Active Images versus Apostrophe
First : An opinion by Apostrophe, posted on alt.binaries.fonts.
Article 395627 of alt.binaries.fonts:
From: "Apostrophe \('\)"
Subject: Re: Font Piracy story...
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 17:49:25 GMT
Well, the old equation goes something like this: if nobody won and nobody
lost, it can mean that everyone won, so I guess they can claim their victory
on that sort of technicality... but I can also claim mine. Since I was in
the middle of what happened and I'm in a position to closely do the math
about it, I still say Toronto 4 - Sacramento 0. Those who need proof can
always check case # T-1981-00 in the Montreal courthouse.
Happy enough that I actually celebrated the night of the settlement. Not
happy enough for some though. Check out the childlish mud-slinging on the
web that the other side has been doing lately. Frustration anyone?
I'll post the verbatim settlement later, as I do not have the exact wording
on hand now. But here's what I can tell you by memory: it was 10 items that
went pretty much like this:
- Defendant (Apostrophe) agrees to have an injunction entered against him,
restricting him from uploading the fonts listed in the claim.
- Defendant agrees to not counter-sue the plaintiffs (the coalition of 7)
directly because of the legal action brought on him.
- Neither plaintiffs nor defendant get damages.
- Plaintiffs cannot disclose, or aid or persuade anyone to obtain,
defendant's real name.
- Mutual release between plaintiffs and defendant.
- Plaintiffs and defendant should secure the injunction without costs.
- Agreement may be executed in parts and by fax, as long as the sum of the
parts constitute the agreement.
- Agreement is governed by the laws of the Province of Quebec.
- Agreement shall be drawn in English.
As you can see, nothing in the settlement stops anyone from talking about
the terms of the monetary settlement, which was $0. Maybe the Emigre and
Hoefler press releases mean that the plaintiffs signed something among
themselves to the effect of not talking about the monetary settlement. I
didn't sign anything to that effect, and last time I checked I was indeed
part of "all parties".
The "3 year lawsuit" was actually 16 months from my receipt
of the plaintiffs' claim to my receipt of their settlement acceptance. "In
concert with House Industries" is news to me. House Industries was not
named, not even once, at any point during the litigation process. "...
eleven type foundries..." was actually seven companies, not eleven. "Held
accountable" is being used there as a synonym for "get sued". The old song
and dance. I actually have proof that this whole lawsuit was initiated for
the sole purpose of instigating a media circus and scaring usenet users into
a belief system that distinguishes "which fonts are and which are not okay
As much as I'd love to open up and talk about this some more, I have to go
meet up with someone in a few minutes. Maybe later.
Second : Verbatim settlement agreement, annotated by Apostrophe, posted on alt.binaries.fonts.
Verbatim settlement agreement, signed by Richard Starkings, Tim Starback,
Petra Weisz, Steve Jackaman, Jeff Gillen, Rodrigo Cavazos, Jonathan Hoefler,
Joseph Treacy, and yours truly. The terms of the settlement (my proposal)
were agreed to on February 8, 2002 (a few months after the original
proposal) and the last signature was obtained on March 22, 2002. Here goes
(with asterisked comments):
** Amended Statement of Claim: the original statement of claim (a 20 million
dollar lawsuit), was enormous and had a bunch of stuff that was reaching
(stuff like accusing me of being 2 other usenet users as well as
Apostrophe). They had to change the statement of claim a couple times. The
final one (the one being called Amended here) was a thin manuscript where a
lot of stuff was modified and even more stuff was removed.
1. The Defendant consents to a permanent injunction being issued by the
Federal Court of Canada, in the form set out in the draft Order attached
hereto as Schedule "A", restraining him from uploading any of the font
files listed in the Amended Statement of Claim.
** This just means that I can't sue them in direct retaliation to them suing
2. The Defendant hereby waives any and all claims, damages or causes of
action he has, may have had, real or apprehended, against the Plaintiffs,
resulting from the Plaintiffs' asserting their rights in the Action.
3. Neither the Plaintiffs nor the Defendant shall claim damages or costs
in the Action.
4. The Plaintiffs may publicize on their respective websites that an Order
has been obtained against the Internet alias "Apostrophe" for an
5. The Plaintiffs shall not disclose or publicize the Defendant's legal
name or any variation thereof in any way or assist, procure or persuade
anyone else to do so.
** This is just the mutual release. Let peace begin. You may pinch the
6. For good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of
which the Parties acknowledge, the Parties hereby grant one unto the
other, their affiliates, directors, officers, agents and employees, a
mutual full and final release and discharge from any and all claims,
damages or causes of action, of any nature whatsoever, they have, may have
or may have had, real or apprehendedm one against the other, past, present
and future, arising out of the facts set forth or alleged in the Action.
7. The Parties shall cause their respective attorneys to file the
requisite motion and motion records to secure the above-noted Order of
permanent injunction against the Defendant, without costs.
8. This agreement may be executed in counterparts and by fascimile, which,
together, shall form a single agreement.
9. This agreement shall be construed and governed by the laws applicable
in the Province of Quebec, Canada.
And they lived happily ever after.
10. The Parties have requested that this document be drawn in the English
language. Les parties ont exigé que se document soit rédigé en langue