rodyancy

If you can't stand that, don't read this http://cameronbsharpe.com/

It is his attempt to redeem himself after making a bunch of money and babies, drinking too much and snorting a bunch of cocaine, and ripping a bunch of people off.

Any product or service that provides real value to customers doesn't need MLM to succeed. That being said, these schemes make their founders a ton of money. SkyBiz was an internet based MLM in 2002. Their revenue was said to be 200 million a year. Although, eventually the FTC filed a civil suit and through a settlement forced them to close down.

"Not everyone can design the product they want - its quite a rare skill. You get wrapped up in irrelevant features."

This skill is hard to find in a startup because founders have more technical acumen than the market. In other words founders are "power users," and most markets are not.

Also, editing your own work, as in looking at something that you've spent months on, saying, "this sucks," and restarting takes a lot of discipline. For a start-up that is worried about its runway, the stress of doing so can be overwhelming.

It isn't absolutely necessary, but having an attorney send the letter will amplify the force of your demands. Also, as mentioned below, if you decide to contact them yourselves, you may unknowingly produce evidence that can later be used against you, or you may lose your head and make a threat you shouldn't make.

It shouldn't take an attorney more than one billable hour. Having an attorney send the letter may save you money, if you consider how long it would take you to research and write, depending on at what rate you value your time.

One thing, and you probably already know this, when you say "ask them to change their direction," don't expect to succeed in keeping them from competing with you. They have a right to express the idea that you are expressing, they just have to write their own copy and markup to legally do so.

I'm an attorney and I've done quite a bit of work relating to copyright law, so I'll chime in.

Copyright to your work is established immediately when your work becomes fixed in its ultimate form. You don't have to worry about losing it.

Assuming that your site existed before theirs, they MAY be found to be infringing. Emphasis on "may" because you don't have a copyright on ideas, only on the expression of the ideas, and it has been ruled that the "look" of a site isn't protected. So, for a court to rule that the they are infringing, it will have to find that significant portions of the copy, code, or presentation must be a near duplicate.

I haven't viewed the two source files or CSS, so I can't even an opinion on the significance of the replication in this case.

Regardless, there are several reasons why pursuing this in court may not be a good idea. First, your copyright isn't registered, so you have the burden of proving that your site existed first. To do this you'll have to meet with an attorney several times, file to have their ISP provide evidence that you will need to prove you case, suffer through the other side's discovery, depositions, etc. Basically, it will waste a lot of time. Second, even if you win you will have to show that you suffered some loss due to the infringement, and any monetary award will be based that loss. You're loss would likely be found to be the percentage of their revenue derived from infringing on your copyright. It appears that in this case, that would be negligible.

All this being said, it wouldn't hurt to have a lawyer write a cease and desist letter, and another if necessary. At the very least, that will force them to reword there sales copy, and rework their markup.

In 1985 I shoved quarters into a Gallaga machine, one after the other, without a second thought. Now, even though apps offer unlimited play, like the author, I'm hesitant to pay $1.99 for one.

Looks like you can self-administer for $340.

http://www.abcam.com/RGS14-antibody-ab14262.html#images

Advances run from 10k to millions, depending on how many albums the music executives believe you will sell, and how badly they want to distribute your album.

If the price of medical care were readily available, I believe the health care "crisis," as it has been called, would be considerably less of an issue. Once care givers responded to the transparency, prices would drop. Additionally, individuals would be able to determine the level of risk associated with purchasing more affordable high deductible insurance. Currently, most people just pick the insurance product that gives them the lowest deductible, never stopping to consider that the aggregate cost of their routine visits may amount to less than the difference between high and low deductible coverage.