Lifevantage (LV) announced that, at the unanimous recommendation of its Board of Directors, it has terminated for cause its relationship with Jason Domingo and Ovation Marketing Group, Inc., one of the Company’s lead distributors. The Company also announced that it has filed suit against Mr. Domingo and Ovation in Federal Court in the State of Utah for breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets. See typical market report.
The detail (see link below) shows that LV made $10.9m in 2010 and $208m in 2013 – this is despite the investigative activity into Protandim, LV’s main product, by LazyManAndMoney and others…! Distributors were paid $91m from which $2.6m went to Domingo. They say he was the lead distributor.
The Detail in the Lifevantage Case
The case details are on PACER – summarised here:
2:13-cv-01037-DB Lifevantage v. Domingo et al
Dee Benson, presiding
Date filed: 11/19/2013
Date of last filing: 11/19/2013
Assigned to: Judge Dee Benson
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Court Filings of Lifevantage v Jason Domingo
You can view the court documents (19 pages) on the attached file:
Jason Domingo,President, Ovation Marketing Group, Inc.
Domingo has been in business for many years. This letter of his to the FTC is dated May 28, 2006 and he states he’s been in network marketing for 14 years, meaning he started back in 1992. Chillingly, he quotes a Dr Charles King that by 2016 one in two Americans will be involved in network marketing. Thankfully, we don’t appear to be treading that path.
The Court Case
The letter of his makes good reading, especially with regard to the free market and in comparison to the Lifevantage court case…. In this, they claim he:
Has been laying the groundwork for setting up a competitive business
Disparaged the company
Is setting up a competitive business
Used his disposal of 90% of his stock as proof of these claims
Sent an email to Randy Haag disparaging the company where he said “there is no statement too strong that speaks to the malfeasance of this management team. Greed and ego has gripped my (sic) beautiful company by the throat.” – Stirring stuff indeed!
If Domingo had worked properly, they’d have paid out tens of millions more to distributors.
In total there are three main actions, divided into a myriad of clauses.
They want a 12 man jury public trial.
They want all costs.
They want $775,000
Domingo used the word malfeasance to describe the LV management team. I had to double-check the meaning. It means:
The commission of an act that is unequivocally illegal or completely wrongful.
In detail, it means:
Intentionally doing something either legally or morally wrong which one had no right to do. It always involves dishonesty, illegality, or knowingly exceeding authority for improper reasons. Malfeasance is distinguished from “misfeasance,” which is committing a wrong or error by mistake, negligence or inadvertence, but not by intentional wrongdoing. Example: a city manager putting his indigent cousin on the city payroll at a wage the manager knows is above that allowed and/or letting him file false time cards is malfeasance; putting his able cousin on the payroll which, unknown to him, is a violation of an anti-nepotism statute is misfeasance. This distinction can apply to corporate officers, public officials, trustees, and others cloaked with responsibility.
Well. Most of what I have seen about LV fits into that. It’ll be interesting to see how this case pans out. I suspect it’ll not come to court.
Roll on the FTC. They’ve got to weigh in on these sharks soon.
Paul Myhill’s Open Letter On Facebook
Update on 24 April 2012
Rather than a comment, (which isn’t so taggable and relevant within search engines), here’s Myhill’s open letter (open – geddit? – in the fullest meaning of the word). Text follows below.
OPEN LETTER TO MY DEAR LIFEVANTAGE FAMILY
Needless to say, the company and I are not on good terms right now. Quite frankly, Doug Robinson’s email to the LifeVantage distributors is fraught with error and misrepresentation. In fact, he gave very little attention to me personally on this matter, hardly exchanging a word with me concerning it. He simply didn’t have the time for me.
It is very well documented that the company was founded on a pledge to give shares, and a percentage of profits, to the charitable cause that it helped to start – rescuing orphaned and abandoned children from being abused, exploited, trafficked and enslaved. This was my “Why?” for joining Bill Driscoll in starting LifeVantage in the first place . . . and it is a cause that he graciously took on as his own and championed also. I’m sure he’s getting many hugs in Heaven as a result of the 15,000 children who are free from slavery today because of our work together.
I will be more-than-willing to make public all that documentation, especially since it was all public information to begin with. This charitable pledge was also the basis for which I assigned my invention (not Dr. McCord’s invention!) to LifeVantage. As soon as Bill and I assigned the patent to LifeVantage the pledge was sadly taken out of company materials, almost immediately. I naturally felt quite betrayed. Again, I can provide full documentation supporting this and it can be easily verified in the public record – through company press releases, investor presentation materials, SEC filings, etc. My resignation letter was also a matter of public record and alludes to the fact that this pledge – which was foundational to the company and my very involvement in it – needed to be kept, otherwise it would represent a promise broken to the original founders and all of LifeVantage’s stakeholders. The erasing of the pledge from company materials was the main reason for my departure, which the original Board and transition management team can certainly attest to. I was quite the thorn in their sides, constantly verbalizing the need to keep the pledge. As such, there is no disputing the existence of the original commitment. It’s simply undeniable.
I have been quite clear in my communications with LifeVantage management that the company still owes the charity now known as Traffic Jam 100,000 shares as part of its original pledge to match the Founders’ donation of shares to that same charitable vehicle. This amount was supposed to match Bill Driscoll’s gracious donation of 100,000 shares that came in a couple of months late. I’m sure if he were alive today he’d be greatly disappointed that the company never followed through on that commitment . . . and other commitments. Bill and I had our differences, but I also owe it to him as my brother-in-arms to get his shares matched, as he fully expected would be done when he made his generous gift in the first place. I owe it to his memory and legacy. And I owe it to his family – to see more children rescued because of his gift and defense of the pledge.
Despite the implication made in Doug’s letter, I never approached the company to ask anything for myself. In fact, it was David Brown who suggested that I become a “Goodwill Ambassador” for the company with a job role that would give me a greater platform to share the “correct” company history and bring attention to the fine work of the Traffic Jam Campaign. It was through that process that compensation (as with any job) was sought to channel to Traffic Jam. I have quite a few emails that show that this compensation was for the purpose of supporting the work of Traffic Jam. I’m on record multiple times stating that I gave everything away . . . and would give it away again.
It is with great sadness that I write this on the eve of my Birthday – not exactly the “gift” I was hoping for . . . or hoping to give. Since 2008, I have been pleading with the company to correct its marketing materials – to reflect that Joe is not the “Inventor” or “Creator” or “Scientist behind” Protandim; that Protandim wasn’t “developed after 40 years of research;” and that it didn’t consist of a “laundry list” of 40 ingredients that Joe whittled down to the current formula. This is all simply untrue. I’m sure the company will try to put some sort of further spin on this now and try to convince people otherwise, but the truth is the truth and will always come out in the end. Darkness can’t hide from the light.
The CORE botanical formula I forwarded to Joe included the current five botanicals, plus one additional one – all in the EXACT same proportions/weights as the current formula (all 1/3 of the original to get it into one pill), but with Milk Thistle subsequently bumped up at my suggestion. The other ingredients were part of an “all-in-one” (multi-formula) addition to that CORE botanical formula that I developed. Given such indisputable facts (and that the initial patent was filed one month before we even met Joe), how am I NOT the creator? How is Joe THE creator? The simple email record, and even a letter from Joe himself, clearly show that the current company communications are downright false and misleading . . . and, in the eyes of many, perpetuate an ongoing fraud – one that the SEC and FTC should be made aware of.
I initially stated that “nobody lied,” desiring to give this current management team the benefit of the doubt and chalking it to human error and the discontinuity of company management in general. But then, month after month went by with the same erroneous materials still being widely distributed by the company, despite their own admission to me that Joe isn’t the creator. These same materials are on the company website TODAY. I just don’t get how a company can keep doing that, with full knowledge that the materials are sending the wrong message to current and new distributors. Many times I wrote emails (which I’d be happy to share with you) and each time nothing was done to take down the offending materials.
I’ll be glad to once again share that whole “Protandim Development History” with you, which is backed up by meticulous documentation, the full email record, plus personal notes and commentaries. It spanned over 20 blog entries. I’m an “open book.” I had nothing to hide. I shared it all.
I’m sure, though, that if I were to re-post Protandim’s development history, the company would claim that I was then “giving away company secrets” and would once again try to silence the true history of the product’s creation – MY creation of Protandim – that occurred for almost ten months before I even met Joe. The reality is that the company misrepresentations have gone on for so long now that they have no choice but to try to silence the truth. Just you wait and see. I can almost hear the “cease and desist” letter being typed up right now. And I can almost picture the new “watered-down” version of the history that the company will now come up with.
Doug mentioned in his letter that I found the company response unacceptable. Well, one of those unacceptable conditions was that I sign a new set of releases (to silence me telling the true Protandim story again) and that I pull down my “LifeVantage / Protandim Founder’s Page” on Facebook which, of course, would be in addition to my blog that was already pulled down. Do you see the common theme here? Silence. Silence. And more Silence. I’m a high-justice person who stands for truth and integrity and, despite the company trying to buy that silence by offering for Traffic Jam to be featured at convention, I told them that I couldn’t in good conscience do that. I’m not signing away my voice. My “Founder’s Page” stays. My voice stays. And my appeal to get the company to meet its commitments . . . stays.
Do you want a company of integrity? Well, then, don’t let them silence the truth any more. Protandim wasn’t an “idea” that Bill and I took to Joe. It was a full formula that even Joe stated in a letter was almost at its “final embodiment.” And the company’s charitable pledges to Traffic Jam wasn’t an “idea” that I just came up with. It was represented in multiple press releases and SEC filings and collateral materials. If you don’t believe me, go to EDGAR and check yourself for at least the SEC part of it.
Ever wonder why the company took down all the archived press releases? Because it backs up what I’m saying and what I’ve been asking, not for myself, but on behalf of trafficked and enslaved children.
Given the erroneous wording in Doug’s email, I can only assume now that the company has chosen the issue of the 100,000 shares to try to discredit me – making it sound like I’ve been making selfish and unreasonable demands of the company – while at the same time trying to discredit the true history of Protandim’s development. Doug, of course, fails to mention in his email that the “great deal of material” that I posted on the Internet concerning “my view” of that development was 1.) Taken down by me as a sign of “good faith” and 2.) Was only posted in the first place after I reached out to the company multiple times beforehand – with no response.
I’m not sure how Doug can call it “my view” of Protandim’s development anyway, considering that it included hundreds of emails (that were copied or sent to dozens upon dozens of people) as well as a number of other source documents that were widely circulated. It’s not just “my view,” as demonstrated by the substantiated, well-documented evidence. Of course, if the company has its way, you probably won’t see any of that document and you’ll just have to accept Doug’s words that it was simply “my view” of events. Where was Doug during the development of Protandim? Who is he to challenge the clear evidence? Can he not see the patent was initially filed a full month before Joe even came into the picture? Does he not see whose name is on the patent?
For months, I’ve taken steps of “good faith” and have expected the company to do the same – to act in “good faith” to take down the erroneous marketing materials that were propagating that Joe was the inventor/creator of Protandim. Sadly, the company never reciprocated. The 100,000 share issue, unfortunately, has now become the easy point of contention that allows LifeVantage to not have to give credit to me for my invention. By making it so public and contentious, LifeVantage now has a convenient excuse to not have to include Bill and me in our rightful place in the company history. Something that should have been celebrated can now be easily swept under the rug because I’m the “bad guy” with “unreasonable” expectations who asked the company to honor its commitments. It now allows them to feel better about themselves somehow – for so long being negligent in getting the real story about Protandim’s development out there; for so long casting me in a “false light” by commission and omission; for so long keeping up the erroneous materials to the point of malice and great hurt.
Company of integrity, Doug says? How about keeping its original promises to match the founders’ shares to rescue children? How about keeping its original promises to give 10% of pre-tax net profits away for children and related humanitarian causes? How about filing an 8-K correction notice with the SEC every time the erroneous message of Joe being the “creator” went out? How about the promise to correct the development history while at the same time keeping up the offending materials that lead people to believe Joe was the inventor? How about David’s promise to “make it happen” for me to have a “Goodwill Ambassador” role with the company, to help further the purposes of Traffic Jam? How about the company’s constant encouragement for distributors to use the copyrighted material of ABC News for commercial purposes? How about all those big distributors who came over with down-lines allegedly “stolen” from Zrii? How about ALL the mentions of diseases when it’s clearly not permitted in the marketing of a supplement?
Integrity? Company of integrity? Actions speak louder than words.
This is a very sad day for me folks. The “petition” that Doug mentioned in his letter was merely me throwing up my arms in bewilderment and wondering why on earth the Board wasn’t fulfilling the matching pledge with a measly 100,000 shares when the evidence was so clear that 100,000 shares were missing (Believe me, I was asking for these shares long before the recent run-up in price). Even a math flunkey could see that the numbers didn’t add up and 100,000 shares were still owed. Instead of bringing the match to completion, with an amount of shares that pales in comparison to the fat stock options the executives are getting, they chose to make this big issue out of it. It could have been a cause for celebration. Instead, the company has chosen to create yet another public relations nightmare. I didn’t ask for that. They did it. And I’m baffled by it.
I started off with 5 million shares. Why on earth would I make all this fuss about 100,000 shares if it were not true? I’m a man of principle and the principle-of-the-matter is the shares are still owed. Gosh, by their reaction, you’d think I asked for the moon.
I merely responded by saying that I would put out the public information and ask distributors to let their voices be heard – for integrity and common sense. But somehow that’s now something portrayed as me being devious and destructive. Hello? Why would I try to destroy the stock of the company I’m trying to get shares from? Hello?
Conversely, I don’t believe the LifeVantage Board has acted in its fiduciary duty in this matter. I believe they are acting in a destructive manner. Why on earth would they bring about such a disruptive episode in the midst of such growth and promise? The missing shares are soooooooo obvious that they are missing from the match. I gave 200,000 shares. Bill gave 100,000 shares. the company gave 200,000 (matching mine) and, hello again, Bill’s shares didn’t get matched. 100,000 shares missing. You don’t need a mathematics degree to figure that one out. Why would the Board put so much at risk – the airing out of this laundry – instead of just issuing the shares to help rescue kids?! And celebrating it!
. . . Unless, of course, they were needing something to make me look “bad” or “unreasonable” so they don’t feel so bad about the incorrect company communications about who invented the product. And to release themselves from an obligation to correct that history in a way that celebrates Bill’s and my involvement.
. . . Now they can just quietly remove the “creator” tag from Joe and hope that nobody notices. Just like they did when they removed the “inventor” tag from him.
Doug’s letter concludes by asking distributors to not get involved in anything that “disparages” the company. Wow. I asked the company to honor its commitment with a measly 100,000 shares to stop 11 year-olds from getting raped 20 times per day; to stop 7 year-olds from having to shoot their parents before being forcibly conscripted into a child militia. Now, if any distributor goes along with supporting what is clearly in the public record, and honoring their own conscience to see the pledge fulfilled for children such as these, they are in violation of their distributor’s agreement. Seriously?
Looks like the strong arm of silence rearing up again.
My apologies for rambling on in this open letter. Obviously I’m a passionate person – the same passion that brought Protandim into being in the first place. And, obviously, I’m quite upset right now – not just by these events, but how they’ve now been represented in Doug’s email.
Unfortunately, it’s the distributors and the children who lose out because of the Board’s baffling conclusion and Doug’s irrational choice to send out his email. Quite wreckless, if you ask me. Certainly not acting in the best interests of the shareholders. They turned a public relations celebration into a public relations nightmare.
I apologize to all of you that it has come to this. It certainly wasn’t my intention.
I want you all to know that I love you all and do indeed wish you the best. I will STILL use my “Founder’s Page” on Facebook as a place of encouragement and, given this recent turn of events, as a place of clarity and truth.
So there you have it. Since this time, Myhill has been sat on by Lifevantage (as it turns out a kind of double-blackmail) and then stated that the shares were the thing to buy. Following this, Lifevantage have made public pronouncements about their charitable donations to Myhill’s charitable organisation(s) and there’s now, apparently, a kind of Machiavellian sweetness and light between them.
But whatever: the business is still a snake-oil pyramid scheme founded on flawed and discredited “science” and promoted by MLM-hopping get-rich-quick wide-boys. For more on these recent developments and a fuller history of investigations into the topic, see a few of LazyMan’s postings here:
…….I won’t steal any more of Lazyman’s thunder and there much, much more on his site. But from top to bottom, the volunteers and employees of all the charities financed by Myhill and/or Lifevantage should examine their hearts and ask themselves;
What value is there to a charity when it’s financed from deception?
So what if Myhill has had his photo taken with Elton John or whoever.
So what if Myhill plugs;
Paul Myhill Entertainer Plugs
“Meetings getting scheduled with Lady Gaga, Justin Timberlake, Justin Bieber, Slash, Myles Kennedy, and many more. The TRAFFIC JAM Campaign (Stop Child Trafficking & Slavery) will be rocking this summer!”
Our Prime Ministers and Presidents are often photographed with the pariahs of the world. Elton is one of the world’s biggest self-publicists and spend-thrifts. So is Gaga. So, so what? There is no validation there.
It’s still a charity founded on deception. It may have good aims. It may be correctly financed and regulated – though Vogel has shed great doubts over this (See here, here, here, here and here). But it is financed by a pyramid scheme based MLM using a product with no proven benefit as the bait on the hook.
Embarrassment is not it though. The real reason is our discovery of Straw & Blair’s hypocritical dealings over wars and torture, kidnap and illegal detention without trial, things that Straw’s government, and now our own coalition one, seek to hide. That’s a deep guilt.
Was it guilt over the knowledge that as he was the head of an unaccountable web of spies, they were doing everything that any free democratic nation would naturally think abhorrent?
That’s the special relationship for ya! Straw brought in the US-UK one-sided extradition agreement in 2003. The following yearhe and Blair were found out to have started the war in Iraq on false pretences. There then followed the endless investigations that dragged on for so long that folks forgot what they were about.
A collusion between the military, the law and politics from the establishment, designed to legally obfuscate by the dreary analysis of the minutiae of the webs of illegality they’d hatched?
We now find out, in the same year, 2004, that Straw and Blair were (supposedly) in government, Fatima Bouchar and her husband, Abdel Hakim Belhaj were captured, bound in gaffa tape (her eyelid bound open for 17 hours during this process), kidnapped and transported to a foreign power (Libya) where they were tortured and imprisoned for seven years.
Straw said he knew nothing, so what exactly was he paid for? Was he a stooge, a calm reassuring personae, quietly acquiescing to misdeeds on the grandest of scales in exchange for lifelong protection and a nice pension?
Abdel is now in the ruling government of Libya, having fought and beaten Gaddhafi, with The West’s help, let’s not forget….
Cover Up Illegal Government Work by Invoking Secret Trials, “in the national interest”!
Killer Drone Aircraft
It’s all true. Our own (and the US) secret services kidnapped and transported innocents from our own and foreign soils to foreign powers. This was all done without the intervention of a judge, without court orders and in many cases (those in Guantanamo Bay for instance), without any immediate or subsequent trial. They’re still doing it!
Bush, Cheney, Obama, Blair – their handiwork – it is estimated that >3ooo civilians have been killed by drones
The only difference between the recent actions of Jack Straw, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Blunket, Teresa May, Ken Clarke & David Cameron, and the historical actions of Joseph Stalin, Chairman Mao and Adolf Hitler are that in the former, there’s been no trial and the people are still alive, and in the latter there were usually show or peremptory trials usually followed by immediate execution.
Though life is precious, today’s innocents (innocent unless proven guilty, remember) may have at times wished they were dead.
The targets have no chance to surrender, and the Afghan government has raised concerns. The drone strikes are dubbed ”Kill TV” or ”Taliban TV” because soldiers watch live video feeds of bombs and missiles detonating, with one source admitting it is uncomfortable viewing: ”You can see everything.”
Because the real devilish forces, whereby a supposedly civilised country like the United Kingdom can kidnap and torture with impunity, still exist. Pregnant Fatima Bouchar was not a terrorist and nor was her husband. Their terrifying ordeal at the hands of our secret service stands testament to that.
These are the real devils in our midst. They are the real terrorists. Under false pretexts they continue to bomb civilians with drones and kidnap and torture those they can’t kill. Though from different political persuasions, successive governments draft laws cover up the previous one’s actions.
What an evil nasty bunch they are. Cameron and his crowing cohorts are just the latest in a long line.
MPs and judges can retire to fully indexed-linked pensions, unlike the rest of the public sector workers who have been recently brutalised and scape-goated in the press for the thieving behaviour of gambling banker-politicians.
MPs and judges are protected from harm by the very secret services they’ve steered and governed while the rest of us are made
to feel fear at home, where none exists
to feel loathed abroad, when we have done nothing
All due to the evil machinations of these few folk.
The Real Reason for Secret Trials and Internet Censorship
Question: Why Pictures of Drones and Dead Innocents, Yet not many Kidnaps?
A. Simple. It’s the same mentality of person that sends in the drones to kill innocents as kidnaps innocents. In fact, it’s the same people. They stand there smiling on our TVs, in suits, with the appropriate amount of gravitas dependant on the situation.
The real devils in our midst. The real terrorists.
This class action suit caught my eye today from one of my feeds, ClassActionLawsuitsInTheNews.
YouPorn, YouPorn Cocks and YouPorn Gay Privacy Class Action Lawsuit Complaint Filed Over Alleged Internet Browsing History Sniffing
Initially, I thought,
“well that’s tough on those visiting such websites…. they should know what to expect…”
…and other such sentiments.
But then I thought,
“hang on – this technology is used by all websites, and the principle of using vulnerabilities in Java (this time) and other coding as a means to steal user information etc can be applied to all websites that we visit”
It’s not the same as revealing government or business secrets that in an honourable and ethical world should not be secret in the first place, is it?
No it isn’t.
The difference is in the scale of the watching – because the defendants are using Big Brother monitoring techniques for the prime purpose of theft in all its guises.
Notionally, our governments are supposed to “ask the people” by way of an appointed legal authority to do phone tapping etc. The fact that Wikileaks has exposed our representatives doing the opposite time & time again (amongst other illegal things) only clarifies the difference between the right way of living and the wrong.
If our representatives acted honourably, then there would be no need for Wikileaks, or Amnesty International etc.
And plainly, the class action shows that a whole host of people believe the porno-defendants were not acting honourably at the personal level. How many people think this?
Well, the class action is asking for relief for, get this……
Each and every United States resident who has visited Defendant’s website in the previous four years.
And that’s one heap of a list of IP addresses. Where will they get that? Hmmm.
The cause of all of this was a cease and desist request to me via email by a lawyer, Matt Thomson working at Kronenberger Burgoyne. They found me by the simple expedient of checking my WHOIS for this website. This public visibility is something that in his earlier business of Just Think Media and many of the websites run by him, Jesse Willms obviously failed to do – it being very well documented on-line in such places as the legal settlements with the various organisations and persons that he offended, say. Currently, his WHOIS is visible, and I’ve now discontinued those postings or comments and/or their threads above, as requested.
The cause of my postings was my observance of the extremely high level of complaints by users of Mr Willms services at his websites, and reported as such on a host of consumer-focussed websites and organisations, which I won’t list here for brevity, but are widely available. This is what attracted my attention and I would not have published anything without this high level of consumer complaint. (Obviously, why would I suddenly start spouting on a personal blog site about a Canadian about whom I knew nothing? Like der!)
The effect of the wide complaints, was that users of Mr Willms services complained to their finance organisation using such terms as “deceptive practices” and “unlawful withdrawals” from their bank or credit accounts. (n.b. this is the recommended procedure as reported here with a concert ticket selling scam – Added 12/11/10)
Whether we think that all these people were under the mass delusion that they all had the same experience, or not, the effect of this was that credit processing was limited to Mr Willms businesses which made transactional business difficult for him.
Mr Willms therefore sought to apportion blame to his customers and any organisation reporting their complaints for his downturn in business. ( His earlier businesses for which he reached a legal settlement with Oprah Winfrey et al he appears to have terminated.)
This, for all the above in this paragraph above entitled “Cause and Effect”, is my opinion of the history surrounding Jesse Willms and his businesses over the last few years. How he now conducts business is a different issue entirely, which is why I’m stating the fact here.
This “Cause and Effect” paragraph now ends.
I’ve published the full message to myself below, and it makes interesting reading for those interesting in such things.
A very interesting part of the threatening letter to myself from Matt, was the limits to my free speech on something that only they deem confidential and that may or may not be subject to copyright laws! Matt says:
This letter is without prejudice to the assertion of any and all rights and remedies of Mr.Willms, all of which are expressly reserved. This is a confidential legal communication and is not intended for publication, including publication on a website or via email distribution. Any republication of dissemination of any part of this letter will constitute infringement of copyright and a breach of confidentiality.
Remember, the letter was sent to me without my request. Now as far as I’m concerned, and as a subject of the United Kingdom of Great Britain etc, anything I receive, except something from HM Government in the UK that is subject to the Official Secrets Act, I can publish or copy as I see fit if I have a copyright. Is this letter copyrighted? Even if it is, and I profoundly disagree that it is…..I can still publish. How so?
Being a published musician with my copyright works being plundered on-line, I’m not unfamiliar with copyright law.
This is some Crawling Chaos music for you to enjoy and has Jeff Crowe at his finest and for which I have a Copyright that allows me to play it here etc.
A clause in the US version, which almost exactly follows that in the UK and elsewhere through international treaty and general agreements, is that it’s not illegal to reproduce copyright work under the “Fair use” clause for a host of reasons. This is the clause below, taken from the Cornell Uni. Law School website which is copied from the required US law. (They state: Title 17 of the US Code as currently published by the US Government reflects the laws passed by Congress as of Feb.1, 2010, and it is this version that is published here.)
§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Cease and Desist
And here’s the cease and desist to myself Link, to which I’ve complied with all listed terms and by the removal of listed exhibits.
I’ve complied in that all of what I’ve said previously about Willms and a host of other on-line businesses and services, (don’t forget), is either
repetition of opinion, fair comment and prior art from other sources when I consider them as such. My website history shows that I’ve blocked commentary or linkage that is tortious, slanderous, insults appearance, race or sexual orientation of a person, is bigotted etc.
Now back to checking the internet to ensure that businesses are run fairly and that consumers (i.e. me, you and everyone else) do not suffer. This website, and all its contributors, will continue in this vein. All documentation and IP Addresses is available to any legal process, especially those that seek to protect the common man from the bad people and iniquities that exist in our fast-changing world.
After all, it’s always the common man that suffers from the actions and decisions of the creative types… Mostly, they just want to get on and live their lives free from harassment. Here ends my bit for now.
Over the last couple of days the strangest thought has plagued me. Two simple ugly words have kept emerging, only for me to lock them out and ridicule them as bizarre. Simon’s dead. Just to write it down feels like … Continue reading →
If you ever needed confirmation that the UK is not run by a shadowy cabal of sinister plotters but a bunch of chinless fucking idiots then the upcoming Digital Economy Bill is a good place to start. As well as … Continue reading →