Henry Bowman
Senior Member
True, but I would welcome Mr. Volokh's thoughts or comments if he cared to share them. Gun-fucious, do you have some connection with or access to him?
The VPC has stolen a picture of Oleg
- Thread starter gun-fucious
- Start date
- Status
gun-fucious
Member
i have corresponded with Eugene and on his list for awhile now
Eugene even blogs some of my "discoveries"
his response back when i emailed him this THR page was
"interesting"
i would send him an email via his link on the page i posted
Eugene even blogs some of my "discoveries"
his response back when i emailed him this THR page was
"interesting"
i would send him an email via his link on the page i posted
357to44
Member
Legal considerations:
(1) One of the stolen Oleg's pictures is being sold on mugs/t-shirts/mouse pads for some time --> commercial loss
(2) VPC never quoted a single word ("information"), they just stole art
(3) The movie, indirectly, is used for VPC fund raising (commercial gain?)
Actions:
- Posting to newsgroups so that whoever searches for VPC or founding/funding organizations would find the truth on stealing
- Sending letters to founding/funding organizations with the idea of their responsibility; and then to those org's founding/funding organizations (are they legally liable too?)
(1) One of the stolen Oleg's pictures is being sold on mugs/t-shirts/mouse pads for some time --> commercial loss
(2) VPC never quoted a single word ("information"), they just stole art
(3) The movie, indirectly, is used for VPC fund raising (commercial gain?)
Actions:
- Posting to newsgroups so that whoever searches for VPC or founding/funding organizations would find the truth on stealing
- Sending letters to founding/funding organizations with the idea of their responsibility; and then to those org's founding/funding organizations (are they legally liable too?)
bogie
Member
Well, it's been 20 years since my course in broadcast/journalism law, the majority of which seemed to revolve around libel and slander, but hey, I got an "A" in it...
The way I see it, they're using a picture of Oleg (and of other folks...), portraying him in a bad light, insinuating that he's a violent killer type. To my semi-informed mind, this is a clear case of libel. The ownership of the image doesn't even come into play with that.
The way I see it, they're using a picture of Oleg (and of other folks...), portraying him in a bad light, insinuating that he's a violent killer type. To my semi-informed mind, this is a clear case of libel. The ownership of the image doesn't even come into play with that.
Has anyone considered using the DMCA in this instance? After all it is designed to protect digital copyrighted works. After all the MPAA/RIAA uses it to great effect. You also get a great sound bite out of it. I've only delt with the RIAA on one occasion on a case so I'm not certian of the specifics. However I have to go to the Federal offices tomorrow morning and I'll check.
Jim
Jim
357to44
Member
Nobody steps forward to run the fund... Wouldn't it help to quickly transform this Board into a subscription-based one, with different levels and options for members to designate $$?
Server and legal expenses are probably not the only ones that are here to stay, and the Board (or a-human-right site) don't accept paid ads... Non-profit status would make it easier for corp's to make donations.
Server and legal expenses are probably not the only ones that are here to stay, and the Board (or a-human-right site) don't accept paid ads... Non-profit status would make it easier for corp's to make donations.
Henry Bowman
Senior Member
The host for VPC's website was sent a DMCA take-down demand. It was ignored. The ISP specializes in hosting web sites for liberal advocacy groups. Their motto is "Kumbya, dammit." No kidding.
bogie
Member
Actually, I think that Oleg should run changing banner ads, much like benchrest.com does. They don't get in the way, they aren't obnoxious, and they'd support the site - if he's got a problem with the site making money, use it for litigation, donate it to pro-gun orgs, or buy ammo for blasting...
100 banner ads at $25 each per month is $2,500/month.
100 banner ads at $25 each per month is $2,500/month.
Langenator
Member
I know I saw a cover from a Dillon catalog in their, and others have said that VPC used images from Armalite and Olympic Arms websites in the slidshow.
I'm not a lawyer, but are their legal differences between commercial images and ones that are "informational" like Oleg's?
Would one of those companies have a better case than Oleg?
I'm not a lawyer, but are their legal differences between commercial images and ones that are "informational" like Oleg's?
Would one of those companies have a better case than Oleg?
Orthonym
Member
Don't these bozos know whom they're up against?
Oleg is of the ilk of Ike and Hymie. (Asimov and Rickover, respectively)
Aarr! C'mon Oleg! Go get'em! No more Mr. Nice Guy!
Oleg is of the ilk of Ike and Hymie. (Asimov and Rickover, respectively)
Aarr! C'mon Oleg! Go get'em! No more Mr. Nice Guy!
It's worst than it sounds
The VPS "solution" says
- all semiautomatic assault rifles
- all semiautomatic pistols
- all semiautomatic shotguns
But we know the words games these people play (what the meaning of "is" is). They want people to think that they want to ban semiautomatic assault guns, and some people will probably think that banning such evil assault things sounds like "reasonable" gun control. Heck, "assault" is by definition a crime.
What if that's not what they really want? They can later say they told us exactly what they were proposing. Read the "solution" again. It could very easily be interpreted to mean banning all (not just some!):
- all semiautomatic assault rifles (which they define as they please)
- ALL pistols
- ALL shotguns
"Semiautomatic" and "assault" could just refer to the rifles. Why not ban all handguns? They're made to be concealed! Why not all shotguns? They blow people in half in the movies!
What's left unbanned? Bolt and lever rifles. Now we can hunt deer so the Second Ammendment is preserved. Hooray! Until of course they ban evil long-range "sniper weapons".
And that's assuming they don't invent some new category of "assault pistol".
Oleg and Henry Bowman -- good luck, and I'll contribute to the defense fund. But carefully read every word they say.
The VPS "solution" says
You've all been assuming that statement breaks down to mean banning:
- all semiautomatic assault rifles
- all semiautomatic pistols
- all semiautomatic shotguns
But we know the words games these people play (what the meaning of "is" is). They want people to think that they want to ban semiautomatic assault guns, and some people will probably think that banning such evil assault things sounds like "reasonable" gun control. Heck, "assault" is by definition a crime.
What if that's not what they really want? They can later say they told us exactly what they were proposing. Read the "solution" again. It could very easily be interpreted to mean banning all (not just some!):
- all semiautomatic assault rifles (which they define as they please)
- ALL pistols
- ALL shotguns
"Semiautomatic" and "assault" could just refer to the rifles. Why not ban all handguns? They're made to be concealed! Why not all shotguns? They blow people in half in the movies!
What's left unbanned? Bolt and lever rifles. Now we can hunt deer so the Second Ammendment is preserved. Hooray! Until of course they ban evil long-range "sniper weapons".
And that's assuming they don't invent some new category of "assault pistol".
Oleg and Henry Bowman -- good luck, and I'll contribute to the defense fund. But carefully read every word they say.
Mark Tyson
Member
Caliburn, it's no secret that VPC wants to ban all handguns. Tom Diaz has a book devoted to the subject. They say Diaz himself has a handgun - go figure. And when "Assault weapons" go the way of the dodo "sniper" rifles won't be far behind, because there isn't a damn bit of difference between a "sniper" rifle and a hunting rifle. If I'm not mistaken, the first US miltary sniper rifles were drawn from the ranks of hunting and sporting civilian rifles.
Then they'll get the "military style" shotguns - in other words, the useful ones.
Then they'll get the "military style" shotguns - in other words, the useful ones.
alan
Member
Mark Tyson, et al:
In point of fact, the ultimate goals, VERY OFTEN STATED, of the anti gunners are, have been and remain, The Total Proscription Of Firearms. They have, after all, been touting this goal for years.
It never was a "secret", which leaves me rather curious as to how come such a simple truth seems to have escaped the attention of so many, people whose vested interests, one would think, would cause them to fight the achievment of the stated goals of the antis. Interestingly, or sadly, it seems that the obviously needed efforts are, with respect to so many gun owners, just to damned much to expect. The picture strikes me as sad, how does it strike others?
In point of fact, the ultimate goals, VERY OFTEN STATED, of the anti gunners are, have been and remain, The Total Proscription Of Firearms. They have, after all, been touting this goal for years.
It never was a "secret", which leaves me rather curious as to how come such a simple truth seems to have escaped the attention of so many, people whose vested interests, one would think, would cause them to fight the achievment of the stated goals of the antis. Interestingly, or sadly, it seems that the obviously needed efforts are, with respect to so many gun owners, just to damned much to expect. The picture strikes me as sad, how does it strike others?
Warren
Member
el-bumpo-o
aikidoka-mks
Member
I hope something can be done to put that organization in its place. Looks like the legal battle is dicey at best unfortunately :-( Which says a lot about the condition of our legal system. Seems that true and false, right and wrong dont matter but rather who is more creative in the argument regardless of the truth or logic of it.
Mark
Mark
357to44
Member
Now we have a precedent with The Economist on hand. Those folks admitted they used Oleg’s image unfairly and compensated him for that. I believe this case could be argued similarly but suggest bringing it, rather, to Small Court in DC.
VPC have used Oleg’s picture in its entirety for more than 13 months, 24x7. Even setting defamation of character aside, they’d rather pay at least as much as The Economist did. There are many similarities in the way the pics have been used.
Would somebody be willing to have a one-time court appearance as an image co-owner? I am sure Oleg will assign a partial ownership to the volunteer(including a share in what would be recovered). He would probably do it himself if not such a distance.
On publicity side, a victory should be a blow to VPC reputation as well – could be e-mailed to all the sponsors listed on their side. (I think though that they will settle out of court).
Due to the nature of Small Court where parties can represent themselves, I don't think there is a danger of being ordered to pay VPC's legal expenses.
VPC have used Oleg’s picture in its entirety for more than 13 months, 24x7. Even setting defamation of character aside, they’d rather pay at least as much as The Economist did. There are many similarities in the way the pics have been used.
Would somebody be willing to have a one-time court appearance as an image co-owner? I am sure Oleg will assign a partial ownership to the volunteer(including a share in what would be recovered). He would probably do it himself if not such a distance.
On publicity side, a victory should be a blow to VPC reputation as well – could be e-mailed to all the sponsors listed on their side. (I think though that they will settle out of court).
Due to the nature of Small Court where parties can represent themselves, I don't think there is a danger of being ordered to pay VPC's legal expenses.
Warren
Member
tyme said:
They are using it to raise funds, I see no real difference there.
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
I think the effort would be worth making. The only issue would be the difficulty of finding pro-RKBA people in DC.
Stickjockey
Member
Try contacting the NRA?
DragonRider
Member
I can try to ask one of the parents of the kids that I teach who works at the NRA if you like, but I think it would be better comming from you. If nothing else, they can point you in the right direction of who to contact.
John
John
twoblink
Member
All this suing... Goodness people..
Haven't you ever heard of a UCC-1 lien??
Why bother suing them when you can just lien them for everything they've got. They know what a lawyer looks like but probably will laugh at a lien placed on them, until it's binding.
Why try suing for half the farm, and you can own the whole farm?
Haven't you ever heard of a UCC-1 lien??
Why bother suing them when you can just lien them for everything they've got. They know what a lawyer looks like but probably will laugh at a lien placed on them, until it's binding.
Why try suing for half the farm, and you can own the whole farm?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked