So by your own definition, this is not a defamation case until the licensing issue has been sorted, because this could still be considered IP Theft. Glad you sorted that out.
Since you have place thieves in quotes, I am going to want to see the exact quote it was used in. Have fun with that.
Lies about credit being removed by funnyjunk...ok
yeah, you are going to have to quote where he made that claim. Exact words, in context. Ensure that he does say it was FunnyJunk who removed the credit, not just that it was removed.
It's NOW not about the defamation is it !
That is because it is now 8 days after deadline and Carreon has not filed a defamation claim against Inman on behalf of Funnyjunk. Instead he has attempted to manufacture a case by donating to a fundraiser he was trying to have shut down.
To say Inman has not used his skills of "manipulation of the internet" would be really quite naive.
Possibly. But to take everything you have said on face value when it is evident that you have an axe to grind and are hiding behind anonymity, giving us no insight into your personal agenda - that would but complete stupidity.
You said it yourself. Inman is well documented. His skills have served him well in both his comics and SEO. That does not have any bearing on this case however.
If you want people talking about the defamation case, tell Carreon to file it. People talking on the internet and donating to a fundraiser has no bearing on the outcome of the case. Except of course that Carreon knows it is baseless, did not realise what he was getting into sending a stock standard hardball message to Inman just because he was there and knows full well that claiming defamation because of blog posts on a satirical comic website will end up anti-SLAPPed faster than he could fill out the paperwork.
The Oatmeal is entirely a satirical website that wields hyperbole like a giant purple dildo. Not even a really good lawyer would be able to make a defamation case stick.
Carreon was simply hoping that Inman was too stupid to know better, or too broke to afford a lawyer himself.
Note that it is now the 20th of June. As of the 12th of June, all mentions of FunnyJunk were still on the Oatmeal - and now there is even more there. Also it goes without saying that Inman did not deliver $20,000 to Carreon. Yet here we are eight days later and instead of filing the clearly baseless suit against Inman for defamation, Carreon donated to a fundraiser in an incredulous attempt to manufacture anything at all that he could actually sue Inman for.
By the lack of filing a defamation suit against Inman on behalf of FunnyJunk, even your hero Carreon is capitulating to the reality that Inman did not defame them. Just up to you to catch up now.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by aitreni.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So by your own definition, this is not a defamation case until the licensing issue has been sorted, because this could still be considered IP Theft. Glad you sorted that out.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, duh.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Calls people "thieves" for copying...ok
Since you have place thieves in quotes, I am going to want to see the exact quote it was used in. Have fun with that.
Lies about credit being removed by funnyjunk...ok
yeah, you are going to have to quote where he made that claim. Exact words, in context. Ensure that he does say it was FunnyJunk who removed the credit, not just that it was removed.
It's NOW not about the defamation is it !
That is because it is now 8 days after deadline and Carreon has not filed a defamation claim against Inman on behalf of Funnyjunk. Instead he has attempted to manufacture a case by donating to a fundraiser he was trying to have shut down.
To say Inman has not used his skills of "manipulation of the internet" would be really quite naive.
Possibly. But to take everything you have said on face value when it is evident that you have an axe to grind and are hiding behind anonymity, giving us no insight into your personal agenda - that would but complete stupidity.
You said it yourself. Inman is well documented. His skills have served him well in both his comics and SEO. That does not have any bearing on this case however.
If you want people talking about the defamation case, tell Carreon to file it. People talking on the internet and donating to a fundraiser has no bearing on the outcome of the case. Except of course that Carreon knows it is baseless, did not realise what he was getting into sending a stock standard hardball message to Inman just because he was there and knows full well that claiming defamation because of blog posts on a satirical comic website will end up anti-SLAPPed faster than he could fill out the paperwork.
Re: Re: Re: WHO is playing people well
The Oatmeal is entirely a satirical website that wields hyperbole like a giant purple dildo. Not even a really good lawyer would be able to make a defamation case stick.
Carreon was simply hoping that Inman was too stupid to know better, or too broke to afford a lawyer himself.
Note that it is now the 20th of June. As of the 12th of June, all mentions of FunnyJunk were still on the Oatmeal - and now there is even more there. Also it goes without saying that Inman did not deliver $20,000 to Carreon. Yet here we are eight days later and instead of filing the clearly baseless suit against Inman for defamation, Carreon donated to a fundraiser in an incredulous attempt to manufacture anything at all that he could actually sue Inman for.
By the lack of filing a defamation suit against Inman on behalf of FunnyJunk, even your hero Carreon is capitulating to the reality that Inman did not defame them. Just up to you to catch up now.