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?

To my knowledge all of her original designs were "inspired" by Firefly or Serenity. None of them had copyrighted material, logos, or images. They were gorgeous original designs. What Universal had issue with was that she referenced the TV show and the movie in the item descriptions.

I'm reading in the comments here (see one by "ZEEK"), that 11th Hour has done official licensed work for Universal in the past (for their Serenity RPG). From reading on, it seems she may have, and if so, this starting to sound a little more muddled than Universal Shoves Fan in Locker; Steals lunch money. How is this not like "Stan Lee self-publishes Captain America inspired novel"?

In the same thread, 11th hour asks people not to speculate about that (but I think it's likely pertinent, so I am not taking out my mention above) and then says:

The initial notice that Cafe Press sent me was a C&D order, to which I responded to immediately. The "Demand" notice, which prompted this thread, came after the C&D, and also after I had already overhauled my shop in response to the C&D.

What some people do not realize, is that the main issue with my shop was that there were references to the Serenity movie in the product descriptions. This is the part which surprised me. One can feature a design that does not infringe on a copyright... however, if the description refers to the TV show or movie, then it's a violation of intellectual property.

Every design in my shop is/was original, but there were two source designs which allegedly fell into the grey area. I removed those designs. All the rest were absolutely fine, and those are the designs which are still there now. There are designs which incorporate Chinese characters in a creative way. Some of the designs feature the characters for the word "serenity", but there are no references to the movie of that name. And that is perfectly legal.

It was the references and "marketing" of the shop that was the main issue folks. Lesson learned: As to Cafe Press shops, it can be the descriptions, not the images, that will bring the law down on you. So don't refer to the "Serenity" movie.

References made above are - to my knowledge - correct. She got a C&D, removed what she thought were the items at issue, and then effectively got the invoice ('you must agree to pay us $8500' etc).

If I had got the C&D, I would have removed all the items personally, because I don't want to get steam rolled by Universal. That said, if she isn't infringing on Universal's property now, does she have a legal right to disbute the matter? Yes. Does she have the money to do it? No.

By links all over the shop, I mean on Browncoat Invoice, certain words are keywords which have related information associated with them.

Personally, I think what happened with SERENITY is absolutely not a surprise, and I have little sympathy for people selling - for example - the SERENITY logo and who complain about getting C&D notices. That said, they are still pursuing Susan -- she's the only person they're pursing -- and she has a limited chance of getting them to discuss the matter due to the size of the company she's dealing with.

More studios than ever are embracing fans as a cheap way of publicity. And that's great. However, those studios need to think about it a bit more. Not running a forum for people to sell shit whilst a movie is on release is a good start.