User talk:MarkS7982

hwalibrary.com links
It looks like you've added a number of links to the hwalibrary.com website, which (as you are aware) another user believes are links to copyrighted material. A discussion about these links, and their removal and restoration, is underway here. Your contribution to that discussion would be very welcome. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 22:24, 4 December 2016 (UTC) MarkS7982 replied - I do not know what specific issue is being discussed, but HWALibrary.com has over 10,200 different titles, the person should be more specific. I have been having trouble with “Earl Timmons, The World Tomorrow Evangelistic Association claiming a copyright and Trademark to “The World Tomorrow”. They registered the Trademark “The World Tomorrow” US Patent and Trademark Number 3209903, it has a first use date of 20050122 and a first use in commerce date of 20050312. The media in question and given in the URL’s on HWALibrary.com was created under different Owners and Registration Numbers prior to 2005. One being under registration number 1382752 with a first use date 19550700 and a first use in commerce date of 19550700, the other registration number 0791994 with a first use date 19420601 and a first use in commerce date of 19420601. I do not believe the current owner of registration number 3209903 can claim ownership back any further than the first use date 2005 of their registration number 3209903. I believe the First Use Priority applies to the material in question on HWALibrary.com. For some reason they believe just because they registered a Trademark it is retroactive, but it is not, they have rights to material they produce under the copyright as of 2005 and forward only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkS7982 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 4 December 2016 (UTC) Now there is another issue, @MarkS7982, the rights of copyright date back to May 30, 1942. And @MarkS7982, is also in violation of both dad and granddad's materials. Copyright for all of Garner Ted Armstrong's materials dates back to 1953. Copyright owner, Mark Armstrong. The edits are legit. All linked content of the page is copyright protected, and while sourced still disputed as user Armstrongism noted: 19:07, 4 December 2016 (diff | hist). . (0)‎ . . Armstrongism ‎ (Undid revision 753014441 by Gtaeaicg (talk) the text is sourced, although perhaps disputed looking at https://www.ucg.org/world-news-and-prophecy/he-set-ephraim-before-manasseh)Gtaeaicg (talk) 03:21, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Gtaeaicg

I did some spot-checking, and if anything, most (but not all) of the links fail our inclusion standards per WP:EL. No analysis on the copyright violations, but if that is claimed, then these links should stay removed per WP:COPYVIO until they have been cleared (and merit inclusion in the first place). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:28, 5 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gtaeaicg (talk • contribs)

I also suggest that the site contains copyrighted material, and that the registered website owner, who spammed the links himself, is not the copyright holder. According to our article, these copyrights have a value and the website has no affiliation. Personally, I would not be happy restoring these links. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:42, 4 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gtaeaicg (talk • contribs)

The series copyright and trademark rights were transferred from one original producer/owners name, into the name of another original co-producer, in 2004. The series then resumed production with the same format and name. The producer named in the above collapsed thread, owns the copyright and trademark rights dating back to May 30, 1942.

Mark Armstrong owns all materials, video, radio, and print - of his father, Garner Ted Armstrong, dating back to 1953. Gtaeaicg (talk) 03:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Gtaeaicg

I read the opening paragraph, and I see the claim that the trademark was gotten not from the prior trademark owner, but from the government, which is something that one can do with a trademark that has died from inactivity. This is repeated in fuller detail lower in the article. I see that it is being produced by a different organization, not the Worldwide Church of God, but the Church of God Worldwide Ministries. --Nat Gertler (talk) 04:12, 5 December 2016 (UTC) The copyright and trademark were transferred, yes both were transferred, look it up. The US Patent, Trademark and Copyright offices allow Copyrights and Trademarks to be transferred between individuals and entities. Transferred by Joseph Tkach, Jr. to Earl Timmons. (While the original church changed names, the television series and radio series remained the same.) The big organized parent church split into smaller groups of churches and most are registered independently with the secretary of state wherein, as non-profits.Gtaeaicg (talk) 04:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Gtaeaicg

The site and user in violation, user @MarkS7982; http://www.hwalibrary.com, did indeed spam these links to his personal site where he has uploaded, and made hundreds of changes to copyrighted and trademarked materials he obtained from non-profit unaffiliated church sites and which he is now soliciting personal donations for at his site: https://www.hwalibrary.com/cgi-bin/get/hwa.cgi?action=donate. Clearly this user is violating the trademark name The World Tomorrow, and the HW Amstrong and GT Armstrong audio and video sources. Gtaeaicg (talk) 04:52, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Gtaeaicg

Reply MarkS7982; All material in question on HWALibrary.com is on or before January 1986 concerning “The World Tomorrow”. Garner Ted Armstrong was excommunicated from the Worldwide Church of God in 1978 (see Wikipedia); his removal did not transfer the Trademark rights to material held by his father Herbert W Armstrong, nor did the rights transferred to Mark Armstrong (very likely a minor at the time) in 1978. Mark Armstrong may hold the copyrights to his father’s (Garner Ted’s) material after he was removed from the Worldwide Church of God in 1978, but HWALibrary.com does not have any of that material on the site and therefore is not in violation of Garner Ted or Mark Armstrong’s copyrighted material. Also, neither of the Registered Trademark Numbers list Garner Ted, Mark Armstrong or Organizations of theirs as the owners (see Trademark Registration Number 0791994 and 1382752).

Trademark Registration Number 1382752 shows the “Prior” Registrations Number 0791994 which shows transfer from (REGISTRANT) AMBASSADOR COLLEGE NON-PROFIT CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 363 GROVE ST. PASADENA CALIFORNIA – to – (REGISTRANT) WORLDWIDE CHURCH OF GOD NON-PROFIT CORPORATION CALIFORNIA 300 W. GREEN STREET PASADENA CALIFORNIA 91123. There is no such transfer showing on the Trademark in question (3209903) of any -“Prior Registration Number”-. If the Trademark was transferred by Joseph Tkach, Jr. to Earl Timmons why does the Trademark Number 3209903 not show this transfer with a “Prior Registration Number” like the previous transfer shows?

The Trademark Registration Number 3209903 shows a first use date of 20050122 and a first commerce date of 20050312 for a reason and that is to show when the Trademark Registration Number 3209903 was first used by the current owner which is in 2005, this does not reflect ownership of any Trademark or copyright material held by a previous Trademark owner prior to 2005. Those Trademarks (0791994 and 1382752) were marked DEAD and not transferred to anyone per the “Legal” Trademark records. Just because a DEAD Trademark was registered it does not “automatically” give ownership of “all” previous material listed under “different” owners to the New Trademark owner Number 3209903, the New Trademark owner has a Trademark on the material they produce from 2005 forward.

As for “most (but not all) of the links fail our inclusion standards per WP:EL” I will be more than happy to explain the reason each link was added as soon as I know which links are in question. MarkS7982

The copyright materials were transferred by Joe Tkach, Jr,, to Earl Timmons. You stand in violation. The material prior to 1978 was also copyrighted GARNER TED ARMSTRONG PRODUCTIONS INC., and all that material transferred to MARK ARMSTRONG, a 59 year old man at the time of transfer. You are guilty of trademark and copyright infringement and can be arrested and charged for criminal theft and use of intellectual property. You are guilty of using a trademark name to draw Internet traffic and donations to your personal bank account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.255.133.154 (talk) 15:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I have been having some trouble with someone removing External Links and was wondering what can be done to stop them from removing the External Links. I had a discussion about this issue (IncidentArchive940) and thought it was resolved, but the links are being removed again. Can you give me some help on this issue?MarkS7982 (talk) 12:14, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * 1) All or virtually all of your editing is for the purpose of using Wikipedia to attract readers to a particular web site. Adding links for promotional purposes is contrary to Wikipedia policy.
 * 2) All evidence suggests that you have a personal connection to the web site you are linking to, in which case you should not be linking to that website in view of Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest.
 * 3) If you continue to use Wikipedia for promotional purposes you may well be blocked from editing by an administrator. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:45, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * The website that is being linked to is an archive library about Herbert W Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God. The pages that links are being added to on Wikipedia have direct references to both Herbert W Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God. Wouldn’t links concerning the material these sites (Wikipedia pages) claim they got their beliefs from be helpful to Wikipedia users? MarkS7982 (talk) 13:02, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Most editors hate external links and only allow a few on suffrage. If the data on the external site is useful for Wikipedia readers, then it should be rephrased in the Wikipedia style and added to the page. We do not expect readers to have to leave Wikipedia to find the information available - Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a google type collection of links. Ron h jones (Talk) 20:12, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Is there anything I can do when someone that was blocked (Gtaeaicg) keeps coming back under different IP addresses (68.112.80.243) and (174.255.133.154) to remove links?MarkS7982 (talk) 15:08, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Gtaeaicg is not blocked, nor has that account ever been blocked in the past. If you believe that a user is intentionally using multiple accounts or editing while logged out for deceptive purposes, you can report this at WP:SPI. Yunshui 雲 水 15:18, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I had a link on the EL area of this page (The_Plain_Truth) which links to the Plain Truth Magazine archives for all years the Plain Truth Magazine was published, but the user (Gtaeaicg) more than likely using IP address (68.112.80.243) keeps removing my links. The link is so users of Wikipedia can see what was published in the magazine from 1934-1986. There is no WP:COPYVIO nor do I believe I am linking to "vandals personal website". The website being linked to is an archive library (www.library.com) of the material of the Worldwide Church of God and Herbert W Armstrong which published the Plain Truth Magazine operating under the 17 U.S. Code § 108.

Could I please have admin help with this issue on stopping this user/IP from removing links?MarkS7982 (talk) 14:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If you cannot agree with the editor, then you will have to use Dispute_resolution Ron h jones (Talk) 19:43, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not the IP's mentioned. But I do have to agree. " If you continue to use Wikipedia for promotional purposes you may well be blocked from editing by an administrator." User @MarkS7982 is only editing these Wikipedia to advertise his personal website http://www.hwalibrary.com, where he solicits donations on copyrighted material he illegally downloaded and does not own. The Plain Truth for example already has the outside link to the magazine at http://www.herbert-armstrong.org. Providing another link to the magazine is pointless. Gtaeaicg (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2016 (UTC)Gtaeaicg User @Mark


 * You own no copyrights to the Plain Truth Magazine, but removing the links as if you do. I think admins here can see you’re claiming copyright to something you don’t own, and can’t prove any copyright to the Plain Truth Magazine at all, can you? Or is an IP address (68.112.80.243) claiming “it” owns the copyright to the Plain Truth Magazine?


 * Let me get this straight Gtaeaicg, I am spamming if I put a link on the Plain Truth page, but the site http://www.herbert-armstrong.org is not spamming their site. I don’t think either one of us are spamming. The site http://www.herbert-armstrong.org requires users to download large PDF files of the Plain Truth to view or read material. www.hwalibrary.com is a text based site that allows people to read material without downloading large files, it also has title indexes showing for each magazine. There is a difference and both links would be useful for Wikipedia users. Why aren’t they in violation of “your” copyright?


 * You and everyone else can visit www.hwalibrary.com and view or download 100% of the material on the site HWALibrary.com without making a donation at all. Donations are accepted ONLY for people that wish to support keeping the library available to everyone and the cost associated with the large volume of users it has. It accepts voluntary donations ONLY, they are not required!


 * If I have illegally offered this material under 17 U.S. Code § 108, why don’t you take legal action? You have been trying this all over the web and all other services have rejected your claims immediately when I filed a Counter Notice to your bogus DMCA claims. The problem is, Wikipedia does not require this and that is the only reason this issue is still going on. You have the Trademark “The World Tomorrow” as of 2005, everything on HWALibrary.com you’re claiming “as yours” is 1986 and before. Anyone that looks at your trademark number 3209903 can see it has a first use date of 2005. The material prior to that did not automatically become yours just because you registered the DEAD name in 2005, it was owned by someone else (see Trademark numbers above) and is not covered under your post 2005 trademark number 3209903. I know you will state it was given to you, but the legal documentation does not show the name was transferred to you, you simply registered the DEAD Trademark in 2005.


 * Seems kind of funny, the links you’re removing were there for a while, you started removing them with your false claim and now both you and “some other” IP address (68.112.80.243) is not you, sure! MarkS7982 (talk) 23:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Nice ad for your website @MarkS7982, but I haven't the faintest about your claims, or as to the rest of your rant. I do not claim to own copyrights or trademarks on any of that stuff. Your rant sounds as if you are having some kind of pending legal issues and a personal mental breakdown over it. Keep in mind Wikipedia is not a place for this, your cause, or for you to advertise links to your personal websites. LOL. Gtaeaicg (talk) 04:03, 24 December 2016 (UTC)Gtaeaicg No real problem that requires an admin Ron h jones (Talk) 22:46, 26 December 2016 (UTC)