Quote Originally Posted by 'Lax',index.php?page=Thread&postID=136275#post1362 75
Quote Originally Posted by 'Vyndree',index.php?page=Thread&postID=136274#post 136274
Quote Originally Posted by 'Lax',index.php?page=Thread&postID=136273#post1362 73
In the context of programs written, marketed and distributed by Lavish Software versus programs written, marketed and distributed separately of Lavish Software by Joe Thaler.
And I gave you an appropriate analogy. Bill Gates actions' reflect on Microsoft just as much as Joe Thaler's actions reflect on Lavish Soft.

In either case, the actions of the figurehead reflect on the company, and vice versa.

The specifics don't change my response.
Your analogy does not apply. If Bill Gates writes, markets and distributes "Billy Bob.exe" on billybobgates.com web site, it does not make it written, marketed, or distributed by Microsoft.
I didn't say that. Please read my original response. Do you see any implication of legality in my response, or my previous original version?

LEGALLY, yes -- they are independent. But to the common consumer, anything with the name "Bill Gates" immediately implies a connection to Microsoft -- legally or not. To us (the consumers of your multiboxing product), the name "Innerspace" automatically gets associated with "Bot", regardless if it was Joe Thaler's legal action.

It's a reputation. It doesn't have to be legal. Reputations are very volatile creatures -- they're immeasurable, easy to ruin and hard to repair. And, I will repeat, you've been responsible for upkeeping your reputation and your company's reputation -- so you've earned the difficulty in proving to your consumers that you (and your company) are trustworthy.

People, consumers -- we're not as easy to sway because we're not as black and white as the law. We don't follow the absolute path. You can tell us something is "legal" or "illegal", but just because legality is involved doesn't make it "right", "wrong", or more notably "trustworthy". Humans, people, consumers -- we work on unmeasurable metrics that the law attempts -- but is not perfect at defining. Just because something is legal doesn't make it trustworthy. Just because something is legal doesn't prevent us from making human associations between company and employee/owner. Just because something is legal doesn't make it unbannable or safe to use.

I have highlighted the important word in my response for better clarity.