Bigfoot Expert Claims "Fair Use" for Video Posting, Woolheater/MM et all Options

[GuyInIndiana]

http://www.onpointnews.com/070219.asp

In an unusual preemptive suit, a Texas man claims the “fair use” exception to copyright liability applies to his Internet publication of a videotape that supposedly shows a Bigfoot snacking on pancakes.

Craig Woolheater, co-founder of the Texas Bigfoot Research Center, filed the suit last week, alleging that another Bigfoot researcher, Matt Moneymaker, has accused him of infringing the copyright to the video and threatened him with financial ruin for posting the tape on the Cryptomundo.com Web site “as part of a discussion on video evidence of Bigfoot.”

Moneymaker shot the murky nighttime footage in July 2005 while investigating the supposed sighting of one of the mythical, ape-like creatures in Kentucky. What he has described as a “real deal” Bigfoot helps itself to syrup-smothered pancakes left as bait in the backyard of a home.

The video originally appeared on a Web site operated by Moneymaker's Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO). “Plaintiff's publication of the Video is protected ... as a fair use of copyrighted works for educational, research, and newsworthy purposes,” the complaint for declaratory relief states.

UPDATE ... A Canadian developer and Bigfoot investigator has sued Woolheater and Cryptomundo for injunctive relief and damages in Texas, claiming they pirated the video. Adrian Erickson paid Moneymaker $20,000 for the rights, the complaint says.

The “purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes” is part of the statutory test for fair use. The video posted by Woolheater on Cryptomundo is accessible free of charge.

Another element of the fair use test -- the “nature of the copyrighted work” -- also appears to favor Woolheater. The video, shot with a motion-sensing camera from a fixed location, is a “factual work,” which qualifies for less protection than an “artistic representation” of ideas, emotions, or feelings.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a TV station's unlicensed broadcast of news video was not a fair use, in part because of its damaging effect on “the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.” Los Angeles News Service v. KCAL-TV, 108 F.3d 1119 (1997)

But according to Woolheater's suit, Moneymaker may have himself facilitated the unlicensed use of his work. After the BFRO site experienced download failure due to high demand for the video, the suit says, he “advised members of the BFRO community to 'feel free to send it to others in the group'” -- and one of those members allegedly gave a copy to Woolheater in September 2005.

In another fair use case, the 1st Circuit found the potential market for a model's portfolio photos “small or nonexistent.” Núñez v. Caribbean International News, 235 F.3d 18 (2000)

The same could be true of the market for the Moneymaker tape, particularly if, as several Cryptomundo readers conclude, the Bigfoot sighting is nothing more than a hoax perpetrated by someone dressed up in an animal costume.

[Ty]

Adrian Erickson paid Moneymaker $20,000 for the rights.

......He probably coulda' made his own for 50 bucks and a six pack.

[Blackdog]

What a bunch of bullshit for a bullshit video.

No wonder no one takes this subject seriously.

[Drew]

In Another story:

Rudy "The Goblin-Smasher"Smith, owner a 17th Level Half-Orc Fighter named Orogg, has filed suit against Rodriguo "You're just gonna open the door?" Martinez an experienced Dungeon Master, for the unlawful death of his beloved Character.

The incident happened at approximately 3:30AM after each had eaten "At least one bag", according to one witness, of Nutter-Butter cookies, and "Damn near" 4 liters of Sam's Cola. Rudy claims in his state he was "In no condition to enter into a contract, and therefore the results of the ensuing battle should be null and void" An injunction has been issued pending the outcome of the case.

An attorney for Rodriguo, offered the following on the case: "Any time you have high level characters trekking over the Spine of The Earth Mountains, or venturing far into the Underdark, you are bound to have casualties, The contract was made when they decided to play, not after the Nutter-Butters were consumed."

According to Martinez; "Rudy bitches everytime his character dies, Just last year he cried mightily when I rolled a 'natural 20', and my ancient cave bear decapitated his 12th level elven wizard, but I never thought he'd sue me. It's all about the roll of the dice man"

It just doesn't seem real ya know?

This post has been edited by Drew: Apr 10 2007, 07:24 AM

[Bukwas]

The reason behind the lawsuit is beyond ludicrous but dillweed Moneymaker has a bad history of threatening people, hope the court rules in Woolheater's favor just to piss MM off.

[Jim Flowers]

.

[Timberghost]

All this over a hoax and a bad one at best. I hope Craig counter sues and wins. It would be funny if the Judge rules he has to continue the pay to play camping trips and all proceeds go to Craig.

[Ty]

.

!!

[Bukwas]

.

!!

?

[rockinkt]

.

!!

?

The God Damn Llama ate Jim's post!!!

This post has been edited by rockinkt: Apr 11 2007, 11:36 AM

[Jim Flowers]

The God Damn Llama ate Jim's post!!!

Nah! No Llama, just the smallest thing I could find on the keyboard to represent exactly what my opinion of the situation is.

Will it effect research ? No.

Will it cause someone to find a bigfoot ? No.

Will it make for better investigations ? No.

Does it represent anything that has anything to do with anyone outside of the TBRC or BFRO? No.

Does it look like nothing more than free publicity of a sorts on both sides of the issue by generating a talking point that will be picked up by small town newspapers and maybe the UPI or AP ? Yes.

And that's exactly what I think it is. Nothing less , nothing more than free publicity.

[rockinkt]

The God Damn Llama ate Jim's post!!!

Nah! No Llama, just the smallest thing I could find on the keyboard to represent exactly what my opinion of the situation is.

Will it effect research ? No.

Will it cause someone to find a bigfoot ? No.

Will it make for better investigations ? No.

Does it represent anything that has anything to do with anyone outside of the TBRC or BFRO? No.

Does it look like nothing more than free publicity of a sorts on both sides of the issue by generating a talking point that will be picked up by small town newspapers and maybe the UPI or AP ? Yes.

And that's exactly what I think it is. Nothing less , nothing more than free publicity.

Aw - come on Jim - most people forgave a certain person for selling out her integrity and making a joke of this phenomenon on a TV series because she was personable and pretty.
Don't you think MM is pretty enough???

[rockinkt]

Just noticed my "smiley" didn't register for the post above.
One should never try humour on Friday the 13th...

[Drew]

Jim got some free publicity too!!

http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/lawsuit2/

Case in point. The following was posted on the Bigfoot Discussions message forum by Jim Flowers.

Does it represent anything that has anything to do with anyone outside of the TBRC or BFRO? No.

Does it look like nothing more than free publicity of a sorts on both sides of the issue by generating a talking point that will be picked up by small town newspapers and maybe the UPI or AP ? Yes.

And that’s exactly what I think it is. Nothing less, nothing more than free publicity.
Jim Flowers

I can assure Jim, and everyone else, that this was far from free publicity. I can assure you that hiring an intellectual property attorney is not free.

[Blackdog]

Craig prefaced Jim's quote with this:

Some of this speculation has bordered on the ridiculous.

I wonder which side of the border he was referring to. At least he was kind enough to provide a link to our little forum of ridiculous thought.

Last I checked we aren't exactly on the top of the food chain as far as Bigfoot forums go and I doubt many people even read Jim's original post. I wonder why Craig thought it was so important to single it out? I've seen more ridiculous posts elsewhere... I guess all that matters is who is buttering your bread.


BTW....Jim sold me the exclusive rights to his post, I wonder what my options are.....

[rockinkt]

Jim got some free publicity too!!

http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/lawsuit2/

Case in point. The following was posted on the Bigfoot Discussions message forum by Jim Flowers.

Does it represent anything that has anything to do with anyone outside of the TBRC or BFRO? No.

Does it look like nothing more than free publicity of a sorts on both sides of the issue by generating a talking point that will be picked up by small town newspapers and maybe the UPI or AP ? Yes.

And that's exactly what I think it is. Nothing less, nothing more than free publicity.
Jim Flowers

I can assure Jim, and everyone else, that this was far from free publicity. I can assure you that hiring an intellectual property attorney is not free.

"If you would like to contribute to the legal defense fund that exposed Moneymaker and his threats, feel free to click the BIG Support Cryptomundo with Paypal button to the right.

All proceeds will be used to protect your freedom to examine and learn from the results of Cryptomundo's research and critical review of the evidence for the cryptozoological world.



Clarification

All suits have been settled or dismissed. The mention of legal defense fund assistance is for the fees that have already accrued."
quoted from a/n Cryptomundo link this date.



I do not know what Woolheater's motives are - but Jim's comment is "fair" comment.

From Woolheater's own lawsuit: "Plaintiff has achieved a high degree of notoriety and acclaim..." (my highlighting)

Since Woolheater's action contributed jack-shit in the way of a legal decision because he decided to drop it for whatever reason - he doesn't have the right to ask for money for anything.

If he that he had a good case or really thought that it was important - he would be continuing his suit.

Sounds to me like Woolheater is just looking for more "notoriety and acclaim"

This post has been edited by rockinkt: Apr 20 2007, 05:52 PM

[Jim Flowers]

From the same article:

But the story doesn’t end there. Until now, I have remained tight-lipped regarding the lawsuits. The article from OnPoint Legal News has been reposted on various and sundry Bigfoot message forums, blogs and elsewhere on the internet.

Maybe not UPI or AP exactly, but there you go.

So since it seems what I said is true in a way, I wonder how that translates into the ridiculous? Did he pay those various and sundry forums or Onpoint for their writings and musings? If not, I guess that makes the publicity free.

Since you're apparently reading here Craig , maybe you could take the time to explain what exactly the ridiculous part was ?

By my way of thinking it's the lawsuit and then instead of simply defending the suit as needed , counter-suing instead that's by far more ridiculous than anything I've said, not meant in jest.

Since I was quoted regarding it also maybe you could explain how exactly it affects anyone outside the TBRC or BFRO?

[Gerry J. Matthew...]

WOOOOHAHAHA!!!!

In the background I am dubbing a video by Rick Noll showing how to make a plaster cast..and then I am reading this thread...

What ever happened to sasquatch research...not who has the bigger piss on you machine.
It is all turning into such a joke..and leaving a bad tast in one's mouth!
Let this one go Craig! Don't sink to the Changling's level! If that is indeed what is happening?
Personally, I don't care. The politics of all of this is now lost upon me!

All I know is that..Craig ..yer welcome to my place anytime..long over due!
Cannot say the same about Moneymaker...

Back to the 7 year old video!
Damn! But Rick has great hair!


Hell..P.L. Pinkham has great hair compared to me!

[Stacy Flowers]

I guess all that matters is who is buttering your bread.

For the most part, and with a few notable exceptions, that sums up this field nicely.

[Blackdog]

Since I was quoted regarding it also maybe you could explain how exactly it affects anyone outside the TBRC or BFRO?

I'd like to know that too.

How does this help explain things?
Does this help explain whether bigfoot exists or not?


I see this said a lot......"follow the money".

What used to be a scientific endeavor, or a hobby, or a serious point of interest for intelligent individuals has devolved into a point of posture and profit.
Profit or non profit, no matter how you spell it it's all about attention and who gets to be the biggest dog on the porch.

Bottom line... No one has anything yet... debate all you want to, and sue whoever you want to, but no one has anything yet. This whole Bigfoot internet thing is more about attention than anything else.

When I started exploring the internet for bigfoot I thought I could find intelligent discussion about what was going on... I found it, I lost it, and I found it again here. And the fact that we don't have that much to discuss as far as actual evidence should say something... there just isn't much of anything yet.

But as the subject has become more popular it is getting weirder and weirder by the day and the pandering for the sake of pandering is more prevalent. Those of you who don't get it... Too bad, you're probably part of the problem as I see it.

I was naive and I was wrong to think that this was different than any other paranormal subject.... "follow the money".

If lawsuits and making a name for yourself is what bigfooting is all about, I don't want any more to do with it.
If finding the truth, pro or con, is what it's all about, then I am there... Not like it matters to anyone else, and it shouldn't...and if you don't understand that than maybe you are who I am talking about.