ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
ELI Forums => Getty Images Letter Forum => Topic started by: Matthew Chan on April 30, 2011, 01:01:26 AM
-
There is a new settlement demand letter player that was brought to Oscar's attention and subsequently to me.
This time around it is NOT a stock photography company sending out the demand letter. It is a private solo lawyer based in San Diego who is sending out demand letters now.
Brandon Sand is asking $10,000 for 1 image and he wants payment mailed to him! Presumably, he keeps a percentage and forwards the rest to his client?
Feast your eyes on his letter!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/72740193/Brandon-S-Sand-Settlement-Demand-Letter
Then feast your eyes on his resume! He is no Oscar Michelen, that is for sure!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/72753092/Brandon-S-Sand-Resume
Enjoy the reading!
===========================
This post was modified on November 16, 2011 to comply with the DMCA complaint made to my hosting service. We were originally hosting the large PDF documents and happy to not incur the bandwidth behind this anymore and have taken down those PDF documents. We prefer Scribd for posting PDF documents.
In case Scribd takes down the resume that he freely shared with the world via LinkedIn, you aren't missing much. His resume is still available at LinkedIn minus these very interesting musical career entries. I am guessing that is now too embarrassing for a respectable lawyer image. Even without the five music entries, he has a very weak legal resume indeed. Again, he is no Oscar Michelen.
Music Artist at Paramanu Records
May 2006 - February 2011
Music Artist at Uncommon Records
January 2004 - February 2009
Music Artist at Equinox Records
May 2005 - July 2008
Multimedia Producer at Vision Enhanced Studios
January 2004 - April 2007
Music Artist at Definitive Jux Records
January 2004 - January 2005
-
Matt, this is hilarious.
They're sending all that US law psychobabble to a Canadian resident?
The US registrations don't mean much in Canadian law.
That resume!! A failed music career? Why not try IP law?
Hilarious.
S.G.
-
My Client just received one of these letters. Any advice on what to do?
Eric
-
SG,
It is certainly a very humorous resume. I wonder how other lawyers will regard his stellar resume.
When I got wind of Brandon Sand and did some digging, I just had to share it.
Matthew
Matt, this is hilarious.
That resume!! A failed music career? Why not try IP law?
Hilarious.
S.G.
-
The short, easy answer is to hire Oscar if you want to make it easy.
But if you want to save yourself some money, you need to get educated on the relevant issues. That is not something we can explain in 3 sentences. The advice we have given about Getty Images also applies to most other extortion letters.
We have this discussion forum and the free videos/audios in our Free subscriber area as your resource.
Matthew
My Client just received one of these letters. Any advice on what to do?
Eric
-
Today, I was informed by Oscar that San Diego Attorney/Lawyer Brandon Sand does not like the fact that his information is being posted on this website and wanted the information removed. Oscar told him if there were any inaccurate information about him or his case, we would happily remove it.
However, I should point out that all the information we posted on Brandon Sand and his extortion letter actually comes from him! It was his paperwork that we scanned and shared. It was his LinkedIn profile information that he posted that we are sharing.
He was informed that if he decided to get into this business of threatening to sue people to pay $10,000, people receiving his letters are likely to get upset and angry and ask for help and share this information. He also needs to back up what he puts out there.
From what I was told, Brandon Sand is a relatively young attorney. His own lack of professional experience comes shining through on his online resume.
Brandon Sand, attorney from San Diego, is now being watched and monitored by Oscar, myself, and this entire forum community. He may want to reconsider sending out extortion letters in the future and be more measured in the future. Another thing he MIGHT want to know that getting into the "copyright trolling" business is going to be a highly-visible contentious business. If he isn't prepared for the heat, it is going to get very uncomfortable. Oscar and I are allying ourselves and supportive of the efforts of EFF.org.
If Brandon Sand or any of his clients decide to pull the trigger to file a lawsuit, he can be sure it will be reported loudly for all to see and hear.
Matthew
-
Yeah sorry to hear Mr. Sand doesn't appreciate people looking into who is threatening them with legal action.
I found the MySpace page of his previous record label interesting. It's at http://www.myspace.com/paramanurecordings and under Bio it says, in part: "We don't believe in Contracts. FUCK CONTRACTS. Besides we are not rich, just like every other starting record label its straight out the pocket, we here do it for the passion and for the love of music, the entertainment, and the culture. "
-
All this is really amusing.
Thanks for posting the info.
This is the kind of sleazy business that Mr Sand has associated himself with.
But, he wants to hide what he's doing? Good luck.
Keep posting the LOL's guys.
S.G.
-
Oscar & Matthew, you are doing the world a great service by educating those who suffer by these outrageous extortion letters. This website is a very great source of information & if anyone out there is in need of legal help - do not hesitate to call Oscar!
-
Thanks for the vote of confidence It is appreciated!
-
I have recently received a similar letter from a different lawyer representing the same company. Does anyone know who brandon sand sent that letter to? I would like to touch base with them and how things turned out or proceeded.
Dear Mr.
Re: Cease and Desist Demand and Offer to Settle Copyright Infringement Claim
I represent Hawaiian Art Network LLC (HAN), the owner and operator of HawaiiArt.com and HawaiiPictures.com, and photographer V.K. Tylor.
It has come to our attention that you are using one (1) of Mr. Tylor’s images without authorization on your website
My client’s Image is used at:
Page URL:
Image URL:
Copyright subsists in Canada in this work by virtue of Section 5 of the Canadian Copyright Act and the Berne Convention. Even if your use of the image was an innocent infringement, you could be liable for statutory damages as high as $20,000 as set forth in Section 38 of the Copyright Act plus the legal costs of proceeding against you. We have copies of your unlawful use to preserve as evidence.
Demand is hereby made that you immediately remove the image from the website, delete all digital copies of the image from your computers and digital storage devices, and destroy any hard copies of the image maintained in your files. If you believe you have been granted a license to use the above-described image, please provide me with any documentation upon which you base that belief.
Removal of the infringed work does not relieve you from liability for damages arising from your past infringement. An award of statutory damages for the copyright infringement would likely be multiples of actual damages and would also include legal fees and costs of bringing suit.
My client prefers to settle claims amicably whenever possible and without recourse to lengthy and expensive litigation. For settlement purposes, Hawaii Art Network offers settlement for a fee of $2,268.00, including legal fees incurred to date and a retroactive license back two years for the past website uses. Kindly pay this amount in full on or before October 31, 2011, without Hawaii Art Network and Mr. Tylor being caused to incur further legal fees and costs. Any further legal fees and costs that Hawaii Art Network or Mr. Tylor must incur in order to resolve this matter will be added to the settlement demand. This settlement amount anticipates immediate removal of the image from the website by October 31, 2011 with no future uses. Any other uses of the image, or any other image must be negotiated separately with Hawaii Art Network (I can provide contact details).
Accordingly, we hereby demand that you:
1. Immediately cease and desist from all unlicensed use of the above image, remove the image from the website and delete all digital copies of the image from your computers and digital storage devices, and destroy any hard copies of the image maintained in your files.
2. Remit the full amount of $2,268.00 to my office by October 31, 2011. (Payable to: Hawaii Art Network) A copy of the transmittal for your payment with a copy of the check should also be mailed directly to Hawaii Art Network, 1888 Kalakaua Ave., Suite C312, Honolulu, HI 96815.
Hawaii Art Network has a commitment to their photographers to enforce the copyrights for their images. Consequently, I have been instructed by my client to take all appropriate steps to pursue this claim. Again, my client would like to settle this claim amicably; please feel free to contact me directly to discuss further.
-
Hey Loopster,
Brandon Sand was/is based in the US and he sent a letter to a Canadian resident.
Is the lawyer that sent you the letter also a US attorney?
They're using PicScout to troll the web for infringements.
http://www.picscout.com/images/stories/pdfs/HawaiianArtNetwork.pdf
I also notice that they've used "photoattorney" in the past...
S.G.
-
Photographer is a US resident - we are a Canadian company - they are using a Canadian Lawyer
Thanks for the heads up on picscount
-
Loopster,
I did some checking at the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO).
http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-cipo/cpyrghts/dsplySrch.do?lang=eng
I found no works registered by "Tylor" or "Hawaii Art Network"
This means that they could only legally collect actual damages (the actual retail price) of the images in court.
They couldn't collect "statutory damages" (legal fees, other damages & losses).
So, the prospect of a court case is unlikely; they'd have to spend thousands just to get an award of what would likely amount to a few hundred dollars.
Some companies make a big deal of having an 'exclusive' contract with the photographer.
But, that still doesn't allow the photographer to transfer rights that he/she doesn't have due to non-registration.
They mentioned the Berne Convention, but that's not really an issue here.
What you can do is offer a smaller settlement that reflects that purchase price of the images.
If you can put up with some harassment, you might choose to do nothing as a court battle is highly unlikely.
Good luck.
S.G.
-
I appreciate the information - not sure I want to roll the dice yet or not - still weighing options as to what to do. I certainly don't agree with the approach and tactics being used much like everyone else, however I'm not in a position to dedicate a lot of personal time/hence money to the matter either. Might see how low of a settlement I can get first before proceeding.
-
Soylent Green on what basis or where do you derive this fact from of not being liable for damages? I'm interested to learn more of this possibility. I wonder why would a Can Lawyer get involved if they weren't certain they would receive appropriate compensation for their efforts if this was the case. Surely some homework as been done I would think.
" This means that they could only legally collect actual damages (the actual retail price) of the images in court.
They couldn't collect "statutory damages" (legal fees, other damages & losses).
So, the prospect of a court case is unlikely; they'd have to spend thousands just to get an award of what would likely amount to a few hundred dollars. "
-
Is this what you are referring to? They have to pick one or the other?
38.1 (1) Subject to this section, a copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of damages and profits referred to in subsection 35(1), an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the proceedings, with respect to any one work or other subject-matter, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $500 or more than $20,000 as the court considers just.
(2) Where a copyright owner has made an election under subsection (1) and the defendant satisfies the court that the defendant was not aware and had no reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant had infringed copyright, the court may reduce the amount of the award to less than $500, but not less than $200.
(3) Where
(a) there is more than one work or other subject-matter in a single medium, and
(b) the awarding of even the minimum amount referred to in subsection (1) or (2) would result in a total award that, in the court’s opinion, is grossly out of proportion to the infringement,
the court may award, with respect to each work or other subject-matter, such lower amount than $500 or $200, as the case may be, as the court considers just.
-
I followed up on this, and I need to make a correction to my original statement.
It seems that while Canada does have "statutory damages", these damages can be sought whether or not the image was registered.
In the 'states, the image must be registered in order to seek statutory damages.
It appears from the law that only one or the other option (damages or statutory) may be sought.
I think that the stock photo company would elect to seek statutory damages in most cases.
That's because their business model seeks much more than the purchase price of the image.
They'll call this a "deterrent". But, it's actually just greed.
Since a search on the copyright database turned up nothing, it's time to find out what kind of contract the artist has with the stock photo company.
In order to collect any kind of damages from you on behalf of the original artist's work, the stock photo company must have an agreement with the artist that essentially transfers rights to the stock photo company.
Without that, they won't have standing to collect damages in court, unless the artist joins in as a plaintiff also.
S.G.
-
Well guys, my hosting service issued me this notice regarding posting Brandon Sand's PDF resume and PDF demand letter. My reply is below following this notice. Presumably, Brandon Sand is behind this action.
For the record, I am not mad at my hosting service. They are doing their jobs. They have been great to me over the years. I have spoken to the owner in the past and I intend to contact him again to let him know what is going on. I will be calling him personally to give my assurances that we provide an honorable and highly-needed service and we run a respectable operation here.
I also requested a copy of the original complaint that eApps was compelled to act on.
Matthew
=========================
To Whom It May Concern:
We have received notice of a complaint of Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) violation under 17 USC § 512(c)(3)(A), regarding material hosted on your account. The infringing material can be found at:
****
****
Please remove the infringing content and respond to us confirming that this action has been accomplished. The disputed material must be removed as swiftly as possible. Please note that if the disputed material is not removed within 48 hours, we reserve the right to suspend your site to conform with the requirements of the DMCA.
If you feel that this complaint was made as a result of a mistake or of a misidentification of the disputed material, please send us a written counter notification within fourteen (14) days. A valid counter notification must substantially contain the following (as required per 17 USC § 512(g)(3)):
(A). A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber
(B). Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.
(C). A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.
(D). The subscriber's name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriber's address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the service provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c) (2) (C) or an agent of such person.
Any counter notifications should be addressed to:
Legal Department
eApps Hosting
7742 Spalding Drive
Suite 363
Norcross, Georgia, USA 30092
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this complaint, please let us know.
Regards,
eApps Hosting
====================
Original DMCA Complaint Submitted to eApps
====================
Hello,
Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, I am requesting the take
down of the following infringing documents hosted on your server:
***
***
Both documents are infringement of works of authorship as defined in Title
17 of the Copyright statute.
I have a good faith belief that use of the material on the above mentioned
website is not authorized by the copyright owner.
The information in this notification is accurate, and is made under penalty
of perjury. I am the owner of the exclusive right that is allegedly
infringed.
I may be contacted at:
[email protected]
Brandon Sand, Esq.
699 14th St, Apt 252
San Diego CA, 92101
Electronically signed,
/s/ Brandon Sand
-
DMCA applies for copyrighted materials, I would demand that Mr. Sand provide proof of registration, of his "resume", his letter and possibly even his name!
not to mention they are links to scribd...he's barking at the wrong tree!!
-
Actually, the original links were ELI links to PDFs we were hosting. I removed the the files and simply pointed them to scribd.
Matthew
-
This was my reply to eapps regarding the DMCA Complaint. I had intended on eventually removing all PDFs from the ELI website due to bandwidth concerns so removing the PDFs were really not a big deal to me.
========================================
Hello eapps Legal Dept:
I want to acknowledge receipt of this email and wish to continue maintaining a good relationship with eapps as I have done for many years. Please forward a copy of this to Rick as I want to personally assure him of our good intentions and introduce him to my attorney friend, Oscar Michelen, who is an experienced intellectual property attorney in such matters and that we will do everything we can to minimize such occurrences.
As you can see for yourself, ExtortionLetterInfo.com is a widely-read website that deals with heavy-handed tactics used by the stock photo industry supposedly in the name of copyright protection. However, we feel they are actually engaged in acts of "legalized extortion" in trying to scare people out of many thousands of dollars per image which far exceed the actual market value of the images in dispute! This is an issue other customers on eapps will likely face sometime in the future and we are leading authority website in the U.S.
A quick study of our website should reveal that we run a highly-credible website with community rules and enforcement in place. Oscar Michelen, a highly respected well-established New York attorney works with me on this cause-based project.
Up to recently, we haven't had issues with DMCA takedown requests. But now, because the spotlight has been shined on some of the lawyers involved and their embarrasingly lack of legal experience compared to the legal threats they regularly issue, they seek to suppress the information where they can.
Regarding this particular DMCA takedown request, because the information is available elsewhere on Internet and we prefer to not host such large PDF documents due to bandwidth concerns, we are happy to comply with this particular request. The documents have been entirely removed from the web server.
The two files in question have been entirely removed and the internal referral links to those documents have been changed.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
Matthew Chan
-
Firstly, thanks to all for their very hard and diligent work here.
I'm sure that it's a comfort to many that there are those who work to fight this.
Secondly, it's interesting to see that these lawyers have so much time on their hands that they have time to Google their own name.
With regard to ELI linking to content on other sites such as Scribd, we will recall that US law doesn't consider linked content from site "A" to copyrighted material on site "B" to be an infringement by site "A".
In any case, it seems absurd to me that these lawyers would use claims of "copyright infringement" to attempt to hide what they are doing.
When somebody goes through a great deal to hide their actions, their moral compass should be telling them that they're doing something wrong.
I'm sure that Oscar would agree that legal issues should be as open as possible in our society, lest we pay a heavy price.
I think it's time to report Bandon Sand to the California Bar Association for sending his extortion letter into another country.
S.G.
-
California Bar Association ...Thanks S.G. I agree
-
I requested a copy of the DMCA complaint made to eApps which they were compelled to act on and share with me.
==================
Hello,
Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, I am requesting the take
down of the following infringing documents hosted on your server:
***
***
Both documents are infringement of works of authorship as defined in Title
17 of the Copyright statute.
I have a good faith belief that use of the material on the above mentioned
website is not authorized by the copyright owner.
The information in this notification is accurate, and is made under penalty
of perjury. I am the owner of the exclusive right that is allegedly
infringed.
I may be contacted at:
[email protected]
Brandon Sand, Esq.
699 14th St, Apt 252
San Diego CA, 92101
Electronically signed,
/s/ Brandon Sand
-
Our friend Brandon has issued a bogus DMCA complaint to Scribd regarding HIS Settlement Demand Letter. He knows full well that letter has no protection given he sent/delivered it to the intended recipient as a business communication and that person freely shared it with us. Brandon, like Julie, are two copyright attorneys that should know better than to knowingly file false DMCA complaints. They WILL be held to a higher standard in a court of law and public opinion.
Another counter-notification letter I have to write. Sigh.... this is really tiresome.
====================
Scribd:
Hello, extortionletterinfo --
We have removed your document, "Brandon S. Sand Settlement Demand Letter" (id: 72740193) in response to a third-party notification or other indicia that this document was uploaded to Scribd.com without the authorization of the copyright owner. If you believe the removal of this document is the result of a mistake or misidentification, please visit our Scribd Support Desk to access the instructions for providing a counter-notification.
For more information, read about our Copyright Management System or contact us through [email protected].
Please note that under Section 512(f) of the Copyright Act, any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that content was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification may be subject to liability. Please also be advised that we enforce our policy that provides for the termination of users who are identified as repeat infringers.
Thanks for your cooperation.
-Scribd Customer Care
P.S. You can always fine-tune which notifications you receive or opt-out completely.
Scribd Inc., 539 Bryant St., Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA
-
Scribd provided me the original DMCA complaints from Brandon Sand. He filed two of them. I don't really care about reposting his sorry resume I found on Linkedin which was fully accessible to everyone. I think he got licensed as a lawyer in 2010, a newbie lawyer. Plus his interesting stints in the musical career.
His Settlement Demand Letter, I have filed a counter-notification with Scribd to challenge posting that.
============
Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, I am requesting the take
down of the following infringing documents hosted on your server:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/72753092/Brandon-S-Sand-Resume
The documents is an infringement of a work of authorship as defined in
Title 17 of the Copyright statute.
I have a good faith belief that use of the material on the above mentioned
website is not authorized by the copyright owner.
The information in this notification is accurate, and is made under penalty
of perjury. I am the owner of the exclusive right that is allegedly
infringed.
I may be contacted at:
[email protected]
Brandon Sand, Esq.
699 14th St, Apt 252
San Diego CA, 92101
Electronically signed,
/s/ Brandon Sand
***
Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, I am requesting the take
down of the following infringing documents hosted on your server:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/72740193/Brandon-S-Sand-Settlement-Demand-Letter
The documents is an infringement of a work of authorship as defined in
Title 17 of the Copyright statute.
I have a good faith belief that use of the material on the above mentioned
website is not authorized by the copyright owner.
The information in this notification is accurate, and is made under penalty
of perjury. I am the owner of the exclusive right that is allegedly
infringed.
I may be contacted at:
[email protected]
Brandon Sand, Esq.
699 14th St, Apt 252
San Diego CA, 92101
Electronically signed,
/s/ Brandon Sand
-
Well, the person who provided us Brandon Sand's Settlement Demand Letter has been on the phone with me twice this week and we swapped a couple emails. Boy, does she have some stories to tell about her experiences with Brandon which does NOT paint him in a good light. Further, one of those actions could get him severely reprimanded. I have asked her to share her story and she has tentatively agreed. All this recent activity seems to have gotten her riled up. I will keep you updated.
Maybe she will jump on an introduce herself. I hope so.
Firstly, thanks to all for their very hard and diligent work here.
I'm sure that it's a comfort to many that there are those who work to fight this.
Secondly, it's interesting to see that these lawyers have so much time on their hands that they have time to Google their own name.
In any case, it seems absurd to me that these lawyers would use claims of "copyright infringement" to attempt to hide what they are doing.
When somebody goes through a great deal to hide their actions, their moral compass should be telling them that they're doing something wrong.
I'm sure that Oscar would agree that legal issues should be as open as possible in our society, lest we pay a heavy price.
I think it's time to report Bandon Sand to the California Bar Association for sending his extortion letter into another country.
S.G.
-
Brandon Sand gave himself a stellar review:
http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/92101-ca-brandon-sand-3411110.html
lol.
S.G.
-
Brandon Sand gave himself a stellar review:
http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/92101-ca-brandon-sand-3411110.html
lol.
S.G.
tis a dirty job but someone has to do it! I was tempted to test the email button, to say hello but figured we could just as easily say hello to him from here..