Messages

1756

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Attorney Bruce Rosen (representing Julie Stewart) Sends Certified Letter to ELI

« on: January 13, 2012, 03:18:58 PM »

SG,

I think you are trying to bait me. But I just couldn't let your comments go unanswered. 

Let me be clear.  I have run into some really, stupid lawyers over the years that had the spine of a jellyfish and the street smarts of an adolescent but Julie takes the prize.

She is a blooming idiot that has no credibility or reputation-building or engagement skills. She knows how to send threatening letters but her actions show how truly ignorant she is in these matters.  Her bogus DMCA complaints against us could not be unchallenged, nor could I be silent about it. 

She wants to be in Entertainment Law but has embarrassingly little experience on Internet or Social Media.  Her resume smells of a liberal environmentalist not fit for actual "street fighting". A college kid would have more savvy than she has.

So, she got rid of that one little innocuous Facebook post about my rebuttal letter to Bruce Rosen.  Fine, I will endeavor to share more happy news on Facebook. Boo-hoo, she keeps trying to hide what has happened when all she has done is add to the story. In fact, I am going to write a short outline and chronology because I am losing track of the various attacks and harassment.

And if I am ever compelled to deal with this in front of a judge, I will have the entire drama laid out neatly for him.

I am getting very tired of bullying lawyers that make threats they cannot legally support. It seems they want to test if Oscar and I will take our "stupid pills".  I may take a "stupid pill" one day but not this month.  One of my projects is to one day write an article or booklet about how ordinary citizens can fight back against bullying lawyers.

Lawyers do have some extra "powers" but there are plenty forms of "kryptonite" to use if need be to combat them and put a world of "butthurt" on them.

Every single threatening letter she sent us has been met with an equally strong rebuttal. Attempting to squash the truth will only force it out more.

I really don't want to get pissed off. If people think I am prolific with my words now that I am irritated and annoyed, they will have no idea how much content that can spill out of me if when I can truly pissed and go into angry, fighting mode.

As David Bruce Banner often said, "Please don't make me angry. You won't like me when I'm angry". Cue soundtrack music.

Facebook is known for being quite draconian when it comes to user complaints/ their user agreement.
I doubt that any human actually reads/views content that's the subject of a complaint; it's simply removed automatically.
If the other party makes a counter-argument, then a person might look at it.  Yes, I said "might".

These days, many of the people who use "social media" consider themselves "skilled marketers" simply because they can set up a profile, and use the basic features of a the system.
But, nothing could be further from the truth.  Skilled marketing/public relations takes many years to master.
Additionally, it's much easier to carefully foster a good reputation, than to attempt "damage control" later on.

I suspect that even lawyers are having a hard time finding work these days.
That's understandable given these times, but taking on legal cases that appear to be an obvious fraud is going to attract unwanted attention.
In addition, she's made false claims through the US DMCA.  This is illegal.  So, I really question her moral compass.

I think that Julie Stewart is making huge mistakes in her public relations by meeting any criticism, or even mention of her name with claims of "slander", "libel", and "anything that I write is copyright".
I personally don't think that she's in the correct profession for her.
At the very least, she should try practicing family law (wills, real estate, etc.).  She doesn't have the stomach for what she is doing now.
Most people don't believe that lawyers have some sort of "powers" to abuse the system, and bully people.
Anybody, and I mean anybody can hire a lawyer, send letters, make bogus claims and intimidate.
Ms Stewart isn't "special", and has no "special powers" or privilege.

S.G.

1757

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Attorney Bruce Rosen (representing Julie Stewart) Sends Certified Letter to ELI

« on: January 13, 2012, 03:04:48 AM »

So, Facebook advises me to read through these community standards so I don't violate them again.  Anybody want to speculate how my letter to Bruce Rosen violated this?

http://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/

It couldn't be bullying, could it?  It can't be harassment because I didn't start this nonsense. If anything, i am being harassed. Or is it because I said I might report her to the Canadian Bar for harassing the ELI site with bogus complaints?

1758

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Geoffrey Beal of Masterfile Tries to Suppress Information on ELI

« on: January 13, 2012, 01:53:29 AM »

Off with your head then.  And you will be docked one week's pay for disagreeing with us.  :-)

Actually, if you read my last paragraph, I did see the merits of his approach. It can be a tough call when to continue responding or when to stay quiet.

Believe me when I say my self-control is being tested on another front. I am desperately trying to behave myself.

I have to say I don't agree with you guys. Dieselfish found some rather damaging information – another entity claimed copyright to the image prior to MF contacting him. The fact that there is more than one copyright claimant out there makes the issue fuzzy. If the copyright claim was before the MF filing, that pretty much blows up the case.

Then he simply closed the issue. MF certainly can decide to "re-open" the issue at any time. But clearly if they continue to pester him after this, MF could be held for any of his legal costs.

I would say there is a 50-50 chance of them contacting him again.

1759

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Attorney Bruce Rosen (representing Julie Stewart) Sends Certified Letter to ELI

« on: January 13, 2012, 01:48:25 AM »

Look at what Facebook sent me tonight. Was my letter "hateful?"  This is getting ridiculous. Obviously, I can only have happy thoughts on Facebook.  So, fine, I will stick to happy posts only.  God forbid I should openly explain my frustration and aggravation.

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

Subject:    Facebook Warning
Date:    Thu, 12 Jan 2012 21:36:50 -0800
From:    Facebook <[email protected]>
Reply-To:    Facebook <[email protected]>
To:    matt

Hello,

You posted an item that violated our Terms of Use and this item has been removed. Among other things, content that is hateful, threatening or obscene is not allowed, nor is content that attacks an individual or group. Continued misuse of Facebook's features could result in your account being disabled. <br><br>If you have any questions or concerns, please visit our Help Centre.

The Facebook Team
==================

We removed content you posted
We removed the following content you posted or were the admin of because it violates Facebook's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities:
Matthew Chan writes a lengthy, detailed rebuttal to Attorney Bruce Rosen's Letter Regarding Canadian Lawyer Julie Stewart of Blackline.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/77577916/Matthew-Chan-Response-to-Attorney-Bruce-Rosen-Regarding-Julie-Stewart-of-Blackline

1760

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Geoffrey Beal of Masterfile Tries to Suppress Information on ELI

« on: January 12, 2012, 12:13:28 PM »

IN another thread I started regarding Masterfile lawsuit history, 2011 seemed to be a very quiet year with 10 case in terms of filing lawsuits. I do not yet know why it dropped so dramatically after a record-breaking 2010 of 36 cases. It seems likely that within the next fee weeks, Masterfile will be filing their first 2012 lawsuit cases.

In the few Masterfile cases I saw, I don't remember any lawsuits for a single image.  Most involved 4 or more images. When you consider at least several hundred letters sent out per year by MF, the changes of getting a lawsuit is less than half a percent.

I am much more confident that Geoffrey Beal will not go out of his way to generate more mails to Dieselfish but that does not mean his case will not be escalated to a lawyer.

For me, I would have also left it alone but having read his well-written letter (which I will post later), I do see the merits of why he chose to do so. As nearly all of us know, there are no guarantees when fighting these letters only likely outcomes and behavior.

1761

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network Lawsuit Collection

« on: January 12, 2012, 12:00:33 PM »

Believe me when I say I am on on Aloha's side. However, the issue the court cannot easily ignore is that corporate entities require proper legal representation otherwise it has no voice. If he wants to represent himself "pro se", he would have to agree to take on the accusations and be the defendant himself (not necessarily recommended).

By the quality of writing and spelling in his document, Michael does not appear close to being able to represent himself. I hate to say that I agree with opposing counsel with him being so unqualified and unprepared.

Also, it would have been so easy to file any kind of answer (much less use a lawyer) to let the court know he was paying attention instead of letting the deadline go away.  At the very least, he could have asked for a time extension for Pete sake.

But, you are right, he needs to a lawyer NOW to intervene on his behalf because it looks very bad right now.

Aloha Plastic Surgery does seem to be on the ropes at the moment.  However, it seems not so hard, at least according to this, to get a default judgement set aside:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_judgment:

"However, "good cause" is rather easy to meet, compared to other instances where "good cause" might be required. For example, mere "excusable neglect" is, at least at the federal level, a sufficient reason to vacate default judgments.[26] There are often time limits and other requirements"

I do worry that he is trying to get it set aside "pro se".  I think he needs to lawyer up FAST.

1762

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Free Baitpapers

« on: January 12, 2012, 11:49:13 AM »

I don't want to overstep my boundary but I have asked EVNL to go another step further in the story in revealing additional info which she has not yet done. Some of you might be surprised.

EVNL, thank you for sharing your story.

It's remarkable to me that there are men and women practicing law who have hardened themselves to the point where money is apparently the only thing that has meaning for them. I honesty don't understand how these people can ignore the genuine pain they inflict on others with their outrageous and perverted demands for settlements.

1763

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Hawaiian Art Network Lawsuit Collection

« on: January 12, 2012, 06:16:27 AM »

I uploaded 4 more documents to this collection.

Outrigger appears to have settled based on this dismissal by HAN.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78001362/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Outrigger-Lodging-Services-Voluntary-Dismissal

Moku-aina Properties are still fighting. They filed an answer. I have not read it yet.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78001554/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Moku-aina-Properties-Defendant-Answer

And we know Aloha Plastic Surgery defaulted. However, I just discovered that Michael Pasquale filed a Motion to Set Aside the Default Judgment.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78021881/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Aloha-Plastic-Surgery-Motion-to-Set-Aside-Default-Judgment

Naturally, HAN is aggressively objecting to this motion.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78021564/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Aloha-Plastic-Surgery-Motion-to-Strike-Defendant-Request

Very interesting reading but it does not look good for the defendant. I would be shocked if the judge granted the defendant's motion/request.  Michael screwed up badly.

1764

Getty Images Letter Forum / Analyzing Masterfile's Lawsuit History

« on: January 12, 2012, 06:10:00 AM »

In researching Masterfile, I was referred to Justia.com and ultimately got sucked into spending $80 worth of downloaded Masterfile documents tonight from 2010 and 2011.  I have uploaded about 60% of them so far with quite a bit more to come.  (Yes, it costs me money to pay PACER so I can provide everyone those nice court documents on Scribd. It will be one of my biggest bills yet from PACER so Paypal contributions will definitely be appreciated this time around.)

Justia lists the following for Masterfile being the plaintiff:

2004: 1 case
2005: 3 cases
2006: 17 cases
2007: 1 case
2008: 2 cases
2009: 12 cases
2010: 36 cases
2011: 10 cases

I might by off by 1 or 2 if I miscounted. However, what was up with 2006 and 2010? They seemed unusually high.

I will need help analyzing and reading through the 40+ cases that will soon be on Scribd.  Most look like they were ultimately settled. Some simply defaulted and several defendants are putting up a fight.

http://www.scribd.com/collections/3431851/Masterfile-Lawsuits-2010-2011

This discussion thread is a bit ambitious because there are about 80+ cases to potentially analyze. However, I am not paying for anymore documents. We will have to work with the 2010 and 2011 documents I downloaded which were far more tedious, time-consuming, and expensive than I had anticipated.

1765

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Free Baitpapers

« on: January 11, 2012, 11:02:18 PM »

Thanks for getting the courage to finally share your story.  As you can see, your story is very moving to our readers. I daresay that he caved in very quickly at $300 because he was getting lots of heat. Plus, when you have a young, inexperienced lawyer with minimal track record going up against Oscar, it will not be pretty.

You have the unfortunate distinction of being the one of the first HAN cases ELI heard about. We are glad you found ELI and Oscar to help you.

You did pay a heavy emotional price. But your story will impact and move many people.  Many people have shared their stories but yours is probably the most egregious we have heard thus far. Chalk it up to the genius of Hawaiian Art Network's executive management and supreme lawyer-hiring ability.

Thanks all, I appreciate your kind remarks! I rushed the story because I wanted to post but was on my way out the door...Honestly, it was the jail time threat that really got to me the most. I had reason to believe its validity when I contacted our region's most sought after & successful patent attorney,  who happened to be a friend of my family...When I sent him a copy of the demand letter I received from BS, even he said that given the fact that the image was not mine to use, not even the best lawyer in the world could get me off...

I started this thread because over the period of weeks while this was happening, I felt in my gut that this was a trap for the unknowing website builder like myself. I recall receiving the "shakedown Letter" one day & after reading it, I thought how could this be happening...Seriously? $10,000 dollars for one photo that I presumed was free to use...My husband thought it was spam & told me to ignore it...

But of course I couldn't stop thinking about it so I googled the lawyers name & saw that he existed.

Naturally, I wanted to end the stress so I called him & tried to rationalise that it was an accident & that no infringement had been intended. He was very quick to explain the laws of copyright infringement to me & no matter what I said, at the end of the day, the only thing he wanted me to say was that I would pay. I remember crying on the phone & pleading which got me nowhere...if anything it gave him the confidence to further intimidate & scare me.

The next thing I did was call VKT gallery & ended up on the phone with his wife. I was again in tears fearful of the prison threat...I have never broken the law except for maybe speeding, so the thought of jail was suffocating me inside & out. She told me I wouldn't go to jail, but that it would cost me something  & then informed me to contact HAN & ask to speak to the Art Curator. I did, & gave him the same speech, pleading once again. He told me to call BS to deal with him directly...but I had already tried 4 or 5 times over the phone & several times through email only to be reminded that criminal prosecution was hanging over my head. As I mentioned in the earlier post, I was terrified, had nightmares & would find myself in tears even in the garden trying to find peace of mind planting flowers...what have you etc.

At one point I asked BS, where is the humanity in all of this? Here I am, I'm a good person & would never intentionally break any law, would never steal from another, I've made a stupid uneducated mistake of using this photograph for @ 2 weeks & now I am to come up with $10,000 dollars? I don't have that kind of cash on hand! His only response was "The humanity in this is to pay!" Well that is when I started getting angry and chose to fight back. I found ELI & Oscar & just like that my torment was over.

I have to say, at first when I saw their names appear on this awesome forum & how much they didn't like the negative exposure, I was rewarded by a slightly sweet revenge. Felt that they deserved it for what I was put through...but after time passed, I started to feel sorry for him.

I paid him out...I think it was $300...but was it really worth it for him to go after little me for $300 dollars? After all the dedication, time & money$$$ it cost him to get his degree only to have his reputation darkened. I went to Med school for 2 years before leaving it behind to begin an entrepreneur dream with my family. I know how much work & dedication is involved with getting a degree.

But even after the feeling sorry...all I have to do is remember how he spoke to me while I cried telling him how much I love my son & how he needs me & how I can't go to prison. On every call, he clearly did not care but always told me to pay or make a reasonable offer...

I sent him as much proof as I could to prove I couldn't pay them what they were after. He followed with that he would go after my husband who is also on the my website even though he is not administrator or owner as I am, but still liable. Enough time went by without a reply from me while I searched for answers & loopholes that he must have realised I wasn't lying. He finally emailed me & said "even a few hundred dollars is an offer". But by then, he had gone too far & I had already spoken with Oscar & Matthew over the phone. I made a decision to expose what had happened by associating myself with ELI. I wanted the truth & facts to come out, wanted others to have some defence against this sort of attack...I did it because it was the right thing to do.

I do believe many actions deserve a second chance, for a person  to feel remorseful & be forgiven. I believe that BS regrets his dealings with me, primarily because of the light it has shed on him but not necessarily for what happened to me. If anything, judging by his personality during the time I dealt with him, if anything he is just as angry & soar over it all. I am sorry that it got this far & that it tarnished his reputation but had he been just a little more humane with me, none of this would have happened.

My website relies on good photos & since this has all happened, I deleted every photo I had thought free to use...5 years of work gone. I was blessed by several key individuals who volunteered me with unlimited use of thousands of photographs & I was able to re-build my website, even better than it was.

So there it is, the whole story & yes I am much better now, better educated too.

1766

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: IT Machines, LLC vs. Masterfile Corporation, NCS Recovery Corp. and Phusion 25

« on: January 11, 2012, 10:22:13 PM »

After DieselFish brought this to my attention, I dug deeper. I took his docket submission and dug into PACER further. There is a story to be told. I have sorted the documents in numerical order based on court numbering. The documents are in this Scribd collection:

http://www.scribd.com/collections/3431323/IT-Machines-vs-Masterfile-NCS-Recovery-Lawsuit

However, the initial complaint is actually Exhibit A in the federal system. I labeled it as Initial Complaint in Scribd for easier following. The Initial Complaint is rather scathing against Masterfile, NCS Recovery, and Phusion 25

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77980349/IT-Machines-vs-Masterfile-NCS-Recovery-Initial-Complaint

From there, there is a motion to remove it from state court to federal court.

The rest of it mostly speaks for itself. Ultimately, there was a settlement between the parties.

1767

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Free Baitpapers

« on: January 11, 2012, 08:05:21 PM »

FYI, if it means anything, that lawyer did get some bitter pills along the way.

Extortion-Victim-No Longer, thanks for sharing your experience here.
This is the sort of thing that drives me; fighting the copyright trolls' use of over-the-top tactics, and the human cost of that.
Your case illustrates the lies and the intimidation tactics used.

Sounds like things are better for you now, and I'm sure that I speak for everyone here when I say that I'm glad for that.

S.G.

1768

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Free Baitpapers

« on: January 11, 2012, 05:39:54 PM »

mcfilms,

I give you credit for going the extra mile to reach out and solicit commentary from them. But I think they have no PR sense. Unfortunately, I feel they really had no choice but to answer in that manner they did for PR purposes.  Their credibility is very low as far as I am concerned. Talk is cheap.  They have made little or no effort that I can see in getting any other message out other than bragging about how much they have enjoyed their PicScout relationship.

I also question what the motives are for pirates to steal photos only to give them away.  Sure, they might get some traffic and visibility but there is overhead to pay for to host all these free images.

If I was a photographer, I would scream bloody murder over this but everyone in the HAN camp and especially VK Tylor is suspiciously quiet about the issue.

Sorry, absent more information, I don't buy it.  I am not a conspiracy theory lover but there one response is not enough for me to believe.

Getty Images and Masterfile, for all their faults, continue to have much higher credibility than HAN in my book.

There has been a lot of speculation about how the HAN images got dispersed on so many free wall paper sites. Nobody's really sure and there is a lot of conjecture flying around.

So I asked them.

Here is the content of my letter:

Hi,

I notice that some of the print photographs you sell are available on free digital wallpaper sites like http://www.webshots.com. It seems like some of your artisans are posting their images on these sites and they are offered "Free" or for a very low download price. The exact terms of these "Wallpaper sites" are vague. But many individuals believe it includes permission to use these images on their own web site. This has resulted in several recent "Demand Letters" issued by Hawaiian Art Network for copyright infringement.

Although I am a strong advocate for copyright, this situation has led to a great deal of confusion in the marketplace. Are you aware of this situation? Are your artists at liberty to distribute their images through other outlets? Has H.A.N. contacted these sites and asked them to stop providing these image?

Thank you for your attention to this matter.
 
Jerry Witt

I was pleasantly surprised to get a reply the very next day. The position of HAN tracks with what has been said here. They say they HAVE issued takedown notices (hundreds), but many in the Eastern European sites don't respond. They suspect that originally a hacker gained access to the high resolution images. Once distributed to free wallpaper sites, they spread out widely.

I invited the representative of HAN to join the discussion here and I hope he takes up the offer.

1769

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A letter to my Congressman and my two Senators

« on: January 11, 2012, 02:10:08 PM »

mcfilms and I actually discussed this on-camera in his very first video update.  mcfilms is a more thoughtful and methodical guy than I am. He thinks like you do while it may be very slow, there is benefit from it.

My position is that if someone wants to sprearhead the idea of pre-written letters, I would be happy to post them into our Scribd account for anyone to use and access. ELI Defense Team members have different strengths and preferences in what each individual member wants to bring to the fight.

If someone believes in the idea strong enough and wants to take the lead in it, I would be happy to give support and visibility to it. However, for me, I think my time is best spent on another front.

Let us remember, ELI is a hobby or side-project for most of us including me. We have to be selective in how and where we put our time.

Though I agree with Mulligan on this, there might be something in making it very easy for people to write to their elected officials.  I have seen several "causes" actually post pre-written letters and current lists of addresses for senators and congressmen.  All one would have to do is then print the pre-written letter, sign it, and send it off.  A site like ELI would be perfect to host such letters.  I have also seen several attempts on the ELI forum to start online petitions on the whitehouse.gov site - does anyone know if they gained any traction?  When I found the links, the petitions had already expired.  Yes, it may be a waste of time, but it can't hurt our cause.

1770

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Geoffrey Beal of Masterfile Tries to Suppress Information on ELI

« on: January 11, 2012, 01:57:20 PM »

You are correct in that the stock photo companies have lost their way. However, I also think photographers have lost their way also. There is an entitlement mentality by photographers that they deserve to make a living as they have done in years past.

The problem here is that since the advent of digital photography, the Internet, and the ever-decreasing prices of digital cameras, ANYONE can be a photographer and people can actually take some nice photos with relatively inexpensive cameras. Further, the people who invest in nicer cameras can take photos that match those of so-called professionals.

When you have an abundance of imagery, over time, it becomes a depreciating commodity. Being in "professional" photography in most cases is like trying to get into desktop publishing, printing, or secretarial business. These are functions that still exist but FAR smaller than before advances in technology.

Professional photography is a dying industry because nearly everyone has a nice camera.

I would venture to say that many of the smaller stock photo companies would go out of business without the revenue stream from the extortion letters. In fact, I t believe very few stock photo companies can stay in business WITHOUT being in the extortion letter business. I would venture to say it is the MAJORITY of their revenues.

I put the stock photo companies among the dying, antiquated businesses such as the newspapers, book publishing, and music publishing business.  These are people who tried to make money off the artists they sponsor without providing much value.  Now, the biggest value stock photo companies provide is PicScout and their "extortion letter" "shakedown letter" campaigns.

I think the stock photo companies have lost sight of their claimed purpose - managing the rights of artists.  They have found a way to make ridiculous amounts of money for themselves.  In fact, I'd be curious to see what percentage of a settlement claim actually make it to the artist.  Until companies like Masterfile see that they could actually continue to make money, support their artists, and gain new customers... I'm afraid nothing will change.