It seems like you basically have ideas for products that already exist--- either a slight change and some branding or a way or sell certain products together. It will be very difficult for you to monetize these types of concepts.
You cannot copyright ideas. Period. With respect to alternatively trying to obtain a patent, it does not appear that you have anything that could be patented. Maybe (and this is a stretch) your "basic product with a twist" could be patented, but there are...
It is sad that you have to consider these types of things, but it is also necessary. You may want to speak with an estate planning attorney to audit your situation and make sure that your current set up will protect you and your assets.
Beyond speaking with an attorney, you may also want to have someone -whether attorney, CPA, etc - routinely monitoring your finances and accounts to ensure that there is no misappropriation, etc.
Speak to a good estate planning lawyer.
In my experience, law enforcement are unlikely to do much about this. Your best bet is writing to the websites and asking them to take the content down, or, pursuing a private lawsuit. The former is quicker, easier and cheaper.
The alternative, of course, is pursuing a lawsuit. You would file what is called a John Doe lawsuit. You sue John Doe for defamation, then you subpoena records from the ISP so you can unmask the person behind the IP address. Once you get the person's name,...
You're going to have to hire a lawyer and file a John Doe lawsuit for copyright infringement. Basically, you named John Doe as the defendant because you do not know the true identity of the person behind the counterfeit website. A case like this is pursued in federal court. Once the case is filed, you will have the ability to engage in discovery. At that point, you serve a subpoena on the internet service provider or any other party that might have John Doe's true identity. Once you obtain...
I second Heather's advice. This is a very serious situation. Please (1) go back to the police and (2) alert the campus authorities. Do not stop until you find someone who will listen and intervene to ensure your safety.
As others have suggested, you should consult with an attorney immediately. Unfortunately, a great deal of time has already elapsed and you may be time-barred. Even focusing on the most recent events, those occurred in 2007, so roughly five years ago (or more). Unfortunately, many of the relevant causes of action (fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, even racketeering) have four-year statutes of limitations.
One alternative possibility may be a civil theft claim, which has a 5-year statute...
The Baker Act is a double edged sword. Although I understand the reasoning behind the Act, it is abused far too often. Many people are wrongfully Baker Acted and left with no remedy.
This is a complicated scenario and more facts would be necessary to flesh out a possible course of action. That said, my initial take is that you may have a variety of tools at your disposal. You should absolutely consult with an attorney about how to proceed. A good attorney may be able to pursue claims...
As Mr. Matthews notes, the answer will depend on what agreements you signed. In many instances, a company that hires someone to create software will have the employee or contractor sign a "work for hire" agreement. A work for hire agreement basically indicates that the creative work becomes property of the company. You may have signed one of those at some point.
Technically there is no such thing as a motion for reconsideration. You are probably talking about either a Rule 59 motion (to alter or amend the judgment) or a Rule 60 motion (for relief from the judgment).
The applicable rule is FRAP 4(a). The clock will essentially "re-start" once the court disposes of certain post-judgment motions (including but not limited to 59 and 60).
First, I hate things like this--- this happens all the time. I have seen so many instances in which there is a sort of bait and switch: Everything is supposed to be covered, per-registered, etc. But then something changes and there is a balance owed to the hospital. I have even heard of instances in which the hospital was paid, but the doctor tried to bill the patient after the fact.
In my book, this type of conduct constitutes a false/deceptive trade practice.