Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won not tay ber own

Tabbers Temptations     www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/ Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me!   "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" Edmund Burke

HattieRex Tessa Long Hall Of Shame Members Added October 11, 2010

Last updated November 3, 2010

FLASH UPDATE - November 3, 2010 - After review, the US Copyright Office has cancelled the two copyrights that Hattie Rex claims as a basis for her harassment of other legitimate sellers. So, what now, McPherson D. Moore and Scott A. Smith? Without a registered copyright you are up the oft quoted creek without your corporate lawyer paddle. Your villages are still without an idiot since you left. If you return quickly they may take you back. The IQ in Missouri will rise significantly when you leave.

We think there must be something in the mental makeup of designers that makes many of them believe that they are something special and that the laws of reason as well as the laws covering copyrights do not apply to them or to the voices in their heads. Tessa Long (tessaburnett@gmail.com) owns Hattie Rex, which it appears, she runs out of her home at 806 Orchard Drive, Rolla, Missouri 65401 [(573) 263-0832]. What is in the water in Rolla, Missouri? Tessa Long owns two registered copyrights, VA0001711566, which is titled "Pretty bird pet id tag in aluminum", and VA0001711584, which is titled "The Gold Collection washer disc in brass". Both registered copyrights have almost the same included under the registration category: Description: Sheet(s). Sheet? Or is that how they pronounce shit in Missouri? And she has tried to register a whole bunch more. Tessa Long makes doggie jewelry which she sells on Etsy and on her web site, http://hattierex.com/, but do not bother trying the web site as it has nothing on it as of October 11, 2010. Doggie jewelry is a cute idea but hardly original. Yet, in 2009 Tessa Long filed for and received copyright registration on two expression of her handy work. Two. Count them: TWO. But now she thinks she owns the idea of doggie jewelry, or her lawyer does, one Scott A. Smith of Polster, Lieder, Woodruff & Lucchesi, L.C., out of St Louis.

In a recent notice of claimed infringement ("NOCI"), Scott A. Smith instructed Etsy to remove listings that used the words "pet tag", "aluminum" and "washer". These words now belong exclusively to Tessa Long and HattieRex because they are part of the titles of the two copyright registrations? Did Scott A. Smith of Polster, Lieder, Woodruff & Lucchesi, L.C., actually study copyright law or did he attend Billy Bob's School of BBQ and Law? We already know most law students sleep through Constitutional Law. Scott - FYI - your client does not own the rights to all pet id tags or the use of aluminum and washers to make them. Her copyrights are for the designs she submitted, not for the idea they represent. Get your head out of your Missouri ass, Scott. The pictures below very clearly show that the copyrightable work of Tessa Long was not copied. Tessa Long does not own the idea of pet jewelry.

Examples of pet jewelry ordered terminated by Tessa Long/HattieRex

Examples of pet jewelry by Tessa Long/HattieRex from her Etsy store : http://www.etsy.com/shop/makeyourdogsmile Tessa - Show Us The Copying! You do not own the idea!

Dumb

On October 22, 2010, some jerk named McPherson D. Moore, another attorney at Polster, Lieder, Woodruff & Lucchesi, L.C., along with the town idiot, Scott A. Smith, filed a lawsuit in the District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, 10cv1997,(PDF format) alleging copyright infringement and false designation of origin. Fellas, you are really stupid attorneys.

Dumber?

First, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("FRCP") require that an attorney make an "inquiry reasonable reasonable under the circumstances" (see FRCP 11(b)):

(b) REPRESENTATIONS TO THE COURT. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper — whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it — an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:...

YOU LYING CORPORATE LAWYER MORONS! The above means that the person signing the complaint, in this case one jerk named McPherson D. Moore and another jerk named Scott A. Smith, are to conduct a reasonable inquiry BEFORE signing the complaint. Only a complete moron, like Moore and Smith, would not know that ideas are not copyrightable, only the expression of those ideas. Only a complete moron, like Moore and Smith, would look at the examples shown above and see a substantial similarity (which is required for a finding of copyright infringement). In our opinion, neither McPherson D. Moore nor Scott A. Smith did anything to follow FRCP 11(b) but rather willingly, and with their retainer and fee in mind, committed perjury in the name of the American dollar. Then, as though they needed to reinforce their stupidity, they make the ridiculous claim, CLAIM II - FALSE ASSOCIATION, and try to tie it to trademark law under 15 U.S.C. 1125(a). What a crock of flaming Missouri shit. Even if the defendant used "LLC" in a manner to deceive, it would be a state tort, not a federal violation of trademark law. Even a halfway intelligent first-year law student can tell that 15 U.S.C. 1125(a) refers to using a trademark to confuse the public, NOT the appendage "LLC". You will lose this law suit.