ExtortionLetterInfo.com Forums - Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum

He strikes again... (2 replies)

anotherone — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:03:25 -0400

I too fell victim to Mr. Riddick last December when I received an email informing of a copyright infringement for one image I had on a website that I paid to have created in 1999.

When I emailed back asking which image was claimed I got the response that the 'identified image will be sent to you tomorrow' . I did receive what image it was which I had not even recalled being on the website as it is very small and was only for decorative purposes. That same day it was removed from anywhere located on my website.

I also received the demand for settlement verbiage that others have mentioned here but did look up the name and saw that it was a scam. I think I even found this website at that time and so forgot all about it until yesterday.

I got a certified letter from Image rights claiming I did not respond to a letter from an attorney's office from last year and demanding money once again. I did not get any such letter last year but this was enough to be upsetting. Once again I found this site and have solicited the aide of Oscar Michelen to help with this matter.

Thank you Mr. Michelen for putting me at ease and stopping my panic attack!

Looking forward to getting this resolved!

New Videos in the works! (1 reply)

admin — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 13:22:27 -0400

Hello All,

I have a small announcement to make. In the weeks to come, I will be producing and posting some new videos on various questions and issues that have been posted or emailed to me specifically regarding Getty Images, Masterfile, and the Riddick situation.

They will be editorial videos and should NOT to be construed as any kind of advice whatsoever. The best "official" advice I can give is to contact attorney Oscar Michelen for assistance. But for the more sophisticated reader/fighter, you may be interested in some of the comments I make which go beyond the legal realm.

The best example I can give is that I do take full credit for creating a strategy and hence this website for fighting back. Anyone who only does "legal think" (with no offense to Oscar or any other respected attorney), would not necessarily endorse or condone what I have done. In fact, many attorneys feel this approach of opening up information is too risky and reveals too much information. Nevertheless, the underlying concept is that it harnesses the power of groups and masses in the fight. Additionally, it attracts "like-minded" folks. Hence, all of us have the good fortune for Attorney Oscar Michelen to lend his name, mind, and resources to the fight. Another point is that I "went public" by posting my real name for all to see. With my business background and credentials, I saw it as a credibility-building asset.

I am not saying this to be boastful. I am trying to make some important points that I think people need to understand in fighting and defending yourself. I think many of you will be interested in learning more of the strategies that goes behind this website and larger fight at hand.

There is more to fighting and defending yourself than this website than most people see. I will finally take the time to reveal more information that might be instrumental in helping you not just in your case but in life in general. Learning to fight and defend yourself outside of the legal system can be a very important skill.

MatthewC

Riddick's Respect For The IP of Others (4 replies)

YetAnotherRiddickVictim — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:35:05 -0400

Some people on the Riddick forum have pointed out that he's 3 months from his "coming soon" message being a full year out of date. Others may have noted that he let the registration on imageline2.com lapse for weeks, during which time the site was offline.

Something I have not seen noted, the "more" link on the front page of imageline2.com. it's in light-colored letters in the upper left corner of the body content. It leads to... [imageline2.com]

Basically, here Riddick outlines 5 business initiatives he was planning to unveil last fall. The fourth initiative he calls "LogoWorks DYOL". The name sounded familiar, so I ran LogoWorks through TESS, the trademark search engine at uspto.gov. "LogoWorks" is a trademark of Hewlett Packard and the way in which Riddick claims he is going to use it seems to me to be a clear and blatant violation of that trademark.

Also, regarding the coming soon... when he first contacted me in 2008, he had that coming soon message up and it was out of date. For a while he'd update it every time it got a month or three out of date. Now it just seems he's given up.

Riddick and Imageline sued in Federal Court (38 replies)

stevep — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 14:11:02 -0400

Here is a summary of the case filed yesterday in Federal Court in Chicago against Riddick and Imageline. The filing goes on to explain why they believe Riddick's copyrights are essentially worthless.

NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This action arises from (1) Defendants’ false allegations of copyright infringement and threats of litigation against Bernina and its authorized dealers; (2) Defendants’ misuse of copyright to extort money and gain concessions from Bernina; (3) Defendants’ bad faith publication of defamatory statements about Bernina; and (4) Defendants’ malicious interference with Bernina’s valid and existing business relationships. Since Defendants, by their conduct, have created a real controversy between Plaintiff and Imageline, Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment that it has not infringed upon any valid copyright owned by Imageline. Plaintiff further seeks damages and injunctive relief as a result of Defendants’ defamation and tortious interference with Bernina’s business relationships with its dealers.

He's Still At It! (2 replies)

riddickvictim2 — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 20:44:14 -0400

Here is the latest email from Mr. Riddick:
NOTE: First contact is always labeled "3rd Notice."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please be reminded that the most recent discounted settlement offer made to
you, and the other officers and directors of your company, by Imageline,
Inc. expires at 5:30 p.m. (EST) tomorrow afternoon (Friday July 16, 2010).

Any agreement we reach with you to settle these claims and release you and
your customers from copyright infringement liabilities will obviously be
contingent on our providing you with proof of our exclusive ownership in the
digital clipart illustrations and designs we found you to be infringing.

If you have already decided to reject our offer and prefer for Imageline to
turn this matter over to our outside litigation counsel, please identify the
names and contact information for each officer and director of your
organization, your registered agent, and a licensed attorney who will be
representing you in this serious matter.

Thank you.

Copyright Compliance Team
Imageline, Inc.

(804) 368-8731 - voice
(804) 368-8721 - fax

From: George Riddick [mailto:griddick@imageline2.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 2:36 PM
To: 'xxxxxxx@xxxxxx.com'
Cc: 'dnoble2006@comcast.com'; 'gpaine3@yahoo.com';
'copyrights@imageline2.com'
Subject: New Judicial Standards for Copyright Infringement - 3rd Notice

Dear Copyright Infringer,

Since we have not received any correspondence from you to the contrary, we
must assume that your use of Imageline's copyright-registered image(s) on
your website, as previously documented and sent you on numerous occasions,
constitutes serious copyright infringement.

While we do not agree with the two recent rulings (see below link) in
Minnesota and Massachusetts that significantly lowered well-reasoned jury
damage awards, we are aware that these rulings will establish rough
guidelines that other federal jurisdictions are likely to follow, or at
least take into consideration.

[www.pcmag.com]

As you know, Imageline is in the process of filing a federal lawsuit against
you and your organization. We have sent you specific documentation showing
you each of our copyright-registered clipart illustrations and designs you
have infringed. It is also our view that the unlawful display and
distribution of images, which are often copied and infringed again and again
downstream, causes substantially more marketplace damages than the sharing
of songs for personal use. Therefore, we expect for the infringement
damages award in our cases to be much higher than the two cases referenced
above.

While we believe we will be entitled to substantially more than the
$2,250.00 per independent infringement (3 times the minimum statutory award
of $750.00 per infringement), as well as additional DMCA Section 1202
damages and all attorneys fees, we are willing to accept the amount awarded
in these two highly publicized court cases if you decide to settle with
Imageline before July 16, 2010.

Please also remember that your customers, who downloaded or copied one of
copyright-registered images from your website, are also liable for copyright
infringement and could have additional damage claims against you if you do
not try to resolve this dispute amicably.

Once we turn these claims over to our litigation attorneys these settlement
amounts will go up sharply. As of today, this case has not yet been
assigned.

Please have your business owner(s) or your attorney contact me directly
prior the end of business on Friday July 16th if you would like to consider
this alternative to a federal copyright infringement lawsuit. If you need
another copy of the documented infringements , please let us know that
request immediately.

Imageline has been actively fighting digital piracy for over fifteen (15+)
years now, and we have a well-deserved reputation of never letting a known
infringement go unresolved.

Please contact me via e-mail and let us know which way wish for us to
proceed.

Thank you.

George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.

My ridiculous experience with Riddick and Imageline (2 replies)

stevep — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 09:42:45 -0400

Six months ago, I received an email from George P. Riddick III, CEO of Imageline. He demanded information from me and alleged copyright violations. We don’t sell anything and our website is simple and clean. I was surprised. I immediately fired off a reply asking him which image was infringing, and asking him to provide proof of his copyright. He never replied.

A few days ago, six months later, I finally heard back. Riddick alleged I hadn’t replied, and demanded $2,500 for the alleged use of one clipart image, payment plans accepted. This time he displayed his allegedly copyrighted image next to the one that was allegedly on our website. The two images aren’t even the same – they are clearly different works. He still hasn’t provided any proof of his copyright either.

Attached to Riddick’s most recent email was an impressive sounding letter from a law firm, spelling out the trouble I was in. I thought it was odd that a law firm’s client (Riddick) would forward the law firm’s correspondence to me. I called and talked to the principle (head lawyer) at the law firm, and to my surprise found out that Riddick and Imageline aren’t even clients of the firm.

I tracked down the attorney who allegedly signed the letter. She now practices law in a different state. She told me she did not send the letter, and she even put that in writing.

I dug further into the letter, a Word document, and was able to determine that it was Riddick himself who apparently edited the document last. No surprise there at this point.

I contacted the cities in Florida where Imageline was last said to be located, and where it is now said to be located. Neither city has any record of Imageline, nor does the State of Florida, according to officials in both cities.

So it would appear after talking to officials from two cities, the State of Florida, and two attorneys that fraud may well be involved here; at least from the perspective that Riddick apparently sent me a letter on a law firm’s stationary which was not authorized.

If you get a Riddick email, do some digging and ensure it’s from a real attorney, then call that attorney and confirm they sent the letter. Also check the document properties on any Word or PDF document sent to see who last edited the document. I suspect I’m not the only one who got a letter said to be from an attorney, that was actually from Riddick himself.

Needless to say, I’m not paying $2,500 to this one-man operation.

Just received a Riddick letter (2 replies)

stevep — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:21:12 -0500

I had the honor of receiving a Riddick letter this week. He wants the name of our attorney and says "Whether you knew you were infringing when you first used unauthorized copyright-registered and protected works belonging exclusively to Imageline, Inc. or not, you are liable for copyright infringement under the laws of the United States and Canada."

New to us. We have never heard of him before this, and he doesn't even indicate what images are alleged to be his.

I also see that he has filed several federal lawsuits against companies selling his images. We don't sell images.

Anyone else received such a letter recently?

Two New MP3 Audio Interview Files Available! (no replies)

admin — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 05:44:28 -0400

Oscar Michelen and I have recorded and released two new telephone interviews which will be of tremendous interest to our readership.

The first recording is the 3rd update of our ongoing coverage of the Getty Images Demand Letter controversy. It contains the latest information, updates, and insights to the situation.

The second recording is "Filing a Lawsuit". Oscar and I discuss what is truly involved and what it means for someone to file a lawsuit. Anyone can threaten to file a lawsuit. But most people do not really understand what can and cannot be done through a lawsuit. A win is not always a win and lawsuits can be unpredictable if brought before a judge. Do yourself a favor and get educated on this. Whether you are directly involved with Getty Images letter tactics or another similar company, you will want to listen to this informative discussion.

These audio recordings are freely available by becoming a Priority Subscriber. Becoming a Priority Subscriber is also free. Visit our home page and look for the purple box.

Matthew Chan
Editor

Embroidery Industry Consumer Alert - We listened! (16 replies)

GRiddick — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:29:50 -0400

Embroidery Industry Consumer Alert

You asked us to take another look at our overall approach towards trying to reduce digital piracy in the embroidery design industry. We listened.

Although our new approach does not excuse anyone for unlawful conduct in the marketplace, we are now going to direct more of our focus on where we have discovered 95% of the infringing embroidery designs over the past four months of intense research, investigation, and documentation.

The most surprising thing to everyone we have talked to about this new focus thus far is the fact that the top nine (9) embroidery industry design developers, publishers, and re-sellers are all heavily engaged in copyright infringement activity and appear to have been so for many years. No wonder small embroidery firms do not have a clue what is legal and what is not.

Yes, names you thought that you could trust, like Bernina, Great Notions, Dakota Collectibles, Amazing Designs, OESD, Oregon Patchworks, Cactus Punch, Embird, Ann the Gran, Embroidery Library, Adorable Ideas, Artistic Threadworks, Embroidery Central, Brother International, Hirsch, and others, have been actively engaged in digital piracy and have collectively distributed tens of thousands of infringing embroidery designs into your targeted markets. Some of your own designs probably came from them as well.

In most cases, they have claimed they owned the copyrights for these pirated designs, themselves. Thus far, we have not found a single company who was willing to stop the infringing activity and notify their customers that they, too, were potentially liable.

As some of you have suggested, we are also carefully evaluating any and all major clipart software CD/DVD publishers and web site operators who may have misled you as to whether or not you could use Imageline’s copyright-protected digital illustrations and designs to produce digital embroidery design files for commercial distribution.

We invented the software category for digital graphic arts content (including clip art illustrations and designs) back in the early 1980s and we know practically everyone in this industry fairly well. We will notify you of our findings over the next few weeks.

We have led the charge against digital piracy in our industry for over twenty (20+) years. We have never lost a battle to digital pirates and we do not intend to start doing so now. We will reduce and disclose the piracy epidemic that has swept across your entire embroidery design industry during this decade.

Your future depends on our success on this mission more than ours.
Perhaps you can help us.

George Riddick
Imageline, Inc.

What if 'Terms of Service" or "Usage" change (2 replies)

doodlingmonkey — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:21:38 -0400

So much talk about who is responsible if joe schmo buys a cd of clipart at a yard sale if joe schmo now has the same rights for that clipart.

What if Joe Schmo buys clipart from some place such as drawings-r-us and in the terms of service at the time of purchase it does not state that Joe Schmo cant use the artwork to create say "stamps" with the artwork.

Then two years later drawings-r-us decides to go into "stamps" and decides that it does not want any of its customers to make "stamps". It discovers Joe Schmo is making those "stamps", but has been for 2 yrs now.

They tell Joe Schmo to stop. What holds up? The terms of service at the time of Joe Schmo's purchase, or their current terms of service, which Joe Schmo might not be aware of now at this time.

Joe Schmo printed his terms of service at time of purchase and has that, but what happens to the Jane Schmo who might not have the terms of service at the time of her purchase, and since the terms of service was online, the link now only shows current terms of service.

Should "drawings-r-us" have sent a certified letter to each purchaser of their designs to make sure that the change it terms of service was made aware of? Should the end user have to check for change of service terms before they use the product everytime?

Welcome! Please Read the Rules Before You Post! (1 reply)

admin — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:58:12 -0400

Welcome to the ExtortionLetterInfo.com Discussion Forum. This discussion area is dedicated to the Riddick/Imageline Settlement Demand Letter Controversy. Here you can share your story and discuss your situation as it relates to the Riddick/Imageline Settlement Demand Letters.

This forum is intended for intelligent on-topic discussions only.

* No ranting, raving, or cursing.
* No spamming or advertising here.
* No personal attacks or name-calling.
* No URLs, email or physical addresses in signatures.

Thank you!

Show Your Support: A PayPal Donation (1 reply)

admin — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:00:13 -0400

The extensive time and hard work put into this website and forum has been entirely voluntary. The information I have diligently researched, gathered, and openly shared is to assist the ever-growing community of Riddick/ImageLine Extortion Letter recipients. To date, this website continues to be a free service I have personally funded.

ExtortionLetterInfo.com has become the definitive informational website in the U.S. to combat Riddick/ImageLines's extortionistic letter practices.

At the suggestion of one our enthusiastic supporters, I have set up a PayPal Donation Button (throughout the website) for those of you who wish to show your appreciation and gratitude by contributing and assisting our ongoing cause to fight the Riddick/ImageLine Extortion Letters.

Help our cause by supporting the ongoing work and updates to this website by making a donation.

I recommend a small donation of $5.00 to $10.00 if you have found useful and valuable information that assisted you in defending yourself against George P. Riddick III and ImageLine. You may donate as little as $1.00 or as high as $100.00. You may donate as frequently or as infrequently as your prefer. But just realize this is an ongoing fight. I need ongoing community support to continue the work on this website.

Thank you for your continued enthusiasm and support in our cause.

MatthewC (Host of ELI Website & Discussion Forum)

My Position on the Riddick/Imageline Issue (Oscar Michelen) (8 replies)

Oscar Michelen — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:19:53 -0400

Introduction
I thought it was time I responded to some of the concerns and posts on the Imageline issue. I want to make clear that this post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every legal situation is different and needs to be analyzed on an independent basis. First of all, all sides need to keep a more civil tongue. Name calling, labeling, insults, etc, have no place in this matter and we should try to address these issues in a careful and considered manner. I for one will not engage in this behavior nor try to keep up with Mr. Riddick's tactics. He has made many derogatory comments about me and Matthew Chan on posts on this site and in private emails to us. He has questioned my abilities and my motivations and I will not grace his comments with a similar reply. My reputation speaks for itself and the scores and scores of people we have helped in the digital image arena for very little money are enough testament to my motivations. In fact, my motivations for being involved in this are spelled out on the home page of this website. In repeated emails to those who he believes infringed on his intellectual property, he often talks about how much intellectual property lawyers cost and how expensive it would be to litigate these matters or try to get a lawyer to even respond to his claims. So how would I, a partner in a litigation boutique in NYC, be in this for money by charging $150 for a letter and $150 per hour for litigation? Just google my name and you will see some of the high-profile cases I have been involved in all areas of litigation. It makes no sense to claim that this is a money-making scheme on my part. It makes even less sense to claim that money somehow motivates Mr. Chan, who created and moderates this site. He gets no portion of the $150 clients pay me for a letter to Getty and we just recently put up a paypal donation button (at the suggestion of one of the folks who posted I might add) which helps defray the costs of maintaining the site. Matt should be given credit for creating a forum for discussion of an issue that is of critical importance in the digital millennium and for giving information on that and other topics. Rather than attack him on his motives, point out if he (or I for that matter) has stated anything in error or falsely accused anyone of any impropriety. Lets try and stick to facts.

A brief summary of Riddick's claims

Riddick is the CEO of Imageline, a Virgina corporation that apparently owns the copyright to a collection of clip art and graphic images. He has begun a campaign, similar to Getty's, of sending out notices to people whom he believes infringed on his intellectual property by digitizing the images into embroidery designs. Some of these folks then sell these designs and some people give the designs out for free on websites. He demands very high amounts for settlement and often asks the alleged infringer to sign over the designs to him for which he will "credit" them against their claim. I have seen emails where he offers to give a $200 credit per design for example. He seems to rely on strong language and on the copyright law's allowance of up to $150,000 per infringement in statutory damages along with attorneys fees and costs. The effect of the email is to make the receiver feel as if they have very little option because the law is so cut and dried. From the numerous posts and emails Matt and I have been receiving, it appears that many people are agreeing to his demands and that many are also very concerned about their businesses and their exposure.

Is Imageline correct?

Yes and no. Let's assume for the moment that Imageline has registered the clip art that someone has used to create a digital embroidery design. That use would infringe on Imageline's intellectual property. It would not be a defense to the claim that the design was a simple one that anyone could have come up with independently (though his claim to owning flag designs needs to be examined more closely as flags are generally not subject to copyright, though a particular stylized version of a flag may be). It would also not be a defense that the infringer did not know the design was copyrighted either because it did not contain a watermark or copyright notice or because the infringer paid fair market value to another entity for the design. The Copyright Act of 1976 does allow a registered copyright holder to collect statutory damages and attorney's fees as well as litigation costs in successful copyright lawsuits. The law does allow up to $150,000 in damages per infringement. That's the "Yes" part

The "No" part is that it is highly unlikely that a court will award that level of damage in most of the cases I have seen. The users ceased and desisted in using the image once notified, did not make huge amounts of money off of the image and were "innocent infringers." Innocence plays a role in the damages portion of any copyright lawsuit. First of all, courts take that into consideration when assessing statutory damages. Second of all, the copyright law allows judges to reduce ALL statutory damages to $200 per infringement in cases of innocent infringement. Courts often do that. In fact , courts have repeatedly done so in lawsuits brought by the RIAA over illegal downloading of songs. Any certainly people are more aware that music is copyrighted than they are aware that clip art is copyrighted. It should also be made clear that Imageline could not get both statutory damages and its actual damages. It must choose one over the other. If it chooses its actual damages then it would be entitled to receive the fair market value of a license for the use of the image PLUS recovery of the actual profits the user made off of the image. It could not receive attorneys fees and costs as part of actual damages.

Of course, in any lawsuit, the alleged infringer could implead (bring into the lawsuit) the entity that sold it the offending image as being responsible for causing the alleged infringement.

In any lawsuit brought by Imageline, it would first have to prove its ownership of the image (easy if it has registered it) and that the design involved actually came from that image or substantially came from that image.

What should one do if they receive an Imageline claim?

First, evaluate if the image they claim you used infringes on the image they claim they own. Is it substantially similar, Did they send you proof of registration of the image?

Second, figure out how, when and from where you acquired the image you used for your design. Contact that entity and forward them a copy of Riddick's communication asking them.

Third, ascertain how many times the design was used, sold given away.

Fourth, contact an IP attorney. Don't just rely on the information provided here. Have a trained set of eyes review Riddick's claim against you. Call a local IP lawyer and ask what his/her consultation rate is (many are free) You can find one by using your local bar association for a referral or by going on Avvo.com or lawyers.com. I will agree to extend my Getty rate ($150 per hour) to this matter and will accept a four hour retainer to start).

Fifth, send an email back to Riddick advising him that you are evaluating his claim and considering retaining counsel. If you hire an attorney he can no longer contact you directly. Do not engage in a nasty back and forth with him as it will get you nowhere.

Will he sue?

There is no way to predict what a person will do. If it is true as has been posted here by others that his corporation is in default on some issues, then he will have to correct those issues before he can sue. He will generally have to sue you in your home state as it might be difficult for him to get jurisdiction against you in his home state. The suit would be brought in Federal court.

If you don't want to get a lawyer, the law allows you to represent yourself.

Conclusion

The best approach for anyone receiving one of these claims is to review the posts on this site and familiarize yourself with the issues. Refrain from a back-and-forth with Riddick and get some legal advice from a qualified practitioner in your area.

I will be glad to address new posts on this and I will be emailing this directly to Mr Riddick as well to give him an opportunity to respond

George P. Riddick - Survival Manual! (1 reply)

bullyriddick — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:52:24 -0500

I am not a lawyer, but a survivor of George P's extortion tactics. He tried to extort money from me last year, but after I told him he will not get a dime from me I did not heard from him in 6 months now. We will see what happens next, but I am 100% sure that I will not pay to him anything because everything that happened was unintentional.

After you received the first letter from George p., the first feeling is probably shock and disbelief because you can hardly believe that any CEO of any legal entity anywhere in the world can use such language. After you settle for a moment, asking yourself question like which images, where, when, how etc. it's time to plan your action against mafia-like extortion tactics used by George P.

1) DO NOT PANIC - George P. is trying to scare you and rush you into settlement by asking you to pay substantial amount of money without proving that he is right. In most cases people assume he must be right by writing such letters, he must be sure of what he's talking about but it is not the case. As we have seen on this forum, many people have bought perfectly legal copies of clipart and still got extortion letters from George.

2) DO NOT GIVE ANY INFORMATION - Usually in his first email George is asking to identify yourself and send him your address, phone etc. No normal human being would give his personal information to a complete stranger via email, especially someone who is threatening to financially destroy you and your family. Just don't do it.

3) DO NOT SETTLE - This is the most important thing. Do not settle, because you do not know if he's right and he did not prove it. If you do, you may become victim of further extortion with further consequences for your business.

4) CONTACT OSCAR MICHELEN OR GOOD COPYRIGHT ATTORNEY - This is always good advice, especially if you are in the USA. As it has been explained on this wonderful site, people often give up because they are not informed about their rights. As you have seen in his letters, George is boasting with 100's of settlements so far (I doubt that very much), making word extorter his middle name. Explain your situation to your attorney in details and see that a letter is sent back to the extorter.

5) [DELETED to stop false information and untrue rumors]

6) REMOVE SUSPICIOUS IMAGES - this is just in case. George P. will usually not tell you which images are infringed. He will continue to push you to send him your personal information and threaten with extreme measures if you don't pay. If you legally bought these images, you can contact the company you bought images from and ask for the confirmation about copyright. If you don't know the source of your images, remove them just in case. Let you attorney know about any new details.

7) CONTINUE WITH YOUR BUSINESS AS USUAL - you have contacted your lawyer, maybe police or FBI, you have removed images and now you can continue with your business as usual. George may or may not come back. It is still unclear if he goes on with his threats or he retreats after you don't give in. I am sure there are cases with both outcomes. This is something we can discuss here on forums.

This is what I think you should do. I would like Oscar or Matthew or others who had similar experience to give advice on any of the above actions (maybe I missed something or said something wrong). I wish you all good luck against George. Do not give up, people like him just must not win.

Riddick's World (1 reply)

riddickvictim2 — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:39:14 -0500

You reap what you sew and it appears that Mr. Riddick's seeds have really begun to grow in ernest.
Terry S and Mr. Riddick may indeed find themselves in court or worse.
Article:
[www.networkmirror.com]

Sorry...looks like the article is gone. Have you seen Mr. Riddick's damage control postings? "The perfect gentleman?" On what planet?

What George Riddick (Imageline) really wants ... (2 replies)

AnotherRiddickVictim — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 18:20:21 -0400

This is my experience with George Riddick. It gives valuable insight to methods he uses, and ways in which he operates.

First of all, he is not only targeting the embroidary industry ... he is also heavily targeting the graphics industry - e.g vector graphics, clip art, animations etc. My website belongs to this graphics category.

First - some brief background on my site.

I have a freeware archive site with graphics that I have collected and innocently believe to be public domain. I offer these for free download on my site. I have some google ads on my site - but get little money from them, just enough to cover hosting each month. what I'm saying essentially, is that I'm small time (financially speaking).

Enter the infamous George Riddick.

He sends me an email straight away talking about lawyers, me owing him money, damages, "flagrant copyright violations", etc.

I reply to him: "oh, ok sorry. I didnt know that some of the graphics owned on my site are owned by you. Just tell me which ones they are and I will immediately and permanantly remove them from my site". I'm thinking at this point, that this should resolve the matter - right!?

We are dealing with Riddick here, so of course that did NOT resolve the matter.

Riddick refuses to answer the part of my email requesting that he identify those images he alleges are copyright to him. Without this information I have no way of identifying and removing any offending images. His letters only contain more and more desperate, angry and obnoxious threats. In each letter, i ask him to identify the images. Each time he ignores these requests, and demands money/settlement/legal details, my name and contact info, etc..

We must of exchanged 5 or 6 emails like this before I wised up. I realise that he doesnt want to resolve the matter about me removing his alleged copyrighted images from his site .... no - he's not really interested in that.

******* What he IS interested in, is (possible) settlement money. $$$

Money. Money. Money. $$$

So anyway, Ive kept all my emails from him - especially the ones that show that I have tried to resolve the matter by requesting he identify them. In my part of the world, as long as you remove alleged offending copyright stuff as soon as its brought to your attention (and it is an honest mistake), then you (rightfully so, in my mind) have no legal case to answer.

I think that he realised that he wasnt getting anywhere with me, and I havent heard from him in several months now. Good riddance to Riddick.

I encourage others to hold their ground against such bullying tactics, and not give in to his idle threats.

Jeez ... the things I would love to say about this "gentleman" ... but I wont - I will hold my tongue !!!!

He is finally being exposed for the "nasty little man" that he truly is.

I wonder how men such as Riddick sleep at night?

Update to our story about George Riddick of ImageLine Inc. (2 replies)

BartPerry — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:49:59 -0500

I want to post an update to our story about George Riddick of ImageLine Inc.

for the past few days after receiving emails from ImageLine I went to work doing research. I have various contacts in the embroidery world, and contacted them all, and asked them for help in this matter.

We (all of us) started emailing, calling, and faxing Jupiter designs, and other clipart website owners asking for specifics of terms of use, who owned what, and to make terms of use cleared to the embroidery world.

WOW!!!

All I can say is the power of numbers works like crazy!!

One clipart site REVISED their terms of use to specifically include the use of images for digitizers, and Jupiter designs has sent ME personally emails stating they do NOT claim copyright on finished products such as embroidery designs, and that THEY (Jupiter) own ALL RIGHT TO IMAGES ON THEIR SITE!

This means, one of them is in trouble. And I assume that since Jupiter is the larger entity in this matter they will win! At least they made their intents clear now to digitizers.

My advice to others with problems with ImageLine is to contact Jupiter (clipart.com) and get it in email from them who owns what so you have a leg to stand on in court, and force it into the courts without lying down and giving up.

I want to thank the owner of this site. What has transpired in the past few days was nothing less then a miracle, and without this website to point many of us in the right direction, I don't think this would have happened quite so quickly.

Bart

A Clear Message (14 replies)

riddickvictim2 — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:15:14 -0500

From everything I read on this website, the message is quite clear. Do not purchase professional graphics, photos or clipart. Do not support “professional” artists of any kind in any way. If you do, you will be sued.

I have paid hard earned US dollars for every single image on my website. And along comes the likes of Mr. Riddick.
So again, the message that I get from Getty, MasterFile, Riddick, Jupiter and their ilk is very clear. Buy professional works of any kind and you will be sued.

It is sad that the UAW has killed the auto industry. It is equally sad that Getty, MasterFile, Jupiter, and Riddick are killing the image industry. There will be thousands of unemployed auto workers and an equal number of unemployed artists.

From this day forward, I will NEVER purchase a professional image of any kind from any source. Getting back to my website, it is loaded with images that I purchased legally. This was before the revelation that purchasing professional images will get you sued. The question that I pose is this. How do I make my website Riddick-proof, Jupiter-proof, MasterFile-proof, and Getty-proof. I am fairly certain that removing all images would adversely affect sales. Income from sales is what my family and these predators are counting on. Do I just start replacing professional images with home made images?

"Single Trail of Emails to One Letter Recipient" Comments (1 reply)

Crafty — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 16:07:13 -0500

The "Single Trail of Emails to One Letter Recipient" on the right side of this new page you just added [extortionletterinfo.com] reads like a Nigerian 419 scam. Thanks for posting those emails....

You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers. You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers. You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers. You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers. You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers. You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers. You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers. You better settle with me or I'll sue you with my new contingency lawyers...

... For 5 months! Wow. Those are some great new lawyers.

Pat

George Riddick of ImageLine Inc. Contacts ExtortionLetterInfo.com (5 replies)

admin — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:05:16 -0500

I want to report to everyone that George Riddick of ImageLine Inc. contacted me via email today to tell his side of the story. In fairness to him, I am presenting his side by sharing the email I received with you. I am actually surprised he found us and our reporting so quickly.

Because Mr. Riddick has brought up many issues, I cannot immediately reply to every point he raises. My open response can be found here.

===========================

Dear Mathew (sic),

When I first read about your “case”, I had some empathy for the position you found yourself in. We have suffered enormous losses over the years at the hands of design and graphics companies in India, China, Russia, and Brazil, where there are virtually no copyright laws to speak of (and certainly no enforcement of the laws that do exist).

The more I read, the less empathetic I became, however. Here’s why:

1. On your web site, you clearly state that it is your objective to present the facts from both sides, do your homework thoroughly, and provide some relief to end-user “victims” who end up with copyrighted material on their web sites due to the poor business practices and ethics of others, much as is with your case with the folks from India. That’s exactly what we do, Mathew (sic). Yet you posted the rants and raves of two or three disgruntled embroidery industry participants without making any effort at all to hear the other side of this “story”, or to verify what they have told you.

2. It appears to us that both you and Mr. Michelen see these “victims” as becoming another venture capital source of your new online venture. That is simply not right, Matthew. At times, “right” and “wrong” should come before the cold interpretation and/or enforcement of our law.

3. You made no mention, whatsoever, that Imageline has never gone after end-user infringers, like the music industry has done for years, or as you claim Getty Images, Jupiter, and Corbis are now doing. We only go after the “middlemen” (much like the company you dealt with in India) who are sub-licensing and re-distributing our copyright-protected property for their own commercial gain on their web sites and in their CD/DVD products, and distributing the pirated images and designs to others.

4. You also never mention that Imageline agrees to release all of the end user infringers (such as your company would be) when we settle with these “middlemen”. In other words, if your new buddy “Pat” were to distribute unlicensed versions of one of our digital designs to 2,000 embroidery people over his web site, the per infringement settlement fees would be less than $3.75 per end user who is infringing under our laws. That’s a lot less than even the $200.00 minimum Mr. Michelen posts on your blog.

5. Who wouldn’t become angry and agitated if people caught with their hands in the cookie (and very thoroughly researched and documented by Imageline) don’t remove the infringing images after notice, or even have the courtesy to respond to an official cease and desist letter/e-mail communications we send each of them?

6. In fact, we follow the exact same C & D and take-down procedures Mr. Michelen claims he recommends for his clients.

7. This looks like nothing more than sensational investigative journalism to me. I would have been more than happy to share the whole truth with you if you had only bothered to ask.

8. Imageline has been considered the “David” in the copyright battle with a number of “Goliaths” for over fifteen (15+) years. Over ninety- five percent (>95%) of the companies we go after for infringing our hard earned copyrighted works are substantially larger than we are. You would be surprised at how incorrect you and Mr. Michelen have been here, and have interpreted a few ‘out of context’ communications to support your own pre-conceived notions and business plans … not the truth.

9. Finally, posting links to blogs hosted by people who hide behind the anonymous nature of the Internet to conduct smear campaigns is not what anyone should expect from a web site moderated by a professional attorney, and stating that it is your objective to deliver “all of the facts” and the truth. We are very confused here. Does Mr. Michelen’s law firm know what he is doing in these ventures? Lawyers here in Virginia are not allowed to practice law in this manner. I am particularly concerned that he advises everyone to destroy evidence on your web site.. Please have him contact me directly if he has any interest at all in representing the information regarding Imageline in a factual manner to your audience.

Again, please feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions about what we are trying to do to lower the “digital piracy” rate here in this country, and to begin to accomplish the same goals overseas.

ALL legitimate book, software, audio/visual, and graphic arts content publishers and copyright advocates should support the reduction of Internet-based piracy or they will all soon be extinct. At least that is my humble opinion.

I look forward to hearing back from you soon.

Sincerely,

George Riddick
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.

My Comments on the George Riddick/Imageline Controversy (by MatthewC) (14 replies)

admin — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:50:59 -0400

(Please be advised this editorial will be updated or revised to include the latest news and developments.)

Please refer to the Getty Clones page and Riddick/ImageLine Letters page as reference in this discussion.

Disclaimer: Ths editorial is NOT legal advice. It reflects my opinions only, not those of Attorney Oscar Michelen. His response to the Riddick controversy is pending.

I have had the opportunity to read numerous emails written by Mr. Riddick and evaluate his communication pattern. It is clear that Mr. Riddick has been able to inflict an incredible amount of psychological stress by his aggressive and quite unprofessional letter tactics. His behavior is far more egregious than anything I have seen before as it relates to copyright protection.

First off, I believe in copyright protection but I also believe in taking reasonable actions. And if a settlement cannot be reached, then more aggressive measures can be taken. A big problem I see is that Mr. Riddick lacks credibility. He comes across as inconsistent, scattered, and a person that rants and raves. He appears to make threats that he does not follow through on. His rationale is flawed. He displays multiple sides to his personality. He can be civil, gracious, respectful, hostile, insulting, and condescending all in the same email! More importantly, his email threats ring hollow on so many levels. Unfortunately, many letter recipients’ are ignorant of copyright law and proper legal process and so Mr. Riddick has single-handedly distressed the embroidery community.

While I certainly do not condone what Mr. Riddick has done, the effectiveness of his letter campaign is effective because you, the letter recipient, because you have not yet become educated on the issues involved. And you have also unwittingly played into his psychological game by driving this underground. I will list some reasons why this letter campaign has been so effective in creating stress thus far and where I see the lack of credibility comes from.

Most people who are in the artistic community lack a fundamental background on how business works. In the world of business, there are good people and there are bad people. When you encounter bad people in business long enough, you eventually learn what you can and cannot do to fight back. Part of fighting back is knowing what resources, entities, agencies, and tactics actually work. Another part of protecting yourself and fighting back is that you learn to grow a backbone. And if you don’t immediately grow one, you learn to fake having a backbone. I am not saying to this to be insulting. I am saying this because I have to make my points quickly.

Everyone knows that bullies will only back down if you stand up to them. Bullies like Mr. Riddick will only prey on who he believes are weaker parties such as those in the artist community. He tries to overwhelm you by dragging in all kinds of legal arguments that may or may not pertain to your specific situation. Have you not wondered why he would chase after a class of people who have relatively few assets and income vs. larger companies? He does so because uninformed people who are unaccustomed to business and legal conflict are easy prey. He knows he has the upper hand because he has just enough information to sound credible and strike fear within you.

In his email communications, Mr. Riddick makes many legal threats on many fronts but fundamentally he has done nothing. From what I can tell, Mr. Riddick has not sent any physical letters or Certified Letters to anyone. All communications from him appear to be emails only. There has been no indication he has done anything on the legal front against smaller, weaker parties.

What is interesting to me is that my search of Imageline Inc in Virginia indicates that this corporation is currently in delinquent status and even if it were not, has a history of not being in compliance with the State of Virginia’s corporate filings. He has missed the years 1999, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2008. Most of these corporate filings cost $100 to simply update.

Does a corporation that cannot consistently make their annual corporate filings for such a small annual fee sound like a corporation that can hire an attorney to sue anyone? As Oscar Michelen pointed out, a corporation without good legal standing cannot sue. Further, any corporation that wants to sue MUST hire an attorney because corporations cannot self-represent, individuals and sole proprietorships can. Corporations are only legal entities, not human entities.

Mr. Riddick has often mentioned contingency attorneys. Contingency attorneys are smart people. Most are in it to make money, not to do pro bono work. Most will demand an upfront retainer to start work on the case. They will only forgo a retainer and their hourly fee ONLY if they are certain there will be a big payday. Fortunately for you, (but what many of you fail to realize) is that it would not be worth any contingency attorney’s time and effort to sue you because most of you do not make enough or have enough assets to collect on. Mr. Riddick would then have to be like the rest of us in having to hire an attorney at $200-$400/hour. Even for a medium-sized corporation, this is no small expense. And most attorneys would demand an upfront retainer before they start the case. For a 10-hour retainer, this could cost $2,000-$4,000 per party! If he wanted to hire an attorney to sue “only” 5 people, he would have to come up with a retainer of $10,000-$20,000. Do the math with all the letters he is sending out.

From what I can tell, Mr. Riddick is primarily a one-man operation. He appears to use many aliases to create the appearance he works with a staff but I am not yet certain that is true. Currently, I take the stand he is primarily a one-man operation. Does this sound like someone capable or willing to cough up that much money to file suit?

Also, filing suit across state lines and out of country is incredibly difficult because part of filing suit against someone is being able to properly serve defendants personally. There are also jurisdictional issues. Most of you are outside his state of Virginia. And so, you are difficult to reach. Defendants who do not want to be found will not be easily be found and it will be an additional cost to hire a good process server to successfully serve someone.

Copyright infringement is generally a federal issue. Filing suits in federal court can get quite expensive when you take into account attorney fees, filing fees, and travel fees. Yes, someone is going to have to travel and it is most likely the plaintiff that will have to travel. Does Mr. Riddick sound inclined to want to travel to you and testify against you? Even if he was, how many people could he actually sue given that he is a one-man operation?

Even if he were to make it all the way of hiring an attorney, paying the retainer, having you successfully served, traveling to testify, and meet in court, there is the matter of winning the case. It has been my experience that courts are sympathetic to smaller, more vulnerable parties. Judges strive to be fair and reasonable. They look at your intentions and your actions. Did you do it intentionally or not? Do you a pattern of past intentional abuses? Court cases are often not clear cut which is why even attorneys like to settle. They do not like the uncertainty and surprises that can come up. I have been in court many times most often as a plaintiff but I have occasionally been a defendant. There is never any clear “slam dunk” for any side.

Even if you lost the case, the judge would ensure any ruling would be “reasonable”. I believe Mr. Riddick might only stand to “win” a few hundred dollars at best plus attorney costs. I could be wrong but that is what I believe at this point. Even so, there is yet another obstacle for him. If he got a judgment, there is the matter of actually collecting on it. It can be very difficult to collect money judgments from people who have relatively smaller incomes and smaller asset bases.
Are you beginning to see why getting educated on the issues is very important?

Another point I like to make is that Mr. Riddick uses the tactic of urgency. He sets artificial deadlines to force a response. From what I have seen, many letter recipients have disregarded his deadlines with little or no consequence. That is an indication that these are empty threats when there is no follow-up action with the exception of another derogatory email.
Mr. Riddick has made threats to a letter recipient sue them for libel. In other words, he wants to keep his communications with you a secret from others. He wants to keep you isolated. He does not want his tactics to come to light. It takes away the power when EVERYONE knows about how he conducts himself. It is not advantageous for him for all of you to come together and share knowledge as some of you have done with me. In domestic abuse cases where the abuser/bully wants control, a common tactic is isolation and keeping secrets. I should also point out telling the truth is an absolute defense against libel.

In some of the emails I have seen, there is an emphasis on “Confidential”, “Non-Disclosure”, and the like. For the record, if you are the intended recipient of any correspondence, you have the right to openly share it with anyone (unless there was prior agreement by BOTH parties to keep communications confidential or in cases such as attorney-client or doctor-patient confidentiality.) In other words, you have the right to share any communications you have Mr. Riddick with me, Oscar, or the world at large.

The reason I have gotten involved is I know that reporting this will help neuter his efforts to keep you isolated and silent. You now have a platform with our online discussion forum to openly discuss (not rant, cuss, or concoct) your stories in a safe open environment.

You see, karma says that what goes around comes around. Many of you have begun stepping up and stepping out. Continue to get educated on the issues. Speak out openly. Start growing a backbone. You will find that Mr. Riddick may eventually back down, become more reasonable, or go away. And if not, then it is up to him to take the next action except that a lot of people are now watching him.

George P. Riddick III Chairman/CEO Imageline, Inc. (5 replies)

riddickvictim2 — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:12:46 -0500

George P. Riddick III has inflicted a vast amount of misery and suffering among a large group of hard working Internet entrepreneurs. He has used fear as his weapon of choice against those targets he has deemed to be weak. Small business owners, non-profit organizations and churches are his favorite prey. He has even timed his extortion emails to coincide with major holidays to enhance the physiological impact. I have never in my life, witnessed the level of arrogance and downright evil as that of Mr. Riddick.

Justice will prevail. Words can not express my relief that the antics of Mr. Riddick have finally been exposed. I am personally going to make a PayPal contribution to this website. The economy has hit my business like everyone else so it won’t be much, but it is my humble “thumbs up” to Mr. Chan.

Warm Regards,
Your Friend in the Victim Network

George Riddick III Imageline (10 replies)

riddickvictim2 — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:06:00 -0500

George Riddick III CEO Imageline
This gent is doing the very same thing. A growing network of Riddick victims are assembling and documenting threats and extortion tactics. An amazing number of small businesses have already fallen victim and have paid out large "settlements" and even turned over their small businesses to him.

New Getty CLONE Hits Embroidery Community (13 replies)

Crafty — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:20:45 -0500

George P Reddick representing Imageline Inc has sent me an email saying my website has infringed on his company's images. The website creates and sells embroidery designs using images available from various sources. He has identified several images that belong to his company's image library but were purchased by me from either Jupiterimages website (clipart.com) or from a CD-Rom of images. Both touted "Royalty Free" etc on the front page of the site and on the packaging in the case of the CD. And their terms of use on the website seemed to indicate that using thier artwork for embroidery designs was acceptable use. In fact, clipart.com's site still says this on thier home page... or it did until I went to copy it here. And it's gone. (I think I have saved a copy of that)

In checking with friends in our industry it seems that many of them have received the same email and follow-up emails recently. Others have been dealing with it for as much as 6 weeks now. Several have paid the extortion money in one form or another. Others are fretting over what to do. He is claiming $7,500 per image used, but he is such a nice guy that he will accept a fraction of that money (20% to 25%) as long as the person turns over all the embroidery designs created with his images and agrees to also give him additional designs not created with his images that he then credits to their account in the amount of $200 per design, plus agrees to work for him making additional designs. They can also get a credit for turning in other people that they discover to have used his company's artwork.

His images appear to be legally copyrighted by the documentation sent to a couple of these folks so that won't be a defense in this situation, at least I don't think it will be. I'm looking for any input from Oscar and others on this new scam. Also, I wanted to start this thread here for others in the embroidery design business who receive his emails and start searching for what to do next.

Thanks for your help.

Pat

PS: I forgot to ask... once someone settles with Imageline, what happens when Jupiter comes knocking on their door? If the images came from clipart.com (owned by Jupiter) and were copyrighted to Imageline, would these folks then be liable again?