Update on Pink Truth's attempt to silence their critics (this site) with false copyright infringement claims

Well, I was waiting to see what action (if any) blogger would take regarding the alleged copyright infringement.

As you may or may not have noticed, I went through the posts alleging copyright infringement and removed any infringing content that I could see.

I also posted a note on the ones that had (apparently) no such infringing content essentially asking blogger to define what exactly was being labeled as infringing.

As the weekend passed and none of the posts were removed, I assumed that this action had proved sufficient. However, as of this writing, I see that it was not.

Now, I know that I can counter notify blogger that the content is indeed legitimate. And I might just do that. However, as Sean (at Franchise Pick) points out, this would amount to "standing up for my "right" to make fun of those who make fun of Mary Kay" (quote is from Franchise Pick website, no copyright infringement intended) This (to me) seems a bit petty.

I have not yet decided what I will do about all of this. I believe that there needs to be a place where the lies that are told on Pink Truth can be exposed. I hope that this site will continue to provide a venue for that. I do not feel that the dozen (less one) posts that were removed are all that crucial to the spirit of exposing those lies.

I am currently leaning toward doing nothing. It is truly sad that Tracy feels so threatened by the truth that she would stoop to this level of bullying and harassing with such obvious deception. Nonetheless, I am beginning to feel that the best thing to do is to not do anything at all.

By the way, and in the interest of full disclosure, as I have read and educated myself on the subject, I believe that the full screen, screenshot that a few of you may have seen could have been construed as a copyright violation, particularly with my encouragement to all of you to not visit Pink Truth. Worthy of a DMCA take-down notice? Not really. Technical violation? Possibly.

Finally, let me apologize for the sudden sparsity of posting lately. I believe that I will be needing to change the schedule of posting here. It seems that all of the regular authors, myself included, have been quite busy lately. I think that I may begin posting more like once a week than trying to produce something daily. Still trying to figure out what works best for the goals/purposes of this site.

Please let me know what you think. What do you want from this site? What do you like? What is important? What can you do without?

Update on Pink Truth's Outrageous Claim of Copyright Infringement

On Saturday, I informed all of you that someone claiming to be from Pink Truth (but without so much as a signature) alleged that I have "infringed" and "violated" their copyrights on this site. (Link - Pink Truth Threatens Balanced Mary Kay)

Now, as I assured you all in my last post, the very nature of my use of images and text from that website is clearly not a violation or infringement. Nonetheless, even as I contemplated what to do in order to ensure that I would not find myself being forced into a courtroom to discuss this, I received an email from blogger (the ones that host this blog), indicating that someone has, indeed, claimed that "content in your blog allegedly infringes upon the copyrights of others".

The following posts are the ones that are being called into question:

(For your convenience, I have labeled them all as accurately as possible)

Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 1
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 2
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 3
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 4
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 5
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 6
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 7
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 8
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 9
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 10
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 11
Pink Truth Lies About Copyright Infringement 12

Here is the part that I find most interesting:

We are asking that you please remove the allegedly infringing content in
your blog. If you do not do this within the next 3 days (by 10/2/08), we
will be forced to remove the posts in question. If we did not do so, we
would be subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its
merits.

Here is the thing. If "blogger" who is owned by google, does not want to deal with a claim of copyright infringement, "regardless of its merits", I have to wonder, why would I?

They conclude with:

"We can reinstate this content into your blog upon receipt of a counter
notification pursuant to sections 512(g)(2) and (3) of
the DMCA."

I have not yet decided what I will do about this. My life is fairly busy right now and I have other "drama" cooking in my "real" life. But in the meantime, I want to keep all of you up to date.

I am particularly interested in making sure that everyone sees clearly the pathetic tactics and maneuverings that someone who is afraid to be completely truthful will stoop to in order to maintain the cloak of lies that she must constantly perpetuate in order for her jaded world view to continue to seem "true".

I now put it to you, my readers. What should I do?

Special thanks to those of you that have already emailed me with your findings on this subject.

Pink Truth Threatens Balanced Mary Kay with Copyright "Violation" and "Infringement"

Greetings Balanced Mary Kay Readers,

I suspect that what I am about to share with all of you will come as no surprise to most of you. Nonetheless, I have chosen to be completely transparent with all of you, my readers, about what is going on.

I am, unfortunately, faced with a dilemma. This dilemma involves deciding between doing what I know is right and risking a legal battle that would most likely be awarded to whoever has more time and money – or – allowing something I know to be wrong to prevail in order to “play by their rules” and stay safely away from the potential of facing frivolous litigation. Unfortunately, thanks to the way our law is currently written, right and wrong will probably have less to do with this decision than money and time. As the adage goes, “The golden rule prevails, the one with the most gold makes the rules”.

As most of you are aware, at 12:01 AM (PDT) Friday, September 26, 2008 I posted a screenshot of PinkTruth.com’s most recent attack on Mary Kay. The intention of posting this image, naturally, was to allow discussion about the claims represented in that post. I also explained that I would make every effort to provide similar images on a daily basis.

Shortly after 9:00 AM (PDT) Friday, September 26, 2008 I received the following email:

from Pink Truth pinktruth@gmail.com
to This information removed because a private email address that has never been posted on this site was used to deliver this message to me.
date Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:04 AM
subject Copyright infringement
mailed-by gmail.com

It's come to my attention that you're taking screenshots of pages of Pink Truth material and posting it for Balanced Mary Kay readers. That's a copyright violation, as I own the rights to the material and have not given you permission to post it. Please remove the infringing material immediately, and in the future, refrain from using PInk Truth's content without my express permission.

Now a few notes about this.

First of all, I am not an attorney, and I don’t claim to have a full grasp on copyright law.
Second, keeping the above in mind, I am extremely confident that this use of screenshots is NOT a copyright violation.
However, because of the first statement, and because I have not yet received legal counsel about this, I have chosen to err on the side of caution.

It is unfortunate that the people spreading lies about Mary Kay, ironically on a website with the name “truth” in the title, are so afraid of any scrutiny of their assertions that they would resort to ambiguous and unsubstantiated threats about “copyright infringement” to prevent their lies from being exposed.

I do not take kindly to being manipulated.
I firmly believe that Pink Truth is spreading malicious lies about Mary Kay.
I wholeheartedly intend to find a way to expose their lies for what they are.
I will, starting immediately, begin looking for the solution to this problem.
In the meantime, I ask for your patience.
I also would ask that – if you have any knowledge on this subject or could offer legal advice, recommendations or potential safeguards to consider – you contact me at balancedmarykay@gmail.com

Balanced Mary Kay will continue offering the pros and cons, the good and the bad of Mary Kay. As always, all are welcome to participate and we welcome everyone’s opinion. Please keep in mind that we STILL do not allow opinions to be expressed as facts… even if doing so is necessary for your “style” of self expression.

Now, what do you think about this?

It is obvious that someone from Pink Truth is reading this site. What would you like to say to them?

Someone claiming to own the “rights to the material” on Pink Truth is suggesting that using an image of their work for the purpose of criticism (as I have done) is “a copyright violation”. However, I think that the U.S. Copyright Office – Title 17, U. S. Code, Section 107 clearly disagrees. What do you think?

In my opinion, this feature is important. Possibly crucial. Do you agree? Is this worth putting the energy into? Should I just give in, roll over and allow them to continue spreading vicious lies about Mary Kay unchecked? What do you think?

I know that some of you have not yet created a profile. I am sorry for the inconvenience, but I hope that you will take this opportunity to log in and weigh in on this important decision.

Thank you all for your support and continued patience.