Steps to take if you have been ripped-off by a copy-cat government website

bod1467

And the reason it was taken down was because DVLA is a trademark/copyright term, NOT because it was a "copycat" website.

THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED IN THIS THREAD!!! YOU HAVE POSTED NON-NEWS YET AGAIN!

hpuse

bod1467 wrote: »

And the reason it was taken down was because DVLA is a trademark/copyright term, NOT because it was a "copycat" website.

Quote please?

FYI, I have not posted any non-news, I have posted what "government has done" in black and white ..... you read it for heaven sake ...... i.e website is misleading and they took action to protect the public from using it.....i.e by accidental or ignorant clicks/google advertisements.

RichardD1970

hpuse wrote: »

Quote please?

FYI, I have not posted any non-news, I have posted what "government has done" in black and white ..... you read it for heaven sake ...... i.e website is misleading and they took action to protect the public from using it.....i.e by accidental or ignorant clicks/google advertisements.

Actually if you read it, it says "The address for the site" was misleading. No mention of the actual web site being misleading.

bod1467

hpuse wrote: »

Quote please?

No. I'll let YOU look at YOUR OWN PREVIOUS POSTS, thankyou.

It was from ONE OF YOUR POSTS about 50 pages ago (exaggeration maybe) that this was discussed and proven.

Run along now ...

hpuse

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Actually if you read it, it says "The address for the site" was misleading. No mention of the actual web site being misleading.

Another classic "love of copycat" tune.....
May this poster realise one day that it all starts at the "address" i.e a resource on the internet is damn hard to find ( for users, search engines and last but not least law enforcement official in this case) without it!. A copycat website is no exception?

hpuse

All,

You can go on challenging my post. However, fact will always remain.
Copycat penetration will be curbed by the government and we now have funds for it. It is a fight, will be a fight and of course will face challenges.... This forum is a prime example....no exception to it, I agree.

RichardD1970

The point is though, the address was pulled by the government because it contained "DVLA" which is copyrighted and not because of the content of the site as you claimed. Otherwise all the other copycat sites would have been shut down as well.

missprice

hpuse wrote: »

Another classic "love of copycat" tune.....
May this poster realise one day that it all starts at the "address" i.e a resource on the internet is damn hard to find ( for users, search engines and last but not least law enforcement official in this case) without it!. A copycat website is no exception?

You what?
Need more letters

hpuse

RichardD1970 wrote: »

The point is though, the address was pulled by the government because it contained "DVLA" which is copyrighted and not because of the content of the site as you claimed. Otherwise all the other copycat sites would have been shut down as well.

I agree, for DVLA copycats - it was a clear case of using Controller infringement actions of of crown copyrights and the department involved (DfF) and Cabinet Office getting involved and shutting them down.

For passport copycats - the only option was to remove Google ads to stop their penetration via search market. However, the website continue can to exists (or LEGALLY exist as people here call it) as their is currently no regulation or law to shut them down.

bod1467

Every word in that post is a valid English language word (as far as I can tell). The order in which they have been used however .... :eek: