Page 1 of 2

recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 8:03 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Image

Let’s have a little adult conversation here, the bullshit has got to stop, it is crazy on all sides, and in my 50+ years in this city I have watched this shit boil and simmer, boil and simmer, boil and simmer, and it just gets ugly and nasty, so let’s grow up and act like the people we want others to be.

Yesterday morning a website called “Recall Mike Summers” went up on the Internet. Greg Mahoney posted the site on Facebook, and how foolish it was. Unwittingly, Greg was broadcasting something he did not agree with, which is foolish enough, but also set into gear a machine that was not going to be stopped or slowed down. Betsy Voinovich sent me a message, “Did you see recallmikesummers.com on Facebook?” I said I hadn’t so I went there.

A simple site above calling for the signing of a petition to recall Mike Summers.

For the record this is a patently idiotic idea. I am sure the people who came up with it never bothered to look at the order of succession, or it would have been a "Four More Years For Mike" website. I have huge differences with Mayor Summers on many things, but as I have often stated, I would give him another four years when placed next to other names in the wings.

It doesn’t matter, FREE SPEECH I support. BUT, they had stolen 3 images from the Lakewood Observer, and all of our images and stories are copyrighted, and protected under international copyright laws. The Observer is very protective of our property and the intellectual property of those who contribute. If you don’t believe me, ask the Lakewood High Band, the Lakewood Chamber of Commerce, Chris Bindel, Ivor Karabatkovic, Ed FitzGerald, and others about it. This project is built on intellectual property and we will always back the creator in any way we can, even through the courts. Those who steal, and re-post Lakewood Observer material, simply do not understand the project, and\or are afraid to enter our realm of discussion so post to their aggregate sites, or page.

For the record, I do not believe we ever said no to a request made in writing, with the exception of the Lakewood Observer brand and trademarks, which we have taken legal action on many times, and always refuse unless we are part of the promotion. So I immediately called Lakewood Observer legal to get a cease and desist order placed on the individual or group for illegal use. One of my lawyers, Matt Markling, was the first to call back, and I explained the issue and he said he would look into it.

TRANSPARENCY - The website was registered under a hidden name through Go-Daddy, so that it took legal action to notify the owner(s) of the site that we were demanding a cease-and-desist to the web site owner for all images that belonged to Lakewood Observer, Inc. or myself. Matt Markling has always been a proponent of Transparency and Intellectual Property Rights and he got on it. Within hours, the photos were gone, hours later the website was gone.

It would be my understanding that when the owner of the note got a letter from Go-Daddy that the photos had been traced back, he realized you cannot hide on the Internet, that laws, theft, slander, libel, still exist, and a person cannot really hide. This city desperately needs transparency and a real conversation, perhaps the owner(s) of the site realized the greatest disinfectant is sunshine.

DEDICATION TO THOSE PRINCIPLES - I told Matt Markling heads would roll on this one. He never said, “Who cares about Mike Summers?” He never said “Screw Mike Summers…” He said, “Stay by your phone, I'll handle this...” Minutes later I got a call from Go-Daddy on my listed phone number, I confirmed my password and that he was my attorney of record on this, they hung up. Two hours later as I said, the images were down, two more hours later the website down. People in this city have got to put away their differences when it comes to doing the right thing. Too many people in this town keep quiet, cover up and even worse go along with things they are personally against because of peer pressure, connections to one of the people, a sick clubbiness that permeates this town and stops good people from doing good things that are right for this community.

Now after the photos came down, I got a call at the Observer offices. The person on the other end was apologizing for stealing the photos, and was asking us not to sue, as they were taken down. I spoke with the person who wished to be anonymous, and he said the same thing so many people say, “They were on the internet, I thought I could just use them.” That is a great falsehood. “I wasn’t using them for commercial reasons.” Another great falsehood. People cannot take images without permission. Think of the lawsuit of Bruce Spingsteen and Chris Christie, Chris Christie playing Springsteen music at his rallies made it seem like the Boss had given him permission. An artist/writer/photographer always remains in control of their work, but it is only as good as the enforcement of those copyrights. Anyway, I asked him, “Who would you rather have in office?” He had no answer, merely saying, “Just trying to make him listen to residents.”

I will admit on the streets of Lakewood there is a growing concern over a growing disconnect between City Hall and residents. But throwing rocks behind a mask is not the way to fix it. The way to fix it is to state the problem, put your name on it, and keep with it. You cannot ask for transparency behind a hidden site, a hidden agenda or a fun name. You must be willing to lead by example, and demand the same from our elected officials. I said, if you believe in what you are saying, take the site down and do it correctly. Own it. Two hours later the site came down, and I got another call. “You are right, I hope I didn't cause you any trouble using your photos. Use my name if you need to.” I stopped him. I told him he had done the right thing, there was no reason to go any further.

He hung up, and as I mentioned, later the site came down.

.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:31 pm
by Michael Deneen
My top suspect: Fitz!
He's going to need a job on January 1st. :-)

All kidding aside, this "recall" stuff makes no sense.
There will be an election next year.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 9:43 am
by marklingm
Jim O'Bryan wrote:For the record this is a patently idiotic idea. I am sure the people who came up with it never bothered to look at the order of succession, or it would have been a "Four More Years For Mike" website. I have huge differences with Mayor Summers on many things, but as I have often stated, I would give him another four years when placed next to other names in the wings.



Jim,

The recall process is set forth below.

The Article, XXII, Section 8 of the Charter deals with the succeeding officer.


    CHARTER OF THE CITY OF LAKEWOOD

    ARTICLE XXII. RECALL

    SECTION 1. RECALL PROCEDURE.

    Any elective officer provided for in this Charter may be removed from office by the electors qualified to vote for a successor to such office as provided in this Article. A petition demanding that the question of removing such official be submitted to the electors qualified to vote for his or her successor shall be addressed to Council and filed with the Clerk of Council. Such petition shall be signed by qualified electors equal in number to at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total votes cast at the last preceding regular municipal election for the office of the officer sought to be recalled, in case the officer was elected by the voters of the entire City, and at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the total valid ballots at the last preceding regular municipal election for the office if the officer was elected by the voters of the particular ward. The question of the removal of any officer shall not be submitted to the electors until such person has served one year of the term during which such person is sought to be recalled or, in case of an officer retained in a recall election, until one year after that election.

    SECTION 2. PETITIONS.

    Petition papers shall be procured from the Clerk of Council. Prior to the issuance of such petition papers, an affidavit shall be made by one or more qualified electors and filed with the Clerk, stating the name and office of the officer sought to be removed. The Clerk, upon issuing any such petition paper to an elector, shall enter in a record, to be kept in the Clerk's office, the name of the elector to whom issued and shall certify upon each such paper the name of the elector to whom issued and the date of issuance. No petition paper so issued shall be accepted as part of a petition unless it bears such certificates of the Clerk and unless it is filed as provided herein.

    SECTION 3. SIGNATURES.

    Each signer of a recall petition shall sign his or her name in ink or indelible pencil and shall place thereon after his or her name, his or her place of residence by street and number. To each such petition paper there shall be attached an affidavit of the circulator thereof, stating the number of signers to such part of the petition and that each signature appended to the paper was made in his or her presence and is the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be.

    SECTION 4. FILING AND CERTIFICATION.

    All papers comprising a recall petition shall be assembled and filed with the Clerk of Council as one instrument within thirty (30) days after the filing with the Clerk of the affidavit stating the name and office of the officer sought to be removed. Within ten (10) days from the date of the filing of such petition the Clerk shall determine the sufficiency thereof and attach thereto a certificate showing the result of the Clerk’s examination. If the Clerk shall certify that the petition is insufficient, the Clerk shall set forth in the certificate the particulars in which the petition is defective, and shall return a copy of the certificate by depositing the same in United States mail with postage prepaid to the person designated in such petition to receive it.

    SECTION 5. SUPPLEMENTAL PETITIONS.

    In the event the initial petition contained prima-facie sufficient signatures, such recall petition may be supported by supplemental signatures of qualified electors signed in the manner required in Section 3 of this Article appended to petitions issued, signed and filed as required for the original petition at a time within twenty (20) days after the date of the certificate of insufficiency by the Clerk. The Clerk shall within ten (10) days after such supplemental petitions are filed make a like examination of them, and if the Clerk's certificate shall show the same to be still insufficient, the Clerk shall return it in the manner described in Section 4 of this Article to the person designated in such petition to receive it, without prejudice, however, to the filing of a new petition for the same purpose, provided that no new petition shall be filed within one (1) year thereafter.

    SECTION 6. RECALL ELECTION.

    If a recall petition or supplemental petition shall be certified by the Clerk to be sufficient, the Clerk shall at once submit the same with a certificate to Council and shall notify the officer sought to be recalled of such action. If the official whose removal is sought does not resign within five (5) days after such notice, Council shall thereupon order and fix a day for holding a recall election. Any such election shall be held not less than thirty (30) nor more than forty (40) days after the petition has been presented to the Clerk, at the same time as any other general or special election held within such period, but if no such election is to be held within such period, Council shall call a special recall election to be held within the time aforesaid. Such special recall election shall be submitted to the electors of the entire City if such officer to be recalled was elected by the electors of the entire City, and such special recall election shall be submitted to the electors of a single ward if the officer to be recalled was elected by the electors of a single ward. The election authorities shall publish notice and make all arrangements for holding such election, which shall be conducted and the result thereof returned and declared in all respects as are the results of special municipal elections.

    SECTION 7. BALLOTS.

    The ballots at such recall election shall, with respect to each person whose removal is sought, submit the question: "Shall (name of person) be removed from the office of (name of office) by recall?" Immediately following each such question, there shall be printed on the ballots the two propositions in the order set forth: "For the recall of (name of person)", "Against the recall of (name of person)".

    SECTION 8. SUCCEEDING OFFICER.

    The incumbent, if not recalled in such election, shall continue in office for the remainder of the incumbent’s unexpired term subject to the recall as before except as provided in this Charter. If recalled in the recall election, such person shall regardless of any technical defects in the recall petition, be deemed removed from office upon the announcement of the official canvass of that election, and the office shall be filled by Council for the unexpired term. The successor of any person so removed shall hold office during the unexpired term of his or her predecessor.

    SECTION 9. STATE LAW GOVERNS WHERE NO CHARTER PROVISION.

    The method of removal provided in this Section is in addition to such other methods as are provided by law. Where no special provision is made in this Charter governing recall elections, the general law shall govern.

    http://www.conwaygreene.com/lakewood/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&2.0


Matt

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 1:40 pm
by Tim Liston
Whatever. If there ever was such a web site it seems to be down now.

I did a whois search and whoever chose to put it up registered and presumably hosted it with GoDaddy but paid the extra money to be anonymous.

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz........

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:46 pm
by Jim O'Bryan
Tim Liston wrote:Whatever. If there ever was such a web site it seems to be down now.

I did a whois search and whoever chose to put it up registered and presumably hosted it with GoDaddy but paid the extra money to be anonymous.

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz........



Did you even read this thread Tim?

ZZZZZzzzzzzzz............

?????

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 9:56 pm
by Tim Liston
Jim I must say I re-read your post a few minutes after mine and I went "oops." But we're both coming from the same place. Someone out there who should be ignored. But you called huge attention to it/him/her, even in the debunking.

Sorry....

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 8:47 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Tim Liston wrote:Jim I must say I re-read your post a few minutes after mine and I went "oops." But we're both coming from the same place. Someone out there who should be ignored. But you called huge attention to it/him/her, even in the debunking.

Sorry....


Tim

I am always amazed when one person tells others what they should find important, or better yet
what they should talk about. The art of conversation is start one, and see who jumps in.

I didn't wonder about giving them street cred. As I MENTIONED in the article, I thought Greg Mahoney
was silly posting something I am sure he does not believe in. But his right, and had it been real,
it would have warranted coverage or at least comment, right?

But by the time I posted, we had figured out Go-Daddy connection, I had spoken with the owner
and convinced them to take it down. So in fact I was publicizing nothing.

However I did seize the moment for lessons about copyright, the internet and images and stories,
and taking a second to think what is right to do.

What is starting to really bother me though are people that make comments on stories they
never read. See Matt Markling's post in "The Devil Comes To Lakewood..." Where the entire
city thought it was a NEGATIVE story about Bob Evans or chains or whatever people wanted
to read into a NEGATIVE POST BY JIM O"BRYAN... They just didn't ever read it. Really strange, huh?

But in fact, as management at Bob Evans said, and everyone that read the article. To quote Bob
Evans regional Manager, "Great article, very insightful, I hope the little restaurants read it. Because
the article was both positive for Bob Evans, and little restaurants.

FaceBook is positively the worst for this. The number of people making insightful comments that
were ether made in the piece, or by scores of other readers as people race to be the first to cut
it down, defend, or generally trash the message carrier. In this overly narcissistic world of "ME."

There was no ad for a Recall Summers site, as there was no longer a site.

.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:27 am
by Christopher Bindel
Wait!....

Has someone actually tried using something I've posted through the Observer without permission?

First, I'm shocked. Most of my articles are not exactly filled with exciting materials, and not too many of my pictures are that amazing.

Second, if so, I'm horribly flattered! Sorry if you had to do any legal acrobatics, but its kinda awesome if someone did see fit to use something of mine.

Watch, now your going tare my heart out and tell me "I was just using it as a possible example, no one in their right mind would ever want to use your material."

Fair enough. That is probably true.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:46 am
by Christopher Bindel
Wow…..

I may or may not be getting enough sleep and not used to drinking coffee….

It totally normal to have hypothetical conversations with one self on message boards……right?

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:54 am
by Jim O'Bryan
Christopher Bindel wrote:Wait!....

Has someone actually tried using something I've posted through the Observer without permission?

First, I'm shocked. Most of my articles are not exactly filled with exciting materials, and not too many of my pictures are that amazing.

Second, if so, I'm horribly flattered! Sorry if you had to do any legal acrobatics, but its kinda awesome if someone did see fit to use something of mine.

Watch, now your going tare my heart out and tell me "I was just using it as a possible example, no one in their right mind would ever want to use your material."

Fair enough. That is probably true.



Chris

Actually, you know how well we protect our brand, though I doubt you understand why.

Others, like Ivor had their photos taken and used for commercial reasons. In other words, profiting
from his intellectual property and his hard work. We have agreements with all content providers on
the Observer, does that apply to the Scene, the Plain Dealer? WE do have agreements in writing for
most of the TV Stations, AP and Google. Why would any for profit business or hobbyist be different?

Now as you have just pointed out, some people place ZERO VALUE ON THEIR WORK, others do.
When an article, photo or post is sent to the Observer, there is an agreement and one of the
agreements is that we will help support YOUR CLAIM TO OWN YOUR WORK. So we have lent our
lawyers to various copyright claims, and have won.

It is your right to own your work, and Ivor who gets $1,000 a day for photo shoots, puts a high
value on his work. Is it any different than a song, or a painting, or a logo? The courts would say
no, they are all intellectual property protected in federal court. That is why I pay copyright and
trademark fees.

When an article is lifted incorrectly by another group, we find the creator and then do what they
ask. You see the project is built on sharing, respect and community protection. So you think
it is WAY TO MUCH TO ASK for a note in writing asking for the use of the photo or article? You think
it is unfair for the creator to help them remain in control of their photos art or music? Because you
place no value on your words, my $120 an hour when working professionally should also be ignored?

Again many people have many different reasons for coming to the Observer, many are built on
their own needs, which is very common, some do it for portfolio, some do it desperate to build
a name for themselves, and be published, and some do it out of love and respect for the
community, they are hoping to leave better than when they found it. They are all legitimate
reasons. The Observer can accommodate, and hopefully add to their experience and needs.

So to recap, you have now said anyone can take your stuff you don't value it, you would rather get
your name out. And we have Ivor whose legal damages start at about $1,000 and extended to? I
believe everyone else falls somewhere in the middle of that range, just so we understand. And
some of us are wrong to ask for permission to use my work, even though I have never said no,
and Ivor should not control his work, even when some of it was done while working on a job?

As I said at the beginning...
"Actually, you know how well we protect our brand, though I doubt you understand why."

Interesting? For the record I value your words and Ivor's photos, and everything else ever thrown
into this wonderful open mosh pit of word jazz and images.

* Interesting fun fact, only one person has ever been banned from the Deck, and that
was over repeated copyright infringements from other websites. After repeated warnings in writing.

.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:32 am
by Christopher Bindel
Whoa! You took my words way out of context. No snark was intended, just joking around in my sleep deprived state.

I know you protect everything through the observer, and I think that is important, as proven by, if nothing else, Ivor’s case (only one I know of that comes to mind), and it is appreciated.

My comments do not come from me having “ZERO VALUE FOR [MY] WORK” but was a play on the fact that many (I know not all) find city politics, particularly the mundane of a council meeting, boring and would not want to read let alone steal the content of one of my articles. That being said, if they did without asking or wanted to use it for profit (when I make none, not that it matters, but if I’m not making money off of it no one else should, FREE FOR ALL!!!) then I might take issue with that and appreciate that the Observer is there to prevent that.

That being said if this situation were to happen, I would appreciate knowing and being involved in the process of deciding how it can and can’t be used.

So to recap, I never said anyone can take my stuff without permission nor that I “don’t value my work.” Nor did I say that I do this just to “get my name out there.” I don’t, please don’t put words in my mouth. I do it because I think it is important to have the information of what’s happening in Council make it to the public in an easier to understand format than scanning the minutes. And I do it with a lot of time and effort. Just ask my wife and daughter (although the latter might just giggle or raspberry).

Please, don’t take any of this as a questioning of your integrity or responsibility for the LO’s content. It’s not. I was just trying to slightly lighten the mood of a very serious topic (that should be taken so), and with genuine interest if anyone ever actually tried to use any of my work. Though no one should use work without permission, it is still somewhat flattering that they thought it worth sharing.

So please, take a deep breath, enjoy the beautiful weather (at least it was last time I was outside), smile, and have a good day.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 12:20 pm
by Jim O'Bryan
Thanks for the correction, you are too good not to value those words and images.

going outside as ordered!

.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:58 pm
by marklingm
Jim O'Bryan wrote:What is starting to really bother me though are people that make comments on stories they never read.



+1

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:54 pm
by Jim O'Bryan
Matthew John Markling wrote:
Jim O'Bryan wrote:What is starting to really bother me though are people that make comments on stories they never read.



+1


Stop being so negative all the time....

oh that was a plus 1

I didn't have the time to read it, the first time.
And you are just so negative all the time...

:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

.

Re: recallmikesummers.com And Lakewood Observations

Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:34 pm
by Paul Schrimpf
It may be wrong, but if you write a nuanced headline in the internet world, you're going to suffer some level of consequences. It's a shame... the Bob Evans story was great, and well balanced. but you start at at -10 when you go cryptic on the header.