Rick,
I must tell you that, after reviewing the bidding on this one, I think that Sofia is in the right and you are in the wrong.
To the best of my knowledge, "9/11 Revisited" does not even include any of your footage. Isn't there a more constructive way to resolve this conflict? Especially in light of the permission granted by your associates, I believe that your actions are damaging to the 9/11 truth movement. Please reconsider.
Jim
911 MYSTERIES
Avatar, LLC
PO Box 698
Cardiff CA 92007
June 1, 2007
Google, Inc.
YouTube, LLC
[agents thereof]
Re: “911 Mysteries” - DMCA Counter Notification
On or about May 25, 2007, Google Video and YouTube removed links to the video (and to segments from the video) entitled “911 Mysteries,” produced by Avatar, LLC, as a result of a DMCA Takedown Demand filed by Richard A. Siegel, an individual associated with a work entitled “9/11 Eyewitness,” for reasons of copyright infringement.
Mr. Siegel’s claim of infringement is false. First, well before the release of “911 Mysteries,” Avatar obtained express permission from both Blue Star Media Group (co-owner of the copyright in the “Eyewitness” work) through its managing partner Jim Brewster, and from Mr. Siegel’s partner David Shaw, to incorporate limited segments of “Eyewitness” in “911 Mysteries.”
Mr. Siegel’s two partners were fully cooperative with Avatar in licensing this material. Second, even if Avatar had not obtained express permission from the creators of “9/11 Eyewitness” to use their material in “911 Mysteries,” the 38 seconds of incorporated footage that Mr. Siegel has taken issue with is fully protected by the copyright Doctrine of Fair Use.
While Avatar was working with Mr. Siegel’s partners, Mr. Siegel completely delegated the handling of this matter to them, even though Avatar had included Mr. Siegel in its initial contact letter.
Additionally, Mr. Siegel is indiscriminately filing takedown demands against other works on the subject of 9/11, as demonstrated by the recent removal from YouTube (also initiated by Mr. Siegel) of “September 11th Revisited” by Dustin Mugford – a video that does not even use any material from “9/11 Eyewitness.”
“911 Mysteries” is considered by millions to be an important and effective commentary on the events of September 11, 2001. Indeed, Avatar has received a flood of emails and calls from citizens concerned about the removal of the video from your highly valued websites. Even Mr. Siegel’s own business partners are deeply upset by his groundless actions, and wish to see “911 Mysteries” restored on all of its formerly active links.
Therefore, Avatar requests that both Google Video and YouTube restore all removed links for “911 Mysteries,” many of which are listed on the attached enclosure, and that at the same time you restore the settings on the counters for those links, which figures demonstrate the vast numbers of viewers who have found “911 Mysteries” to be a highly important work that provides valuable information to the general public on a subject that has affected this country more than any other in the last 60 years – the devastating events of September 11th, 2001.
Sincerely,
editor:
This blog entry by Jim Fetzer has been promoted to a sticky on the front page - it has been removed as a stick on June 10
OMG they whine arround like
OMG they whine arround like lill kids, and trying to excuse themselfs. What they expected for twisting and mixing up the truth?
And they also pull the "that hurts the truth movement" Card out. This is allways the worst of all arguments
Ripping off Rick's Footage would be bad enough
But then doctoring the audio track is really sinister. Then the idea that Rick randomly sends out takedown notices is pretty silly too. Even if that were true, how does that get them off the hook?
Fred
I think if i people see that
I think if i people see that it is taken down, they will look arround why, so then they maybe find out that the footage was doctored and screwed up, and they will step back from
2 fast and final conclusion.
diff
There is a difference between
9/11 Truth
and the
9/11 Truth Movement
and ne'er the twain shall meet!
its baffling
"9/11 Revisited" does not even include any of your footage.
eh? am i missing something?
I thought it was 911Mysteries that bastardised the audio.
Where does 9/11 Revisted come into it?
Did Sophia and the other makers of 9/11 Mysteries alter the original footage? Yes, they did.
Did they make any mention of this alteration during the progression of the film? No, they didnt.
Did they state that 9/11 Mysteries was a piece of creative entertainment? no, they should have.
Especially in light of the permission granted by your associates, I believe that your actions are damaging to the 9/11 truth movement
emotional blackmail is being employed. Jim, jim, jim.
Your beliefs are misguided. What exactly is being damaged?
Lies, distortion and willful obfuscation.
Sofias lies and misrepresentations Continue
"Mr. Siegel’s claim of infringement is false. First, well before the release of “911 Mysteries,” Avatar obtained express permission from both Blue Star Media Group (co-owner of the copyright in the “Eyewitness” work) through its managing partner Jim Brewster, and from Mr. Siegel’s partner David Shaw, to incorporate limited segments of “Eyewitness” in “911 Mysteries.” "
This bold face lies.
Blue Star Media Group has no license to do this and has told me they never gave any permissions.
Dave Shaw is an alias and attached to a person who has no rights to do this.
I will post the emails later in regards this.
This is not the way one asks permission for anything.
You should stop passing lies Fetzer, it is getting very habitual with you.
Letter from Dave to Sophia
This is just so much bullshit it sickens me. Here is one letter sent email to Sophia from "Dave Shaw":
"Sophia
Our US representative Jim Brewster can't seem to
remember giving you permission, but since you keep
reminding him that he did, he now assumes that he must
have.
Our daily communications with Jim reveal no record of
your sample video files being received or confirmation
of his viewing them. Since no notification was sent
to us by you or Jim, we can only conclude that their
existence is unconfirmed.
Don't misrepresent the truth about this issue like you
misrepresented the precollapse explosion list of the
south tower edited together with the collapse of the
north tower "and then it came down." As if you don't
know the difference between the two yet are qualified
to produce the 911 documentary that everyone should
watch" Dave Shaw
Does this look like she had permission or their wonderful help? Does it look like they are pissed at me for her stealing and changing the works?
Fetzer, you are a repugnant reptile. You have supported this trash even knowing the disinfo in it. You still support it! You did not even email me to ask what is going on you just GO AND TAKE YOUR SIDE! Snake in the grass, pisser, wanker git you take em all.
More from the mouth . . .
"puppet master", "crap", "drone soldier", "sawdust for brains", "snake shill jerk", "crowned indiot", "dingle better", "horseshit", "repugnant reptile", "snake in the grass", "pisser", "wanken git"--this for posting a letter from Sofia and offering the suggestion that something less drastic than having her video (and that of Dustin Mugford, as I understand it) removed from google and YouTube might be a better way to go? For that I deserve this load from a potty mouth? I don't think so, Rick. I may be wrong in my opinion, but you are way, way off base!
"puppet master", "crap",
"puppet master", "crap", "drone soldier", "sawdust for brains", "snake shill jerk", "crowned indiot", "dingle better", "horseshit", "repugnant reptile", "snake in the grass", "pisser", "wanken git"--
Yeah, I get very colorful and drop back to the South Chicago upbringing when I get stabbed constantly. Do the words bother you or the fit?
A possible confusion . . .
"Colorful"? That's right, Rick, you have the right to be verbally abusive to anyone you like because you grew up in South Chicago! That's excellent! I now think there has been a misunderstanding that I may have inadvertently created. I THINK THAT HAVING THE DVD REMOVED IS EXCESSIVE AS MY PERSONAL OPINION. ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE--THE CONFLICT OVER CONTENT--I DID NOT INTEND TO EXPRESS AN OPINION. I don't know the merits of the case well enough to take sides on the legal issues. I now believe that my willingness to post this letter "in the spirit of fair play" was misconstrued as supporting her legal position. I AM NOT DOING THAT. I DO NOT HAVE AN OPINION ON THE LEGAL CASE. What I was saying was that having it removed seems to me to be a bit much! That's all I was saying. So do whatever about it--"asswipe", "drone soldier", whatever--and of course we will all understand because you grew up in South Chicago! Would it have been within the boundaries of common sense to write that there is more to the legal case than I may have supposed, which might have led me to realize the ambiguity in my sentences? No matter. Just get those checks flowing and we'll call it even! It's been an education!