Attorney Bruce Rosen (representing Julie Stewart) Sends Certified Letter to ELI

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

I have a suggestion.

Remember that scene at the end of the movie "War Games"? The computer looks at all the available scenarios for a global nuclear war and says, "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." I think that is applicable here.

Rather than try and figure out what FB's rationale was, rather than get too caught up in her efforts to fix the damage she herself has caused, let it go. Focus on your primary objective, chalk this up as a "win" and move on to the bigger issue of defeating the copyright trolls.

[SoylentGreen]

I'm quite enjoying the most exquisite "butthurt" that I detect, though.
It goes well "with some fava beans and a nice Chianti."
I'm savoring it like a fine apéritif.

S.G.

[Matthew Chan]

SG,

I think you are trying to bait me. But I just couldn't let your comments go unanswered. 

Let me be clear.  I have run into some really, stupid lawyers over the years that had the spine of a jellyfish and the street smarts of an adolescent but Julie takes the prize.

She is a blooming idiot that has no credibility or reputation-building or engagement skills. She knows how to send threatening letters but her actions show how truly ignorant she is in these matters.  Her bogus DMCA complaints against us could not be unchallenged, nor could I be silent about it. 

She wants to be in Entertainment Law but has embarrassingly little experience on Internet or Social Media.  Her resume smells of a liberal environmentalist not fit for actual "street fighting". A college kid would have more savvy than she has.

So, she got rid of that one little innocuous Facebook post about my rebuttal letter to Bruce Rosen.  Fine, I will endeavor to share more happy news on Facebook. Boo-hoo, she keeps trying to hide what has happened when all she has done is add to the story. In fact, I am going to write a short outline and chronology because I am losing track of the various attacks and harassment.

And if I am ever compelled to deal with this in front of a judge, I will have the entire drama laid out neatly for him.

I am getting very tired of bullying lawyers that make threats they cannot legally support. It seems they want to test if Oscar and I will take our "stupid pills".  I may take a "stupid pill" one day but not this month.  One of my projects is to one day write an article or booklet about how ordinary citizens can fight back against bullying lawyers.

Lawyers do have some extra "powers" but there are plenty forms of "kryptonite" to use if need be to combat them and put a world of "butthurt" on them.

Every single threatening letter she sent us has been met with an equally strong rebuttal. Attempting to squash the truth will only force it out more.

I really don't want to get pissed off. If people think I am prolific with my words now that I am irritated and annoyed, they will have no idea how much content that can spill out of me if when I can truly pissed and go into angry, fighting mode.

As David Bruce Banner often said, "Please don't make me angry. You won't like me when I'm angry". Cue soundtrack music.

Facebook is known for being quite draconian when it comes to user complaints/ their user agreement.
I doubt that any human actually reads/views content that's the subject of a complaint; it's simply removed automatically.
If the other party makes a counter-argument, then a person might look at it.  Yes, I said "might".

These days, many of the people who use "social media" consider themselves "skilled marketers" simply because they can set up a profile, and use the basic features of a the system.
But, nothing could be further from the truth.  Skilled marketing/public relations takes many years to master.
Additionally, it's much easier to carefully foster a good reputation, than to attempt "damage control" later on.

I suspect that even lawyers are having a hard time finding work these days.
That's understandable given these times, but taking on legal cases that appear to be an obvious fraud is going to attract unwanted attention.
In addition, she's made false claims through the US DMCA.  This is illegal.  So, I really question her moral compass.

I think that Julie Stewart is making huge mistakes in her public relations by meeting any criticism, or even mention of her name with claims of "slander", "libel", and "anything that I write is copyright".
I personally don't think that she's in the correct profession for her.
At the very least, she should try practicing family law (wills, real estate, etc.).  She doesn't have the stomach for what she is doing now.
Most people don't believe that lawyers have some sort of "powers" to abuse the system, and bully people.
Anybody, and I mean anybody can hire a lawyer, send letters, make bogus claims and intimidate.
Ms Stewart isn't "special", and has no "special powers" or privilege.

S.G.

[Matthew Chan]

I created a new public service video with some sanitized search phrases about a very "unique" lawyer from Toronto. It is about time people keep up with the ongoing saga of Julie Stewart/Blackline vs. ELI.

[Matthew Chan]

I stupidly thought that Julie might come to her senses and would give up in trying to have us remove content about her. I stayed quiet for a long time hoping she would go away. But she has proven me wrong so I caved in and spent the time to create a Chronology of Events. 

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/toronto-lawyer-julie-stewart-vs-eli-chronology-of-events/

Even after Bruce Rosen's letter, she had to get petty and file a complaint about our Facebook Page and ding yet another social media account.  That means it won't be long before she starts digging into all the other ELI accounts and filing reports against our accounts.  So, every time she scores a winning hit, I will document her "successes" and "wins" against ELI.  We will keep score, blow by blow, play by play.  Everyone else can enjoy the show.

The good news for Julie is that she will eventually force us to sanitize every reference and entry on her EXCEPT the ELI Home Bases:  The ELI Site & the ELI Forums.

There have been too many things that have happened between ELI and Julie since October and I cannot track all of the dates, people, threats made, actions taken, rebuttals, gossip, and dramatic events (large and small).

As promised, I wrote a Chronology of Events based on my email records, communication trail, ELI Forum posts, and my memory recollection. I started with the easier items and major events and started "filling in holes". There are still holes in the Chronology but I will fill them in as my memory is jogged. Of course, I am happy for the ELI community to scrutinize it in detail to make sure I get all the dates and sequence correct.

I left out much of the commentary and editorializing that I normally do simply to keep it tight and to the point.

Last thing.... Julie hates ELI using her name on the forum so I am kicking around the idea of using an alternative name. An interesting anagram for a FEmale CAnadian Lawyer is F.E.C.A.L?  So if we discuss issues regarding Juile, we can refer to them as "FECAL Matters".

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Please include monies for a new keyboard in my salary, as mine is now soaked with hot steaming coffee!   

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

The good news for Julie is that she will eventually force us to sanitize every reference and entry on her EXCEPT the ELI Home Bases:  The ELI Site & the ELI Forums.

She'll be hard pressed to sanitize every reference of her, I just stumbled upon this.



Looks like these little clips are making the rounds..

[SoylentGreen]

While we do sometimes have some "fun" here, all that's really being done is the reporting of factual, publicly available information.
We all would like to be seen as "pillars of the community", and "artistic types" want to be seen as "edgy and deep".

However, the entire "copyright trolling" issue is quite controversial to begin with, and lawyer Julie Stewart's involvement with H.A.N., including her reactions to factual reporting are noteworthy.

I really believe in the concept of "Occam's Razor", that is, the simplest explanation is the usually the best one.
It's pretty obvious that H.A.N./Tylor seed their images online to induce copyright infringements.

In the face of weak claims and non-existent legal standing in almost every case, it seems that some wish to suppress the reporting of the issues.
This isn't North Korea.  People can't tell us what we can and can't talk about.  Things could be much worse.
If I got an extortion letter from lawyer Julie Stewart over those deliberately seeded H.A.N. photos, I'd have my PR machine up and running in seven days.
That would include a website called "canadianlawyerjuliestewart.tv" hosted "offshore", with domain privacy in place.
This site would include all publicly available information about lawyer Julie Stewart that can be shown to be factual.
I would also institute pay-per-click ads "Canadian Lawyer Julie Stewart" that direct traffic to my site.
I would place sufficiently high bids so that the pay per-click ads would stay "on top".
Even if I was outbid somehow, my ads would be at least second.
Everything would be "legal" so as to ensure that any legal efforts to suppress information about Canadian lawyer Julie Stewart would be met with a prompt and successful legal response.
Further efforts would be to involve national media if things escalate.  Blogs would link to my site, and the traffic would keep it on top in the search listings.

Again, things could be much worse for those who intend to prevent people from discussing the issues and people involved.

I'm going to make my own "Canadian Lawyer Julie Stewart" video, but "Adagio for Strings" (from Platoon) is copyrighted, and I have to find some other tragic-fail sounding music for my clip about her.

S.G.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

We must be careful if we adopt this anagram, we must continue to report the facts, and not just talk $h!t...

[Peeved]

We must be careful if we adopt this anagram, we must continue to report the facts, and not just talk $h!t...

Couldn't agree more with regard to the "facts" and as long as we are talking "facts", I don't see why we need an "anagram".

btw..it looks like that screen shot is no longer as I could not pull up the link.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

no it's there, but the URL was cut off in the screen capture.

http://www.firstpost.com/topic/place/toronto-toronto-lawyer-julie-stewart-of-blackline-entertainment-law-video-CZMUhEnyiZQ-73-1.html

[Matthew Chan]

Absolutely correct on all counts quoted.

I would be the first to admit we have a slight bias because we are taking a position. Nevertheless, amongst our speculations, we do endeavor to stick to the facts. And with very few exceptions, Oscar and I have never had to take down any information because it was wrong or inaccurate.

It's sort of interesting how ELI is evolving into a mini version of a niche news reporting site. It used to be just "helping" people with their letters by pointing people into the right direction and providing some education. And while that still happens, it seems that that the ELI community has gone "proactive" by seeking out information and developments of interest.  And many ELI Forum contributors bring in interesting nuggets to the overall conversation.

Of course, no one could ever have guessed that ELI would become part of the news it reports and comments on. I guess we have the various opposing lawyers to thank for that as they come one-by-one complaining and making bogus allegations. ELI has to self-report the news because we are too small and nichey for anyone else to care.  LOL.

But even then, most of those incidents were simply small blippy events that came and gone fairly quickly.  But since our favorite F.E.C.A.L (FEmale CAnadian Lawyer) came along, she is an ongoing news story all to herself full of drama that we could not have possibly created by ourselves. And yes, it is quite news-worthy.

And yes, it could be FAR, FAR worse but FECAL just doesn't get it. Your very impressive online combat strategy that you so kindly shared is one such scenario.  Right now, I am sticking to very light "2 for 1 eyeball specials". Every time ELI gets poked in the eye, there will be 2 pokes back.

Last thing, I cannot wait to see the video you come up with.

While we do sometimes have some "fun" here, all that's really being done is the reporting of factual, publicly available information.

However, the entire "copyright trolling" issue is quite controversial to begin with, and lawyer Julie Stewart's involvement with H.A.N., including her reactions to factual reporting are noteworthy.

In the face of weak claims and non-existent legal standing in almost every case, it seems that some wish to suppress the reporting of the issues.
This isn't North Korea.  People can't tell us what we can and can't talk about.  Things could be much worse.
If I got an extortion letter from lawyer Julie Stewart over those deliberately seeded H.A.N. photos, I'd have my PR machine up and running in seven days.
That would include a website called "canadianlawyerjuliestewart.tv" hosted "offshore", with domain privacy in place.
This site would include all publicly available information about lawyer Julie Stewart that can be shown to be factual.
I would also institute pay-per-click ads "Canadian Lawyer Julie Stewart" that direct traffic to my site.
I would place sufficiently high bids so that the pay per-click ads would stay "on top".
Even if I was outbid somehow, my ads would be at least second.
Everything would be "legal" so as to ensure that any legal efforts to suppress information about Canadian lawyer Julie Stewart would be met with a prompt and successful legal response.
Further efforts would be to involve national media if things escalate.  Blogs would link to my site, and the traffic would keep it on top in the search listings.

Again, things could be much worse for those who intend to prevent people from discussing the issues and people involved.

I'm going to make my own "Canadian Lawyer Julie Stewart" video, but "Adagio for Strings" (from Platoon) is copyrighted, and I have to find some other tragic-fail sounding music for my clip about her.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

another blast from the past! Sometimes I don't think Matthew see's or understands, just how well he writes..

[Lettered]

wow ... has it really been a year?  seems like yesterday.

[SoylentGreen]

Julie Stewart had a very short career in copyright trolling...

We should have a Youtube vid of "Trolls that We Said Good-Bye to this Past Year".
A video montage much like they have for actors that have passed on, as shown on the Oscars award show.
Cue the poignant music, applause and black and white photo vignettes.

Heart-warming!

S.G.