I have four questions for you about your screenshot of my website. (1) When was the screenshot taken, time and date required. (2) Who took that screenshot. Was it, Higbee & Assocciates, PicRights International Inc, The Associated Press or was it someone else, in this case I would require a name. (3) Where was the image locate. Please give us the exact location on a give web page with in a give website. (4) Can you explan to me in detail how you could take a screenshot of one of West St Paul Antiques webpages in July of 2022 and a 2nd screenshot of the same webpage and come up with two totally different screenshots. The definition of a screen·shot, "An image of the data displayed on the screen of a computer or mobile device." Our webpage doesn't look anything like you 2nd screenshot so please explain how this is possible.
.
I fully expect you to cooperate with my request in this matter. So I can determine if you have a right to even bring a legal claim to the table on this Exhibit. Thank you.
I'm still puzzled by what you said in your email February 28, 2023
About claim number: 516719 dated September 19th, 2018. You said this claim is closed and you went on to say there is nothing I will be able to discuss. Then you closed by saying we are only discussing and seeking resolution on the five pending claims we are currently discussing.
.
I hate to say this but it is important to me to know why you closed that claim in 2018. If I don't receive an answer I'll just assume that PicRigths knew about West St Paul Antiques website and all of these images back in 2017.
.
I fully expect you to cooperate with my request in this matter. So I can determine if you have a right to even bring these legal claims to the table. Thank you
.
.
I'm still puzzled by the number of images in question. In an earlier email you stated 42. Then in your latest email you now say 40, one was removed and deleted from claim #XQVVPY now making that claim 5 photos in question. So was the 42nd photo from claim number: 516719 or someplace else?
.
In an earlier email I asked you a question. Why did PicRigths vary from their normal policy on notification. You never did answer, so I'll ask it again. PicRights did not make several efforts to resolve these copyright matters with West St Paul Antiques, as stated in all your claims. The several attempts to resolve a claim was in 2017 not in these claims. Compare all of the claims. PicRights reference Number: 1447-7737-5436 attempts made to resolve that claim were made on November 15th & December 13th, 2017 & January 3rd, 2018 before sending the claim to your law firm. The first letter I received from Higbee & Associates was on September 19th, 2018 for that claim. Your Claim Number: 516719. In these claims 6PEEMQ, XQVVPY, L60051, N5MMOZ & OQ993N PicRights sent all the letters on June 20th, 2022. I received those letters several days later. On all of those letters it reads: " We would like to resolve this time-sensitive issue as soon as possible and request that you respond within 14 days from the date of this correspondence." I received your firm's first letter dated July 6th, 2022 followed by four additional letters dated the 7th, 13th, and two on them July 26th, 2022.
.
Sure looks like a coordinated attack between your law firm and PicRights International Inc.on my company website.
-
So can you please answer the question, why did PicRigths vary from their normal policy on notification on your 5 claims? Or have they changed their policy on notification. I know for a fact that they haven't as of February 13th, 2023. All you have to do look up Reference Number: 4094-9680-4118, - Click here* See below
.
As I stated before there are many issues with these claims. Plus I'm finding new things everyday. I haven't even gone into case law yet. That's for another email down the road. I have brought up a few issues in previous emails and I'll bring up a few more in this email.
In an earlier email you stated that your attorney would like you to inform me that none of the information provided in my emails are valid legal arguments, and will not affect the demand amounts we are requesting. All of the images were obtained improperly and without permission or license to use and display them on weststpaulantiques.com.
.
The information you provided to me is incorrect and you know it. If you're going give me your opinion or hearsay, just let know that upfront and not like you're passing on valid information in order to discourage me or even intimidate me in to settling these claims quickly. Get to know me, don't assume I'm stupid, that's insulting. Things like that hinder my decisions on the path forward with these claims. I thought you were negotiating in good fath with me, am I wrong?
.
You also said, we urge you to make a reasonable offer. Do you really think $4000.00 isn't a reasonable offer. What planet are you from. It's not earth that's for sure. For most families of 4 in Minnesota and most states in this great country of ours, $4000.00 would feed a family of four for 6 months or longer. To complete your sentence, you said, We urge you to make a reasonable offer and do not force each client to initiate litigation on all five claims. All I can say is just give your clients all the facts.
.
Then you said, we appreciate you placing your offer back on the table, however, it was already respectfully declined and the reason why we provided you with a counter offer of $21,000. "That offer has now been reduced to $20,000.00 in an email from you on March 1st, 2023." Now you're saying. "Making a lesser amount will not help this situation. I will need you to increase your offer in efforts to reach an amicable resolution."
.
You go on to say, please let me know if you have a different offer you want our client to consider. (Yes give your clients the new offer from me with all the facts this time.) Then you continue to say, "At this time, we do not have any authorization to make any further reductions if you have decreased your offer".
.
So I'm not confused about this, are you asking me to remove my offer of $4000.00, because it was already respectfully declined. I believed you declined the first offer of $4200.00, so this is a brand-new offer with more facts. If you would like me to remove it from the table just let me know. I' m okay with that just let me know.
.
As of today, I'm asking you to provide me with all documents relating to ownership of all images in question. Plus all copyright registration certificates with dates. I'm asking to see all 40 copyright registration certificates, so I can review them and determine legal claim, so I can make plans to move forward with my defense. Thank you and I fully expect you to cooperate with my request in this matter.
.
I really do not want to engage in a back and forth with your law firm. I really don't want to hire a law firm at this time, but I'll leave that option open. My time is limited, hopefully you can understand that and reconsider the offer that still on the table for now.
.
You seem to be more focused on the prize than the facts. This is a good example. You sent me an e-mail on February 15th, 2023 your entire email said:"Hi Floyd, Thank you for taking my call and briefly discussing this matter. Please send me your correspondence and let me know what is your best offer to resolve these matters outside of court. Thank you, Yubani Noriega." I followed up on that email with a page-and-a-half of facts to consider in your claims. Plus the offer to share the link to the work that I've been doing. You don't seem to care about the facts. You're just too focused on the grand prize in your case it's 20 grand. Look, I hate burst your balloon, but there is no way you're getting anything if you reject my offer. Except for a slap on your wrist for being foolish based on a case to case scenario of all your images in question by your law firm. I totally believe each of the images used by West St Paul Antiques was a fair use and will pass all fair use tests. I have been trying to explain to you, just look at our website, for example let's start with Exhibit A - Higbee & Associates, Claim Number: L60051 you seem to been focuseed on that one in an earlier email. North High School Class of '66 Classmate Bill Lee webpage, as you stated in an earlier email, "the image in question for this claim has been removed from the website but is still stored on the following link:" This is the link you sent me: http://www.weststpaulantiques.com/images/512_The_northwestern_shore_of_the_Sea_of_Galilee.jpg
As I stated in an earlier email we have a computer technician from Network Solutions working on the problem. The problem should be resolved quickly by that company, but it is one of their older platforms.
You also stated in your earlier email about that image that is on Bill Lee's web page.
"If the image was obtained from Facebook and placed on your website without the proper authorization, that might the reason why we have a claim. You have to understand weststpaulantiques.com is a commercial website and any content being used will be considered commercial. Whether you generated a financial gain or not. Bottom line, if you did not obtain proper authorization to use and display the image in question, our client is entitled to recover their damages." Maybe you should add or ask your associates to add some case law to your theory on the law. Let me know if can prove me wrong. I'll look forward to seeing your follow-up on this one..
We can argue over this one photograph for days or weeks. Possibly we could set some new law precedents. The bottom line is it will always fall under fair use and you know that for a fact. I'm assuming that based on your title with Higbee and Associates. Save yourself and your associates sometime, just click your own link to the image. That will take you to the web page. (1) Look at where the photo was placed on the web page. There's a web page tag in the place where the photo was. (2) Then check out all the links on this web page for all kinds of information. (3) Now look over the entire web page This web page was created for Bill Lee as time capsule of his life and all of his accomplishments in life. You're probably wondering who is Bill Lee, he's just one of my High School classmates and a Marine brother from the Vietnam War. As I stated in an earlier email there's approximately 619 class members to the class of '66. Each of them with their own web page(s). All pages are different just like humans, some of them are more private that others. They share what they want with me and let me know what's okay to publish and what's not okay. They even at times will share confidential matters with me like an illness or something they're comfortable with. I'm always adding new content to there webpage like stories, news clippings, photos and pretty much what I can find floating around the internet about them. I'm the class webmaster and historian. I'm just doing my best to preserve their life stories. For some of my classmates I have actually started with their birth and taking their story all the way to their passing and wrapping it up in a mamorial page for them. Most of the class is engaged and active in the website. It's their source of information from the class of '66, and in some cases it's the only information they look at on a daily basis. They would be the ones that would volunteer to come and testify on my behalf. I have been doing this for years and I plan on doing it for years to come. God willing. (4) Now check out the nature of the alleged copyrighted work. The amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and, the effect of the use upon the potential market,
,
Now if you can tell me without a doubt and you're that positive this one image that you seem to focus on in your email to me on February 28th, 2023 wouldn't fall under a fair use defense and win the argument. If you are so positive then I suggest you go back to blowing up your balloons.
.
As you can see in the example above, Exhibit A claim number: L6OO51 which I did not cherry-pick, that was the one exhibit you focused on in one of your last emails. If I was given the opportunity to cherry-pick one of the exhibit I probably would have picked one that the photo had been so altered by someone. I couldn't even determine if it's actually the photo, that you're alleging copyright infringement on West St Paul Antiques. But I still removed all of them immediately. So you can see it would not be hard for me to produce similar results in all of the 40 images in question. The only problem with that is the $4000.00 would have been taken off the table by then. In fact as I'm typing this and thinking, why even have $4000.00 on the table. Just let me know as soon as possible, I'm ready to go back to working case-by-case on the balance of 39 images in question by your law firm.
So let me be clear about this today. If you or your associates invest a little time to took a little look at West St Paul Antiques website, you would come to the conclusion almost immediately, that all the images in question “they all fall under fair use!” in the opinion of many. I am claiming a fair use affirmative defense, plus any defenses that will be discovered within the search of the truth behind their claims. Yes I do know “everything you say can and will be used against you!”. I'm just trying to be upfront and honest so we're not wasting our time. West St Paul Antiques website has been around since April 22nd, 2009. It's basically the same website today as it was in 2009. This website is Informational and Educational and used for that purpose, with no profit or gain to West St Paul Antiques or myself. Spend a little time on it and maybe you'll come away with the same opinion.
.
I'll look forward to hearing back from you. If you have any questions for me don't hesitate to send me an email or call me at your leisure.
.
Have a great day and thanks for all your time in this matter.
.
Sincerely,
.
Floyd Ruggles,
On behalf of West St Paul Antiques
.
*This is, a link to all the work that I have done so far on all of the claims in question. I gave you the offer back on February 17th, 2023 in my email I sent to you.
.
.
Februay 17th, 2023 email:.
.
"I can send you a link to the work that I've done so far. If you would like me to send this link just let me know. Keep in mind that this is not the final draft, it's a work in progress for me. This would show you and your associates things that bother me about these claims." .
.
That brings us to the present moment, where do we go from here, the ball is in your court.
I'm actually blown away by all the information out there on your Law Firm. You must be very popular and well-liked by all. I hope this doesn't turn into a PR nightmare for you and your associates. I just don't have the time for this nonsense and attention I'm getting .
A quote from my February 27th, 2023 e-mail.
“I don't believe a jury will think kindly of your playbook.”
