Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



dreamworld ([info]dreamworld) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2012-06-18 14:05:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:lawsuits

Oatmeal vs. Funny Junk
Copy-pasta of the Dear Author article, because it's comprehensive, and Jane gave permission for it.

The Oatmeal is a satiric cartoon site run by Matthew Inman. About a year ago, he noticed that his content was being uploaded without attribution to a site called “The FunnJunk.” The FunnyJunk is a site that contains user generated content. This means that account holders post things that they like from all over the internet. Maybe a pre-Pinterest sort of site. The Oatmeal writes to the FunnyJunk requesting that the information be removed.

FunnyJunk took down the comics but proceeded to create a mirror image of The Oatmeal’s website. The Oatmeal responded by asking his readers what to do.

The FunnyJunk responded with a call to action to its own users asking them to inundate The Oatmeal’s inbox and facebook page. The FJ’s users responded in droves using their arsenal of retorts such as gay slurs and incoherently misspelled sentences to insult The Oatmeal and his biological predecessors for having the gall to procreate and, I guess, learn how to spell and draw.

According to Ars Technica, after the furor died down, the FJ admin acted somewhat responsibly, possibly realizing that its site could be in jeopardy due to all the copyrighted material illegally reposted there.

When the flame war finally died down, the FunnyJunk admin issued an unsigned note saying, “We’ve been trying for the longest time to prevent users from posting copyrighted content” and “I’m having all content, comics, comments, etc. with the names of your comics in them deleted/banned by tonight… The site barely affords to stay alive as it is and has enough problems.”

The Oatmeal v. FunnyJunk could have died there in November of 2011, only to be a footnote in internet flamewar history. But no.

The FunnyJunk for some reason came into contact with Charles Carreon, Esq., an attorney who came into national prominence during the sex.com domain name lawsuit. Carreon penned a letter on behalf of FJ, threatening The Oatmeal with a lawsuit for the post where The Oatmeal points out that the FJ has copied his website. Carreon, on behalf of FJ, wants the post to be taken down and $20,000 in damages.

The Oatmeal gets a lawyer and responds back with well worded, backed by research, rebuttal. The Oatmeal also goes on to decide to raise money off this ridiculous situation because so many of his readers want to help but the money isn’t going to Inman, instead he raised money for charity. Initially, he only thought to raise $20,000 for charity but the donations came in thick and fast and in the end, Inman raises over $200,000 which is donated to The American Cancer Society and the National Wildlife Federation.

The Oatmeal v. FunnyJunk could have died there on June 12, 2012, only to be a footnote in internet flamewar history and with its own Wikipedia entry. But no.

The situation gains the attention of the mainstream media and Carreon begins to make personal threats. He expresses wonderment and dismay at the internet’s reaction (he calls it bullying) toward his legal demands of Inman and The Oatmeal. He suggests that there might be other legal problems for the Oatmeal such as the fundraiser being violative of IndieGoGo’s term of service.

The internet continues to make fun of FJ and Carreon. Other attorneys make public statements about Carreon’s actions which include statements like “Holy fucking shitballs inside a burning biplane careening toward the Statue of Liberty, Captain! I hope that the reporter merely got the story wrong, because if not, that’s more fucked up than a rhino raping a chinchilla while dressed up in unicorns’ undergarments. ”

The Oatmeal v. FunnyJunk could have died there later on June 12, 2012, only to be a footnote in internet flamewar history, with its own Wikipedia entry, and a few mainstream media mentions. But no.

Charles Carreon’s pride has been wounded. In his delusionary state, he must see that the only way out is to double down on the Jack and the Six (i.e., worse blackjack hand in the deck). He takes the situation to DefCon 5. Last night, Popehat was alerted by another legal watcher that Charles Carreon has filed a lawsuit against The Oatmeal, IndieGoGo, American Cancer Society, and National Wildlife Federation.

He transcended typical internet infamy when he filed a federal lawsuit last Friday in the United Sates District Court for the Northern District of California in Oakland. He belonged to the ages the moment he filed that lawsuit not only against Matthew Inman, proprietor of The Oatmeal, but also against IndieGoGo Inc., the company that hosted Inman’s ridiculously effective fundraiser for the National Wildlife Federation and the American Cancer Society.

But that level of censorious litigiousness was not enough for Charles Carreon. He sought something more. And so, on that same Friday, Charles Carreon also sued the National Wildlife Federation and the American Cancer Society, the beneficiaries of Matthew Inman’s fundraiser.

Popehat is a site run by a bunch of lawyers and they are offering Inman pro bono legal work and they are asking the internet the following:

1. Kevin and I have offered pro bono help, and will be recruiting other First Amendment lawyers to offer pro bono help. It’s not just Mr. Inman who needs help. IndyGoGo does to. So do the charities. No doubt the charities already have excellent lawyers, but money that they spend fighting Carreon (whatever the causes of action he brought) is money that they don’t have to fight cancer and help wildlife. That’s an infuriating, evil turn of events.

2. You could still donate through the IndieGoGo program The Oatmeal set up. Or you could donate directly to the American Cancer Society or the National Wildlife Federation. I like animals, and I loved my mother who died at 55 of cancer, but I have no qualms whatsoever about encouraging people to donate to those causes as part of a gesture of defiance and contempt against Charles Carreon and the petulant, amoral, censorious douchebaggery he represents.

3. Spread the word. Tell this story on blogs, forums, and social media. Encourage people to donate as part of a gesture of defiance of Charles Carreon and entitled butthurt censors everywhere. Help the Streisand Effect work.

4. Do not, under any circumstances, direct abusive emails or calls or other communications to Mr. Carreon. That helps him and hurts the good guys. I don’t take his claims of victimhood at face value — not in the least — but such conduct is wrong, and empowers censors.

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part IV from Popehat.

Feel free to copy this entire post and repost it (even without attribution) anywhere you can.

 

Edit: EFF to represent the Oatmeal



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]morgyne
2012-06-19 04:29 am UTC (link)
I don't think anything can really justify that lawyer's behavior, and that was not my intention when I posted those links.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]tofuknight
2012-06-19 03:18 pm UTC (link)
There does tend to be a "poor innocent artist!" thing that happens, and pointing out that he is not a pleasant person merely brings more information to the table, which is a good thing.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]white_serpent
2012-06-19 04:52 pm UTC (link)
My comment would have been better directed at eleutheria.

My personal response to (paraphrased) "he's a dick, so I don't feel too sorry for him" is, "...so you'd prefer someone wonderful and totally likable get their content stolen and then get harassed by a lawyer instead?"

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-06-19 07:00 pm UTC (link)
Yeah. And bringing up someone's sins on a post that talks about that person being the victim of a crime makes me queasy. Where's the line with this?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]cmdr_zoom
2012-06-19 07:52 pm UTC (link)
The first comment in this thread briefly gave me the impression that the artist was merely another content aggregator ("copying whatever is highly ranked in search engines"), but that may just be my poor reading comprehension. Now that it's been established that Oatmeal does produce original content (even if it's pandering crap, in some people's opinion), yeah, not cool.

(Which is much different from the chuckle I get when, e.g., one plagiarizer is stolen from in turn, and cries foul.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mirhanda
2012-06-20 03:53 pm UTC (link)
I agree. It's been bugging me and I couldn't put my finger on it, but that's it exactly.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]eleutheria
2012-06-19 11:57 pm UTC (link)
No, I didn't mean to say it's okay that he got his stuff stolen and he got interfered with by a lawyer. I was more thinking of what tofuknight said above, that the information about his being rather a douchebag is information that should go in there.

That, and honestly there's enough horrible shit going on around in my life and out of it that I don't have a lot of care left over for people who say the kind of shit he's said. Plenty of wonderful people have had their content stolen without it becoming an internet debacle with tons of fans weighing in on their side, one guy that acts like a d-bag doesn't really need me, that's all.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mirhanda
2012-06-20 03:54 pm UTC (link)
IDK. Where do you draw the line at what is put out about a crime victim? Is it only IP crime where it's ok to trash the reputation of the victim? (Deserved or not)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]eleutheria
2012-06-20 06:11 pm UTC (link)
You know, I rather think this wouldn't be a debate if it were, say, OSC. "It's awful, nobody deserves plagiarism. But god, what a jerk."

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mirhanda
2012-06-20 06:14 pm UTC (link)
Is it a debate? IDK, maybe so. Who is OSC? It just kind of feels vaguely similar to "no one deserves to be raped, but she's a hooker." (I know rape is an infinitely much worse crime.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]white_serpent
2012-06-20 07:13 pm UTC (link)
Maybe? I think that holds more when there's a "poetic justice"-type feel to it.

So, if Orson Scott Card's son (or nephew-- pick close relative of choice) came out as gay and became a big leader in GLBT issues, that would make me laugh (while also feeling a bit bad for the likely discomfort of his relative).

If Cassie Edwards or Janet Dailey were plagiarized, I'd probably snicker over that (while also feeling bad for them).

If this guy had swiped a bunch of content and posted it on his site and then had his own content swiped... yeah, I'd be pretty amused.

(But no one's saying you personally need to feel bad for him.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-06-20 08:16 pm UTC (link)
Orson Scott Card? Yeah, it would be. I've been going through my head trying to think of whom I hate so very much that I'd be okay with someone bringing up their jerkitude if they suffered the exact same thing The Oatmeal did, and I couldn't think of any. I classify Oatmeal with the Penny Arcade guys. There are very few steps of douchery below that in my internal classification.

Commenting about what a jerk someone is on a post that is entirely about that person being the victim of theft and a frivolous lawsuit bugs me. Really, really bugs me. It's part of victim-blaming culture.

Again, where's the line? Just how bad does what someone suffers need to be before saying "but they're a jerk" when discussing what they suffered becomes utter douchery? Just how pure does someone have to be before they get sympathy for being a victim, or at least for people who can't get past the victim's assholishness to sit on their hands this one time?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mirhanda
2012-06-21 01:13 am UTC (link)
Commenting about what a jerk someone is on a post that is entirely about that person being the victim of theft and a frivolous lawsuit bugs me. Really, really bugs me. It's part of victim-blaming culture.

ITA

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kijikun
2012-06-23 12:00 am UTC (link)
Yes, pointing out that Oatmeal has made disgusting misgonsist transphobic and fatphobic jokes and that maybe we shouldn't through the guy a ticker tape parade for being awesome is just the same as blaming a rape victim for their rape.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ekaterinv
2012-06-23 05:54 am UTC (link)
First, I said nothing about rape.

Second, um, who was throwing the guy any kind of ticker tape parade? Try reading what people actually wrote.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mindset
2012-06-20 10:20 pm UTC (link)
...Need you to do what? This is otf_wank, right? It's for pointing and mocking, not activism. You don't have to weigh in anywhere.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]eleutheria
2012-06-20 11:01 pm UTC (link)
Gah. I didn't even realize this was OTF, I thought it was unfunnyfandom.

Teach me to look at tags, I'm sorry. Just really, really been a fucking week.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]darksumomo
2012-06-22 08:47 pm UTC (link)
When I first saw this story, I was thinking very seriously about posting it in unfunnyfandom, so you're not alone in thinking it belongs there. Just the same, I'm glad someone posted it somewhere in JF. I just couldn't muster the time and energy.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map