|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > March 2005 > Consumer Alert: Alcon LADARVision
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Consumer Alert: Alcon LADARVision
|
|
|
|
| Ragnar 2005-02-01, 2:47 pm |
| Rebecca... without arguing the merits of the information there...
just what are you doing making up a website intending to "spoof"
people into thinking they are going to an Alcon website when it is in
fact YOU and Lasermyeye?
You wouldn't like it if someone made up a website called
lasermyeyeS.com whose content was some advertising for refractive
surgery.
Can't you be a malcontent without taking cheap shots and deceiving
people?
On 1 Feb 2005 10:42:02 -0800, rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org wrote:
>Please see www.alconladarvision.com.
>
>Rebecca Petris
>www.lasermyeye.org
| |
| rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org 2005-02-01, 2:47 pm |
|
Ragnar wrote:
> Rebecca... without arguing the merits of the information there...
> just what are you doing making up a website intending to "spoof"
> people into thinking they are going to an Alcon website when it is in
> fact YOU and Lasermyeye?
> Can't you be a malcontent without taking cheap shots and deceiving
> people?
There is no deceit, nor cheap shots, nor spoofing intended (with the
exception of the off-centre eyeball - blame that on creative license I
give my designer - and really, you ought to sympathise with that part
considering you were the one who brought up an association between
decentrations and the Ladarvision in this forum!)
It is unlikely anyone would stumble across the site by accident or in
fact in any other context than as a link from LaserMyEye or link posted
by myself.
But even if they do, it should be immediately apparent to them that it
is not an Alcon sponsored site, as I have gone to considerable length
to make that fact prominent and clear from things like "Presented by
LaserMyEye" displayed prominently at the top and the very first content
item being "FAQ: Who we are and why we have issued a consumer alert".
| |
| rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org 2005-02-01, 2:47 pm |
|
Ragnar wrote:
> You wouldn't like it if someone made up a website called
> lasermyeyeS.com whose content was some advertising for refractive
> surgery.
p.s. Too late - it's already taken! 
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-02-01, 2:47 pm |
| Rebecca certainly has not revealed to me why she selected
AlconLadarVision.com for her anti-Alcon website, but it may be because
Internet search engines often consider what words are included in a
domain when they decide what website is listed first. By including
both Alcon and LadarVision in her domain name, someone searching for
"Alcon LadarVision" is likely to have her website come up high in the
list, possibly even higher than Alcon's actual website.
Whether or not it is legal to use two registered trade names in a
website domain not owned or operated by anyone affiliated with those
trade names is another issue.
Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
I am not a doctor.
| |
|
| On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 13:50:33 -0500, Ragnar wrote
(in article <qojvv0hf0mj0i2aolgkvvk0lrcmgvo86u6@4ax.com> ):
> Rebecca... without arguing the merits of the information there... just what
> are you doing making up a website intending to "spoof" people into thinking
> they are going to an Alcon website when it is in fact YOU and Lasermyeye? You
> wouldn't like it if someone made up a website called lasermyeyeS.com whose
> content was some advertising for refractive surgery.
>
> Can't you be a malcontent without taking cheap shots and deceiving people?
A website like this, or CRQSA's redirection of 50+ domains (similar to
anti-LASIK sites) to its main site serves the same purpose. To present a
certain message. The intention is the same, to get as many people to see the
"truth" as possible.
--
~RT
________________________________________________
Hogwasher, Premier News and Mail for OS X
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.../hogwasher.html
________________________________________________
| |
| Ragnar 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
| That's not my point.
My point is that why are you putting up a website which one would
assume to be an Alcon website when it is in fact, quite the opposite?
Is this the way you conduct yourself?
Whatever your message is, when you lose your credibility, your message
is not only lost, it often backfires.
On 1 Feb 2005 11:51:09 -0800, rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org wrote:
>
>Ragnar wrote:
>
>There is no deceit, nor cheap shots, nor spoofing intended (with the
>exception of the off-centre eyeball - blame that on creative license I
>give my designer - and really, you ought to sympathise with that part
>considering you were the one who brought up an association between
>decentrations and the Ladarvision in this forum!)
>
>It is unlikely anyone would stumble across the site by accident or in
>fact in any other context than as a link from LaserMyEye or link posted
>by myself.
>
>But even if they do, it should be immediately apparent to them that it
>is not an Alcon sponsored site, as I have gone to considerable length
>to make that fact prominent and clear from things like "Presented by
>LaserMyEye" displayed prominently at the top and the very first content
>item being "FAQ: Who we are and why we have issued a consumer alert".
| |
| johnmdoe123@yahoo.com 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
|
Glenn - USAEyes.org wrote:
> Whether or not it is legal to use two registered trade names in a
> website domain not owned or operated by anyone affiliated with those
> trade names is another issue.
Gee, that sounds really ominous.
Maybe you should go enlighten those poor fools who run
www.paypalsucks.com, www.ihatemicrosoft.com, and the approximately ten
billion other websites with a registered trade name in the domain that
aren't registered to the company itself.
They might get (shudder) SUED!
| |
| Richard 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
| johnmdoe123@yahoo.com wrote in news:1107293633.488754.76780
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> Glenn - USAEyes.org wrote:
>
>
>
> Gee, that sounds really ominous.
>
> Maybe you should go enlighten those poor fools who run
> www.paypalsucks.com, www.ihatemicrosoft.com, and the approximately ten
> billion other websites with a registered trade name in the domain that
> aren't registered to the company itself.
>
> They might get (shudder) SUED!
>
Actually, many have, generally ones that used it more like
alconladarvision rather than ones that used it in a phrase like you
suggest. Generally, the owner of the website has just ended up having to
relinquish the domain name.
--
Richard
| |
| rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
|
Richard wrote:
>
> Actually, many have, generally ones that used it more like
> alconladarvision rather than ones that used it in a phrase like you
> suggest. Generally, the owner of the website has just ended up
having to
> relinquish the domain name.
Richard,
I'm aware of this. As it happens "Alcon Ladarvision" is not trademarked
at the USPTO. However, if a serious complaint were to be lodged by the
owner of either part of the name individually I would cheerfully
relinquish the domain and set up another - or others - under a related
name (though I daresay I wouldn't be ambitious enough to rival Glenn's
150+ domain acquisitions).
Funnily enough, the URL www.alconladarvision.com was an impulse
purchase on my part, and I'm in no way wedded to the name as such. It's
not as though I would expect it to enhance visibility (last I checked
Ladarvision produces something like 20,000 hits on Google, mine is low
traffic and I don't exactly expect a stampede merely from posting the
link in a couple of internet forums).
Rebecca Petris
www.lasermyeye.org
| |
| serebel 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
|
rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org wrote:
> I'm aware of this. As it happens "Alcon Ladarvision" is not
trademarked
> at the USPTO. However, if a serious complaint were to be lodged by
the
> owner of either part of the name individually I would cheerfully
> relinquish the domain and set up another - or others - under a
related
> name (though I daresay I wouldn't be ambitious enough to rival
Glenn's
> 150+ domain acquisitions).
>
> Funnily enough, the URL www.alconladarvision.com was an impulse
> purchase on my part, and I'm in no way wedded to the name as such.
It's
> not as though I would expect it to enhance visibility (last I checked
> Ladarvision produces something like 20,000 hits on Google, mine is
low
> traffic and I don't exactly expect a stampede merely from posting the
> link in a couple of internet forums).
>
> Rebecca Petris
> www.lasermyeye.org
Ah Rebecca,
Way to stoop to Brent Hanson's tactics. The loonies on your website are
just drooling at this. I see your so called truth won't stand on it's
own.
If it's any consolation, Hanson won't sue.
SErebel
| |
| Ragnar 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
| You missed my point again.
By blatantly and intentionally misleading people, you are destroying
your OWN credibility (as if you had any).
On 1 Feb 2005 16:19:53 -0800, rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org wrote:
>
>Richard wrote:
>having to
>
>Richard,
>
>I'm aware of this. As it happens "Alcon Ladarvision" is not trademarked
>at the USPTO. However, if a serious complaint were to be lodged by the
>owner of either part of the name individually I would cheerfully
>relinquish the domain and set up another - or others - under a related
>name (though I daresay I wouldn't be ambitious enough to rival Glenn's
>150+ domain acquisitions).
>
>Funnily enough, the URL www.alconladarvision.com was an impulse
>purchase on my part, and I'm in no way wedded to the name as such. It's
>not as though I would expect it to enhance visibility (last I checked
>Ladarvision produces something like 20,000 hits on Google, mine is low
>traffic and I don't exactly expect a stampede merely from posting the
>link in a couple of internet forums).
>
>Rebecca Petris
>www.lasermyeye.org
| |
|
| Hmmm. How come it's "bad" when Rebecca is "blatantly and intentionally
misleading people," but when Glenn Hagele blatantly and intentionally
misleads people by claiming on his web site to be a public benefit
corporation, instead of disclosing his true purpose as a business
league/trade organization engaged in promoting refractive
surgery/surgeons, that's not "bad." He can't destroy his credibility
because he has none to begin with.
................................................................................................
CRSQA represents CRSQA surgeons and Glenn Hagele. Period.
................................................................................................
Ragnar wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> You missed my point again.
> By blatantly and intentionally misleading people, you are destroying
> your OWN credibility (as if you had any).
>
>
> On 1 Feb 2005 16:19:53 -0800, rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org wrote:
>
you[vbcol=seagreen]
trademarked[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
related[vbcol=seagreen]
Glenn's[vbcol=seagreen]
It's[vbcol=seagreen]
checked[vbcol=seagreen]
low[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
| |
| Ragnar 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
| I might ask you the reverse.. why do you attack Glenn mercilessly..
yet you don't go after Rebecca at all when she is blatantly deceiving
people.. intentionally luring people to a website whose content is
exactly the opposite of what one would assume?
On 1 Feb 2005 20:39:34 -0800, "xeno" <xenoparadox@peacemail.com>
wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Hmmm. How come it's "bad" when Rebecca is "blatantly and intentionally
>misleading people," but when Glenn Hagele blatantly and intentionally
>misleads people by claiming on his web site to be a public benefit
>corporation, instead of disclosing his true purpose as a business
>league/trade organization engaged in promoting refractive
>surgery/surgeons, that's not "bad." He can't destroy his credibility
>because he has none to begin with.
>...............................................................................................
>CRSQA represents CRSQA surgeons and Glenn Hagele. Period.
>...............................................................................................
>
>
>Ragnar wrote:
>you
>trademarked
>the
>related
>Glenn's
>It's
>checked
>low
>the
| |
|
| The web site, www.alconladarvision.com, very clearly states that the
site is operated by LME and goes into detail about who and what the
site is. The truth is quite prominently displayed.
On the other hand, you have other fingers.....NOWHERE on his site does
Glenn state that CRSQA is a business league/trade organization whose
purpose is to further the interests of refractive surgery/surgeons,
while he quite deliberately and intentionally chooses to mislead the
public into believing he is a public benefit corporation and patient
advocacy organization. The truth is nowhere displayed.
OH, and let us not forget Glenn's obsession with buying up any and all
similar or unused domain names/extensions of other legal entities and
pointing them all to his site in an attempt to mislead the public, once
again.
..................................................................................................
CRSQA represents CRSQA surgeons and Glenn Hagele. Period.
..................................................................................................
Ragnar wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> I might ask you the reverse.. why do you attack Glenn mercilessly..
> yet you don't go after Rebecca at all when she is blatantly deceiving
> people.. intentionally luring people to a website whose content is
> exactly the opposite of what one would assume?
>
> On 1 Feb 2005 20:39:34 -0800, "xeno" <xenoparadox@peacemail.com>
> wrote:
>
intentionally[vbcol=seagreen]
intentionally[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>...............................................................................................
>
>...............................................................................................
destroying[vbcol=seagreen]
by[vbcol=seagreen]
such.[vbcol=seagreen]
is[vbcol=seagreen]
| |
| theOmega 2005-02-03, 11:07 am |
| I thought this was a support site and all I'm seeing are individuals using
this network to boost their search rankings for whatever agenda they are
pushing.
C'mon. Look at the topic and content of this thread.
"Consumer Alert: Alcon LADARVision
Please see www.alconladarvision.com"
There is no agenda there BUT to mislead by getting the site indexed
whenever Alcon is searched and getting clicked on when a user thinks its a
legitimate link. Guerilla marketing at its best.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| Apples and bicycles. CRSQA is not a trade organization and the work
we have done over the years shows our purpose. Rebecca's use of the
trade names of the laser manufacturer in her anti-Alcon website may
mislead someone to believe the website is a genuine Alcon LADARvision
website, at least long enough to get someone to visit her website.
I'm sure Rebecca delights at the thought of someone seeking
information from a legitimate website finding instead all her
anti-Alcon propaganda.
But Rebecca does make a very good point. If Alcon does not care to
defend their rights to their own trademarks, why should she?
Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
I am not a doctor.
| |
|
| On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 00:16:44 -0500, Glenn - USAEyes.org wrote
(in article <85o001deenc491mfgma5c2valo01e23v49@4ax.com> ):
> I'm sure Rebecca delights at the thought of someone seeking information from
> a legitimate website finding instead all her anti-Alcon propaganda.
As you must when someone thinks they are connecting to an anti-LASIK website
and gets CRSQA instead. I really don't see any difference between what
Rebecca and Glenn has done.
To fault one is to fault the other.
--
~RT
________________________________________________
Hogwasher, Premier News and Mail for OS X
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.../hogwasher.html
________________________________________________
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| Touche
I do think the factually substantiated, comprehensive, and reasonably
objective information at our website is something everyone considering
refractive surgery should see. I'm also sure that Rebecca feels the
unsubstantiated accusations on her website are important for people to
see too, and she is right...so long as both sides of the issue are
made available.
Thus far I have not seen her put Alcon's replies to the accusations on
her website. She has not included any of the legitimate questions I
have raised about the accusations and the accusers. If Rebecca wants
to present only one side of the story, that is her prerogative, but
since there is not a pro-Alcon website that refutes what she presents,
there is no objectivity. We attempt to put objectivity directly into
our website. Rebecca excludes a dissenting voice from participation.
Of course, it is her ball and those who want to play must play by her
rules.
Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org
http://www.USAEyes.org
http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org
I am not a doctor.
|
| |
|
|