ADUK Archive

Ah... I get it! Silk you are Pete and I claim my £5. Though maybe Pete is not so pointless in his contributions.

The thing is that if he'd said we can all (except you of course ) boil our heads... That'd be fine. But to continue such an ungracious a pointless course?

But thank you. You have helped me think something through and come to a conclusion which will be of benfit to me. It's this... 'Goodbye'. Life's to short and too valuable to waste it with some people.

Silk wrote:

akirk wrote:you seem to have very little understanding of the law in this area

Perhaps you could provide us with your legal qualifications, otherwise you risk accusations of having even less understanding.

you only need to check which view is correct to decide who has more or less understanding
I have done a lot with trademarks and I would suspect that the chances of trademarking advanced driving UK which is descriptive is virtually zero - however ADUK which means nothing as a word is more likely to be able to be trademarked - and ADUK is much more the brand / mark of trade of this website...

you think the 'pack' whoever they may be is being unreasonable
a) I post my own views and perspectives I don't join packs to do it
b) I suggest you look back at posts by petes as to what might be agressive! Apparently he will do what he wants and doesn't care about anyone else's opinions!

anyway I suspect that this discussion is getting boring now and is past its purpose - petes can do what he likes - can't imagine he will get many of those responding from here, but he may get lots of others - he can post what he wants, unless it is copyright material... it has been made abundantly clear to him that he can't use material from others without their permission...

like others - goodbye...

Alasdair

akirk wrote:

Silk wrote:

akirk wrote:you seem to have very little understanding of the law in this area

Perhaps you could provide us with your legal qualifications, otherwise you risk accusations of having even less understanding.

you only need to check which view is correct to decide who has more or less understanding
I have done a lot with trademarks and I would suspect that the chances of trademarking advanced driving UK which is descriptive is virtually zero - however ADUK which means nothing as a word is more likely to be able to be trademarked - and ADUK is much more the brand / mark of trade of this website...

In other words, you don't know. That's cleared that one up.

Silk wrote:

akirk wrote:
you only need to check which view is correct to decide who has more or less understanding
I have done a lot with trademarks and I would suspect that the chances of trademarking advanced driving UK which is descriptive is virtually zero - however ADUK which means nothing as a word is more likely to be able to be trademarked - and ADUK is much more the brand / mark of trade of this website...

In other words, you don't know. That's cleared that one up.

I suspect if it was illegal to copy content from a publicly accessible website, Google would be in breach of copyright laws every time they crawled a page and took snippets of its content to display in a site's description in its search results. There's also nothing wrong with quoting another site and referencing it accordingly.

petes wrote:

Silk wrote:

revian wrote:Pete... I'm sorry but I can't see why you are pursuing this and why in this confrontational way.

Really? I think he's showing remarkable restraint in the circumstances - I'd have told you all to shove your head in a bucket by now. I'm not a Facebook fan, but I don't see why the "pack" are being so aggressive. Why don't you all go and do something completely useless, like take a driving test in a Model T Ford or something?

Thank you. If I have strayed away from my original point to some extent, it's largely as a result of the unnecessarily negative responses I received from what you fittingly describe as "the pack".

It started off as a constructive suggestion for a site that's clearly struggling, but it seems it's fallen upon deaf ears.

When you have a very vocal group who appear to be too good for advanced driving, it's hardly surprising really. If you can't name-drop someone from high up at Hendon or some "driving-god" with a video and a nick-name, then your opinion doesn't seem to count for much on here.

Silk wrote:In other words, you don't know. That's cleared that one up.

wrong

Alasdair

petes wrote:

Silk wrote:

akirk wrote:
you only need to check which view is correct to decide who has more or less understanding
I have done a lot with trademarks and I would suspect that the chances of trademarking advanced driving UK which is descriptive is virtually zero - however ADUK which means nothing as a word is more likely to be able to be trademarked - and ADUK is much more the brand / mark of trade of this website...

In other words, you don't know. That's cleared that one up.

I suspect if it was illegal to copy content from a publicly accessible website, Google would be in breach of copyright laws every time they crawled a page and took snippets of its content to display in a site's description in its search results. There's also nothing wrong with quoting another site and referencing it accordingly.

oh dear - not this one again! good luck
base legal position is simple - you copy other people's content - it is illegal
if you reference / quote / report on other people's content within the scope of the law - it is legal

have fun!

Alasdair

Yawn.

fungus wrote::roll: Yawn.

Please try to stay awake at the back. This isn't easy for me either.

I haven't been on here for a while and saw the eternal argument between speed and safety was still running strong ... Or not.

Then I realised why I hadn't been around for a while.

This thread appears to have mission creeep ....

triquet wrote:This thread appears to have mission creeep ....

It's an indication of the poor level of involvement from the moderators and site owner that it's been allowed to get to this stage!

In summary, the whole thread could have been reduced to something like:

"I notice the forum seems a little quiet. How about promoting it on social media?"
"That's a good idea. Give it a go."
"I'm not a Facebooker myself but it can't do any harm being on there for people that use it."

Such positive thinking and openness to suggestions obviously isn't welcome by the established core members though.

I'll leave you all to it. You can lead a horse to water...

Not my fault

mefoster wrote: "It's been tried before and it didn't work"

Was it? I don't remember the outcome being mentioned?

What happened?

mefoster wrote: Maybe the horse isn't thirsty after all.

You buying? It's a bit early, but . . .

And on that friendly and conciliatory note - I think it's best we leave this thread here - which has drifted rather!

If anyone wishes to continue the discussion of facebook/twitter ADUK sites, please start a new one in the members section.

Ta.