My Dumble archive

[butwhatif]

A pissing match is all it is, thanks to you Rob for all your efforts, they are appreciated----

[Allynmey]

Rob, Ignore him. He contacted me demanding I remove a picture of "Dumble-toe" from one of Brandons posts. I asked him to kindly provide proof of ownership and copyright and forward them to my attorney....poof...he's gone...never to darken our door.

He is an office of one who feels he can purchase copies of old pictures and that somehow that allows him to retroactively pursue copyright issues on public domain fair use.

Remember, if your site is non-profit or non-income generating, what losses can he claim?


Pound sand, sir!

I also reminded him that the only reason he sells any books at all, is that we here and other sites have paved the road for people to learn about Dumble amps. Don't shit where you eat comes to mind.

[Rob Livesey]

Hi Chaps,

Thanks for all the comments.

I'm going to leave my site alone and see what develops (if anything), and I honestly can't be bothered giving him the time of day even to reply, I've got better things to do.

If I receive any more correspondence I'll post it here for general amusement.

Take care,
Rob.

[Rob Livesey]

Hi All,

What follows is the text of an email exchange between Jesse Schwarz and two of my friends who were selling a Dumble Cab on ebay. Bear in mind that my very good friend actually owns this cab, I see it every time I visit, it's
one of the the Chris Cross cabs shown in those pictures from the guitar player interview.

I don't have copies of replies sent to Jesse Schwarx, only his emails to my friends.

Read on.......



From: Jesse Schwarz <adumblebook@googlemail.com>
Date: 9 July 2009 11:53:33 BDT
To: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xx.xx
Subject: Re: Dumble ad eBay - copyright violation


xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx
(address edited out)


your eBay item: xxxxxxxxxxxx - Dumble speaker cabinet.


July 9, 2009


Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

sadly you have not answered any of our emails.

Just because a picture is out in public, doesn't mean that
somebody doesn't own it. If such is used in another work,
the user should first get permission, otherwise the owner
is able to ask for compensation.

We are now charging you with the copyright infringement
and the digital reproduction of our b&w picture of Howard
Dumble and Christopher Cross.

It is our decision as to whether to license any of our work
to anybody at a cost that we determine.

We are billing you with the following fee for the use of the above
mentioned picture.

You have used our picture twice. Per use we charge you
with 500,-EUR.

Please pay 1.000,-EUR (Onethousand-Euros) within
the next 10 days to the below mentioned account.
Latest by July 25, 2009.

Yours sincerely

J. Schwarz


A DUMBLE BOOK
Jesse Schwarz Publications

BGL Bank, Luxembourg

IBAN: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
BIC: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

----------------------------------------------------------------


On 12 Jul 2009, at 11:36, Jesse Schwarz wrote:


adumblebook@googlemail.com


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xx.xx

xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx
(address edited out)



your eBay item: xxxxxxxxxxxx - Dumble speaker cabinet.




July 11, 2009


Dear xxxx,

we never sent you an email through eBay.
All of them were sent to your official email address.
The email address mentioned above and from the one
you finally answered.

Our billing from July 9, 2009 is still valid.

Please pay the bill latest by July 25, 2009.

Out of precaution, we must tell you that we will take
further legal action, if your payment does not arrive
by July 25, 2009.

Yours sincerely

J. Schwarz

----------------------------------------------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: Jesse Schwarz
To: xxxx xxxxx
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: Dumble ad eBay - copyright violation


adumblebook@googlemail.com

xxxx@xxxxxxx.xxxx.xxx


July 24, 2009


Dear Mr. xxxxx,
Dear xxxx,

excuse our late email reply.

Thank you for your interesting and extensive email Mr. xxxxx,
but all I can tell you is that your email does not change a thing.

We gave your email to our copyright lawyer, as we also gave
him the two eBay ads before and we were waiting for his final
answer.
As you can see, there are already costs involved here.

We sent you xxxx at xxxxxx xxxxxx two emails. Both remained
unanswered, so we had to go and see our lawyer.

A picture is not public domain, even if there are no names on it.
Please also check: www.google.com, if you search for any picture
there, where you probably got ours, you must've read what Google sais.:

IMAGE MAY BE SUBJECT TO COPYRIGHT

Not knowing, does not protect from being liable.

You and your friend are businessmen. You used our picture
for a business transaction, without permission.

We highly advise you to pay the license fee/our bill.
Latest by:

August 8, 2009

We very much do hope that this case will not have to
go any further. Out of our own experience we know
that a copyright lawyer in the UK will at least cost
you 700,-pounds.

Yours sincerely

J. Schwarz

[bluesfendermanblues]

Even if your friend is a business man, selling his Dumble cap through ebay, he is still not making a profit showing the picture, but by selling his own cabinet.

The picture is not the subject of the transaction, the cabinet is.

I don't think the 'dumble book people' or their legal representation has a solid case agianst your friend.

[Hotrod Ford]

Hi Chaps,

I have 5 days to comply, do you think I'll get extradited to the US for trial ?? ha ha

Rob.

Totally weird , I pretty sure Dumble is pretty pissed at him too, for using his name and all,

but regarding lawsuits , isnt Jesse S actually based in Europe ?

[blackguardbob]

I'm new here and wanted to chip in on this.

I personally know the two gentlemen who are being pursued regarding the unauthorised use of a photograph inocently lifted from a website in the public domain.

The reason the picture was not removed within 10 days of the owners email being sent is simple. The gentleman who actually posted the picture had been away for a week or so with no computer access and did not read the owners demand until after the 10 day period was over.

While he was away he had recieved hundreds of emails in his absence and by the time he had trawled through them all it was just passed the 10 day period.

As soon as he read the emails posted above by Rob Livesey in context he immediately removed the picture and emailed the owner back apologising and explaining why there had been a genuine delay in responding and removing the picture.

I think it is unreasonable and unfair for him to pursue them in this manner as they have completely complied with the owners wishes at the first available oportunity.

From reading through the emails the owner has sent, I can't help feeling that his threats are a cheap attempt to 'scare' them in to paying him 1000 euros.

[gilgalad101]

His cupidity is rather ridiculous if you ask me.

[selloutrr]

until a written legal letter is in your mail box and held in your phsyical hands and read with your own eyes.... don't loose sleep.

my guess he bought (or did he) the rights to a few pics for his book and his investment on his books isn't going as well as he planned so he's trying to do anything he can to make money.

I had my attorney read his contract when the book came out, he laughed so hard I almost got uncomfortable and basically said what a crock of shit. if you feel like throwing your money away go ahead if not wait until it ends up used on amazon and buy it then, if it's even real.

still the word that always comes to mind is SCAM!

[briane]

He is just scraping the floor.

My feelings for HAD have recently changed.

He is now no better than a common bum on the street begging for a few quarters to feed his sad crack cocaine habit in my book, or whatever it is.

We pay him great respect in our desire to learn about him, educate ourselves, and use him as a role model. Really he is no better than that bum that keeps following me around all day asking for a quarter, just in search of another fix. Plenty of others have had great knowledge and success, only to ruin the entire legacy due to their petty ways.

Jezus alexander, if you did not waste all your money, screwed over your clients, instead treated your customers like friends and business associates, you would be a very rich and respected man. Instead things like this show us your petty and shameful nature. Unfortunately you are no longer a man, just a dog begging for scraps, based on your actions.

A man only owns one thing in his life, and that is his word. Every thing else is just borrowed for a little while.

Consider applying that philosopher to your life alexander, and you will be much happier and successful, and perhaps even respected once you are gone. As is you have a long way to go before you can achieve true peace.

[Bob-I]

My feelings for HAD have recently changed.

This may be misdirected. I think the guy causing all of this is the writer of the Dumble book Jesse Schwarz. I agree HAD could've run his business in a more professional manner but this guy Jesse S seems worse.

[briane]

This may be misdirected.

I hope you are right. This whole issue sent me into breakdown mode of what a crumb of a person would try and pull this hogwash.

I doubt it will happen, but I think its time HAD stepped in and said something like 'it was not me', lest we get the the impression that (and will assume) that it is him, and thusly his intent is to also ruin his reputation.

If it was not HAD, I think the originator owes the world an apology for misrepresenting him or herself, though of course they did that privately.

Your likely correct, someone paid money for the pictures so they could reprint them, then later noticed they were covered under fair use, and they really did not need to pay for the images. Now their just trying to recoup from a mistake they made, and have no rights or jurisdiction.

Next someone will be knocking on my door, telling me I cant use that circuits in my personal, non-commercial build. They can go to where the sun don't shine!

[Hotrod Ford]

My feelings for HAD have recently changed.

This may be misdirected. I think the guy causing all of this is the writer of the Dumble book Jesse Schwarz. I agree HAD could've run his business in a more professional manner but this guy Jesse S seems worse.

I believe that is correct !


Briane , Dumble is not to be blamed here,

Dumble is not fond of this guy either,

Jesse S is the real bad guy here !

Dumble is a great amp designer,
and without him and his designs this would never have happeded !
and neither would any clones be built

please keep that in mind

[briane]

Briane , Dumble is not to be blamed here,

thank goodness.

I was feeling a bit like discovering superman was actually lex luthor, this is quite a relief. It was the feeling of a hero being dethroned to tell the truth.

I agree dumble was an innovative and extremely talented amp designer and builder, and his work should be respected.

[dreric]

I think the Dumble disease is contiguous!!!! In a few short months Jessie has gone from publishing a book to trying to extort money and to maintain a dominion over images and information.

I have a friend who is a public defender and I asked him once if he ever asked is clients if they were guilty. His response was, "that's irrelevant, its not whether someone is guilty or innocent it's what can you prove in court" This is the nature of these things. If someone reproduced an image that was clearly marked "copyright" then provided that the copyright is still valid then they are liable and action could be taken against them. To win in court Jessie would have to prove that he was the copyright holder, the poster knew they were infringing on copyright, did not respond to a "confirmed receipt" (that means real paper signed for at delivery) of a cease and desist order and if he wants to win anything how he was financially hurt and the poster financially benefited.

What typically happens in these things is that after a lot of saber rattling and dick measuring things go away or legal action is taken. Unfortunately, even if the person suing you is dead wrong you'll spend thousands proving your innocence.

One thing troubling me in this thread is the amount of personal character assassination HAD has received here. It's clear that there are those among us who think of this forum as a tribute to HAD and his work. There those who find it difficult to comprehend HAD's attitude regarding what he perceives as his property. These are just our perceptions and opinions, we are entitled to them. IMO, HAD is also entitled to have his own opinions. Just because we may not understand or agree with them doesn't give us license to question his sanity or to inferring that his behavior is sociopathic.

If HAD truly had trademark and copyright protections for his original work and his expansions of traditional tube circuits I think is likely that he would take legal action against those who have used the information in this forum and from studying his products because they are profiting from his work. Even without trademark and copyright HAD could cause a lot more trouble than he does. One of the only trademarks that Gibson and Fender really own is that to the shape of the head stocks on the guitars. That didn't stop Gibson for locking down PRS in two years of ligation over the "singlecut".

Personally, I think HAD views himself as an artist not a technician. Many artists who have an impact on the world struggle with the rewards they receive monetarily for that impact. Eddie Van Halen changed the way that electric guitar was played in the late seventies. Yet, apparently he felt burned by Music Man, Charvel and Peavey. He says that his current deal with Fender is the first one he's happy with. Like Van Halen, Hendrix and many of the great artists of the twentieth century, HAD has contributed and "original idea" into the world. Whether he did so by rearranging parts or the order of parts is irrelevant as he thought of doing that and created something that hadn't been seen or heard before.

For than alone he has earned my respect.

Whew, sorry for the rant but someone has to say these things

eric