conveyed some
trademarks to e-gold's ownership create a problem?
We may infer that conveyance or transfer from the
web site. But, why is it a problem?
The key word in the above paragraph is "seems".
Of course. You'd like there to be no seeming.
But then, I'd be taking unnecessary risk by
posing my sentences in absolute terms.
G&SR might be owned by Doug, Ried, Barry, etc.
etc. but I, and probably you also, have no proof of
this?
Well, gosh, serve them papers if you want proof.
I mean, that sort of disclosure is basic discovery
stuff. Have you even contacted the State of
Florida about their papers? You're all big on
official filings. Go get 'em.
Do you have a list of board of directors?
Me? Why would I have such a list? If such a
list is required by the statists, ask a state.
The State of Florida has information about the
founding directors, probably requires some sort
of persistent (annual, quarterly?) update on
the flimsiest of excuse. Then you can subpoena
for the rest, assuming you have some meritorious
cause of action. Oh, and standing. Interrogatories
are fun.
Have you or anyone in your family, say, sued
G&SR or e-gold or any of those entities? Tell
us how that went.
I'm glad to see that at least one ecurrency out
there (Pecunix) is disclosing these types of
things and no leaving it to people to speculate.
Hey, that's great. I like Sidd. Used to have a
difficulty with him, but he up and resolved it
like a man, and there's a compliment for him.
For what it may be worth, Gold Barter Holdings
discloses details about our principals on our
web site:
http://goldbarterholdings.com/principals.cgi
or the like.
you and I both agree that e-gold and G&SR are
two very tightly connected companies.
Who can argue with such an adroit statement?
Who would bother?
How is it cause for concern?
GoldMoney and NetGold Services have been tightly
connected. E-bullion and GoldFinger Coin remain
tightly connected. The world hasn't come to a
crashing halt as a result.
But in my experience at working in the G&SR
offices, they wanted to give out the appearance that
e-gold and G&SR were very independent.
And they never gave you a list of their directors?
Heartless cruel and inhumane! <grin>
So, how was it working for G&SR/OmniPay? I've
heard from many former employees of that outfit,
and have worked with several. Quite a few wear
their separation from employment there as a
badge of honor.
That is where the confusion comes in.
Oh, c'mon. Pretense isn't confusing.
George W. Bush is pretending that hijackers who
flew planes into buildings on 11 September 2001
came from Iraq. A year ago he pretended they
came from Afghanistan. Everyone knew it was
pretense. All those guys came from Saudi Arabia,
and, in my view, may well have been put up to
the job much the way the 1993 group that bombed
the World Trade Center was supplied with explosives
by the FBi. And you aren't a revolutionary.
If we consider the trademark to be property, then
we can also consider it to be an asset.
Sure.
Since G&SR takes normal business risks and could
potentially fail,
So could the United States government. Then where
would your official records be?
then assets that should belong to e-gold at no
risk are at risk under G&SR ownership.
"For a dollar in hand and other valuable
consideration G&SR conveys these trademarks to
e-gold, Ltd., and agrees to defend them in
USA courts." Such a document dated at some
reasonable time in the past (2001 or so, I'd
guess) and perhaps notarized or filed with some
third party is sufficient to establish who owns
what. A copy of that document mailed by
certified mail and left sealed in its postmarked
envelope establishes its date. And "official
records" about trademark owners do not have any
precedence over the "official" postmark on that
letter.
It further puts e-gold Ltd under risk because
G&SR and e-gold could be considered "Parent &
Subsidiary" by some courts.
I think the fact that your company has conveyed
some property to, say, the new owners of Pay By
Gold does establish a relationship, but it does
not establish a parent-subsidiary relationship.
Of far greater interest would be the matter of
whether there are interlocking boards of
directors. Have you requested the registry
paperwork on e-gold, Ltd. from Nevis? I mean,
you believe that the USA exists as a state, so
you must have similar fantasies about the
"reality" of official records in Nevis, right?
The idea that records matter more because they
are touched by someone "official" is silly.
Parent companies can be held liable for their
children companies.
True, but the reverse not. So, e-gold, Ltd.
cannot be held liable for much that G&SR does.
Moreover, e-gold, Ltd., is nicely offshore,
which creates some serious barriers to frivolity
in lawsuits and prosecution. And the gold of
e-gold is even further offshore, behind a trust,
and spread around more than a bit with three
(count 'em) jurisdictions. Jurisdictional
arbitrage works, and is fun.
One test of this is Common ownership of assets.
Sure. Prove common ownership and I'll get back
to you.
Not to mention common employees,
Not an issue. Dozens of companies have employees
under contract to other firms. That's what
consultants are.
shared office space,
Office buildings have lots of tenants who share
common hallways, bathrooms, lobbies, etc. Means
nothing. One tenant subleases to some other
outfit. Happens all the time.
and common management.
Common management is an issue, and interlocking
boards of directors is the sine qua non to
establish that two companies are one. But, and
again, here's where it gets good, e-gold, Ltd.
takes all the risk and has some meaningful role
in the trust which controls the gold, and is
safely offshore. G&SR is a target for all kinds
of frivolity in court, but so what? How does
that affect your gold?
Why add to that burden here?
But I'm sure they know this.
Please supply the antecedent for "this" in this
case. <smile>
The e-gold website is operated and maintained by G&SR:
http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/contact.html
But not owned by them. And if it is operated by
G&SR under contract from e-gold, then it is
operated by e-gold. E-gold is simply paying for
the operation of the site, the same way that
GoldMoney pays Foreshore.net for hosting.
Just because I don't like it.. doesn't mean I won't
continue to profit from it.
An excellent attitude, which should pervade your
behavior.
I gather you don't particularly like the FRNs, but
you will probably continue to profit from them.
Until not long before the end, and then it'll be
hot potato time, just like in old Weimar. Would
there be profit in holding dollars with the price
of gold going from $4,000 to $40,000 an ounce in
a week? Possibly.
The notion that someone will accept paper that
is not redeemable for anything in exchange for
something truly valuable like e-gold is amazing,
bears substantial profit potential, and I'm
eager for my hard work to bear fruit in this
area.
And I'm not asking you to do anything.
Swell beans. I guess outexchanging your e-gold
is off. What a relief!
I'm asking e-gold and G&SR to create a more
black and white distinction between them
Why?
and make the whole system a little more transparent.
Sounds great. Much like other tunes whistled
in the dark.
Its in the long term interests of both companies
and all users of the system.
Why?
You ask what I would do if the US government
was overthrown. I think the odds are a lot better
of G&SR failing then the government being overthrown.
Pish and tush. The USA has hundreds of millions
more enemies. And is running around making more
all the time.
And I'm trying to figure out what I will do
when that happens.
But happily ignoring the prospects of the
imminent collapse of the latest in a series
of globe-spanning empires. What does the USA
have that the British Empire lacked? That
the Soviet Empire lacked? Not a thing.
Sic semper tyrannis. ("It's the motto of
Virginia and a great idea!") Deo vindice.
They might not be confused but maybe lazy.
Or cheap. On the whole, evidence that a company
has management which squeezes every nickel
until Jefferson hollers is a good thing. Do
you have any idea how hard it is to find a
tightfisted guy you can trust as well as
these?
The e-gold system will be better trusted when
they start providing proof for what they put
on the website.
Audits would be good.
This trademark issue is just one of the things
One of the utterly trivial things.
that are hurting their "trustability"
Audits are a major one.
right now because the statement on the site
is just blatantly false.
See, now that's defamation. You have no way of
knowing whether a document exists which conveys
title over the trademarks from one company to
the other. You assert that because the title
change isn't reflected in some official documents
(and we know government bureau-rats are never
behind on their paperwork!) that the statement
on the site is "blatantly false." But the
statement is almost certainly true and the entire
issue hardly matters at all.
Not to mention the non-existent audits of the
numbers provided on the examiner.
Well, now, if you spent all your energy on that
issue, I'd be right beside you all the way,
cheering you on, and throwing in a few punches
of my own.
Audits matter. Trademark ownership conveyances
from one entity to another? Why care?
"Class! Pay a-ttention!" - "Men in Black"
Audits we seek. Silliness we disdain. That
is all.
Regards,
Jim
http://cambist.net/
http://101468-AUG0.5.e-gold.com
---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
