Copyright Problem - Please Advise. [Archive]

View Full Version : Copyright Problem - Please Advise.

TwinTone

03-06-2002, 07:33 PM

So, as most of you know I run hosthead.com, I have received a copyright notice about one of the sites I am hosting. I am not a lawyer, nor can I really afford one. But, at the same time I hate being pushed around if this is a bunch of BS just to scare me. If anyone is knowledgeable about such things please advise. I am not in anyway looking to get sued over this. So, if no one really has a good answer for me I will just make the customer delete the content. Attached: NOTICE of COPYRIGHT-TRADEMARK, or RIGHT of PUBLICITY INFRINGEMENT APIC - WORLDWIDE 3325 Griffin Road Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33312 (954) 983-7312 Our association, the Association for the Protection of Internet Copyright ("APIC") (<http://www.apic-worldwide.com>), an Internet organization dedicated to the continued education of copyright law and enforcement of such law on behalf of our members, has been notified by one of our members, that a web site, is infringing upon our member's intellectual property rights. This site is hosted by your organization . APIC is an authorized agent, and has a good faith belief that the copyrighted work described in the paragraph below is being used in manner that is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent(s) or the law. Date: Mar 6, 2002 To: John Doe (xxxxxx-xx) removed@hotmail.com p.o. box removed Islip, ny removed (631)removed ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Infringing URLs: (c) Awesome LLC - Videosecrets <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/panderson_005.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/panderson_005.jpg</a> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (ROP) Alyssa Milano <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/AlyssaMilano/Alyssa_Milano01.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/AlyssaMilano/Alyssa_Milano01.shtml</a> <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/AlyssaMilano/Alyssa_Milano02.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/AlyssaMilano/Alyssa_Milano02.shtml</a> <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/AlyssaMilano/ADV2-Allysa_Milano15.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/AlyssaMilano/ADV2-Allysa_Milano15.jpg</a> (ROP) Denise Richards <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/DeniseRichards/DeniseRichards01.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/DeniseRichards/DeniseRichards01.shtml</a> <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/DeniseRichards/DeniseRichards02.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/DeniseRichards/DeniseRichards02.shtml</a> <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/DeniseRichards/ADV-Denise_Richards43.jpg" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/DeniseRichards/ADV-Denise_Richards43.jpg</a> (ROP) Jennifer Love Hewitt <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/JenniferLoveHewitt/JenniferLoveHewitt01.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/JenniferLoveHewitt/JenniferLoveHewitt01.shtml</a> <a href="http://www.redhotcelebz.com/JenniferLoveHewitt/JenniferLoveHewitt02.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.redhotcelebz.com/JenniferLoveHewitt/JenniferLoveHewitt02.shtml</a> ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Infringing the Intellectual Property of others is against the state and federal laws of the United States as well as many other international countries. Such infringement may provide for substantial financial penalties and / or potential criminal prosecution. Please immediately: a) remove the referenced material from your Online Service Provider, b) provide APIC with written or electronic confirmation of its removal, and c) take other appropriate action against " " to prevent future infringement. Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (<http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/dmca.pdf>), this letter serves as actual notice of infringement in the event of legal proceedings. Mr. Easton is the director of APIC-Worldwide, NOT an attorney. On behalf of the owner of the exclusive right to the material at issue in this notice, I hereby state that I have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the owner, its agent, or the law. I hereby state, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States, that the information in this notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is being infringed as set out in this notification. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----iQA/AwUBN9/veP4FPqLzqgzREQIFMgCfWTmk2wVVtE+oyFYlaopCjtM5/PkAniaU3UDH6hkv28v6cK1VgiDSy/TV=maqC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- APIC WORLDWIDE, (the Association for the Protection of Internet Copyright), is a non-profit membership organization dedicated to the continued education of Internet copyright law and enforcement of such law through the co-operation of international, domestic, federal, state, and local statutes, laws, and ordinances. Additional information can be found at: <a href="http://www.apic-worldwide.com" target="_blank">http://www.apic-worldwide.com</a> <a href="http://www.whatiscopyright.org" target="_blank">http://www.whatiscopyright.org</a> Berne Treaty <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/overview.html" target="_blank">http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/overview.html</a> USC 18-2257 <a href="http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2257.html" target="_blank">http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2257.html</a> INTEGRITY OF COPYRIGHT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION Article 12 of the WCT provides adequate and effective legal remedies against any person knowingly performing any of the following acts knowing, or with respect to civil remedies having reasonable grounds to know, that it will induce, enable, facilitate or conceal an infringement of any right covered by this Treaty or the Berne Convention: (i) to remove or alter any electronic rights management information without authority; (ii) to distribute, import for distribution, broadcast or communicate to the public, without authority, works or copies of works knowing that electronic rights management information has been removed or altered without authority. In addition, it is a criminal offense to violate section 1201 or 1202 willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain. Under section 1204 penalties range up to a $500,000 fine or up to five years imprisonment for a first offense, and up to a $1,000,000 fine or up to 10 years imprisonment for subsequent offenses. Nonprofit libraries, archives and educational institutions are entirely exempted from criminal liability. (Section 1204 (b)). For additional information on THE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1998 visit: <a href="http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/dmca.pdf" target="_blank">http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/dmca.pdf</a>

jojo

03-06-2002, 07:41 PM

they are for real!! i would have the guy removed. or have him remove there content.up to you but they are real and can sue your ass

PeepNTom

03-06-2002, 07:46 PM

yes APIC is for real, I had a run in with em myself with a gallery someone submitted to me <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> Its not worth any trouble to you, so I would remove what they ask you to do or have done and they will go away and be happy.

Rodent

03-06-2002, 07:57 PM

I get this crap everyweek from them about one of my clients. Your best bet is to delete or have your client delete the page/images and they will go away.

TheRookie

03-06-2002, 08:11 PM

There is a rather lengthy thread on this topic spanning from 8/01 to 2/02 at <a href="http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=008024" target="_blank">http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=008024</a> I personaly had "run ins" with them when I ran a non nude celeb site. Basicaly they have there own celeb sites and seem to have enough influence to put other celeb sites out of business hence helping there own sites. Im not saying using copyrighted photos is the right thing to do but its important to know they have a hidden agenda. More and more celebs are jumping on this bandwagon as well. The funny thing is some celebs like JLH were brought to cult status several years ago due to fan sites dedicated to them. Now these same sites are being threatened legally. I would remove the content and sort it out after to play it safe but what do I know I am just a Rookie <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> The Rookie

hotcherry

03-06-2002, 08:22 PM

APIC is very real. Wow, I have never seen a statement from them, looks fairly serious. I'd do as they ask.

toker

03-06-2002, 08:28 PM

I did some resaerch myself into this guy HE IS NOBODY dont waste your time even reading his email. "Mr. Easton is the director of APIC-Worldwide, NOT an attorney" says it all. He is merely a Photograpgher who runs a movie / celeb site and uses this APIC shit to boost himself and kill out any competetion. He is full of shit and worthless cannot even afford an answering machine. I have called that number before and his office address you have there is about 5 mins from me. I would simply email him and tell him to have his lawyer send you letter that has proper authority under Florida Bar to represent these persons. Untill then you cannot legally remove anything because his word is just not good enuff and the client is innocent untill proven guilty. Gotta fight back with this guy and he will go away. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

toker

03-06-2002, 08:41 PM

Better yet for your own sake you should check out the Florida Bar and maybe drop them a letter. I grabbed the URL for you which pretains to this unlicensed law pratice in this state. <a href="http://www.flabar.org/TFB/TFBLawReg.nsf/e0f40af2c23904c785256709006a3713/691cc41e2886b8e785256b2f006cd7ad?OpenDocument" target="_blank">http://www.flabar.org/TFB/TFBLawReg.nsf/e0f40af2c23904c785256709006a3713/691cc41e2886b8e785256b2f006cd7ad?OpenDocument</a>

Jorge

03-06-2002, 09:12 PM

Safe mode "First remove, then ask questions." Which material is copyrighted & he has to send you / show you license, agreement like anybody else. If he does not do anything within x days, send him nice email to fuck himself. Frankly, that celeb webmaster is clever. From the first sight, you can see these are scans, and APIC guy cannot claim anything. He has sent you URLs of some nude pics, his mother could be on them. He is only pissed off because he represents some models who do not want to be linked with xxx. I understand his biz model - he promises them he is able to erase their (fake)nude pics from i-net, collects nice stack of money, and send them monthly report about sites/pics he was able to "convince" to turn this material down. He needs an email, and a few templated letters, I bet he´s got top notch office as well to host celebs asses. In my humble opinion, that guy (webmaster) needs only change desription of these nude pics to neutral, i.e. instead of Alyssa nude at CelebTicket, just Nude Celebs F*cking at CelebTicket. Or he can remove those 2 pics, and replace them by different ones (licensed).

arthurdent

03-06-2002, 09:30 PM

I really don't understood how some actress can demand (via lawyer and APIC) from anyone to remove her pictures (if they are video-caps). She doesn’t have rights to claim that. Only producer of that movie can do that. But, I never see any "Studio" to do that... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> If they (pictures) are scanned from some magazines, then request for removal can submit only magazine (authorized exponent of course), and not actress (or models) by herself. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" /> peace

shane94

03-06-2002, 09:31 PM

Toker is right Steve Easton is a nobody. the only reason he does that shit it to elimate the competiton. Post anything negitive about him on his BBS board and it will be earsed too damn fast. He will not answer questions and he has to prove the pics are copywrited. Does he contact the national inquire or any of the other super market trash magazines when they put pictures up?? Proabably not and if he did they would tell him to go fuck his self. A big <img border="0" alt="[Finger]" title="" src="graemlins/finger.gif" /> to Steve Easton <img border="0" alt="[Finger]" title="" src="graemlins/finger.gif" /> Shane

dialerking

03-06-2002, 09:34 PM

shane94 can you icq me please asap 9976906 thanks <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[Dan]

03-06-2002, 10:01 PM

LOL you are pretty funny. Steve is not a lawyer but is in contact with the real copyright owners. If you don't comply he will forward that to the owner of the pics, and then they might choose to sue the owner of the domain (and possibly you if you don't do anything - see next paragraph). Even if it's his way to kill competition, the point is he WILL forward the complain to the owners and the infringer will end up in shit (if it's worth for them to sue him). If you're in the US, I believe the DCMA protects hosts like you (for some time).. Once you are notified of hosting infringing material, you have 48 hours to have it removed. If you don't, then you're liable as much as the owner of the domain. You should have a look at this: <a href="http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/hr2281.pdf" target="_blank">http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/legislation/hr2281.pdf</a>

[Dan]

03-06-2002, 10:06 PM

Humm I could be wrong about the time frame.. Anyway search for "provider" in this text, it should tell you your answers...

baddog

03-06-2002, 11:32 PM

While I agree with Toker (first time for everything) that APIC is full of shit, the letter they sent you is quite accurate. The offending sites do not even need to have content in violation of anyone's copyright, just utilizing the celeb's name in the URL is enough to find your ass in court. I have read old APIC letters, and they were definitely full of shit. This one is very well constructed. Looks like they have hired some professionals now.

PeepNTom

03-07-2002, 12:46 AM

like I said in my original post, if you can live without whatever he is bitching about, just remove it as its more a pain in the ass than its worth. do you really wanna see if it turns into lawyers and lawsuits? If you got a heavy bank account I would stand up to him and make him provide full documented proof, otherwise its just a pain that wont go away quitely.

Dammy

03-07-2002, 02:34 AM

:mmmmmmm: Denise Richards :mmmmmmm: Thanks for those URLs <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

baddog

03-07-2002, 02:23 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by arthurdent: I really don't understood how some actress can demand (via lawyer and APIC) from anyone to remove her pictures (if they are video-caps). She doesn’t have rights to claim that. Only producer of that movie can do that. But, I never see any "Studio" to do that... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> If they (pictures) are scanned from some magazines, then request for removal can submit only magazine (authorized exponent of course), and not actress (or models) by herself. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" /> peace<hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[ROTFLMAO]" title="" src="graemlins/rotflmao.gif" /> Well, it is obvious that you know nothing about law. I suggest you do not ever try representing yourself in a court of law.

*Kimmykim*

03-07-2002, 03:02 PM

APIC is an organization that is paid BY legitimate copyright holders to look for infringements. They provide a service. My suggestion is to take it down, otherwise the affadavit or perhaps the lawsuit from the owner of the copyright will be the next thing you see as a host. DMCA has many provisions to protect hosts from being sued or otherwise when they do not know the content is on their service. Once you are made aware, you then open yourself up to becoming a part of a suit (perhaps the major part of it since most hosts have more money than gallery submitters do) that will be a pain in your ass and your wallet to either settle or defend. Just my .02.

toker

03-07-2002, 03:34 PM

Hey he bought an answering machine today i guess he is coming up in the world!! Wonder why it dont say anything about APIC in the greeting.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" />

eXtremal

03-07-2002, 03:51 PM

Had anyone here ever been SUED by Steve Easton, rather then just being treatened or harassed by him? Anyway, I'm wondering, why would the copyright owner hire this asshole to handle his lawsuit, while he is states himself, that he is "NOT ATTORNEY" Isn't it more effective to claim copyrights, while the real attorney takes care of it ? Just My 2¢ <img border="0" alt="[Finger]" title="" src="graemlins/finger.gif" />

toker

03-07-2002, 05:47 PM

Big twist to this story.. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> I just drove out to that address listed in that letter and on the APIC whois. It does not exist folks there is a gas station, bait shop and redneck bar. Today its been raining but tomorrow i will bring photos of the area for everyone to see this guy is so full of shit. I also have more info on this guy and another address for Easton Steve Photogy which i believe is his home or real office. So tomorrow if its not raining we will be taking a fieldtrip and see if we cant find the man behind all the threats.

Jorge

03-07-2002, 06:09 PM

arthurdent

03-07-2002, 10:26 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bad_dog: <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by arthurdent: I really don't understood how some actress can demand (via lawyer and APIC) from anyone to remove her pictures (if they are video-caps). She doesn’t have rights to claim that. Only producer of that movie can do that. But, I never see any "Studio" to do that... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> If they (pictures) are scanned from some magazines, then request for removal can submit only magazine (authorized exponent of course), and not actress (or models) by herself. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" /> peace<hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[ROTFLMAO]" title="" src="graemlins/rotflmao.gif" /> Well, it is obvious that you know nothing about law. I suggest you do not ever try representing yourself in a court of law.<hr /></blockquote>This is a very interesting remark. But, bad dog I must to disappoint you. Well, I'm lawyer... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> Last two years I'm on practice, and salary is miserable so I started with this biz. Now my practice is (almost) over, I pass adept examination (exactly copyright's), but I will continue with this biz... Like Jorge say, I don't speak about "using celebrity names with obscene descriptions", I was talked only about copyrights... If you have vid-caps from e.g. "Pretty Woman" and use text "Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman as prostitute - entirely nude", then JR doesn't have any rights to prevent this. Naturally producer of this movie can, but she doesn't... Again, if you claim that you have pics with JR anal actions, but really you have some fake pics, you are in problems (if you have fake pics, and promote them with "look this chick looks like JR", she can't do anything). Contrary if you have your (pics with you and JR) real pics <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> , you may post these pics like your "family" album (you don't have rights to selling them without her written allowance). Third, if you write fiction story about your sex experience with JR, and say that "story and characters are fictional", then she can't do anything. If you write story, about your sex or some others sex with JR, for which you have evidence, she, again, can't do anything. This is a tricky part, she can sue you, but she can't win... There is no difference between vid-caps and movie fragments... If someone doesn't have ownership on movie, then he/she doesn't have any rights on movie fragment or frame... Process can start only holder of copyrights. I use JR like a generally primer, only with Alyssa Milano (or Traci Lords) facts are different. Her nude pics with obscene descriptions are CP <img border="0" alt="[No No]" title="" src="graemlins/nono.gif" /> , because in that time, when is movie recorded, she had only 16 years... I don't say that this gay have rights to publish these pics, I only said that actress (or models, or...) doesn't have rights to stop him (of course if pics are vid-caps or scans). I never read US copyrights law, but seeing that USA is signatory of all International pacts, and protocols about copyright protection, law is probably very similar... I don't want to start any stupid topic, but bad dog, what is your profession when you can say this: "Well, it is obvious that you know nothing about law. I suggest you do not ever try representing yourself in a court of law". <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> peace

mozart989

03-08-2002, 01:27 AM

Hey guys im the webmaster of the site in question at the start of this topic. I added some posts to the APIC topic which looks like it got buried so ill restate here: "Just wanted to mention something that I realized about the APIC threat letter. He says "Under penalty of perjury" that he represents the copyright owners that are being infringed upon. Now in his letter to me he listed 6 pages as well as a few specific pictures. The thing is, theres no way in hell he represents the owners of ALL 102 pictures that I have there. Maybe he does represent a few of the owners (probably very few) but theres no way he represents EVERY one of them. This means that by his own admision he is perjuring himself. I am considering telling him that but I'm unsure if this will anger them into persuing me more. First, am I right and second, should I send them a mail stating this?" From what can be surmised , since he seems to basically work for safesearching.com (Alyssa Milanos mom started this site as a safe haven for celebrity content, non nudes and the like), is that he represents some authority of the celebrities themselves but thats it. I wonder if the owners of various pics he complains about such as maxim and playboy would be happy that this person is claiming to represent them. I find this to be an obvious illegal act. Opinions?

druhix

03-08-2002, 04:07 AM

I would send the mail Patch up the holes <img border="0" alt="[Nod]" title="" src="graemlins/nod.gif" />

slickroyale

03-08-2002, 02:42 PM

Or the "hole" might ne in ya wallett hehehe....

TwinTone

03-08-2002, 11:36 PM

Well, one of the pics he claims copyright to is a Pamala Lee, Tommy video screen shot. I know damn well he doesn't own shit on that.

louanne

03-28-2002, 10:46 AM

It looks like I have to throw in my "experience" with that asshole Steve Easton. That asshole accused me of using copyrighted material on a gallery I submitted. I bought a few CDs when I ran a BBS. All 3 Cds gave me a license for electronic transmission. Years ago, I attempted to find FAO to inquire about the license for internet use. Since I already have the license for "electronic transmission", I feel that the license is still valid. Well, one day, one of my sponsors gets a letter from that shit head, telling them that I am using copyrighted content. First off, Steve Easton did not send me a copy of the email. I had the sponser send me a copy of the email, and, my email address was not on the email. That dumb fuck never emailed me. A DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE DMCA! on APIC/Steve Easton's part. Now the plot thickens, the sponser put a hold on my account. After 10 or so email, the sponser reinstated my account. Here is a side note-the sponser is telling me that they will not pay me for for the months in question because their was an issue. Thats fuckin Bullshit!. While this BS was going on, I did some research on the DMCA and I discovered that APIC/Steve Easton is violating the DMCA himself.. 1) APIC is 1 guy who goes around make accusations without providing ANY proof. DMCA Voilation 2) APIC "claims" to be the agent for several copyright owners. APIC/Steve Easton is NOT registered with the US Copyright office as an agent. Violation of the DMCA. 3) APIC has had several complaints filed against it according to the FLA Attorney Generals Offce. His tatics are in voilation of the DCMA. 4) The US Attorney General has a few complaints against APIC/Steve Easton. 5) APIC uses the logic that you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. The list goes on .... Someone mentioned about posting on his BBS. He deleated ALL of my posts that were very negative twards his scam. I really don't take him serious. If he fucks with me, in any way, I'm going to strike back on his sorry ass, in ways that will make his online life difficult. Fuck APIC/Steve Easton. He should have the slogan: "APIC. You are guilty of copyright theft until you prove yourself innocent" Louanne

louanne

03-28-2002, 07:37 PM

Here is another intresting twist. I was looking at safesearching.com. I dont see anything, anywhere that states they(safesearching.com), are licensed to display all those celebrity pics. Isn't that intresting? Louanne

copland

03-28-2002, 08:14 PM

He sounds like a right wanker. I say we all chip in and see if we can't rustle up a grand or so to get his fucking legs broken.

Brian911

03-28-2002, 08:24 PM

ok, I would reply << "XDMAILER DAEMON 2.2 - error - too much stupidity found in your email, could not be received" >> .. or just delete the stuff if you dont ask for trouble, I never heard of anybody being sued for a single buck because of APIC though. but you're right, they pretty much scare you with that celeb stuff and I wouldnt risk it, thats my 2c

gotgauge

03-28-2002, 11:25 PM

If you think this guy is a treat or not, doesn't matter. If you host copyrighted material that you or the person that has the sight does not own then you are asking for trouble by not taking it down. I know for a Fact Alyssa Milano does sue people, and WINS. I also know if you do not remove the material, then that guy will Email your upline and they will ask you to remove the content...and he will keep going up the hosting chain until he gets the material removed.. Sorry, but that is just how it is right now.

gotgauge

03-28-2002, 11:27 PM

If you think this guy is a treat Should be THREAT Dang laptop

toker

03-28-2002, 11:33 PM

I can have him tracked down and have them put a tattoo with your celeb URL on his forehead for under $1k any takers?

baddog

03-29-2002, 12:47 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by arthurdent: But, bad dog I must to disappoint you. Well, I'm lawyer... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> ... I don't want to start any stupid topic, but bad dog, what is your profession when you can say this: "Well, it is obvious that you know nothing about law. I suggest you do not ever try representing yourself in a court of law". <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> peace<hr /></blockquote>All apologies counsellor, perhaps I should have said it was obvious that you were not an attorney familiar with United States law. I am relatively familiar with the law in this country, and if you want to try and defend yourself in a copyright infringement case if you like, but I will put my money on a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff. As far as my legal expertise goes, I am a California paralegal, and have represented myself successfully in civil, criminal, Family Law, traffic, arbitration and Small Claims actions. I have appeared three times in California Appellate Court, successfully overturning one lower court conviction. I have also represented major insurance companies in negotiations with other insurance companies when they were unable to reach a satisfactory settlement of their issues. I have probably made close to 100 court appearances In Propria Persona in everything from basic Motions filed by myself or the opposing counsel, to full blown trials. while I have not appeared in any copyright cases, I have acted on behalf of an AWI webmaster that was threatened with legal action by a law firm representing an actress he had featured on his website. I will let him speak up if he feels it is warranted. So, to make a long story short, I may not have the license to practice law yet, I am pretty familiar with law and the system. I even have an attorney in the industry that discusses issues and possible solutions with me on a regular basis.

flyingiguana

03-29-2002, 10:29 AM

Louanne what sponsor was that? a company that does something like that when there's no evidence of copyright violation should get their balls cut off.

[Dan]

03-29-2002, 11:35 AM

Well looks like many of you will be happy to learn that Steve is taking a break from APIC, I don't know if he's on vacation or what.. But anyway you should be happy now, you'll be able to steal all the content you want without disturbed by him...

louanne

03-29-2002, 03:16 PM

FlyingIguana, Belive it or not, it's Maxcash. They refuse to pay me for the sales I made while all this bullshit was going on. Their responce is: "Not unfounded...just subsequently recitified" What the fuck does that mean? I'll see my $700.?, I can sue that cock sucker Steve Easton?. I can file a fraud complaint with his host company and have them shut down? I WANT MY $700!!!!!!! Louanne Here is a side note. That cocksucker Steve Easton took down the fourms on APICs site.

AgentCash

03-29-2002, 03:31 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> "Not unfounded...just subsequently recitified" <hr /></blockquote>I would take that to mean there was a violation that was fixed after it had been reported, meaning they're gonna keep your cash because it was earned under an umbrella of copyright violation.

louanne

03-29-2002, 08:22 PM

Thats FUCKIN BULLSHIT!

pornman7678

03-30-2002, 03:39 PM

Seems anal enough to hire a lawyer.

arthurdent

04-01-2002, 05:40 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bad_dog: <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by arthurdent: But, bad dog I must to disappoint you. Well, I'm lawyer... <img border="0" title="" alt="" src="biggrin.gif" /> ... I don't want to start any stupid topic, but bad dog, what is your profession when you can say this: "Well, it is obvious that you know nothing about law. I suggest you do not ever try representing yourself in a court of law". <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> peace<hr /></blockquote>All apologies counsellor, perhaps I should have said it was obvious that you were not an attorney familiar with United States law. I am relatively familiar with the law in this country, and if you want to try and defend yourself in a copyright infringement case if you like, but I will put my money on a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff. ... I even have an attorney in the industry that discusses issues and possible solutions with me on a regular basis. <hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[Hi]" title="" src="graemlins/hi.gif" /> Well, maybe you shall read USA Copyright Law. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> Look at U.S. Copyright Office, FAQ 43. Question : Can I copyright the name of my band? Answer : No. [b]Names are not protected by copyright law. Some names may be protected under trademark law. 44. Question : How do I copyright a name, title, slogan, or logo? Answer : Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks. United States Patent and Trademark Office What is a trademark? A trademark includes any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination, used, or intended to be used, in commerce to identify and distinguish the goods of one manufacturer or seller from goods manufactured or sold by others, and to indicate the source of the goods. In short, a trademark is a brand name. Is the name of a band a trademark? It depends on how it is used. A band name may function as a service mark for entertainment services in the nature of performances by a musical group if it is used to identify and distinguish the service of providing live performances (see TMEP §§1301.01(b)(i) and 1301.02(b)), or as a trademark for a series of musical recordings (see TMEP §1202). Read more about TM names in U. S. TRADEMARK LAW RULES OF PRACTICE & FEDERAL STATUTES U. S. PATENT & TRADEMARK OFFICE (TITLE VIII - FALSE DESIGNATIONS OF ORIGIN, FALSE DESCRIPTIONS. AND DILUTION FORBIDDEN) <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bad_dog: I even have an attorney in the industry that discusses issues and possible solutions with me on a regular basis. <hr /></blockquote>In short, I suggest you, change your attorney. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> peace

baddog

04-01-2002, 08:21 PM

Arthurdent, I am not sure how you got to the issue of whether or not a name is protected by copyright or not, and I am a little too busy to try and figure it out right now, but I do happen to have some case law handy on unauthorized usage of a celebrity name. However, without digging it up, why not try using Playboy on a website, and seeing how long that lasts. Here is some case law you might be interested in: Hoffman v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 1999) 33 F.Supp.2d 867 Lugosi, supra, 25 Cal.3d at 819, 160 Cal.Rptr. 323 I have a shitload of other citations if you like, which I will gladly e-mail to you, as I am sure it holds little interest to most of the people reading this.

arthurdent

04-01-2002, 08:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bad_dog: Arthurdent, I am not sure how you got to the issue of whether or not a name is protected by copyright or not, and I am a little too busy to try and figure it out right now, but I do happen to have some case law handy on unauthorized usage of a celebrity name. However, without digging it up, why not try using Playboy on a website, and seeing how long that lasts. Here is some case law you might be interested in: Hoffman v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 1999) 33 F.Supp.2d 867 Lugosi, supra, 25 Cal.3d at 819, 160 Cal.Rptr. 323 I have a shitload of other citations if you like, which I will gladly e-mail to you, as I am sure it holds little interest to most of the people reading this.<hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[Hi]" title="" src="graemlins/hi.gif" /> Because, Playboy is trademarked Brand Name (like coca-cola or pepsi-cola, or Smirnoff...)... peace

baddog

04-02-2002, 03:46 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by arthurdent: <img border="0" alt="[Hi]" title="" src="graemlins/hi.gif" /> Because, Playboy is trademarked Brand Name (like coca-cola or pepsi-cola, or Smirnoff...)... peace<hr /></blockquote>So, let me get this straight, are you trying to say that a movie star can not sue you for using their name or likeness on an advertisement or a website?

ragnar

04-02-2002, 08:33 PM

wahhaaa steve crappingston is just a negative person ive got two mails from him aswell last year wich made a total of 7 mails in those 2.5 years that im in the buiz. ive never removed one pic one of my celeb sites (maybe with updating but not for Mr. steve). And never got a letter from his so called laywer. That fucking pig is lying like hell 2 months ago i got a letter that i had to remove pics of J. Lopez nude, wich aren't copyrighted by him. I even mailed them to a dutch tv station, they searched for they rights and guess what they belong to a swedish newspaper wich isnt affliated with Mr. Easton or should i say APIC ? (in case Mr. Easton reads this board) Mr. Steve Easton im still at the same location in the Netherlands, i still didn't received a letter from your laywer in your so called big company, nor, did i got any answers that where asked by my laywer. Maybe youre gonna explain it now !!! Cheers fucking bastard, Ragnar den Besten

ragnar

04-02-2002, 08:41 PM

by the way, if somebody wants to get you down just wait for their laywer not Mr. steve Urkel, he doesnt is a laywer, nor he can bring you down, simply he doesnt have the papers for it <img border="0" alt="[Finger]" title="" src="graemlins/finger.gif" />

copland

04-02-2002, 09:27 PM

I think it's perfectly obvious to anyone with half a brain that apic is a front to simply shut down any and all competition to the celeb sites that bankroll it. It's good that all the hosts know. Now they can tell him to fuck off when they get one of his gay emails. If as someone else said, he doesn't stop, and keeps going up the chain till he gets what he wants then it's time to pay the tattooist.

louanne

04-22-2002, 12:59 PM

Copland, I have been saying it for months - APIC and Steve Easton is nothing more than a scam. For the ones who actually think APIC/Steve Easton is legit, run a whois search for a-w.org and apic-worldwide.com. Notice that his Administrative Contact, Billing Contact has no phone? His Technical Contact has no phone?. What is wrong with this picture. If he was legit, he would have a telephone.

SAE

04-22-2002, 01:17 PM

Tell about downtime of HostHead. <img border="0" alt="[Bounce]" title="" src="graemlins/bounce.gif" />

TwinTone

04-22-2002, 08:02 PM

Not the reason we are down. SAE, acting like a 3 year old will not help you. Twintone

wd-

04-23-2002, 01:20 AM

if you had have posted this topic 1 day later, you would have been a strong competitor for the free ucj <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

wd-

04-23-2002, 01:26 AM

bleh, never mind, i read the date wrong <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="frown.gif" />