Click Official ELI Links
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - SoylentGreen

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 84
571
A growing industry? 
I guess that more people are paying these demands that I might have imagined.

S.G.

572
This cracks me up:



I also like the comments:

"this video sucked balls. only watching it becuase my teacher made us in order to "understand copyright". i'm still more lost than a foriegn country"

and:

"This is sooooooooo irritating. Can't stop singing it... Copyright full of people..."

S.G.


573
Wow.  That would be 5 dollars a day.
Imagine if you paid that rate for a whole year... that would be 1825 dollars.
Sounds rather expensive, guys.

S.G.


574
I like Mulligan's posts.
I know how those "zero" keys on a keyboard can sometimes stick.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2wxegtYcD1qdwm2w.jpg

S.G.


575
This is all the same old thing that has been going on for years.
Getty wants money.  Getty says that it has "exclusive rights".  Getty can't prove that it has "exclusive rights"  Getty says that it doesn't "have to prove anything". lol

More misleading info: "nothing prohibits us from obtaining an expedited registration prior to filing suit".
While this is true, registering an image AFTER an infringement has occurred is useless to create "standing to sue", unless the registration is made within 90 days of the first publishing of the image in question.

Getty speaks of "litigation", however such a litigation WILL FAIL without Getty owning the copyright registration or owning "exclusive rights" (see Getty vs. Advernet).
Getty cannot sue over property that it doesn't own, whether it's for "damages" or "statutory damages".
Therefore the copyright registration/ownership of exclusive rights ARE relevant.

But, again, it's the same old thing we've discussed on here for years.
Here's some free advice: don't pay it.

S.G.


576
By the sounds of it Cindy Hsu's office reminds me of Saul Goodman's law office on "Breaking Bad":

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100621014530/breakingbad/images/thumb/c/c0/SaulOfficeOutside.JPG/830px-SaulOfficeOutside.JPG

S.G.


577
I'll say it.  These lawyers can fuck off. lol.
They'll have a hard time replacing "evidence" and "standing" with bitching.

Awww... here's wittle Timmy McCormack doing his first wittle twoll...
...awww Matty rustle your Jimmies?  Dat's ok... mommy get you your bwottle..!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ScLOND9qOxs/TfmWlmPVsqI/AAAAAAAAA24/Xn744M6ceOY/s400/baby%2527s+first+troll.jpg

S.G.


578
Yeah, they're phishing using the "shock and awe" technique to see if they can get a larger than normal settlement quickly.
Those photos don't look like something that one would register with the copyright office.
If they're not registered, this demand letter isn't worth the postage used to mail it.

S.G.


579
Also, look up "Barratry" which is a felony in some states:

Several jurisdictions in the US have declared barratry (in the sense of a frivolous or harassing litigant) to be a crime as part of their tort reform efforts. For example, in the U.S. states of California, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Washington, barratry is a misdemeanor;[4] in Texas, a misdemeanor on the first conviction, but a felony on subsequent convictions.[5]

  • California Penal Code Section 158: "Common barratry is the practice of exciting groundless judicial proceedings, and is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months and by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000)."

  • California Penal Code Section 159: "No person can be convicted of common barratry except upon proof that he has excited suits or proceedings at law in at least three instances, and with a corrupt or malicious intent to vex and annoy.")

  • Revised Code of Washington 9.12.010: "Every person who brings on his or her own behalf, or instigates, incites, or encourages another to bring, any false suit at law or in equity in any court of this state, with intent thereby to distress or harass a defendant in the suit, or who serves or sends any paper or document purporting to be or resembling a judicial process, that is not in fact a judicial process, is guilty of a misdemeanor; and in case the person offending is an attorney, he or she may, in addition thereto be disbarred from practicing law within this state."

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

I brought this up some time ago... but maybe it seems more relevant in light of recent developments?

S.G.

580
I was thinking along the same lines as Lucia.
Which lawyer is butthurt over this?

S.G.

581
The first nail in the H.A.N./Tylor coffin.

S.G.


582
Great video, Matt.  Sounds like you took some criticism for stating that complaints can be made to the state bar?

My thoughts are that lawyers do have some power, and as such the state bar with its formal complaint process are necessary to ensure that the profession is regulated.
Regulated, if only to prevent what must be a tiny number of unethical people from doing a lot of damage.

In any case, a lawyer that has acted ethically and within the law really has nothing to worry about, regardless of complaints.
I suspect any lawyer that is agitated over complaints to the state bar probably has an ethics problem, and shouldn't be practicing law.

S.G.

583
I've noted that some folks have commented about a FAQ.
I wrote up something of a "strategy guide" a little ways back (on Jan, 11, 2012).
The only thing that I'd change is that "bulk registration" is not a "guarantee" of a dismissal or win for the defendant.
I think that Masterfile had a partial victory in this regard agains Martin Gale.

----

Lucia had inquired about whether or not I'm an attorney.  I’m not an attorney.
I had thought at length about how to answer her query as to what my opinion was regarding "where or not it's worth a shot", or "what the probability is of winning a dismissal".  Each individual must decide for himself/herself whether or not it's "worth a shot".  But, we can do research and make a reasonable determination.  Now, if something was to go to court, it's often difficult to predict "probability", as a human "the judge" will make a decision based on aguments/evidence.  The following is my thought process.  It's a bit long, but perhaps, there's some food for thought in there.

I’m speaking in terms of US laws/ existing precedents.
Historically speaking, most of the people who paid Getty, Riddick and Righthaven didn’t have to.
Corbis had a good case but gained mixed results, and rumor has it that Masterfile is much better organized than Getty when it comes to contracts/registrations.  I’m a bit unclear on the Masterfile thing.  They may only be filing lawsuits wherein the paperwork is in place; this may give the false impression that everything that they have is registered/under proper contracts.  Most of their wins are on “default” wherein the defendant didn’t show for court.
So, the odds are good that there’s some problem with most infringement claims that should be explored and could possibly be exploited.

Your priority in fighting such claims might be as follows from most desirable to least:
1) Make an informal response, and show evidence that causes them to simply go away
2) Make an informal response, and show evidence that causes them to accept a very low settlement.  One so low that the time you saved is more valuable than that of the settlement.
3) In the event of a lawsuit, file a formal defense that causes the plaintiff to give up and withdraw
4) In the event of a strong defense, fight it in court, win, and collect legal fees and other damages
5) In a case wherein you cannot reasonably prevail, pay a the lowest settlement possible in lieu of a larger court loss and legal fees.

Fighting these claims is a process.  Collect evidence and find out if there’s a fatal problem with the claim such as:
1) The content was never registered
2) Faulty registration (dates missing, signatures missing, incorrect names)
3) The content was registered by the “original artist”, but there is no “exclusive agreement” in place between the artist and company (agent).  Or this agreement is faulty.
4) The registration was made in “bulk”, that is, many items registered together as a collection
5) Registration not made within lawful time limits

The above examples will kill a case in the US.  That doesn’t stop ignorant people from filing lawsuits in some cases.  File for “summary dismissal” and site precedents.  If it does go to court, at least you’ll win and collect your legal fees if applicable.  Except in “scorched earth” near-criminal situations such as Righthaven.  Note that court precedents currently exist for the above list.

Other fatal problems.  These are situations involving mistakes or even fraud which make even the possibility of a claim invalid:
1) Outright fraudulent claims (the image didn’t even appear on your site, or the image only similar and not the same).
2) Companies or individuals impersonating artists/ agencies/ companies/ lawyers and sending forged correspondence/fraudulent claims.
3) Misrepresentations of law, for example situations wherein Getty makes accusations of infringement over linked images not actually residing on the server/domain of the accused person/company.

Things that might kill or at least give leverage in negotiations or reduce awards in court
1) The images are widely available as “free” (the more the better for the defendant)
2) The images are widely available as low-cost “clip-art” (non rights-managed)
3) The infringement had low exposure (hit count), low resolution, small image size, was on tertiary web pages.
4) The same images sold on multiple sites by unrelated companies
5) Only some rights assigned (but not others) in an “exclusive contract” between an artist and agent.
6) It was “fair use” under the law for registered educational/non-profit organizations.
7) The web site was not commercial, or didn’t make much money.
8 The defendant was unemployed or unemployable, and the web site didn’t make much revenue

Things that people do to avoid payment/court in a worst-case scenario:
1)  In the case of a corporation, ensure that the company has little assets left by the time collection efforts are made.
2) Personal bankruptcy
3) “Disappear” in order to avoid service of court papers (somebody did that in a Corbis case).

Where to begin?  Here’s what you do:
1) Assess your risk tolerance.
2) Assess your budget
3) Go through the lists above and highlight any points that might apply to your situation
4) Collect all evidence that you can to support what you’ve highlighted
5) Determine if the evidence strongly supports your defence(s)
6) You must now decide if your defence and corresponding evidence support your desired outcome from the very first list.

If your accuser will not provide evidence of their claim, do realize that they’re holding out because they do not have enough evidence to support their claim. Be patient.   The accuser must present their evidence before the commencement of any court case.  So any evidence will have to be presented eventually.  Next, reassess your strategy as you receive any new information.
If new evidence becomes known that isn’t favorable to your defence, keep in mind that you may make a settlement at any time if that’s in your best interest.
---

S.G.

584
Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: CEG Email?
« on: May 15, 2012, 01:02:09 PM »
Mulligan just nailed it.  The intimidating threats are precisely intended to make one shop around for "legal advice", i.e. an attorney.
The one finds out that attorney's are expensive. Yes, almost all attorneys don't recommend fighting a claim that's probably less in value than what their "retainer" costs.
Even experienced attorney's well versed in copyright law know that it's a waste of their time doing consultations for what amounts to small legal disputes for the most part.
So, that's all a big part of the tactics.

On a grander scale, it also concerns me greatly that all this creates a sort of "phantom" economy.
While money may change hands, none of this really delivers much if any "customer value", or actual "productivity" than enriches society, "social value", or business development that benefits society.

The only worse thing by comparison are prison inmates who read legal texts all day and file lawsuits over mashed potatoes that are too "cold" and cole slaw that's too "warm" at dinner.

However, "Righthaven" taught us that people DO fight back... and not every company can just "fail" and go bankrupt like Righthaven did.

S.G.

585
The God of Karma has been eating his fiber...

S.G.


Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 84
Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.