Messages

301

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: What is up with Attorney Adam Gafni of Gafni & Levin LLP?

« on: October 17, 2017, 09:53:36 PM »

By the way, there is a "new" domain http://gafnilevin.com they are promoting which points to the older domain http://gafnilaw.com.

At long last, we get to see what the two Gafni & Levin lawyers look like.  Jason Levin is one very TALL dude. He sort of reminds me of "Jaws" from the Roger Moore's James Bond movies.  :-)

http://gafnilaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/history.jpg

302

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: What is up with Attorney Adam Gafni of Gafni & Levin LLP?

« on: October 17, 2017, 09:44:19 PM »

I have always wondered about the validity of the law firms Adam Gafni have been involved with. I could never find their law firms name in any corporation online search which made me suspect their operating status.  It appears I finally got a better answer by way of a forwarded email written by Adam Gafni partner, Jason Levin.

It appears in my original research, I did NOT have the additional insight gained from the Disclaimer fine print from the Business Search Tips page. This is the text found on the Business Search Tips page (which is a different page from the main Business Search Page):

http://www.sos.ca.gov/business-programs/business-entities/cbs-search-tips/

Disclaimer: This Search tool allows you to search the Secretary of State's California Business Search database for abstracts of information for domestic stock, domestic nonprofit and qualified foreign corporations, limited liability companies and limited partnerships that have filed with this office. This search tool groups corporations separately from limited liability companies and limited partnerships and returns all entities for the search criteria in the respective groups regardless of the current status. This database does not include other types of business entities that are registered with the California Secretary of State, such as general partnerships and limited liability partnerships. The search results only include copies of filed Statements of Information for corporations and limited liability companies that have been imaged. Search results that indicate “Image not available online” may be available by ordering copies, refer to refer to Information Requests.

The bottom line is that Adam Gafni's current and prior law firms might have been properly registered in California but they do not appear in the California corporations search if the legal entity is a California general partnership (GP) or a limited liability partnership (LLP). According to the website, the only way to get that information is to inquire further.

The ELI tries to get its facts straight but sometimes we have missing information.  That missing information is that the main California Business Search page https://businesssearch.sos.ca.gov/ does NOT have the same disclaimer as the one on the Business Search Tips. Excerpted below, there is no mention of different treatment of online listings of general partnerships or limited liability partnership.

Disclaimer: This tool allows you to search the Secretary of State's California Business Search database for abstracts of information for domestic stock, domestic nonprofit and qualified foreign corporations, limited liability companies and limited partnerships that have filed with this office. This search tool groups corporations separately from limited liability companies and limited partnerships and returns all entities for the search criteria in the respective groups regardless of the current status.

Although every attempt has been made to ensure that the information contained in the database is accurate, the Secretary of State's office is not responsible for any loss, consequence, or damage resulting directly or indirectly from reliance on the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of the information that is provided. All such information is provided "as is." For information on ordering copies of the official business entity records for a particular entity, please refer to Information Requests.

Given this insight was conveyed to me recently, I would now say there is a good chance that if anyone chose to look into corporation filing status of Adam Gafni's law firm, it will be there. I haven't yet gone through the motions of checking myself but I find the Disclaimer text on the Business Search Tips page to be informative and compelling give benefit of the doubt.

303

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Still insisting

« on: October 04, 2017, 09:40:40 PM »

The trolls are out in force because many people are legally ignorant and easily intimidated. Quite frankly, the Getty issue is old news. The fact that their demands are now so low, it is hardly worth the time to discuss it. Pay it, don't pay it, the risk is very low.

Until they change the laws, copyright still is strict liability which is why the trolls are out in full force.

304

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: October 02, 2017, 03:09:16 PM »

David,

Thank you for your public comment here. It helps us A LOT to understand why the hell this lawsuit even happened? It is just plain stupid of Naomi in light of the additional information you have provided.

I also agree there is a concerted effort to squelch information in any way they can. We expose a lot of shenanigans by reading between the lines and gathering intelligence from ELI members and victims. We try to get it right but we sometimes have to make educated guesses in the absence of hard core information and verification.

ELI exists for the very reason you say. The public needs to know.  This copyright extortion operation has become a "thing" for the last decade. And there are new victims every day. This stuff just never goes away. It keeps growing like a cancer. 

The amounts they are asking in the demand letters to settle claims for are extortionate amounts in my opinion and that is why there continues to be the outrage.

P.S. Glad you have a sense of humor about your AOL account!

Thank you to all of your forum members for their interest in this case.  Please don't be jealous of my aol account.  I may change it someday.  Yes I have an account through my law firm, but this started out as such a petty matter, I thought it would wrap up, used my old aol, and well, here I am.  I do not have a great deal of time to use the forum, but want to support an active community fighting these lawsuits.  Yes, they had my client's check in their possession.  In fact, my client signed their release and returned, it, correcting some errors, and drawing a line through confidentiality clause (which is almost undoubtedly unenforceable anyway).  They returned the check and filed suit.  Ironically, they have undermined the confidentiality they claim to seek in a manner which cannot be undone.  Interesting to see what the Federal Court will think of that.  I will certainly do a FRCP rule 68 offer immediately after responding.  I think that showing the public what goes on here is important not just for this one case, but for an "extrajudicial business model" driven by dishonest representations of legal repercussions to the primarily innocent infringers whom have inadvertently been misled, sometimes by the photographers themselves or those acting their behalves.  Yes, I am the defense attorney in this case.  Yes, I am fine with public scrutiny of what I have done.  My client has done nothing to be ashamed or embarrassed of, either in innocently posting what he reasonably believed was an image in public domain, or in offering to settle for $1000, more than the case should be valued at.

305

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee & Assoc. Lists RM Media Ltd in Nick Youngson Template Lawsuit

« on: October 02, 2017, 02:20:00 PM »

There is precedent here about copyright extortionists blindly following lawsuits against parties getting poor results. Masterfile did just that for a few years. By my estimate, they spent several tens of thousands of dollars of filing fees and attorney fees filing lawsuits against defendants where many did not bother to respond.  More importantly, Masterfile abruptly stopped filing ridiculous amounts of lawsuits. I believe they stopped not because they were "being nice". They stopped because it was expensive, not working, and resulting in a net loss for their efforts. The only people who profited were the lawyers. I think Masterfile lost a good amount of money from the endeavor.

It seems Higbee & Associates are on a similar path. They take pride in bragging about their growing "copyright litigation".

As my friends report over at fightcopyrighttrolls.com (they report on porn demand letters & lawsuits), the more lawsuits are filed, the more "unintended consequences" are likely to happen to the plaintiffs and lawyers themselves. What happens is a hornets nest is stirred among anonymous readers and they work in unorthodox and nasty ways to bring down the lawyers and the plaintiffs.

The stuff we discuss here is tame comparatively speaking. But if Higbee and their other lawyers are foolish enough to believe that their firm's growing aggressiveness will go without consequence from their victims, they might be in for a rude surprise. Smart people are reporting to me various cracks/flaws in their little collection system and I suspect these will be turned against them somewhere down the line.

Many abusive players that tried this have been put down over the years. RIAA, Righthaven, Prenda (Steel & Hansmeier), Timmy McCormack firm (ex-outside Getty counsel), Linda Ellis, and many others suffered greatly for their abusive ways. It always happens when they go after the wrong folks. When they hit the wrong targets, bad things seem to happen to the plaintiffs. 

As Robert said elsewhere, Higbee might be the new Timmy McCormack. However, Timmy's primary client was Getty. Higbee appears to have a larger base of clients. And it will be interesting to see how one client's aggressive actions/inactions spills over to another client.

We have seen it happen before and we will see it again.

So I guess Higbee is still pounding sand on the Youngson cases despite all his 14 day deadlines etc.? I haven't found any filings for Youngson or RM Media. For the people dealing with this for a long time, is his last gasp the draft lawsuit? He probably doesn't want to eat the $400 filing fee for a plaintiff he knows won't show up. He seems quick to file like with that confidentiality clause filing in another thread so dragging his feet on these reveal a lack of confidence.

306

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: October 02, 2017, 01:49:56 PM »

Can't really see anything without registering for an account. However, the information you have to give to register for an account is too invasive for my taste.

I found this which lists all the changes his operation goes through since it is almost impossible to keep track of the turnover. Looks like he started out doing bankruptcies. If you want to track people that leave their jobs check out the multiple twitter accounts they have, they list jobs there. One copyright case manager only lasted a few months before they were hiring the same job again.

https://www.matchdeck.com/company-monitor/company/10289439/profile

307

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: September 30, 2017, 07:16:14 PM »

What is this photo? The URL indicates it is Twitter related? If it is, that must be a photo from many years ago.

My guess is this image link won't be active for very long. And she probably doesn't own the copyright of that photo of her laying down. Lots of dark red in that photo. It looks like it might have been taken by a professional photographer. Her face seems airbrushed.

Egos on parade.. Naomi thinks shes model material too..

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/755244758/l_685d175318689233f579d353461a0409.jpg

308

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee's Greatest Courtroom Hits

« on: September 30, 2017, 05:17:57 PM »

My comments inline...  You too can have the Higbee lawyers represent you with their excellent attention to detail. This is what happens if you decide to go public with the lawsuit. Many more eyes looking and scrutinizing.

So check out this Motion to Strike Higbee filed in a case. You might notice the parties listed on page 2 Under I. are not the parties in this case. Cut & Paste gone wrong. How embarrassing for him.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6ZBMFkSS0ADcHJzVDRMYnZ6aXM

LOL! They can't seem to figure out who the plaintiff really is. Is it Leif Skoogfors or Christopher Sadowski? And how about "CONNIE BRANABA & ASSOCIAATES, INC." an obvious TYPO of Associates.

Now this. Higbee was trying to avoid leaving his desk in California on this case, using hired local guns instead. I guess the judge got tired of it, he ended up getting an order to personally appear lol

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6ZBMFkSS0ADWG4xbWI1MXJvdXc

Actually, what I found interesting is this.

... Christopher Sadowski will give BackChina information about (a) the sale of the photograph - to whom it was licensed, for how much, and the market data; and (b) the top five selling photographs for the preceding five year.

It seems to me Sadowski will actually have to JUSTIFY his claim amounts, not just the cookie-cutter $5,000 in the Higbee letters.

309

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: If You Want To File a Complaint Against Higbee

« on: September 30, 2017, 04:59:34 PM »

OMG, this is just what every young lawyer looking for street cred needs on their record.

Actually, this happened to a couple of Getty Images lawyers a few years ago who were overly aggressive. A Getty victim filed a bar complaint against one of Getty's outside lawyers and I was told she found herself having to answer the complaint against her and defend the accusations to the local State Bar. (This is what was told me by the victim)

A bar complaint for allowing their underling clerks to practice law, asking for business insurance, or any other plausible complaint would likely be "inconvenient". So which young copyright lawyer in California is going to get their first state bar complaint?

P.S. I just saw that your complaint form was "pre-filled out" against Mathew Higbee! 

Here is a link to a pre-filled California bar complaint form. The blank portions are at least fillable electronically.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6ZBMFkSS0ADZ3BFeHBwczRjbE0/view?usp=sharing

310

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: September 30, 2017, 04:47:16 PM »

Naomi (the bimbo) filed a dumb case which I think will come back to embarrass her at the federal court level.

Any lawyer should know that remedies are generally financial. Naomi/Reed negotiated an alleged agreed $1,000 for settlement.

But now, the federal court judge and his staff are going to see that the most important part (financial agreement) was turned down because some no-name defendant didn't want to sign a confidentiality agreement.

Everything about this lawsuit seems to scream to the federal judge "Why are you wasting your money and the court's time with this dumb case?" I am willing to bet that there is going to be a lot of pressure by the court for Naomi to take the damn $1,000 that was agreed upon.

I can hear her whining "But they wouldn't sign the confidentiality agreement!"

The judge might reply, "And yet you have made this entire matter more public than if you took the $1,000"

She might say, "Well, we can't let OTHER victims know we are willing to take $1,000 when we send out $5,000 letters.

Judge might eye-roll and say, "Then why did you file this dumb lawsuit and submit into public record with exhibits of your settlement emails?"

She might say, "David Brown said he might write articles about us and the business we are in."

And on and on....

What a dumb case Naomi gets to have her name on. The client Aaron Reed  (the Himbo) stupidly agreed to the lawsuit instead of quietly taking the $1,000. You have a dumb client who listened to a dumb lawyer to file a dumb lawsuit.

Your comment jogged my memory when I was looking up some of his other filings they were getting encouraged to have the Magistrate hear the case over the sitting judge.

311

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Some nuggets regarding Higbee & Associates lawyers

« on: September 30, 2017, 04:26:53 PM »

It has been awhile since I peeked in on the Higbee & Associates website.

In particular, you might want to look at the About the Attorneys page.

https://www.higbeeassociates.com/about/attorneys/

Can anyone tell me what appears to be a recurring trait about the Higbee lawyers?  They are "youngish".

I was also provided some reasonably credible info (but I have not verified it personally) who checked into some of Higbee's court filings that they are being filed by a "Melissa Higbee". However, that "Melissa Higbee" may, in fact, be Melissa Clark on their Attorneys page. The suspicion is Mathew and Melissa may be spouses.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/melissa-higbee-a3a4b56/

It might be useful to start tracking which Higbee lawyers are dumb enough to put their names on some of these lawsuits.

And some might wonder why I look at these things? Because there is a lot of insights you gain by understanding the people, structure, and relationships of the people involved.

Higbee has a habit of making himself "much larger" than he really is. Robert and I verified and reported he uses various virtual offices and virtual business address to create the illusion that he is a "national" law firm.  Actually, he is primarily a California law firm and one of the "staff lawyers" may, in fact, be his wife.

Things are never what they seem to be and ELI tries to look a little further than the letters we see so frequently.

312

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: September 30, 2017, 04:09:32 PM »

I got curious about the lawyer who signed off on the Oregon lawsuit (Naomi Sarega). Naomi is apparently a "supervising attorney". My guess is she supervises her "clerks" (the ones who come dangerously close to practicing law on behalf of Higbee's firm).

https://www.higbeeassociates.com/about/attorneys/naomi-sarega/

The Higbee & Associates website certainly posts LARGE photos of their lawyers!

As I suspected, Naomi is on the "youngish" side as most of the lawyers in the copyright extortion business seem to be.

It seems to me all victims of Higbee and associates need to be collecting all the emails and correspondence of these clerks. There might be some enterprising lawyer in the ELI community who may want to read them over to see if the clerks are "practicing law".

313

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: September 30, 2017, 04:02:39 PM »

That is why Higbee and others of their ilk submit "template/draft lawsuits" as part of their collection process. To mentally "stimulate" a victims heart bpm.

Everything Higbee does just seems so amateur hour. That petition is written mostly to scare the defendant.

First, if he is serious in copyright litigation he knows statutory damages are per work, not per infringement. He messes that up in the petition, probably on purpose to see if the defendant knows the rules to strike it.

Second, #26 and #27 are not appropriate parts of a petition and those plus the email exhibits should be stricken and force him to re-file.

314

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: September 30, 2017, 04:00:35 PM »

Icepick,

Good stuff you are posting and sharing. Thank you.

And I have it on pretty good authority that federal judges HATE these kinds of small-fry lawsuits and there is a fair amount of pressure to make it go away (settle the damn thing). It makes the plaintiff and the lawyer look petty.

This is why I generally tell victims that they should put IN WRITING an at least one offer to settle and keep that letter on file even if the settlement amount is smaller. It takes away the argument that the defendant didn't try and helps make the case that the plaintiff is being too greedy.

Another interesting fact is it was filed in Oregon where the defendant was. The Plaintiff appears to live in Washington state. Still closer to the courthouse than Youngson is. I'd love to hear more from this Attorney on his dealings with the Higbee outfit.

I'm not an expert, but I think the defendant can shield himself from the attorneys fees and costs with an offer of settlement that is equal to or more than any judgment plaintiff wins. That would force Higbee to decide if they want to go out on that limb and pay those costs + court time over a confidentiality clause.

And I laughed that Higbee demanded a jury trial in the petition, I would think defendants would make out better with a jury in Higbee cases than he would.

315

Higbee Associates Letter & Lawsuits Forum / Re: Higbee client's lawsuit/ Failed settlement over confidentiality clause

« on: September 30, 2017, 03:55:40 PM »

I always tell people to remove the image from the server. But layman users sometimes think that removing the image from the page is the same thing and later learn the hard way, it isn't.

And regarding the 1-hour drafting time for the complaint, you are being too generous here given it is generally a Word template they have on file.

Found another suit he recently filed for the same photographer. The interesting thing here is defendant removed the image from the page it was on, but it was still on the server so Higbee is going to push for willful infringement based on that. So delete the images from your server also.

https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/federal/ord/133130/

This is purely a guess, but if he can get $1,500 settlements for paying $400 filing fee + at most an hour drafting time I guess he still makes enough to keep going.