The concept of intellectual property, including copyright ownership, ought to be a no-brainer for anyone in a tech business. Before someone grabs images from a commercial website and posts them elsewhere, they really need to get permission to do that.
Jeremy Shoemaker, aka ShoeMoney, heard about my appearance at SMX West, and made a misguided attempt to supply his own "before/after" using images of me he copied from the Web without permission.
Had Jeremy asked me, I would have told him that those images are proprietary, but would have supplied him with other ones. For that matter, had he attended the SMX conference he would have been free to take his own photos and use them.
The comments in the blog were really disparaging of me. That was in large part because the things Jeremy and Shannon said on air were sheer speculation, totally crass, and completely sensationalist. Virtually every "fact" they stated was incorrect.
Coupled with the comments, the posting is without any redeeming qualities. I can't do anything about people making fools of themselves for their opinions, but I can prevent them from using my copyrighted images when doing so - so I demanded their removal.
Jeremy failed to contact me before spreading disparaging speculation on air, going public made it a very public affair. A call by him before going public might have prevented public misconception. The onus for preventing the issue from getting out of hand in a public manner was on him, not me.
He showed no restraint about me on air. I could not gauge the seriousness with which he would reply, since I do not know him personally. An email or phone call by me could have been a giant mistake - it does *not* guarantee any rational response from a well-known branded link-baiter. In perfect keeping, he ended up publishing the letter from my attorney.
To me, that's indicative of behavior I can't control. If he was going to publish anything further, it might as well be my attorney's letter. That way, legal requirements are clearly spelled out. We included options for use of new images which in my opinion, was a professional courtesy that goes far beyond what I experienced from him.
Aside from getting the facts wrong and using proprietary images, Jeremy blogged and broadcast a radio show for his own commercial purposes. It certainly would have been more professional of him to contact me before going live and spouting falsehoods, all while I was minding my own business up in the air flying home to Chicago.
Jeremy had initially replied to my attorney's letter in Twitter, amazed he got a "lolable" demand to remove the images. He is apparently as ignorant of intellectual property law as he is disrespectful towards me. To claim that images are "fair use" because they were found on the Web is either disingenuous or stunningly naive.
Then he followed it up with another post, suggesting I should have contacted him before sending that letter. He has never contacted me about this matter. What initially was most amazing about this, was how people reacted on his blog. Most of the comments were from people that took Jeremy's side of things. That's obvious. They're his sycophants.
What became even more amazing, is that Jeremy himself talked about Intellectual Property in an interview that published days after the incident. Granted, the interview with Lisa Barone was prepared prior, but I would think these things should be top of mind with him. Especially since he was providing advice about matters of Intellectual Property.
Ironically for him, he recommends as step one: using a Cease and Desist. That is the very thing he complained about in his follow up post on the matter with me. Either way, in his interview, he provides advice I would argue he has trouble tracking when it comes to his own behavior. He was wrong to use my images without permission. He complained about behavior he recommends himself. He seems to be perfectly capable of dishing out what he is unable to handle graciously. He refers to several lawsuits of his while my attorney's legal notice to him was at that point: my first and only thing like that ever.
Stay tuned.
Jeremy Shoemaker, aka ShoeMoney, heard about my appearance at SMX West, and made a misguided attempt to supply his own "before/after" using images of me he copied from the Web without permission.
Had Jeremy asked me, I would have told him that those images are proprietary, but would have supplied him with other ones. For that matter, had he attended the SMX conference he would have been free to take his own photos and use them.
The comments in the blog were really disparaging of me. That was in large part because the things Jeremy and Shannon said on air were sheer speculation, totally crass, and completely sensationalist. Virtually every "fact" they stated was incorrect.
Coupled with the comments, the posting is without any redeeming qualities. I can't do anything about people making fools of themselves for their opinions, but I can prevent them from using my copyrighted images when doing so - so I demanded their removal.
Jeremy failed to contact me before spreading disparaging speculation on air, going public made it a very public affair. A call by him before going public might have prevented public misconception. The onus for preventing the issue from getting out of hand in a public manner was on him, not me.
He showed no restraint about me on air. I could not gauge the seriousness with which he would reply, since I do not know him personally. An email or phone call by me could have been a giant mistake - it does *not* guarantee any rational response from a well-known branded link-baiter. In perfect keeping, he ended up publishing the letter from my attorney.
To me, that's indicative of behavior I can't control. If he was going to publish anything further, it might as well be my attorney's letter. That way, legal requirements are clearly spelled out. We included options for use of new images which in my opinion, was a professional courtesy that goes far beyond what I experienced from him.
Aside from getting the facts wrong and using proprietary images, Jeremy blogged and broadcast a radio show for his own commercial purposes. It certainly would have been more professional of him to contact me before going live and spouting falsehoods, all while I was minding my own business up in the air flying home to Chicago.
Jeremy had initially replied to my attorney's letter in Twitter, amazed he got a "lolable" demand to remove the images. He is apparently as ignorant of intellectual property law as he is disrespectful towards me. To claim that images are "fair use" because they were found on the Web is either disingenuous or stunningly naive.
Then he followed it up with another post, suggesting I should have contacted him before sending that letter. He has never contacted me about this matter. What initially was most amazing about this, was how people reacted on his blog. Most of the comments were from people that took Jeremy's side of things. That's obvious. They're his sycophants.
What became even more amazing, is that Jeremy himself talked about Intellectual Property in an interview that published days after the incident. Granted, the interview with Lisa Barone was prepared prior, but I would think these things should be top of mind with him. Especially since he was providing advice about matters of Intellectual Property.
Ironically for him, he recommends as step one: using a Cease and Desist. That is the very thing he complained about in his follow up post on the matter with me. Either way, in his interview, he provides advice I would argue he has trouble tracking when it comes to his own behavior. He was wrong to use my images without permission. He complained about behavior he recommends himself. He seems to be perfectly capable of dishing out what he is unable to handle graciously. He refers to several lawsuits of his while my attorney's legal notice to him was at that point: my first and only thing like that ever.
Stay tuned.
Leave a comment