************ vs Lithium Picnic Lawsuit Settles

[Buster Friendly]

I know better than to stick around and argue with tar baby, I've said what i came to say I'm out. Keep hacking away in my absence, it's what you do best.

odd, I didn't get that at all from the article, or the discussion here.

I'd say that seems a little defensive, but I don't know anything about you other than what I've read here, and what you've just posted, so welcome to our community.

Even when I've disagreed with Amelia 100% I've never know her to be unfair to people in conversation, and she's always been pretty open to listening to what someone else has to say about a given topic.

So I hope you'll stick around and enlighten us, or maybe even participate in other ways.

$G turned me off long ago for many of the reasons listed in the article, that data mining/hot topic bit is really galling. Ah well, c'est la merde.

[Amelia G]

For what it's worth my electricity and gas have been turned off twice during the past two years becuase i couldn't pay it - I think you've got a lot of incorrect ideas and theories about me.

I understand though, if i were you I probably wouldn't like me either.

I know better than to stick around and argue with tar baby, I've said what i came to say I'm out. Keep hacking away in my absence, it's what you do best.

Uhm, the whole point of these forums is to provide a venue for people with varied points of view to exchange their varied perspectives. The members of the Blue Blood boards tend to be excellent at engaging with one another on actual points and being able to explain what they have to say and back it up and not getting into flame wars or just throwing sound bites around.

I wrote the article about your legal scuffle with ** the same way I covered the legal beat for the other cases this week with Max Hardcore, Ira Isaacs, and R. Kelly. I did not touch on your personal life, just presented my analysis of the news. So how is journalistic coverage of events of interest to the community hacking away in your absence?

And, I have to ask, if you were me (which you are not), why would you dislike you?

[Amelia G]

I said I put all my life savings (401k) and retirement into buying these two old fixer upper houses - I've never done better than breaking even with "real estate" it's not ever been a source of positive income for me it's been a source of support and space for me to work in Houston where the cost of living is low.

I put the property on the market over a year ago and wasn't able to generate sufficient interest in this economy and in their condition to do much better than walking away from the mortages.

As for "soliciting donations" I was very firm about only selling prints, shirts, and personal stuff on ebay for almost all of the two year battle - it wasn't until the very end and desperation around the looming trial that we created a chipin applet and it was only live for 30 days and raised about 3k. That's a small dent in over $40,000 in legal fees.

I've spent over $18,000 in fees to my attorney and currently owe them over $25,000 - the income generated from fundraising never exceed the amount owed.

Thanks.

I do not understand how this could be, but I guess maybe you don't have visibility to what the lives of most artists are like.

Most artists either never get to quit their day jobs, not for any length of time, and constantly have work they do not enjoy get in the way of their art.

Or they live very month-to-month and never have a moment in time when they could have life savings or buy multiple rental properties.

If you did not make a living from photography *and* you did not make a living from your income real estate properties, then that means you just had the the money on hand to buy tons of photo equipment and jet all over the world for parties and shoots. I'd like to be able to spend more of my time that way too. So would lots of artists. Nothing wrong with doing it, if you can afford it, but I think there is something wrong with asking for charity from people who (a) didn't make the pact with the devil you did and (b) never had the opportunity to take years off to focus on being creative.

None of which means that a soft real estate market or a wretched economy or a soul-sucking lawsuit are not difficult things to deal with. But times are tough all over.

You are a grown man and you had every reason to know what Sean Suhl was like when you decided to climb into bed with him and certainly when you just publicly supported his ** venture again. I understand that there may be settlement restrictions on you explaining why you are speaking so highly of ** now, but presumably you are permitted to explain what motivated you to work for ** in the first place. It couldn't have been money because, it appears from what you say and from court documents, that, factoring in equipment and travel, you lost money overall on the shoots you did and ** ended up owning all rights to your work. All of which means that you not only lost money working for Sean Suhl, but you will never be able to recoup it because you do not own your own work. What in the world could have made that seem like a good idea to someone with your business experience?

[Bikerpunk]

I'll just reiterate

Fuck SG
and
Noone wants to see me naked, but it'd be funny to watch one of you artistes try to take a good naked shot

[Mindgames]

Bikerpunk - nobody needs to ask to see you naked. We put a webcam in your ceiling (and btw, we owe you 49 cents in appearance fees for the last 28 months. You'd get more but you kept bending over... naaasty...)

Shame to see LP arrive here under such circumstances - like Buster I hope he sticks about to see what we're normally like, but if I found a site arguing over my morals and finances I'd probably not feel an urge to socialize with them much. I agree with Amelia that BB prides itself on being a place where intelligent discussions can happen without any hidden agenda from 'the sponsor', but to me the tone of the duolog is veering more towards vitriol than journalism. I'm curious - was Phil asked for a comment when the article was being written?

[addictedimage]

Dear internet hate machine,

Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can tell that the settlement letter just posted was not written by Phil. It is obviously a letter written by SG lawyers and handed to him with the conditions of, "post this or your life is going to suck for a long, long, time."
I just got off the phone with Phil, and all he will say is "I'm not allowed to talk about it man..." But, as someone who knows Phil personally, this speaks volumes about what is going on.
Here is the lowdown from what I can tell;
A few weeks back Phil went unusually silent about the whole situation, and a few weeks after that he posted something about Apnea being sued. Since he wasn’t speaking about it to anyone, I called up the courthouse in Oregon, and low-and-behold there was a new case naming Apnea as the defendant.
So I sent them a few bucks and got the transcripts back in a few weeks. These documents state that Apnea is being sued for -breach of a confidential settlement entered into on March 8th-
The so called breach was for her selling apneaticmedia dot com. So it’s rather clear that on March 8th the two of them entered into some sort of resolution on the lawsuit, which probably included some clause that forbade them from disparaging SG in any way or from speaking about the case. At some point Phil and Apnea decided to sell apneaticmedia dot com and SG used that as an excuse to sue Apnea.
Now Phil posts this junk about being friends with SG. Bullshit. They aren’t friends…SG are just flexing their muscle to crush Phil. His post is proof of them trying to humiliate him.
So after fighting this case for two years of his life, and after spending over 40 THOUSAND dollars Phil and SG came to some sort of resolution. Followed immediately by SG suing Apnea.
I am extremely dismayed by all of the negative comment I have been hearing about this settlement. Not many of you would have held up for so long under such circumstances.
A smart person knows when to call it quits, when to move on with their life and rebuild. SG obviously wasn’t going to stop until Phil and Apnea had been utterly crushed. SG has the resources to make that happen.
When they come after you, it’s hard. When they come after your loved ones…it’s a whole different story.
Those of us that are friends with Phil and who have seen what he has gone through are wishing him well and are glad this is over. All your support and help means much more to him than you will ever know. Fighting this was tough….fighting it alone would have been unimaginable.

Phil,
Although this resolution is bound to leave a bad taste in some people’s mouths, all you have fought for is not in vain. Through your strength and perseverance you have open many people’s eyes to the truth behind Suicide Girls and because of you many more will be spared the same fate as you. Sure there are bound to be those who feel let down, but they don’t take the time to see the whole picture. You never asked to be a champion for this cause, but you fought nonetheless, and you fought hard.
Your friends still stand behind you.

Conan
addictedimage

[Morning Glory]

what is this interent hate machine? is that the new trent reznor album?

This is getting fun. I can't wait to see it play out on The People's Court.

[Mindgames]

"Internet Hate Machine" is the operating system Bebo runs on. It's Gentoo ported through a high school cheerleading squad.

I get why Conan felt the need to drop by and post, but I'm not too comfy about bringing Apnea's case into this argument, lest this turn into even more of a mudwrestling match than it already is.

(and get your damn minds out of the gutter.. Amelia and Apnea mudwrestling is not an image higher-minded souls like us should be entertaining...)

[addictedimage]

"Internet Hate Machine" is the operating system Bebo runs on. It's Gentoo ported through a high school cheerleading squad.

I get why Conan felt the need to drop by and post, but I'm not too comfy about bringing Apnea's case into this argument, lest this turn into even more of a mudwrestling match than it already is.

(and get your damn minds out of the gutter.. Amelia and Apnea mudwrestling is not an image higher-minded souls like us should be entertaining...)

It was just to help explain his mindset. Nothing more.

[Morning Glory]

Amelia and Apnea mudwrestling is not an image higher-minded souls like us should be entertaining...)

you must not know us very well.

[SyntheticShock]

LP is one of my favorite photographers, and its a sad situation to be in in the first place to see someone getting sued for "vindictive" reasons. I'm glad for him that it's done and over with now. I however, will not be a supporter of SG, knowing their practices, just because LP settled on an agreement.

[Morning Glory]

Hate the game, not the player?

[Bikerpunk]

No, hate the player.

Using courts vindictively is NOT cool.

[One Eyed Cat]

No, hate the player.

Using courts vindictively is NOT cool.

With the caveat that we all do follow internet laws established in 2005 (privacy etc), that is definitely an understatement. The frivolity of these suits clogs our courts and gives cover to those who would deny citizens legal recourse in legitimate instances.

This was just a contract suit though. I haven't had time to read the SG v. GG cites as yet, but I think it may backfire when people see a company trying to basically trademark "alt.porn".

OEC

[Bikerpunk]

I understand they've lost a LOT of members, due to their head-up-the-ass asshattery, fucking over their models, photographers, etc.

Live video chat including tits was cool though. But they were a douchey group, so I went out in my usual inimitable style, double kickstands thrown and bridges burned.

[One Eyed Cat]

I understand they've lost a LOT of members, due to their head-up-the-ass asshattery, fucking over their models, photographers, etc.

Live video chat including tits was cool though. But they were a douchey group, so I went out in my usual inimitable style, double kickstands thrown and bridges burned.

Yeah, I first heard about them some years back. One of my friends was dating one of the models. They wanted me to check it out. I did. It seemed a bit silly. The celeb orientation was obvious and I just didn't need the trouble.

In '06, I found out other people I'd known as a kid had been involved. I spouted off a bit but tired of it. I don't understand the level of vigilance of that company. The coin is good but this is ridiculous. I see a lot of silly shit in these subcultures (lacking a better name), it generally isn't worth much of our time.

OEC

[Amelia G]

Bikerpunk - nobody needs to ask to see you naked. We put a webcam in your ceiling (and btw, we owe you 49 cents in appearance fees for the last 28 months. You'd get more but you kept bending over... naaasty...)

Shame to see LP arrive here under such circumstances - like Buster I hope he sticks about to see what we're normally like, but if I found a site arguing over my morals and finances I'd probably not feel an urge to socialize with them much. I agree with Amelia that BB prides itself on being a place where intelligent discussions can happen without any hidden agenda from 'the sponsor', but to me the tone of the duolog is veering more towards vitriol than journalism. I'm curious - was Phil asked for a comment when the article was being written?

Philip made a public comment which seemed sufficient to cover the case. I didn't feel that an article on the fourth weird sex trial covered on BlueBlood.net this week needed an exclusive quote when I didn't require R. Kelly, Ira Isaacs, or Max Hardcore to give me an exclusive. And I've met Max on many occasions and never met Philip. Why should this coverage be different?

I would prefer that it be done without resorting to name-calling, but, if there are areas Philip feels his comments could present a different view of his actions, I am more than open to letting him comment here to his heart's content and actually discussing the issue.

[Amelia G]

Dear internet hate machine,

Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can tell that the settlement letter just posted was not written by Phil. It is obviously a letter written by SG lawyers and handed to him with the conditions of, "post this or your life is going to suck for a long, long, time."
I just got off the phone with Phil, and all he will say is "I'm not allowed to talk about it man..." But, as someone who knows Phil personally, this speaks volumes about what is going on.
Here is the lowdown from what I can tell;
A few weeks back Phil went unusually silent about the whole situation, and a few weeks after that he posted something about Apnea being sued. Since he wasn’t speaking about it to anyone, I called up the courthouse in Oregon, and low-and-behold there was a new case naming Apnea as the defendant.
So I sent them a few bucks and got the transcripts back in a few weeks. These documents state that Apnea is being sued for -breach of a confidential settlement entered into on March 8th-
The so called breach was for her selling apneaticmedia dot com. So it’s rather clear that on March 8th the two of them entered into some sort of resolution on the lawsuit, which probably included some clause that forbade them from disparaging SG in any way or from speaking about the case. At some point Phil and Apnea decided to sell apneaticmedia dot com and SG used that as an excuse to sue Apnea.
Now Phil posts this junk about being friends with SG. Bullshit. They aren’t friends…SG are just flexing their muscle to crush Phil. His post is proof of them trying to humiliate him.
So after fighting this case for two years of his life, and after spending over 40 THOUSAND dollars Phil and SG came to some sort of resolution. Followed immediately by SG suing Apnea.
I am extremely dismayed by all of the negative comment I have been hearing about this settlement. Not many of you would have held up for so long under such circumstances.
A smart person knows when to call it quits, when to move on with their life and rebuild. SG obviously wasn’t going to stop until Phil and Apnea had been utterly crushed. SG has the resources to make that happen.
When they come after you, it’s hard. When they come after your loved ones…it’s a whole different story.
Those of us that are friends with Phil and who have seen what he has gone through are wishing him well and are glad this is over. All your support and help means much more to him than you will ever know. Fighting this was tough….fighting it alone would have been unimaginable.

Phil,
Although this resolution is bound to leave a bad taste in some people’s mouths, all you have fought for is not in vain. Through your strength and perseverance you have open many people’s eyes to the truth behind Suicide Girls and because of you many more will be spared the same fate as you. Sure there are bound to be those who feel let down, but they don’t take the time to see the whole picture. You never asked to be a champion for this cause, but you fought nonetheless, and you fought hard.
Your friends still stand behind you.

Conan
addictedimage

I'm really not comfortable having the serious dialog about the case here dismissed as being part of some mysterious internet hate machine or part of how I am somehow supposed to not like Philip. Partly, if one wants to get mindless internet name-calling masquerading as debate going, aren't I supposed to not like his opposition on this case? More importantly, Blue Blood is a place for critical thinking and actual conversation which involves sharing different ideas. The forums are free and Philip and any other folks such as yourself are welcome to join for free and post their own opinions in this discussion. Think I can go post my views on ************ for free without being censored? I only ask that people try to refrain from name-calling like "tarbaby" or generalized hostility like "fuck SG" and try to just debate and discuss the actual core subject matter. You are also welcome to post pics in the cupcake thread and post selections in the zombie mall thread etc., although it may be helpful to read the FAQ first.

The truth behind ************ and Sean Suhl is not that they are evil because they tried to hold one photographer and one model to the unfair contracts they consensually signed. SG and Sean are evil because they have systematically gone about the business of trying to dismantle, co-opt, and destroy what was once a vibrant and collaborative underground art world and counterculture.

I understand why Philip would not want to keep bleeding his personal bank accounts for a lawsuit he was unlikely to win. But he made the choice to support SG early on, knowing what kind of people he was dealing with. Apnea was young and may have been innocent of what she was getting into, but Philip was an adult with extensive business experience and he had to have known. I'd like to know what could have made Philip support SG so heavily in every way, not just photographically, from early on and I don't think a court settlement would really prevent saying what he was initially attracted to.

If Philip didn't want to waste a lot of both his money and other people's on a painful lawsuit, there were a few easy ways to avoid it. First of all, he could have elected not to support bad people in the first place. Having already made that bad decision, he could have chosen to formally resign as an SG staff photographer and then walked on eggshells until the timeline for his noncompete ran out. Philip and Apnea may have been surprised that SG got upset about her solo girl site, but Philip had to know that his announced multi-girl site was going to antagonize SG, and he announced it, not only before his noncompete ran out, but before he had even quit. When I first heard he had posted the announcement of his forthcoming multi-girl site, I said that either SG must be backing it or he was about to get sued.

[Amelia G]

...

PS Off-topic, but nice port and you are welcome to add a link to it in your profile.

[Amelia G]

Apparently Conan's post where he said "Dear internet hate machine" was not directed at Blue Blood specifically, but rather a copy/paste of a letter he had posting on LJ in his journal linked to from the LithiumPicnic one, as a general response to the huge number of people angry about Philip Warner's handling of the ************ settlement.

Obviously, as regular members know, we don't like to edit previous posts here, so I'm posting this as an additional note.

[addictedimage]

Apparently Conan's post where he said "Dear internet hate machine" was not directed at Blue Blood specifically, but rather a copy/paste of a letter he had posting on LJ in his journal linked to from the LithiumPicnic one, as a general response to the huge number of people angry about Philip Warner's handling of the ************ settlement.

Obviously, as regular members know, we don't like to edit previous posts here, so I'm posting this as an additional note.

Correct Amelia, I wasn't specifically referring to blue blood or you, but the internet in whole. While I applaud the effort I see you put in to your analysis of most situations I have also come to notice that when you feel passionately about a situation you sometimes lose your objectivity a tad. So for the same reasons that I didn't take Phils post at face value, I took your article with a grain of salt as well.
But unfortunately there are many people out there that don't have the inclination to dig a little deeper so I felt I had to stand up for a friend when his voice has been silenced.

[Amelia G]

Correct Amelia, I wasn't specifically referring to blue blood or you, but the internet in whole. While I applaud the effort I see you put in to your analysis of most situations I have also come to notice that when you feel passionately about a situation you sometimes lose your objectivity a tad. So for the same reasons that I didn't take Phils post at face value, I took your article with a grain of salt as well.
But unfortunately there are many people out there that don't have the inclination to dig a little deeper so I felt I had to stand up for a friend when his voice has been silenced.

I prefer magazine style writing to newspaper style because I believe nobody is flawlessly objective 100% of the time and I like it better when people state their opinions, rather than implying them. That said, I think it is important to keep an open enough mind that one is capable of processing new data as it comes in. I am wholly open to accepting new information and adjusting my opinions and viewpoint as appropriate. I disapprove of believing dogmatically in either everything or nothing about a topic, so I would be surprised if you could come up with three examples of me feeling so passionately about something that I am unable to process new data objectively and allow it to change my mind if it should.

Seriously, leaving this article aside for a moment, can you come up with three examples of my immense passion preventing me from being objective?

Below is a screen shot from ** of what Google Blogsearch describes as:

"EVERYTHING SG: SG vs. Lithium Picnic legals woes all over?
15 Jun 2008
Posted by: LadyLike."



I'm willing to give Philip or anyone who likes him (or doesn't) a venue to discuss what happened without name-calling or meaningless sound bites. That is freedom and opportunity which would probably not be offered or granted if the shoe were on the other foot, but I actually still believe in trying to do the right thing. Obviously, various members in good standing have already posted on the Blue Blood boards and made statements which are not wholly damning of Philip's handling of this situation, so I really do not see why he would feel the need to name-call and tell me I am not supposed to like him, with no reasons why supplied.

[One Eyed Cat]

Correct Amelia, I wasn't specifically referring to blue blood or you, but the internet in whole. While I applaud the effort I see you put in to your analysis of most situations I have also come to notice that when you feel passionately about a situation you sometimes lose your objectivity a tad. So for the same reasons that I didn't take Phils post at face value, I took your article with a grain of salt as well.
But unfortunately there are many people out there that don't have the inclination to dig a little deeper so I felt I had to stand up for a friend when his voice has been silenced.

I read everything on the internet that way. It's more the overall situation pertaining to the suit that interests most of us. Make no judgment on the individual settling a given case.

OEC

[addictedimage]

I'm really not comfortable having the serious dialog about the case here dismissed as being part of some mysterious internet hate machine or part of how I am somehow supposed to not like Philip. Partly, if one wants to get mindless internet name-calling masquerading as debate going, aren't I supposed to not like his opposition on this case? More importantly, Blue Blood is a place for critical thinking and actual conversation which involves sharing different ideas. The forums are free and Philip and any other folks such as yourself are welcome to join for free and post their own opinions in this discussion. Think I can go post my views on ************ for free without being censored? I only ask that people try to refrain from name-calling like "tarbaby" or generalized hostility like "fuck SG" and try to just debate and discuss the actual core subject matter. You are also welcome to post pics in the cupcake thread and post selections in the zombie mall thread etc., although it may be helpful to read theFAQ first.

The truth behind ************ and Sean Suhl is not that they are evil because they tried to hold one photographer and one model to the unfair contracts they consensually signed. SG and Sean are evil because they have systematically gone about the business of trying to dismantle, co-opt, and destroy what was once a vibrant and collaborative underground art world and counterculture.

I understand why Philip would not want to keep bleeding his personal bank accounts for a lawsuit he was unlikely to win. But he made the choice to support SG early on, knowing what kind of people he was dealing with. Apnea was young and may have been innocent of what she was getting into, but Philip was an adult with extensive business experience and he had to have known. I'd like to know what could have made Philip support SG so heavily in every way, not just photographically, from early on and I don't think a court settlement would really prevent saying what he was initially attracted to.

If Philip didn't want to waste a lot of both his money and other people's on a painful lawsuit, there were a few easy ways to avoid it. First of all, he could have elected not to support bad people in the first place. Having already made that bad decision, he could have chosen to formally resign as an SG staff photographer and then walked on eggshells until the timeline for his noncompete ran out. Philip and Apnea may have been surprised that SG got upset about her solo girl site, but Philip had to know that his announced multi-girl site was going to antagonize SG, and he announced it, not only before his noncompete ran out, but before he had even quit. When I first heard he had posted the announcement of his forthcoming multi-girl site, I said that either SG must be backing it or he was about to get sued.

Amelia, just because we are adults, doesn't mean we don't make mistakes. In fact I relish my mistakes as they form the basis of me being a well rounded, experienced individual. And when Phil went to SG he wasn't mr uber experienced photographer. He was just an extremely talented individual trying to find his place in one of the most competitive job markets there is. Photography is not easy to make a living at. The only reason I am able to run a successful photography company is that I have fucked up many times and learned from my mistakes. Unfortunately for Phil, his first major bad experience was the one that would end up with him being sued.
It's easy to say what we all would have done in the situation from the sidelines, but the truth is for all the mistakes that each of us make we tend to be most critical of others.

[addictedimage]

I prefer magazine style writing to newspaper style because I believe nobody is flawlessly objective 100% of the time and I like it better when people state their opinions, rather than implying them. That said, I think it is important to keep an open enough mind that one is capable of processing new data as it comes in. I am wholly open to accepting new information and adjusting my opinions and viewpoint as appropriate. I disapprove of believing dogmatically in either everything or nothing about a topic, so I would be surprised if you could come up with three examples of me feeling so passionately about something that I am unable to process new data objectively and allow it to change my mind if it should.

Seriously, leaving this article aside for a moment, can you come up with three examples of my immense passion preventing me from being objective?

I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with having a viewpoint, an opinion or passion in your writing. Any good editorial writer has strong viewpoints about what they are discussing. And I agree, dogmatic viewpoints are for those who can't think for themselves. I am not tying to put you in the defensive. That was not the intent of my last post. I appreciate you having your opinions while at the same time allowing others to have theirs.

[Amelia G]

Amelia, just because we are adults, doesn't mean we don't make mistakes. In fact I relish my mistakes as they form the basis of me being a well rounded, experienced individual. And when Phil went to SG he wasn't mr uber experienced photographer. He was just an extremely talented individual trying to find his place in one of the most competitive job markets there is. Photography is not easy to make a living at. The only reason I am able to run a successful photography company is that I have fucked up many times and learned from my mistakes. Unfortunately for Phil, his first major bad experience was the one that would end up with him being sued.
It's easy to say what we all would have done in the situation from the sidelines, but the truth is for all the mistakes that each of us make we tend to be most critical of others.

Oh, I certainly agree with you there. Everyone of any age makes mistakes. Believe me, no one is harder on me than me, when I make a mistake. I do think that part of being a well-rounded person is, as you say, gaining experience from mistakes. Part of the experience comes from living with the consequences of one's choices. Nobody is perfect, but we should all strive to do the right thing and learn from errors.

Some of the problem here is that Philip seems to want to have his cake after he has already eaten it. He wants to be able to spend his time jetting to parties and shoots without having to work at a way to make that a viable business. He wants the free publicity of a huge lawsuit without the expense. He wants the comfort of a settlement without the backlash from those who gave him donations and support. He wants a cause celebre when that is to his advantage and just business when that is easier. He wants to be able to get press coverage he likes in Adult Video News or AltPorn.net without getting press coverage he does not like in BlueBlood.net or Fleshbot. He wants to speak at the people on the Blue Blood boards without having to speak with them.

[addictedimage]

Oh, I certainly agree with you there. Everyone of any age makes mistakes. Believe me, no one is harder on me than me, when I make a mistake. I do think that part of being a well-rounded person is, as you say, gaining experience from mistakes. Part of the experience comes from living with the consequences of one's choices. Nobody is perfect, but we should all strive to do the right thing and learn from errors.

Some of the problem here is that Philip seems to want to have his cake after he has already eaten it. He wants to be able to spend his time jetting to parties and shoots without having to work at a way to make that a viable business. He wants the free publicity of a huge lawsuit without the expense. He wants the comfort of a settlement without the backlash from those who gave him donations and support. He wants a cause celebre when that is to his advantage and just business when that is easier. He wants to be able to get press coverage he likes in Adult Video News or AltPorn net without getting press coverage he does not like in BlueBlood net or Fleshbot. He wants to speak at the people on the Blue Blood boards without having to speak with them.

Again, it's all a matter of perspective. The image we portray to the public and the truth of the matter are usually quite different. I am not Phils PR man, so I can't really devote any more time on this matter, I would just like to add that Phil didn't ask for handouts, didn't ask for charity...it wasn't until a month before the end that he even put up a link to donate money. Even that left him feeling conflicted. He didn't like asking for money. He tried to raise the money through prints and such. When you talk about the "free publicity" please realize how much $40K could have bought you with a professional PR firm. It would have been money better spent if that was his desire. And as far as him "jetting around to parties" understand that they coincide with work, and with shooting his quota for other sites. I keep telling him to take a break from shit and come out for a vacation, but the only time he manages to fly out is when it is for work.

And if he really wanted the "comfort" of a settlement he would have chosen that option long ago. Do you really think that SG could have proven $40k in damages if they settled early? This is obviously a settlement of exhaustion, not something that he is benefiting from.

[funkatron]

As for "soliciting donations" I was very firm about only selling prints, shirts, and personal stuff on ebay for almost all of the two year battle - it wasn't until the very end and desperation around the looming trial that we created a chipin applet and it was only live for 30 days and raised about 3k. That's a small dent in over $40,000 in legal fees.

Whose fucking fault is that then, man? It's not like you found out you had cancer.

But hey, it's nice you guys are all friends now! Go forth and empower women!

[Bikerpunk]

Funkatron wins.

[Amelia G]

Again, it's all a matter of perspective. The image we portray to the public and the truth of the matter are usually quite different. I am not Phils PR man, so I can't really devote any more time on this matter, I would just like to add that Phil didn't ask for handouts, didn't ask for charity...it wasn't until a month before the end that he even put up a link to donate money. Even that left him feeling conflicted. He didn't like asking for money. He tried to raise the money through prints and such. When you talk about the "free publicity" please realize how much $40K could have bought you with a professional PR firm. It would have been money better spent if that was his desire. And as far as him "jetting around to parties" understand that they coincide with work, and with shooting his quota for other sites. I keep telling him to take a break from shit and come out for a vacation, but the only time he manages to fly out is when it is for work.

And if he really wanted the "comfort" of a settlement he would have chosen that option long ago. Do you really think that SG could have proven $40k in damages if they settled early? This is obviously a settlement of exhaustion, not something that he is benefiting from.

#1 Yes, I do know what $40k could have bought with a professional PR firm -- about half a year and the coverage might not be sympathetic. Philip got three times that and he got other people to chip in for the tab.

#2 Philip was soliciting money for his defense waaaaaaaaay more than a month before he settled, unless he settled waaaaaaaaaay before anyone heard about it. The $3,675 figure from the chipin donations is misleading. One needs to factor in all the nightclub promoters who threw benefits for him and all the photographers and models and painters etc. who were pressured to sell their own work and give their money to Philip. And, even if he sent someone a T-shirt, that is still soliciting donations if the T-shirt just promotes his legal case. A real charity breaks down what their costs were, where the money came from, and where the money went. I (and many people) have asked Philip to disclose that information in multiple forums and he has run away and hidden every time.

#3 I said, "He wants to be able to spend his time jetting to parties and shoots without having to work at a way to make that a viable business." Doing the first part without the second part is trying to have his cake and eat it too. Making art is a different and more active form of leisure than some, but it is still a luxury that it is unreasonable to ask other artists to foot the bill for. Keep in mind that I do have some experience here and practice what I preach in precisely this.

#4 Most importantly, please, if you are discussing the issue with me, discuss it with me and not the point some other person made. I think Philip should have settled because he was in the wrong. I think he should have kept his word to Sean. I think he should have settled the first day Paul Loving emailed him. He was not fighting the good fight against the bad guys; he was having a contract dispute about business and it is not like he cared when Sean Suhl's antics damaged any other person's business. I think Philip's word should have been worth something, even if he gave it to an unpleasant corporation. I think what SG asked of him sucked, but I also think he should have kept the promises he made to SG, once he made them.

#5 I am kinda not into the thing where Philip either pops over here to engage in name-calling and then exit without actually engaging in meaningful back-and-forth dialog or he phones you to come over here and have the last word. A genuine conversation is over when all parties have communicated fully to one another and addressed what each has brought up.

[SI_commentator]

#1 Yes, I do know what $40k could have bought with a professional PR firm -- about half a year and the coverage might not be sympathetic. Philip got three times that and he got other people to chip in for the tab.

Now, Amelia, that's simply dishonest of you to claim that the sort of PR you'd get for $40K is in any way comparable to the PR LP got, especially that "three times" nonsense. Or at least, if you seriously think that way, your knowledge of PR is lacking.

And you yourself are proof that the PR LP did get wasn't always sympathetic, so that part of your point collapses on its face!

#2 Philip was soliciting money for his defense waaaaaaaaay more than a month before he settled, unless he settled waaaaaaaaaay before anyone heard about it. The $3,675 figure from the chipin donations is misleading. One needs to factor in all the nightclub promoters who threw benefits for him and all the photographers and models and painters etc. who were pressured to sell their own work and give their money to Philip. And, even if he sent someone a T-shirt, that is still soliciting donations if the T-shirt just promotes his legal case.

How, exactly, do you know that the $3675 number is misleading? I.e. how do you know it doesn't factor in all the issues you seem to think it omits? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't... I don't know, and (the point) you don't either.

A real charity breaks down what their costs were, where the money came from, and where the money went. I (and many people) have asked Philip to disclose that information in multiple forums and he has run away and hidden every time.

Ah, you seem to have missed the fact that Philip isn't, nor has he ever claimed to be, a charity of any kind! I, for one, can understand both sides of the "disclose or not" issue, and it's nowhere near as clear-cut as you imply. For example, if you sell a print to raise money (as Philip did), how much of that money is the profit that you disclose to the circling vultures, and how much is the cost? Do you just consider out-of-pocket costs, or do you use the price you'd have gotten under normal circumstances? What about labor -- do you claim your own time spent handling orders as an expense, or do you work "for free"?

Any and all of those are perfectly valid choices, but when the only likely consequences of disclosure would be to provide ammunition for those who, for whatever reason, dislike or are otherwise opposed to him, it seems disingenuous of you to try to make a big thing out of his reluctance to provide you with more rocks to throw!

#3 I said, "He wants to be able to spend his time jetting to parties and shoots without having to work at a way to make that a viable business." Doing the first part without the second part is trying to have his cake and eat it too. Making art is a different and more active form of leisure than some, but it is still a luxury that it is unreasonable to ask other artists to foot the bill for. Keep in mind that I do have some experience here and practice what I preach in precisely this.

Really? Are you willing to go on record to state that you would REFUSE to "jet to parties and shoots" unless it was as part of a viable business? If so, it follows that your writing and/or photography is purely motivated by business considerations, which means that it is (at best) "commercial art", not "passion" art. And despite your bland assertion, artists (and art lovers) regularly and reliably "foot the bill" for other artists, as it's their money and their choice. Of course, _compelling_ them to do so is another matter, but that's clearly not the case here.

#4 Most importantly, please, if you are discussing the issue with me, discuss it with me and not the point some other person made. I think Philip should have settled because he was in the wrong. I think he should have kept his word to Sean. I think he should have settled the first day Paul Loving emailed him. He was not fighting the good fight against the bad guys; he was having a contract dispute about business and it is not like he cared when Sean Suhl's antics damaged any other person's business. I think Philip's word should have been worth something, even if he gave it to an unpleasant corporation. I think what SG asked of him sucked, but I also think he should have kept the promises he made to SG, once he made them.

Well, Amelia, that's an assertion that lacks a shred of foundation! How, exactly, did you decide that Philip "was in the wrong"? What crystal ball did you use? The _only_ way anyone could know the answer to the rightness or otherwise of the situation is if the dispute came to court, and the court reached a decision. That didn't happen, so all you can do is state that your opinion that you side with SG in the belief that a business owner can restrict the fundamental nature of an artist's work even after the owner ceases to compensate the artist for that work.

For example, by your position, a rap artist signed to a record label may find that, once the contract expires, that rapper may not write rap songs for a period of time. Is that reasonable? Is it fair? Is it lawful?

It is also baseless for you to suggest that Philip did NOT keep the promises he made to SG. The reason that there is a controversy here (and hence a lawsuit) is that each party is asserting that the tangible objects (e.g. the contract) mean different things (e.g. it may well have been that SG believed Philip was agreeing to never shoot alternative styles unless it was for them, and Philip believed he was agreeing to not shoot SG models in SG styles). This is entirely normal; it is why we have courts to rule on contracts!

#5 I am kinda not into the thing where Philip either pops over here to engage in name-calling and then exit without actually engaging in meaningful back-and-forth dialog or he phones you to come over here and have the last word. A genuine conversation is over when all parties have communicated fully to one another and addressed what each has brought up.

That would seem to be another case of you, Amelia, making unsubstantiated claims! And, incidentally, calling the kettle black.

Did Philip "phone addictedimage"? I doubt it, but I don't know, and neither do you. Is addictedimage a proxy for Philip? I think any fair-minded observer would conclude that he isn't. Given that, you casting other people's actions as less than admirable is, itself, a case of an equivalently disreputable conduct as the "name calling" you attribute to Philip.

Moving on, here's the executive summary why Philip ought to have prevailed in this situation, and why SG was indisputably in the wrong: artistic talent is not like business knowledge, and thus non-compete clauses that make sense for (say) salesmen when applied to artists amount to prohibitions against a salesman working in sales. Further, artistic style is not, and should not, be the property of any one individual.

Here's the executive summary of why Amelia sides with SG on this topic: the number of artists who have what it takes to produce regular, dependable content in any genre (including "alt") is limited. If you remove one of those artists, the commercial market for the products of the rest is enhanced. Thus it is in Blue Blood's interest to see that anyone who produces content that might be seen as similar to Blue Blood's should fail. Philip is personable, produces content that people like, and has a good reputation amongst the modelling community. Thus, even if Philip is not a direct competitor of Blue Blood, he provides material to competitors, therefore his departure from the marketplace is in Amelia's best interest.

In this regard, Amelia and SG behave similarly: they both claim some kind of moral ownership of the altporn "scene", and fight (albeit in rather different ways) to preserve their business's interest over the best interest of their customers. This is entirely understandable, if not exactly laudable.

However, I tend to think better of those who are honestly savage in protecting their turf compared with those who smile while attempting to sink a blade in one's back.

You can trust a self-proclaimed dictatorship more than sham democracy...

SI.

[Bikerpunk]

Dude, you're a sockpuppet. You fail on principle.

[Amelia G]

Dude, you're a sockpuppet. You fail on principle.

[DoctorZ]

Moreover, I saw quite a lot of straw-men arguments in there...

Did anyone else, or am I going crazy?

[Joel Awesome]

SI, beyond all of the slippery slope fallacies you've commited here we have no clue who you are and I for one feel compelled to disregard everything you've said out of hand and encourage Amelia to not waste her time an energy trying to pick appart your poorly constructed logic traps.

The vast majority of the issue is the accountability grey area that comes from soliciting donations or presenting wares as "support for the cause" without transparent accounting of how that support was applied when the "Cause" was presented as a rebellion, a rebellion that was apparently put down and smoothed over with a "we're all friends now" which is absolutely going to generate negative public sentiment towards both sides.
That said, again I like Philip and wish him all the best and hope that all of this is resolved in a way that sees his life and career become bigger and better than it was before but just because I like someone doesn't mean I won't call bullshit when I think I see it.

[Amelia G]

SI_commentator,

If you do not know what retaining the services of a professional PR firm costs, then you do not know what retaining the services of a pro PR firm costs. As you wish to be anonymous, of course, no one here knows your credentials or lack thereof.

There is nothing wrong with Philip (or anyone else) wanting to keep their finances private. I would normally never comment on someone else's fiscal situation. But Philip presented himself as a charitable cause. Yes, yes, I know he was probably not technically registered as a charity with the U.S. government, but the situation was presented to people as a cause they should get behind and not as just business. If it was just business to Philip, then he had no right damaging people's faith by taking their money and then supporting something they saw as the enemy.

It is my understanding that the $3,675 number is solely the chipin money Philip received, as that is what appeared on the online thermometer. I have had many artistic folks tell me personally that they were, for example, told that they would not be permitted to participate in an art show unless they contributed all proceeds from their own work to Philip. Some of these were people who could only dream of ever owning real estate but who did not want to be disincluded for not agreeing to such terms. If all the art shows and club nights and other fundraisers were actually included in that sum total, I will be surprised, but, as no one is privy to just how much money Philip pulled out of the scene, it is certainly possible that I have a misimpression there and I am wholly open to being corrected by actual facts. I can answer your question about whether Philip should pay himself for his time out of his own legal defense fund though -- No.

I do not accept that being an artist means never having to keep your word. Do I think the noncompete clauses SG tries to foist on some people seem nice? No, I do not. Would I sign one? Probably not, but I would keep my word if I gave it. I've only sold all rights to my photography once in my life. It was for a Playboy gig where Forrest Black and I had to shoot these vanilla swinger travel agents and it was totally Playboy's access and Playboy's money and it was work that my heart was really not in. I've only signed a noncompete once and it was when I managed an adult boutique and I kept my word to my former employer, and honored the noncompete term, even after I no longer worked for her.

There might be some technicality by which Philip could get away with breaking a noncompete after he signed it. If he had more money than SG. But he would still be breaking his word and a man's word ought to mean something. The time to negotiate contract terms is before you sign on the dotted line and cash the checks.

I'm not going to address the issue of my level of passion for my art because y'all need to decide if you are whining that I am too passionate to be objective or competent in basic math because I am too dispassionate. I'll be happy to discuss that point, once y'all decide what it is.

I think everyone here, including you, knows that I do jet to parties and shoots, albeit perhaps less often than Philip, but everyone has obstacles in life and I do not make my problems everyone else's problem, and that means that how I make all that happen doesn't matter to anyone who is not me.

Conan stated clearly in his posts here and elsewhere that he spoke with Philip on the phone. I base my theory that Philip and Conan spoke on the phone on Conan having stated it as fact and Conan seeming like a credible witness.

The only people who think evil dictatorship at SG is a good thing are maaaaybe people who work for SG.

The difference between name-calling and communicating disapproval of someone else's behavior is that people can have an intelligent discussion of the latter and come to an accord.

Lastly, I buy tens of thousands of photos from photographers every year, with very artist-friendly terms. I've been an editor and publisher longer than I have been a photographer. Are you seriously seriously trying to assert that I think Hot Topic-esque ************ winning a dispute with a photographer who would otherwise be freelance is good for my business???

I'm not really into the whole "turf" thing, as the help Blue Blood gave ************ when they launched attests. In fact, pre-SG, we actually did a lot of press coverage and collaboration with first other zines and then other sites. Still do some, but not as much. SG really brought the ridiculous juvenile competitive nonsense into the arena.

My issue is that I think every person's word should be their bond and they should fulfill their obligations to both former employers and current supporters. Philip broke his word to his employer by violating the noncompete and he broke his word to his supporters by saying there are no bad people at SG and spamming affiliate links for them. Although really my coverage of this was pretty similar to the coverage of the R. Kelly, Ira Isaacs, and Max Hardcore sex-related legal battles and they aren't popping in here to call me names while refusing to have an actual civil conversation.

[Amelia G]

SI, beyond all of the slippery slope fallacies you've commited here we have no clue who you are and I for one feel compelled to disregard everything you've said out of hand and encourage Amelia to not waste her time an energy trying to pick appart your poorly constructed logic traps.

The vast majority of the issue is the accountability grey area that comes from soliciting donations or presenting wares as "support for the cause" without transparent accounting of how that support was applied when the "Cause" was presented as a rebellion, a rebellion that was apparently put down and smoothed over with a "we're all friends now" which is absolutely going to generate negative public sentiment towards both sides.
That said, again I like Philip and wish him all the best and hope that all of this is resolved in a way that sees his life and career become bigger and better than it was before but just because I like someone doesn't mean I won't call bullshit when I think I see it.

I restrained myself from picking apart all of it, but I just had to hit the high points.

[Bikerpunk]

Ever thought about branching into fine art, Amelia G?

[DoctorZ]

Or maybe a politician, she seems pretty good at diplomacy.

Oh, right, she isn't a spineless lying dirtbag. Nevermind.

I don't like politicians or government. Does it show?

I've never been to SG, so I don't know of their quality. Although, after this, I'm not sure I'll be looking there any time soon.

[addictedimage]

#1 Yes, I do know what $40k could have bought with a professional PR firm -- about half a year and the coverage might not be sympathetic. Philip got three times that and he got other people to chip in for the tab.

#2 Philip was soliciting money for his defense waaaaaaaaay more than a month before he settled, unless he settled waaaaaaaaaay before anyone heard about it. The $3,675 figure from the chipin donations is misleading. One needs to factor in all the nightclub promoters who threw benefits for him and all the photographers and models and painters etc. who were pressured to sell their own work and give their money to Philip. And, even if he sent someone a T-shirt, that is still soliciting donations if the T-shirt just promotes his legal case. A real charity breaks down what their costs were, where the money came from, and where the money went. I (and many people) have asked Philip to disclose that information in multiple forums and he has run away and hidden every time.

#3 I said, "He wants to be able to spend his time jetting to parties and shoots without having to work at a way to make that a viable business." Doing the first part without the second part is trying to have his cake and eat it too. Making art is a different and more active form of leisure than some, but it is still a luxury that it is unreasonable to ask other artists to foot the bill for. Keep in mind that I do have some experience here and practice what I preach in precisely this.

#4 Most importantly, please, if you are discussing the issue with me, discuss it with me and not the point some other person made. I think Philip should have settled because he was in the wrong. I think he should have kept his word to Sean. I think he should have settled the first day Paul Loving emailed him. He was not fighting the good fight against the bad guys; he was having a contract dispute about business and it is not like he cared when Sean Suhl's antics damaged any other person's business. I think Philip's word should have been worth something, even if he gave it to an unpleasant corporation. I think what SG asked of him sucked, but I also think he should have kept the promises he made to SG, once he made them.

#5 I am kinda not into the thing where Philip either pops over here to engage in name-calling and then exit without actually engaging in meaningful back-and-forth dialog or he phones you to come over here and have the last word. A genuine conversation is over when all parties have communicated fully to one another and addressed what each has brought up.

These are all points we could banter forth over for hours. Phil didn't call me and ask me to come over here, I followed your link from your LJ and felt I had to stick up for a friend. I am going to let you have the last word on this as I really have to get back to work. Taking pictures of boobies takes precedence over internet debates any day...although I do love a good debate.
Ciao,
Conan