:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

boo eh nanat koss me deh :1orglaugh

It solves alot.

Evan gets xxxcash to tear down the images then Evan can get the images and capitalise...

Duh...

The date at the end is the date our check to you cleared -

You have 30 Minutes to apologize and retract krosh!

2005/02 11860 $3.48 #21321--3/18/05

2005/01/08-2005/01/21 11860 $60.00 #21142--02/25/05

2004/12/25-2005/01/07 11860 $60.00 #20972--02/11/05

2004/12/11-2004/12/24 11860 $120.00 #20890--01/31/05

2004/11/27-2004/12/10 11860 $60.00 #20731--01/14/05

$120.00 05/01/2004-05/14/2004 19241--06/21/04

$86.35 05/15/2004-05/28/2004 19353--07/06/054

$60.00 05/29/2004-06/11/2004 19403 --07/16/04

$30.00 08/21/2004-09/03/2004 19881 --12/13/04

$30.00 09/04/2004-09/17/2004 20041 --10/22/04

$30.00 10/02/2004-10/15/2004 20161 --11/22/04

$33.40 10/16/2004-10/29/2004 20342 --12/01/04

$30.00 10/30/2004-11/12/2004 20419 --12/20/04

$60.00 11/13/2004-11/26/2004 20592--12/31/04

OWNED AGAIN Krosh! Start looking for a new job!

LOL that about sums it up! :thumbsup

so add shoddy accounting to the xxxcash portfolio

we have no interest in using tmobile pics

by we, do you mean you and paris?

btw your conversions were like 1:30

So then whats the big deal if they want to use them?

Why wouldnt you want them photos Evan:)?

I would take em after I tore up someone to get em!
Shizzz!

I thought that was part of the plan LOL!

All XXCASH goto do is say they got the rights...

So far Nada.

Someone has the rights or will have the rights.
Eventually.

As much as I do not even like the whole Paris thing it is about money.

nope- we have the rights to the legal content and xxxcash is using unfair competition to interfere with our business as it is.

Actually, Evan doesn't want those images, he just wants to be the only legal place on the web to view Paris. The point Evan is making is, it puts people at risk when they don't have the rights to those pics, it also helps Evan as being the only place to send adult traffic to view pics and videos of Paris doin' the nasty stuff. If someone else is has a way to convert traffic, it takes away from people who could be sending that traffic his way, the legal way.

Other legal ways would be to sell the DVD over the internet, but they couldn't view it online. So Evan has a good argument.

But if XXXCash some how got the rights to those pics, then they are in the right and Evan is wrong, but if they don't have the rights, shouldn't those images be taken down immediately before putting everyone at risk? And shouldn't people be thanking XPays and Evan for pointing this out?

So what is the answer everyone is waiting for, does XXXCash have the rights to the pics from the cell phone? Seeing that they haven't answered that once, it appears they don't. Evan provided the letter from TMobile where they say no one has the rights, so far it appears XXXCash does not have the right to use those pics. So what's the answer?

Personally, I really like everyone over at XXXCash and I like XPays, I hate when friends of mine get into piss matches. I'd really love for XXXCash to address that simple yes or no question so we can all put this drama to rest. Do they own the rights to the pics of Paris they use in their site?

Here's the link to their site you can see the pics are still up.
http://femalecelebrities.com/

It's a very valid point Evan is making and he doesn't deserve to be called names over this issue. There is a yes or no question that could end the argument, so what is it?

Well if I were Evan I would want em just to consolidate the collection and maximise sales;)
PS: I would be shameless in pursueing there acquisition.

You really should clarify this false and potentially damaging post bro. You do not need to apologize on a personal level - just business-wise you published a false statement. fyi :thumbsup

am i making anything up here krosh? otherwise, your clock is ticking :winkwink:

i read the whole thread and im very curious to the answer of this question too

congrats on 15,000

100 dramas...

congrats again on 15000

You bastard...

Not that I feel the need to answer to anyone, but since you question the validity of XXXcash sites, here's a statement from our attorney.



1. Does XXXCASH?s use of celebrity images violate California Civil Code Section 3344?

Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(a) sets forth the statutory right of publicity to a person?s ?name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness? and imposes liability where the use is knowing, for the purpose of ?advertising or selling? and is ?without the person?s prior consent?. Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(d) exempts any use ?in connection with any news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account, or any political campaign?. We have previously written to you and explained that the First Amendment provides for a similar exemption for uses in connection with matters of public interest.

We believe that your activities, as you describe them, involve both ?news? and ?public affairs? so that the statute is not violated.

The meaning of the term ?public affairs? was considered in Dora v. Frontline Video, Inc., 15 Cal. App. 4 536, 545-46, with the Court holding that ?public affairs? means ?something less important than news?. The Court stated that ?[p]ublic affairs? relates to ?real life occurrences? about which the public is interested. The public is ?constitutionally entitled to know about things, people, and events that affect it?. The Court concluded that the term ?public affairs? could not be limited to ?topics that might be covered on public television or public radio,? as to do so, ?would be to jeopardize society?s right to know.

We also believe that your use of celebrity photos constitutes a depiction of ?news? as that term is used in this statute. We have previously written you in detail about how showing celebrity photos as part of a news presentation can be newsworthy, and you have informed us that your site is newsworthy.

Indeed, the amount of effort you extend in making your site newsworthy is impressive. You have informed us that you employ a Celebrity Content Manager and staff who has been directed to provide your members with a ?One Stop Shop? treasure trove of newsworthy information about their favorite celebrities.

The enhancement of content on your celebrity web sites includes, but is not limited to, the following information and features:

? Celebrity Biography
? Celebrity Filmography
? Celebrity Trivia
? Celebrity Birthday and Horoscope
? Celebrity Gossip
? Celebrity Mug shots
? Celebrity Autographs
? Celebrity Addresses
? Celebrity Classifications
? Celebrity Interviews
? Movie Reviews
? Links to personal, official celebrity web sites.


Your sites provide a pictorial history as well as biographical information of the celebrity as related to the impact of nudity on their career. You have told us that your celebrity photo database provides enhancements that are related information as to the origin and informational description of the photos.
You also indicate that you have partnered with various entertainment and news agencies that provide an enviable database of news stories, covering every aspect of the music, movie and showbiz industries.

We note that you have developed and implemented special feature sections highlighting historic entertainment events; i.e. 40 years and 22 movies of the James Bond series and 37 years and 18 Star Trek TV and movie series, including a special section of "Daytime Soaps" featuring 24 of the top daytime soap opera series of all time, including the entire cast listing for each from the beginning to now.

You indicate that you are currently developing the following:
? Special feature section of 36 popular adult TV programs; highlighting plots, casts and related features including biographies, filmographies, etc.
? A "Survivor" feature with all 5 Survivor series contestants including photos and personal background information.


You apparently have implemented various methods of extensive research to obtain as much background information from public media sources to enhance your celebrity content area and your special feature sections highlighting momentous entertainment events.

We understand that it is your goal to enhance and promote all of the entertainment features available and link related web sites to create a wide range of newsworthy information and services


Thus, when considering the nature and content of the XXXCASH website, it appears that the use falls within both the news account and public affairs exemptions of Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(d).


2. Does XXXCASH?s use of celebrity images violate the common law of California as it relates to Right of Publicity?


Under California?s common law, a claim for infringement upon the right of publicity requires a showing of the following elements:

i) Use of the plaintiff?s identity;
ii) Appropriation of plaintiff?s name or like to defendant?s advantage; iii. Lack of consent; and
iii) Resulting injury.

Eastwood v. Superior Court, 149 Cal. App. 3d 409, 417 (1983); BAJI No. 7.23 (8? ed. 1994).

The news account exemption codified in Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(d) is a defense not only to the statutory cause of action of 3344, but also to the common law cause of action. Eastwood v. Superior Court, 149 Cal. App. 3d at p. 421; New Kids on the Block v. News America Pub., Inc., 971 F.2d 302, 309-310 (9th Cir. 1992); Comment, BAJI No. 7.23 (8th ed. 1994) p. 318.
Thus, the defenses described in relation to the statutory right of publicity are equally applicable to the common law claim. As noted above, we believe these defenses are fully available to XXXCASH.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

dude - you are cracking me up - LMFAO

you continue to dig your hole deeper and deeper

just a friendly head's up - the pic of her coming out of her car with the upskirt is owned by the paparazzi who took it and is very expensive to acquire. i can refer you if like.

did your attorney give you authority to make false statements about another company as well?

KRosh, no one is questioning the concept of celeb sites.

The issue is about pics that were never issued as legal pics.

If pics are stolen, then everyone on the internet sees it, does it make it right to take them because that person is a celeb?

Your answer doesn't address this issue.

If you have the rights to use those specific pics, which TMobile says no one has the rights to, then you need to speak up and let the world know you have the rights. Not a bunch of california laws on celeb sites.

Just answer the question. I like you man, I'm just curious if you have the rights or not. No need to go back and forth and name call and pull out an answer to the wrong question.

yes or no?

No shit. Attorneys are in the business of "billable hours", not necessarily giving you the best advice.

Take their "opinion" with a grain of salt. THey would love nothing better than to defend you in a huge lawsuit- they see "TMobile" and fucking salivate.

You ready hand over your profits to this law firm?

Now Far L you understand what I been telling you all these years?

The amount money ya spent on shit with attornies...

OMG...
I can only imagine.

It's amazing how this sort of shit can change one's opinion on someone... watching some of Evan's posts I figured.. hey.. he's an "ok" guy.. I'll promote XPays... But the last few days.. well I've got to say that I'm starting to think he's a nutcase.. sorry.. but that's just the perception I'm getting...

Krosh you havent really made it until you get a C&D originating from xpays

see ya soon buddy

Ya must be a pretty stupid webmaster to make your biz decisions like that.

But even so...

Point and case the logic is simple.

No rights to use = Content Violation.

It's pretty black and white.

if you are referring to their unfair and deceptive business practices then ok, but this thread is about tmobile and is not a hypothesis.

anyone in our industry that supports xxxcash on this is a hypocrit.

When all you have to judge someone by is how they act on a business message board, then it's not "stupid".. One has to go with their gut. Course.. coming from you I should have expected something like this..

But thanks for reminding me that you can't post anything without resorting to name calling etc.

if you are pro-xxxcash then you are pro: content infringement, pro- unfair competition, and pro - a lot of things.

Ethics getting called out and jumping on the thread starter without any basis or valid contradictory proof is lame.

So XXXCASH-

I posted proof- so should you and my retraction will be immediate.

edit- proof twice now- a copy of tmobile's c&d evidencing that your content is not public domain and proof of your checks clearing.

Tempest your here to make money right?
Your here to make money honestly right?

Whats so stupid about not following those simple rules?
Instead discarding Evan as a Nutcase ya might wanna consider the fact that he is right and avoid possible problems in the future.

Evan,

are you on a bandwagon again? haven't read the other thread but will soon.

Why didn't you handle this off board man?? I could see brining this public ASAP if krosh or someone stole from your members area, but WTF..

Oh and you know you sent a few c&d's out in the old days :(