PART 1 OF 3
378 Comments (The Oatmeal v. FunnyJunk, Part VI: The Electronic Frontier Foundation Steps In)
Ken • Jun 21, 2012 @11:00 am Incidentally, I say "near-perfect" only because he did not close with "snort my taint," for which I understand I am entitled to royalties.
Nicholas Weaver • Jun 21, 2012 @11:10 am Go EFF!
Nicholas Weaver • Jun 21, 2012 @11:18 am Also, yay, this means since you won't need to be the attorney for anyone, you can continue to rip any future Carreon filings a new one, for our popcorn-laden entertainment!
Damon • Jun 21, 2012 @11:21 am @ Matthew Inman,EFF, and the folks helping defend him: burn them..burn them all and leave them nothing. They deserve it.
Jay Lee • Jun 21, 2012 @11:22 am Inman tells Carreon to go EFF himself!
Nibor • Jun 21, 2012 @11:23 am Thanks Ken, for a new post my scroll wheel finger is getting hurt, by scrolling down over all the comments (gigantium number of them) on the previous posts now I can start at the top again
And hoping that all the commenters move over here of course
HeatherCat • Jun 21, 2012 @11:29 am *APPLAUSE* And continued thanks to Ken and others for all they do.
I particularly like how Mr. Inman phrased it: "I have a right to express my opinion, whether Mr. Carreon likes it or not."
Yes, so do we all.
Robert C • Jun 21, 2012 @11:30 am It really does sound like he's talking about attorney-client communications. I've been wondering for a while what Funny Junk thinks about how their attorney has been handling this situation. While they're not involved in the suit he filed against Inman, it's still reflecting on them since the action arose out of their C&D letter. I can't imagine that they're happy about it. What are the ethics of a situation like this? Does Carreon have any duty to refrain from activities that make his client look bad?
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @11:30 am Yeah, he really threw Funnyjunk under the bus, didn't he?
Joe • Jun 21, 2012 @11:30 am Ken – not if Carreon trademarks it first
Mike K • Jun 21, 2012 @11:31 am So I'm assuming the way Carreon described the exchange isn't exactly how it happened. My guess is he asked if those particular comics had been taken down (which they had), he got the answer he wanted, and proceeded without further questions.
Assuming something similar to that happened, can FJ now sue Carreon for defamation since he's claiming they misinformed him?
I'm just curious as such a suit probably would be neutral or positive for the reputation of FJ.
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @11:38 am The Guardian article was written by the same person as The Stranger article (although they are very different pieces) and both are presumably based on the phone conversation the author had with Carreon.
From the Guardian article:
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @11:39 am Oops! I messed up the quote, Should be:
"I did not know those links were there. According to my client, he didn't know about it and there was no way for him to discover it," said Carreon.
Ann Bransom • Jun 21, 2012 @11:41 am My prediction, from a PR standpoint, is that FunnyJunk coasts along until they see the new visitors to their site start to taper off and then they will take some kind of action or make a statement to churn it back up again. There is no reason for them to make a statement at this point. They are not under the microscope or holding the microscope.
Collin • Jun 21, 2012 @11:41 am typo:
"it's not year clear who is representing"
"not yet" or "not very" perhaps?
Nick • Jun 21, 2012 @11:42 am Ken, this is great work, but I have one question about your coverage of this incredible saga: why did you pick "oatmeal-v-funnyjunk" as a tag? Everyone knows this should be tagged as the "bearlove" saga.
Ann Bransom • Jun 21, 2012 @11:43 am There was no way to discover links on their own website?
Roxy • Jun 21, 2012 @11:44 am I really wouldn't expect Carreon to know anything about attorney-client privilege since he basically uses clipart and a microsoft template as letterhead. I'm glad that Inman is getting the help and resources of the legal community to put the smack down on this tool.
Adam Steinbaugh • Jun 21, 2012 @11:46 am @Ken — It's not an isolated slip-up, either, as he told the Guardian today:
FunnyJunk wouldn't return calls from the Guardian to tell us about its own policies, but Carreon has now effectively abandoned the threat of a FunnyJunk lawsuit, stating that he was misinformed by his client. His letter claimed that all the comics had been removed from FunnyJunk, but Inman pointed out dozens that were still there.
"I did not know those links were there. According to my client, he didn't know about it and there was no way for him to discover it," said Carreon, still smarting from a torrent of abusive mails from angry netizens.
A far cry from the requirement that attorneys keep client confidences "at every peril to himself or herself" — unless, of course, FunnyJunk consented to the disclosures. What motive they'd have in doing so is beyond me.
The fact that it makes FunnyJunk look bad suggests that he might not have their permission to make that disclosure.
Plus,
Adam Steinbaugh • Jun 21, 2012 @11:49 am Pretend I had another point at the end of comment.
Ann Bransom • Jun 21, 2012 @11:58 am Funnyjunk.com is running off of a Linux server in the Netherlands. So all that content is most likely being dynamically generated out of a MySql database.
mysql> Select * From [Table Containing User Uploaded Entries] Where [The Title Column] LIKE '%Oatmeal%'
^^ seems like that would have been a reasonable place to start in making sure you're not hosting the content that you are accusing someone of lying about you hosting
Chris R. • Jun 21, 2012 @11:59 am Ann, I actually feel bad for FunnyJunk at this point because so much traffic probably was directed at them the first day or two. Then suddenly Charles made this whole thing about himself and no one really spoke about FunnyJunk after that.
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @12:02 pm @Ann, the claim that they had no way to discover the comics is BS of course. Many of Inman's comics were promoted to the front page, and the search feature was available. Now it seems they have disabled search, at least for terms like oatmeal.
Link • Jun 21, 2012 @12:02 pm This case is an example of douchetwaddle asshattery at it's finest.
Ken • Jun 21, 2012 @12:03 pm I think everything on FunnyJunk is just tagged "hurrrlolfag," which makes it more challenging to search.
Sarahw • Jun 21, 2012 @12:06 pm So Carreon admits his demand letter was a screwup from the start, and indirectly concedes that Inman absolutely had some rational basis to strenuously object to its bogosity and publicly and hilariously refuse to comply.
So now, he rewards Inman and other parties concerned, for his own sloppy error, by finding new ways to demand improper things.
If I could have found the cartoons on FJ I'm sure FJ LLC and Carreon could have. So I'm not sure the "we had no way to know how bogus the demand was" excuse is very compelling.
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @12:10 pm It took me all of ten seconds to find this on funny junk: http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures ... L+do+this/
Roxy • Jun 21, 2012 @12:12 pm Snerk. You would think that FJ would be better policing their site for Oatmeal things right about now.
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @12:18 pm @Roxy, I really don't think they even try:
http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures ... uth+korea/
HeatherCat • Jun 21, 2012 @12:24 pm I dunno… the original complaint of Mr. Inman was that his work was being copied WITHOUT credit to him. So, if they copy it but keep the signature/copyright or tag, I don't think he'd mind so much.
I mean the guy has admitted that an artist likes their work to be shared as much as possible, just so long as everyone knows who really created it.
and that's what it was all about in the beginning, if I'm not mistaken.
Robert C • Jun 21, 2012 @12:25 pm @Jack, @roxy FunnyJunk actually crippled their own search engine so that it doesn't work for certain terms, such as "Oatmeal" "XKCD," "Cyanide & Happiness" or other titles of webcomics.
http://changememe.com/2012/06/12/funnyj ... ch-engine/
Luke • Jun 21, 2012 @12:27 pm @Jerk: Which just gives The Oatmeal's initial blog post about FJ's tactics even more weight. That second one hasn't even been cropped.
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @12:27 pm @hearhercat, He may not mind (but who knows at this point), but my point was more that it would have been simple for the FJ admin to find these comics on his site, if he really wanted to.
GabrielHounds • Jun 21, 2012 @12:29 pm I can't wait to read the Chas Carreon / American Buddha illustrated version of the super secret motives of the real EFF.
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @12:32 pm @Luke, "@Jerk"!? That's defamation! I shall have to retain Mr Carrion's services!
Luke • Jun 21, 2012 @12:34 pm @Jack Doh. Co-worker was talking to me while typing and I had a freudian slip there.
Noah Callaway • Jun 21, 2012 @12:36 pm I completely agree that FunnyJunk's original demand for defamation was totally bogus and Carreon's further actions somehow manage to go several steps beyond that.
That being said, I think people severely underestimate the cost of policing user generated content. To partially block people from uploading comics you could prevent anything with "Oatmeal" in the title being uploaded. Ignoring the fact that this prevents people from uploading comics about oatmeal (which is annoying, and becomes a bigger problem as you block more words), you now probably need to police each comic by title.
Now you have to manually add every comic title that the Oatmeal produces (their entire back-catalog, plus monitoring going forward) to your black-list. Now you're pissing off more users who are triggering false-positives on your upload filter, _and_ you have to monitor the Oatmeal and keep updating this filter.
But wait! Now there's precedent. You filter the Oatmeal's comics, so now you need to filter Cyanide & Happiness. And if you do that for them, you need to filter XKCD, Penny-Arcade, SMBC, and hundreds more.
So now you're filtering on tens or hundreds of webcomic titles, and maybe thousands of individual comic titles. The only way to do this is to take a few weeks to set up automated systems to check RSS feeds for the comics and automatically add things to the filter.
Oh boy! Now you're in a world of false-positives hurt when XKCD posts a comic titled "funny", and your automated system unfortunately removes anything with the word "funny" in the title.
And this only covers webcomics. Good luck trying to remove other infringing material on your website.
It's actually a huge amount of work to police user-generated content on a web-platform. I'm not trying to validate any of the inappropriate demands based on the defamation claim in any way, but please don't assume that keeping user-generated content from infringing is trivial!
ben • Jun 21, 2012 @12:37 pm Well, it's not clear to me how FunnyJunk is even involved in this. Has it been established that FJ is actually Carreon's client? His initial demand was for $20,000 for *himself*, it seemed. His subsequent suits are "pro se". Is he actually working for FJ, or what?
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @12:39 pm @Luke, I would've guessed autocorrect. ( that's always my wife's excuse :p)
Nibor • Jun 21, 2012 @12:42 pm Hey the fundraiser made 208,000 and a bit
So that's (minus the 4% for IndieGoGo) 100,000 if it's split between the two charities, and reading all the comments that is the safest way for Inman to go, so he doesn't get in to trouble with someone I do not want to name, for this person is so engaged with those two charities, that he even has donated to this fundraiser, but he wants to force/ensure the split in equal parts and only to these two charities, as far as I can understand out of the ramblings by this not named person.
The unnamed person is unnamed because his name is copyrighted and I do not want to be sued for infringement.
By the way I’m not a lawyer and not even an US citizen so forgive me if I misinterpreted the (US) law or even misused the right words.
Grifter • Jun 21, 2012 @12:44 pm @Robert C:
Speaking of Cyanide and Happiness, today's comic seems pretty apropos:
http://www.explosm.net/comics/2836/
Dan Weber • Jun 21, 2012 @12:44 pm Today I learned a taint is worth $20,000.
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @12:51 pm @Dan Weber: Depends on the taint.
Jess • Jun 21, 2012 @12:58 pm Perhaps Carreon is pissed O-F-F at the E-F-F
http://charles-carreon.com/2012/06/21/f-the-eff/
Dan Weber • Jun 21, 2012 @12:59 pm Someone pointed out on the Part IV thread:
FunnyJunk only registered its trademark on May 23rd, with Chas as the correspondent. This seems a lot like the Mattel issue, where he went out looking for a case. Register the trademark and then issue the threat letter complaining about violation of trademark.
(I believe FunnyJunk, for all its problems, deserves trademark protection and this should not be interpreted as critical of that right. I also think they deserve unregistered trademark protection before their registration date — just like Oatmeal deserves copyright protection before they register their copyright — although as our host would quickly point out merely criticizing FJ isn't a violation of their trademark.)
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @1:02 pm Re: registering FunnyJunk's trademark
It appears, does it not, as though Mr. Carreon both registered the FJ trademark and submitted their DCMA paperwork within a week or two before sending the demand letter.
While there's nothing wrong with that per se, and FJ should have a trademark and a DCMA filing, the timing is simply too suspicious.
Randall • Jun 21, 2012 @1:04 pm all this leads me to wonder: How did lawyers commit career suicide before the internet?
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @1:05 pm "Legal Avengers Assemble!"
Turk • Jun 21, 2012 @1:06 pm Advice to Carreon on a statement he should make:
"After speaking with FunnyJunk (and getting their permission to write this) we realize that my initial letter shouldn't have been sent. It appears that we had a miscommunication about what Oatmeal stuff was still on the site. Because we may have inadvertently exacerbated the situation that letter, I'm going to drop the suit that I just started. I don't want to be involved in a suit unless my own hands are 100% clean."
Leon • Jun 21, 2012 @1:07 pm You can pretty easily search Funnyjunk for Inman's works. They have a filter in place that changes "the Oatmeal" to "the fag" in user's posts. If you search for "the fag" (with quotes) his work comes right up. I would have to look through the comments again to verify it, but I believe that's how Inman found all of the links he posted in his initial response.
Roxy • Jun 21, 2012 @1:09 pm @Robert C, I noticed that right off the bat! Good thing my google-fu (and anyone else who is internet literate) is strong.
Roxy • Jun 21, 2012 @1:27 pm @Noah: I don't disagree with you that user generated content is something that is nearly impossible and a huge amount of work to police. On the other hand, being an admin of such site, you should really already know the huge risk you are taking. In the case of FJ I don't think they realized the can of worms they were opening with this claim against The Oatmeal for damages.
While I am sure this isn't a special snowflake type of defamation complaint, any reasonable attorney should have advised their client of what some of the repercussions would be in store should they proceed with an actual lawsuit against Inman.
The fact that Carreon did not do a basic google search against his clients site to make sure that all copy written material had been removed, he also probably did not advise his client that user uploaded content would need to be heavily moderated to avoid countersuit or further legal action from The Oatmeal or other websites. Great job, Carreon!
Any real professional would have made sure that the complaint was actually valid and not leave his client vulnerable to countersuit and instead thought with his rage-reflex. Maybe his Goldline ambulance chase wasn't creating enough revenue for him to make his mortgage payment this month.
And in reference to FJ, obviously inexperienced admin probably got an email from Carrion and thought, "Cool, I'll get 67% of 20K if I let this guy write a letter. Seems legit."
Either way, one thing is certain, Carreon, vastly underestimated the ramifications which shows his very obvious inexperience.
SPQR • Jun 21, 2012 @1:28 pm The crippled search and the substitution for Oatmeal confirms FunnyJunk's bad faith rather brazenly.
Elly • Jun 21, 2012 @1:31 pm I just donated $25 to the EFF – and cited their support for Inman as the reason.
Thanks for posting the link, Ken!
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @1:33 pm http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/ ... meal-suit/
A new Forbes Article
https://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/ ... %20carreon
Mentions of "Charles Carreon" speeding up too. (Doesn't help that https://twitter.com/#!/bybeautydamned is sparring rando trolls again, I'm really starting to think the Carreons are their own worst enemies.)
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @1:36 pm @Noah, one simple step that could greatly reduce copyright infringement on FJ would be to have a clearly communicated, and enforced, policy that prohibits it. If a user violates the policy, warn them and then ban them if they continue to violate said policy. They can also provide a simple method of reporting or flagging posts that violate copyright.
FJ may already do some of this, but I doubt it. If they do have a policy, they don't enforce it.
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @1:39 pm http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012 ... s-carreon/ Yet ANOTHER interview
"“There are some things that you accept with grace," Carreon said. "But I do not accept that my mother engaged in bestiality and I do not accept that FunnyJunk slept with its mother, as it does not have a mother.""
He's STILL saying that was about him and not Funnyjunk. Talks the twitter alot too.
Another techdirt article too, no lulzy comments so far but we all know what happens there.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201206 ... ount.shtml
Tali • Jun 21, 2012 @1:39 pm Carreon's newest interview is a doosy.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012 ... s-carreon/
Ann Bransom • Jun 21, 2012 @1:39 pm @Noah – I don't think anyone is trivializing the difficulty in policing user generated content on websites, including Inman himself. I think the point is that the amount of money being invested in newer technologies that automatically detect or red flag copyrighted materials needs to be proportionate to the amount of revenue your site is generating.
Look at the financials that were revealed about how much Matthew Inman is making from the limited advertising on his website, then imagine what the financials of an advertising laden sight like FunnyJunk must be. There is a huge span of content management options in terms of cost, time, and effort between code hacking to prevent certain keywords from being used and the video fingerprinting techonologies utilized by YouTube or technologies employed by iStockPhoto or Flickr. FunnyJunk needs to find an appropriate means of auditing the content users post to their site that is proportionate to the amount of visitors they get and the amount of revenue they are earning.
Or get out of the content aggregation business.
There is a difference between being guilty and being responsible.
Tali • Jun 21, 2012 @1:41 pm I love how he's trying to defend his American Buddha stuff
In court filings and on Twitter, Carreon makes much of the fact that he engages in "tempered speech," even on hot-button topics. He doesn't resort to name-calling like "dumbass." Instead, he writes, sings, and publishes amazingly offensive songs about "President Evil" (Bush), pornographic images of newspaper columnists he doesn't like, and wishes-for-waterboarding of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.
"I am not a politician," he says sternly when asked about the apparent discrepancy. "I have not deceived anyone. I am not able to stand armies. It is entirely distinct. The grounds for engaging in savage satire of people who are murderers [is a] completely different situation. That’s like comparing touch football with warfare.”
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @1:43 pm @SPQR, it most definitely does. In fact, by actively thwarting searches for user uploads of Inman's work it appears that FJ admin is encouraging and protecting continued infringement so that he can continue to profit.
Douchebag move on his part.
John • Jun 21, 2012 @1:50 pm @Noah: If your business model exposes you to legal problems, fines, and punitive damages if it doesn't work just perfectly, perhaps it's a poor business model.
Allowing uploaded content is dangerous, even if it's just printed words. Accept the danger — including the possibility that you're going to get hurt really badly if you screw up — or find something else to do.
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @1:52 pm @Tali: OMG OMG OMG I think his interview broke my brain. For real.
Stuart • Jun 21, 2012 @1:56 pm In response to FJ didn't have an agent for DMCAs priors to may 25th which is just prior to his 20K demand:
Still, Carreon says it doesn't matter now. "[FunnyJunk] now [has] an agent,” he said. “If someone wants to make something of the fact that they didn’t have an agent, there’s nothing to be made of it. There you go. It’s a fact. There’s no legal claim that can be made on it whatsoever."
This makes me think of a kid trying to change the rules in the middle of the game.
Colin • Jun 21, 2012 @1:56 pm "The grounds for engaging in savage satire of people who are murderers [is a] completely different situation. That’s like comparing touch football with warfare.”
…or perhaps even like comparing being mocked on the internet with the nuclear attacks on Japan.
Ann Bransom • Jun 21, 2012 @2:01 pm I'm sure it's a legal term…
but "allegeable fact" broke my English major soul.
Valerie • Jun 21, 2012 @2:03 pm @Tali Silly, that's way different because they can "stand armies." By crudely photoshopping Bush / Rice porn Charles Carreon is heroically saving lives.
Now I was not aware that the conservative columnist Kathleen Parker (pictured between the erections at American Buddha) had a private army that she could "stand" to perpetrate evil and start wars, but I assume that must be true because the Carreons say so – and they would never distort facts to serve selfish ends.
Or maybe she is just part of the Hollywood Mafia-CIA-Bearlove conspiracy to persecute the Carreons because their ancestors were secret Spanish Jews. Either way, he is right and you are wrong (probably because you are part of the conspiracy).
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @2:06 pm http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/201 ... awsuit.php
SF Weekly picked it up.
Tali • Jun 21, 2012 @2:06 pm @Margaret I know! I still haven't finished reading the article, because between the crazy and my sinus infection, it is taking a lot for it to sink in.
I recently graduated with a BA in History, and my junior research project was to research a legal case in Ireland in the late 1800s involving a priest in a small town in Kilkenny Co who sued a bunch of people (including his curates, his Bishop, and the Cardinal) for slander/libel after he was told that he would not be allowed to have a group of nuns come to start a girl's school in his town. The priest's (a Fr. Robert O'Keeffe) writings and newspaper interviews are a similar crazy to Carreon's, and O'Keeffe ended up a broke, broken, jobless (he was removed not only from his position as parish priest, but also as chaplain of the local jail) and reviled. I think Carreon would do well to learn from O'Keeffe's story (which…shameless promotion of my mentor…is the subject of the book "The European Culture Wars in Ireland" by Colin Barr. He also has a shorter academic journal article on the story somewhere on the Internets ) as he is probably going to end up with a similar conclusion to his story.
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @2:07 pm Also LOL, the Techdirt account points right to Tara Carreon's Techdirt account. That's brilliant.
Tali • Jun 21, 2012 @2:09 pm @Valerie If I'm part of the conspiracy, then I sure hope I get named as one of the Does in his case (although I think he probably should have listed more than 100 Does, as I think there have been several thousand volunteers to take those positions)
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @2:10 pm @Tali: Oh, man, if you haven't read it all yet… the delights that await you!
Xenocles • Jun 21, 2012 @2:14 pm @ Noah: "It's actually a huge amount of work to police user-generated content on a web-platform."
Perhaps it's not such a good business plan, then. If FunnyJunk can't conduct itself ethically perhaps it should fold.
Xenocles • Jun 21, 2012 @2:15 pm John-
I should have read your comment first so I could just +1 it.
Tali • Jun 21, 2012 @2:21 pm @Margaret Finished it finally. The insanity astounds.
I think I might have found my calling, as a legal historian specializing in these sort of crazy litigations throughout history.
Adam Steinbaugh • Jun 21, 2012 @2:24 pm @Tali — I can kind of see his point that Twitter posts denigrating random people might hurt his "brand", and that inflammatory posts about public figures are distinguishable, but only if Twitter were considered in a vacuum. Mr. Carreon has been quite willing to use those same kind of ad hominem attacks against random people via his YouTube account.
Unless, of course, YouTube automatically adds "retard" to comments as a feature.
His rationale for connecting Inman to those accounts (that he replied to one quickly?) is bizarre.
Valerie • Jun 21, 2012 @2:25 pm @ Tali Yes, I do believe the waiting list to be named by this douchebag has gotten kind of long.
Personally, I would prefer a more lasting souvenir from this trip into crazy town – for instance an original Tara Camerron print of me on a box of oatmeal being seduced by a bear-o-dactyl while a psycho-santa plays the mandolin and shouts obscenities at a nefarious, black CIA helicopter. But that may just be me.
Tali • Jun 21, 2012 @2:28 pm @Adam
That would make sense if he was only going after public figures. But what about the journalist? Her reputation as a journalist could be hurt just as much as Carreon's as a lawyer. The only difference I see there is that he's copyrighted his name, while she hasn't.
Tali • Jun 21, 2012 @2:31 pm @Valerie
O.O
that. is. brilliant. I have amended my previous statement (as I am in Fl and the trip to court in CA is probably more than I can afford). THAT is how I want to be immortalized in this whole thing as well.
I am actually really quite disappointed that Tara hasn't tried to spread her crazy and defend her husband here.
Ken • Jun 21, 2012 @2:39 pm @Noah:
I don't doubt that it is resource-intensive. So imagine how hard it is for authors and artists to police such sites for their work being ripped off.
Also, it seems as if FunnyJunk (like other sites) is structured with the intent of inviting such stolen content. Could it exist without it?
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @2:47 pm Ars Technica's title of "The Internet's Most Hated Man" is sticking. He's gotta love that. (Previous title holder owned a revenge porn site, google it yourself and see!)
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @2:47 pm The mental gymnastics required for Carreon to rationalize and justify his own actions are mind boggling. It's scary to think about what sort of delusions must be rattling around in his head, especially with such a fragile ego.
Scott Jacobs • Jun 21, 2012 @2:50 pm <blockquoteI would've guessed autocorrect. ( that's always my wife's excuse :p)I dunno what she's telling you, but "You worthless fucker I want a divorce" isn't actually in the autocorrect system…
Jack • Jun 21, 2012 @3:01 pm @Scott, I'm pretty sure she has that one saved as a custom auto-complete.
Margaret • Jun 21, 2012 @3:01 pm Free speech for me, but not for thee!
"It's totally different!"
Scott Jacobs • Jun 21, 2012 @3:02 pm Replacing "I'll be home soon honey" I am certain…
Dan Weber • Jun 21, 2012 @3:27 pm It's a bitch to police the Internet for your stolen content. A game of infinite whack-a-mole. But FunnyJunk (until very recently) seems to have made even that game useless.
Devin • Jun 21, 2012 @3:37 pm Do we have any idea yet who actually owns funnyjunk?
What are the chances it's owned by someone in the Carreon family?
Matthew Cline • Jun 21, 2012 @3:40 pm If Carreon is the FunnyJunk owner then he isn't violating confidentiality, though he is being deceptive by referring to his "client".
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @3:52 pm I'm 99% sure that Carreon is NOT the FunnyJunk admin. He's been married to Tara this whole time, and though FunnyJunk's tech design is a horror show it's STILL better than American Buddha and Charles' websites. If he had access to even FunnyJunk level Internetz he'd have used them, and his sites would be at least as "good" as FunnyJunk. There's other reasons I'm pretty sure of this, but they involve too much speculation.
HeatherCat • Jun 21, 2012 @4:02 pm I can't believe he's the FJ admin either – if he WERE, then this would've happened much sooner. As fast as he trips himself responding to other things, one would tend to think he'd have at least taken to ranting online about the Oatmeal a year ago.
Gal • Jun 21, 2012 @4:03 pm I was all aboard the lol train, but upon reading the ars technica article I've just been overwhelmed by what a terrible, terrible human being Charles Treyf really is.
The level of hypocrisy, vanity, avarice, and smug superiority is staggering. He actually claims that his purpose in all this litigious nonsense is to protect well-meaning people from unscrupulous or simply misinformed characters who would misuse their funds, rather than just wasting the justice system's time to serve his bloated ego.
He is a vile, evil little man and I hope this endeavor proves to be so financially ruinous to him and his family he is forced to make ends meat by serving as Kathleen Parker's gimp.
Kevin • Jun 21, 2012 @4:16 pm Quick, Mr. Carreon, add Electronic Frontier Foundation to the lawsuit!
Ara Ararauna • Jun 21, 2012 @4:53 pm “This lawsuit is a blatant attempt to abuse the legal process to punish a critic,” said EFF Intellectual Property Director Corynne McSherry. “We're very glad to help Mr. Inman fight back.”
OMG, I think I've shed a tear after reading that answer. Bravo. I wish them the best of lucks in their quest to put that "delusions of grandeur" man on the place he belongs: back to mining stone in Siberia for a decade.
Ara Ararauna • Jun 21, 2012 @5:04 pm Ironically, the threat of the first lawsuit never materialized. Carreon admits he was misinformed: Before demanding the $20,000, which was based on FunnyJunk's "estimate of advertising losses sustained due to the taint of being accused of engaging in willful copyright infringement,"
OK, that made me to LOL so hard. So, by Bryan's point (FJ's admin), he lost plenty of money for his host of FJ because he lost all the income revenue that hosting and monetizing all the works of Mr. Inman represented. Sorry if it sounds confusing, but more or less it means that Mr. Inman's works mirrored in FJ represented a huge chunk of the revenue Bryan received by monetizing them.
So, who is in blame here?
Elliot • Jun 21, 2012 @5:07 pm Gal,
Nice use of the original meaning of "Treyf," as distinguished from the general usage of it to mean "unkosher."
Chris R. • Jun 21, 2012 @5:28 pm @Ara,
I think he intended it to mean that The Oatmeal's calling FunnyJunk out as the second search result for Funny Junk is what lead to the loss of money, not the loss of content. However I am open to Charles Carreon's logic process being flawed.
Gal • Jun 21, 2012 @5:29 pm Thanks, Elliot.
I was sorta going for both. I… like puns.
Chris R. • Jun 21, 2012 @5:36 pm Oh hell. If you search Charles Carreon on google the link below his website is popehat.com the following one is charles-carreon.com. Shit is getting real.
Jess • Jun 21, 2012 @5:37 pm Gal, even better use of the word "meat" as in "forced to make ends meat by serving as Kathleen Parker's gimp."
Bwah ha ha.
Tomas - University Place, WA • Jun 21, 2012 @5:50 pm I would expect that any site depending on user uploaded content should have as the very first rule that ANY content must be either the uploader's own original IP, or that the uploader has permission of the copyright holder(s) to publicly distribute the content.
Considering that in the United States (and per the Berne convention) IP is automatically copyrighted simply by existing, there really is very little gap (fair use, parody, etc.) in which an "aggregator site" can operate without problems.
(Of course, an aggregator site purposely blocking search for specific IP ownership clues should speak volumes about the ethics of their "business model.")
Then, of course, there is this particular vexatious twatwaffle and his bat-shit crazy wife for which there is no rational explanation or justification.
Perhaps it is something in their water…
joe • Jun 21, 2012 @5:56 pm Some interesting web stats. The Oatmeal by far is the more popular site but both the Oatmeal AND FunnyJunk saw a spike in web traffic over this kerfuffle. FunnyJunks traffic died down sortly after the initial publicity likely because 12 year old prepubecent teenagers have the attention span of a lightening bug, but The Oatmeals traffic continues to trend upwards as does Popehat. Especially given Carreons continued massive hole digging excavation.
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/4176/slide2ln.jpg
Ara Ararauna • Jun 21, 2012 @6:18 pm @Chris R. just hope Mr. Carreon doesn't sue this site for reiterative use of his trademarked name and for "…inciting people to think that Charles Carreon was always wrong, when in fact his almighty self is always right!".
Without The Oatmeal I would have never found this awesome site, I even made my gravatar just to lurk a little more openly and educate myself about the US's laws and lawyer dramas, if it can be called like that (I'm not sure, English is not my mother tongue). My drop my two-cents about certain subjects I know from witnessing certain dramas myself.
On the other hand (about things that must be spoken aloud, and to inform people that the owner of FJ has already a name and an address, Bryan Durel, who is not a relative to Carreon – they don't even belong to the same race at all), Bryan has an ego as big as planet Jupiter, and the gravity created by the mass of that ego fits perfectly when you ask why he was not able to find any of Inman's works on his own database, even at the point of crippling his own search-engine on his website, and filtering words like Oatmeal and Inman and changing them by "that fag" (in fact, if you also type "Richard Simons" it will be turned to "fag") to render any user unable to find Inman's works. Bryan is also diagnosed with HPD and it made it more obvious when he conscripted Mr. Carreon as lawyer without (apparently) telling his lawyer about all the "dubious deeds" this Bryan have made to more than a thousand of users and non-users of his website. I don't plan to defend Carreon just because Bryan framed him by hidding from him "sensible information" about his own daily activities on his website, but merely stating that they are birds of a feather (because Carreon also indulged himself in hidding, deleting and fabricating evidences based on the numerous contradictions that other people pointed out in different sites, like this one). In other words, Bryan is not a person that deserves to have a lawyer, even if the cops says that you have the right to one; well OK, he can have one, I respect the rights of everyone, but this guy doesn't deserve it… at all *sniffle*
Still outraged, I went on a saving spree, saving plenty of screenshots and saved barely almost all of Carreon's site for the sake of evidences in case he plans to take down his sorry site, including the one about his failed attempt at creating a religion around himself http://www.oestia.com/ <<< reposting because it is great example of how bipolar Mr. Carreon and wife can be if you leave them alone with a keyboard and too much hours reading L. Ron Hubbard's essays.
Chris R. • Jun 21, 2012 @6:51 pm @Ara Ararauna, How dare you link me to that website. My eyes bleed.
Joe • Jun 21, 2012 @7:04 pm Chris R. – I have a project that I'd like to collaborate with you on. You can ask Ken for my email or reach out to me via my "lime popsicle" email address.
yundah • Jun 21, 2012 @7:08 pm My new favorite name for Carreon comes from CensoriousDouchebag http://charles-carreon.com/2012/06/21/f-the-eff/ "he who shall not be satirized"
Look at that • Jun 21, 2012 @8:00 pm Lowering the Bar has a new post on topic:
http://www.loweringthebar.net/2012/06/c ... ereof.html
AlphaCentauri • Jun 21, 2012 @8:07 pm With all the people downloading Carron's sites to keep a record, are they putting themselves at in a bad legal position by now having copies on their own hard drives of the pirated music that is hosted on AB?
Look at that • Jun 21, 2012 @8:15 pm I've a question, raised either here or elsewhere that's got me curious (I'm a total non-lawyer, but in one of my past lives, this question would be reasonable):
This lawsuit seems to be way out there. What if it were way out there on purpose? (as in crazy-like-a-fox?) What could be a positive outcome for he-who-shall-not-be-satirized?
Joe • Jun 21, 2012 @8:22 pm Not to be outdone, FunnyJunk’s users have now made “The Carreon Effect” Meme (see link below) the #1 Google link for that phrase.
http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures ... on+Effect/
So now the client (albeit via their users) is poking fun at their own lawyer. And boyo do their users have something to say about Carreon.
#2 to #1 – Newantdroid ONLINE (16 minutes ago) [-]
I don't think you understand, you retard.
This lawyer isn't suing The Oatmeal on the behalf of FunnyJunk.
Most of us disagree with his actions and donated spares to the charity.
The most he did was bring twats like you around who think we all have Admin's back.
Rob T. • Jun 21, 2012 @8:28 pm What seems pathetically obvious is that this is entirely a case of someone who has always wished they were funny taking an opportunity to hound someone who actually is.
I'm reminded of Lt. Hauk from "Good Morning, Vietnam."
Chris R. • Jun 21, 2012 @8:31 pm Joe, you have mail.
Alpha, probably not unless you then mirror the site.
Spectrum • Jun 21, 2012 @8:45 pm I keep misreading FunnyJunk as FunkyJunk. Kind of funny considering this general balls-up.
T. J. Brumfield • Jun 21, 2012 @8:46 pm Ann, I'm already married (minor technicality) and you may be as well for all I can tell, but can we find a state where I can marry you?
mhm5 • Jun 21, 2012 @8:53 pm Couldn't help but notice that the Lowering the Bar article missed the bit about him donating to the campaign to create standing. Is that an ethics violation?
Scott Jacobs • Jun 21, 2012 @8:56 pm @ T.J. Brumfield – If TLC is accurate, your best best would be Nevada…
Myk • Jun 21, 2012 @9:00 pm tl;dr. Precis – Carreon's original complaint was about FunnyJunk's taint.
Jonathan • Jun 21, 2012 @9:13 pm Some of the things he claims in the ARS technica interview… I'm not sure he realises what he has gotten himself into. I for one am getting sick of his blatant hypocrisy. He is one of those people who feels they can bully anyone into doing what they want but as soon as someone snaps back they can't take it. I sympathize with you lawyers at the moment, as a dental student I abhor when a terrible dentist makes a fool of the lot of us.
Matt Scott • Jun 21, 2012 @9:18 pm Latest comment from Tara claims that Inman is the one posting his pictures on sites like Funnyjunk…
Meanwhile, Mr. Matt Inman posts his pictures everywhere on the Internet, magically making "THIEVES" everywhere he goes, according to his own sick morality, poor judgment and humongous power trip. He and his mob followers don't care about reason.
Adam Steinbaugh • Jun 21, 2012 @9:33 pm Mrs. Carreon also theorized:
There's something very bad going on here, and I don't know why I can't get a simple yes or no from ANYONE about whether Matt Robert Inman is related to Bobby Ray Inman. Apparently, every journalist in the world doesn't seem to think that knowing WHO Matt Inman is is important. He's a man without parents, brothers and sisters, or childhood friends. Sure, there's lots of famous people like that in the world!
She's stumbled onto the Great Plan. You guys remember The Plan, right? Take one of the Illuminati-Penguin-Mafia's most powerful members, a guy once nominated for Secretary of Defense and who now heads Blackwater Xe, put one of his distant relatives (with his personal history now erased! ::cackle, stroke black cat::) in charge of a cartoon website, and wait quietly for years for Mrs. Carreon's husband to send Matt Inman a demand letter about a lesser-known website called FunnyJunk. Then we use that to try to reset a blog password! The cover is perfect!
Drat! Who knew the Great Plan would fail because we forgot to give Matt a different last name?
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @9:36 pm @Matt Scott
"These Yellow Journalists want to give the Internet to Loki."
She's found us out!! PRAISE HIM! PRAISE HIM!
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2 ... e/Loki.png
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @9:44 pm @Adam
Who told!? It must have been someone from IlluminatusCorp, because the people down in the FBI haven't leaked anything about "Project AppleButter" since she found out that everyone is related to high level Halliburton operatives, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't the Russians. Regardless, we're HOSED.
OK guys, I'm super serious now. Nobody talk about the secret plan. Now I know we all know we're CIA, and also simultaneously being paid by the Oatmeal, also- but Tara Carreon is getting wise. Tell the cloned Elvises, Psychic Bigfoot, and Cyber Condi to stand down!
We've been found out, people. We're in a level 31 "Code Blue" hold until further notice.
Adam Steinbaugh • Jun 21, 2012 @9:47 pm Quick, somebody put all these spill-the-beans comments in invisible text so that we don't get picked up on the Google!
Valerie • Jun 21, 2012 @10:19 pm "He (Inman) is a man without a past like Barak Obama." -Tara Carreon
So she's a 9/11 truther AND a birther. Anyone want to bet against her believing the moon landing was faked and that TuPac is living with Biggie on an island somewhere?
@W ross
Valerie • Jun 21, 2012 @10:22 pm Whoops. I meant to tell w. Ross that I heard his code 31 and must relay that the lion dances with the bear in the moonlight. Repeat: the lion dances with the bear. That is all.
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @10:24 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTeGoxBG4Mo
He also doesn't seem to like latino's.
"I'll show you what this burrito's for." – Charles Carreon, White Hat Internet Warrior
W Ross • Jun 21, 2012 @10:28 pm https://www.youtube.com/user/chascarreon
Here's Charles Carreon sockpuppeting his own Hater TV Videos. Yes, that's right, Charles Carreon, man who speaks out against the sock puppets of the world, is not against a little sock puppeting of his own when people disagree.
And you thought we'd never find out, you saucy little minx. We're the internet, we find out everything. (Scroll down to the Mark Levin thing, where he comments on his other "lofinikita" account.)
Valerie • Jun 21, 2012 @10:37 pm @W. Ross I'm pretty sure that that video is meant to be mocking the minuteman militia and the government for deamonizing Latinos. I point this out because I wouldn't want the litigious bastard to sue you for libel. I'm thinking of the verse after the one you quoted + the comment that he wrote that says"all your nativist warriors are mine."
Chris R. • Jun 21, 2012 @11:40 pm I am not sure if I see even a reason why she is so fixated on Bobby Ray Inman. I mean unless he's the guy who controls the demon satellites that cause people in cities to lose their nature given intelligence.
Scott Jacobs • Jun 22, 2012 @12:24 am Latest comment from Tara claims that Inman is the one posting his pictures on sites like Funnyjunk…
Well that's a delightfully easy-to-disprove comment.
Seriously, has one of these morons said something they can be sued for yet?
Ann • Jun 22, 2012 @12:25 am @T.J. – only if our union can be officiated by Hon. Edward M. Chen.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/califo ... 12/256114/
W Ross • Jun 22, 2012 @12:58 am More Tara Carreon. Now she wants us to come to our senses, we're the victims of peer pressure.
So far we've been:
The victims of peer pressure
The Oatmeal (and a VERY fast typer)
The CIA
People Paid by The Oatmeal
Juggalos
Yellow Journalists
Also, apparently the Buddhists ALSO -got trolled by Tara Carreon- targeted their family for unfair, Walt Disney-like destruction. Will we ever run out of new people she's started an Interfued with?
http://www.naderlibrary.com/bulletin_bo ... c753464bf9
W Ross • Jun 22, 2012 @1:00 am DAMN YOU FAILED STRIKEOUT! (Shakes fist.)
W Ross • Jun 22, 2012 @1:06 am http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&s ... 8j7j1.26.0…0.0.Igp8_GjJRoY&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=a8708267f6810afa&biw=1368&bih=678
He's also secured the first spot when you search for "the internet's most hated man."
Gal • Jun 22, 2012 @1:24 am "We were targeted by the entire Buddhist community when I told them to go fuck themselves"
Bwaaahahahaha.
W Ross • Jun 22, 2012 @1:27 am You know what's really ironic? Charles Carreon talks about his super secret email addresses, but if you look for it his wife posts his Gmail address completely underacted.
Dredd • Jun 22, 2012 @1:39 am Actually when it comes to the copyright infringement, I would have been on FunnyJunk's side UNTIL they decided to sue for libel. Though I'd have them to be harsher on people who censor the source of their uploads.
Tom Trudeau • Jun 22, 2012 @2:25 am It's great to read this lively comment fest. Here's a handy overview of the five fates facing King Carreon…
Far in the future, when the kerfuffle has calmed and the dust has settled, there will be a panel of appellate judges that hands down the final ruling. King Carreon’s plaintive wail will face one of 5 responses. Bookies are taking bets and laying odds. Will it be 1) Abuse of Process, 2) Malicious Prosecution, 3) Frivolous Litigation, 4) Vexatious Litigation, or 5) Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. For the bonus round, place an additional bet on Disbarment. To help you plan your bet, we offer this crib sheet explaining the differences between the 5 twatwaffle types of asshat litigation. Don’t thank us. Thank Wikipedia.
http://dont-care-eon.tumblr.com/post/25 ... has-calmed
HM • Jun 22, 2012 @2:48 am I hope Oats will sue funnyjunk for both defamation and Copyright infringement. I think 20000 dollars+ legal fees (this lawyer deserves at least a giant meal at a super fancy restaurant and some to go hang out with Oats in Hawaii).
Maybe gather all the people funnyjunk stole content from(funnyjunk probably posts on his site himself) and clear that place up. They can also argue for Mr. junks' bullying by posting claims that artists are trying to shut him down and sending his ad viewers against them.
Nibor • Jun 22, 2012 @2:50 am Finally the Oatmeal has posted a new comic, the first since this all began and tweeted about another generous fundraiser for a good cause.
I wonder if the comic has something to do with the whole situation, or better said does he-who-must-not-be-named-due-to-copyright-issues can come up with any kind of connection to his situation.
I only found it a very very funny comic about a dog that does exactly that what the dog of my parents used to do, but my autistic mind messes satire, sarcasm and plain humour up, so I often do not get it at all.
And this redirecting attention to an (even more saddening) case, with a spontaneous fundraiser as a reaction. And this one even gets more successful than the bearlove campaign, it set out for $5,000, to send the bullied elderly woman on a well-earned vacation, and had already exceeded $250,000 yesterday
(I can’t post the correct amount at the moment, for IndieGoGo is updating their system as they say on their website)
Does anybody know if this is Mat Inman just being him useal good natured selfish self, trying to get on with “normal” live, or is he trying to get THE INTERNET’s attention redirected, in such a way that he uses the very very limited attention span of the average internet user, when they start reading this new thing, they completely forget the previous one, being something with love and a furry animal wasn’t it???
I don’t want to suggest that what he is doing is wrong, I even find it a stroke of genius or a stroke of kind heartiness and even admire him on/over? It. I could try to look into the things he has done until now, to know which of the two it is likely to be, but I just haven’t got a basement with oempaloempas like Ken has at my disposal, so I have to sleep, eat, drink and go to the toilet next to keeping up with this stuff and do so myself, which leaves me practically no time to research Mat’s past as well.
By the way, thanks you all for filling my day with all your writings and opinions, yes this is a genuine thanks, I don’t do satire, sarcasm or plain humour that well as I mentioned earlier.
(I try and will keep trying to, but will often fail miserably and I’m fine with that. )
Now I’m going to try to include the links to the two thing I mentioned, maybe I get it right this time.