Lawyers of LetsRun, anyone want to sue Skyhorse and Andrew Hutchinson for statutory damages?

malmo wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

who registers their online writings?

The only reason to register is to sue. It's a formality. Thirty five dollar give you the right to holler. Your copyright is automatic when you produce.

and how many people actually do this? Millions are having their "copyright" violated online all the time.

Copyright was a protection for the publishing industry from when publishing required risky capital investment. Now publishing is free. Publishers were the market for professional writers, so their product has lost all intrinsic commodity value. Suing for statutory but never actual damages merely admits that the protection is not needed anymore; words are worthless and writers have nothing to complain about and should get real jobs.

If people want to complain about plagiarism of online content outside academia, find or make a law about that.

Just ordered a copy. Thanks for bringing the book to my attention. You guys are doing a wonderful marketing job for Hutchinson. Kudos.

Blowing Rock Master wrote:

Just ordered a copy. Thanks for bringing the book to my attention. You guys are doing a wonderful marketing job for Hutchinson. Kudos.

Me too. The brojos aren't smart enough to realize this.

Brojos and Gault-

I don't have any legal advice, but a thought based on the tail end of Gault's well researched/ covered piece about the plagarism- why not use the wide reach of LetsRun to get permission and publish an appropriately attributed compilation of great XC coverage with some original content?

I'm not about to buy this nonsense, but would buy that if it also had some great pictures. It'll look nice on the coffee table.

I ordered this book back in January and wondered why it never arrived. I ended up canceling my order (after over two months) and getting a refund but I was pretty bummed not to get the book. Something definitely seemed fishy to me when it never shipped but I didn't think it'd be for this reason. Glad I got the refund instead since it was just a collection of uncredited work from real writers within the sport.

There is a LOT of confusion or misinformation on this thread and in Jonathan Gault's article. Much of it has to do with the distinction between plagiarism and copyright infringement. But there is also considerable confusion about whether certain publications constitute plagiarism or copyright infringement at all. (I'm also surprised by the statement of an "actual lawyer" that "almost no one goes for actual damages in copyright cases. Everyone just goes for statutory damages--way easier on the plaintiffs." Yes, it's easier not to have to go to the trouble of establishing things like lost profits or unjust enrichment, but those are the kinds of remedies that big copyright cases tend to involve.)

One more thing: From what I've read, there may be very good reasons in this case for some people to be ticked off, but you'd be surprised how little relationship there can be between, on the one hand, your sense that something is unfair or unethical and, on the other hand, a legally cognizable claim of copyright infringement or a well-supported journalistic or academic claim of plagiarism.

FFF wrote:

This board is full of images hyperlinked from elsewhere, presumably without the person posting asking for, or getting permission.

This comes up in courts now and again. There was a time this was illegal, or in question.

I say this as someone who has run a fairly popular blog in the past, and I used images and graphics I had created, or I DID, in fact, get permission and attribute for images that were not mine.

Just saying.

I'm no lawyer but this falls under fair use.

If people weren't allowed to discuss news articles, artwork, etc, then what is the purpose for an artist/journalist/whatever to create those pieces? For those not familiar with fair use, this is what allows people to write reviews of books and things, and use content and images from the reviewed works, without receiving permission from the creator. This is necessary for a democratic capitalist society to function correctly.

Now copying someones work word for word without permission in your own book you sell: that is illegal. I don't understand why posters in this thread are not on Gualt's side.

I've handled cases like this before with success and would be interested in taking it. What is the best way for me to get in touch with you about it?

Thanks,

-Vince

Perryman wrote:

I've handled cases like this before with success and would be interested in taking it. What is the best way for me to get in touch with you about it?

Thanks,

-Vince

Because a split second before the torque wrench was applied to the faucet handle, it had been calibrated by top members of the state and federal Departments of Weights and Measures, to be dead-on balls accurate. Here's the certificate of validation.

malmo wrote:

Perryman wrote:

I've handled cases like this before with success and would be interested in taking it. What is the best way for me to get in touch with you about it?

Thanks,

-Vince

Because a split second before the torque wrench was applied to the faucet handle, it had been calibrated by top members of the state and federal Departments of Weights and Measures, to be dead-on balls accurate. Here's the certificate of validation.

gulp, malmo’s off his rocker again folks

Almost a sure thing that this guy plagiarized throughout school and college (if he went to college)>

Banana Bread wrote:

I don't get this. Who is suing who and why? Nobody was killed or something like that from what I could tell. I switched off literally a quarter of the way through rojo's message.

A Literal Quarter. Not possible. I counted all of the characters in rojo’s post and it wasn’t divisible by 4. So their.

Why is letsrun worried about this?

In there Term of use under #6: You acknowledge that material that you post becomes the copyrighted property of LetsRun.com and LetsRun.com can reproduce it in any form that it sees fit without providing you compensation.

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/TOS.php

malmo wrote:

Perryman wrote:

I've handled cases like this before with success and would be interested in taking it. What is the best way for me to get in touch with you about it?

Thanks,

-Vince

Because a split second before the torque wrench was applied to the faucet handle, it had been calibrated by top members of the state and federal Departments of Weights and Measures, to be dead-on balls accurate. Here's the certificate of validation.

Careful! With its recent acquisition of relevant portions of Twenty-First Century Fox, Disney probably owns the copyright in that line. Don't want to have those guys coming after you for $750 in statutory damages!

Don't you worry about me, Avocado. After receiving a C&D from UCLA's Trademarks and Licensing lawyers for designing, producing and marketing thousands of T-shrts that mocked UCLA when 19 football players were arrested in 1999 for illegally obtaining disabled parking placards, I think I'm up for Disney.

UCLA's Wilshire Blvd trademark attorneys were blindsided when I responded to their written C&D with a telephonic STFU begging them to draw up the lawsuit, and I'd agree to being served on the steps of the USC Law School. Since I've alraeady mocked the despicable conduct of their football team, why not have UCLA's crack attorneys pay for my publicity and marketing? That was the last I ever heard from UCLA.

http://i64.tinypic.com/11rus5y.jpg

hjjhhj wrote:

malmo wrote:

Because a split second before the torque wrench was applied to the faucet handle, it had been calibrated by top members of the state and federal Departments of Weights and Measures, to be dead-on balls accurate. Here's the certificate of validation.

gulp, malmo’s off his rocker again folks

I pre-ordered the book, devoured it when it arrived, but noticed a lot of plagiarism (not all of which has been flagged here). I was disappointed, but I didn't think it was worth pointing out. I'm glad the book exists, I doubt it made much money, and it was clearly a labor of love. Just let it go.

800 dude wrote:

I pre-ordered the book, devoured it when it arrived, but noticed a lot of plagiarism (not all of which has been flagged here). I was disappointed, but I didn't think it was worth pointing out. I'm glad the book exists, I doubt it made much money, and it was clearly a labor of love. Just let it go.

I get that point.

1) Jon gave them over a year to fix the issues in the book. The publishing house said the book would not be published without the issues being fixed.

No LetsRun article written at that point.

2) Publishing house republishes book a year later and does not fix majority of issues. Quits responding to Jon.

I've got no problem with Jon publishing his article. As a professionally trained journalist he was upset. Maybe we should just start copying Tim Layden's work on here and publishing it as our own.

If the book hadn't been republished with the errors I'm pretty sure this issue would have been privately dropped.

Actually Avocado the biggest copyright infringement awards are typically based on statutory damages, contrary to your insinuation.