Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Copyright Infringer Tries To Shut Down Reporting On Her Infringement

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the would-you-like-some-goose-with-your-gander? dept.

Your Rights Online 418

An anonymous reader writes "Further to the previous story on Slashdot where attorney Candice Schwager threw threats to sue a photographer who reported a DMCA violation against her for infringing use of his photography: Candice has now made a DMCA threat of her own against Petapixel, a photography site that reported on her infringement. The kicker? She's sent the DMCA notice an apparent six times not to Petapixel's registrar or their hosting service, but to Godaddy, her own registrar."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Suing herself? How you say .... (0, Flamebait)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198067)

wah-wah.

This entire thing reeks of FAIL.

Re:Suing herself? How you say .... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198517)

wah-wah.

This entire thing reeks of FAIL.

She's just a particularly dumb cunt. It's not like women in general know a great deal about law or technology. But even compared to THEM this woman is a fucking idiot. That's saying something. Only women who drop their last egg, as it were (post menopausal) ever care about anything remotely concrete or quantifiable.

Re:Suing herself? How you say .... (1, Insightful)

cforrester (2474734) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198599)

0/10 zero-effort trolling attempt go back to reddit

WTF? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198071)

This story makes no sense at all. And "threw threats"?

Off of her Meds.. (5, Funny)

pro151 (2021702) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198073)

She is!

this woman is an attorney? (5, Funny)

sdnoob (917382) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198095)

how the fuck did that happen?

oh, wait.. she's from texas. never mind.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (4, Insightful)

griffjon (14945) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198121)

As a Texan, I somewhat resent this statement. Some of us were lucky enough to have parents who valued education, despite the State's constant de-funding of it.

Also, there are dumbasses everywhere in "amercia" it would seem.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (0, Troll)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198127)

And I could say you guys gave us GWB, but then "someone" voted for him... twice.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (2, Informative)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198163)

And I could say you guys gave us GWB, but then "someone" voted for him... twice.

GWB was actually from Connecticut. He bought the Texas property purely as a political prop, and sold it the second he was out of office. The entire thing was social engineering, designed to make rural and lower class people empathize with him, instead of realizing he's just an embarrassing brat from a New England, old money family.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198329)

If that was true, why does Texas always eat up these fakers? While what you say is true, voters there apparently love 'em.

Of COURSE Texas is full of dumbasses (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198375)

Make no mistake -- Texas is indeed full of dumbasses. It's not a unique condition. I have lived here ALL my life and the one thing I have come to understand about dumbasses, is not all of them are malicious assholes. We didn't all vote for Bush (or Perry for that matter) but WAY too many of us did.

Then Karl Rove put his thumb on the scale and nothing else mattered.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198391)

Texas ate up GWB, like the rest of a America ate up Obama...and look what Obama left us, a LOT of debt and lot of FAILED promises.

Please stop trying to scapegoat (0, Flamebait)

publiclurker (952615) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198471)

the nearest adult for the failures of the teabagging idiots who caused the mess. You see son, just because you change a president does not mean that any sort of reset button is pressed, and the cost of your past mistakes is suddenly forgotten. Hopefully you'll figure this out by the time you grow up, so we won't have to continue to clean up after spoiled children like you yet again.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198547)

Texans are well known for clinging to guns, religion, and derp.

The strange thing isn't that they once elected George W. Bush and Rick Perry as governors, it's that they once elected Ann Richards.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (2, Interesting)

swalve (1980968) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198377)

Are you talking about the Bush the Elder, or the Lesser? Because I think "Junior" has a pretty good claim on being a Texan, what with having been governor and all.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

FishOuttaWater (1163787) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198403)

Ya, I think anybody that lost their shirt on oil in the 80's is a bonafide Texan. ...but what do I know, I'm from California.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (3, Insightful)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198593)

Citation please? According to Wiki, he bought a new home in the Preston Hollow Area of Dallas, where they settled. Nor was there any mention of their selling their Crawford ranch. There's nothing that I've read anywhere that suggests that they moved 'back' to CT. Similarly, Jeb's still parked in FL.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (2, Funny)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198175)

The Bush thing worked! We got him out of Texas and he never came back! We tried to give you Rick Perry too, but unfortunately we can't get rid of him that easily.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1, Insightful)

Lord Kano (13027) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198411)

And I could say you guys gave us GWB, but then "someone" voted for him... twice.

I'm not from Texas. I'm a highly educated Yankee and I voted for George W. Bush twice. Like I was really going to vote for Al Gore or John Kerry. It would be nice if the Democrats would put up a candidate that doesn't make my skin crawl.

LK

So much for educated then. (-1, Flamebait)

publiclurker (952615) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198481)

Sounds like a perfect example of a dunning incompetent, probably with a good dose of self-serving moral bankruptcy to go with it.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (4, Interesting)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198511)

Sadly I am with you...
I voted libertarian (I'm in CA, so not like it matters, my vote is swamped by SF and LA/SD areas).
Frankly I know we are supposed to have a multiparty system, but we've been a duopoly so long that the republicrats have consolidated their power. They battle over petty stuff very publicly. But if there is ever something that could actually harm their power base you never hear about it and how they work very closely together to see that it fails.

We need a revolution in this country, not a bloody one, but a ballot box one. I think the Tea Party is a good thing, just because they are harming the existing power base.
-nB

Re:this woman is an attorney? (2, Funny)

MicroSlut (2478760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198527)

You sir, are feeding the trolls. In doing so you have fallen into their trap and revealed information about yourself that others may find abhorred. You have yourself become a troll. Please trade-in your low ID for a higher one.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198379)

Also, there are dumbasses everywhere in "amercia" it would seem.

Why did you lowercase America and encase it in the ironic form quotation marks?

North America and South America are proper names. As far as my English education goes, you can properly say Americas as a plural, or as individual proper nouns (further distinguished as proper names) like my previous sentence contains. I'm unaware of any instance in the English language where writing a proper name in all lower case is correct.

Encasing the word the way you have in your post, suggests you mean to imply irony. Which in and of itself is actually ironic: you claim there are dumbasses everywhere in America, and your mastery of English implies you are one of those dumbasses.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198543)

Woosh! I think this "amercia" is referring to the Romney phone photo app that has this typo in an overlay. Colbert had fun with it earlier this week on his show.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198125)

how the fuck did that happen?

oh, wait.. she's from texas. never mind.

how the fuck did that happen?

oh, wait.. she's from texas. never mind.

I think somebody from texas, or several slashdotters from texas need to take copies of all this and send it to the texas state bar: Technically the:
State Bar of Texas Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, for their review, this woman if she is indeed a lawyer needs to be dealt with swiftly. Also the state congressmen and senator need to be contacted if the state bar doesn't do anything because she is giving the great state of texas a bad name.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198229)

sorry for posting this earlier, but I figured its relevant, btw I'm not an american, I'm a Canadian, but I just hate it when a good state looks stupid because of one person, especially texas because southern texas women are HOT.

To file a complaint you must:

Contact a CDC Regional Office

If you have questions about the grievance process or the status of a grievance, or if you need to request a grievance form, please call the office located nearest you.

Austin, Texas
Phone: (512) 427-1350, or
      (877) 953-5535
      Fax: (512) 427-4169

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
      1414 Colorado St.
      Austin, Texas 78701

Dallas, Texas
      Phone: (972) 383-2900
      Fax: (972) 383-2935

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
      14651 Dallas Parkway, Ste 925
      Dallas, Texas 75254

Houston, Texas
      Phone: (713) 758-8200
      Fax: (713) 758-8292

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
      600 Jefferson, Ste. 1000
      Houston, Tx 77002

San Antonio, Texas
      Phone: (210) 208-6600
      Fax: (210) 208-6625

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
      Federal Reserve Building
      126 E. Nueva, Suite 200
      San Antonio, Texas 78204

How to file a complaint:

http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Filing_a_Complaint&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=15451

Grievance Form:

http://www.texasbar.com/Content/NavigationMenu/ForThePublic/TheGrievanceProcess/HowtoFileaGrievance/GrievanceFormEnglish.pdf

Re:this woman is an attorney? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198589)

A good State...christ....you Must be An Albertan

Re:this woman is an attorney? (5, Informative)

darkmeridian (119044) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198233)

Read her blog. She sounds insane: http://attorney4specialneeds.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

"Isn't it ironic? Atty4kids' suffering began when a crafty Houston Chronicle Help Desk Guy, Jay Lee asserted what appeared to be false claims for copyright violation against her, wiping out this and 13 websites 8 days before the primary, under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). Why do I believe it was false? A litany of facts suggesting Jay has very naughty. "Fair Use" Doctrine. Jay Lee and his outrageous lynch mob media printing lies to smear Candice have gone so over the top, there's simply more to the story. I've never met anyone so masochistic, begging to be smacked, as Jay. Call in the lynch mob! It goes all the way to Scotland! what's really up? Why would grown men put on an act like this,assassinating the Character of the President & Founder of Attorneys for Special Needs Children? Jay Lee is a hacker and tech expert and knows everything imaginable about computers. He would certainly know how to take down 14 of Atty4kids' websites with a single accusation. He would also know that images can be purchased through licensing, if he did not truly own the image motivating him to slice her jugular. What was wrong with sites? Sheriff Garcia was called a cry baby and couldn't take it. Artsy people like Lee usually possess many talents. He is an Amatuer photographer. He had a right to file te claim if true, but Most people are kind enough to first notify the person going for the jugular. He did not. He whines that he didn't know this would occur, unlikely story. What I think he failed to anticipate was the devastation and anger he'd cause to a mom with three kids who is deeply committed to advancing the Civil Rights of Special Needs Children (Atty4kids) who is a force to be reckoned with. Realizing the damage caused, he withdrew his sworn infringement claim immediately and practically begged her ISP to restore service quickly. Whether her suspicions are right or not, HE SHOULD HAVE HIT THE ROAD After she apologized, offered payment, permitting him to NAME HIS PRICE, he withdrew the accusation and the image was removed. He did not, but began stalking Atty4kids on Twitter and accused her of infringement AGAIN in fron of 1700 followers. Livid, she said "you better be joking" and he disappeared in abject fear. Coupled with the bait and switch game he played on Flickr, theres reason for concen. First, he scripted a drama for others to play that was enough to make you vomit. He wrote his pathetic sob story all over the photo with a frowny face as onlookers gawked ooh, aah, and spoke of the money he should have been paid on Flickr, UNAWARE that he could have NAMED THE PRICE and FAILED. 10 seconds was my limit. I left ad clicked the link a short time afterwards of curiosity, POOF! GONE! A magician like Sheriff Garcia? With the Chronicle Head Sheriff Garcia's crafty weasly Campaign Manager, free lessons? What are the odds that less than 24 hours after calling Garcia a cry baby and 8 days prior to primary, her VERY POLITICAL, HIGH RANKED blog, Chicks and Politics, would be suspended by a hacking pro employed with the Chronicle! If you knew Bernie's influence with the Chronicle, you'd laugh. She traced the Twitter stalker immediately, finding Jay and his Chronicle association she knew before even looking. Media Libels Atty4kids & Violates Her COPYRIGHT (DMCA) Jay milked the horrific tragedy for 4 days at which time Atty had enough and demanded he remove all of his libel, infringement and harassment from the web within 2 hours. Several cease and desist letters were sent, but this one hit a nerve. Maybe it was Atty's advice, "Get a lawyer," for 4 days, every parasite imaginable seeking to cash in (they are collecting funds for Jay's Defense), not yet realizing they'll need one too, is defaming her too. Theyve republished a BS atiry to inflict damage. Keep it up, morons! Damages are looking great! Atty has given 1000 hours in our fight foe justice for disabled kids. She took on the corrupt establishment and punched! She took a few below belt hits for exposing them in the Senate, but the government officials we reached, Statewide fear she aroused having 5 law firms follow her on radio, and near toppling of a 24 year law firm with indictments, and fearless head to head battle she fought was valiant--and it was for kids. God deserves the glory for the success of the Non-Profit, but we still have a way to go. The fruit that has blossomed is incredible! A Nationwide Documentary on Corruption in Special Education was given a $10,000 head start using Candice's book. In what they call, Barbra Streisand syndrome, the story has gone viral in Geek News, resulting in more defamation, lies, libel, slander, harassment, stalking, insults, character assassination and COPYRIGHT VIOLATIONS, her rights. The entire set up is bizarre. Why would so many Democrats (Garcia is a Democrat) become engulfed in RAGE that Atty used a photo on a dormant website for creativity, preparing for the future, never profiting, and upon notice, even gave cry baby a sweet deal, "name your price for your trouble." She removed it immediately and was prepared to pay Jay well to take his photo and go? She never knowingly violated the DMCA and the first time ever, offered to pay the holder well FOR NOTHING. At this point, he should have been decent enough to go away. But he won't. Libeling her from Houston to Acotland and beyond, he and his minions have exploited her (which exploits the nonprofit for disabled kids because that is the only thing she's known for), and violating her copyright by using her screenshot to vomit filth! She ceased to have liability almost immediately. He picked it up and multiplied it by 100. Jay Lee Completely Withdrew His Accusations of His Own Volition (if he's not accusing her, why has total drama island with a cry me a river of Jay's crocodile tears morphed into chaos, with 35 and tea-party haters sending a barrage of hate mail, malicious calls, to accuse her?) Why after withdrawing his hot potato infringement claim--is he still milking this tragedy to the point of humiliation! Genius tweeted a bar graph, denoting all the hits received exploiting Atty4kids. Selling his photos would Be a great incentive to milk it, stating he's gone viral! I would agree. Candice tells it like it is and doesn't put up with bullying. She has at least 35 idiots assaulting her with hate because of this opportunist's lies and they say she's a bully for wanting to sue the lynch mob. Today was it. Discovering that Jay's attorney's statement assuring her all had been taken down was removed, was untrue. She happened across the libelous site frozen in a different place. I am glad to see that she's had enough--thrilled to see the freakin big shot should take the reigns from here. This is the first time in my life I understood pain and suffering. Too little, too late. Maybe Jay can ask Bernie or Adrian to defend him? Or his worldwide lynch mob? By Crystal, a believer in Atty4kids, for all that she has given the World. God backs His Kids, so stand and see the salvation of the Lord! We love you dearly!"

Re:this woman is an attorney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198401)

What. A. Nut.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198419)

Too bad comments are disabled on her blog.... I could see some fun coming from that.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198557)

I am sure there is a reason they are disabled...
Wonder if anyone here has the "m4d sk177z" to enable them? (heh) Oh the hilarity that would ensue... I wonder if she would then file a DMCA about her own site's comment fields to GoDaddy and knock herself off the net? That would be *awesome*.
-nB

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198445)

What in the flaming nacho pants is that shit? I feel like I've lost something just reading some of it. Why is scorched earth (a great game) used as a metaphor for retards? (Yes, I know some of them aren't retarded, but it's just easier to type "retard" as a blanket description.)

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198259)

i already called the last time she pulled this stupid stuff. i even called her, she actually called me back too. just to tell me how wrong i was. and how she was gonna sue me for libel.

this woman is hilarious, someone should hook her up with jack thompson.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198295)

i already called the last time she pulled this stupid stuff. i even called her, she actually called me back too. just to tell me how wrong i was. and how she was gonna sue me for libel.

this woman is hilarious, someone should hook her up with jack thompson.

Great Diety NO! Regardless of age if they somehow produced offspring it would be the end of the human race!

Re:this woman is an attorney? (4, Funny)

snspdaarf (1314399) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198535)

...because she is giving the great state of texas a bad name.

Ha! After living there for 24 years, I already have a bad name for the state of texas.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198193)

Come on... Everyone has there "slow people." We try not the let them out without a parent, but sometimes they get into the red punch, and all that sugar...

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

Penguinshit (591885) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198197)

The imbecile who started the Birther movement is a lawyer too. I know quite a few excellent lawyers and a few who must have gotten their J.D. from a box of CrackerJack.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (5, Interesting)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198417)

Well you know Schizophrenia can sometimes have a late onset. I'm not a doctor, but her writing definitely has a certain rambling, imbalanced quality to it. That whole, huge thing was one long paragraph on the theme of "everyone is out to get me". It's possible that she is genuinely mentally ill, and yet she might have been a competent attorney once. All I can say is that, as a layman, I was somewhat concerned for her mental health after reading that blog entry. It doesn't strike me as the writings of a sane person, but I'm not an expert.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (2)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198459)

What we can garner from this is the "few excellent lawyers" aren't lawyers at all, and to be a lawyer, you have to apparently go through some sort of head trauma.

That's the only way to explain Congress.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198565)

You know? I think you may be right...

Re:this woman is an attorney? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198497)

You're right, HIllary Clinton is a lawyer! I'd forgotten that. Thanks for the reminder.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198321)

oh, wait.. she's from texas. never mind.

You might have just as well said something along the lines "she was black, that explains everything". It's the same fucking sort of bullshit.

Texas has produced a lot of brilliant engineers, scientists, leaders, and good regular people too.

Have states like California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut, and etc. ever produced douchebags? Of course not...

Re:this woman is an attorney? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198479)

You might have just as well said something along the lines "she was black, that explains everything".

Actually, she's a Jew. That explains everything!

not conpared to texas trash they haven't (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198493)

Just because the truth shows you in a bad light doesn't mean that we should all be expected to lie, just so you can pretend to have a reason to feel good about yourself.

Re:this woman is an attorney? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198515)

no but Texas has had a severe case of head up ass for the last oh 30 or so years, and continues to get fucking stupider every single day

Re:this woman is an attorney? (2)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198581)

Hey, here in California we restrict the douchbags to SF and Hollywood. In both cases we are hoping for the San Andreas to fix this issue for us. Also, I would like to point out that we in California are the only state to get you to watch our douchbags hours on end in our movies. You even spend money to watch our douchbags.

We do occasionally promote them to be governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and possibly president *(I don't think Regan was a douch, but I'm sure some do).
-nB

Re:this woman is an attorney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198433)

Hey, leave Texas out of this. She's probably an import.

The bigger question should be - how do we make life a living hell for this woman? Seriously, she's only going to continue to piss in every bowl of cheerios she happens to be near. I'm not suggesting any attacks to her sites, but possibly a coordinated campaign to spread knowledge of her idiocy far and wide.

Wouldn't it be fantastic if we could get a photo of her added to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot [wikipedia.org]

Re:this woman is an attorney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198461)

So well said!

Turing Test? (2)

ShiftyOne (1594705) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198103)

Can a person fail the turing test for being too dumb to create a description that most people on slashdot can understand?

Barbra who? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198115)

Roll on, Streisand effect, roll on.

Re:Barbra who? (2)

tom17 (659054) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198385)

She'll probably sue her now too for ruining her career...

Petapixel's registrar is GoDaddy (5, Informative)

truesaer (135079) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198129)

petapixel's registrar appear to also be GoDaddy. Of course that may not be their host...in fact probably is not. Her takedown notice still makes her sound like a lunatic though.

Re:Petapixel's registrar is GoDaddy (1)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198447)

They're hosted by RackSpace

ballz on my chin (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198141)

Yahoo to Log "Source Port" with IP Address/Time

        - https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/dfDBtCcXNmH [google.com]

        via http://cryptome.org/ [cryptome.org] @ O f f s i t e :

        2012-00344 Yahoo to Log "Source Port" with IP Address/Time June 2, 2012

        ===
        FBI: New Internet addresses could hinder police investigations

        "As the Internet prepares to celebrate World IPv6 Day next week, law enforcement is worried the transition could hinder legitimate investigations. Some tech companies agree it's a concern."

        by Declan McCullagh

        May 31, 2012 11:58 PM PDT

        - http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57445157-83/fbi-new-internet-addresses-could-hinder-police-investigations/ [cnet.com]

Attention Whore (3, Funny)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198147)

http://houstonattorneysocialmedia.com/law-firms-are-embracing-social-medis-for-top-seo-rankings-in-texas/ [houstonatt...lmedia.com]

Apparently she's an expert in social media.

Re:Attention Whore (1)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198347)

At least the bitch removed the infringing picture, now she is steering even /. to her cause, acting stupid might get her into the spotlight after all. Nobody was visiting that poor half-stolen site of hers, now they do! Unfortunatelly for her, it is not the crowd she was after.

This entry was posted in... (1)

RzTen1 (1323533) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198151)

That's an unusual and quite unexpected number of tagged categories.

Clearly not a copyright atty (4, Informative)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198155)

She needs to look up "fair use". In case she's reading, I refer her to 17 USC 107 [cornell.edu]

Re:Clearly not a copyright atty (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198183)

Like she's gonna know that the USC you refer to is not http://www.usc.edu/ [usc.edu]

Re:Clearly not a copyright atty (2, Informative)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198213)

I should have included this in my original post, but for anyone too lazy to follow the link, 17 USC 107 [cornell.edu] states (in part):

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 short, it appears to be an explicit and clear cut example of fair use.

IANAL

Re:Clearly not a copyright atty (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198357)

but for anyone too lazy to follow the link. . .

I don't understand why people write this cliche. This is slashdot. WE ARE ALL TOO LAZY TO FOLLOW LINKS! Btw, this time, I was too lazy to read the rest of your post.

Re:Clearly not a copyright atty (4, Interesting)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198457)

Showing a picture of a hamburger (as an example), then reviewing the food is not what is meant by "criticism, comment, news reporting"--if you didn't take the picture, that's just plain old infringement. It means commenting on or criticizing the *actual* photograph in question as a work of art--not the subject of the photograph.

So if I run newspaper, I can't just use whatever graphic for any story I want and claim fair use because "news reporting"--I only get to invoke fair use if the news story is about the photograph in question.

She might be able to make a fair use claim somewhere, but I doubt she can make a fair use case for the vast majority of the infringements. I don't see how some guy's campaign for Sheriff qualifies as an entitlement to free use of any stock photography he wants.

That's just my 2 cents. But, like yourself, IANAL.

Re:Clearly not a copyright atty (4, Informative)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198505)

She doesn't have a fair use claim, but petapixel has a very clear fair use claim for the thumbnail screen shots of the original photo, and her infringing usage of it. That appears to be the photo she's claiming a DMCA violation on, and she has no valid claim because of 17 USC 107. Also, the fact that she doesn't own the copyright to the image in question means she may have committed perjury when she filed the DMCA takedown notice.

I'm only a layman, and my conclusions are not legal advice. But I have read the copyright law many times, and that's how interpret it. YMMV.

Paging the Texas Bar... cleanup in aisle seven... (1, Interesting)

Rone (46994) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198157)

So, how long before the Texas bar pulls the Jack Thompson trigger on Ms. Schwager for conduct unbecoming?

Re:Paging the Texas Bar... cleanup in aisle seven. (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198181)

They need a complaint first:

Contact a CDC Regional Office

If you have questions about the grievance process or the status of a grievance, or if you need to request a grievance form, please call the office located nearest you.

Austin, Texas
Phone: (512) 427-1350, or
  (877) 953-5535
  Fax: (512) 427-4169

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
  1414 Colorado St.
  Austin, Texas 78701

Dallas, Texas
  Phone: (972) 383-2900
  Fax: (972) 383-2935

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
  14651 Dallas Parkway, Ste 925
  Dallas, Texas 75254

Houston, Texas
  Phone: (713) 758-8200
  Fax: (713) 758-8292

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
  600 Jefferson, Ste. 1000
  Houston, Tx 77002

San Antonio, Texas
  Phone: (210) 208-6600
  Fax: (210) 208-6625

Chief Disciplinary Counsel
  Federal Reserve Building
  126 E. Nueva, Suite 200
  San Antonio, Texas 78204

How to file a complaint:

http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Filing_a_Complaint&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=15451

Grievance Form:

http://www.texasbar.com/Content/NavigationMenu/ForThePublic/TheGrievanceProcess/HowtoFileaGrievance/GrievanceFormEnglish.pdf

Re:Paging the Texas Bar... cleanup in aisle seven. (1, Insightful)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198245)

Excellent! Now off to complain away....

Unbecoming of what, a lawyer or a Texan? (0)

publiclurker (952615) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198507)

both are have pretty low standard.

Schwager = stupid cunt. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198173)

Law degree or not, that's immaterial.

What we have here is a classic example of a bitch who needs a stiff cock
shoved in her mouth. That's the only way to make sure she doesn't
say anything stupid.

Better have armour plating on it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198219)

Personally I value my private parts.

Re:Schwager = stupid cunt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198519)

Why? It doesn't seem to have helped you at all.

Clarification here (5, Insightful)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198275)

Petapixel is reporting on her copyright infringement. As such they have a thumbnail screen shot of her site as proof. That thumbnail includes her logo, just barely readable. This woman needs to go back to law school and look up "fair use" and the difference between copyrights and trademarks. Next thing you know, she will be claiming copyright infringement for publishing her DMCA letter. If she really is practicing law then she ought to be disbarred for her behavior.

Re:Clarification here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198405)

You say that like anyone has ever gotten in trouble for filing a false DMCA notice before. Sure, there's a first time for everything, but we'll have to see.

4chan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198289)

Just take the story to the tools at 4chan. They're so annoying and I am sure they'll do something funny to make her wish she wasn't such a troll.

Re:4chan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198553)

Didn't you hear? Reddit is the new personal Internet army.

Libel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198297)

Can the tags at the bottom of the linked page be enough to hit her with libel?

She is a fucking nutcase. Holy crap... I'd run away too, out of fear she'd kill me. I guarantee she carries a gun.

Can't bring up context menu. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198315)

She has even put in a script to block right-clicking and asking to respect her copyright. All I tried to do was copy a shortcut!

Ironic her sight disables right clicking... (4, Insightful)

Formorian (1111751) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198333)

It says:

Sorry right clicking is disabled, please respect copyright.

WTF? really lady? You didn't with that photo and go on some crazy rant. I can't even read some of what she writes without just rolling my eyes.

Re:Ironic her sight disables right clicking... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198469)

I never have understood blocking right-clicking. I right click every link I want to explore and open it in a new tab. So those little JavaScript warnings are nothing but a nuisance that makes me clicking a few extra times to add their domain to my JavaScript blacklist. And really, how many people don't know that everything you look at online is stored (at least temporarily) on the computer somewhere. I bet you a solid 75% of married men know this, as well as where the cache is and how to clear it.

Re:Ironic her sight disables right clicking... (1)

jhobbs (659809) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198487)

I never have understood blocking right-clicking. I right click every link I want to explore and open it in a new tab. So those little JavaScript warnings are nothing but a nuisance that makes me clicking a few extra times to add their domain to my JavaScript blacklist. And really, how many people don't know that everything you look at online is stored (at least temporarily) on the computer somewhere. I bet you a solid 75% of married men know this, as well as where the cache is and how to clear it.

what's in your anus right now? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198341)

"Everything we see has some hidden message. A lot of awful messages are coming in under the radar - subliminal consumer messages, all kinds of politically incorrect messages..."
---- Harold Ramis

===

âoeRFID in School Shirts must be trial runâ

The trial runs began a LONG time ago!

Weâ(TM)re way past that process.

Now weâ(TM)re in the portion of the game where they will try and BRAINWASH us into accepting these things because not everyone BROADCASTS themselves on and offline, so RFID tracking will NEED to be EVERYWHERE, eventually.

RFID is employed in MANY areas of society. RFID is used to TRACK their livestock (humans) in:

* 1. A lot of BANKâ(TM)s ATM & DEBIT cards (easily cloned and tracked)
* 2. Subway, rail, bus, other mass transit passes (all of your daily
activities, where you go, are being recorded in many ways)
* 3. A lot of RETAIL storesâ(TM) goods
* 4. Corporate slaves (in badges, tags, etc)

and many more ways!

Search the web about RFID and look at the pictures of various RFID devices, theyâ(TM)re not all the same in form or function! When you see how tiny some of them are, youâ(TM)ll be amazed! Search for GPS tracking and devices, too along with the more obscured:

- FM Fingerprinting &
- Writeprint

tracking methods! Letâ(TM)s not forget the LIQUIDS at their disposal which can be sprayed on you and/or your devices/clothing and TRACKED, similar to STASI methods of tracking their livestock (humans).

Visit David Ickeâ(TM)s and Prison Planetâ(TM)s discussion forums and VCâ(TM)s discussion forums and READ the threads about RFID and electronic tagging, PARTICIPATE in discussions. SHARE what you know with others!

These TRACKING technologies, on and off the net are being THROWN at us by the MEDIA, just as cigarettes and alcohol have and continue to be, though the former less than they used to. The effort to get you to join FACEBOOK and TWITTER, for example, is EVERYWHERE.

Maybe, you think, youâ(TM)ll join FACEBOOK or TWITTER with an innocent reason, in part perhaps because your family, friends, business parters, college ties want or need you. Then itâ(TM)ll start with one photo of yourself or you in a group, then another, then another, and pretty soon you are telling STRANGERS as far away as NIGERIA with scammers reading and archiving your PERSONAL LIFE and many of these CRIMINALS have the MEANS and MOTIVES to use it how they please.

One family was astonished to discover a photo of theirs was being used in an ADVERTISEMENT (on one of those BILLBOARDS you pass by on the road) in ANOTHER COUNTRY! There are other stories. Iâ(TM)ve witnessed people posting their photo in social networking sites, only to have others who dis/like them COPY the photo and use it for THEIR photo! Itâ(TM)s a complete mess.

The whole GAME stretches much farther than the simple RFID device(s), but how far are you willing to READ about these types of instrusive technologies? If youâ(TM)ve heard, Wikileaks exposed corporations selling SPYWARE in software and hardware form to GOVERNMENTS!

You have to wonder, âoeWill my anti-malware program actually DISCOVER government controlled malware? Or has it been WHITELISTED? or obscured to the point where it cannot be detected? Does it carve a nest for itself in your hardware devicesâ(TM) FIRMWARE, what about your BIOS?

Has your graphics card been poisoned, too?â No anti virus programs scan your FIRMWARE on your devices, especially not your ROUTERS which often contain commercially rubber stamped approval of BACKDOORS for certain organizations which hackers may be exploiting right now! Search on the web for CISCO routers and BACKDOORS. That is one of many examples.

Some struggle for privacy, some argue about it, some take preventitive measures, but those who are wise know:

Privacy is DEAD. Youâ(TM)ve just never seen the tombstone.

Disbar... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198369)

Will someone please disbar this "attorney"? If she can't even understand the basics of who owns what then she doesn't need to harm others by "practicing" law.

here is her home address and telephone (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198371)

Do your worst

4307 Long Grove Drive
Seabrook, TX 77586
281-508-7722

She volunteers found it here
http://www.probono.net/oppsguide/organization.360024-Attorneys_for_Special_Needs_Children
street view
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=4307+Long+Grove+Drive+Seabrook,+TX+77586&hl=en&ll=29.57483,-95.061393&spn=0.00195,0.004128&sll=35.101934,-95.712891&sspn=58.609375,135.263672&hnear=4307+Long+Grove+Dr,+Seabrook,+Texas+77586&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=29.57483,-95.061393&panoid=fMHngnUnnmfS_rfkwQIxuA&cbp=12,181.97,,0,-1.35

Re:here is her home address and telephone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198551)

Another number, perhaps: (281) 957-9028

It's like raaaaain, on your wedding daaaaay (4, Insightful)

BillX (307153) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198409)

Does anyone else find it ironic that the actual infringer's sites [ http://chicksandpolitics.com/ [chicksandpolitics.com] , http://atty4kids.org/ [atty4kids.org] ] have an anti-right-click script that produces a smarmy message about respecting copyrights?

Re:It's like raaaaain, on your wedding daaaaay (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198443)

The code from that script:

//
          -->

!--
var message="Warning Copyright Infringement ";
function clickIE4(){
    if (event.button==2){
    alert(message);
    return false;
    }
}

Re:It's like raaaaain, on your wedding daaaaay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198463)

No, because the people most intent on keeping people from stealing 'their own work' usually do so because they know how easy it was to steal somebody else's and being talentless hacks, realized that a talented hack with no scruples could roll over them in a new york minute.

You see it also in the publishing industry, programming industry (more among the hacks than the 'artistes'), and expecially the art industry (how many art forums have you gone across where someone stole somebody else's mesh, made a few modifications to it, then tried to pass it off as their own original work?)

Irony would require this being outside the norm. This is really most of hypocrisy, since it's so common the phrase 'everybody is doing it' could be used to aptly describe it.

Re:It's like raaaaain, on your wedding daaaaay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198467)

To me it is. Only because my browser lets me display the page source (which I could directly copy all image links from), but I NoScript disables her stupid pop-up :)

Is texas ever going to secede or what? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198441)

They always talk about how they hate America and want to quit the union so get the fuck out all ready, you contribute nothing to society except Mexicans and minimum wage shitjobs. You're not needed.

Streisand Effect (1)

firesyde424 (1127527) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198449)

A clear example, if only a recent one, this is.

You're all doing it wrong. (3, Interesting)

Static (1229) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198455)

She needs to hear the other point-of-view from someone she trusts and respects. Someone she will listen to and actually take it onboard when they tell her she's being pretty stupid and wasting her own time. Probably someone she works for at one of the sites she maintains. And if you locate someone, be nice. Real nice. I shouldn't need to say it, but distingush between Ms Schwager and her actions and also between her actions and these organisations. Point out how her idiocy is making them look bad.

Wade.

The takeaway (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198477)

She's sent the DMCA notice an apparent six times not to Petapixel's registrar or their hosting service, but to Godaddy, her own registrar.

From this its obvious, Candace Schwager is incompetent as lawyer and at life. In my opinion, of course.

404 on her original site. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198483)

It looks like someone took her site down.. Nothing but 404 pages
http://www.schwagerconsulting.com/

Has no one noticed how justice works? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198501)

Personally, I think I am honest, and a terrible liar. I didn't realize most people were full of shit until I was about 32, and by then it was too late for me. My honesty, even though I am skeptical, makes me trusting and gullible.

What I have learned is that there are people like me... but we look just like people like them, the liars. Liars don't lie necessarily to hurt people, just to amuse themselves sometimes. They are not always sociopaths. Most churches, for instance, by and large are full of decent individuals... yet they are also chock full of liars. The same is true of any large group.

The best defense is an early and strong offense: Lie first, lie well. Once you accuse someone of something, it is nearly impossible to get rid of the bull... unless you have been in the same place for a long time and have a large number of friends you trust. But if this is true, likely, you feel comfortable enough to lie... that you are more important than whomever your apparent enemy is.

I was always taught that eventually, the truth comes out... and this is more or less the case... but even when the truth comes out, damage has been done. First impressions are lasting impressions. In any microsociety, everyone loves a stink... everyone loves to talk trash, everyone loves heresay, and even third hand heresay. If you happen upon a truely honerable person that stands up against the bullshit, do what you can to support them, befriend them, because they are the most loyal friends.

Remember this: the crowd is untrue! The individuals are beyond reproach, everyone sees themselves as better than the other, but the crowd decides what happens, and the individual can do nothing to stem the tide... nothing but get thrown under a bus.

Either you can subscribe to social darwinism, dog eat dog world and all that, or you can strive to be better, a human being, someone who won't devolve into a back stabber just to amuse yourself or eliminate someone you see as competition. You don't have believe in God to see that the Golden Rule is actually a decent code... its really Newton's Third Law of Motion, and in that you can believe because its science! Try to break Karma... I dare you.

Disbarred already? (3, Informative)

mpoulton (689851) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198503)

Although her Linkedin profile states that she has worked as an attorney in the past, the Texas bar website does not show her as a current member. She claims to have made a voluntary career change and left the practice of law to become an attorney marketing guru. That's somewhat plausible, except that NO attorney who has been admitted to the bar would allow their admission to lapse voluntarily except in VERY unusual circumstances. Even those who leave the practice of law almost always maintain their bar memberships. I would bet she was disbarred or suspended for an extended time.

Re:Disbarred already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198545)

Or only ever was an attorney in her own mind...

Re:Disbarred already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198571)

If she was disbarred but making it appear as if she is indeed a practicing attorney, then all the more reason to contact the state bar, there are some pretty serious fines and potentially jail time for that. Her site http://chicksandpolitics.com/ claims her to be an attourney.

And I'm done (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40198521)

Why or how is this even worth reporting? I've removed Slashdot from my homepage after reading this story. What a waste of time this site has become.

Re:And I'm done (2)

sideslash (1865434) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198559)

Why or how was that rant worth posting? Slashdot has been an effective avenue for wasting time for its whole existence (in addition to having some worthwhile articles). The trick is to read the headline, maybe part of the summary, and decide if you want to read further.

Inherited Genes (1)

jhobbs (659809) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198577)

After reading some of her posts, I'm not all that surprised she has special needs children.

Fair Use Applies to All (1)

ljhiller (40044) | more than 2 years ago | (#40198585)

Lest you forget, and I'm sure you have all forgotten, one of the universally-despised Righthaven's early major defeats in court occurred when a judge decided that a non-profit could use a news article IN ITS ENTIRETY as fair use http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/03/copyright-troll-righthaven-achieves-spectacular-fair-use-loss/ [arstechnica.com] . Can this woman lose a similar defense over a single image (not that the photographer has yet sued)? Perhaps she can, if only through her own incompetence. Odds have shifted in her favor, and in the favor of 1000s other organizations you may consider undeserving. Yes, that's the taste of victory turning to ash in your mouth. Remember to vote Pirate Party!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?