RSS
Twitter
Prisoners Figure Copyright Abuse Is A Way To Get Out Of Jail
from the a-sign-of-the-times dept
Well, we've seen all kinds of companies abuse copyright law for a variety of purposes, and it seemed only a matter of time until outright criminals caught on as well. A group of inmates apparently copyrighted their names and then demanded millions of dollars from the prison they were in for using their names without permission. The claims were sent to the warden of the prison and when he didn't pay up, the prisoners were able to file claims against his property -- and then hired someone to seize the warden's property and freeze his bank accounts. At this point they then demanded to be released from prison before they would return the property. Instead, they were charged with extortion and "conspiring to impede the duties of federal prison officials." While the story is amusing, it does show how copyright law is being perceived these days. As intellectual property lawyers push more and more ridiculous positions concerning copyright law, people are beginning to realize that it can be used as a hammer for all kinds of ridiculous lawsuits that have absolutely nothing to do with creating incentives for the creation of new content.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
Pay up...
It is my sad duty to inform you that I have copyrighted the words "Warden" and "prison officials". Please send me my million dollars to avoid further legal action.
Hey, this *is* easy!
:-)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
copyright
I have applied to copyright the alphabets, when used in sentences.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: copyright
This is not a sentence.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Extortion
So why can't the RIAA likewise be charged with extortion?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Extortion
Because they have billions of dollars between them.
You forget America is run my money, pure and simple.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Extortion
Any combination of the following:
£ € $
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
aha!
douche`!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
aha!
frad, quite the paronomasia - douche` vs touche
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Hahahaha. That's a really ingenious, if somewhat unrealistic plan. They should've left it at the copyright and seizure of assets, and not tried to negotiate a release. Sadly, that might actually have left them with a case. At any rate, it's a hilarious prank.
The biggest flaw I see is that since it didn't work, and they're still in jail, that warden is more than likely going to tell the guards it's open season on these guys.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Then they will have a case for abuse just call the same lawyer up and say since the last time we talked I have abused by the guards. It never happened before the copyright case who do you think can be blamed for it?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Ever heard of an urban legend?
This reads like an urban legend because it is ridiculous to imagine that if I ACCUSE you of copyright violations I would get to "seize" your property without first winning a court judgment. No court would rule against the warden to seize anything under these circumstances. In fact no one needs to "copyright their names" because if someone uses my name to make money, I can sue them without any copyright required. But, if I say "CopyCat is an idiot" I don't owe him squat, because its his screen name and I can say it all I want as long as I don't use it to make money. Try to be a little less gullible, CopyCat.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
They "*** TRIED *** to sieze...."
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
In order to *try* to seize anything, you would need a court order. The story does not add up.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
all I can say is, your nick is very appropriate...
you don't need jack shit...I can go out and try to seize whatever I want, without any court order...although this would be considered stealing, I can still go out and try to do it
and when you do have a court order, there's not much *try* involved now is there
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
To _legally seize_ property, you would have to have something more than just the claim that someone was violating copyright law by saying your fucking name. Case closed.
BTW, just because this appeared in a British newspaper does not somehow mean that they got the facts right. A number of urban legends have been fueled by lazy-ass reporters who repeat BS as fact in their news stories. So, until you see evidence to the contrary, I wouldn't believe it.
And remember as the following link shows, "when I tell you to do something you do it" or else: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GWYG_en___US207&q=timmy+ cripple+fight+video
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Which of these best describes America: "we the people", or "follow the money"?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Ever heard of an urban legend?
I was thinking copyright posted this story. I should have said Mike Massnick is an idiot.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
Wow, amazing how these fools can't read the linked article.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
I read the story, tim-tim. I'm just not so freaking retarded that I believe everything I read. Now get in your little yellow school bus and go buy a spare brain before I get Jimmy from South Park to cripple fight your dumb ass.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
It's Timmy (Timmay!) from South Park...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ever heard of an urban legend?
as much as I think Duh is a fuck-tard, he is right about Jimmy
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
You gotta tip your hat to this rare display of ingenuity and psychological aggression by the inmates. The warden is definitely going to declare "open season" on these guys. However, I would think that this whole fiasco has earned them some street-cred and respect.
If I was a C.O. at this facility I would be laughing my ass off with everyone else in the bar after work.
Kudos to the inmates involved. You'll get 'em next time...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I'm going to copyright
'the internets' That way I can sue all the idiots in government everytime they say it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
It's art!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
It's art!
Ceci n'est pas une phrase.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
America? RIAA?
Why the rag on America and RIAA. It seems the EU courts are just as guilty as Americans in the money grubbing category and profit by tort. Then there's the International Federation of the
Phonographic Industry (IFPI) dia-RIAA's nasty European cousin.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Who the fuck charged them with extortion and conspiring to impede the duties of a federally funded kidnapper? Their names WERE being used without permission. In addition to that, they were abducted by government funded kidnappers, and are currently being held against their will. Their privacy rights have been shit upon. Their UNALIENABLE rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness have been thrown out the window. Jail is a serious violation of human rights. Violent offenders should be killed, non-violent offenders broke no law, regardless of what they are charged with. The country needs to give up the astronomical costs of government funded police, and establish vigilante law. It would work much better, and nobodies life would have to be ruined. If you disagree, you are wrong.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Good one. You had me going for the first half of your comment. But playing mind-games by writing wack postings on this form is a bit tacky...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Actual article is fairly divergent from this summa
The actual article makes clear that these crooks weren't working with a real copyright lawyer, but with an undercover FBI agent...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Actual article is fairly divergent from this s
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Actual article is fairly divergent from th
why would you hire an attorney in the first place? any moron can do it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Actual article is fairly divergent from this s
I'm not sure if the FBI agent pretended to be a lawyer, since well, it's actually a crime to pretend to be one, which would be a serious problem for any gov't agent who did so.
And they certainly couldn't give testimony based on that.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Actual article is fairly divergent from th
Undercover cops give testimony all the time based on things they did that would be illegal for most other people.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I'm trying to work out if Jason is being exceptionally amusing and I just don't get the joke, or he has just arrived from some other planet.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
This post is a load of crap
This is a load of crap. The copyright office does not permit registration of individual words, personal names, etc., The situation in question was an ATTEMPT by a single misguided inmate, and it failed miserably.
The prisons are full of jailhouse lawyers, and they're all willing to try anything to get out, or make some money... mostly, they fail.
There's no problem with the intellectual property law here, the problem is with gullible and ignorant posters who don't know what they're talking about and don't bother to research before the post their "news".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
re: This is not a sentence
re: This is not a sentence. Yes it is. It's just not true.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Memories, sweet memories.
This reminds me of the time I was flipping through a "textbook" dictionary (that is, the kind a middle school or high school would supply to their students) and decided to check out the legal spiel at the beginning-- and sure enough, I wasn't allowed to recreate the *dictionary*, in whole or in part, without prior permission. In fact, just by writing this comment I'm infringing on what they feel are their rights.
I felt torn between laughing and crying.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
1. A number of FBI agents are attorneys (it used to be only law school graduates and accountants could even be an agent).
2. A lien can be registered against a person's house with minimal official-looking forms. The Freemen and similar groups in the 1980's and 90's used to do this to police officers and judges (and others who pissed them off). The person owning the house didn't even know about it until he went to sell or re-fi the house.
The lien does not automatically ensure that the lienholder will be paid, just that the homeowner can not sell the property without going to court.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: pay up
I work in a prison, I don't know how true this particular story is, but I can tell you that ..... The premise of the original story is true. The reason I came across this thread is that, my work crew inmates were talking about another inmate that threatened to sue a fellow officer for the use of his copyrighted name. We were looking for information specific to copyrighted names.
I dont know if any inmate in this states system has successfully sue'd over copyright name violations, but the push came in the 80's in the inmate population..... And later lost popularity, most likely through unsucessful attempts to sue...... But there are still a few of those old-timers around, and a lot of newer officers to push around.
Just Me.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
you can so
you can copyright you name under commonlaw and you can seize property by notice signed by a notary which has the same athourity as a judge or lawyer you just might find it hard to find one that would do it
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment