IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR JEFF RALPH AND ANY OTHER IMAGE THIEVES WITH MY PROPERTY

[The pixel Bandit]

In 2000, moral rights were recognised in Australian copyright
legislation. The moral rights provided under Australian law
now are:

A right of attribution.

The right to be clearly and reasonably prominently identified
as the author, in any reasonable form.

The right to avoid false attribution, where the work is
falsely presented as being another's work ...Integrity of
authorship.

*The right to not have the work treated in a derogatory manner
(this is a right to protect the honour and reputation of the
author).*

*Take notice:* That legal action is about to be commenced
against you for damages caused by your repeated refusal to
remove the material you improperly obtained and used without
my (the copyright owner) permission.

*Last warning:*
Get rid of that part of your website that contains copyright
material belonging to me that you are using in a derogatory
manner intended to damage my reputation ...*before midnight on
9th August 2009*

If you fail to do this, I will have your site taken down for
breach of copyright and issue instructions to commence action
against you and your host for damages.

If you follow my demands and then re-launch the pages under a
different site or banner, I will increase the amount of
damages I will seek and proceed to litigation without further
notice to you.

[Pete D]

Umm, Dougggy, this is a newsgroup mate, did you not notice?

LOL

[The pixel Bandit]

Post by Pete D
Umm, Dougggy, this is a newsgroup mate, did you not notice?
LOL

Yeah I did actually but the fuckwit's listed e-mail address
...the one you have to maintain to keep your domain name,
returns an error, just like his listed residential address.

[Jeff R.]

Post by The pixel Bandit

Post by Pete D
Umm, Dougggy, this is a newsgroup mate, did you not notice?
LOL

Yeah I did actually but the fuckwit's listed e-mail address
...the one you have to maintain to keep your domain name,
returns an error, just like his listed residential address.

Doug, would you please moderate your obscene language.
My sensitive nature is offended by such things.

--
Jeff R.
(but I'm sure the court will appreciate it...)
:-)

[Jeff R.]

Post by The pixel Bandit

Post by Pete D
Umm, Dougggy, this is a newsgroup mate, did you not notice?
LOL

Yeah I did actually but the fuckwit's listed e-mail address
...the one you have to maintain to keep your domain name,
returns an error, just like his listed residential address.

Use the legitimate, valid, current address I posted some time ago.

--
Jeff R.

[^Tems^]

Umm, Dougggy, this is a newsgroup mate, did you not notice?
LOL

Yeah I did actually but the fuckwit's listed e-mail address ...the one
you have to maintain to keep your domain name, returns an error, just
like his listed residential address.

If his email address bounced how did he get this you dumb cunt?

http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html

You aren't the worlds biggest asshole as your sig says you are the
worlds dopiest cunt.

I haven't been bothered with this group for a long time but I get an
email today 'come and have a look Doug has had his biggest flip out in
years' and when I look he was right. Same shit, different name,
different day.

I am sure you can get help for your compulsive lying disorder Doggy.

I am just glad Jeff didn't wait for days next to the letter box back in
April last year waiting for your last threat.

[Charles]

Post by ^Tems^

Umm, Dougggy, this is a newsgroup mate, did you not notice?
LOL

Yeah I did actually but the fuckwit's listed e-mail address ...the one
you have to maintain to keep your domain name, returns an error, just
like his listed residential address.

If his email address bounced how did he get this you dumb cunt?
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html
You aren't the worlds biggest asshole as your sig says you are the
worlds dopiest cunt.
I haven't been bothered with this group for a long time but I get an
email today 'come and have a look Doug has had his biggest flip out in
years' and when I look he was right. Same shit, different name,
different day.
I am sure you can get help for your compulsive lying disorder Doggy.
I am just glad Jeff didn't wait for days next to the letter box back in
April last year waiting for your last threat.

The ABN lookup

http://www.abr.business.gov.au/%28cjmkn1552rp15tei3bpdu4u1%29/main.aspx

Your search for Ryadia Pty Ltd found no matching records.

WHY?????????????????

[DRS]

"Charles" <***@poppy.net> wrote in message news:h5jeip$pjh$***@aioe.org

[...]

Post by Charles
The ABN lookup
http://www.abr.business.gov.au/%28cjmkn1552rp15tei3bpdu4u1%29/main.aspx
Your search for Ryadia Pty Ltd found no matching records.
WHY?????????????????

Because it was only registered 3 days before your post:

Extracted from ASIC's database at AEST 11:52:46 on 07/08/2009

Name: RYADIA PTY LTD
ACN: 138 464 472

Type: Australian Proprietary Company, Limited By Shares
Registration Date: 05/08/2009
Next Review Date: 05/08/2010
Status: Registered
Locality of Registered Office: Birkdale QLD 4159
Jurisdiction: Australian Securities & Investments Commission

[Charles]

Post by DRS
[...]

Post by Charles
The ABN lookup
http://www.abr.business.gov.au/%28cjmkn1552rp15tei3bpdu4u1%29/main.aspx
Your search for Ryadia Pty Ltd found no matching records.
WHY?????????????????

Extracted from ASIC's database at AEST 11:52:46 on 07/08/2009
Name: RYADIA PTY LTD
ACN: 138 464 472
Type: Australian Proprietary Company, Limited By Shares
Registration Date: 05/08/2009
Next Review Date: 05/08/2010
Status: Registered
Locality of Registered Office: Birkdale QLD 4159
Jurisdiction: Australian Securities & Investments Commission

Same day the email sent to ***@mendosus.com

as refered to here http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html

interesting!!!!

[Annika1980]

Post by The pixel Bandit
*Last warning:*
Get rid of that part of your website that contains copyright
material belonging to me that you are using in a derogatory
manner intended to damage my reputation ...*before midnight on
9th August 2009*

Uh-oh, I can hear the crack Arkansas legal team firing up!

Jeff (I thought it was "Raph") could always move his site to GoDaddy.
We both know that GoDaddy doesn't enforce their Terms of Service.

One Q. Given what you've posted here and all the vitriol and lies
you've been spewing for years, how could anyone possibly damage your
reputation?

[Jeff R.]

Annika1980 wrote:

(directed to D-Mac)

Post by Annika1980
One Q. Given what you've posted here and all the vitriol and lies
you've been spewing for years, how could anyone possibly damage your
reputation?

Someone thanked him for advice, and complimented him for his knowledge once.
I'd call that *severe* damage to his reputation.

--
Jeff R.

[Robert Coe]

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 13:37:24 -0700 (PDT), Annika1980 <***@aol.com>
wrote:
: On Aug 5, 3:49 pm, The pixel Bandit <***@news.group> wrote:
: >
: > *Last warning:*
: > Get rid of that part of your website that contains copyright
: > material belonging to me that you are using in a derogatory
: > manner intended to damage my reputation ...*before midnight on
: > 9th August 2009*
:
: Uh-oh, I can hear the crack Arkansas legal team firing up!
:
: Jeff (I thought it was "Raph") could always move his site to GoDaddy.
: We both know that GoDaddy doesn't enforce their Terms of Service.
:
: One Q. Given what you've posted here and all the vitriol and lies
: you've been spewing for years, how could anyone possibly damage your
: reputation?

Few would appreciate being considered a clown. But even fewer would care to be
demoted from a clown to a laughingstock.

Bob

[Jeff R.]

Post by The pixel Bandit
*Last warning:*
Get rid of that part of your website that contains copyright
material belonging to me that you are using in a derogatory
manner intended to damage my reputation ...*before midnight on
9th August 2009*

Do your worst.

You have stated -unambiguously- on this forum, that my webpage assists your
business and increases your sales.

Do I get a commission?

The law allows for fair use for the purposes of parody or satire - not to
mention review.

http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html

I have (ever since day 1) scrupulously attributed the work (!) to you.
That's my whole point, Doug - that it *is* yours. I have never - would
never - even consider passing it off as my own. (ewwww...)

Read the page above very carefully, Doug. The most damning statements - by
far - were written by *you* (the right-hand panel) All I've done is point
them out (the left-hand panel.)

Answer your critics, Doug.
Justify your claims.

Your "legal team" may contact me at the (100% valid and active) address I
gave you earlier. I await your correspondence.

Oh, and BTW - the other two URLs are loaded up and ready to be publicised at
a moment's notice. They're both hosted anonymously and internationally. I
have no idea *who* in this forum may be willing to mirror my webpage....

Doug, there's no need for you to tell further lies about threatened legal
action.
Just post the "stepped-out pano" and I promise - hand on heart - I'll remove
the webpage and apologise.

You know - the image you have repeatedly claimed you made.

Ball's in your court.
Go for it.

--
Jeff R.

[Jeff R.]

Post by The pixel Bandit
In 2000, moral rights were recognised in Australian copyright
legislation. The moral rights provided under Australian law
A right of attribution.

Which is provided.
I had to *add* it to the images, to avoid any misunderstanding.
To be precise: *I* added the watermark on the images with *your* name.

Post by The pixel Bandit
The right to be clearly and reasonably prominently identified
as the author, in any reasonable form.

See above

Post by The pixel Bandit
The right to avoid false attribution, where the work is
falsely presented as being another's work ...Integrity of
authorship.

See above

Post by The pixel Bandit
*The right to not have the work treated in a derogatory manner
(this is a right to protect the honour and reputation of the
author).*

Truth is a defence here.
I simply presented what you originally presented yourself - and then I
pointed out your lies.
Good luck establishing "honour and reputation" there, Doug. Look at the
defamatory language *you* used - and continue to use.

I quote you - in this forum - from a few days ago:

"...I often refer people to Jeff Ralph's site for a laugh.
Anyone who's seen or bought my marine photos has
probably seen the one he's helped sell for me... "

Good luck proving damage to reputation or business.
I take the above statement by you as implied permission to publish - not
that I need it, of course. Its just nice to know that I have your approval
and blessings.

I re-state: Where is my commission for the "sale" of your prints? (To cover
my costs re marketing and advertising of your "product")

Do I have to threaten legal action to get my fair cut?

--
Jeff R.

[The pixel Bandit]

Jeff R. wrote:

Oh boy...
You finally got your wish... Fool.


--

[Jeff R.]

Post by The pixel Bandit
Oh boy...
You finally got your wish... Fool.

Interesting sig you're using Doug.

Now - does this mean you're finally going to post the elusive stepped-out
pano?

--
Jeff R.
(forgive me if I don't hold my breath)

[Annika1980]

Post by Jeff R.
Interesting sig you're using Doug.
Now - does this mean you're finally going to post the elusive stepped-out
pano?
--
Jeff R.
(forgive me if I don't hold my breath)

Don't be silly, Jeff.
Douggie doesn't take photos. He's too busy coordinating his imaginary
defense team for future imaginary litigation. I understand that the
internationally known barrister, Julian Abbott, will be heading up the
team. As D-Mac says, "I imagine he'll do a terrific job."

Don't sweat the threats and ultimatums coming from the Brisbane
Butthole.
As they say around here, "His mouth writes checks his ass can't cash."

[Atheist Chaplain]

Post by The pixel Bandit
Oh boy...
You finally got your wish... Fool.
--

WOW this should have Douggie hunkered over Google for ages so he can pretend
to be a legal eagle and bluff your host into submission, I DO DO DO DO so
want Douggie to try this because filing a false or misleading DMCA complaint
is punishable by fines in excess of $50,000 US and/or Gaol time LOL
Should be fun to watch events unfold.

[Jeff R.]

Post by Atheist Chaplain

Post by The pixel Bandit
Oh boy...
You finally got your wish... Fool.
--

WOW this should have Douggie hunkered over Google for ages so he can
pretend to be a legal eagle and bluff your host into submission, I DO
DO DO DO so want Douggie to try this because filing a false or
misleading DMCA complaint is punishable by fines in excess of $50,000
US and/or Gaol time LOL Should be fun to watch events unfold.

...and unfold they will.

Here is a copy of an email received this morning:

http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html

I have already (in a previous post in this thread) outlined the many errors
in Doug's charge(s), so I don't think its necessary to restate the obvious.

I will, however, restate my sincere offer to remove all of the so-called
"offending material" if Doug will simply prove my assertions wrong, by
posting a copy of the alleged "stepped-out pano."

There is certainly no obligation under law for me to remove my page - but I
will do so if Doug can prove me wrong on the original issue.

Blustering threats don't impress me.

--
Jeff R.
(63 hours and 53 minutes to go, and counting...)

[Troy Piggins]

[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 10 lines snipped |=---]

Post by Atheist Chaplain
WOW this should have Douggie hunkered over Google for ages so he can
pretend to be a legal eagle and bluff your host into submission, I DO
DO DO DO so want Douggie to try this because filing a false or
misleading DMCA complaint is punishable by fines in excess of $50,000
US and/or Gaol time LOL Should be fun to watch events unfold.

...and unfold they will.
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html
I have already (in a previous post in this thread) outlined the many errors
in Doug's charge(s), so I don't think its necessary to restate the obvious.
I will, however, restate my sincere offer to remove all of the so-called
"offending material" if Doug will simply prove my assertions wrong, by
posting a copy of the alleged "stepped-out pano."
There is certainly no obligation under law for me to remove my page - but I
will do so if Doug can prove me wrong on the original issue.
Blustering threats don't impress me.

What should impress you is that he set up a new company just to
make that threat. Same day of the email in fact.

[Jeff R.]

Post by Troy Piggins

Post by Jeff R.
Blustering threats don't impress me.

What should impress you is that he set up a new company just to
make that threat. Same day of the email in fact.

Hehehe.

I may have got under his skin... you think?

Its a shame he doesn't just destroy my argument entirely by posting the
imaginary (I'm sorry - "alleged" ) pano.

But then...

--
Jeff R.

[DRS]

[...]

Post by Troy Piggins

Post by Jeff R.
Blustering threats don't impress me.

What should impress you is that he set up a new company just to
make that threat. Same day of the email in fact.

Well spotted.

Extracted from ASIC's database at AEST 11:52:46 on 07/08/2009

Name: RYADIA PTY LTD
ACN: 138 464 472

Type: Australian Proprietary Company, Limited By Shares
Registration Date: 05/08/2009
Next Review Date: 05/08/2010
Status: Registered
Locality of Registered Office: Birkdale QLD 4159
Jurisdiction: Australian Securities & Investments Commission

[ColinD]

Post by Jeff R.

Post by Atheist Chaplain

Post by The pixel Bandit
Oh boy...
You finally got your wish... Fool.
--

WOW this should have Douggie hunkered over Google for ages so he can
pretend to be a legal eagle and bluff your host into submission, I DO
DO DO DO so want Douggie to try this because filing a false or
misleading DMCA complaint is punishable by fines in excess of $50,000
US and/or Gaol time LOL Should be fun to watch events unfold.

...and unfold they will.
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html

Instinct tells me to keep out of this dogfight, but having looked at the
above link, there are one or two technical errors from Douglas' post
that should be mentioned. Here is a sentence from his write-up about
his 'panorama':-

Quote: "10 megapixel images x 5 or 6 equals a final 50 or 60 megapixel
image I can then enlarge to 9 feet high and get a wall filling mural for
my client."

It is apparent that Douglas has made no allowance for overlap between
successive images. If the usual 20% or so overlap was allowed for, then
6 shots at 10 MP will yield an approximately 48 MP image, nowhere near
his quoted 60 MP.

Second, a 9 ft. high wall is probably wider than that, and extrapolating
from Doug's 5 or 6 images, where 2 images produced a more or less square
image, the wall is probably 20 feet or so long. So, how well does a 48
MP image enlarge to 9 x 20 ft? Plugging the numbers into CS2 and
solving for image size, a 47.8 MP image will yield a 9 x20 ft image at
25 pixels per inch. For a poster or hoarding that's probably ok, but
for wallpaper, where it may be viewed close-up, I would think that a
minimum of 50 ppi would be needed, which makes the required image size
more like 200 MP - that's a 600 megabyte image. Note these calcs assume
an image aspect ratio the same as the wall shape. If cropping of the
image is needed to fit the wall, then that worsens the outcome.

Of course, those figures are for all of us that don't have access to
Doug's magical detail-inventing algorithm!

I emphasise that the foregoing remarks are not personal; they are merely
to point out that Doug's figures are marginal at best.

Colin D.

[ColinD]

ColinD wrote:
<snip>

Post by ColinD
Second, a 9 ft. high wall is probably wider than that, and extrapolating
from Doug's 5 or 6 images, where 2 images produced a more or less square
image, the wall is probably 20 feet or so long. So, how well does a 48
MP image enlarge to 9 x 20 ft? Plugging the numbers into CS2 and
solving for image size, a 47.8 MP image will yield a 9 x20 ft image at
25 pixels per inch. For a poster or hoarding that's probably ok, but
for wallpaper, where it may be viewed close-up, I would think that a
minimum of 50 ppi would be needed, which makes the required image size
more like 200 MP - that's a 600 megabyte image. Note these calcs assume
an image aspect ratio the same as the wall shape. If cropping of the
image is needed to fit the wall, then that worsens the outcome.
<snip

Oops, mistake here. I was thinking that CS2 was giving me megapixels as
the image size, but in fact it was megabytes. A 48 megapixel image is a
144 megabyte image, and so the above calculations are wrong. My
mistake. A 48 MP image will give a 9 x 20 ft image at about 42 ppi, and
not 25 as I said above. Probably ok for wallpaper.

Apologies to all,

Post by ColinD
Colin D.

[Annika1980]

Post by Jeff R.
...and unfold they will.
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html

As American football great, Terrell Owens, would say, "Better get your
popcorn ready, cause it's gonna be a show!"

Douggie, I'm hurt that you didn't sue me first. Perhaps you're
waiting for our Sheriff to get out of prison before you serve the
papers?

[Bowser]

Post by Jeff R.
...and unfold they will.
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html
As American football great, Terrell Owens, would say, "Better get your
popcorn ready, cause it's gonna be a show!"

Yeah, he said that before a game against the Patriots. Which TO's team lost.
It was a shot, but not the way he wanted. Too bad he can't play the game
with his lips.

Post by Jeff R.
Douggie, I'm hurt that you didn't sue me first. Perhaps you're
waiting for our Sheriff to get out of prison before you serve the
papers?

[Robert Coe]

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 15:42:24 -0400, "Bowser" <***@gone.now> wrote:
:
: "Annika1980" <***@aol.com> wrote in message
: news:6b3030d7-745d-4810-a63b-***@o13g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
: On Aug 6, 6:09 pm, "Jeff R." <***@this.ng> wrote:
: >
: > ...and unfold they will.
: >
: > Here is a copy of an email received this morning:
: >
: > http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html
: >
:
: >As American football great, Terrell Owens, would say, "Better get your
: >popcorn ready, cause it's gonna be a show!"
:
: Yeah, he said that before a game against the Patriots. Which TO's team lost.
: It was a shot, but not the way he wanted. Too bad he can't play the game
: with his lips.
:
: >Douggie, I'm hurt that you didn't sue me first. Perhaps you're
: >waiting for our Sheriff to get out of prison before you serve the
: >papers?

Hey, Bowser, have you been to see the Edward Steichen exhibit in Williamstown?
My wife and I are heading up there tomorrow (on possibly the only really nice
weekend of the summer in our part of the world).

The Austrialians in this thread wou't have the slightest idea what I'm talking
about, but that just makes it even. I don't have the slightest idea what
they're talking about either.

Bob

[Annika1980]

Post by Bowser

Post by Annika1980
As American football great, Terrell Owens, would say, "Better get your
popcorn ready, cause it's gonna be a show!"

Yeah, he said that before a game against the Patriots. Which TO's team lost.
It was a shot, but not the way he wanted. Too bad he can't play the game
with his lips.

Actually, he first said it when he signed with the Cowboys. He may
have repeated it later, however. Like Douggie, TO's mouth sometimes
writes checks his ass can't cash.
Unlike Douggie, I'm a big fan of TO.

[Robert Coe]

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 08:09:27 +1000, "Jeff R." <***@this.ng> wrote:
: Atheist Chaplain wrote:
: > "The pixel Bandit" <***@news.group> wrote in message
: > news:***@mid.individual.net...
: >> Jeff R. wrote:
: >>
: >> Oh boy...
: >> You finally got your wish... Fool.
: >>
: >>
: >> --
: >
: > WOW this should have Douggie hunkered over Google for ages so he can
: > pretend to be a legal eagle and bluff your host into submission, I DO
: > DO DO DO so want Douggie to try this because filing a false or
: > misleading DMCA complaint is punishable by fines in excess of $50,000
: > US and/or Gaol time LOL Should be fun to watch events unfold.
:
: ...and unfold they will.
:
: Here is a copy of an email received this morning:
:
: http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html
:
: I have already (in a previous post in this thread) outlined the many errors
: in Doug's charge(s), so I don't think its necessary to restate the obvious.
:
: I will, however, restate my sincere offer to remove all of the so-called
: "offending material" if Doug will simply prove my assertions wrong, by
: posting a copy of the alleged "stepped-out pano."
:
: There is certainly no obligation under law for me to remove my page - but
: I will do so if Doug can prove me wrong on the original issue.
:
: Blustering threats don't impress me.

I think they should agree to hold the trial in Tibet. Either or both of them
could well benefit from having a jury that doesn't understand English.

Bob

[Doug Jewell]

Post by Jeff R.
Jeff R.
(63 hours and 53 minutes to go, and counting...)

about 40 hours now... oh the suspense!
My guess...
D-Mac will disappear for 3 months or so like he has done so
many times in the past. I think it happens when his doctors
realise he has stopped taking the medication and lock him
back up for a couple of months.
Did anyone else notice - that email that he sent Jeff
references YET ANOTHER internet domain that he has created.
On the new web page, there is a woman holding a phone. She
looks REMARKABLY similar to one of his "brides". There is
also a remarkable resemblance between his brides, and I'm
sure that some of the kids in his wedding portfolio are the
same ones that were holding the famous mirrored panorama.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - I'm sure the
only weddings D-Mac has photographed are his own children.

[Annika1980]

Post by Doug Jewell
On the new web page, there is a woman holding a phone. She
looks REMARKABLY similar to one of his "brides". There is
also a remarkable resemblance between his brides, and I'm
sure that some of the kids in his wedding portfolio are the
same ones that were holding the famous mirrored panorama.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - I'm sure the
only weddings D-Mac has photographed are his own children.

========================

About planning4weddings.com.au

Planning4weddings.com.au is operated in conjunction with the magazine:
"Planning for weddings" a Brisbane wedding magazine.
Margie and daughter Sam, run the venture from Birkdale. The unique
knowledge gained from publishing a magazine devoted to planning
weddings give us a pretty decent advantage over those who have to shop
for vendors... Most of whom are friends of ours from advertising in
our magazine and attending our Expos.

We operate under a code of ethics that guarantees all our dealing will
be fair to all concerned. Our only goal is to satisfy our clients.
Once we achieve that, everything else that comes with success will
naturally occur.

Contact information:
Phone; 0431 289213
Email; Use this form.

Our office is at our home in Birkdale in the City of Redlands. You can
visit us by appointment or we'll come to you (also by appointment) to
discuss your needs.
=====================

What? No gallery? No office? Hold the phone!
What is this, some 2 bit fly-by-night operation?

"I'm sorry, grandpa can't come to the phone right now cause we only
let him out of the basement for his feedings."

[Atheist Chaplain]

Post by Jeff R.

Post by Atheist Chaplain

Post by The pixel Bandit
Oh boy...
You finally got your wish... Fool.
--

WOW this should have Douggie hunkered over Google for ages so he can
pretend to be a legal eagle and bluff your host into submission, I DO
DO DO DO so want Douggie to try this because filing a false or
misleading DMCA complaint is punishable by fines in excess of $50,000
US and/or Gaol time LOL Should be fun to watch events unfold.

...and unfold they will.
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug-02.html
I have already (in a previous post in this thread) outlined the many
errors in Doug's charge(s), so I don't think its necessary to restate the
obvious.
I will, however, restate my sincere offer to remove all of the so-called
"offending material" if Doug will simply prove my assertions wrong, by
posting a copy of the alleged "stepped-out pano."
There is certainly no obligation under law for me to remove my page - but
I will do so if Doug can prove me wrong on the original issue.
Blustering threats don't impress me.
--
Jeff R.
(63 hours and 53 minutes to go, and counting...)

What strikes me is the fact that Douggie sent you the "take down" email
himself, having friends in the legal profession I can tell you that no
Solicitor/Barrister would ever let the plaintiff send such an email, it
would be sent from the plaintiffs legal representative and it would be sent
out via registered mail or courier. I smell another Douggie attempt at lies
and deception, it would actually be funny if it were not so pathetic and
predictable.
Sure Douggie can stir shit between you and your service provider but for a
hundred dollars (or free if the Solicitor see's the funny side of this) you
can get your REAL solicitor to send them a polite letter outlining your
stance and the legal precedents that you are using, then if Douggie makes a
false DMCA take down claim you can advise them and they can file AGAINST
Douggie for making a false of misleading DMCA take down claim, severe
penalties apply :-)
It also comes to mind Douggies claims that YOUR site is actually generating
traffic and income for him, so even the most naive Solicitor would see that
a claim for compensation would not only be laughed out of court on that
basis alone but the frivolous nature of the complaint would probably have a
Judge award costs against him :-)
I see nothing but Win Win for you and escalating costs for Douggie :-)
just for the record I am not a Solicitor and have no formal legal training,
all that I have posted here is my opinion, gained after a conversation with
a friend who is a real Solicitor (although he is in Corporate Law) so YMMV
:-)

[Jeff R.]

Post by Atheist Chaplain
What strikes me is the fact that Douggie sent you the "take down"
email himself, having friends in the legal profession I can tell you
that no Solicitor/Barrister would ever let the plaintiff send such an
email, it would be sent from the plaintiffs legal representative and
it would be sent out via registered mail or courier.

In Douggie's defence (!), he has only sent warning that he *will* issue the
"take-down" order - he hasn't actually issued it.

As someone else suggested, I think Julian may have written it. :-)

As to the other stuff, thanks for the suggestions, but I'm not about to
telegraph my punches.

We'll all see.
Soon.

--
Jeff R.
27 hours and 4 mins to go (and counting)

[-hh]

Post by Jeff R.

Post by Atheist Chaplain
What strikes me is the fact that Douggie sent you the "take down"
email himself, having friends in the legal profession I can tell you
that no Solicitor/Barrister would ever let the plaintiff send such an
email, it would be sent from the plaintiffs legal representative and
it would be sent out via registered mail or courier.

In Douggie's defence (!), he has only sent warning that he *will* issue the
"take-down" order - he hasn't actually issued it.
As someone else suggested, I think Julian may have written it.  :-)
As to the other stuff, thanks for the suggestions, but I'm not about to
telegraph my punches.
We'll all see.
Soon.

Which reminds me ... I can't recall the URL of the supposedly
'offending' material. I do recall getting a good laugh out of it, so
I'd like to perhaps take one last look "just in case".


-hh

[Jeff R.]

Post by -hh

Post by Jeff R.

Post by Atheist Chaplain
What strikes me is the fact that Douggie sent you the "take down"
email himself, having friends in the legal profession I can tell you
that no Solicitor/Barrister would ever let the plaintiff send such
an email, it would be sent from the plaintiffs legal representative
and it would be sent out via registered mail or courier.

In Douggie's defence (!), he has only sent warning that he *will*
issue the "take-down" order - he hasn't actually issued it.
As someone else suggested, I think Julian may have written it. :-)
As to the other stuff, thanks for the suggestions, but I'm not about
to telegraph my punches.
We'll all see.
Soon.

Which reminds me ... I can't recall the URL of the supposedly
'offending' material. I do recall getting a good laugh out of it, so
I'd like to perhaps take one last look "just in case".
-hh

http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html

Not much risk of "one last look", though. I.m aware of at least two
anonymous mirrors of this page. There may be more. :-)

--
Jeff R.

[Annika1980]

Not much risk of "one last look", though.  I.m aware of at least two
anonymous mirrors of this page.  There may be more.  :-)
--
Jeff R.

Hey Jeff, you forgot the countdown.
How many more hours until you get your pants sued off?

And what time is 12:00 Midnight Aussie time converted to American EDT?
Some of the lads here were thinking of shooting off some fireworks for
the occasion, but I think you guys are 15 hours ahead of us and I
don't want to wake the neighbors at 9:00 in the morning.

[^Tems^]

Post by Annika1980

Post by Jeff R.
Not much risk of "one last look", though. I.m aware of at least two
anonymous mirrors of this page. There may be more. :-)
--
Jeff R.

Hey Jeff, you forgot the countdown.
How many more hours until you get your pants sued off?
And what time is 12:00 Midnight Aussie time converted to American EDT?
Some of the lads here were thinking of shooting off some fireworks for
the occasion, but I think you guys are 15 hours ahead of us and I
don't want to wake the neighbors at 9:00 in the morning.

Got to wonder what sort of wanker issues something like this and puts
the end time on a Sunday, just shows he knows nothing about law.

Something like this is always a CLOSE OF BUSINESS on a given BUSINESS
DAY threat not midnight on a Sunday.

Where is Doggy by the way? I thought he would put up a fight till Sunday
night before hiding for 3 months

[Jeff R.]

Post by Annika1980

Not much risk of "one last look", though. I.m aware of at least two
anonymous mirrors of this page. There may be more. :-)
--
Jeff R.

Hey Jeff, you forgot the countdown.
How many more hours until you get your pants sued off?
And what time is 12:00 Midnight Aussie time converted to American EDT?
Some of the lads here were thinking of shooting off some fireworks for
the occasion, but I think you guys are 15 hours ahead of us and I
don't want to wake the neighbors at 9:00 in the morning.

Sorry Bret.
I forgot.

We are normally GMT+10, but are now GMT+11 (DST)
(did I get that right? Add an hour for DST? I think that's right.)

As I type, it's 10:27 am AEDST, so:

--
Jeff R.
(13 hours and 33 minutes to go)

[Annika1980]

Post by Jeff R.

Post by Annika1980

Not much risk of "one last look", though. I.m aware of at least two
anonymous mirrors of this page. There may be more. :-)
--
Jeff R.

Hey Jeff, you forgot the countdown.
How many more hours until you get your pants sued off?
And what time is 12:00 Midnight Aussie time converted to American EDT?
Some of the lads here were thinking of shooting off some fireworks for
the occasion, but I think you guys are 15 hours ahead of us and I
don't want to wake the neighbors at 9:00 in the morning.

Sorry Bret.
I forgot.
We are normally GMT+10, but are now GMT+11 (DST)
(did I get that right? Add an hour for DST?  I think that's right.)
--
Jeff R.
(13 hours and 33 minutes to go)-

Ah, 14 hours then. On my end it shows your post as 8:27 PM on August
8.
Since Douggie's been spending so much time in the USA of late
(allegedly) perhaps he'll grant you a 14 hour reprieve before he sues
your ass into oblivion.

I'm amazed that we haven't seen even one photo from Douggie's trip to
the United States and not one from his new D3 that he got (allegedly)
10 days ago. Also, I guess he was so busy arranging exhibitions at
all of his New York City galleries that he didn't even have time to
give me a ring.
You know how those whirlwind art tours go .... one minute you're in
New York City, the next you're in Toronto, Paris, or Venice.

And then Margie wakes your fat ass up and tells you to stop snoring
and asks, "Who's Helen?"

[Robert Coe]

On Sat, 8 Aug 2009 19:44:10 -0700 (PDT), Annika1980 <***@aol.com>
wrote:
: On Aug 8, 8:27 pm, "Jeff R." <***@this.ng> wrote:
: > Annika1980 wrote:
: > > On Aug 8, 7:58 pm, "Jeff R." <***@this.ng> wrote:
: > As I type, it's 10:27 am AEDST, so:
: > ...
: > --
: > Jeff R.
: > (13 hours and 33 minutes to go)-
:
: Ah, 14 hours then. On my end it shows your post as 8:27 PM on August
: 8.
: Since Douggie's been spending so much time in the USA of late
: (allegedly) perhaps he'll grant you a 14 hour reprieve before he sues
: your ass into oblivion.
:
: I'm amazed that we haven't seen even one photo from Douggie's trip to
: the United States and not one from his new D3 that he got (allegedly)
: 10 days ago. Also, I guess he was so busy arranging exhibitions at
: all of his New York City galleries that he didn't even have time to
: give me a ring.
: You know how those whirlwind art tours go .... one minute you're in
: New York City, the next you're in Toronto, Paris, or Venice.

Well, the place to be this weekend was in Williamstown, Massachusetts for the
Edward Steichen exhibit. So my wife and I headed up there and took it in (and
took a few pictures for the Shoot-In while we were at it). Some of Steichen's
work is superb; most of it is quite imaginative for its time; and all of it is
interesting for its role in the history of American photography. But let me
say this: nobody better tell me, ever again, that any of my Shoot-In pictures
are underexposed!

All kidding aside, do old prints tend to darken with time? One unquestionable
advantage of digital photography is that it should be possible to know, far
into the future, exactly what the photographer intended.

Bob

[Jeff R.]

Post by Robert Coe
All kidding aside, do old prints tend to darken with time? One
unquestionable advantage of digital photography is that it should be
possible to know, far into the future, exactly what the photographer
intended.
Bob

In my experience, they bleach with time - get lighter, that is.
The ones I didn't fix properly develop hypo stains, and the white areas go
yellow.

Other funny colours develop over time depending on the chemistry I used and
the care I took in washing and stop-bathing. Some of my prints get pink
patches! (go figure!)
Plastic-coated paper is affected far less.

Overall, though, I find they lighten, not darken.
Modern inkjet prints definitely fade (go lighter).

Others may differ.

--
Jeff R.

[Peter Chant]

Post by Robert Coe
Well, the place to be this weekend was in Williamstown, Massachusetts for
the Edward Steichen exhibit. So my wife and I headed up there and took it
in (and took a few pictures for the Shoot-In while we were at it). Some of
Steichen's work is superb; most of it is quite imaginative for its time;
and all of it is interesting for its role in the history of American
photography. But let me say this: nobody better tell me, ever again, that
any of my Shoot-In pictures are underexposed!

Hmm, my prints come back darker than I expected when I get them printed.

Pete

[ColinD]

Post by Jeff R.

Post by Annika1980

Not much risk of "one last look", though. I.m aware of at least two
anonymous mirrors of this page. There may be more. :-)
--
Jeff R.

Hey Jeff, you forgot the countdown.
How many more hours until you get your pants sued off?
And what time is 12:00 Midnight Aussie time converted to American EDT?
Some of the lads here were thinking of shooting off some fireworks for
the occasion, but I think you guys are 15 hours ahead of us and I
don't want to wake the neighbors at 9:00 in the morning.

Sorry Bret.
I forgot.
We are normally GMT+10, but are now GMT+11 (DST)
(did I get that right? Add an hour for DST? I think that's right.)
--
Jeff R.
(13 hours and 33 minutes to go)

Jeff, your date header shows UTC+10 hours, and I think it's a bit early
yet to be in DST. Here in NZ we go to NZDST at the end of September.

--

Colin D

[Jeff R.]

Post by ColinD
Jeff, your date header shows UTC+10 hours, and I think it's a bit
early yet to be in DST. Here in NZ we go to NZDST at the end of
September.

<*blush*>

Brain-fart.

Of course it isn't DST here now. Its the middle of bl**dy winter.
My mistake.

I am GMT+10

7 deg C in my house this morning.
(though quite nice outside, as I type)

Anyways - things are bound to warm up soon... :-)

--
Jeff R.
(9 hours and 16 minutes and counting)

[-hh]

Post by Jeff R.

Post by -hh
Which reminds me ... I can't recall the URL of the supposedly
'offending' material.  I do recall getting a good laugh out of it, so
I'd like to perhaps take one last look "just in case".
-hh

http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html
Not much risk of "one last look", though.  I.m aware of at least two
anonymous mirrors of this page.  There may be more.  :-)

But of course.

<http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Gilmore>


In having another look at the images, I now recall this nonsensical
claim made by Doug. And since he has made himself into a public
personality, its functionally impossible for him to try to
retroactively squelch his publicly-announced mistakes. If his
business (allegedly wedding photography) suffers as a result, its
really his own damn fault - he has no one to blame but himself.

BTW, I take it that the so-called deadline has passed and nothing has
happened?


-hh

[Jeff R.]

Post by -hh
BTW, I take it that the so-called deadline has passed and nothing has
happened?
-hh

Uh huh.
Nearly four days, but we're very patient here.

--
Jeff R.

[Walter Banks]

The pixel Bandit wrote:

Pixel bandit threatens action against stolen pixels


w..

[Troy Piggins]

Post by Walter Banks
Pixel bandit threatens action against stolen pixels

Hahahahaha! Excellent!

[Doug Jewell]

Post by The pixel Bandit
*Last warning:*
Get rid of that part of your website that contains copyright material
belonging to me that you are using in a derogatory manner intended to
damage my reputation ...*before midnight on 9th August 2009*

7 Hours after the deadline and not only is the site still
there, it's 4 days since D-Mac has posted. My guess is we
won't hear from him until November, when we'll hear some
lame excuse about him travelling the world. Course the only
travel he does is in his mind, with fairies. Just like when
he picks up his little Kodak Easyshare, he thinks he has a D3.

Hey Jeff, if you close your eyes and imagine real hard, you
might be able to tune in to D-Mac's fantasy world and
pretend you are being sued by him.

[Jeff R.]

Post by Doug Jewell
Hey Jeff, if you close your eyes and imagine real hard, you
might be able to tune in to D-Mac's fantasy world and
pretend you are being sued by him.

Oh I have.
I have.

I've already spent half my settlement.

Catch is... what the heck am I going to do with barnacle-encrusted
catamaran? I have no interest in sailing vessels. Anybody wanna buy a
cheap boat?

Now if Doug was into aircraft....

<dreams... a la Doug-style>

sigghhhh..

--
Jeff R.
+ 16 hrs and 12 minutes

[Here's Johnny]

LOL

Love the brisbaneweddingphotographers.com website, mate.

[Noons]

Post by Here's Johnny
LOL
Love the brisbaneweddingphotographers.com website, mate.

oh FFS! Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel...

[John McWilliams]

Post by Noons

Post by Here's Johnny
LOL
Love the brisbaneweddingphotographers.com website, mate.

oh FFS! Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel...

Stay outta here!

[Noons]

Post by John McWilliams
Stay outta here!

Who the hell do you think you are, arsehole?
Get stuffed!