What can we do about Skyride?

[EricTheRed 0]

And what effect is that going to have?

(Not being a smart ass but does this really have any effect?)

illegible usually

[bbarnhouse 0]

Quote

And what effect is that going to have

If nothing else it shows that the governing body of our sport does not agree with the business practices of skyride, its owners and/or subsidiaries.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

(Not being a smart ass but does this really have any effect?)

The bans/revocations clear a hurdle for decisive action in the federal district court system. Skyride and its proprietors can no longer claim official endorsement of their practices.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[PhreeZone 15]

Lots of airports are requiring proof of membership for insurance reasons. Trying to renew leases could be potentially a lot harder if the airport questions why the DZ's had their memberships revoked from the governing organization. Also if the individual members that had their memberships revoked that will make any student jumps that they do invalid for insurance claim reasons for thier students on that jump.

It also distances the USPA from the companies/individuals for lawsuits, liability and accountability reasons.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

I don't know much about these guys. Any chance they have enough outside backing to adopt silent partners/reorganize and trump their ouster?

Even if they have Joe Blow business and legal advisors an attempted end run would hardly be surprising. It should be interesting to review at least a summary of the board minutes, I personally am curious whether USPA or a dzo pool has assembled a core nucleus of paid or pro bono counsel, assuming more steps to quiet this matter are needed.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[PhreeZone 15]

USPA with 30000+ members and annual dues income of I think over a million dollars is having issues getting insurance coverage. The plans to go self-insured fizzed a while ago since the risk was too high. You'd have to have the million dollar insurance policy or be self insured for that ammount since thats the typical ammount airports are asking for. Tying up a million dollars is a big gamble when planes need maintained, fuel needs bought and staff needs paid.

And yes, there is a collection of DZO's out there that have counsel hired on this issue. Who they are I do not know.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

And what effect is that going to have?

(Not being a smart ass but does this really have any effect?)

The effect is that a world-wide recognizable organization, such an USPA, does not want these people as members.

This may or may not carry weight when a Skyride fronted business applies for CSPA or APF memberships.

The effect in the US would be detrimental in that they cannot 'pledge' to up hold the USPA BSRs or recommendations.

Bottom line is that they can and probably will continue doing what they have been doing. They can also recreate themselves under a new business name. USPA has added stronger language to the Group Membership that supposedly will prevent these people from reapplying under a different name.

USPA has not changed their business practices. USPA has severed a social endorsement of their operations.

I would like to mention that the motions were passed without the support of any DZO[*]. Any drop zone owner on the BOD was not allowed to vote on these motions.

The vote was 9-3 for removing individual memberships and 10-3 for removing GM.

[*] meaning that the DZO could not vote. There are many DZOs that do support this action.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[PhreeZone 15]

Will the voting record be made public?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

Bottom line is that they can and probably will continue doing what they have been doing. They can also recreate themselves under a new business name.

Not if a court with jurisdiction issues a proper injunction which forbids them from doing so. I'm sure of this. Quite.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

Will the voting record be made public?

I can make my notes public, but they are not the official record.
BOD Members that voted for the removal of Ben Butler and Cary Quattrochi were:
Jan Meyer, Madolyn Murdock, BJ Worth, DJan Stewart, Chris Welker, Chris Quaintance, Scott Smith, MaryLou Laughlin, and Tony Thacker
Against were Gary Peek, Richard Schatner and John DeSantis

BOD members not allowed to vote (because they are owners of a DZ) were:
Larry Hill, Jessie Farrington, Sherry Butcher, Mike Mullins and Dr. Lee
Max Cohn and Mike Perry also declined to vote for other reasons.
John Goswitz had left the meeting to catch his plane back home when this came up.
Jim Jenkins was at home with an illness and did not attend this BOD mtg.

My notes show that Gary Peek voted to remove the GM of the DZs and that Max Cohn voted no on the GM removal.

This is definitely an unofficial accounting and may be subject to change.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[marks 0]

Quote

Max Cohn and Mike Perry also declined to vote for other reasons.

maybee they shouldnt be on the bod then....

i would have like to have seen there vote. regardless of what it is....

but i know why they didnt vote........ so no respect here.!...

excuse me. but honestly. i couldnt tell you why they didnt vote. i can only speculate.... but i have a good idea why max didnt vote... and all i can say, i dont blame him.....

but i still stand... no respect here...

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Bottom line is that they can and probably will continue doing what they have been doing. They can also recreate themselves under a new business name.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Not if a court with jurisdiction issues a proper injunction which forbids them from doing so. I'm sure of this. Quite.

The issue here is whether there is cause for a private injunction. For an injunction there has to be proof of a risk of irreparable harm. Courts don't like granting them if monetary damages can be paid instead.

Now, a governmental body, like a state attorney general, may have an easier time of doing so if the state's laws are being violated and injunction is a legislative remedy. Heck, in some cases private individuals may do so, but these statutes are being pulled back from private enforcement due to the excessive abuse of them by lawyers.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

The issue here is whether there is cause for a private injunction. For an injunction there has to be proof of a risk of irreparable harm. Courts don't like granting them if monetary damages can be paid instead.

“Damages caused by [unfair competition] are by their very nature irreparable and not susceptible of adequate measurement for remedy at law.”

“It is difficult to imagine an unfair competition case where damages are adequate to remedy the problem of defendant’s continued acts. If an injunction were denied, the court would be telling plaintiff to sit by and watch defendant continue to violate the law and infringe upon plaintiff’s rights until such time as plaintiff decided to sue again for money damages as compensation for the past injury incurred. Thus, an injunction is the standard remedy in unfair competition cases.”

5 McCarthy On Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 30:2 (West); accord McKenney & Long, Federal Unfair Competition: Lanham Act § 43(a) § 10:2 (West).

Quote

Now, a governmental body, like a state attorney general, may have an easier time of doing so if the state's laws are being violated and injunction is a legislative remedy.

You’re not going to get a state AG’s attention with this trifling (in their view) matter unless the scale of Skyride’s business practices increases measureably or a customer is physically harmed.

Quote

Heck, in some cases private individuals may do so, but these statutes are being pulled back from private enforcement due to the excessive abuse of them by lawyers.

Name one such federal intellectual property or unfair business practices statute that has been “pulled back” during the past twenty years. Certainly you’re not referring to the Lanham Act, which has *expanded* the availability of private enforcement actions by the addition of federal dilution and domain name infringement causes of action.


Lawrocket, I tend to value your postings on a wide variety of topics including legal ones. However I earn the lion’s share of my income from litigating intellectual property cases across the globe and I sincerely hope that you will bone up on trademark and unfair competition law a bit before posting on legal matters having to do with these subjects.



Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Lawrocket, I tend to value your postings on a wide variety of topics including legal ones. However I earn the lion’s share of my income from litigating intellectual property cases across the globe and I sincerely hope that you will bone up on trademark and unfair competition law a bit before posting on legal matters having to do with these subjects.

The Lanham Act itself was expanded a few years ago, if I understand it, to include trademark dilution. Individual states (like Cali) also have their own trademark laws.

I was trying (rather usuccessfully) to get to unfair competition. I dont' do much federal practice, but here in Cali the operative statute is Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. A couple of years ago, there was a law group in Beverly Hills that was using this law to file hundreds of lawsuits per year! Using unfair competition was SO easy that lawyers were flocking to it. Included in it was a section allowing injunction.

After word broke about attorney abuses (3 of them were summarily disbarred) of this statute, the law was pulled back, which basicaly mean that District Attorneys and the State AG would be the primary plaintiffs enforcing it.

A couple of years ago, gettign skyride here in Cali would have been a piece of cake for any "consumer protection" attorney. Regarding the intellectual property stuff, I got some pm's a few months ago and told them all, "I AM NOT YOUR MAN WITH THIS."

For pure IP law, sure, that's never been really an issue. It's the trade practices that seem difficult, and I would almost certainly defer to your judgment on this.

But, it is obviously more difficult than it seems. Unless there's been some serious action going on behind the scenes, I've heard of no lawsuit, order, or any other such thing affecting Skyride, meaning that the potential plaintiffs don't seem any closer to a solution.

How long does it usually take to get a permanent injunction for things like this in the federal court?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[marks 0]

Quote

Quote

Max Cohn and Mike Perry also declined to vote for other reasons.

maybe they shouldnt be on the bod then....

i would have like to have seen there vote. regardless of what it is....

but i know why they didnt vote........ so no respect here.!...

excuse me. but honestly. i couldnt tell you why they didnt vote. i can only speculate.... but i have a good idea why max didnt vote... and all i can say, i dont blame him.....

but i still stand... no respect here...

i want to apologize two these to B.O.D. members, im sure there are many reasons why you wouldnt vote, and it isnt my judgment to think why you didnt. i of course would like to know why.

but especially to max, im sure you have a good reason for not voting, and i hope it isnt the reason im thinking.
actually, it most likely isnt. i have a paranoid mind, and im sorry for making judgment on you.

hope you read this, because i would really like to talk to you, if not to only clear my conscience.

[LoudDan 0]

Oh I don't know.....I think the USPA may have just stirred itself up a small shit storm. Where's the popcorn, this should get interesting.

Coming soon to a bowl of Wheaties near you!!

[marks 0]

whatever.

uspa just cut it's ties, thats all.

[slug 1]

Quote

whatever.

uspa just cut it's ties, thats all.

A lot of DZ websights use the USPA logo as a "seal of approval" for the people looking for a "qualified, safe etc" DZ.

Does the BOD decision mean that skyrides DZ's won't be able to use the Logo?

Of course the DZ's will still have USPA rated instructor's and the skyride DZO's can start their own national skydiving organization with logo.

Why should skyride mess with lawyers if the USPA issue doesn't hurt their bottom line, otoh....if it does.

R.I.P.

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

Quote

whatever.

uspa just cut it's ties, thats all.

A lot of DZ websights use the USPA logo as a "seal of approval" for the people looking for a "qualified, safe etc" DZ.

Does the BOD decision mean that skyrides DZ's won't be able to use the Logo?

R.I.P.

That is seriously ironic! I once asked USPA if I could use (get them to send me a copy of) the USPA logo, the response was basically NO. They take the stance of “protecting” the use of the USPA logo. So the irony is that if what you say is true, those DZs are using the USPA logo without permission (intellectual property issue?), and now you think that because USPA has pulled group and individual membership the Skyride Guys will cease using USPAs logo because they no longer have permission!

For the most part the customers lured in by the bait and switch, boiler room tactics of the Skyride operators are not exactly “doing their leg work”, or McDonald’s mentality, as in I want it, and I want it now!!! Whether the particular boiler room they’re connected to is a USPA Group Member isn’t exactly going to be the first question that comes across their lips. If the customer did enough research to even know that there was a national association, I would guess that 98% of them would never be lured into the trap in the first place.

Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[ripcords 0]

Quote

Of course the DZ's will still have USPA rated instructor's and the skyride DZO's can start their own national skydiving organization with logo.

Oh you didn't know? They already have their own fake National Skydiving Association, the NSA, and all of their dz's are members of it. They have had it for quite a while now. It has a beautiful map of the nation with hundreds of dz's listed, but all links lead back to skyrides.

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

Oh you didn't know? They already have their own fake National Skydiving Association, the NSA, and all of their dz's are members of it. They have had it for quite a while now. It has a beautiful map of the nation with hundreds of dz's listed, but all links lead back to skyrides.

Now don't be unfair. Almost every dropzone in the country is certified as a safe dropzone by the NSA. You're probably just jealous that yours isn't. http://www.skydivinginfo.com. And remember, Skydive ONLY at SAFE approved skydiving centers.

Dave

[Thanatos340 1]

A New Low for even Skyride:

Sometime last year after Chris Martins Death (Owner of the Tulahoma TN Dropzone), Someone contacted the Phone company claiming to be Chris Martin and had the 1-800 number for his Dropzone redirected to skyride.

I would love to see any of the ASC/Skyride supporters try to defend this action. Hey.. Its just aggressive Marketing right??

Absolutely disgusting!! Hopefully someone can pursue criminal charges for this act of Fraud and Theft by deception.

[marks 0]

Quote

Absolutely disgusting!! Hopefully someone can pursue criminal charges for this act of Fraud and Theft by deception.

i beleive this was the straw that broke the camels back..

the attitude you will see some of the asc peeps. "i said some", is they will be thinking they are going to start a pissing match with uspa. kinda like pissing into the wind. uspa is MUCH larger, i wouldnt bother.

just move on and let the owners piss all over themselfs if they try to take action. and if they do take action, everyone can always donate a few bucks to uspa for defense lawyers...

i would guess it will be buisness as usual in cedertown, unless the county and the goverment find out. they required the farm to be a uspa member to get the buisness license and to operate, so i would think they would have to do the same for asc..

im sure more shit will hit the fan soon..

i also wouldnt be surprized to see the fbi make an arrest for identity fraud.

time will tell, meanwhile im going to make some jumps and graduate aff students and shoot some smiling faces on tandam vids.

[Ashtanga 0]

Quote

Sometime last year after Chris Martins Death (Owner of the Tulahoma TN Dropzone), Someone contacted the Phone company claiming to be Chris Martin and had the 1-800 number for his Dropzone redirected to skyride.

If this is true I will help anyway I can to assist someone in closing not only said dropzone but also Skyride. Albeit financially or through paperwork.

[Dougjumper 0]

Quote

Sometime last year after Chris Martins Death (Owner of the Tulahoma TN Dropzone), Someone contacted the Phone company claiming to be Chris Martin and had the 1-800 number for his Dropzone redirected to skyride.

Well, Im sure Beezy knows about this and is very aware of their intention. As for the latest info Beezy has purhased the DZ and is in the progress of updating things at the moment. We shall soon have the DZ in Tullahoma up and running in TN and sorry Skyride Buzz off...