Masterfile's Copyright Registration Method Held Invalid by California Court

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

Hahaha! You had me going there for just a minute wondering what in the world had happened. However this could be an opportunity Eli could use to help raise MasterFail in the Google search engines. We should do all we can to help restore the link between the two names so they appear together in Google searches

[SoylentGreen]

"Masterfail".



S.G.

[Bekka]

It looks as though Masterfail, uh I mean Masterfile has appealed their lawsuit against Chaga.  A new filing took place September 06, 2012.

 http://dockets.justia.com/search?q=Masterfile+Corporation

[SoylentGreen]

Great find!  A lot is riding on this case for Masterfile, and their industry.
I wonder if their strategy will be different, or are they simply hoping for a different judge with a different opinion?
I guess that many observers were expecting this.  Masterfile was holding off on pursuing other cases, it seemed.

Very nice to see that Bekka's still here!!

S.G.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Heres is a quote by Nancy Wolff of PACA and her thoughts on the Masterfile loss.

"In support of Masterfile's copyright infringement case against Chaga International PACA attorney Nancy E. Wolff prepared a declaration explaining the purpose of the registrations and the meetings on behalf of PACA with the Copyright Office. The defendants had moved to dismiss the action based on the validity of the registrations. In addition Marybeth Peters, the former register prepared a declaration in support of Masterfile and its registrations.

Unfortunately, Judge Real disregarded the declarations and ruled against Masterfile. Apparently this judge has a reputation for being anti-plaintiff and dismissing cases. He is frequently reversed. Relying on the prior cases of Alaska Stock and Bean he gave no deference to the Copyright Office. Masterfile has filed an appeal and is awaiting the 9th circuit decision in Alaska Stock v. Houghton Mifflin. If the 9th Circuit upholds the registrations in Alaska Stock, these lower court decisions from the 9th Circuit will be overturned.

Meanwhile, these declarations are available and may be helpful to other members in arguing against these strings of lower court rulings invalidating the group copyright registrations."

http://www.pacaoffice.org/membersOnly/updateArchive/120717.shtml

Looks to me that she's hoping fr a reversal, however with Alaska Stock being in bankruptcy, it looks like they maybe in for a long wait.

[Bekka]

Thanks S.G.  I always drop in from time to time and catch up with what is going on in the copyright trolling industry.  This forum will always hold a special place in my heart.  It was this forum that educated and helped me formulate a plan to fight back against my own letter from Masterfile.  I am not out of the woods yet, but I don't worry about it anymore.  I am a fighter and will fight to the bitter end.

Take care all, and keep up the great work!

[SoylentGreen]

Good info from Buddhapi!!

Wolff's assertion that "this judge has a reputation for being anti-plaintiff and dismissing cases" seems a bit childish.

The stock photo industry trolls are demanding very high settlements en-masse.
I don't think that the public, the justice system, and content owners would be well served by a copyright system such as that which the trolls desire.
Such a system would be too informal and simplistic to properly answer legal questions regarding standing and ownership.

When defendants are sued for many thousands, and sometimes millions of dollars, statements made by the trolls to the effect of "the photos are in there somewhere" and "we don't need signed contracts" are simply not acceptable.

S.G.

[Khan]

If the police stops you in your brand new car  and ask for your paperwork and you tell them : "It is somewhere and I am not sure if I have signed contract with my car dealer"

I do not think that they will let you go any further either 

Khan

[RosebudTiger]

I was hoping someone (Oscar?) could provide an update in regard to MF's recent actions (if any) involving these types of cases.  Have they initiated any litigation where the allegedly infringed image was part of a bulk registration since the Chaga decision?  Have they been initiating more/less litigation in general since the Chaga ruling?

Just curious if their strategy and/or tactics have changed recently.

Thanks!

[Addy]

As Rosebud, I too am looking for any updates to this litigation. I just received my extortion letter from MF the other day, and the image at issue is part of a group registration from 2003. I would like to know if there have been any follow-up decisions with respect to the invalidity and/or noncompliance of group registrations.

Of course, I removed this image immediately upon being informed of MF's letter. I am a once-in-a-blue-moon website designer with very serious medical issues and am currently going into hock just to pay for hospitalizations, specialists, diagnostics, meds, etc. With literally $5 in a savings account and living on a shoestring, I am not in a position to pay MF the requested sum, although I verbally agreed to do so in increments over 6 months. They are supposed to be emailing me their "settlement letter". However, after getting over the initial shock and finding this site's forums, I am now wanting to send them a letter requesting a copy of the assignment from the image author and the application made to the Copyright Office for this particular image. But I would also like to have current ammunition with respect to their group registrations and whether they are still deemed invalid by the court in the instant matter.

Thanks so much for any feedback you can give.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Addy, given your backstory ( which totally suckss) I would say you are pretty much judgement proof anyway..If you pay them nothing, and they decide to sue you and they win...you have no means to pay them...so actually they lose..don't lose sleep over these dick heads at Masterfile, your health needs to come first!

[Addy]

Addy, given your backstory ( which totally suckss) I would say you are pretty much judgement proof anyway..If you pay them nothing, and they decide to sue you and they win...you have no means to pay them...so actually they lose..don't lose sleep over these dick heads at Masterfile, your health needs to come first!

Thank you, Robert. I did lose sleep and could not eat after the initial notification. Not good for MS and heart disease, and the stress of it has taken its toll already. But I want to ensure I do things correctly, especially since I don't want the company whose website the image was used for caught up in Masterfile's extortion net. They initially received MF's letter, and I told them to pass it to me and I would take care of it. I would like to at least write to MF before their 10 day time limit expires so that it doesn't look as if I'm simply ignoring it. If it does go to court, I would like to have it clear from correspondence that I tried to resolve the issue.

The letter they sent demanded $3880 for an image I used for less than one month that has absolutely no copyright info linked to it in the EXIF info and no watermark to give any indication that there would be any issue with using it. I always check images before using them and, if they are copyrighted, I either do not use them or I pay for them. Had I known this image was copyrighted, I certainly would not have paid the exorbitant fee to use it and would have used a royalty free image from elsewhere.

After I spoke with the MF agent, they lowered it to $970, the amount they usually charge for using the image for "up to one month" on their site. They want me to make monthly payments for 7 months. However, even this lower amount is far outside my ability to pay right now, considering all the medical bills I am dealing with. I require constant monitoring by my specialists and need to keep current with them.

Frankly, since the initial shock has now worn off, I am angry with the fact that they are attempting to bully me into making payments I simply cannot make right now. I immediately removed the offending image and that should be the end of it. But after reading this forum, I see that they have quite a history of bamboozling people. I may be disabled, but I'm not an idiot and am very glad to have found this site with such helpful information.

I have set up an account with Pacer (still pending authorization) to check for a recent docket on the Chaga case and see if there have been any further developments with respect to the validity of group registrations. But if anyone here has any immediate answers on that front, I would so appreciate hearing about it.

Thank you, again for your kind words of support, Robert. They are much appreciated.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

a couple of notes / thoughts

1. The 10 day time frame is largely a scare tactic, to make you do something right away.
2. IF this does go to court, they will pursue the end user (your client)
3. If you do not pay them, they will simply remove you from the equation, and pursue your client.
4. Just because there is no watermark or EXIF info, means nothing copyright exists at the moment of creation, having said this, you may want to be proactive in removing any and all images you did not purchase, and that you don't have receipts / licenses for. As you are inviting more letters from other sources. Simply assuming images are safe and would pose no issues, is risky at best.
5. While PACER is a great tool, use with caution as it is very easy to generate a nice bill ( I speak from experience here)

[Addy]

Thanks again, Robert. Except for this one image, there are no others that I have not paid for (or downloaded when it was clearly stated it was free, as in 123rf.com free images), or owned by the client, or created myself. This is a first for me, and will be the last.

I agree with you about the judicious use of PACER (no pun intended). I just pulled up the docket on the Chaga appeal (10 cents), and currently they are still having mediation assessment telephone conferences. The next one is scheduled for 6/25/13.

I am upset to learn that they will go after the client if I fail to pay. That would reduce my income if I lose the client over this. Now I'm back to a state of confusion over how to handle it. 

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

You might want to look into Oscar's letter program. It costs $200 but your client (and you) will no longer be contacted by them. All further collection attempts would need to got to Oscar. It is not a guarantee that they will not sue. But I don't believe it has happened yet.