Removing posts for legal services

[jsobellaw]

Hi Oscar -

I was surprised that you and/or Mr. Chan removed my posting from earlier this week.  

I know that you and Mr. Chan have a virtuous stated goal for this website, which is to help recipients of these letters.  I viewed my email as offering a helpful resource to them.  

I give you and Mr. Chan credit for turning this site into a marketing tool for generating business, but wonder whether you should be more explicit on the home page in disclosing the fact that you are the only lawyer who is permitted to offer advice that might elicit inquiries from potential clients.

I hope to hear from you.

Best regards,
Jonathan

[Oscar Michelen]

Dear Jonathan:

We deleted your post not because we wanted to have a monopoly (on cases that I lose money on), but because I did not have time to reach out to you to assess your intentions and to see if you agree with the general theme and goals of this site.  I am away in Boston until Monday and will touch base with you when I get back.  But, Matt and I have worked very hard to have this be an informative site - not a business site.  We don't sell links, advertisements, etc.  I added the $150 letter program to give folks a resource to address the Getty problem. When Masterfile and now Corbis jumped into the fray I agreed to take those cases on for $150 per hour (as opposed to my $450-500 per hour standard IP retainer). Matt and I have also developed a very clear and particular philosophy on where we stand on these issues and we want to make sure we stay on message.  
 
This site is not a money-maker by any means - believe me. For every one company that retains me for the $150 - that's $150 Jonathan- I answer six to seven emails and forum posts for folks who have questions but don't retain me. The $150 covers two letters by the way, and at least one or two phone calls between my office and the client and/or my office and Getty. If that is the service you are willing to provide let me know and we will talk about it. This is a labor of love that Matt and I have worked on for over a year now and which has been the first place in the country to take this issue on and give some relief to folks.  Forgive me if I get territorial about it when I see another lawyer trying to use it for advertising purposes but I really resent the tone and implication of your post. Feel free to check out my educational background and experience,the kinds of cases, clients that I have represented and tell me that $150 for all of the above is  a money-maker for me.  Matt meanwhile makes nothing from the site so what is his financial motivation?

Let's be clear that you are not "offering a resource" as we are - you are offering your services on a paid basis. You have never answered a post on this site and did not offer any advice. You did not even tell our forum anything about the one Masterfile claim you have handled. So please be clear that your motivation and your post was purely financial.

Oscar

[Matthew Chan]

Jonathon,

Let me first start this post by saying at the top of the message list, is a "Please Read the Rules Before You Post" message.  It is short and sweet but works for us.

Welcome to the ExtortionLetterInfo.com Discussion Forum. Here you can share your story and discuss your situation as it relates to the Getty Images Settlement Demand Letter.

This forum is intended for intelligent on-topic discussions only.

* No ranting, raving, or cursing.
* No spamming or advertising here. (Pay attention to this rule.)
* No personal attacks or name-calling.
* No URLs, email or physical addresses in signatures.

Thank you!

Second, I would normally not even bother answering "why did you delete my post" messages because over the years I grow tired of explaining the rules of Internet etiquette. It seems people feel entitled to be able to say or write anything they want on the Internet.  People seem unaware the rules of protocol vary from site to site. However, I am going to take the time to reply because I plan on adding a new dimension of insight and explanation that I have not yet shared.

In a prior online life (2000-2008), I ran a successful and popular discussion forum community called "The MasterMind Forums". It was innovative at the time where I partnered with several subject matter experts in business, investing, and entrepreneurship to delivery high-quality information freely. Like this forum, the other forums had a niche mission. Because the time of subject matter experts are extremely valuable and I don't allow "hard selling", the only "reward" is recognition, exposure, and exclusivity.  I was approached all the time by people who wanted to join up except I had one hard-core rule, I won't work with anyone I don't know.

I will share another secret.  One reason most of my websites (including this one) almost always climb to the top of Google search engines in the subject it focuses on is that I deliver a high signal-to-noise ratio.  Inch per inch, there is a lot of high-quality content here if people read and look for it.  Part of achieving that high signal-to-noise ratio is making sure that my visitors have a safe experience.  They need to trust that when they visit and/or participate on my site that they will be blind-sided or hit over the head with marketing or advertising messages.

I have different business interests and, in fact, have a publishing company with an entire line of books.  I have also recently released new titles that I am actively promoting.  And yet, there is almost no mention of my publishing company on this website.  Oscar tells me about interesting cases he litigates that would just make people's head turn and yet it never makes it to these discussion forums. The point I am making is that both of us as "partners" of this website have the opportunity to put out many more advertising messages than we do.  But we have jointly built this website community from the ground up based on the foundation of trust, respect, sympathy, and compassion for our community.

We give out our information and advice freely. Anyone who wishes to engage us more directly know how to find us by email or by phone calls.

We are not going to allow "outsiders" to simply crash the party and start pitching products, services, and ads to them especially from someone that has no track record with us and have contributed nothing to the community.  Why would we allow an "outsider" do violate rules that we, ourselves, could easily do, but don't.

Let's say for a minute that this website really was a real "moneymaker" (which it is not).  Having someone crash the party with their advertising message after all the hard-work of building trust and traffic has been done is a bit like stealing billboard space without asking the guy who built and paid for the billboard.

In any case, Oscar and I have traditionally been very open and forthcoming with our community.  But I am in agreement with him on a number of points he made to you.

1.  You have provided no advice, legal opinion, insights, etc. to the cause established here.  You have earned not yet earned any goodwill or trust here.

2. You have not been privvy or participated in the hundreds of hours of conversations/meetings/research/writing articles/making recordings/producing the website/managing the forum/etc. that Oscar and I have put in over the span of a year discussing the many issues spanning from Getty Images, Jupiter Images, Masterfile, Imageline, litigation, negotiation, strategies, etc.

3.  Oscar and I do work closely in a complementary, "tag-team" fashion to make sure we cover as many bases as we can and that we have a cohesive message. We have provided advice based on the experiences of hundreds of participants, clients, emails, conversations, and cases that have been submitted to us, not simply one lone Masterfile case.  I don't mean to disparage you or your legal abilities because that is not the intent but we are MUCH further down this knowledge and experience path in the U.S. than anyone we have met thus far. Quite frankly, sheerly by accident, we have become the de facto "go to" website for anyone in the U.S. with a stock photo copyright infringement dispute.

As it stands right now, I am happy with what we are providing thus far.  I am also happy with the working relationship I have with Oscar.  I am quite satisfied that the customer service he and his firm provides is more than sufficient at this time.  I continue to get very happy emails and comments about the services provided.

Quite frankly, if Oscar ever decided to stop being the "subject matter expert" for this website, I would probably just shut it down.  The website has long since served its purpose for me which was to help me getting information and resources in defending my case against Getty Images.

I hope this clarifies my position in having additional lawyers joining this website.

MatthewC

[jsobellaw]

Thanks for your thoughtful repsonses, gentlemen.  I meant no harm by my post.  My approach is a little different - I do wish to go to litigation with Masterfile and Getty, as I think full discovery will level the playing field even further.    

You guys have done an outstanding job with this site and have provided a great resource to many.  I applaud you for that.

Jonathan

[Matthew Chan]

My question to you is that if you wish to go to litigation with Masterfile and Getty, are you actually going to recommend this course of your action to your clients?  Furthermore, who is going to pay for your time?  I am assuming you are expecting a client to pay for this process.

I am not an attorney but I am a practical businessman.  I very much believe in standing your ground but I would not recommend going through as a first choice especially over a matter that is relatively small.  I am very leery of anyone who actually wants to go into litigation if given a choice.  The discovery process can be very expensive.

I could be wrong, but I don't get the feeling you would go through the discovery process pro bono just for the education and experience of it.  Oscar and I have donated a lot time into research and diplomatic efforts so that litigation is not necessary.

Litigation, especially for these smaller cases, make the lawyers richer and clients poorer.  If I am wrong in my assumptions, I would welcome your reply on why you would want to intentionally go through the discovery process.

MatthewC

jsobellaw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks for your thoughtful repsonses, gentlemen.
> I meant no harm by my post.  My approach is a
> little different - I do wish to go to litigation
> with Masterfile and Getty, as I think full
> discovery will level the playing field even
> further.