Messages

1411

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Troll and Georgia Attorney Cindy Wan-Hsin Hsu

« on: May 25, 2012, 12:11:52 AM »

Not surprised. I have a screenshot in preparation of that. I will upload it to Scribd and change the link when I get a chance.  The replacement link now points to the Scribd upload of the screenshot.

Did you notice her fee structure page is down now?

1412

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Copyright Troll Carolyn Wright, welcomes new trolls

« on: May 25, 2012, 12:01:14 AM »

I do recall Leslie's photo from before. Before 2011, she wasn't listed as an attorney. I think she was listed a legal assistant or something. Presumably, that changed after she passed her State Bar exam.

1413

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Aloha Plastic Surgery Submits Counterclaim

« on: May 24, 2012, 11:57:06 PM »

Good insight.  "Good faith" is a principle that can be carried over into many areas.

I hope Aloha and their lawyers have a good faith basis to make that claim. You can't just say anything you want in a Federal complaint; you must have a factual basis for it or a good faith belief that you will develop  factual support for it in discovery.

1414

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Getty to possibly be sold or go public?

« on: May 24, 2012, 04:01:54 PM »

Wow, this is big news. This is a good catch.

As much as we think the extortion letter business is significant in the valuation, I believe it is the extensive IP portfolio they have accumulated over the years that have boosted the overall valuation.  They have been buying and swallowing up so many smaller image and media-related companies.

However, all of that is not important without considering the actual cash flows from the collective businesses.

I favor Getty going public because it gives us more information, channels, and options to attack. Don't get me started. Going public entails many disclosures. They can't keep all the info they have been the last 4 years secret as a private company.

1415

Getty Images Letter Forum / Photo Attorney Leslie J. Burns Settlement Demand Letter for Phototake

« on: May 24, 2012, 01:26:37 AM »

Phototake, a stock photo agency we have not come across before, has hired one of the lawyers from Photo Attorney, Carolyn E. Wright's law firm. California newbie attorney Leslie Burns has put her signature to the previously reported Photo Attorney Extortion Letters.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/94632704/Photo-Attorney-Leslie-Burns-Settlement-Demand-Letter



State Bar Information
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/276687

Leslie Burns was admitted to the California State Bar in June 2011. Definitely a newbie lawyer if I ever saw one.

These Photo Attorney letters are starting to annoy me and I am starting to see them way too frequently. Similar to the McCormack's extortion letters, there are many issues in the letters that are grounds and deserving of State Bar and Attorney General Complaints. The sad part of this is that nearly all of the Photo Attorneys are relatively young and it will be quite upsetting for them to get such complaints so early in their careers.

There are a great many presumptions and accusations that overstep boundaries.  They are not the freaking judge and their judge and jury stance is what is going to get them in trouble.

I don't have time to get into a detailed "extortion letter dissection" of the problem areas but I foresee some serious State Bar hits on the Photo Attorneys who are dumb enough to sign their names to these letters. Someone remind me and when I have some free time, I will do an in-depth extortion letter dissection on the Photo Attorney letters.

Remember, one of the strongest ways to get them to back off is to hit back very hard where it counts using the "SB-AG SCAR (Strategic Complaint / Attorney Retaliation) attack".

1416

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another fine example of Timothy B. McCormack the puking out garbage

« on: May 23, 2012, 11:27:05 PM »

There is no question that I do my share of venting, ranting, and even a bit of name-calling. But I do try to make sure it is appropriate to the context of the discussion.

Given that I am a cranky and mean SOB at times, I also strive to maintain a good level of credibility when I can. That is why sometimes I ask for some restraint here on the forums regarding some of the more colorful humor and antics we sometimes engage in. A lot of it is because I want to maintain some level of minimal credibility not because I don't have a sense of humor. We have newcomers coming all the time and one never knows what they will contribute when they post.

Here on the forums, we can be more casual because many of us are "old-timers" in this little informal social club. But on the blog side of ELI, you will notice there is a different decorum and level of interaction there.

But make no mistake, when it comes to written complaints, legal actions, letter responses, etc. I take it very seriously and want to make sure it is the best possible presentation. I don't endorse nonsensical, thoughtless, ill-considered, or trivial actions.  That is why I don't encourage people to complain anonymously or use lazy form letters. If you can't legitimately write and sign your real name to a written complaint or letter, then don't bother doing it all.  It is a waste of time.

What sets ELI apart from all the other places that discuss and fight extortion letters is the level of credibility, community interaction, transparency, quality of information, and quality of discussions here. Oscar and I made this agreement early on we would conduct ourselves differently than the rest of the people.  We would play off each others strengths and create something larger than each of us could do separately.

It is my ongoing goal to continue to legitimize and improve the overall quality of ELI.  Thankfully, you guys haven't given me too much grief over the years. I do appreciate your willingness to be team-players when you really don't have to. I also appreciate the loyalty.

The ELI community has made huge strides in affecting change over the last four years.  Education and community is such a powerful thing. It goes to show that you don't need a ton of money to fight back.

1417

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another fine example of Timothy B. McCormack the puking out garbage

« on: May 23, 2012, 01:39:06 PM »

Good question.

Keep in mind that anyone can make a complaint against anyone for any reason. However, I don't believe in making frivolous complaints or making complaints that don't hold water.

I think it is quite legitimate to complain about someone that comes after you for money but don't explain how they arrived at those numbers. That is something Oscar and I have loudly complained about and fought against since the very beginning.

The true reason is that regardless of Getty's public statements and position, is that they are serving as their own judge and jury. The actual "executioner" part is dependent on how the letter recipient responds. Further, they don't look to recover what they "lost". They for far and away beyond that by using a "multiplier" system to serve as punitive measure and a business revenue generation system. Their extortion system is not simply loss recovery, it is a profit center all to itself.

I do collections but NEVER is it a profit center because you never come out ahead with the time, money, and aggravation lost. We always lose something even if we get lucky in a "complete" collection effort. I can get back court costs, lawyer costs (if any), a little bit of interest, plus my actual debt amount but most of us in business cannot mark up the actual debt.

In a similar fashion, Getty never goes by actual "market value" since most image values have nearly hit bottom. They now use a jacked up value that is artificially inflated by their tinkering of their website. The image I allegedly infringed upon was priced at $49 four years ago by Getty Images themselves, today that same image has been jacked up to $500-$600 range for a minimal, low-resolution, limited-time, web-based use. "Coincidentally" that was the "final" settlement offer made to me which I promptly declined.

Even judges have difficulty with ruling with "arbitrary" numbers even if there is legitimate infringement. Judges want to tie monetary awards to some degree of reality and justification, not a random number that makes no sense.

In my view, if I had to do it all over again, there would be no question I would have a filed a complaint listing the issues I brought up to AG. Their ongoing refusal to provide information but they happily stick their hands out to receive money. Remember, AG complaints are public record whether the AG chooses to agree with its merits.  Anyone who wants to download a list of complaints on Getty Images will see the written complaint on file.

The AG works on technicalities. Any member of the general public or press reading those complaints would know better and not bound by legal technicalities in their judgment or reading. They would be educated in the extortion business that Getty Images and CEO Jonathan Klein endorses.

Bottom line, given my list of complaints against them, it is absolutely appropriate to file a complaint with the AG if someone is inclined to. Ultimately, it is up to you to decide if you have been "wronged enough". Let us know what you decide.

Question for the group. 

Since I have asked GI to provide proof they have the rights to the image (signed contracts), how they came up with the amount they are asking for, past sales history etc.  They refused and basically told me go to their website and view the image there and that is all the proof I need. I have sent a letter now telling them we have nothing more to discuss until they can provide me the proof I have reasonably requested.  When GI replies, as I'm sure they will, still demanding payment without providing proof, would it be appropriate at that point to file a complaint with the AG office for trying to extort money from me by claiming I owe money and refusing to provide proof requested?

1418

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Aloha Plastic Surgery Submits Counterclaim

« on: May 23, 2012, 12:43:04 PM »

The links to the Defendant Answer and the Defendant Counterclaim has been uploaded. Look to the originating post to this thread.

I am gratified that someone has taken the step of filing a counterclaim against these dumb lawsuits. This is an important step because HAN cannot simply drop the lawsuit at their leisure. They are now being held accountable to the Defendant. Even if HAN were to chicken-out and want to drop the lawsuit on their side, that does not mean the Defendant has to.

It is a noose and important legal weapon which the defendant can now wield. Whether or not the Defendant ultimately has a good case or not is irrelevant at this early juncture. There is a huge symbolic message being sent to everyone that this Defendant isn't rolling over and they are courageous enough to take the fight on their terms. It forces the Plaintiff into a defensive position also, not just the Defendant. The fight has become a bit more equalized in theory.

Now, the Plaintiff will be forced to provide an Answer to all the issues the Defendant brought up.

I would like to point out that many of the listed defenses look very familiar to those provided by Oscar Michelen on the Getty vs. Advernet case.  Good job in doing some research and building on the work done before. Someone isn't trying to entirely reinvent the wheel here.

There are elements of the Defendant countersuit that I don't think will hold up well. Nevertheless, it is the Defendant's right to bring up those issues THEY feel are important thereby forcing the Plaintiff to respond and reply to.

My gut reaction is that this lawsuit will not "go all the way" and will get settled. However, if HAN thinks they were sending a public message to scare everyone, they quickly discovered what it's like to get a punch-back on two fronts.

It is probably bad enough that Glen Carner's and HAN's online reputation is shit given the extensive ELI coverage has given.  But now HAN gets more spotlight as the Defendant mounts a considerable legal defense and direct counterattack on the Plaintiff. Glen Carner now has a PR and legal battle to contend with at the same time. I wonder how deep pockets he has.

I have repeatedly said that many people overly fear lawsuits. They don't understand that filing a lawsuit comes with the risk of a countersuit they never anticipated or wanted. I have been saying this for some time and the entire stock photo industry can watch as the Defendant hits back on HAN.

You can be sure that HAN will have some allies behind the scenes. None of the stock photo agencies will want an unfavorable legal precedent. It should get interesting.

I commend Aloha Plastic Surgery for stepping up on this fight. They may or may not realize it but their fight has far-reaching impact beyond themselves. It's clear that the ELI community supports Aloha Plastic Surgery's position in their fight against HAN.

1419

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another fine example of Timothy B. McCormack the puking out garbage

« on: May 21, 2012, 10:32:50 PM »

I agree with the comment on Photo Attorney Carolyn Wright and her extortion letters.  Carolyn and her co-horts have largely stayed below the radar until now. For some reason, we have recently gotten a sudden rush of submissions and cases coming our way.

They are now famous for the $35,000 for 2 images deal.

Having said that, the Photo Attorney letters are a bit more toned down from the McCormack letters but it is still pretty nasty and I could tear into them pretty well if I had time. I could definitely make a case that the Photo Attorney Letter is egregious enough to warrant a state bar complaint if I were to receive one.

1420

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Meltzer-Grant Initial Contact Letter & Settlement Offer Letter

« on: May 21, 2012, 10:23:42 PM »

AS I have long known since the beginning, corporate employees are chicken-shit outside of the protection of the corporate environment. They draw strength from being within the company. Most couldn't survive a real fire-fight outside.

That is why I don't care if they are "just doing their jobs". I made it an early strategy to fight against my extortion letter to personally attack and name whoever came after me. I am quite gratified that people are listening to some of my suggestions to punch back where it hurts and not simply bitch about it.

Corporate employees will try to hide.  Notice how you don't hear anything from any of the Getty staff attorneys.  They are very quiet and stay behind the scenes. 

I believe in using power responsibly, not recklessly. I would be uncomfortable filing any complaint on any staff lawyer (at this time) not because I am afraid of retaliation. I don't think the complaint will hold up very well unless you have personally been attacked or harassed by it. At the very least, you would have to make a compelling argument to connect the dots.

McCormack and many other collection lawyers are an easy mark for a state bar or attorney general complaint.  But a few of them like Meltzer-Grant have wised up by toning it down.  In those cases, it falls upon the letter recipient to get a brain and backbone. If you have no brain or backbone, it will be hard regardless of what the letter says or does not say.

1421

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Photo Attorney Carolyn E. Wright $35K Settlement Demand Letter

« on: May 21, 2012, 01:58:46 PM »

The joke is that these lawyers aren't really practicing law.  They are sending out collection letters most of us could have sent out. The difference is they have better credentials and nicer letterhead stationery.

1422

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Another fine example of Timothy B. McCormack the puking out garbage

« on: May 21, 2012, 01:53:45 PM »

McCormack is allowed to put out his propaganda.  WE are certainly providing a counter-point.

And for anyone curious, McCormack supposedly has at least 6 state bar complaints against him regarding his extortion letters. Many don't get one state bar complaint in their ENTIRE CAREERS!  That is a lot of complaints in a short amount of time. But as we have said, Karma is a real bitch.  (Speaking of bitches, I hear McCormack's paralegal is a real class act too. Anyone have her name?)

McCormack might be the first collections attorney that we know of who has gotten his state bar record dinged by his extortion letter campaign. As far as I am concerned, he deserved it for his outrageous letter.

We are noticing that more "extortion" letters really aren't extortion letters as they used to be. They are slowly becoming more civil, gentle, and truthful.

It looks like people like the idea and see the wisdom of fighting back against a lawyer who goes too far. Whoever those 6 people were, good job! As I predicted, the impact would be stunning and disorienting. Even I am amazed how quickly changes in extortion letters are being made by the various collection attorneys.

However, I suspect the ELI website is considered mandatory reading nowadays and the smart ones don't need to get their state bar records dinged to "get it".

I am not sure how many Attorney General complaints have been filed against McCormack. I haven't checked but maybe someone can make a phone call and report back to me since it is supposed to be public knowledge. 

1423

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A win for the bad guys

« on: May 21, 2012, 01:39:09 PM »

I briefly followed and researched this case and this is a minor setback for most people. This is an older case.  We are talking about 30 songs here and music downloaders back then were much more belligerent about it vs. making an innocent mistake. College students are notorious for asinine things and had a bad reputation for egregious downloading and handling their affairs inappropriately.

And although this case exists, it will not directly apply to most of our audience because the circumstances are very much different here.

The music industry is fairly deep-pocketed.  So much so that they were able to lose a ton of money on the collective RIAA lawsuits. But when the dust settled, the RIAA came to their financial senses that the only people who made out like bandits were the lawyers that were milking these cases for all they are worth. They "won" with a very steep cost.

The article is still somewhat encouraging.  The argument being turned down was "constitutionality". However, that court has "hinted" to some future judge to consider reducing the award. It doesn't seem entirely over to me.

1424

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: CEG Email?

« on: May 19, 2012, 03:00:15 PM »

No problems. I perfectly understand. It is busy enough maintaining your own community without having to participate in others.

We love publicity. Wonderful tool. Court of public opinion works much quicker. We are online publicity whores nowadays.  LOL.  We also love the power of natural, organic SEO.

Thanks for stopping in. You are welcome anytime.  Again, keep up the good work. I am a fan and reader of FCT.

Thanks! I would love to stop by and comment more often, but currently I'm overwhelmed with FCT activities. I really appreciate what you guys do. Publicity is much more powerful weapon than I thought a yer ago when I was a scared, disoriented victim of a troll's attack.

1425

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: CEG Email?

« on: May 18, 2012, 10:21:15 PM »

FightCopyrightTrolls.com (FCT) is an ELI-recommended website. I read that website to keep up with our brother-in-arms fight on the P2P/Bittorrent lawsuit front. I have gotten some great nuggets reading SJD's analysis there.

I have been in contact with SJD behind the scenes a few months back.  We have a mutual respect for each other's websites and the related work we do on the different copyright trolling fronts.

I did not know about that site. I found this interesting: the chatter on that thread is about trying to drum up some racketeering charges and use the RICO statute to go after the trolls.