Tabberone Logo

Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won
not tay ber own

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

Last updated March 14, 2009

Acts By Defendants

Concise paragraphs stating historically what has happened.

These following statements are the ones we used when we sued Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts & Sevenarts:

Acts of Defendant Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts

1. Karen and Michael initiated auction number 6221832561 on or about October 30, 2005, and auction number 6203338371 (date unknown) in 2005. Auctions 6221832651 and 620338371 (the “Auctions”) were for yardage of fabric with images of Betty Boop posed in elegant gowns on a black background. Included in the images of Betty Boop is the word “ELEGANCE”.

2. The fabric was manufactured by Shamash & Sons. Upon information and belief, their corporate offices are located at 42 West 39th Street, New York, NY 10018.

3. Upon information and belief, the Betty Boop character is copyrighted and is a trademark of King Features and Fleischer Studios.

4. Upon information and belief, this fabric was manufactured under a valid license from King Features and Fleischer Studios to Shamash & Sons.

5. On December 2, 2005, Defendant Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts (CVFA) transmitted to eBay a Notice of Claimed Infringement (“NOCI”) which stated under penalty of perjury that this Defendant had a good faith belief that the sale of the fabric via the Store Auction infringed its intellectual property rights.

6. When they received this notice, eBay halted the Store Auctions.

Etc, etc, etc.

This is an exmple only. You will have to use the wording that applies to your situation. Do not copy and use as you will be wrong.

The court must be told everything that happened, in what order it happened, when it happened, by whom, and what consequences there were from the acts. Remember, you know what has happened but the court doesn't. Don't make statements that begin with the assumption that the court understands what you mean.

Acts of Defendant Sevenarts, Ltd

1. Defendant Sevenarts, Ltd (“Sevenarts”), openly agreed that the Plaintiffs were not responsible for the manufacture of the fabric or the design thereon. Sevenarts referred to Plaintiffs and other purchasers of the fabric as having “innocently bought fabric which makes (alleged) unauthorized use of Etre designs.” (see Exhibit #3)

2. Plaintiffs repeatedly offered to no longer offer the fabrics for sale if Sevenarts would simply have eBay withdraw the black-mark. (see Exhibit #4)

3. Despite pleas from Plaintiffs, Sevenarts refused to take action to remove the black-marks against the Plaintiffs, thereby placing the continuing business of Tabberone in potential future jeopardy. (see Exhibit #3)

4. On December 4, 2005, Sevenarts informed Plaintiffs that if they had a “complaint and wish to take legal action you must do so.” while also providing a contact address in the UK. (see Exhibit #3)

Etc, etc, etc.

This is an exmple only. You will have to state what applies to your situation. Do not copy the above and use it as worded you will be wrong.

There are plenty of examples on the internet. Find them, read them, and use what you like.


We are not lawyers and we cannot give you legal advice. Our opinions and the information provided is based upon our experiences in federal court as well as research. You should always contact an attorney if you have a legal problem.

Articles | Cease and Desist Letters | Federal Court Cases | FAQs & Whines | Glossary | Hall Of Shame | Contributions

Corporate Lawyers
Cartoons | Code Of Ethics | Courtroom Remarks | Definition Of A Lie | Jokes | Lawyers | Lying | Who Have Lied

eBay - Land The Game


Trademark Definitions
Blurring   |   Confusion   |   Damages   |   Dilution   |   History   |   Initial Interest Confusion   |   Likelihood Of Confusion   |   Material Difference Standard
Parallel Imports   |   Post-sale Confusion   |   Puffery   |   Secondary Meaning   |   Subsequent Confusion   |   Trademark Abuse
Unauthorized Use   |   Unfair Competition   |   What is a Trademark?
Copyright Definitions
Angel Policies   |   Contributory Infringement   |   Copyrightability   |   Copyright Extortion   |   Copyright Misuse Doctrine
; Derivative   |   The Digital Millennium Copyright Act   |   EULA   |   Fair Use   |   First Sale Doctrine   |   Product Description   |   Registration
Registration Denied   |   What is a Copyright?   |   What is not Copyrightable?
Other Issues
Embroidery Designs   |   FAQs & Whines   |   Image and Text Theft   |   Licensed Fabric   |   Licensing & Licenses   |   Patterns
Patterns Index   |   Profit   |   Quilting   |   Selvage   |   Stanford School of Law Case Outline
Tabberone Disclaimer   |   Trademark Extortion   |   Urban Myths   |   What To Do If You Are Veroed

Federal Court Cases
Alphabetically | by Federal Circuit | by Subject | by Court Quotations

Federal Statutes
Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. 5 | Digital Millenium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. 12 | Lanham Act 15 U.S.C. 22

VeRO (Verified Right's Owner Program)
VeRO Commandments | VeRO-Verified Rights Owners Program | Counter Notice Letter
Counter Notice (pre-2003) | Counter Notice present | On-Line Survey from 2004 | Articles about VeRO | What To Do If You Are Veroed

Original material by Karen Dudnikov & Michael Meadors is © 1999-2017