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 - YetAnotherRiddickVictim

Pages: [1] 2
Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum / Is it time to retire this Riddick forum?
« on: November 27, 2012, 07:47:29 PM »
Every once in a while I check back to see if there's any news. But it seems he's dropped off the face of the earth. No more ranting comments on various articles, no one coming here asking for advice, no press releases, looks like his site's gone... I don't think he's dead, but he seems to have given up, at least for the time being.

Anyone have any concrete info?

Since it's based on both parties' stipulations, it was dismissed with prejudice because they reached a settlement. No one would settle if the case wasn't dismissed with prejudice, because then the plaintiff could re-file at any time.

Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum / Re: Is Riddick Dead?
« on: February 03, 2012, 11:55:09 PM »
A dismissal with prejudice on the stipulation of both parties and where each bears their own costs is usually a settlement.

OTOH, Riddick has mostly sued with contingency lawyers who saw dollar signs and would hold on to the case like pitbulls. Telling him to pound sand when he hits you with a demand letter is one thing, but if he sues with a lawyer, you cannot afford to ignore that. You don't want to try to appeal a judgment on a case you lost because you willfully defaulted.

I wish I could talk about the specific facts of our case, but I'm prohibited by the settlement. Let me just say, a dedicated asshat with a lawyer can cause you a lot of trouble and cost you a lot of money, whether he's right or not. If you get a letter from Riddick or someone like him, don't base your legal strategy on the bravado of some anonymous board poster. Call Oscar or someone like him and get help.

Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum / Re: Is Riddick Dead?
« on: November 13, 2011, 06:09:07 PM »
From what I've heard, not dead but pretty much out of commission. 'Course, he could come back full of piss and vinegar if the latest IP laws pass through Congress and give him new ammunition.

But what does this have to do with Riddick, especially when there's a separate Righthaven forum?

The registration has to occur within 90 days of first publication.

For example, here's an article on a sports-betting law suit:

The article was published on November 10, 2010 and the copyright registration was filed on February 7, 2011... just within the 90-day limit.

It's a pretty clever strategy. Every day, spider Google and other databases for key phrases from your 60-day-old content. Hand off the the top hits (if there are any) to a paralegal who checks them to make sure the infringement exists and meets certain minimum standards. Pick the low-hanging fruit from that batch and file individual copyright applications for the attendant articles. Then file boilerplate suits with the right blanks filled in. Collect settlements galore from people without the resources to fight you or who decide it's cheaper to pay you to go away than to fight and prove they're right.

Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum / Two More Suits
« on: February 03, 2011, 02:49:32 AM »
On the day stevep was posting about Riddick suing HP, Riddick's new lawyer in Florida filed suit against two companies: and

Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum / Re: Imageline sues H.P. Development
« on: January 21, 2011, 03:27:19 AM »
@Steve - I've been pointing this fact out for a while, even before he sued HP. He demands respect for his IP, but doesn't respect the IP of others. And as he refuses to believe anyone else's claim of innocent infringement, I wouldn't think he's entitled to make that claim with a straight face.

Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum / Re: Riddick Sues CafePress
« on: January 03, 2011, 03:47:54 AM »
I'm going to have to disagree a bit. Riddick is out-of-pocket on the Bernina case because he's being sued instead of doing the suing. It's a bit apples and oranges to compare the two.

On the CafePress case, he's suing in CafePress's home jurisdiction and has even established a business presence for Imageline in that state. He can argue that the alleged infringement by other defendants was facilitated thriough CafePress and that they all agreed to have their dealings with CafePress "governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California," so they have all, in some form, agreed to California as an acceptable jurisdiction.

He's being more careful on jurisdiction this time, IMO.

Riddick/Imageline Letter Forum / Riddick Sues CafePress
« on: December 26, 2010, 04:04:49 AM »
On the Monday before Christmas, Riddick delivered a gift to CafePress, 19 sellers, and a handful of does.

It's pretty much the same old complaint... infringement, removal of copyright management information, providing false copyright management information.

One new bit of information. Apparently Imageline "maintains an office" in Los Angeles, within the jurisdiction of the court. Did a quick Google search on the address, found that it's owned by a flex office service called Regus. At the bottom end of their scale, there's a package that gets you a local phone number, answering service, mail service, and use of one of their furnished offices 2 days a month. Goes up from there.

IIRC, Riddick had some jurisdiction issues with the rash of suits he filed in 2009. Most of the suits were in jurisdictions where the ONLY one with a business presence there were Riddick's lawyers. Neither Riddick nor the defendants had presences in the states where the suits were filed. And in a few of those cases, I believe the suits were dismissed on the jurisdictional issues, leading to quick settlements.

Looks like an old dog like Riddick can learn new tricks, like making sure he dots the I's and crosses the T's on issues like this.

Doubt CafePress will respond any earlier than it has to, but it will be interesting to see their response.

Sounds like Riddick is having more trouble. Heard from a case follower that Riddick's lawyer submitted 5 affirmative defenses and the judge has taken some level of issue with 4 of them.


He has a number of subpages you can find through google.

Good luck, Oscar. Look forward to hearing the update.

Is there anything new since Holland & Knight stepped in? Or have they filed a few motions to slow everything to a crawl while they get up to speed and generate 6 figures in billable hours for Riddick's angel to pay?


Just one correction, the ACLU represented the Nazis in their quest to march through Skokie, not the Klan. Small difference, but a vital one.

It may not be SIIA, but another benefactor paying Riddick's bills in Chicago. But I've been told that any rulings in this case would not be precedent that could be cited outside of this jurisdiction. Could be Getty or some other angel.

If the companies do suffer default judgement, It is my understanding that some of Riddick's copyrights are owned by those companies and not by Riddick personally. That means those copyrights that remain could be sold to the highest bidder to satrisfy Imageline's debt to Bernina and any other creditors that might exist in a bankruptcy proceeding.

It's interesting to see how fast this is progressing.

Pages: [1] 2
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.