Print

[112233]

there's a press release at prosperreport.com with an update about the matter. more information will be posted as events unfold.

http://www.prosperreport.com/pr12212007.aspx

112233, first, good going!  Second, your press release says "Private Citizen" in the title, but "Public Citizen" in the text.  Might want to clarify. 

thanks! my proofreader hat hasnt come in yet.

[leporello]

This is super news.  Please keep us all posted.

Go Team!

[112233]

hey folks, I need to delay the release of that link for a bit. I will be back though. these are unchartered waters for me 

[Mark12547]

112233, if I can be of any help (at the moment I can't imagine how, other than tossing some cash your way), please let me know.

Thank you!

[BigGulp]

hey folks, I need to delay the release of that link for a bit. I will be back though. these are unchartered waters for me 

and I didn't get a chance to see it... :'(

...Gulp

[chameleon734]

My open letter to Prosper.com via Customer support.

Re: Prosper.com suing Prosperreport.com

Dear Prosper.com,

Here is my opinion on your lawsuit against the owner of Prosperreport.com aka 112233 for cybersquatting your name.

1)Good luck with that, although since his site is non-commercial in nature it will be declared invalid anyway.
2)I'm suspending my transfers into Prosper as of 12/21/2007 @ 7:53 pm PST until there is a winner in this lawsuit.
3)I will suspend my lending on Prosper.com until 2/1/2008 or until there is a winner in this lawsuit, whichever is later.

Sincerely,
Chameleon734

[Caladia]

My open letter to Prosper.com via Customer support.

Re: Prosper.com suing Prosperreport.com

Dear Prosper.com,

Here is my opinion on your lawsuit against the owner of Prosperreport.com aka 112233 for cybersquatting your name.

1)Good luck with that, although since his site is non-commercial in nature it will be declared invalid anyway.
2)I'm suspending my transfers into Prosper as of 12/21/2007 @ 7:53 pm PST until there is a winner in this lawsuit.
3)I will suspend my lending on Prosper.com until 2/1/2008 or until there is a winner in this lawsuit, whichever is later.

Sincerely,
Chameleon734

Chameleon, you should read the letter.  Nobody's suing anybody.  The letter specifically says they prefer to resolve the issue without litigation.  It's clearly a form letter designed to show that Prosper is actively trying to protect its trademark (which they have to do in order to keep it trademarked).  It's still tacky and uncalled-for, but it's not a lawsuit.

[Caladia]

*poof*

(double-post)

[SGriff]

Chameleon, you should read the letter.  Nobody's suing anybody.  The letter specifically says they prefer to resolve the issue without litigation.  It's clearly a form letter designed to show that Prosper is actively trying to protect its trademark (which they have to do in order to keep it trademarked).  It's still tacky and uncalled-for, but it's not a lawsuit.

Cal, I read the letter, and it's an un-veiled threat of a lawsuit. With our friend here refusing to take down the site, it's basically a notice of intent to sue.

[Caladia]

Chameleon, you should read the letter.  Nobody's suing anybody.  The letter specifically says they prefer to resolve the issue without litigation.  It's clearly a form letter designed to show that Prosper is actively trying to protect its trademark (which they have to do in order to keep it trademarked).  It's still tacky and uncalled-for, but it's not a lawsuit.

Cal, I read the letter, and it's an un-veiled threat of a lawsuit. With our friend here refusing to take down the site, it's basically a notice of intent to sue.

Sgriff, Chameleon sent Prosper a note referring to a lawsuit, as if one had been filed.  Per the letter, no lawsuit has been filed. 

Furthermore, as I said above, just because a law firm sends out a form letter, that does not mean a lawsuit is imminent.  Law firms routinely send out such letters in an attempt to frighten uninformed people into complying with their clients' requests, even though they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on. 

In this particular case, it's important to keep in mind that a company that has a trademark must show that it is actively engaged in protecting its trademark.  That's what these kinds of form letters are for.  They're not genuine threats to sue, they're just sent so they can be used as evidence that a company has been protecting its trademark so they won't lose it.  This is all information that I learned in my Commercial Law class in college; feel free to ask Ira or Xraider about it.

[ira01]

In this particular case, it's important to keep in mind that a company that has a trademark must show that it is actively engaged in protecting its trademark.  That's what these kinds of form letters are for.  They're not genuine threats to sue, they're just sent so they can be used as evidence that a company has been protecting its trademark so they won't lose it.  This is all information that I learned in my Commercial Law class in college; feel free to ask Ira or Xraider about it.

I don't think that was the purpose of this particular letter.  I think it is pretty clear that Prosper was hoping that 112233 would throw in the towel and take the archive of the old .com forum off line.  I'm sure that Prosper was very disappointed when it learned that it's sudden poofing of the forums with no advance notice did not achieve the intended result of eliminating the contents from public consumption. 

Part of me hopes (for 112233's peace of mind and stress avoidance) that Prosper will simply slink off when they get a response to their lawyer's letter from a very capable public interest lawyer with the resources to fight Prosper (and the much stronger legal position).  But the other part of me hopes that Prosper will be stupid enough to actually file suit.  A good David v. Goliath ass kicking should lead to a wave of negative publicity that should have, but so far hasn't, developed about Prosper to date.  That may well be one more nail in the current management's coffin.

[Caladia]

In this particular case, it's important to keep in mind that a company that has a trademark must show that it is actively engaged in protecting its trademark.  That's what these kinds of form letters are for.  They're not genuine threats to sue, they're just sent so they can be used as evidence that a company has been protecting its trademark so they won't lose it.  This is all information that I learned in my Commercial Law class in college; feel free to ask Ira or Xraider about it.

I don't think that was the purpose of this particular letter.  I think it is pretty clear that Prosper was hoping that 112233 would throw in the towel and take the archive of the old .com forum off line.  I'm sure that Prosper was very disappointed when it learned that it's sudden poofing of the forums with no advance notice did not achieve the intended result of eliminating the contents from public consumption. 

Part of me hopes (for 112233's peace of mind and stress avoidance) that Prosper will simply slink off when they get a response to their lawyer's letter from a very capable public interest lawyer with the resources to fight Prosper (and the much stronger legal position).  But the other part of me hopes that Prosper will be stupid enough to actually file suit.  A good David v. Goliath ass kicking should lead to a wave of negative publicity that should have, but so far hasn't, developed about Prosper to date.  That may well be one more nail in the current management's coffin.

My own interpretation is that Prosper said, "Oh sh*t, what can we do about this?"  And somebody said, "Let's hit 'em with the Trademark Letter!" (Which is a nonsensical form letter designed to scare clueless people.) 

So, it's not that there's a real lawsuit in the works, it's just what random peeps said might be a good solution to the "hey, they still have archives" issue.

[112233]

I wonder if wallofsham got a similar letter

[chameleon734]

My open letter to Prosper.com via Customer support.

Re: Prosper.com suing Prosperreport.com

Dear Prosper.com,

Here is my opinion on your lawsuit against the owner of Prosperreport.com aka 112233 for cybersquatting your name.

1)Good luck with that, although since his site is non-commercial in nature it will be declared invalid anyway.
2)I'm suspending my transfers into Prosper as of 12/21/2007 @ 7:53 pm PST until there is a winner in this lawsuit.
3)I will suspend my lending on Prosper.com until 2/1/2008 or until there is a winner in this lawsuit, whichever is later.

Sincerely,
Chameleon734

Chameleon, you should read the letter.  Nobody's suing anybody.  The letter specifically says they prefer to resolve the issue without litigation.  It's clearly a form letter designed to show that Prosper is actively trying to protect its trademark (which they have to do in order to keep it trademarked).  It's still tacky and uncalled-for, but it's not a lawsuit.

Thanks for the observation and given the lag-time of online customer service these days, the cut-off being 12/23/07 for a reply and Christmas vacation they won't get to it until after 12/26/07.

[112233]

for 112233's peace of mind and stress avoidance

stress? lol ... not at all..