How the Hell did 50Cent get a Satin Jack shirt???

That absolutely SUCKS. Gator97, your intellectual property was STOLEN. Plain and simple. They found your site, knew a good thing when they saw it (your pics) and they flat out STOLE them. :mad: :mad: :mad:

Their site has this long legal schpiel about how all the stuff on their clothes and website are copyrights, trademarks, trade dress and/or other intellectual properties owned, controlled or licensed by them.

Hmmm, so this means that they either own the images on the shirts (nope), they bought the images on the shirts (nope again, or Gator97 would have a check in his hand), or they licensed the images on the shirts (nope again, or Gator97 would have been asked).

Just get a good lawyer and you should be able to get what you deserve for your hard work THAT WAS BLATANTLY STOLEN FROM YOU!!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
 
From that site:

Q. What if a copyrighted work is used without permission?

A. The unauthorized use of a copyrighted work is called an infringement. The Copyright Act provides stiff penalties for infringing copyrighted works. Under appropriate circumstances, penalties can include monetary damages, all profits earned by the infringer from the unauthorized use of the copyrighted work and attorneyís fees. A court can also order the destruction of all infringing copies.
Click to expand...
 
More applicable stuff from the site.

Q. What is copyright infringement?

A. Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of a copyrighted work. Even the simple act of photocopying a copyrighted image without permission can be an infringement. When there is an infringement, the owner of the copyright can sue for damages. All lawsuits for copyright infringement must be brought in federal court, not state court.


Q: If I change a few things in a copyrighted work by adding or taking something away, am I guilty of copyright infringement?

A. Yes. The right to make derivative copies is reserved exclusively to the copyright owner. While the idea for a work of art can be copied, the expression of the idea is fully protected. Sometimes, it is difficult to differentiate between an idea and an expression because the idea can sometimes get lost in the expression.

For example, one court had to decide if a pin made in the shape of a bumblebee was protected by copyright. The court said that the bumblebee was taken from nature and there was only one way to express this idea. Consequently, when there is only one way to express an idea, copyright will not prevent the copying of the expression. Furthermore, even though the pin was decorated with colored jewels, the placement of the jewels had to follow the form of the insect. Therefore, the jeweled bumblebee pin was not a expression that would be protected by copyrighted. The court held that it was an idea that could only be express in one way.


Q: If someone infringes my work, do I have to catch the infringer in the act?

A. No. It is not necessary to have finite proof that an infringer copied a work in order to prove copyright infringement. Infringement can be established simply by proving that the alleged infringer had access to the copyrighted work and that the offending work is substantially similar to the original.

The concept of substantial similarity is another tricky copyright concept. For example, making an illustration directly from a photograph without permission would be risking infringement. If the illustration were substantially similar to the photograph, there will be an infringement. The degree of similarity between an original work and a copy can cover a broad range from an exact copy to substantial similarity to some similarity to no similarity. The degree of similarity is a question for the court to decide. Common sense and good judgment must prevail.


Q. What are the damages for an infringement?

A. The owner of a copyright can always claim whatever damages he has actually sustained as a result of an infringement plus whatever profits were earned by the infringer from the unauthorized use of a work. In addition, if the copyright to a work which was infringed was registered with the Copyright Office either prior to the infringement or within 90 days after first publication, there are alternative damages that can be awarded. The owner of the copyright can elect to seek the greater of either his actual damages plus the profits earned by the infringer, or damages of up to $100,000 plus attorney's fees and court costs. The total damages that can be awarded by a court depends upon the degree of willfulness of the infringer.

For example, if a company has an agreement with a photographer to use certain photographs for one year only, the photographs can only be used within the one-year term. The company cannot use existing printed matter that contains any of the photographerís images beyond the one-year term. Simply, the continued use of copyrighted materials beyond the licensing period constitutes copyright infringement.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the support and advices guys. I guess I'll try to contact them myself first to see if they remove w/o litigation. Otherwise I'll have to find a lawyer.
I assume there will be copyright law specialist amongst them?
 
Those last two paragraphs in ZAL's last post pretty much state your case. You should be able to win using the wording off their site. They are clearly guilty of what they are trying to prevent others from doing. What a piece of crap. Take that mother trucker to court and get every stinking dime from him you can. This ass clown has a multi-million $$$ contract. I'm thinking that you may have just won the lottery.


Cerberus
 
Gator,

Go to photo.net. Look up Bert Krages in the membership directory, and get his email address. He is the lawyer you want for this case.

Also, post a thread on photo.net to solicit similar experiences from other members, and to get opinions about how to proceed.

I can tell you that, in my own case, I was able to get my stolen picture removed from use by the Mother****ing SOBs, but pushing further to collect money was too compicated, time consuming, and expensive.

Wishing you the best outcome possible,

--Mike

P.S.

50cent may have a goofy t-shirt with a nice Satin Jack pic, but I've got the best Satin Jack variant out there, and my Got INFI? shirt to go with it!

Oink!
 
I double second all of the above. Now waht is even funnier about the e-bay add is the plea to not support "bootleggers" products. HAAA HAAA HAAA. Opps I guess it's not fair to apply that to this guy. After all the rappers did have a great argument about their use of "masking" from other artists.


As stated, "...HELL YEAH BECAUSE I KNOW THESE DUDES AND THE HARD WORK THEY'VE PUT INTO THIS PRODUCT FOR SOME GRIMY BOOTLEGGER TO COME AND STEAL THEIR WORK AND MAKE A QUICK BUCK OFF THEM GOT ME TIGHT FOR REAL. YOU WOULDN'T BUY FAKE ROCAWEAR OR AKADEMIKS SO WHY WOULD YOU NOT SUPPORT A COMPANY ON THE COME UP JUST AS MUCH?"

Yeah my Bro. Go for it. Schizzel his nizzel! :D :eek:
 
Not a really smart move by these guys.

Stealing Zvi's photo is unbelievable. To put it with a puffed up, "It's not our fault that we commit acts of violence, you need to give us gun control in order to stop us from killing each other" message is preposterous. It will not stand.
 
Originally posted by Jerry Busse
Not a really smart move by these guys.

Stealing Zvi's photo is unbelievable. To put it with a puffed up, "It's not our fault that we commit acts of violence, you need to give us gun control in order to stop us from killing each other" message is preposterous. It will not stand.
Click to expand...

Hell yeah! It should not stand! I have been thinking about this ever since I first read the thread, and it just makes me mad as hell.

Hey Gator - I sent you an email.
 
Thankd AntDog, got mail, reply sent.
Will move on tomorrow with photo.net and other stuff. Been a rough day, too tired now.
It's really ironical what the seller wrote in his ebay page about bootleggers and that load of copyright info armeonline has on their site.
 
I never post here (don't know to much about Busse, except I want one), but I felt compelled to add my support for Gator97. I actually can't believe I'm this pissed off over something that doesn't even involve me. This sucks, I hope it comes to a favorable conclusion for you.

-Dan
 
Welcome to the Busse forum Dan. Feel free to post here as often as you can and join in the discussions whenever possible.

Jerry
 
"There are no gun factories on my block; there are no gun shops in my hood so if my t-shirt shocks you then fix the problem because this is just a t-shirt, imagine this pistol being pointed at your face so somebody can eat tonight, this is my reality...welcome to the hood."
Click to expand...

from just a glance on google, i noticed that desert eagles arent exactly cheap guns... it looks as though the cost anywhere from 1,100$-2,000$ to buy... (i could easily be wrong about that - but even if it was as low as 500$)

im reminded of a line that henry rollins once said in a spoken word tour about a guy in hollywood asking for money - wearing a rather nice leather jacket.

"come on man, i thought you were cool"
"i think your LAZY. SELL your jacket - EAT YOUR JACKET"

i wouldnt expect to see 1,500$ worth of armery staring me in the face in the hood, i would more expect to get shot from behind, then robbed and left for dead where i come from. your hood is pretty posh if desert eagles and warning shots are how they do things.

and 2,000$, especially when properly invested will fead your children a lot longer then a jail sentence. there is always a way out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top