Tradename or Copyright?

[Ice]

The State must PROVE OWNERSHIP in court. Now, do you really think that they will do that? Do you think they can?

[goldphoenix]

Originally Posted by KaosTheory

Lithmus,



I think what Jersee was getting at is that the car is actually owned by the STATE who created the PERSON who owns the car that Lithmus bought....You are a mere custodian of the STATE's property. Sorry Jersee if that is not what you meant.



Now, if my above statement is true and I think it is.......How does the Constitution/Common Law play into this? I mean I really don't know. Can't the STATE do what it wants with it's own property. I'm just asking.



I know that Common Law is the key but my problem is getting there from here.





KT

The common law can be accessed only after an explicit reservation of rights in commercial law, "without prejudice" ucc 1-207. That is my current understanding, anyway.



At that point, one can claim fraud since "ownership" by the STATE was not prima fascie on the signed contract. Contract law says that there must be good faith and a meeting of the minds in the ordinary course of business (knowing, voluntary, and willing signature). I wouldn't say that leaving out little details like "your signature on this document denotes your agreement that your 'vehicle' is owned by the STATE, and you merely possess Title to 'use' it" would be signed by anyone except a man/woman with the intent to "rent" a car, or by someone three sheets to the wind (aren't invisible adhesive contractual conditions fraudulent by nature?).



I found this an interesting thread, so figured I would throw in two cents. Perhaps it is not even worth that.



Does anyone think that what I have typed is correct or incorrect?



Peace,



goldphoenix

[KaosTheory]

Ice,



Are you saying that even though the STATE does own it, that they won't step forward and claim it in public court? I imagine that they could show ownership by producing the MSO but you are saying that they don't want people to know about that? Hmmm I guess that would be admitting fraud right there. So we can go forward and pretend that we are the actual owners?





GoldPheonix,



Apparently, there are other ways to access common law besides using 1-207. I am like you though. I am only familiar with the 1-207 thing. "All Rights Reserved" works too though. Ice and I have been discussing this lately. He says that focusing on the absense of a bonafide contract is the most effective way to deal with the Government. I am still foggy on how to effectively go about this though. Just hang around and keep reading......



KT

[Jerseee]

KT,



You are right. That is the point that I was trying to make-the State owns the car.



Now to piggy back on what Ice stated....they will not come forward and claim they own the car--that would be catastrophic the to public. But you can get them to argue--since this is what they love to do.



THere is case law on the right to travel. If you start from that platform and stop trying to argue about who owns what--they will admit sooner or later that they own the vehicle. All in a effort to try to get you to agree to the violation.



So what I was working towards was a strategy for lithmus2. The first thing is to stop arguing about what you believe to be your car.



Next challenge their right to tax your god-given right to travel. There is case law posted in the forum above called "Travel". This should get them reeling and fighting the fact that Lithmus and LITHMUS are one in the same. And get them to say that it is a privilege to drive. They will do this and think they have a slam dunk.



Next keep them off-balance with this and then put into record the definition of the terms "drive" & "privilege" (since they brought it up). Then remind the court of those terms.



Look up the definition of privilege in any dictionary (even black's) and they will see the train coming after you bring this into play (which should be on the record).



Then start on the premise that if driving is a privilege then so is "pseudo" ownership of the vehicle if I have to register it. Then link together driving and title of ownership are all privileges. Since you have to have permission to use it--then someone else is accountable for the same crimes or how can the state own something and charge me with a crime as if I am the owner of such a thing--when I have proof that the state owns it? That is how they create commerce through the vehicle code.



Now if you think you still own the car--I will tell you this.....Look at the line that you sign your name on as "owner"--you will see that it may say, "authorized agent or authorized signature"--don't believe me? Look at your title and really really close at the line. It is the same type of line that is on checks. Notice that the line seems broken or faint. Most States use the same tactic. Now if you think that you own the car then you must think that when you sign a check you are getting money for it.



Look up the definition of "Title" and that should do it for you as well. Remember that "lawful" and "legal" do not mean the same.



If you are an agent are you also the principle? Can you be both? Is there a controversy? Now do you think you still own it?

[KaosTheory]

Hmmm that sounds like an excellent strategy. It was also well written making it very easy to follow the line of reasoning.



Did you learn this from personal experience? I mean have you used this or has someone that you know used this strategy? I love to read about squirming judges and unhappy lawyers. Actually, I can't get enough of that kind of stuff.



My all time favorite is seeing the underdog win.



KT



P.S. Teach me Obi Won, I want to learn the ways of the force like my forefathers .

[Ice]

Here's somethig to think about... if the State ever did claim that they own the vehicle they would have to submit proof that 1) they paid for it or 2) it was a gift.



If it was a gift then they owe you a pretty big "tax deduction" for gifting it to them. ha ha.



Screw 'em... don't even worry about who they think owns the auto. You own it until it is proven otherwise. Possession is nine tenths of the law.

[weishaupt1776]

Trademark Notice
All rights reserved re common-law trade-name/trade-mark,
RESEARCH ONE —as well as any and all derivatives and variations in the spelling of said trade-name/trade-mark—Trademark 1976 by Said common-law trade-name/trade-mark may neither be used, nor reproduced, neither in whole nor in part, nor in any manner whatsoever, without the prior, express, written consent and acknowledgement of Research One as signified by the hand-signed, red-ink signature of Research One hereinafter “Secured Party.”With the intent of being contractually bound, any juristic person, as well as the agent of said juristic person, assents, consents, and agrees by this Trademark Notice that neither said juristic person, nor the agent of said juristic person, shall display, nor otherwise use in any manner, the common-law trade-name/trade-mark RESEARCH ONE nor the autograph common-law copyright contained herein, nor any derivative of, nor any variation in the spelling of, RESEARCH ONE™ without the prior, express, written consent and acknowledgment of Secured Party, as signified by Secured Party’s hand-signed signature in red ink. & Secured Party neither assents, nor consents, nor agrees with, nor grants, nor implies any authorization for, any unauthorized use of RESEARCH ONE, and all such unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. Secured Party is not now, nor has Secured Party ever been, an accommodation party, nor a surety, for the purported debtor, i.e. ” nor for any derivative of, nor for any variation in the spelling of, said name, nor for any other juristic person, and is so-indemnified and held harmless by Debtor, i.e. “RESEARCH ONE,” in Hold-harmless and Indemnity Agreement No. R1-HHIA dated the First Day of the First Month in the Year of Our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred Ninty-four against any and all claims, legal actions, orders, warrants, judgments, demands, liabilities, losses, depositions, summonses, lawsuits, costs, fines, liens, levies, penalties, damages, interests, and expenses whatsoever, both absolute and contingent, as are due and as might become due, now existing and as might hereafter arise, and as might be suffered by, imposed on, and incurred by Debtor for any and every reason, purpose, and cause whatsoever.& Mutual Assent Implied and Express Contract Executed by Unauthorized Use of Secured Party’s Common-Law Trademark; Self-executing Security Agreement in Event of Unauthorized Use of Secured Party’s Common-Law Trademark & By this Trademark Notice, both the juristic person and the agent of said juristic person, hereinafter jointly and severally “User,” assent, consent, and agree that any use of other than authorized use as set forth above constitutes unauthorized use, counterfeiting, of Secured Party’s common law-trademarked property, contractually binds User, renders this Trademark Notice a Security Agreement wherein User is debtor and Research One is Secured Party, and signifies that User:
(1)incurs a contractual obligation in favor of Secured Party, and grants Secured Party a security interest in all of User’s assets, land, and personal property and all of User’s rights, title, and interest in assets, land, and personal property, in the sum certain amount of $500,000.00 per each occurrence of use of the common law-trademarked trade-name/trade-mark as well as for each and every occurrence of use of any and all derivatives of, and variations in the spelling of,RESEARCH ONE plus costs, plus triple damages;

(2) has present intention to authenticate, and hereby and herewith authenticates, this Security Agreement, wherein User is debtor and Research One™ is Secured Party, and wherein User pledges all of User’s assets, land, consumer goods, farm products, inventory, equipment, money, investment property, commercial tort claims, letters of credit, letter-of-credit rights, chattel paper, instruments, deposit accounts, accounts, documents, and general intangibles, and all User’s rights, title, and interest in all such foregoing property, now owned and hereafter acquired, now existing and hereafter arising, and wherever located, as collateral to secure User’s contractual obligation in favor of Secured Party for User’s unauthorized use of Secured Party’s common law-trademarked property;

(3) assents, consents, and agrees with Secured Party’s filing of a Uniform Commercial Code, hereinafter “UCC,” Financing Statement in the UCC filing office, as well as in any county-level recording/registration office, wherein User is debtor and Research One™ is Secured Party;

(4)assents, consents, and agrees that said UCC Financing Statement described above in paragraph “(3)” is a continuing financing statement, and further assents, consents, and agrees with Secured Party’s filing of any continuation statement necessary to maintain Secured Party’s perfected security interest in all of User’s property and rights, title, and interest in property, pledged as collateral in this Security Agreement and described above in paragraph “(2),” until User’s contractual obligation theretofore incurred has been fully satisfied;

(5) assents, consents, and agrees with Secured Party’s filing of any UCC Financing Statement, as described above in paragraphs “(3)” and “(4),” as well as the filing of any Security Agreement, as described above in paragraph “(2),” in the UCC filing office, as well as in any county-level recording/registration office;

(6)assents, consents, and agrees that any and all such filings described in paragraphs “(4)” and “(5)” above are not, and may not be considered, bogus, and that User will not claim that any such filing is bogus;

(7) promises unconditionally to accept, has present intention to authenticate and accept, and hereby and herewith authenticates and accepts, as drawee-acceptor, any draft drawn by Secured Party to secure payment of outstanding unauthorized-use fees, as set forth above in paragraph “(1),” incurred by User through User’s unauthorized use of Secured Party’s common law-trademarked property;

(8) waives right of presentment and all defenses; and

(9) Appoints Secured Party as non-fiduciary authorized representative for User, effective upon User’s default re User’s contractual obligations in favor of Secured Party as set forth below under “Payment Terms” and “Default Terms,” granting Secured Party full authorization and power to engage in any and all actions on behalf of User, in respect of User’s outstanding contractual obligation as set forth above in paragraph “(1),” including, without limitation, authentication of a record on behalf of User, as Secured Party, in Secured Party’s sole discretion, deems appropriate and, as regards any deposit account of any kind maintained with any bank in/under the name of User, and likewise any deposit account maintained with any bank in/under the Taxpayer Identification Number of User, notwithstanding the absence of User’s name as account-holder on any such deposit account, grants Secured Party full authorization and power to originate instructions for said deposit-account bank and to direct the disposition of funds in said deposit account and execute demand drafts, as that term, i.e. “demand draft,” is defined at UCC 3-104(k), to discharge User’s aforementioned outstanding contractual obligation, without further consent of User and without liability, and User further consents and agrees that appointment of Secured Party as non-fiduciary authorized representative for User, effective upon User’s default, is irrevocable and coupled with a security interest. & User Further Assents, Consents, and Agrees with the Following Additional Terms of “Mutual Assent Implied and Express Contract Executed by Unauthorized Use of Secured Party’s Common Law-Trademarked Property; Self-executing Security Agreement in Event of Unauthorized Use of Secured Party’s Common Law-Trademarked Property”Payment Terms: In accordance with fees for unauthorized use of RESEARCH ONE™ as set forth above, User hereby assents, consents, and agrees that User shall pay Secured Party all unauthorized-use fees in full within ten (10) days of the date Secured Party sends User the invoice, hereinafter “Invoice,” itemizing said fees.

[weishaupt1776]

[b]Default Terms

In event of non-payment in full of all unauthorized-use fees by User within ten (10) days of date Invoice is sent, User shall be deemed in default and: (a) all of User’s property and rights, title, and interest in property pledged as collateral by User, as set forth in above in paragraph “(2),” immediately becomes, i.e. is, property of Secured Party; (b) Secured Party is appointed User’s Authorized Representative as set forth above in paragraph “(9)”; and (c) User assents, consents, and agrees that Secured Party may take possession of, as well as otherwise dispose of in any manner that Secured Party, in Secured Party’s sole discretion, deems appropriate, including, without limitation, sale at auction, at any time following User’s default, and without further notice, any and all of User’s property and rights, title, and interest in property, described above in paragraph “(2),” formerly pledged as collateral by User, now property of Secured Party, in respect of this “Mutual Assent Implied and Express Contract Executed by Unauthorized Use of Secured Party’s Common Law-Trademarked Property; Self-executing Security Agreement in Event of Unauthorized Use of Secured Party’s Common Law-Trademarked Property,” that Secured Party, again in Secured Party’s sole discretion, deems appropriate.& Terms for Curing Default: Upon event of default, as set forth above under “Default Terms,” irrespective of any and all of User’s former property and rights, title, and interest in property, described above in paragraph “(2),” in the possession of, as well as disposed of by, Secured Party, as authorized above under “Default Terms,” User may cure User’s default only re the remainder of User’s said former property and rights, title, and interest in property formerly pledged as collateral that is neither in the possession of, nor otherwise disposed of by, Secured Party within twenty (20) days of date of User’s default only by payment in full.
Terms of Strict Foreclosure: User’s non-payment in full of all unauthorized-use fees itemized in Invoice within said twenty- (20) day period for curing default as set forth above under “Terms for Curing Default” authorizes Secured Party’s immediate non-judicial strict foreclosure on any and all remaining former property and rights, title, and interest in property formerly pledged as collateral by User, now property of Secured Party, which is not in the possession of, nor otherwise disposed of by, Secured Party upon expiration of said twenty- (20) day default-curing period. & Ownership subject to trademark of common-law trade-name/trade-mark; priority perfected security interest subject to UCC Financing Statement filed in the UCC filing office.& Record Owner: Research One , Autograph Common Law Copyright © 1994 & Unauthorized use of “Research One incurs same unauthorized-use fees as those associated with , as set forth above in paragraph “(1).”
IJust wanted to clean this one up from all the html tags from the old software

Whatever happened to Research1?

[weishaupt1776]

I would save this link:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...te/3000837.htm

Jeb wanted to trademark his name. So if we have our UCCFS straight plus the trademark, should we default the DMV & issue them a self executing contract for using our tradename in commerce?

If the cop pulls you over, hand him your docs, contract & inform him of the charges & damages he could incur as a result of tarnishing your commercial identity.
With the self executing contract, any liens you put on them are now consensual & not non-consensual

[KIWI guy]

Hi!
ive looked through the many CN out there and when i came across the
NEW strawman copyright notice in the download section i noticed it was
a fair bit diffrent in (IMHO) to the many others i have seen. I was wondering
if it is the preffered CN or would the one earlier in this thread suffice.
The NEW one was reffrenced to minnesoda(lol) or somewhere in the US so i
have a fair bit of restructuring considering i live in New Zealand. Now for my
dumb question"do we all we have to do is replace the names respectively?"

many thx for all replies (:

oh yeah...
i also read the ctc3 errata/revision in the download section, it bascily told me to fix up my CN respectively, i was just a wonderin if that had already been done in the CN given in this thread, and if so , then that CN would be suffient(hopefully) only cause this NEW one kinda has me lost(lazy) with all the changeing of city and country goverment blahblah and im unfamiliar with the correct changes which mean more studying!!!