Document created: 10/25/02
Document modified: 11/2/02 2:25am CDT
Last Update: Added Cease And Desist Letter.

This is an open letter response to a mail I was sent by Sean Straw. His original mail is prefixed
with the Internet standard ">". My comments and responses are not prefixed in any way. His
original email, including headers, is available upon request.

A bit of background (keep this in mind when reading this - I have no idea
where he gets some of his theories): I called Sean on Tuesday. In an
erstwhile friendly call, I said that I'd heard about their new parts
interchange, and when I went to view it, I noticed that they'd copied
some original copyrighted materials of mine (without crediting me in the
copyright notice, and that I wished them to not do this. I also (several
times) explained that I was calling to defend my own individual rights as
an author and that this had nothing whatsoever to do with JagSource.
After all, in copyright law, if you don't defend it when you hear about
an infraction, you lose the rights. We "agreed" that I would compile a
list of URLs that I wanted to dispute. I got caught up in JS and other
work, and this morning, I got this insane rant.

He doesn't seem to understand that I pretty much wrote most of XJ and a
bit of the XJ FAQ's. All the things he quotes just happen to be my own
creation. Ooops.

Below is my reply.

>

>Pursuant to your call on Tuesday, I still have not received an email from

>you. As indicated, I cannot forward your complaint to anyone until you

>present it to me concisely in an email, since if it's left to interpretive

>translation of your telephone call, your message may not be conveyed to

>others with the same meaning. I've got absolutely no interest in being

>blamed for mistranslation of your message.

Not a problem. I haven't sent you a list because I haven't finished

compiling it. I'm busy trying to puzzle out code for a client. Gotta eat,

ya know. Sending you an incomplete list would be a waste of time.

>

>The Parts Interchange database was formerly administered by BJ Kroppe, who

>was a Jag-Lovers webadmin at least as recently as July of 2000 and whose

>responsibility at that time was the Parts Interchange.

Actually, as of July 2000, he *wasn't* a web admin of any kind that I am

aware of. <shrug>

>

>It is my understanding that you took over the responsibility of

>administering the XJ Lovers Parts Interchange as the J-L XJ webadmin,

>having implemented it on your Macintosh database because you didn't have

>familiarity with formal SQL databases or with the PHP scripting language

>used on the Jag-Lovers servers (I may be mistaken about your familiarity

>with PHP & SQL - but that's the impression I was given from the exchanges

>we had on the webteam list about this very project in November 2000), not

>because you were taking it over as personal property -- which I know that

>J-L would never have approved, nor did Mr. Kroppe. Your use of the

>XJ-Lovers graphic at the head of the Interchange supports the argument that

>it was produced as a Jag-Lovers resource, as well as the copyright

>statement which once adorned the resource. I haven't seen whatever

>JagSource may have resurrected the Interchange as, but I suspect that if

>you've resurrected it, you've probably revised the copyrights to expressly

>exclude Jag-Lovers - something which would be just as wrong as excluding

>Mr. Shields or Kroppe from the copyright declarations.

Actually, I haven't excluded Kroppe or Shields, or any of the original

authors. One of the reasons I kept it off of JL was because of the

potential liability exposure to the organization. As I have no money,

suing me would be a waste of time. Suing JL and the admins, at the time,

would have been a much better idea, financially speaking. That's why I

hosted it off JL, as did David Shields and BJ Kroppe before me.

Nor do I have any intention of reviving the Interchange in it's old

format. Too much stuff in it I can't legally use.

Funny that you should mention excluding Shields from the copyright

declarations, because that's *exactly* what Jag-Lovers did.

http://www.dallasdrivers.org/jlevidence/picture1a.jpg

Pot. Kettle. Black.

>

>If you wish to argue that your contributions to the parts interchange

>should somehow be removed from the Jag-Lovers Parts Interchange (if I

>interpreted your call correctly, that's your complaint), you should

No, you didn't. I have no objection to JL keeping the data. I couldn't if

I wanted to, as information such as part numbers cannot be copyrighted. I

*do* object to JL using my custom database entries and using them

verbatim. Intentional spelling mistakes and all. Such as a part number of

"See Comments" when you don't have a comments field. Oooops.

>carefully consider that the data from the Parts Interchange BEFORE you

>administered it (as a Jag-Lovers admin) isn't your property to haul off

>with as your own, and, the database having been operated under the auspices

>of Jag-Lovers (supported not just by the use of the banner graphic, but

>also the copyright statement to that effect, and the title of the link as

>provided by the XJ web pages - which YOU administered), the very foundation

>of the Parts Interchange belongs to Jag-Lovers and all those who have

>contributed to it over the years.

Did I say that I wanted the Parts Interchange taken down? No. What I want

is for JL to remove all materials that I wrote from their future version

of the guide, if they wish to remove my name from the copyright list.

Also, I made a point of stating that this has *nothing* whatsoever to do

with JagSource. I am simply defending my rights as an author. As you

know, if you do not defend them, you lose them.

>

>Considering that Jag-Lovers has not directed JagSource to cease use of our

>database, nor have we issued any pre-emptive strike barring you from

>reviving the database under your own logo (which I can only expect that

>your complaint about our continuing use of the database is a precursor to),

>I believe that disputing what individual records and comments in the

>original Jag-Lovers database we have the right to continue to publish is a

>rather petty action - if we were to oblige, I'm sure you would understand

>that the response which JagSource should reasonably expect is Jag-Lovers

>directing you to cease use of the database on which the interchange was

>further developed, which would leave your own version of the database in a

>shambles.

You can expect all you want - and you'd be wrong. (More info below.) The

funny thing is, once one starts looking at things like the Hollander

parts interchange, and several of the Standard Motor reference guides,

the amount of information in the JL PIG is rather sparse.

Feel free to send me such a directive. I can't use the damned thing

anyway.

>

>The whole process would simply result in _useless_ work for both

>organizations, and two crippled databases, as well as a large number of

>enthusiasts asking why our organizations have to be so petty.

>

Again - I'm not doing this on behalf of JagSource. They do what they

want. What I *am* doing is defending my own individual rights.

>So, how about we just set resonable groundrules that in moving forward,

>Jag-Lovers doesn't use JagSource sources to populate its database, and

>similarly, JagSource doesn't include material from Jag-Lovers in its

>database or website? I'm fairly certain I can sell the other admins on

>such a proposition - it's reasonable, and doesn't subject anyone to a

>useless workload -- and importantly, doesn't continue to put our

>organizations at odds with one another, to the detriment of the enthusiasts

>which we are here to serve.

>

>The Jag-Lovers Parts Interchange was a Jag-Lovers resource, and will

>continue to be so. The content of the Jag-Lovers database while it was

>maintained as a Jag-Lovers resource is Jag-Lovers property, and is

>reflected in the database which we continue to offer freely to Jaguar

>enthusiasts.

It can remain so. I have no interest in attempting to deny J-L's right to

the information. I do deny that J-L has the right to steal original works

from me.

>

>I am not the spokesperson for Jag-Lovers, but I don't personally see any

>immediate need for Jag-Lovers to take JagSource to task for basically

>absconding with the database which was administered by you as a

>representative of Jag-Lovers -- provided you don't try to lay claim on

>everything you touched while acting as a Jag-Lovers admin. That's simply

>petty, and absolutely NOBODY will benefit if anyone chooses to carry out

>such petty disputes. As I've reiterated several times througought this

>whole ordeal -- we're here for the enthusiasts, how's about we not do

>things that disrupt their access to information that allows them to keep

>their cars on the road?

Well, let's see. As there is no parts interchange database up anywhere on

JagSource as of yet, I'd say your claim has no grounds in fact. I will

happily provide a directory and link listing proving it. I won't deny

that I had planned such a database, but it would consist of publically

available data (see above) and was subject to approval by the JagSource

board of directors before the project could be posted. As I said, there

is too much information in the database that I can't legally use for me

to be interested in resurrecting it.

Thanks for reminding me, though. I was willing to let Jag-Lovers have

what work I did while I was there, but you have clearly stated that you

wish to illegally exert control over my works. I'll be sending you a list

of all the files and guides that I clearly and indisputably authored or

created during my tenure. I will provide replacements for these files in

the form that they existed in before I became involved. I'm not laying

claim to *every* file I touched, but since J-L seems to be intent on

ignoring copyright (right down to filing my name off the copyright list

on the main XJ page, even though you do still acknowledge my creation of

the logo), I see no reason why Jag-Lovers should remain in "custody," for

lack of a better word, of these items.

>

>BTW, I believe it would be in everyone's best interest if JagSource didn't

>choose to continue to use the same fonts and graphics as are used on

>Jag-Lovers - your basic nav graphics are the same as the pre-existing

>graphics serving the same functions on Jag-Lovers. Surely, generating new

>graphics based on the same fonts and context as the Jag-Lovers ones which

>your are mimicing doesn't convey a clean break and a fresh look? In fact,

>your basic sidebar navigation graphics are BINARY DUPLICATES of the

>graphics on Jag-Lovers. That is, in launching JagSource, you didn't even

>take the time to create your own graphics, you lifted them DIRECTLY from

>the Jag-Lovers pages. Tsk.

>

>The use of other verbatim copies of Jag-Lovers text is also

>questionable. Take the following passage for instance:

>

>"No, we are not kidding. We have had list members killed by what they

>thought was a properly supported car - which fell on them. That's right;

>read that again - killed. Dead, finished, kaput. Again, failure to read and

>follow these instructions can result in severe injury or death. We cannot

>emphasize this enough. You have been warned, and we take no responsibility

>for your actions."

>

>In the course of one month, you've already lost a plurality of members to

>jacking incidents? Tell me it ain't true! Surely, the above text was, to

>put it gently, "borrowed" from somewhere? Perhaps here:

>

> <http://www.jag-lovers.org/xjlovers/xjfaq/index.html>

>

>The chief difference here is that if you follow the links on your FAQ page,

>you'll find entries where the banner and footer graphics are broken, but

>they're IDENTICAL filenames and image dimensions to the files found on

>Jag-Lovers.

>

>Needless to say, if we need to dispute content, there a lot of material on

>JagSource which would be in dispute. So, how about we don't go there?

>

Hm. How about we do? Because 1) I authored all of that, and 2) as author,

I retain rights to use that material, accurate or not.

Are you saying that I don't have minimal rights to the works I created?

Or perhaps you are saying that this was a work-for-hire and that the

rights belong to Jag-Lovers? If the latter, please produce my written

release, as well as a statement showing wages I was paid or a waiver

thereof. Also, please produce the tax documents and the tax ID number of

this "Jag-Lovers" entity. I belive that since this entity does not exist

in any legally recognized form, you won't be able to do so.

Seeing as how I wrote or designed every single element or article you

have mentioned, I don't see where you get off accusing me of stealing

things. After all, of the articles and items you mentioned above, I am

the author/creator of ALL of them. Every single one. And I can prove it.

Can you?

>As for your concern about the link to JagWeb from the Jag-Lovers site,

>seeing as they support Jag-Lovers through maintaining the jagads service

>for us (so that we don't have to deal with policing the UPE, which believe

>me, was a major PITA), and also manage a vendor database (so that

>Jag-Lovers doesn't need to offer such a resource, which would tie us to

>individual vendors), I don't see that as meaning by any stretch of the

>imagination that Jag-Lovers is a commercial operation.

>

>Even if it were, precisely what concern is that of anyone at JagSource?

It isn't. As I made clear in my phone call, I wasn't calling on behalf of

JagSource, but as an author concerned about misuse of my copyrighted

materials. As long as Jag-Lovers was a non-profit, there wasn't any

reason to be concerned. I have since been informed that you are no longer

a non-profit and that I *did* need to be concerned. I am not acting on

behalf of anyone but myself in this matter.

Since you aren't seeing the connection I am, let me explain it to you (as

someone had to do for me). JagAds sells advertising based off of the

users at Jag-Lovers.

http://www.dallasdrivers.org/jlevidence/picture9.jpg

Note the links to JL and JagWeb.

This is the terms and conditions page from JagAds:

http://www.dallasdrivers.org/jlevidence/picture12.jpg

So far, nothing unusual. Notice the blatant "Adverts for Jag-Lovers" on

the title bar.

Then move on to the News section.

http://www.dallasdrivers.org/jlevidence/picture18.jpg

To quote: "We are offering these facilities in collaboration with the

Jag-Lovers website. Jag-Lovers offers free, basic adverts to their

members (non-commercial, no traders) and JagAds is handling the non-free,

enhanced ads (no restrictions on commercial status). With the combined

visitors from JagWeb and Jag-lovers, JagAds is truly the best exposure

for the items you wish to sell..."

"Please contact us for Banner Advert pricing - with exposure here and on

JagWeb."

I don't know if you know this, but JagWeb/JagAds charges some vendors in

the neighborhood of $350 per year to advertise with them. Multiply that

by the number of vendors there, and we're talking some real money, in

excess of $7,000 USD per year. Where is that money going? That money is

being made off the members of J-L, and the cash is going into someone's

pocket. It's not going into the coffers of J-L. If it was, we sure

wouldn't have had to have that fundraiser.

Therefore, JagWeb is the only other possibility. I happen to know that

there are very few people involved in JagWeb. Nick Johannssen is the sole

proprietor. Draw your own conclusion.

The website admits that the operation is a joint venture of Jag-Lovers

and JagWeb.

I refer you to http://www.dallasdrivers.org/jlevidence/picture2.jpg

It's a screen shot of the JL home page that indicates the "supported by

JagWeb" button, which is prominently displayed.

That link was up there *long* before JagAds was started (thanks to that

magazine article that shows it, there's evidence enough). So, what has

JagWeb been doing to support JL? Does JL get a cut of the profits from

JagWeb? Didn't while I was there. Does JagWeb pay the operating

expenditures of JL? Well, no, because wasn't there a discussion on

workers about how Gunnar wasn't getting paid and that we needed to take

up a collection for him? Hm. Where's all those thousands of dollars going?

There's also a serious (but pertinent) conflict of interest here. Seems

the same guy that owns JagWeb and is pointman for JagAds (as well as the

owner of that domain) just happens to be the webmaster of Jag-Lovers.

http://www.dallasdrivers.org/jlevidence/picture1b.jpg

Hm. Nick, the sole proprietor of JagWeb, is also running a "non-profit"

site, which just *happens* to generate traffic for his commercial

sites... which happens to charge money for the privilege of having one's

wares or logo viewed by those people from the "non-profit." That I

believe, under US law, makes Jag-Lovers of questionable legality as a

non-profit entity, assuming it was ever recognized as an entity at all.

You may recall that during our prior phone call I kept asking you what

Nick's official position was within Jag-Lovers. You never answered that

question, Sean.

As it was when I left, he was one of the three (or four, if you counted

Patsy) people who had "hire/fire" authority, who approved sites, who made

day to day decisions, and basically oversaw operations. That, absent an

incorporation document, makes him a proprietor. It also makes any and all

of the admins, as managers and executives of this 'company,' individually

and severally liable for the conduct of the business (see Enron).

The phrase is "follow the money." I did, and I didn't like what I saw.

You might *really* want to start asking questions. One of the (many)

reasons I left JL was because someone pointed out just how many US laws

that JL appeared to be in violation of, and just how liable the administrators were. I did

not, and still do not wish to be held liable for those activities, so I

left.

In closing, I wish you luck in your further endeavors, and again note

that I speak only for myself and not JagSource Inc. The above mentioned

lists will be available in the next 48 hours, and the URL for the

replacement materials will be available at the same time. Please have the

courtesy to remove the documents in question at the time that the

replacements become available. If this is not done, any and all legal

actions that I deem necessary will be taken. Notification of the list and

files availablility will be executed via email and through this web page.

Last night, I sent Straw the URL for this page as my response. He refused to read it. When I got his response, I started thinking of a Harvey Danger song: "Paranoia, paranoia, everybody's coming to get me!"

I don't know about you, but this thing just doesn't make much sense to me. What game? I just want my rights respected. And as for "changing my words"... I don't do that. I leave that up to you readers to decide who of these parties is more likely to do that sort of chicanery.

His response:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA1

I'm not about to continue to play your game. I gave you the courtesy

of following up to your vague telephone call which after three days,

YOU failed to follow up on with on your own word with an emailed

explanation, and you think I'm going to go to a website to view your

tirade? Nope. Not on your life - you know as well as I that your

webpage content is there so you can change your words as you see fit.

You can email your issues, or consider it a dead issue. I will not

be visiting your website to view your political tirade.

Update: 10/26/02 9:21pm

http://www.dallasdrivers.org/jlevidence/xjlovers.exe has been posted. What is it? It's the XJ site before I performed work on it. Just about everything in the XJ directory, and in much of the XJ FAQ directory at Jag-Lovers is my own work or contains my work. This virus-free self extracting archive has been compiled for the use of Jag-Lovers in restoring their site to comply with international copyright law.

All they have to do to resolve this issue is to unstuff this file, and replace everything in the XJ-Lovers directory with the contents. Everything will still work - but it will be as it was several years ago before I rewrote it.

I will shortly be sending off an official cease and desist letter to all known Jag-Lovers admins; since they do not wish to respect my rights when asked in a friendly, non-threatening way, I am forced to proceed with less friendly actions.

Unfortunately, they have made it difficult for me to list the URLs of the parts interchange entries that are in question. I'll have some screen shots up here soon, along with screenshots of the database that they took it from.

Update: 11/2/02 2:25am

Unfortunately, they have made it *very* difficult for me to list the URLs of the parts interchange entries that are in question. I've decided to give up on that - it's too damned hard to prove. Not impossible, but pointing to exact images and text is weak at best. However, the XJ pages are another matter.

This cease and desist letter was sent to all parties this morning. A copy was also sent to all known JL Admin addresses via registered mail. I am in the process of registering the letter with Chilling Effects, the Internet clearinghouse for cease and desist letters. I think that by providing the old files and the letter, we should be able to deny claims of harassment...

Dear "Jag-Lovers" Administration (including Sean Straw, Chuck Renner, Mark Stephenson, Pascal Gademer, Nick Johannssen, Tony Bailey, and all other associates thereof):

It has come to my attention that you are making unauthorized commercial use of my copyrighted work entitled "XJ Lovers Pages" (herinafter called the "Work") in the collection of advertising revenues derived therefrom. I have reserved all rights in the Work, first published in 1999, and have registered copyright therein. In addition, you have clearly modified the Work to deny my legal rights to the work; though modified, it is essentially identical to the Work and clearly used the Work as its basis. Examples of the infringment and proof of authorship are available upon request.

As you neither asked for nor received permission to continue to use the Work, nor to make or distribute copies, including electronic copies, of same, and as you have never paid for the use of the Work, I believe you have willfully infringed my rights under 17 U.S.C. Section 101 et seq. and could be liable for statutory damages as high as $150,000 as set forth in Section 504(c)(2) therein.

I demand that you immediately cease the use and distribution of all infringing works derived from the Work, and all copies, including electronic copies, of same, that you deliver to me, if applicable, all unused, undistributed copies of same, or destroy such copies immediately and that you desist from this or any other infringement of my rights in the future. If I have not received an affirmative response from you by November 15, 2002 indicating that you have fully complied with these requirements, I shall take whatever further actions that seem appropriate.

Any further correspondance other than an acknowlegement of compliance should be directed to my lawyers' offices:

Skinner and Associates, PC
9304 Forest Lane, Suite 162
Dallas, TX 75243 
(214) 349-9975 

Very truly yours,

Henry Fok
Dallas, Texas
(214) 766-0793