Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (4735)	6/22/2003 1:46:07 PM
From: rjm2	Respond to of 12465

Wow. You & pugs make a great team ! You have a god-complex and pugs thinks everyone is out to get him ! Believe me, your "likeness" is nothing to protect. You are a CRIMINAL and you are going BACK to prison for a LONG TIME ! Perhaps you can share a cell with one of those that you THOUGHT you were better than ! In the end, you are JUST LIKE those you exposed. I wouldnt argue if someone said YOU are a CRIMINAL CON-MAN ! In fact, the US Government said just that !

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (4735)	6/22/2003 8:45:14 PM
From: SalemsHex	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

lol, that oughta be good for a few RANTS from the Pugger.

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (4735)	6/23/2003 12:47:22 PM
From: SI Bob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

Who is Gary Dobry ? you ask..noone really. LOL! Pretty good description. He's also been quite obsessed with me ever since his eviction from this site for his conduct in the RMIL thread. Or was it TVSI? Don't really remember. Some now-defunct ticker. Janice Shell has a compilation of a PugsRant involving his claim that I called him at his new, unlisted phone number, then hung up. It's a hilarious read and a very accurate glimpse into how his mind works.

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (4735)	6/23/2003 10:12:58 PM
From: Mahatmabenfoo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

Anthony Pacific wrote (quoting the Illinois Act): "A person may not use an individual's identity for commercial purposes during the individual's lifetime without having obtained previous written consent from the appropriate person or persons?? Come on! That's goofy. The Act is supposed to prevent use of an "individual's identity" to SELL something -- like the classic case of a baby's face used to sell a box of oatmeal. The painting sells only the painting -- it doesn't change the image into a trademark. Besides Anthony has become a public figure, making him fairplay for commentary -- even offensive or comical commentary. I see nothing illegal about those paintings. For more information, see "First Amendment". - Charles