I can't read anything in a justified layout. Is that just me? It freaks my eyes out.

---

Strega, did you notice it has links all over the shop?

I don't know what shop you're talking about. I saw the links at the invoice site. The problem is not that I don't understand the background. The problem is that when I read this:

we thought that asking fans to tally those hours and publishing the totals for all to see would be a gentler way to make both the specific point about Browncoat marketing for Serenity and the more general point about the relationship between producers of entertainment and their increasing (and knowing) reliance in the 21st century on fanbases to help promote that entertainment.

And

We simply believe that issues are raised in this area when a company knowingly has accepted the promotional work of fans.

I think, "And what are they?" I can make some guesses, but when someone's trying to frame an argument, it's a good idea to actually, y'know, state what it is, instead of just alluding to it.

Using "chilling effect" to describe the situation strikes me as a tad over the top as well.

---

I think, "And what are they?" I can make some guesses, but when someone's trying to frame an argument, it's a good idea to actually, y'know, state what it is, instead of just alluding to it.

Well, the issues could be more well defined, but I think the "points" you cite are...pretty much pointed. Browncoats marketed for Serenity, and there exists a relationship between producers of entertainment and their increasing and knowing reliance on fanbases to help promote that entertainment. I suppose it's not entire clear what that "relationship" is, but the point that said producers relied on fanbase promotion is there.

---

Browncoats marketed for Serenity, and there exists a relationship between producers of entertainment and their increasing and knowing reliance on fanbases to help promote that entertainment.

Right. ...And? I mean, the implication I get is "And therefore, this isn't fair." I guess? I don't know, because there's a lot of supporting statements, and then no actual thesis. They tell me that they're not arguing against copyrights or trademarks. Swell. What are they arguing for?

---

Free pizza?

---

There is a fair bit of self righteous indignation going on cause as always it has to be the "fans good, everyone else bad" mindsight. But peeling aside and ignoring the "oh no, I didn't realise I was only being used" fan spasms, Universal lawyers used bully boy tactics against a fan who did her best to promote something she loved. And that it is unfair in my view and not on.

---

I think Strega is right. I think if there is any point (and I'm not sure there is, honestly), it is: Universal is now billing fans for work Universal asked the fans to do.

That's the fans' only leg on which to stand, But you need to say it clearly like that, and cite chapter and verse of Universal's requests, with screen shots of the requests, not archives of dead links that once linked to the requests.

I'm also wondering what 'links all over the shop' means.

---

Universal is now billing fans for work Universal asked the fans to do.

Yeah, that's the point that needs to be made pretty clearly.

Additionally, Universal is violating the standard procedure for such legal actions, which is that you send out a C&D letter and shut them down, you don't invoice them. Especially if your ownership of the intellectual property in question is less than completely established. (I understand they never trademarked "Serenity", right? And I gather a lot of the merchandise 11th Hour was selling didn't have clearly copyright-violating images or phrases on it, either.)

Universal's lawyers are being jerks, and I wonder how much of this is fueled by terror of the internets, and not actually sensible marketing strategy.

---

I might have the story wrong, but I think this is the story behind the invoice chapter (from Universal):

Universal sent 11th hour a C&D letter. 11th hour removed all the copy righted images, but left up shirts with Chinese characters for the word "serenity" and such. If I recall correctly, where the violation remained (the one that precipatated the invoice from Universal, which came after the initial C&D) is that 11th hour continued to cite Firefly and/or the Serenity film in the product descriptions.

I do think their lawyers are being jerks, but I think 11th hour pushed it after the initial C&D.

Kevin/Simon/anyone in the know, if I've confused things, or made incorrect statements, please feel free to correct me.

---

That was my impression as well. I thought that she was selling items with copyrighted material incorporated in the design, got a C&D, removed those items, and now is being charged the licensing fee for the items she sold that were infringing.

Is that incorrect?

---