HENDRICKSON VS AMAZON.COM ET
AL
January 31, 2003
CHARLES MANSON FAMILY WANTED
As bizarre as it might seem, the real Charles
Manson Family may be called to testify at the up and coming
Hendrickson vs. Amazon.com copyright infringement trial. In a
desperate attempt to block any Court decision that would make Amazon
liable for selling "counterfeit" MANSON DVDs, Amazon is challenging
the "originality" of the now famous "MANSON" movie, in an effort to
have the MANSON film copyright invalidated.
While this sort of legal maneuver may seem
brilliant as a last resort, it does not come free of charge. Video
tape depositions most likely will be taken of "Squeaky" Fromme and
even Manson himself, both of whom are behind prison walls. Anyone that
was put before the cameras over 30 years ago may be now put under oath
to reveal the truth of just how the MANSON film was made and whether
it is "original."
Of course, Robert Hendrickson and Tobann
International Pictures will have to foot the bill for travel expenses,
in order for the witnesses to appear in Los Angeles, but that is but a
small price to pay for justice.
Therefore, if you are one of those who became
a significant part of the "MANSON" film, like "Clem," "Gypsy," Sandy,
"Cappy," Brenda, "Country Sue," Chuck, Phip, Jennifer, Mary or Park,
maybe start thinking about returning to LA for one last visit to the
Hall of Justice. We hope you can understand just how important this
is. Obviously, if you are physically unable to make the trip to Los
Angeles, arrangements can be made to take your video tape deposition
wherever you are for viewing later at trial.
HENDRICKSON VS EBAY CASE
On August 13, 2002, a trial was held for the
last remaining defendant in the Hendrickson vs. eBay consolidated
actions, and on August 15, 2002, the court rendered its propound
decision. The court decided that because the last defendant,
"did not sell or otherwise transfer
ownership in any copies of the motion picture "Manson" in DVD
format," but only "posted an advertisement, offering to sell a copy
of the motion picture "Manson," in digital video disk ("DVD") format
on eBay, Inc.'s internet website, www.ebay.com," the defendant "did
not distribute copies of the copyrighted work "Manson" in violation
of 17 U.S.C. section 106(3)"
Not only does this decision have a chilling
effect upon DMCA Notices of Infringement provided by copyright owners
to internet service providers, but the matter of who’s liable for
selling "counterfeit" items on a website like eBay, when the sales are
conducted right on the website by the website's sales transaction
system, seems to put the legal liability hat squarely upon the
website. This will undoubtedly be a major issue in the Hendrickson vs.
Amazon.com cases and Hendrickson already has a Summary Judgment Motion
pending before the court to determine this very issue.
Simply put, the court has determined that
posting a listing on a website that offers a "counterfeit" item for
sale is NOT unlawful, but if a sale occurs, then the sale is an
infringement of the copyright and the law has long been established,
all who participate in an infringement are considered infringers of
the copyright.
Now, if the sale occurs, via the website's
computerized sales transaction system, while the person who posted the
listing is asleep, could he still be considered a participant in the
actual "sale" which is the" actual "infringement?"' This is but an
example of the decisions the court must now make, which will have a
lasting effect on the entire eCommerce industry.
As most of you know, what makes buying on
eBay or Amazon a convenient and pleasant experience, is the automatic
checkout system or the buy and pay instantly via credit card system,
eliminating the mailing of money orders or checks and then hoping that
your payment gets to the vendor, but it doesn't take a rocket
scientist to understand that such a system makes the website a
participant in the actual sale and thus liable if the "sale" was for a
copyright infringing item. Any legal eagles out there? Send us your
opinion and maybe we can post it on this site.
CIVILIZATION, COPYRIGHTS
AND SLAVERY
Most folks think, "What's all the fuss over
this copyright thing?" Simply put, its all about a form of modern day
slavery thriving in an otherwise civilized society. In a civilized
world, the members respect each others rights, whether those rights be
human in nature or of property. A copyright grants a property right,
not unlike the deed to your home grants you a property right, and when
someone trespasses on a copyright, not unlike when someone walks into
your home without your permission, the law has been broken by the
trespasser.
The difference is, a copyright grants legal
entitlement by which the owner derives the fruits of his labor in
connection with his literary, dramatic, pictorial, and or other
graphic creations. In other words, an artist labors to create a
copyrightable work and then he or she receives a paycheck for such
work by exploiting that work under copyright. If someone else derives
monies or rewards from that work, without the copyright owners
permission, he has unlawfully violated the copyright owners rights and
actually, in essence, stolen a portion of or all of the copyright
owners paycheck.
Where the United States Congress, to some
extent, has granted a select few the right to unlawfully violate and
profit from another’s hard work, (I.E. The Digital Millennium
Copyright Act) many Americans interpret such laws as to include them.
Unfortunately or otherwise, Congress has not and does not grant
privileges to those of lesser means, who do not specifically pay the
going rate for such benefits.
Probably, ever since time began, a certain
breed has always sought to exploit the fruits and labors of others,
rather than toil themselves. Sometimes whole cultures embrace this
medieval system by where one specific group of people are made to bare
the entire work load, in order that the whole society can prosper and
advance. Over a hundred years ago, our own "Deep South" provided the
perfect example of such unfairness gone completely mad. There, such an
affront against the nature of things was given a somewhat polite label
"Slavery" and accepted by many, until politicians finally realized
that the exploitation of human beings was a right to be shared by all
the privileged throughout the entire land, and should not be reserved
for only those select few while they sip on mint juleps and bask in a
moist summer sun or under a grand veranda.
Today, slavery has simply taken on a more
modern day form, approved of by the people and made lawful by an
entire United States Congress under the guise of the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act. Congress is even so bold as to come right
out and admit that The Act was made to promote the progress of the
internet at the expense of a certain group of people, copyright
owners. So, instead of Mr. Lott and his brain dead buddy sipping on
mint juleps while reminiscing about the "good'ol days" of slavery; now
Maggie and Jeff are sipp'in martinis on the rear deck of the Good Ship
Lollipop, and laughing all the way to the bank.
During the Industrial Revolution a hundred
years ago, children used to work 12 hours a day in factories, simply
because it was their turn to slave away for the privileged few. And
least we forget the Vietnam War where minorities and poor whites were
selected to pay the price for "America's Freedom" while the privileged
few sent their children off to college.
Please pardon our "in your face" arrogance,
but instead of being able to benefit from the internet, like most
everyone else, we have been forced into a standstill until the
widespread distribution of "counterfeit" MANSON DVDs is curtailed, or
at least until the court makes some necessary decisions.
PLEASE NOTE: If you
have purchased a MANSON DVD (all are counterfeit) on eBay, Amazon or
even from Wal-Mart, please do NOT sell or otherwise dispose of it. We
will reward you for turning it in to us, if you have documentation
identifying from whom you purchased it. BUT remember, if you
ever "sell" it, or even "give" it to anyone else, you can be held
liable for copyright infringement. We are presently putting together
this "reward" program and the reward will be at least $100 and maybe
more.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING
