TweetPhoto & Their Lawyers Discover A New Way To Look Ignorant On The Internet
Nov 19th, 2009 | By James Lewin | Category: Commentary, Podcasting Law 
We’ve seen a lot of ignorant new media moves over the last few years – but it looks like photosharing site TweetPhoto and their lawyers could be blazing a new trail.
TweetPhoto, via their representatives Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, has sent a takedown letter full of legal threats to podcaster Frank Peters, because Peters published an on-the-record interview with the TweetPhoto CEO Dan Caulfield (now former CEO). In the interview, CEO Caulfield discussed business plans that the company did not want publicly discussed.
Here’s an excerpt of the TweetPhoto takedown letter:
Dear Mr. Peters:
We represent TweetPhoto, Inc. (“TweetPhoto” or the “Company”). It has come to our attention that during the course of your recent interview with Dan Caulfield, Mr. Caulfield breached numerous continuing legal obligations that he has to TweetPhoto, including his obligations not to disclose the Company’s confidential and proprietary information.
The Company is concerned that the reproduction of your interview with Mr. Caulfield on your website will substantially damage TweetPhoto and TweetPhoto will not hesitate to enforce its rights against any person contributing to this damage. Accordingly, on behalf of TweetPhoto, we hereby demand that you immediately disable and remove any link, transcript or any other reproduction of your interview with Dan Caulfield from your website – http://thefrankpetersshow.com.
In the history of ignorant PR moves, sending a podcaster and blogger a threatening takedown notice for publishing an on-the-record interview with your company’s CEO has to be right up there at the top.
The story of TweetPhoto’s bizarre PR fiasco has now made it into TechCrunch and onto TechMeme. Within a few days, TweetPhoto will be best known, not for photosharing, but for loose-lipped CEOs and for hassling bloggers and podcasters.
Well the lawyers don't know anything about the internet so of course they think that they can plug a dike by sticking their little dicks in it.
They have made the situation worse, unless "the company" actually wanted the word to get out and get tons of free buzz and free PR and be able to blame the law firm while the "situation just gets sorted out."
This is a situation which might best be handled by ignoring the whole "lawyer thing" unless they get insistent. Then you go public and spill the beans.
Well the lawyers don't know anything about the internet so of course they think that they can plug a dike by sticking their little dicks in it.
They have made the situation worse, unless "the company" actually wanted the word to get out and get tons of free buzz and free PR and be able to blame the law firm while the "situation just gets sorted out."
This is a situation which might best be handled by ignoring the whole "lawyer thing" unless they get insistent. Then you go public and spill the beans.
The Lawer must be cute enough .i guess