User talk:OWAtech

I have forwarded your words to Prof. Willie W. Lu and our attorneys in S.F.

We have invested hundreds of millions in OWA technology and we have rights to protect our IPRs from unlawful infringement.

You have rights to block our account, but we have rights to seek protocols.

OWAtech (talk) 05:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

So, I enforced "Trademark and Copyright Exclusively Enforced for anyone or any company" in our website.

Also, our USPTO registration No and InternationalRegistration No. is:

US: Open Wireless Architecture (OWA): 2872772, 3161665, 3766531 WIPO: 1012567

Please remove anything termed OWA or Open Wireless Architecture from Wike sites.

Please forward to legal departs.

OWAtech (talk) 05:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You do realize that means blocking this account for use of the term, correct? Additionally, I suggest you read WP:No legal threats, as your above comment is also grounds for blocking your account. —C.Fred (talk) 05:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

If you do not allow us to post in Wikipedia, you should delete anything named "Open Wireless Atchitecture" or OWA in your Wikipedia, because both are our registed trademarks in USPTO.

Because you do not allow us to do so, I am going to remove the FREE License from our website immediately.

OWAtech (talk) 05:03, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Please note that if the "FREE License" were a valid free license, it would be too late. By putting the tag on the page, the cat would be out of the bottle. Licensing text under Creative Commons or similar free licenses is an irrevocable act.
 * That said, many trademarked terms are used in describing the products, services, and technologies involved. It would be impossible to write an article about Coca-Cola without mentioning it by name. Accordingly, mentions of trademarked terms or names of copyrighted works appear throughout Wikipedia. Only when the use infringes on the rights of others—the copyrighted materials or a confusing or otherwise mark-infringing use of a trademark—must it be removed. —C.Fred (talk) 05:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I have add "Free Copright License to Wikipedia and its users in that page (cwc.us/owa.htm). So you can allow us to post here.

OWAtech (talk) 04:50, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * That is not compatible with Wikipedia requirements: the contents must be licensed freely to everyone, anywhere, at any time for any purpose (with attribution), not just Wikipedia, under the Creative Commons CC-by-SA license. I strongly advise you to consult your company's legal counsel before doing so, as you would be surrendering rights to the content in releasing the content in such a manner. Additionally, you have a conflict of interest in this matter, and I am concerned that you do not understand the implications of what you're trying to do.   Acroterion  (talk)  04:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I have add "Free Copright License to Wikipedia and its users in that page (cwc.us/owa.htm). So you can allow us to post here.

OWAtech (talk) 04:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Please refer to the bottom of your cited b3g.org/owa.htm to see that: Delson Group Inc is the owner of this copyright.

Prof. Willie W. Lu, as mentioned in this webiste, is the chairman and CEO of Delson Group Inc, and the inventor of this OWA tech.

So why you deleted our post of OWA? OWAtech (talk) 04:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

B3G belongs to Delson Group, pls see: cwc.us/owa.htm or b3g.org/owa.htm. Please see the bottome notice of Delson Group.

We are the owner of Delson Group and I am working for prof. Willie W. Lu.

So why you deleted our page?

OWAtech (talk) 04:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Because the page is copyrighted, and there's no evidence that the rightsholders have donated the text to Wikipedia. If they are willing to release it, including unlimited commercial re-use and unlimited editing by others, then the text can be put on Wikipedia. Until that's demonstrated, the text may not appear on Wikipedia, because it is not free. —C.Fred (talk) 04:31, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Open Wireless Architecture (OWA)


A tag has been placed on Open Wireless Architecture (OWA) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  ttonyb (talk) 04:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you create an inappropriate page, as you did at Open Wireless Architecture (OWA), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Wikipedia cannot use text that is under an "all rights reserved" license, as the text you copied is. If the rights holders wish to give it away, you may refer them to the instructions at Donating copyrighted materials, but until they release it, we cannot use it on Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 04:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * One last time: Wikipedia operates under a free content license. The page you keep copying is copyrighted "all rights reserved" which is not compatible with the Wikipedia copyleft principle. You may not copy material from such a website without gaining specific approval by providing satisfactory evidence of permission to donate.  Simply stating so here is not sufficient.  You have been directed to the appropriate place: WP:COPYRIGHTS for further information.  Wikipedia editors will not contact you: you must follow the instructios to donate the material as free content, available for editing, use and revision by anyone, with no retained rights on your part. Please respect our submission requirements.   Acroterion  (talk)  04:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Blocked
There were a number of problems with the conduct of your account: you didn't clearly understand Wikipedia's definition of non-free content and how it cannot accept text under copyright. You have a conflict of interest with some subjects you have attempted to write about. Your username is a borderline violation of the username policy. However, your comments at the top of this talk page necessitated this action.

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

—C.Fred (talk) 05:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended or used for publicity and/or promotional purposes. Please read the following carefully.

Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, celebrity or other well-known individual, or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but it is considered inappropriate for such groups to use Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.

Probably not. See WP:FAQ/Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, or organization. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.
 * Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?

You are still welcome to write about something other than your company or organization. If you do intend to make useful contributions on some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:
 * What can I do now?


 * Add the text on your user talk page.
 * Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
 * Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, please see how to appeal a block. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  23:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)