ø Realtouch Forum ø

I can assure you qDot does not work for RealTouch.

nevermind from where the Qdot is
as long he could hack it....!

a lot of people are happy, no matter he's nerdy or not!
even bill gates was & still a nerd!

(02-06-2010 03:12 AM)Haptic_Encoder Wrote: [ -> ]I can assure you qDot does not work for RealTouch.

I agree.
QDot Does NOT work for AEBN (Last I knew,) and he DOES know his shit.
Reverse engineering is what he does, and what he lectures on.
If he is telling you a thing is, then I would take it to the bank, that's what it is.

Just an FYI we are going to be working on a SDK for developers to use with RealTouch. Can't give any details really but it is in the works.

(03-16-2010 11:35 PM)Haptic_Encoder Wrote: [ -> ]Just an FYI we are going to be working on a SDK for developers to use with RealTouch. Can't give any details really but it is in the works.

Now that's some pretty exciting news - should lead to some unique and interesting (licensed I'm assuming) content.

Fantastic, the more people that can release content, the better, for everyone involved.

(01-26-2010 01:00 AM)realman Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-26-2010 12:48 AM)evorealtouch Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-25-2010 08:34 PM)realman Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand why a thread like this is even allowed. Particularly when this website has RealTouch in the domain name.

I imagine that this forum was setup to allow people to freely exchange ideas. You can't stop people from talking and sharing ideas on the internet.

From a legal point of view, AEBN can when it's done through a site whose domain name includes their trademark.


Try posting PlayStation hacks at a site called PlayStationForum and if you don't get a writ from Sony, the webmaster certainly would.

Interesting that YOU would make this argument.
"Virtual Sex" is a registered trademark of Digital Playground, and your use, (as well as AEBN's Use) is a violation of their rights in the mark.
I'd expect you'd want to sit by the door. You'll likely be hearing from them.
"The Future of Virtual Sex" is a trademark of VR Innovations, and has been in use by them since 1999. Again, an unauthorized use.

Well Eric, I won't wait by the door but I will be contacting Digital Playground just to put this right.

Are there any words or phrases in common english usage that you or someone you know hasn't trademarked?

Do I have to get on the phone to you or digital playground and seek permission before I ask a chick if she wants to have 'virtual sex' with me?

There are thousands of websites with the GENERIC term virtual sex in the title.

I've supported you on this board from the beginning, because I realise and respect what you've done, but frankly, you're starting to sound nuts.

---

O.K., I've just gone to digital playgrounds website and it does seem, incredibly, that they have managed to trademark the CLEARLY generic term 'virtual sex' which has been in common usage for decades at least.

First of all, I wasn't even aware of the digital playground interactive dvd virtual sex series, and certainly not that they had somehow managed to register a generic name as a trademark.

By the way, there has been a legal precendent whereby trademarks are allowed in domain names so long as the trademark is not being used in a manner that harms the trademark brand. Allowing someone to promote a hack that would undermine AEBN's sales would clearly be an example of that.

I'll be happy to promote digital playgrounds affiliate program on my site (together with RealTouch, as well as your own...errr, no, scratch that).
Having said that, I don't have the financial muscle to go to court with digtial playground, I'm just a webmaster trying to earn a living and to promote the virtual sex industry at the same time. So I'll contact them tonight.

Seriously, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on if AEBN challenged your 'virtual sex machine' trademark. Both 'virtual sex' AND 'virtual sex machine' are CLEARLY generic, and generic terms CANNOT be registered as trademarks, and if they have been, they automatically lose trademark status as soon they do become generic.

Tell me if it's different. I'd like to register '3D Porn' as a trademark tommorrow and I'll be the first porn billionaire within 10 years.

Quote:1. What is meant by generic term?

Generic terms are common words or terms, often found in the dictionary, that identify products and services and are not specific to any particular source. It is not possible to register as a trademark a term that is generic for the goods/services identified in the application. If a trademark becomes generic, often as a result of improper use, rights in the mark may no longer be enforceable.


2. Are generic terms considered a category of trademarks?

In assessing their suitability as trademarks, words can be divided into five categories. These categories range from fanciful, invented words, which are typically strong trademarks, to generic terms, which are not protectable at all. The stronger the mark, the more protection it will be given against other marks.

The categories, ranked in decreasing order in terms of strength, are:


a. Fanciful Marks—coined (made-up) words that have no relation to the goods being described (e.g., EXXON for petroleum products).

b. Arbitrary Marks—existing words that contribute no meaning to the goods being described (e.g., APPLE for computers).

c. Suggestive Marks—words that suggest meaning or relation but that do not describe the goods themselves (e.g., COPPERTONE for suntan lotion).

d. Descriptive Marks—marks that describe either the goods or a characteristic of the goods. Often it is very difficult to enforce trademark rights for descriptive marks unless the mark has acquired a secondary meaning (e.g., SHOELAND for a shoe store).

e. Generic Terms—words that are the accepted and recognized description of a class of goods or services (e.g., computer software, facial tissue).

http://www.inta.org/index.php?option=com...tcontent=4

The only puzzling question is, if you've been threatning AEBN like you have me, why haven't they sued your ass into the ground for restriction of trade? Or do you just pick on people who can't fight back?

---Reply to LONG post by "Realman".......

You misunderstand.

I was offering you valuable information, and you seem to feel it's a direct attack on you.
Not sure why that is, either you feel threatened, or you view my comments aggressively. Although, you seem to be barking at everyone in that response.....
Anyhow, let me explain the parts directed at me;

There are some basic things about trademarks you have to wrap your mind around, and if you don't, it may cost you allot of money.

To answer your facetious questions, no, an awful lot of stuff has been trademarked. And for companies, it's important to protect your marks from other people building off your hard spent advertising dollars and reputation. Your favorite company there, AEBN, has trademarked about 4 versions of "real Touch." So, if you want to fuss, they're doing it too. (There is also flooring called "real touch" by Armstrong, and they aren't real happy about a "porn company" (others' words, not mine) using their mark for "something like that."
But I digress.
No, you don't have to ask them permission to ask a girl that. However, if you do it for MONEY, as "in commerce," then yes, technically you would, and you'd have to be talking about their products. You could say "Virtual Reality Sex," and be Ok, because THAT is actually the "generic term" of the same thing, as determined by the USPTO. Otherwise, you gotta pay, or have permission. (You could also be doing "fair use," but that get's a bit fuzzy, and is a little too broad to cover in this response.)

And yep, there are thousands, but thousands of people speed on the highway everyday, and never get stopped by the law. Doesn't make it any less "a crime." (Bad example, but you get the idea.)

As for "not aware," I'm sorry, but that's not a defense.

If you would look through your "anger haze" for a minute, you'd realize, i was trying to help/educate on a subject that an awful lot of money has already been spent on.

And while I appreciate your "support" in this forum, I can't help but notice you take time to do a backhanded slap when you say something... i.e. "errr, maybe not."

I would STRONGLY suggest you read an article written in April 2003, Page 28, of Adult Video News Magazine. It is SPECIFICALLY about this topic, and these players. I would furnish a link, but we can't post links here. It is available on the internet for reading, at the news page of one of the protagonists. You might still be able to access it from AVN as well, but not sure, with all the jostling there. They routinely had different material in the print mag, and online in 2003.
The online print of the page can be found at vrinnovations <dot> com/Newslinks/magazines/avnonline42003.htm (We'll see if that semi link stands the forum crushing)

So, while you're just coming to this, understand, others have been dealing with this for years. And none of us like it any better.

You're biggest problem is not with AEBN, I think. While they COULD object, I doubt they will. You are strongly promoting their product, and if you are in their affiliate program, you would have a strong "fair use" argument with them. (Although they would still have control, but why stop someone helping you?) That's how an awful lot of this goes on. They could, but is better for them to "pretend" to ignore it.

Your problem, as I see it, is using other people's trademarks to promote AEBN's products, and not theirs. I think even an hour's worth of time with an IP attorney would be quite the eyeopener for you. And I wouldn't spend allot of time listening to "people's opinions" about "precedent," on cases, and then trying to "apply" it to your situation, as means nothing. until challenged in court, you have no idea how it will go, or be applied. At the point you actually get to court, you've already spent tens of thousands of dollars on fees. Unfortunately, "right," as you see it, has very little to do with anything.


Wanna hear soemthing REAL funny? This will set you right off. Lawyer picconelli, the self described "man that brought this technology to the industry" (He said this in both AVN, and XBIZ magazines....go look,) is an IP lawyer for both of the companies, AEBN, and Digital Playground. Not sure how he keeps that straight in his head, but hey, not my ethics problem.
(AOH, and in case the sarcasm doesn't come through on the "man that brought this technology to the industry," let me assure you, I think that is the most assanine thing anyone has EVER said. While I have respect for both AEBN, and Digital Playground for bringing something new into the world, I have less than NO respect for lawyers that aren't much above the level of a sucker fish, feeding off the blood, sweat and tears of others.

YOU are using these terms, not in an editorial capacity, which would have some limited protection, but, in fact, in a thinly veiled sales message to sell someone else's product. (AEBN's) If you were actually doing what you say you're doing, namely, discussing the broad field of Virtual Reality Sex, I don't think anyone would have a problem.

But these blog styled advertisements are nothing more than a new way to advertise. Every new "communication method" has people that turn it to making a profit.

It's sad, to. Frankly, I'd be happy to see LOTS more of people talking about this topic. I've been screaming about it at the top of my head for the last 20 years, to little effect.
I was REALLY hoping AEBN would spend as much money on advertising to consumers, as they have spent advertising to the trade. That would get the field moving along....good for everyone.

And it would be REAL nice if they came up with something new. Not just re-use other people's sales messages. Even down to blatantly ripping off an advertising design idea.

Although, I suppose the most sincere form of flattery is imitation.

I'm not angry with anyone except you. On the other hand, everybody here except me became pissed off with your constant bitching on the RealTouch long ago. I always defended you here and you can check back on my posts if you've forgotten.

Most people use the term 'virtual sex' and not 'virtual reality sex'. In fact, I've never heard the latter phrase used. Virtual Sex is clearly the generic term, no matter what has been wrongly ruled. From what I have been reading (see below) digital playground does have some licence to use the term 'virtual sex' as a commerical trademark because they allegedly 'invented' the phrase.

The fact is, virtual sex was going to fall into common speech as soon as the phrase 'virtual reality' was invented. Now that virtual sex is a reality the use of the generic term is going to be widespread in reference to an actual genre of products, and not just an abstract concept that is/was being applied to one brand of goods only.

And therefore it will no longer be an enforceable trademark. Sorry to say, but the same will apply to your virtual sex machine trademark.

If digital playground has a problem with my use of the term virtual sex, I'll get an email or a writ through the door requesting me to stop using it, and I will.

But you know, an individual can also lose a lot of money if he takes somebody to court and he loses the case (and his trademark).

Thanks for the compliments regarding my website. Of course I'm focusing on RealTouch because that is the future of v...oops, that is the big hope for virtual reality sex. It also just happens, that when I write non product selling posts titled 'the future of virtual sex' I get threats from enraged individuals shouting trademark violation.

The purpose of this site is obviously to sell a product (RealTouch). That doesn't mean that the information here (thanks to people like WolfPup, and hopefully myself, isn't very useful and a genuine effort to promote the fut...forward uni-directional temporal motion of virtual...reality sex.

Are you saying AEBN has also registered virtual sex and might have a problem with my virtual sex site??? If you mean my other site 'RealTouchReviews' I didn't have any worries about setting it up knowing that AEBN representatives are happy to come on this forum (REALTOUCHforum.com). I make sure I promote RealTouch EXCLUSIVELY on that site, even when it looked like the affiliate program was never going to happen (not knocking the webmaster of this site, but we were looking at Fleshlight banners here until recently).

You sound extremely bitter that RealTouch is succeeding where you failed. It's interesting that you are launching this tirade now that AEBN have accepted that allowing various purchasing options will help sales massively.

And believe me, when the new pricing models come into effect, RealTouch IS going to explode. As soon as I posted on my sites the news that you could buy the RealTouch without having to worry about paying for every time you used it, sales rose by over 300%.

Quote:A California pornography company claiming it coined the term "virtual sex" in 1994 lost its bid Tuesday to gain control of the virtualsex.com domain.

The World Intellectual Property Organization said Tuesday that Network Telephone Services of Woodland Hills, California, is the rightful owner of the domain. The WIPO concluded that Network Telephone Service’s website offered all the appropriate merchandise to match its namesake, even if Digital Playground of Chatsworth, California, owns the trademark, Virtual Sex.

"Finally, the diverse offerings available on the website to which the domain name at issue resolves suggest that respondent is trading on the descriptiveness of the term ‘virtual sex,’" the WIPO ruled Tuesday.

Pornography is among the top trafficked features on the internet — and big money is at stake. That was illustrated with the protracted legal battle over the sex.com domain, which resulted in a $65 million court judgment against Stephen Michael Cohen. He was accused of illegally hijacking the domain from Gary Kremen in a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court.

In Tuesday’s dispute, Digital Playground, which has a 40 percent market share of the DVD adult video market, claimed Network Telephone Services purchased the domain in bad faith in 1995. Network Telephone Services — whose virtualsex.com offers adult DVDs, strip club web-cam sites, sex chat rooms, adult dating services and adult toys — claimed it did not know of the trademark and considered the "virtual sex" phrase to be a generic term.

The WIPO, however, agreed with Digital Playground that the domain was "confusingly similar" to the valid Virtual Sex trademark. That said, the WIPO ruled in favor of Network Telephone Services, saying it could keep the domain because it made no sense why Digital Playground brought the complaint in January — about 14 years after Network Telephone Services purchased the domain.

I think my website is more of an attempt to provide a genuine virtual sex (information) service than a one page site with nothing but links to sex chat lines.