Masterfile starts it round of 2012 Lawsuits

[Bekka]

Masterfile is wasting no time this year.  They just filed another lawsuit yesterday against Global Services Worldwide.  However, it doesn't show up as IP, it shows "other" under type of suit. 

http://dockets.justia.com/search?q=Masterfile+Corporation

[Matthew Chan]

There is a very good chance that it is a copyright case regardless of what justia may label. The reason why I say this is simply because I went bug-eyed downloading and eye-balling every Masterfile complaint and answer a week ago.  They were all copyright infringement cases even though justia lists them as "blank".

Masterfile is wasting no time this year.  They just filed another lawsuit yesterday against Global Services Worldwide.  However, it doesn't show up as IP, it shows "other" under type of suit. 

http://dockets.justia.com/search?q=Masterfile+Corporation

[Matthew Chan]

This thread is taking a life of its own which is nice.  The information discovered in this thread of discussion will be incorporated into the Masterfile Analysis project I announced in this thread:

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/getty-images-letter-forum/analyzing-masterfile%27s-lawsuit-history/msg4605/#msg4605

So, keep going in your research, digging, and reporting. As you guys focus on current Masterfile lawsuits, feel free to incorporate any other Masterfile news you happen to find along the way.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I attempted to pull up the complaint with Pacer for this latest suit, I could find the actual complaint, but did learn it is a copyright case and it appears to be over 1 image...will get back in there later and see if I do a better job, without racking up my invoice...

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

The defendant is out of the country until this Thursday, I already have a message into him..

Just a quick update to this:
I have spoken to Dr. Wetherman from the animal hospital, at this point as far as he knows the case has been dropped, however he was out of the country on the date the suit was filed. Perhaps he hasn't yet been served the papers.

He purchased a template thru Template Monster, and basically dropped it back in their lap. he did state that he had not heard from TM since. He is aware of the forum and that we have this thread going on, and he will be contacting TM's legal dept to get an update.

I know TM settled with Getty Images, but I can't say for sure if they had a suit with MF. I have also heard several times that TM will not step up to the plate, even tho they settled with Getty. I'm curious as if to whether TM just completely blew this off leaving the end user hanging, and also if this was indeed dropped. Hopefully the Dr. will visit us and bring us up to speed..as he was a little taken aback when I told him the date that the suit was filed..he was completely under the impression, that this was a done deal and no longer an issue.

[Bekka]

I find it rather surprising that MF would file suit against Dr. Wetherman considering he can prove "innocent infringement" based on his purchase from TM.  What are they thinking here? Default judgement?  Pressuring him into paying because they filed a lawsuit?  It seems to me that this case could blow up in MF's face if Dr. Wetherman decides to see this through or am I missing something here?

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

The missing item, is if TM ever addresses the issue to begin with. The Dr. left it in their hands. As we already know these stock company's like to go after the end user/domain owner. So if TM ignored it, masterfile will still persue it...and yes if he has proof from TM as in a reciept and emails this could be problematic..

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/idaho/iddce/1:2012cv00012/29042/

I hope these people fight.  It looks like this might be a veternian clinic.

Sorry to report..another has fallen victim to Masterfile as this case was dismissed with prejudice...

[Peeved]

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/idaho/iddce/1:2012cv00012/29042/

I hope these people fight.  It looks like this might be a veternian clinic.

Sorry to report..another has fallen victim to Masterfile as this case was dismissed with prejudice...

Lucy please splain? lol    What does this mean?
"If the case ends with prejudice, the effect on the defendant (for the purpose of punishment) is the equivalent to a finding of not guilty and they cannot be retried."

Does this mean the Vetrinarian was found "not guilty and cannot be retried"? I clicked on the link budd but I could not see any info without having a Pacer account.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Means one of 2 things...

Template monster took care of it and MF dropped it, or the vet settled out of court and MF dropped it, unfortunately the paperwork does not state which. I had assumed ( which is bad on my part) that they just settled, I had to go back and refresh my memory, as I forgot template monster was involved..

you should get the recap add on for firefox, it will allow you to see items from pacer that have been downloaded already, and you won't have to pay...I'm dangerous when I get into pacer! 

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

Hi Buddahpi,

Earlier in this thread you mentioned you had spoken with Dr. Wetherman from the animal hospital. Is there any chance you can contact him again. He may be limited in what he can tell due to any settlement. But I would consider Template Monster stepping in on his behalf a "win" whereas him having to pay anything to the MF-er team a "loss."

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I would consider that a win as well< I'll try to contact him this coming week...

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

I left a message, no word back as of yet, I'm not holding my breathe..

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Another case of someone rolling over to masterfile's demands.

5/16/2012:
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL filed by Plaintiff Masterfile Corporation pursuant to FRCP 41a(1) Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice as to Pindar Enterprises Import and Export LLC. (Weinberg, Steven) (Entered: 05/16/2012)

Masterfile is wasting no time this year.  They just filed another lawsuit yesterday against Global Services Worldwide.  However, it doesn't show up as IP, it shows "other" under type of suit. 

http://dockets.justia.com/search?q=Masterfile+Corporation

[Moe Hacken]

Thanks for doing that.  So much for not suing over 1 image....

This is true, this is no longer the best rule of thumb. I think it's more about the amount of the claim than the number of images or infringements. Like Matthew commented on another thread, it's all about risk analysis. They're shooting for $30,000 in this case, so the fact that it's one image doesn't change the economics outlook for Masterfile's legal henchmen.

I don't think they'd go to court for less than a certain amount to make it "worth their while". There are also non-monetary considerations, such as the possibilities of loss of face, damage to their brand, financial blowback and setting bad precedents for their "business models". They probably go in knowing fully well it's likely to end up in a settlement that pays them enough to keep their current posturing and continue with the letter program.

They are definitely sending a statement about the former "never-for-one-image" rule. Like Matthew says, they can take people to court anytime they want and they want us to know that. However, as Matthew also says, the question is whether they can make it stick.