Messages

481

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A Masterfile Demand Letter Story

« on: January 11, 2012, 12:49:15 PM »

The term "without prejudice" is also used in the course of negotiations to indicate that a particular conversation or letter cannot be tendered as evidence in court; it can be considered a form of privilege. This usage flows from the primary meaning: concessions and representations made for purpose of settlement are simply being mooted for that purpose, and are not meant to actually concede those points in litigation.

Such correspondences must both be made in the course of negotiations and a genuine attempt to settle a dispute between the parties. A prohibition exists on documents marked "without prejudice" being used as a façade to conceal facts or evidence from the court. As a result, documents marked "without prejudice" that do not actually contain any offer of settlement may be used as evidence, should the matter proceed to court. Courts may also decide to exclude from evidence communications not marked "without prejudice" that do contain offers of settlement.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice_%28legal_procedure%29

482

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Name for Members of the ELI Defense Team

« on: January 10, 2012, 10:44:01 PM »

Honestly I like "Members of the ELI Defense Team" too.

MUTINY!

483

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Alternative names for Extortion Letters

« on: January 10, 2012, 12:30:12 PM »

I prefer "shakedown" as well. A "ransom" usually indicates someone is holding something of value that belongs to you. It doesn't ring as accurate as "shakedown" or "extortion". I also like "copyright trolls" because this practice is so similar to the practice of "Patent trolling" that is currently all the rage. I'm sure it served as a model for copyright trolling.

The only thing these stock companies fail to realize is that a patent troll has nothing to loose. A company like Fictitious Holdings, LLC can sue people like crazy because it doesn't have to maintain a decent image. But when a company like Getty Images starts suing their customers and potential customers, word gets out and it hurts the company. That is why I think we have not seen many cases from them recently. I also think it is only a matter of time until Masterfile comes to this same conclusion.

By the way, thanks for sharing those definitions of "Extortion." It helps make it clear that "Extortion" does not always have to be criminal. (Something Matt and Oscar have said for years.)

484

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Are Copyright Holders Seeding Own Files To Find, Sue Downloaders?

« on: January 09, 2012, 05:03:31 PM »

My thoughts exactly! In coding there is such a thing as a "code sprint" where programmers get together for a concentrated effort. It can be a few hour over over a few days. But imagine if all the ELI members got together, hunted down the most prevalent purveyors of "Free" wallpapers that use HAN images. From there we could "notify" (because I'm sure they are unaware) HAN that these sites were indeed giving away there images. This would effectively shut down this process.

This is too late to help anyone going through this right now. But it might serve to prevent future victims. I can give a few hours to this some evening.

485

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: CPM Legal Settlement Demand Lettter on Behalf of Hawaiian Art Network

« on: January 09, 2012, 04:29:22 PM »

Hey milosron,

I'm glad you are down for the fight. And hopefully you have the ability to devote the time and energy to your case. Sometimes I say things to challenge people and check in to see if they are serious. Because honestly, when I consider the time I have spent on my issue and all the others I try to help with, it would have made more sense financially for me to just pay the fools. I think it takes a healthy dose of outrage and indignation about what some stock companies are doing in order to really see the fight through.

I would encourage you to follow your state attorney general's advice and file a complaint at www.ice3.gov the Internet Crime Complaint Center. Especially if, as you say, you are doing it in addition to your other efforts.

486

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

« on: January 09, 2012, 03:02:12 PM »

Yeah, you guys are right. I believe it is the gentleman on the left of this photo:
http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/215479_5150729140_520419140_162676_929_n.jpg

(Again, just trying to place a face with the name.)

487

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A Masterfile Demand Letter Story

« on: January 09, 2012, 02:43:54 PM »

Okay that letter makes no sense to me. Unless it was a way to say "I know that you are posting on the ELI site." Well, yeah! So? Since Mr. Beal is already on the site, I would hope that he would join and engage in a dialog here.

I'm so glad to hear that dieselfish is nowhere near "tipping." If one were to objectively look at the scenario, the best solution would be to re-consider dieselfish's $150 offer. Already a search for "Geoffrey Beal masterfile" turns up nearly a full page of information about this issue and points here. Trying to "force" removal of these threads has not worked out for other attorneys (See the Julie Stewart threads).

488

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

« on: January 09, 2012, 02:29:31 PM »

Sometimes it is helpful to put a face with a name. I believe this is Mr. Beal's FB page:
http://www.facebook.com/Masterfile/posts/104455336272182#!/profile.php?id=536445270

489

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A Masterfile Demand Letter Story

« on: January 09, 2012, 01:16:55 PM »

Their claim of Copyright protection is laughable to me. A business may be able to claim copyright of business correspondence in the US. But, I have not seen it tested here yet. (It does seem to be the case in the UK.) But more relevant is that publishing the redacted version of this letter on a site that is designed to discuss these types of letters, falls so squarely under "fair use" that it almost fits the very definition. This letter is not published to make a profit or steal content. It is published for informational and educational purposes on a site designed to inform and educate about this process. That a law firm wouldn't understand this seems very odd to me. Perhaps they want the EFF to get wind of this.

As buddhapi indicated, their move now is going to be to cut you out of the loop and concentrate on squeezing your client. Their goal is to try and embarrass you into paying up. That and maybe irritate your client enough so that they may want to just settle.

Depending on your relationship with the client, you can ask them to refer all contact regarding this issue to you. But I'm not sure how that would go. I think MF will still focus on pestering your client.

The only way to completely stop it that I know of would be to get a lawyer to represent you. Then all correspondence has to be directed to that lawyer.

But as I mentioned last night, you are so close to where they want you at this point, I imagine they are betting they can tip you over with this latest email. However I am very glad you decided to share this news here.

490

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A Masterfile Demand Letter Story

« on: January 09, 2012, 02:36:40 AM »

Oh I see... the image was cropped.

491

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: A Masterfile Demand Letter Story

« on: January 09, 2012, 02:34:51 AM »

My suggestion is that this would be bad publicity if it DID go to court. I'm not interested in settlement discussions. I think people start trying to "meet them half way" too quickly.

In the unlikely event that this did go to court, part of the discovery process would be to figure out how many licenses they have sold for $390 for one month. How many do you suppose that is. I am thinking zee-row.

By the way tineye shows one and only version of that image (on the MF site). You don't need to post it here, but how did you come across this image? If the watermark was removed by you, well... you're gonna have to pay them. If it was out in "the wild" unwatermarked, then I wonder how prevalent it is.

So you are already within $185 of what they want? Last I heard you were willing to pay $200, now it's $315. Well I guess if you keep dickering over the price and asking for more paperwork, that helps our cause a bit.

492

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

« on: January 09, 2012, 01:58:09 AM »

Two pertinent points...

First, you touched on this, but there are pretty serious consequences for issuing a false DMCA copyright notice. And I know you cannot claim copyright over a letter someone else wrote. I'm not a lawyer, but even I can see that is a big boo-boo.

Second, the more Ms Stewart continues on this course, the more it damages her reputation online. Google "Julie Stewart Blackline Entertainment Law." Her site is fifth with this whole ELI thing above it. If I were to offer a bit of advice, I'd suggest that her best move would be to offer Matt an apology and optimize her own web presence.

493

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: New ELI Video Update (January 2011): Jerry Witt aka mcfilms

« on: January 09, 2012, 01:08:02 AM »

SG maybe you can do an interview with the Guy Fawkes mask and using your Dark Night voice.

494

Hawaiian Letters & Lawsuits Forum / Re: CPM Legal Settlement Demand Lettter on Behalf of Hawaiian Art Network

« on: January 09, 2012, 01:05:32 AM »

milosron, when I first got my letter over a year ago, I thought Matt and Oscar would sometimes be a little short with people. But I totally get it now. People come to the site totally freaking out because they got "the letter." It's easy to feel like you are being singled out. But once you dig into this site you'll find that almost all the questions you might have, have already been answered.

Another pattern that emerges is that some people sound like they are ready to stand up to the stock companies. But after the ELI community spends time coaching and trying to help them, they "chicken out" and ultimately roll over. Apparently they decide to settle and cut a check and never are seen on this forum. Well, this emboldens the copyright trolls and they just keep pumping out the letters.

You seem like a nice "guy" (since you saw the interview you can tell I can't guess gender over the internet). Maybe you are too nice. At some point you have to draw a line in the sand and say, "This far and no farther." You have to get mad and mean about this. I feel you have a strong case here. If you're up for it, you have a great support network here. But if your not -- and I intend no offense -- you are kind of wasting everyone's time.

495

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: New ELI Video Update (January 2011): Jerry Witt aka mcfilms

« on: January 08, 2012, 04:13:35 PM »

Who is that dashing young man? I like the cut of his jib.

(I guess I look okay too.)