For those of you following the absurd back and forth between us and a very confused photographer, we have an update. Mr. Figueroa emailed today to tell us we’re off the hook: he won’t be suing. In a email titled “apology” he writes:
Michael, I want to apologize to you and your advertisers for accusing you of using an Image of Ashton Kutcher that I thought was to drive traffic to your website and to add revenue for your advertisers.From the large response from some of your moore educated followers they have made it clear to me what had taken place.And I admit that I did not understand the way the Internet works and still don’t. I just find it unfair that that image is on there and there seems to be nothing we can do to remove it even after calling google. when I said I represent Beth Boldt I should of said I’m calling on behalf of Beth Boldt I’m not an attorney and don’t want to claim to be one and wasn’t trying to come across as one. I was just trying to get the attention of the person involved in putting that image there and when I used the large amount of money I figured it would get the attention of the right person but what I realize I had kicked the wrong bees nest. I don’t enjoy the insults or insulting back and no We are not going to sue you or your advertisers and I hope you wont do the same.I actually enjoy reading up on the latest news of what’s hot in the technology of the web on your website and think it’s a great tool to inform the public of what’s going on in the industry as I myself like to look for investment opportunity’s.
Please if you make this public don’t reveal this email address.
Thank You
Richard Figueroa
Peace!!
I just wish he had figured things out before calling all of our advertisers and threatening to sue them, too. And at least one good thing came of all of this: Richard officially coined the term “TechCrotch” in the lengthly comments to that post.
looks like someone helped him with the spelling this time.
What a tool.
I think TechCrotch is starting to stick
Hey Mike,
As I suggested. Accordingly, s512(c)(1) provides limited liability protection for “service providers (who) provide infringing material on websites (or other information repositories) hosted on their systems”. The DMCA states that in order to be eligible for protection, the following conditions must be met:
1. The provider must not have the requisite level of knowledge of the infringing activity, as described below.
2. If the provider has the right and ability to control the infringing activity, it must not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity.
3. Upon receiving proper notification of claimed infringement, the provider must expeditiously take down or block access to the material.”
Interestingly, the most relevant section of s512(c)(1) it seems to this case is the point (ii) which states that a provider “must not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity”. Guess that is the root of the problem here. Has Mike received a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity ?
Obviously, the answer is no. Perhaps in the future, Richard will consult the law before attempting to question a person who is not only a technology guru, but also one well versed in copyright after writing about *ahem* YouTube.
Least he had the balls to apologize.
“…but what I realize I had kicked the wrong bees nest.”
Bees in a nest? Right… I once had a koala bear I kept in a fishbowl.
But sadly grammar checkers aren’t as reliable as the spell checkers.
I had a hunt for this fellow on Google Images and the only result that made sense was http://info.doc....asp?OID=221685
……………”Peace!”
Yeah, I’ve found that throwing “Peace!” into my apologies when I’m apologizing for failed extortion plots, often helps to calm tensions and make everybody feel all fuzzy and warm. Especially when they have grounds to sue me. Did I mention, I’m super duper sorry?
opportunity’s
A “bee’s nest” is a term people use. Please don’t look for things to pick at. The man did something a lot don’t do anymore…he apologized.
Señor Richard Figueroa is giving all Latinos a bad name. Not only is he spelling-impaired, but I listen to his recording and he WAS posing as a lawyer (not legal in the US, and I’m pretty sure neither in Latin America). That’s the only reason he repeats so many times in his apology that he wasn’t posing as a lawyer. Let’s sue his donkey!
Can someone donate a “Video Professor” CD to MR. Figueroa, so he will learn how to use a PC. And some common sense as well, please.
Bee’s Hive…It’s called a bee hive… Don’t you watch Sci-Fi???
he was an emotional hyper one – quick to react
now he’s cowering back, with apologies and brown-nosing even, when he realized he may have bitten off more than he can chew
And OH PLEASE let us know his email address, Michael. In this country you are free to express your opinion, but that comes with the courage of accepting the consequences…
…and I have a big bag full of consequences that I’ll like to send to Mr. Figueroa…
or should I say, I have a Bee Nest full of…difficult to decide…
yeah I think it’s a bee hive.
Yeah the guy is not too bright, but it takes a big man to admit it when he’s wrong and apologize. Kudos.
And so we close another chapter of the ever-dramatic story “As The Web Turns”…..
yes, consider this chapter closed.
Thanks for publishing…EVERYTHING!!!
w0ot win for us! No one can mess with TechCrotch Err TechCrunch!
@Zach A Koala is no more a bear than your displaced goldfish.
The apology reads like a confession. Gonna get it tabled as evidence, Mike?
I completely missed this story the first time around (I must be auto-filtering all the stories about TechCrotch being sued), but after going back to read that original comment thread I laughed so hard I was crying. Wow was that awesome.
Peace!!
Sounds like Ms. Ashton needs to fire Mr. Richard and hire someone that is Web savvy and gets there facts straight i.e. with an attorney before firing off such nonsense, lol.
It’s clear he wasn’t a lawyer and nobody could have thought he was. Otherwise, what’s will all that spelling and malapropisms? “Could of” instead of “could’ve” then “opportunity’s” instead of opportunities, and the list goes on.
Isn’t the case is too weak for legal proceeding?
I gotta tell ya the very funniest part is the fact that the guy(s) that run TechCrunch are LAUGHING at TechCrotch.
You have a follower forever!!
I think a bee hive is a man made construction, i.e. for the production of honey. I guess a nest is what bees would live in were it not for hives?
I think hornets have nests, but not bees.
After all his accusations, and after all the flaming here in the comments: I think Richard deserves respect for such an apology. Kudos!
Not all bees live in a hive – some are solitary (here in the UK we’ve got 200 species) and they, indeed, do nest. I should stress, though, that I am not attempting to pass myself off as an apiarist.
Ok fine the guy has a writing issue, so does 80% of other Americans. As previously stated by one of the posters, we should give the guy some kudos for having the guts to apologize via email knowing he was going to be put on blast by Mike.
Finally to the guy who used the word “malapropism”, nice man.. i’ll make sure i add that language to my treasure trove of big vocabularies.
^ You may not be an apiarist, but you are aping one rather well.
The guy says:
—————————————————————————
From the large response from some of your moore educated followers they have made it clear to me what had taken place.
—————————————————————————-
Mike, Although the guy has been dubbed as very confused, I learn something here. Followers can help to take one out of trouble.
Richard said: ….”I’m not an attorney and don’t want to claim to be one…..”
Richard don’t feel bad. Michael is an attorney – but, he doesn’t want to be one!
Who needs the Digg effect?
Fear the wrath and power of the TC army!
Kuddos for this man. It’s a brave thing to admit you were wrong.
Oh the lengths people go to get TechCrunched!
Unfortunately, I believe TechCrotch was first coined by bLaugh.
http://www.TechCrotch.com was registered back in June 2006.
http://www.Beesnest.com was registered in June 2004
http://www.Beeshive.com was registered in December 2005
http://www.moron.com was registered in May 1995
Darn, there’s no money to be made here….
Well, this cannot be finished unless you post a video of yourself to YouTube getting kicked in the TechCrotch.
It sounds like it was the counter sue threat that made him step back. Tit for tat, I guess!!
Figueroa is a damn scammer and must be put behind bars.
If somebody can trace his activities and how he makes money extorting people I could send my italian cousin to pay him a “friendly” visit.
I think it was just a plot to get some attention on the net. The best thing for everyone to do now is just ignore this guy so he won’t be able to profit from this. Just a thought!
Well, at least he apologized, right! I don’t think that anybody would take him serious in regards to online business as he has undoubtedly proven to be a complete newbie.
He’s apologized and run away with his tail between his legs. Let him be….unless he tries to scam anyone else, especially TC readers. Then you can go after him with full force yet again!
Mike:
You know that this guy was never a threat to TechCrunch. Who in this world cannot see that you will shamelessly leverage ANYTHING that gets exposure for your site? The problem is that such posts and associated juvenile comments only degrades the credibility of TechCrunch. Does your CEO not have any control over what you write about, or does she endorse such tactics?
I wonder how much money he extorted before he ran into TechCrunch. The apology is only there because he’s afraid of being sued. The only reason not to sue this guy is out of fear that he’ll show up and harass you in person. And if that’s the case then you’re doing the world a disservice by staying silent.
What the heck.. How did I miss a 500 comment thread though the day was pretty busy.. Anyways here is my 2 cents..
Whether Richard is wrong or Michael Errington is, is a different qn, what is pretty clear from this and the other thread is that, in a desperate attempt to be funny, all Mike did was ridiculing someone who was probably new to internet and copyright stuff. All the guy did was to stick to, what he thought was right, a decent gentleman would have made him try to understand that google and yahoo are not in control of TC, but all Mike did was ridicule the guy for his spelling, ignorance and innocence. Just because, he has an access to mass media, Mike was trying to act like a bully, and hey, what goes around comes around, get ready for some ridicule Mike. What astonishes me is the amount of ego you carry around..
hey now… let’s stop turning the tides and attacking mike here. This guy called and threatened Mike’s advertisers. That is grade-a not cool. The way the situation was handled (as with all these petty legal threats) was perfect: publicly.
The guy could have been wrought through legal hell for the stunt he pulled, his ignorance is no excuse. As was stated a gazillion posts up… another chapter “closed”. No harm, no foul.
You harp on him for throwing us freebies like this… shame on the lot of you.
Saagar – This person called our advertisers and threatened to sue them, too. I did call him and he wouldn’t listen to me at all. Our policy is to post lawsuit threats in order to discourage them. And I never ridiculed his spelling. Richard dug a hole and threw himself in.
If I was being a bully I would have sued the shit out of him.
Richard should of researched moore opportunity’s for his girlfriend before pissing on your bees nest.
“And I admit that I did not understand the way the Internet works and still don’t.”
I think Bill Gates should sue Richard for stealing his line.
Budduh um bum.
Thank you – I’ll be hear all week. Don’t forget to tip your waitresses.