Attorney Steven Weinberg contacts ELI on behalf of John MacDougall of Masterfile

[Matthew Chan]

Oscar and I have been contacted by attorney Steven Weinberg with a short email letter regarding personal attacks and inflammatory remarks regarding John MacDougall of Masterfile.  John is clearly unhappy about it and had Steven Weinberg send us a letter.  According to their letter, they feel it is unlawful and defamatory.  Unsurprisingly, I don't agree with him and if it were really brought up in a court of law, I think it would be a very weak case.  Personally, I think John has a bit of a thin skin about it.  It is actually pretty tame compared to much of what I have seen written about others on other websites.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77683647/Attorney-Steven-Weinberg-Letter-to-ELI-Regarding-John-MacDougall-of-Masterfile

I do want to publicly say about Steven Weinberg that we appreciate him not using a "hammer" with the Certified Mail or Overnight Letter bit.  I considered it a professional courtesy he gently emailed me the letter stating his position without drama and I can respect it. I become much more offended and angered when the FIRST course of action is some Certified Letter or Overnight Delivery that lands on my doorstep.

Nevertheless, the reason why this forum is so reputable and credible is that we do have rules of forum behavior.  I have always stated, personal attacks, insults, and inflammatory statements does not help the mission.  And Oscar, has consistently reinforced this.

As such, I have deleted those sections of posts that I believe to be "over the line".  It is good for everyone. For the record, I have never met or encountered John, not even seen his photo, so I don't have any opinion on him one way or another.

Going forward, I will have to insist that people choose their words more carefully.  You can express your anger and frustration without name-calling and offensive, inflammatory statements. If you cannot, you should not post here because it hurts the website's mission.

Last thing, attorney Steven Weinberg wants me to make it clear the following: "..in posting my letter, it would be an injustice and frankly defamatory to John to do so under the rubric that his feelings need to be protected – if you are going to post my letter, the truthful comment would be that Masterfile supports discussion protected by the first amendment, but will not tolerate unprotected, unlawful defamatory statements."

Is everyone clear where John and Steven stands now?  I hope so.

Matthew Chan

[RagingBull]

I am "dontgivein"

I am not happy that my account has been disabled.

Matthew and Oscar shoud not give in to the Maserfile threats. The lawyer letter means nothing to me. I speak the truth. Truth hurts. I stand by all what I said. I am not afraid of John MacDougall and his lawyers. I have my own lawyers too working for me. Come get me and I will tear you into pieces! Steven, you can take your letter and put it you know where!

People reading this, you should stand up for yourself and don't let Masterfile or some lawyer scare you with their lette. They are nothing!

Yours,
DONT GIVE IN!

[Matthew Chan]

Your account has NOT been disabled.  I simply edited out a few phrases from some of your posts. The majority of your posts were ok.

As far as I am concerned, you are free to communicate your unhappiness with Masterfile or John but you should watch the language you use.  If you read my posts, I have a lot to say but we don't need to use inflammatory words to do so.

People are astute and can read between the lines.  Please note your post was NOT edited this time around because I read the words you used and you communicated strong feelings without name-calling.

In the letter, you will note that they might ask for your IP address and your identity. However, even I don't have access to your identity.  People can set up accounts however they want. As a practical matter, it would be very difficult to try to track you down even if I cooperated.

But you should realize my "cooperation" has to do with the preservation of keeping the signal-to-noise ratio high on these forums.  They didn't technically threaten me or Oscar (yet), they were threatening to find you.

It is a moot point because while I disagree with their defamation accusation, I do agree that we need to have a standard of decorum.

This is NOT about giving up.  This is just watching your mouth as if you were going into any public place. 

Matthew

[RagingBull]

Thank you Matthew and Oscar,

Everyone is grateful for this website.

I recommend everyone posting in this forum using a web proxy gateway located in a foreign country such as Turkey, Russia, etc.. where Steven, John and others can't apply US or Canadian laws to get to you.. and do it from a public computer such as internet cafe etc..

My comments were perfectly accurate and legal. John MacDougal and Masterfile have earned their reputation through years of unethical behavior.  I did not invent anything new.

I ask Steven Weinberg and John MacDougall to immediately write a letter of apology to Matthew and Oscar and everyone else for trying to suppress freedom of speech here.

I will be sending a separate letter to the Senators, Representatives and the Attorney General in New York complaining about Masterfile and their abusive behavior. I suggest that everyone does the same as soon as they receive an extortion letter from Masterfile. Do it anonymously if you wish. They read and log all letters in the database and one day will put an end to this. You can file complaints via internet, just do a search for it.

Yours,
Don’t Give In

[Matthew Chan]

DontGiveIn,

Thank you for understanding what our intentions are and respecting our request in using good forum decorum.

Obviously, you have not been banned and your account was not disabled.  You haven't even been edited. :-)

So feel free to express yourself.  One thing I will definitely agree on is that the legal loopholes are being abused.  I am a big believer in spreading the word.  The more people that get educated, the more options they have.

At this point, I don't have an axe to grind with Steven Weinberg.  He was pretty civil, diplomatic, and professional about the whole thing from beginning to end.  He sent an easy email to me and I replied to him quickly which he seemed to appreciate. You also have to remember that it was John or Masterfile that instigated Steven to write the letter. Boo hoo, John got called a couple of streetyard names (thanks SG!), and felt it was "DEFAMATION" and "UNLAWFUL".  Right....... GMAFB.  (Anyone knows what that stands for? *wink*)

Incidentally, I spoke to Oscar today and he is A-OK with what has transpired and how everything has been resolved. I don't know for sure but I think Oscar finds this all a bit amusing. Regardless, he is ok with us taking the high road.

You see, by taking high road in watching our language, we are free to talk infinitum about our OPINIONS which there is no shortage of by the core community.

In my opinion, Masterfile and John just got more publicity by having Steven send us the letter than if he just left it well enough alone.  It was a nice looking letter wasn't it?  I went and visited Steven Weinberg's law firm website.

Matthew

[Matthew Chan]

Oscar and I mutually agreed to share our email replies to Attorney Steven Weinberg regarding John MacDougall's so-called unlawful defamation of his character.  As you can see, there is disagreement but entirely cordial. The dialog is presented in reverse order.

========================================================

Dear Steven:
 
Matt has removed all of the indelicate comments about John on the post and I know that he and I will continue to try and advise our posters to maintain civility when posting.  I don't want to drag out this issue but the comments would not qualify as defamatory statements; they were certainly  immature, sophomoric and rude but not defamatory. While I cannot speak for your client, I think it would not be worth Masterfile's time and effort to commence litigation to try and have Matt turn over the IP address of the poster.  First of all, as I am sure you know, that is not automatically or readily granted, especially here in NY. Second of all, even if the court would grant that relief,  Masterfile would only be likely to find out that it was someone who was judgment proof.  Please ask Masterfile to leave this issue where it now stands and to take no further action as all sides should get back to their regular business. Thanks          
 
Oscar Michelen

============================================================

Steven,

I respectfully disagree with you.  There actually has to be harm and damages by what is being said in defamation.  People would actually have to believe the statements as well.  Calling someone a name is in itself not a defamation. I have been on the Internet for years and seen all kinds of writings about people.  What was said about John is really tame and no one would take it literally.  Let’s get real here. I have been to court enough that there is some “common sense” about these matters.

There is no conspiracy against John, just one guy who got overly fired up.  I edit it out and now it is done.  Your letter is a warning to others.  Let’s not twist this thing out of proportion here.

At this point, I believe your specific situation is remedied.  If you would like to follow-up on what I posted as a reply, I have no problems with you or John setting the record straight. Let’s not make this any complicated than this has to be.

Matthew

==============================================================

From: Steven M. Weinberg
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 5:35 PM
To: * Matthew Chan* ; omichelen
Cc: Steven M. Weinberg
Subject: RE: Urgent

Matthew:

I appreciate your quick reply and your positive response.

FYI, John is not “thin-skinned” nor are any of us who are involved in the enforcement of the rights of IP owners.  We all know there are a lot of opinions on these issues, and Masterfile, like my other clients, which include some of the major rights owners in the worlds of copyright and brands, accept that there will always be the name callers who hide behind pseudonyms.  Defamation, in contrast to first amendment protected expression, however, is a very different issue, which is why my letter and Masterfile’s comments are limited to that unlawful activity.  Thus, in posting my letter, it would be an injustice and frankly defamatory to John to do so under the rubric that his feelings need to be protected – if you are going to post my letter, the truthful comment would be that Masterfile supports discussion protected by the first amendment, but will not tolerate unprotected, unlawful defamatory statements.

Regards,

Steven M. Weinberg
Holmes Weinberg, PC

==============================================================

From: * Matthew Chan*
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 2:09 PM
To: Steven M. Weinberg; omichelen
Subject: RE: Urgent

Hello Steven,

I have not conferred with Oscar Michelen but I have read the post you listed and its replies in question.  Aside from a couple of mocking statements, I don’t see anything that is truly defamatory and unlawful so I respectfully disagree with your assessment.  May I suggest that John MacDougall has sensitive skin?  Having said that, I do publicly state that we should not get into personal insults and name-calling as it takes away from the credibility of our website’s mission.

Subject to my discussion with Oscar, within 48-hours, I will edit out or delete those statements that appear to be inflammatory or overtly personal and untrue and trust that will be sufficient.  But you should suitably inform John MacDougall that in his line of work will naturally bring out hostility in people that will inevitably cause bad behavior.  If he has such thin skin over those remarks, then you will continue to enjoy collecting more legal fees to dispatch more letters to other website owners.  I certainly do not condone it and it is specified in writing on our forum rules.

I will also do John MacDougall a favor and post a copy of your letter as to send a strong message as to not to hurt your clients feelings anymore with personal insults and inflammatory statements. I am quite confident that it will end the matter once and for all on our forums to John’s satisfaction.

On a related note, you and John should know I have a big problem with the rampant anonymity that goes on the Internet.  I feel people should back up what they say with their true identity.  If we were required to do that, there would be far more civil behavior and less outrageous and inflammatory statements.  Please note that Oscar and I continue to be among the very few in the world involved in this issue that (perhaps stupidly) sign our names to what we write.  We do not hide behind anonymous pseudonyms because we stand by what we say.

Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention and I trust the course of action we will take will resolve the matter.

Matthew Chan

[SoylentGreen]

Matt,

Thanks for posting the correspondence between you, Oscar and Mr Weinberg.

Basically all of this is just posturing and bullying.
I like how respectful you are in your conversations with Mr Weinberg.
However, he sounds like he needs a little less starch in his collar.

I've followed some actual Internet defamation cases.
It required the US Secret Service (I assume that's the CIA?) in at least one case to determine who was behind some defamatory postings on USENET (there were thousands of postings over many months).
They practically have their man, but it's still difficult to prove.  It may never, ever come to anything and that's with the CIA looking into it.
In the case that I'm speaking of, it's a criminal matter and the plaintiff cannot collect damages under the law.
I could go on and on here, but everyone gets the idea.

I'd like to see Mr Weinberg and Mr MacDougall recruit the vast resources of the CIA in their quest to keep Mr MacDougall's reputation untarnished.
Weinberg and MacDougall shouldn't flatter themselves; nobody cares about this petty BS in the courts.  Masterfile, MacDougall, and this industry just aren't that important.
People can criticize the President, and this sort of thing never happens.  Mr MacDougall; "here's your crown, Your Majesty!!"
The stuff that "dontgivein" posted wouldn't even make it to court.

Yes, most people don't use their real names here.
That's because they don't want to be bullied by masterfile and its attorneys who have nothing better to do than threaten people to get money, or to shut people up.
It seems that masterfile is really entering into new arenas wherein they will not be able to win in court, nor survive as a company if the damage is bad enough.
Are we to believe that masterfile is really that powerful or influential on an international scale that people will be sued if somebody's called a name that's fit for the schoolyard?
Masterfile is a company that hasn't even properly registered many of its images with the Copyright Office.  Need help tying your shoes, too?  Get a grip.

This whole thing is getting to be more and more newsworthy every day.
When it gets bad enough, and it hits the news, masterfile and Mr Weinberg et al can waste more paper threatening the news stations and newspapers.
Go ahead and get laughed at.  It's funny as hell right now.
This is the funniest thing I have seen in many, many months.

S.G.

[dontgivein]

I have been reading all the posts and I don't like several things.

It looks like I am being set up as a scapegoat to blame for the entire discussion topic. I find it very unfair. The fun begun after "SoylentGreen" took a photograph from Linked-In of John MacDougall and wrote on it "I Will Be Rich As Somali Pirate". Another user "laverne" posted his laughs about it and said that he had also received a letter from John MacDougall, then Oscar came out and said that John is nice and professional. Well... I posted my disagreement with Oscar. My post included words such as "henchmen" and "cold blooded monster" when I referred to John and his helpers/lawyers. The recent atack from John MacDougall showed how "nice" John MacDougall and Masterfile is proving my point.

The image posted by SoylentGreen and the laughing post by another user were completely removed by the moderators of this website. My post was left there to put the entire blame on. I am not asking to remove it. I wished you had never deleted the content from it, because there was nothing bad in it.

I really do not understand what the fuss is about my post anyway. The words I used were not "Street Yard" words and I did not go overboard. The entire website is dedicated to the topic of extortion by Masterfile and their friends. I don't believe the words I used were offensive at all. They described their pathetic attempts of getting rich at the cost of others. Given my anonymity, I was very polite. I could have easily used derogatory vocabulary and said anyting I wanted. I didn't.

Suing me for defamation? I can do the same because I feel greatly offended, singled out and defamed by Masterfile's approach. Besides, if what I said is true, which it is, it is not a defamation. All one needs to do is to read victims testimonials in this forum. John MacDougall, being the Senior Compliance Officer, one of the main if not the main persons behind the "demand/extortion letter" is most likely the one responsible.

As far as taking a court order for my IP address?
I am not "behind 7 proxies" as one user said. I use several web proxies vertically one on top of another in countries on different continents. The difference is that I do not exist behind them because I use a public computer. I do it to protect my freedom of speech and my right to privacy. I do it because I know how predatory John MacDougal and Masterfile corporation is and I will not give them the satisfaction to use their weapons against me.

I recommend everyone here to do the same to protect themselves. Let them punch the air and send their letters to Santa Claus.

Nothing that I wrote in my posts was illegal nor defamatory. Please don't let John MacDougall or Masterfile label me with some garbage because I will not allow it. I will sue them myself for defaming me and limiting my freedom of speech. John MacDougall and Masterfile have defamed themselves through years of merciless extortion of thousands of dollars from the unaware public earning themselves millions of dollars. They go after stay-home-moms, mom-and-pops etc... common.. open your eyes!

Deleting words from my posts is not good, because others may think that there was something bad posted. There wasn't. The words were full of well deserved criticism. If John MacDougall and Masterfile had not been extorting money from the public for years, they would not have been criticized. If one does such things, one would be foolish not to expect very sharp criticism.

I belive the most touching was his picture posted with a funny text "I will be rich as Somali Pirate", but that wasn't me who posted it and I never laughed at it publicly either. Some people here have a very good sense of humor. They should not be blamed for it. Conan and Jay Leno do it every day.

Therefore, please don't give me the entire credit for that subject.

Another thing that I dislike is Masterfile coming here and reading what their victims post. Masterfile, Getty and others should be blocked from viewing this forum. This forum is to help their victims fight them. Masterfile may be using it to their advantage. They are reading every post and have reacted quickly when they saw something they didn't like. Mathew and Oscar, on behalf of all the victims that share their despair here posting their personally identifying details, please ban these predators from accessing this website, reading the posts and trying to limit our basic freedoms by calling us criminals.

When compared, Getty which is based in the USA is actually not as bad as Canadian based Masterfile. Getty does not attempt to extort thousands of dollars per image as Masterfile. Getty does not put liens on people houses to ruin their lives as Masterfile because of some stupid picture. Getty's business is diverisfied. Masterfile's actions are a clear predatory extortion. To see it all one needs to do is read the actual stories that their victims posted in this forum. One can compile a whole book on it. Some day it may make it to CNBC speciall programming called "Canadian Greed", Hey, that is a great idea. Lets all write to CNBC, 20/20, Dateline and ask them to cover it. This would put an end to this finally and the laws will be amended to protect the public from all these predators.

Yours,
Don't Give In

[Katerina]

Don't Give In,
I am fully agree with you. This forum is not intended for Masterfile, Getty etc., but for their victims. I also don't like that they browse posts here. I am sure that they will use it for their interests.....If it could be possible to block them! But of course, it wil not happen.
This forum is a great relief, people could find here support in their desperate situations. Everyone will agree that what Masterfile is doing is not that funny and pleasant, a least not for those who gets their demand letters. If this forum will be viewed and limited by Masterfile and its attorneys, people will lose their supports, hopes, we all will feel unsafe.
If Masterfile doesn't like that people try to fight them in what they are doing and how they are doing this - it is their own problem. But we all have our rights, too!
However, I do agree with Oscar and Matt that some posts can seem too offensive and rude to John, too. 

[Matthew Chan]

DontGiveIn (DGI),

Let me be clear, I did not think what you said came close to defamation and I said this once or twice already. Nevertheless, Oscar did say to you (which I support) that your tone and words was a bit stronger than we would encourage on these forums.

You are NOT being made the scapegoat.  But the the truth of the matter is, your posts were the one that upset John which triggered the letter by Steven to us. You are smart enough to know that you really have nothing to be concerned about even if we had left the original post up as is.  Steven didn't like it when I said that I felt John has a thin-skin.  He tried to tell me (or insinuate) that it was still defamatory and unlawful if people got the impression that John initiated the letter because he was overly sensitive and had a thin-skin.  That was the point where I thought to myself GMAFB and I told Steven to not make this situation any more than it had to be.

John may be respectful and professional in his dealings but the fact he decided to have Steven write both Oscar and I a letter makes my eyes roll over in my head.

DGI, you are a smart guy and you write well. I like this side of you. And what John has inadvertently done is raised your profile and credibility because you are capable of communicating and writing well.  DGI, don't be upset.  As SG said, this whole incident has evolved to a humorous discussion.

Oscar and I discussed this on the phone.  I told Oscar that even if the ISP and I cooperated to "find you true identity" through the IP address, it would still be a big job in itself.  Then having to prove that you were the one that posted.  Then to prove that your post was truly defamatory in nature and caused damage.  There is the "common sense" factor that happen in courtrooms that most lawyers don't even want to admit. Lawyers want to cite all these laws, statutes, etc. but at the end of the day are they willing to spend the money to prove it?  And  if they are willing to spend can they prove it?  And if they can prove it, how much would they win?  And if they did win, how much would they win?  Also, how much could they actually collect?  Would the judgment even mean anything in practical terms?  I could go and on but you already know most of this.

Having said that, you have to pick and choose your battles.  If the word "monster" or "henchman" is too offensive and too personal, fine.  We will not allow forum posters call John a "monster" or "Henchman" on the off-chance that someone would actually believe he is an off-world alien or wears an executioner's uniform.  "Whatever" is my attitude about it.

DGI, you sound angry but all I was trying to do is paint a picture that it was only one guy that got carried away with name-calling (my opinion).  I say to you, take it easy.

Out of this incident, I think John comes of as looking the most embarrassing. As I said elsewhere, boo hoo, we promise not to do it again, ok? Jeez.

Regarding Getty Images or Masterfile, there is really nothing you can do to hide this open forum and I wouldn't even try.  People need to get educated in the fact that you are allowed to speak freely with little repercussions.  We don't force anyone to use their real names. Oscar and I do, it is our choice.

I agree with you, this has gotten control.  All this copyright and patent trolling is causing a lot of unnecessary damage. I have personally boycotted the stock photo industry and really don't want to deal with any professional photographers, period.  I am not saying that all photographers are bad but I have dealt with enough of them to know they get freakish about certain things.  That is why I own a nice camera and take my own shots.  And if I need someone to take shots, I will get almost anyone besides a so-called professional photographer to hold a camera.  That is just my thing nowadays.  The only exception that I have done in past years is I paid for their time and made it clear to them that I own the images they take of me. And that works out well if you find the right person with a not-so-tight attitude.

Matthew

[Matthew Chan]

SG,

Your welcome on the sharing. I thought it might be of public interest. I wanted to post the exchange earlier but I had not yet spoken with Oscar and wanted to make sure he was ok with it, which is obviously is otherwise I wouldn't have done it. We like to tag-team how we handle certain things.

I really do try to be respectful when I can but I do have my limits.  When people push beyond my limits on what is rational or makes sense to me, then I get a bit snarky and sarcastic. (*gasp, really?*)

Quite frankly, this whole thing is both a little petty but amusing at the same time.

Oh, and have you noticed the readership count on the thread have spiked dramatically?  It is change from a typical post where someone new receives a letter.

Matthew

Matt,

Thanks for posting the correspondence between you, Oscar and Mr Weinberg.

Basically all of this is just posturing and bullying.
I like how respectful you are in your conversations with Mr Weinberg.
However, he sounds like he needs a little less starch in his collar.

Go ahead and get laughed at.  It's funny as hell right now.
This is the funniest thing I have seen in many, many months.

S.G.

[dontgivein]

Saying that John L MacDougall may be offended is very funny given that John L MacDougall and his subordinates that he trained send 7000 extortion letters per year (according to their CEO). This is 21000 extortion attempts in the past 3 years alone! These letters are written to accuse others of criminal acts without looking into facts. Some bullied people pay thousands of dollars per image. How many people has he offended? How many stay-at-home-moms he stole sleep from? The words I chose were very decent considering this totally inhumane and unethical way of doing business.

This is neither nice nor professional. And the funniest thing is, that he and the Masterfile Corporation will insist that it is all legal. Nope, it is not legal. This is a major case of massive extortion. Masterfile knows that but hopes to get away with it because there has not been a specific law written against it. Our responsibility is to report this to the media and our governments in every possible way to criminalize their actions and bring them to justice.

One more thing, This is not personal. I don't care what the name is behind the "Poster Boy" of the "Demand/Extortion Letter". It happens to be John MacDougall, therefore he is being exposed. The company executives are even more guilty because they approve, encourage, and get filthy rich from it.

There are many nice people here that don't like to see others being called monsters etc.. Well.. John has just contacted you to pay up thousands of dollars for some image that you thought was ok to use. If you don't pay, he will continue blackmailing you into paying up under a threat that you will be sued for $150000. Don't panic! This of course is not what the reality is. You must read other posts to educate yourself. You tell me what you call such individual. Candy man? a professional, nice man? LOL?

That's right, he is about to nicely and professionally take your hard earned money via a legal loophole that their CEO, or his lawyer discovered a few years ago. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! DONT JUST SIT AND BE SCARED. MOST OF ALL DONT SEND THEM ANY MONEY! This only allows them to pay their employees to send you multiple letters and pay for their lawyers to sue you and make John and the Masterfile CEO rich.

Having them file a lawsuit to attack this website or its members will only encourage many here to come forward and speak up. The judge will look at the reasons behind the public outrage and will criminalize their business. It might actually be a good thing! The justice will eventually prevail. It always does, and those that abuse it always pay for it dearly.

Oscar having contact information to thousands of victims, is actually very well positioned to file a class lawsuit against all the copyright trolls, especially Masterfile. The attorney who will do that, will make Ta lot of money. It is only a matter of time. A tiny amendment to the copyright law will trigger a gold rush for defense attorneys suing them for all the money they extorted from the public and some more. Therefore you, the victim, must make the utmost effort to notify the media and your governments to propose changes to the current copyright laws. TAKE ACTION NOW! Do something good for the society. Make a difference!

Matthew and Oscar, Thank you for this website and thank you for not bending for those bullies.

In my native country Italy there are laws that prevent this type of abuse. In the United States it is only a matter of time.

Unless Masterfile provokes me, I will not post anymore because this no longer concerns me. I hope that others will follow up and do something about Masterfile and their friends.

[Matthew Chan]

How and where did you get the statistics on how many extortion letters go out?  Do you have a source?

I was also told by someone reputable that Masterfile makes more money from the extortion letter program than from legitimate paying customers buying photos from their website.  I would like to see someone or hard-core evidence that corroborate this.  I was also told that one time this information was shared in a speech and it was posted on a website but subsequently taken down at the request of the Masterfile employee for fear of reprisal.

If that is the case, I would not be surprised if Masterfile employees have to sign confidentiality agreements so they cannot publicly reveal Masterfile's true profit centers.  Most involved in the stock photo industry, including so-called professional photographers, now knows that without a copyright trolling strategy, many in the stock photo industry would most certainly be put out of business.

In other words, without the extortion letter program, Masterfile would be far smaller and less significant than it can earn legitimately.  This reminds me of stories that ask for "protection money" from the people they extort since the mob cannot as much money legitimately.

Matthew

[SoylentGreen]

Hey Matt,

I think that the data came from one of my posts on this forum.

MF president Steve Pigeon did an interview with a stock-art related magazine (applied arts online) and mentioned some stats.
http://www.petebarrett.com/blog/?p=709
He sounds like a complete copyright troll in the interview.

In addition there was an MF employee who posted a profile on LInkedIN, where he/she stated how many cases he/she would pursue yearly.
Name was "Shahadyda Babb".  I remembered the name, because it rhymes with "Blab".
This profile has since been removed, but the data's probably still valid

I don't have a crystal ball, but I surmise that MF is going to milk this for all it's worth until the legal/business climate turns against copyright trolling.
Then the scraps will be sold off to the likes of Getty.
The management at MF doesn't appear to be able to get the traction that Getty has in other more lucrative areas that generate revenue conventionally.
The execs at MF either don't have the talent, resources, or they're just concentrating on trolling for a quick buck.  Or, all three.

Regards,

S.G.

[Matthew Chan]

SG,

I have never seen the article before with these precise statistics on Masterfile or anyone.  So, this is a very good post. In the past, Oscar and I have tried to do an estimation on the Getty Images letter front (over 100,000 letters since they began years ago).

If 15 MF employees are working this and assuming each make an average of $50,000/year salary, that would mean the extortion letter operation would have to exceed $750,000 in net profits to justify its own existence.  This number would have to clear any Picscout fees, legal fees, and commissions paid to photographers.  Because we do not know the payment structure, we can only surmise that the letter operation is a multi-million dollar operation! Hence, their operation probably does make more than traditional sales.

You could be correct on Shahadyda Babb, I don't remember the name but I do remember looking up some professional women's blog and the info was not there anymore.

And it isn't just MF that is milking this thing, it is stock photo industry.  It has gone so far now that individual photographers are making deals with attorneys directly to set up copyright trolling operations.

Last thing totally off-topic, is it just me or when I see or type "MF", I instinctively think of a phrase besides Masterfile?  ;-)

Matthew