Matthew Inman Takes Photos Of $211,223 In Cash To Send To FunnyJunk & Charles Carreon
from the enjoy dept
Charles Carreon dropped his highly questionable case against Matthew Inman, IndieGoGo, the American Cancer Society and the National Wildlife Fund last week. It was pretty clear he was going to lose (and in a big, bad way). However, he claimed "victory" because, to avoid further complications, Inman made sure that all the money went directly from IndieGoGo and/or Paypal to the charities, so there was never any question of what he might do with the money. Of course, as part of his original pitch, he had promised to photograph all of the money raised as cash and send it to Funnyjunk. Inman got around the rules by taking out the same amount of money from the bank, and photographing it in a variety of different poses, some of which I'm assuming Inman won't mind if we reproduce here.First up, the money in a duffel bag and laid out on a table, including a shot of Inman in front of it.
Either way, we await Carreon's response.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: charles carreon, matthew inman, money, photos, the oatmeal
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Um...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
his wife
It fits her like a glove. a horrible pungent disgusting used autopsy glove.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What playing w/ $211k is like
Apparently, Matt invited whoever wrote this article over to help him manipulate the cash.
There are also more pics there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gotta love some people's definition of victory
When I was in high school, a punk kid was picking on myself and a friend. Finally my friend got in a fight with the kid, got him in a headlock and proceeded to punch him in the face repeatedly. The punk finally pushed away and asked my friend if he had had enough. I guess the punk felt like my friends arm might have been getting tired?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gotta love some people's definition of victory
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gotta love some people's definition of victory
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When I recommend Techdirt to my friends and this is what they see they click away before they get a look at the scary stuff. It detracts from your message and makes Techdirt look less serious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Perhaps we can now get back to how Inman has accused people of theft, when no one has stolen anything and has basically refused to use the DMCA process with regards to funnyjunk and then whined about having to do so to get stuff he doesn't want up taken down, even when funnyjunk have gone to the lengths of chasing down everything he complains about outside the DMCA process and tried to take them down too.
And though he hasn't threatened to litigate, which is to his credit, he has otherwise adopted much of the same tone and attitude as the MPAA and RIAA which writers and readers here normally consider to be irrational and unreasonable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
We pick on the **AAs mainly because they consistently refuse to innovate, try to stifle innovation wherever possible, and tout suing grandmas and laser printers as 'beating piracy'. Somehow, I don't think Inman is anywhere like in the same league. If TechDirt had to post a story every time someone whined about the DMCA but didn't do much else, we'd drown under even more crud than the trollshills spout.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
We also castigate them for complaining about said "theft" rather than simply using the DMCA process which is there to specifically deal with the complaint of others using your work without permission and Inman has also complained about being expected to use it.
Carreon's idiotic behaviour was obnoxious and a distraction and indeed an entertainment albeit of the sideshow tattooed and bearded pig lady variety but some of Inman's attitudes are of a piece with the nonsense heard from the copyright extremists.
Of course he is "entitled" to whine, but he doesn't deserve to be praised for doing so unreasonably just because Carreon was a bigger douche.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
But why would we keep saying it, if Inman hasn't called it theft ever since? Should we keep banging on that old saw?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But why would we keep saying it, if Inman hasn't called it theft ever since? Should we keep banging on that old saw? "
Oh, for heaven's sake, that's how this whole thing started, it's fundamentally what Carreon was initially complaining about in his hamfisted, thickheaded, idiotic, moronic and overly aggressive way, although he specifically targeted the claim by Inman that deliberate copyright infringement was the business model of Funnyjunk rather than the claim that it was theft.
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/funnyjunk_letter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sure he still has the originals, but if you don't know who's property it is, how can you find them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If people are inclined to make judgements on this kind of behaviour then they can draw their conclusions and make their judgements on the basis of such reporting.
Personally I think it was a bit silly of Inman, but find such silliness to be trivial and entirely normal on the internet and note the comedic nature of his website and how very apt and appropriate a bit of internet silliness is in that context.
This is why I mildly judge but mostly don't care about that unfunny comic woman reported on Techdirt as having an internet hissy fit at Something Awful.
Yeah, her behaviour is a bit silly, but it's the internet stupid.
If she starts wasting the time and resources of the justice system and making a legal nusiance of herself, I'll review my opinion of her.
Equally, Inman's behaviour was an example of typical internet silliness, and so entirely human and mundanely ordinary, not to mention contextually apt and appropriate, and so nothing non drama whores would make a fuss out of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You are correct. He did use the dreaded "theft" word. It is not the correct word to use. It would have been best for him to use the proper term of copyright infringement.
has basically refused to use the DMCA process with regards to funnyjunk and then whined about having to do so to get stuff he doesn't want up taken down
He didn't refuse to use the DMCA process. He realized that it was a pointless and fruitless endeavor that would have eaten more time and effort than he was physically able to do. He realized that even if he did send proper DMCA takedowns for all the comics he found on that one site, for each one taken down, 50 more would have popped up whether on Funnyjunk or elsewhere.
Instead on expending all that energy and resources on a fruitless quest, he instead vented his frustration and then went about his business. Funnyjunk was the one that escalated things.
even when funnyjunk have gone to the lengths of chasing down everything he complains about outside the DMCA process and tried to take them down too.
They did that as a purely reactionary and defensive move than anything else. They had hoped that it would have eased the complaints that Inman and others had against them. They were not required to do so.
And though he hasn't threatened to litigate, which is to his credit, he has otherwise adopted much of the same tone and attitude as the MPAA and RIAA which writers and readers here normally consider to be irrational and unreasonable.
He complained and then went about his business. That is nothing like what the MPAA and the RIAA have done. Had the MPAA/RIAA simply complained about disruptive technology and then went about their business, we would not be having this conversation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I think though that you are attempting to split hairs, when saying that Inman's claims which were both libellous and inaccurate and despite being the exact same foundation that is used by the various AA's in their push to extend copyright and destroy rights that were until recently taken for granted.
In a way we have been lucky that **AA's and their ilk didn't take Inman's approach as their ridiculous law suits and so on have attracted far more attention and therefore more opposition to the laws that they are getting passed on the basis that copyright infringement is just the same as theft and that businesses like Google, Youtube etc business models are based on that copyright infringment.
If they had gotten all their constraints to personal freedom in place before acting, then the world would be a different place even now and the future would be far bleaker.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/rapeutation-charles-carreon-still-not-done-wi th-the-oatmeal/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+arstechnica%2Find ex+%28Ars+Technica+-+All+content%29
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
But then I'd say the same to Carreon to.
Birds of a feather, or should that be of a beak and claw. I'm thinking they deserve each other.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Sorry for the triple posts, I has teh dum today and can't brain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If you woke up married to her, would you actively disagree and risk her wrath? I'm not sure I am that brave. I'd probably nod and smile and say "yes, dear" and hope my pets weren't boiled.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Will this idiot never stop digging.
I was beginning to pity him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/rapeutation-charles-carreon-still-not-done-with-the-oat meal/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Excellent use of understatement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
O_____O
I wonder: how well do you think Charles is sleeping these days?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wow. This deserves to be an Internet meme for expressing an 'existential crisis'. That whole diatribe really made it seem like she "might" need medication... in a hurry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Over-share.
Note to Carreons: I don't want to know about the hostile and pathetic power struggle in your so called "partnership". You're supposed to be each other's lover, not each other's rival you douchbags.
You made the baby Boy George cry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nice copyright infringement, Pirate Mike. Why ask permission when you can just take what you want?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Stupid Troll is Stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
More evidence that trolls are brainless windbags that don't know anything about the law and should just stfu rather than open their mouths. Instead, they just prove their ignorance again and again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ha lovely drama, sweet juicy drama
:D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Confusion
Insofar as Carreon represents Funkyjunk, it would be logical to send the promised photo and drawing to him. Once someone retains legal counsel it is appropriate to communicate through that counsel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Confusion
I'm not sure anything about this entire Carreon/Inman saga qualifies as "appropriate" :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Confusion
But ... in normal circumstances (not here), a party should generally not be communicating with anyone about the case but their own counsel, as anything they say is admissible against them (even if the person they said it to gets it totally wrong). Here... no matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Confusion
Well, that and law enforcement. But yes, parties may communicate directly with other parties without involving counsel. It is smarter to talk through the lawyers, since anything you say can and will be used by the other party, but you can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More photos
Plus Funnyjunk's owner has been identified and is Bryan Durel of NYC.
http://www.nvannualreport.com/entities-DLLC-FUNNYJUNK-LLC.aspx
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EPIC WIN!!!
Inman claims victory over teh Intarwebs, ascends next boss level! w00t!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Abbr
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Abbr
FU
Philanthropy >
Douchebaggery
FunnyJunk
Yeah, think he coulda if he wanted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No brainer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
whoops
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enough Already!!
Why does anyone want to keep digging up the rotting corpse of Carrion?
Can we just move on? This is such a waste of good digital space.
Please no more...pretty please?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Enough Already!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Small Technical Point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A Small Technical Point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: A Small Technical Point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: A Small Technical Point.
didnt give it near the thought you did, it was just on my way to criticizing the request for compressed eye candy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This will roll and roll for some time yet.
DIRA is a crime and needs to stop
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Carreon
you're still a jerk and Inman's won.
Lay you empty head to rest,
Don't practice law no more......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Notice to agent is notice to principal, so yeah, it should work just fine. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And you wouldn't like me when I'm angry.
Also, Nazis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Unbelievable
"While it's not the largest sum of money I have ever had a substantial role in raising," he wrote to me, referencing the $211,223.04 collected by Inman's fundraiser, "it is the first time I've seen it go to charity, and I think it's great."
http://digitallife.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/10/12667082-will-laywer-and-cartooni st-continue-fighting-for-charity-in-the-wrestling-ring?lite
This guy needs to get smacked hard. I do hope at least the EFF is going to pursue legal fees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Unbelievable
Still a bit twisted claiming 'credit'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
surely thats gotta be against some sort of trade-descriptions act?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]