Hawaiian Art Network Lawsuit Collection

[Matthew Chan]

I downloaded the court documents (Complaints & Exhibits) from PACER of the 3 outstanding Hawaiian Art Network lawsuits. I have not yet read the complaint or exhibits in detail.

http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/3402361

Moku-aina Properties, Aloha Plastic Surgery, and Outrigger Lodging Services are all being sued.

Please note that Vincent Tylor is a co-plaintiff in all 3 cases.  Hawaiian Art Network is filing as a co-plaintiff, not the sole plaintiff.  It appears that Righthaven lawsuits and the Getty vs. Advernet case has gone into effect by compelling the original copyright holder (Vincent Tylor) be named as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, not simply relying on the stock photo company (HAN) to file a lawsuit.

If HAN had filed as the sole plaintiff, there would be no question HAN would be challenged whether they had standing to sue would be called into question. By including Vincent Tylor (original copyright holder/owner) as a co-plaintiff, it seems HAN has covered themselves on that front.

Let the analysis and critiques begin!

[Lettered]

My first thought is that the photographer may not have thought this through very well.  

First he has publicly associated his name with these people.  That alone would be enough to compel me to not participate, I think.

Second, wouldn't he be opening up himself to potential counter-suits?  What if he finds himself up to his eyeballs in counter-suit(s) aimed directly at him?  If the going gets tough, will his "friends" hang around to protect him and finance his defense?

[Matthew Chan]

Lettered,

I am guessing he is not terribly worried about his name being associated with HAN. Many of us suspect that he "seeds" the Internet with "free wallpaper" images to entrap people. As far as we are concerned, there seems to be some funny business going on.

You do bring up a good point that there is the potential for a counter-suit.  If it were me, I would be asking why he is giving away the images for "free" only to turn around and extort them into paying several thousand dollars if they use them on a website.  It may not win them the case but it can seriously mitigate any outrageous damages HAN may be seeking.

Now that a lawsuit has been filed, you can bet there will be many more eyeballs following this.

[Lettered]

Actually, that may be good news.  Maybe this will be the venue to get that practice exposed and shut down.

Seems to me that a good strategy might be to file suit against the free wallpaper site and the uploader (John Doe) for contributory copyright infringement to compel the free wallpaper site(s) to reveal the IP of the John Doe.  Even if John Doe is using a proxy server there are ways to figure out who he is.

This will be interesting to watch.

By the way, I assume this is guy we are talking about in the following link?
http://www.hawaiianphotos.net/VKTylor.htm

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Lettered, yes that is the person in question, and to follow up with Matts opinion of possibly some funny business going on, I can't help but make the following observations..

HAN has other photographers under their umbrella, yet it seems that only V.K. Tylors images are spread out on multiple wallpaper sites. Furthermore in every letter we have seen and reported on every single one is a V.K. Tylor image.
I've also noted that on many of these sites the signature is already removed, yet Hawaiian Art network / V.K. Tylor are also suing for removal of copyright information.

If I remember correctly the first HAN letter we saw came from Carolyn Wright, who is a well known and respected photo attorney, it would appear that she is no longer involved in these matters and I can't help but wonder why?

There has been some research ongoing in regards to the domain owners of the wall paper sites, just to see if it is remotely possible that there is a link somewhere.

I would also like to know what HAN is doing proactively to have these images removed from the wall paper sites, my best "guess" is nothing.

[Matthew Chan]

Lettered sent me a stunning idea most of us have not thought of regarding the HAN lawsuits.

His idea was to have the ELI community file an amicus brief on those cases. Because the central idea of an amicus brief is so important, I started an entirely new thread regarding the possibility of ELI filing amicus briefs in the future.

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/index.php/topic,2441.msg4249.html#msg4249

Thanks Lettered for making me work this holiday weekend.  :p

[Matthew Chan]

It appears Aloha Plastic Surgery has not filed an answer in a timely manner and an Entry of Default has been filed against them by HAN & Vincent Tylor. Quite unfortunate.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77406749/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Aloha-Plastic-Surgery-Entry-of-Default

The other 2 cases has no answers filed yet. However, no entries of default have been filed either. My guess is that they are under negotiations to settle.

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Unfortunate indeed, especially after speaking with the recipient on 2 occasions, and getting the impression, that was going to fight and not give in. Perhaps he weighed his options and thought this was his best course of action ( or in-action).. To bad, another win for the trolls.

[Jerry Witt (mcfilms)]

I really don't understand why someone would subject themselves to a default judgement. You automatically lose and don't have an opportunity to present your side of the story.

[lucia]

mcfilms-- In advernet, was the reason the defendant didn't show up in court that as a corporation they could not represent themselves and the corporation had no money anyway?

[Matthew Chan]

I uploaded 4 more documents to this collection.

Outrigger appears to have settled based on this dismissal by HAN.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78001362/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Outrigger-Lodging-Services-Voluntary-Dismissal

Moku-aina Properties are still fighting. They filed an answer. I have not read it yet.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78001554/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Moku-aina-Properties-Defendant-Answer

And we know Aloha Plastic Surgery defaulted. However, I just discovered that Michael Pasquale filed a Motion to Set Aside the Default Judgment.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78021881/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Aloha-Plastic-Surgery-Motion-to-Set-Aside-Default-Judgment

Naturally, HAN is aggressively objecting to this motion.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78021564/Hawaiian-Art-Network-Vincent-Tylor-vs-Aloha-Plastic-Surgery-Motion-to-Strike-Defendant-Request

Very interesting reading but it does not look good for the defendant. I would be shocked if the judge granted the defendant's motion/request.  Michael screwed up badly.

[Lettered]

Thanks for posting all these documents, Matthew.  Looks like Moku-aina Properties might be planning some defenses we've been talking about here and hoping to see:

"SIXTH DEFENSE" mentions implied license
"SEVENTH DEFENSE" mentions unclean hands, entrapment, enticement and honeypotting

Aloha Plastic Surgery does seem to be on the ropes at the moment.  However, it seems not so hard, at least according to this, to get a default judgement set aside:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_judgment:

"However, "good cause" is rather easy to meet, compared to other instances where "good cause" might be required. For example, mere "excusable neglect" is, at least at the federal level, a sufficient reason to vacate default judgments.[26] There are often time limits and other requirements"

I do worry that he is trying to get it set aside "pro se".  I think he needs to lawyer up FAST.

[Matthew Chan]

Believe me when I say I am on on Aloha's side. However, the issue the court cannot easily ignore is that corporate entities require proper legal representation otherwise it has no voice. If he wants to represent himself "pro se", he would have to agree to take on the accusations and be the defendant himself (not necessarily recommended).

By the quality of writing and spelling in his document, Michael does not appear close to being able to represent himself. I hate to say that I agree with opposing counsel with him being so unqualified and unprepared.

Also, it would have been so easy to file any kind of answer (much less use a lawyer) to let the court know he was paying attention instead of letting the deadline go away.  At the very least, he could have asked for a time extension for Pete sake.

But, you are right, he needs to a lawyer NOW to intervene on his behalf because it looks very bad right now.

Aloha Plastic Surgery does seem to be on the ropes at the moment.  However, it seems not so hard, at least according to this, to get a default judgement set aside:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_judgment:

"However, "good cause" is rather easy to meet, compared to other instances where "good cause" might be required. For example, mere "excusable neglect" is, at least at the federal level, a sufficient reason to vacate default judgments.[26] There are often time limits and other requirements"

I do worry that he is trying to get it set aside "pro se".  I think he needs to lawyer up FAST.