Santa Claus Oath Copyright Reminder

[Michael Rielly]

Just a reminder folks, the Santa Claus Oath (Oath) and the Santa Claus Oath Crest (Crest) are copyright protected.  For more information on the proper usage, please see this post:

 

[Santa Gordon]

As an Intellectual Property/IP/Copyright owner it is the onus and duty of the owner of the IP to address any infringements of the IP as soon as they become aware of the infringement. Care must be taken to be quick in this response as to wait will weaken your claim on it. However it is also important to make sure you are approaching the right party when citing an infringement. There is no "Copyright Enforcement Agency" that keeps a watch out. It is on the owner of the IP to be vigilant and act swiftly.

I support the Oath but I do not display it anywhere.

[Felix Estridge]

2 hours ago, Santa Gordon said:

As an Intellectual Property/IP/Copyright owner it is the onus and duty of the owner of the IP to address any infringements of the IP as soon as they become aware of the infringement. Care must be taken to be quick in this response as to wait will weaken your claim on it. However it is also important to make sure you are approaching the right party when citing an infringement. There is no "Copyright Enforcement Agency" that keeps a watch out. It is on the owner of the IP to be vigilant and act swiftly.

I support the Oath but I do not display it anywhere.

The IP owner can only take action to remove unauthorized posting themselves if they have the authority to remove it where it was posted.  If they do not, the only recourse they have is to either contact the site owner or those who do have that authority.  In the most recent case, it was 2 people.  One who created the discussion topic and the one who posted it under that topic.  Only those 2 people have the authority to remove it.  Thus, one of the IP owners reached out to both of them in an effort to get it removed.

[Michael Rielly]

2 hours ago, Santa Gordon said:

As an Intellectual Property/IP/Copyright owner it is the onus and duty of the owner of the IP to address any infringements of the IP as soon as they become aware of the infringement. Care must be taken to be quick in this response as to wait will weaken your claim on it. However it is also important to make sure you are approaching the right party when citing an infringement. There is no "Copyright Enforcement Agency" that keeps a watch out. It is on the owner of the IP to be vigilant and act swiftly.

I support the Oath but I do not display it anywhere.

And we do.

Before contacting our attorney we always connect with the individuals involved first. We often find that people post the Oath an/or the Oath Crest on Facebook or on their websites because they "just found it on the Internet". For some reason these folks are under the impression that because it is on the Internet, they can use it however they please. 

[Santa Gordon]

3 hours ago, Felix Estridge said:

The IP owner can only take action to remove unauthorized posting themselves if they have the authority to remove it where it was posted.  If they do not, the only recourse they have is to either contact the site owner or those who do have that authority.  In the most recent case, it was 2 people.  One who created the discussion topic and the one who posted it under that topic.  Only those 2 people have the authority to remove it.  Thus, one of the IP owners reached out to both of them in an effort to get it removed.

So, just so I have this straight in my mind and no mistakes, The IP owner (in this case the image of the Santa Oath Crest) is going to sue every facebook page holder if someone else posts the crest on a thread that was in no way discussing the Oath in any way. You will punish the page owner along with the actual infringer of the IP in an effort to control the image ?  Might I suggest you do it in Federal court then like "Barney" did?  

I would say that your lawyer is going to be working overtime sending out cease and desist letters. If this is about the incident I think it is, After Michael's rather terse request I spoke to the offender and convinced him of his mistake. Many admins on facebook have rules regarding the activity that happens on groups but what happens on individual pages that the page owner might not visit regularly to be held liable for third party actions is a bit of a stretch and then again it would be a recourse for lawyers to follow up with.

Much better if you can simply explain the situation and get the fellow to modify his postings (which i did in a long Pm exchange)

 

[Santa Gordon]

By the way? How much are you charging for the use of the emblem? For personal use. Such as I see on the various Clausnet members medallions?

 

 

[Santa Gordon]

The post by Ed has been taken down under apparent threat of legal action.

 

[Michael Rielly]

7 hours ago, Santa Gordon said:

So, just so I have this straight in my mind and no mistakes, The IP owner (in this case the image of the Santa Oath Crest) is going to sue every facebook page holder if someone else posts the crest on a thread that was in no way discussing the Oath in any way. You will punish the page owner along with the actual infringer of the IP in an effort to control the image ?  Might I suggest you do it in Federal court then like "Barney" did?  

I would say that your lawyer is going to be working overtime sending out cease and desist letters. If this is about the incident I think it is, After Michael's rather terse request I spoke to the offender and convinced him of his mistake. Many admins on facebook have rules regarding the activity that happens on groups but what happens on individual pages that the page owner might not visit regularly to be held liable for third party actions is a bit of a stretch and then again it would be a recourse for lawyers to follow up with.

Much better if you can simply explain the situation and get the fellow to modify his postings (which i did in a long Pm exchange)

 

Actually we have had only a few incidents where the attorney for the Santa Claus Oath Foundation has had to get involved. As I mentioned above. We always contact the person first to explain the situation. Nine times out of ten the person has no idea they were doing anything wrong and complies.

Thank you for removing the image from your timeline on Facebook.

7 hours ago, Santa Gordon said:

By the way? How much are you charging for the use of the emblem? For personal use. Such as I see on the various Clausnet members medallions?

 

 

I am not sure what you are implying. There is a Santa Claus Oath Medallion that has been awarded to several individuals over the years. The medallion is awarded to individuals who have demonstrated the highest devotion to the Eight Principles that make up the Santa Claus Oath.

The Medallions are not for sale. There is a lapel pin for sale however where 100% of the proceeds goes to support various events sponsored by Santa Claus Oath Foundation.

 

[Santa Gordon]

Not implying anything, I see the Emblem being used online and apparently used with full permission. My question is "How much does that permission cost?"

As for Ed, he did not understand the finer points of using IP online for the purpose of sharing. His intentions were fairly innocent but he did understand towards the end why it was wrong. And the consequences attached.

[Michael Rielly]

51 minutes ago, Santa Gordon said:

Not implying anything, I see the Emblem being used online and apparently used with full permission. My question is "How much does that permission cost?"

As for Ed, he did not understand the finer points of using IP online for the purpose of sharing. His intentions were fairly innocent but he did understand towards the end why it was wrong. And the consequences attached.

You referred to it above as "medallion", so I assumed you mean the Santa Claus Oath Foundation Award. If you are referring to the image of the Santa Claus Oath Crest used on personal websites, then yes that is allowed. As stated above, we do allow people to use the Oath and the Oath Crest on their personal websites (at no cost) so long as they meet the requirements stated here:

However, if you have found the image of the Santa Claus Oath Crest being used online somewhere without permission or it does not meet the requirements, then please forward those URLs to either myself, Felix, or Phil and we will investigate.

Yes, I realize Ed's intentions were innocent. That's why I asked both of you to remove it from your timeline and we appreciate your timely response. 

[Ol Santa]

Howdy there all...

        ...Ol' Santa here.    It appears that this matter has been well handled by all involved once the rules were properly

explained.    It would be my guess that the facts were unknown by most of us, and we should all be grateful for

members of the Front Office Staff who took the time for the explanation.    Just another great thing about ClausNet!

Ol' Santa 

[Michael Rielly]

Just a friendly (and LEGAL) reminder that the Santa Claus Oath and the Santa Claus Oath Crest (Coat of Arms) is copyright protected. You are NOT permitted to use the Santa Claus Oath or Santa Claus Oath Crest without permission from the Santa Claus Oath Foundation. For more information, please see this post:

 

If you are looking to purchase Santa Claus Oath items you can purchase them here:

http://www.ptsdrillteam.com/support.html

If you have any questions regarding, please feel free to contact me.

[Santa Marty]

I would hope that those members here on ClausNet respect the Oath and its copyrights.

 

Unlike some who have no clue, disparage those who enforce the Oath's copyright.  Some of those on Face Book have no clue, none what so ever, complain when they get caught, and then have the gall to do what ever "they" want.  They want to use it, think its free use, and not a problem.  Egos so big, they can not even understand the principles of the Oath, or respect those who have taken the time to create such a fine document.  I wonder what they would say if someone "lifted" a photo off of their website or used their image in an advertisement.  Oh well.

I know of NO Santa who has not been given permission for its use, IF they asked first and gave credit to those who wrote it.

 

This is why I do not especially like FB, and off the topic hope ClausNet never becomes like it.

[Michael Rielly]

6 hours ago, Santa Marty said:

I would hope that those members here on ClausNet respect the Oath and its copyrights.

 

Unlike some who have no clue, disparage those who enforce the Oath's copyright.  Some of those on Face Book have no clue, none what so ever, complain when they get caught, and then have the gall to do what ever "they" want.  They want to use it, think its free use, and not a problem.  Egos so big, they can not even understand the principles of the Oath, or respect those who have taken the time to create such a fine document.  I wonder what they would say if someone "lifted" a photo off of their website or used their image in an advertisement.  Oh well.

I know of NO Santa who has not been given permission for its use, IF they asked first and gave credit to those who wrote it.

 

This is why I do not especially like FB, and off the topic hope ClausNet never becomes like it.

Hmmm. I sent a friendly FB message to a violator yesterday. By chance does this have anything to do with it?

I always find it interesting when you see quotes from the Bible and images of Jesus alongside lifted content. Plagiarism is stealing.

[Chris Capstone]

I love Hatebook! 

[Santa Marty]

6 hours ago, Michael Rielly said:

Hmmm. I sent a friendly FB message to a violator yesterday. By chance does this have anything to do with it?

I always find it interesting when you see quotes from the Bible and images of Jesus alongside lifted content. Plagiarism is stealing.

Yes

 

The response was who is this guy and who does he think he is telling me what I can & can't do.  Not to worry Micheal, there was plenty Oath backers to set him straight!

 

[Santa Bill Reiller]

I agree with Marty.  

[Santa Kevin]

16 hours ago, Santa Marty said:

I would hope that those members here on ClausNet respect the Oath and its copyrights.

 

Unlike some who have no clue, disparage those who enforce the Oath's copyright.  Some of those on Face Book have no clue, none what so ever, complain when they get caught, and then have the gall to do what ever "they" want.  They want to use it, think its free use, and not a problem.  Egos so big, they can not even understand the principles of the Oath, or respect those who have taken the time to create such a fine document.  I wonder what they would say if someone "lifted" a photo off of their website or used their image in an advertisement.  Oh well.

I know of NO Santa who has not been given permission for its use, IF they asked first and gave credit to those who wrote it.

 

This is why I do not especially like FB, and off the topic hope ClausNet never becomes like it.

Right you are Marty and Michael

[Michael Rielly]

Thanks for the support everyone.

I take a lot of slings and arrows for being the bad guy on these situations and I am sorry if I come off as a jerk on the matter sometimes. The problem is we have had so many people attempting to pass off the Oath and the Crest as their own or attempting to profit from it. It is frustrating, not to mention exhausting.

I always lead with a positive attitude when contacting violators. It's only when they start attacking me that I push back. When that happens I just let the attorney handle it. It's less stress for me.