Why? Why is it ironic to support copyright. Visit the ELI site. It has been said time and again that participants on the site support copyright. They just don't support extortionate demands, like $7500 for posting a sing-song poem that was seen by 50 people.
@anonymouse - I post on that site from time to time and I have to tell you that there were several stories from small business owners and church representatives that made the mistake of posting that poem in a newsletter. Matthew Chan made some of these documents available on Scribd and Ellis issued a DMCA claim. This required Chan to dispute it. She also filed a DMCA hit on other content (YouTube videos).
These were all restored, but they required Chan to file a counter-claim. She was using the system to try and silence criticism of her $7500 claim. I think he was fed up with what she was doing. This is certainly not an excuse and I'm sure he learned a hard lesson about Internet rants.
But she is doing it again. She was able to shed some tears and get a judge to censor ALL coverage about what she was doing, virtually silencing all criticisms of her $7500 poem.
The one positive that has come from this is that more people are aware of the danger of publishing, sharing, or writing down, The Dash. Less people will be inclined to quote the Dash. And I believe that THAT will make the world a better place.
First, visit http://extortionletterinfo.com and check out the forums. You'll learn that there are hundreds if not thousands of people in the same situation. Image copyright trolling is a booming business!
You should know that any legal advice given on the internet is probably worth every penny you pay for it. That said, if you read up on this you can educate yourself and make your own decisions on how to fight.
In general, you need them to start making some demands of your own. They need to establish who holds the copyright to that image. You need to find out if that image has been registered with the copyright office. They may have the rights to the image, but if it has not been registered, what they can collect is severely limited. And finally, I would push back on the issue of having them provide a model release too.
By the way, if you truly have no money, then you are judgement proof and any attorney pursuing this claim would be a fool.
I doubt LiLo or her representatives are even aware of this. I have been in contact with the original recipient and I'm suspicious that neither AKM Images nor CEG have a model release from Ms Lohan. There is such a thing as a right of publicity. She has the right to control the commercial use of her name and likeness. Since the letter hardly mentions her, I wonder if there is a release. I have asked the recipient to insist on documentation from CEG -- a model release and proof that the images were previously registered with the copyright office.
Mr. Wilson, I think you use the term "earn money" pretty loosely. I would suggest they "extort," "squeeze," "coerce," "shakedown," or "swindle" money. These outrageous claims are rarely put to the test and when they are, it is not even close to the $8000 sought here.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by mcfilms.
Re: Copyright
Why? Why is it ironic to support copyright. Visit the ELI site. It has been said time and again that participants on the site support copyright. They just don't support extortionate demands, like $7500 for posting a sing-song poem that was seen by 50 people.
@anonymouse - I post on that site from time to time and I have to tell you that there were several stories from small business owners and church representatives that made the mistake of posting that poem in a newsletter. Matthew Chan made some of these documents available on Scribd and Ellis issued a DMCA claim. This required Chan to dispute it. She also filed a DMCA hit on other content (YouTube videos).
These were all restored, but they required Chan to file a counter-claim. She was using the system to try and silence criticism of her $7500 claim. I think he was fed up with what she was doing. This is certainly not an excuse and I'm sure he learned a hard lesson about Internet rants.
But she is doing it again. She was able to shed some tears and get a judge to censor ALL coverage about what she was doing, virtually silencing all criticisms of her $7500 poem.
The one positive that has come from this is that more people are aware of the danger of publishing, sharing, or writing down, The Dash. Less people will be inclined to quote the Dash. And I believe that THAT will make the world a better place.
Just educate yourself and push back
First, visit http://extortionletterinfo.com and check out the forums. You'll learn that there are hundreds if not thousands of people in the same situation. Image copyright trolling is a booming business!
You should know that any legal advice given on the internet is probably worth every penny you pay for it. That said, if you read up on this you can educate yourself and make your own decisions on how to fight.
In general, you need them to start making some demands of your own. They need to establish who holds the copyright to that image. You need to find out if that image has been registered with the copyright office. They may have the rights to the image, but if it has not been registered, what they can collect is severely limited. And finally, I would push back on the issue of having them provide a model release too.
By the way, if you truly have no money, then you are judgement proof and any attorney pursuing this claim would be a fool.
I doubt LiLo or her representatives are even aware of this. I have been in contact with the original recipient and I'm suspicious that neither AKM Images nor CEG have a model release from Ms Lohan. There is such a thing as a right of publicity. She has the right to control the commercial use of her name and likeness. Since the letter hardly mentions her, I wonder if there is a release. I have asked the recipient to insist on documentation from CEG -- a model release and proof that the images were previously registered with the copyright office.
Re: Re: CEG Is a Paper Tiger
Mr. Wilson, I think you use the term "earn money" pretty loosely. I would suggest they "extort," "squeeze," "coerce," "shakedown," or "swindle" money. These outrageous claims are rarely put to the test and when they are, it is not even close to the $8000 sought here.