Verdict for photographer in self-litigated copyright lawsuit

[minneapolis]

<p>Hi, I wanted to share the news of a favorable verdict in a copyright lawsuit

I've been litigating for the past two years (I'm a photographer, and represented

myself). It went to trial last Nov. 5th and I was awarded $19,462.00 for the

unauthorized use of two photos on Feb. 15th.</p>

 

<p>They were used by Vilana Financial, Inc., who refused to pay the licensing

fee and got my small claims court case tossed on jurisdiction. I wrote about

their unauthorized use of my photos on my website. They sued me for defamation.</p>

 

<p>I didn't have the money for an attorney, so I defended myself pro-se. They

produced a sales agreement to prove the photos were taken by Michael Zubitskiy,

who sold them the rights. There is no such person as Michael Zubitskiy, and

after 2+ years of litigation, a judge finally ruled as such -- they made up the

whole story, and had just swiped the photos from my website.</p>

 

<p>I submitted this story to Slashdot, so perhaps some of you know about it.

There are more details on my webpage about the case:

<a href="http://www.cgstock.com/essays/vilana">Gregerson v. Vilana Financial,

Inc. (06-cv-01164)</a>. The judgment is here: <a

href="http://www.cgstock.com/essays/gregerson_v_vilana_judgment_152.pdf">Findings

of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order for Judgment</a>.</p>

 

<p>I will check back and respond to any follow-ups below, but I can also be

reached at chris@cgstock.com.</p>

 

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>Chris Gregerson

<p>[<em>Signature URL deleted. Not allowed under forum rules</em>]

[bobatkins]

You're a little late - we already have discussed it!

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00OYjK

 

You might want to followup comments in that thread.

[WJT]

<b><i>Excellent</i></b> Chris! I offer my sincerest congratulations to you on your successful outcome. This is really an uplifiting reaffirmation of the American judicial system, though I bet you worked your tail-end off to get what you deserved. Best Regards.

[charles_reid]

Congratulations! And this lets us know not to do business with a "financial" institution who believes they have the right to steal.

[tholte]

Good work, how would you like to get a mortage from that guy?

[ellis_vener_photography]

Congratualtions but what I would like to know is why, given the guys behavior, the judgement wasn't for the full amounts (totaling about $180,000) that you might have been awarded for copyright infringement?

[danielleetaylor]

I want to know why the guy isn't being prosecuted for perjury since it's apparent that he made up "Michael Zubitskiy".

 

I also want to know why it takes our court system two years to deal with such a straight forward case. Why are lawyers, who are officers of the court and are supposed to be held to a high legal standard, who are supposed to know and obey the law, allowed to use delay tactics and make arguments before the court that they KNOW are false? For example: the motion filed by Boris Parker to dismiss the suit, claiming the use was not "commercial." It is so painfully obvious that the use WAS commercial that the judge should have removed the attorney from the case on the basis that he was incompetent to argue a copyright case. An attorney removed from a case in such a manner should be restricted from taking any cases involving related law until he/she passes a specific test about 10x longer and more difficult than the bar exam, just on the specific body of law.

 

If attorneys were punished for making clearly false motions, for delaying the court and bullying the opposition, then they wouldn't do such things and we could clear our court system of cases.

 

If you've ever watched a trial proceed, it makes you want to scream.

[ellis_vener_photography]

I'm married to a very fine attorney and I agree completely with DLT.

[mahonri_moriancumer]

You have a judgment against a corporation. Now, can you collect on it?

Why don't you go to the FBI and push them(after visiting with your US Congressman and Senators) to go after the guy for you. They would do it for Disney, Sony, MGM, and so many of the big guys. Why not push them to get off their dead butts and actually do what they are paid to do. It should be very easy for them as the court record already shows the whole thing.

 

You saved a fortune on Attorney fees but sure lost a lot of time in the process... and this guy will change to a different corporate organization and do it again. Unless criminal charges are levied and pursued against him.

[minneapolis]

<p>I've posted an update today about how Andrew Vilenchik has created two new corporate identities since the trial, owns a home appraised at over a million dollars, and has refused to pay the judgment:

<a href="http://www.cgstock.com/essays/andrew_vilenchik">Andrew

Vilenchik, Community Finance Group, and Custom Properties, Inc.</a></p>

 

<p>I will obtain discovery on the two corporate defendant's

assets. If Vilenchik lies, has siphoned them or transferred them,

and continues to refuse to pay the judgment, there will be

consequences (e.g. being found in contempt of court, which

can mean being jailed). I updated my complaint with the

Minnesota Department of Commerce; there are rules against

those who hold a mortgage originator's licenses

and refuse to pay federal damages awards.</p>

 

<p>Regarding the damages amount: the statutory maximum

of $150,000 is only awarded to

repeat offenders and when the infringement was more

substantial (in terms of number of copies, for example).

I was awarded $10,000 in statutory damages for

thumbnail size use of a photo in a brochures with an alleged

press run of a couple thousand copies; if he infringed again,

and I uncovered more use that the brochure, it might be

closer to $150,000.</p>

 

<p>In reply to the occasional comment that it wasn't worth it:

I was sued for six causes of action (and sued first); you don't have the option of saying "I decline to litigate" when someone

sues you! They demanded I replace my critical website with one endorsing Vilana, so their potential customers would be

unaware of their behavior. I would also have to

give up any compensation for my photographs,

and sacrifice my first amendment right. These things

are "worth it" to me.</p>

[charles_reid]

Bravo Chris

 

There are too many "roll over and grovel" people in the world. Bravo to you.

[tholte]

Sounds like the Russian Mafia has invaded Minneapolis, just kidding!

[akochanowski]

Excellent job, Chris, and this coming from a litigator.

[photobycate]

You deserve a standing ovation. You were willing to work your heiny off and not back down because you were dealing with a corporation. But, I do not think you would have backed down, no matter who it was. Standing up for your rights takes a lot more courage, time and effort than most people think. We are all very proud of you.

[bob_schueler]

WOW - what a great ending to your story Chris! Kudos to you for your diligence!

 

I've personally been victimized by attorneys in the years I owned rentals. While I can say that there are honest and ethical ones out there, the lawyers who are dirty are truly cesspool scourge, right out of a John Grisham novel. Legal ethics is as contradictory a term as business ethics, but nonetheless an area in which the public needs to draw attention and demand legislation. In the meantime, Ship "Vile 'n Chick" back to Siberia :)