Falcon Photo Sues Pimpdog

[gonzo]

Seattle, Washington - Falcon Foto, owner of the world’s largest copyrighted library of erotic images has filed a multi-million dollar copyright infringement lawsuit against Trey Hickey, Lucas Bradfield, E-Media, LLC and Noble Developments Inc, owner and operators of Pornkings and its affiliated websites. In its filing (attach filed copy) Falcon alleges that Pornkings has infringed its rights by using Falcon images on its web sites and free hosted galleries without a license.

This suit, if successful, will have a sweeping affect on the industry in that any Pornkings Affiliate who has ever sent traffic through a Pornkings free hosted gallery that had a Falcon image could be held liable as an infringer. That could amount to thousands of dollars personally per Affiliate.

Attorney Robert Apgood of Adultlaw.com said, “Some say that pornographers should not sue each other. Wrong….they should not steal from each other.”

Falcon President Jason Tucker says, “Falcon will vigorously protect its intellectual property and protect its legitimate licensees. Trey, Lucas, E-Media, LLC and Noble Developments, Inc. have infringed our copyrights with complete disregard for the law and disregard for the potential exposure they have forced on their Affiliates. We gave them almost a month to settle. With no other course of action, we have filed a lawsuit in Federal Court and anticipate a successful outcome.”

Attorneys Robert Apgood and Spencer Freeman are representing Falcon.

[Hammer]

MULTI million eh? Wow, I guess Pornkings musta stole a buttload of content? Just how many videos can someone get for a multi million dollars? Or is Jason suing for pain and suffering?

I can't remember but I think I used to promote Pornkings so I sure hope Jason isn't going to sue me too.

[TheEnforcer]

It will be interesting to see if Falcon goes after the affiliates as well as Pornkings. They might get more money from teh suit but they would create a lot of bad will in the community if they do.

[Jace]

The article from Xbiz, it says that Roger V and a couple other people are going to be paying also

Gretchen Gallen
Thursday, September 28, 2006

SEATTLE – Falcon Foto has filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against the current and prior owners of Porn Kings and its affiliated websites.
The multimillion-dollar lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, Wash., alleges that the owners of Porn Kings infringed on its rights by using Falcon images on websites and free hosted galleries without a license.

Falcon seeks damages and injunctive relief from Porn Kings’ original owners John Does 1 and 2, subsequent owners Marvad Corp. and Roger Vadocz, Trey Hickey and E-Media Group, and current owners Lucas Bradfield and Noble Developments.

Licensing negotiations between Falcon Foto and the first owners of Porn Kings began in 2003, but according to the lawsuit, they failed to reach a purchasing agreement for Falcon-produced content. The suit further claims that the defendants used Falcon content regardless of their legal right to do so, and that Falcon content was allegedly passed along from each subsequent owner of Porn Kings, without licensing permission.

Falcon attorney Robert Apgood told XBIZ that at no point did any of the owners of Porn Kings have licensing agreements with Falcon.

Porn Kings affiliates that have sent traffic through a Porn Kings-owned free hosted gallery that featured unlicensed Falcon images could also be held accountable.

Porn Kings operates many adult sites, among them Gutter.com, Chubby.com, AdultPussy.com and StonerBabes.com.

Falcon is represented by Apgood and Spencer Freeman.

A Porn Kings representative would not comment on the suit.

[gonzo]

Marvad . . . now there are some scamming motherfuckers.

[Hammer]

Well of course Roger will be paying, it was his company. It's a shame to see Treys name in there though.


Not.


p.s. If Falcon actually does go after certain affiliates, they could single handedly dismantle the entire affiliate program concept over night. Would any of you ever promote a sponsor using their content again if you knew you were liable for the content they provided you?