The Trials of Little Jimmy

From: Monster328@aol.com
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 14:17:50 EDT
Subject: murder.com
To: //hatemail@lfino.com

I enjoyed your title murder.com. unfortunately, this is a working title and not only copywrited (before yours) but trademarked. Our lawyers will be in touch with the paperwork.

Again, congratulations on an excellent title. I thought of it first though. Yes, how strange that this goes into a needlepoint website. I discovered that 3 years ago. When did you?

You really need to investigate your titles before publishing them as your own.

Author,
Michele Landgraf

To: Monster328@aol.com
From: Kevin Maples
Subject: Re: murder.com

Dear sir and/or madam,

1. You're apparently not clear on whom you're addressing. You might want to investigate these things before making presumptions.
2. You're vague. You might want to familiarize yourself with English before writing.
3. Already sent this to my lawyer. Since you're making no specific claim, I can only take interpret this as an attempt at a general threat.
4. Is that the royal 'we', or are you suffering from multiple personality disorder?
5. You have no idea who did what when. Nice try. You go ahead and send me 'paperwork'.

You amuse me. Now go away.

-Kevin "not the goddamned author, but I'll play one on TV"

From: Monster328@aol.com
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 11:52:01 EDT
Subject: Re: murder.com
To: kmaples@lfino.com

Dear Ridiculous Person:

After seeing the website I can see why the only way you know how to respond is unproffessional. I didn't know when writing an e-mail I had to proof read and re-edit for publishing, thus your comment on my command on the english language.

You only have one area that I could find that has a "contact us" area. I don't really care if you are the author or not. The email I sent was to "//hatemail" not "kmaples". Not my problem if you got forwarded my letter. If you are not, then perhaps you need to be responsible for checking out working titles and stories before they are published.

My attempt to reach you was not to be "threatening" or nasty in any way. It appears you have somewhat of a paranoid response. Is this a general format for you? This is rhetorical, of course. I have read other responses you have made to people who write in to you. The same tone seems to be your general format. A Howard Stern want-a-be. Whatever.

This is the deal. I wrote a story 3 years ago, copywritten and trademarked, called Murder.com. It is going into production in July (the "we" I assumed you could figure out on your own) Do what you want with this information. Now you have it.

As far as you writing back the undeserved response...well, all I can say is that you are either very young or act it. My guess is you are around 22. Am I right?

Your trivial attempts to irritate me have not worked.

Now grow up. Don't play in the adult world if you are going to pout.

Sincerely ML

To: Monster328@aol.com
From: Kevin Maples
Subject: murder.com redux

Well hello there! I could've sworn I told you to go away! Really, I don't know where to begin with you, and my mother told me not to pick on people intellectually ill-equipped for it, but oh my this is fun! I'll set aside the evident English-as-a-second-language issues you suffer from, as going there would just be unfair (though a quick tip here - 'thus' implies a logical conclusion, a 'therefore' - your linguistic difficulties do not imply a necessary action on my part. Most of my former ESL students had the same problem with the term. Work on it).

I have no obligation to respond professionally to you, "author" ... this isn't my professional context! And indeed, I know of many ways to respond, most of which depend on the way in which I am addressed, some of which involve my attorney. It is not as if you addressed me with any decorum in the first place, or took the time to establish who you were corresponding with, or bothered to state your wishes, etc. etc. ... telling me what I "really need" to do before hosting people's works and attempting to intimidate me with "our lawyers" is just likely to piss me off, and put me in a litigious mood. Congratulations on that - you're getting what you give. In any event, if it didn't occur to you that it might be a good idea to proof an email to someone you don't know filled with vague threats and unclear demands, I'm frankly concerned about your screenplay. But I'm sure it speaks better than it reads.

I'm equally sure that I needn't point out that you weren't attempting to reach me, but rather the author. I need to stress the point here that Mr. Samet is a published author, is completing a graduate program in writing, and just completed his first term as a professor of literature - Not some fucking hack with a screenplay. I also needn't point out that I didn't even have to delve into my own personal paranoia for fun and games with you - my attorney concurs that a reasonable individual would interpret your email as threatening. And as the author is out of the country at the moment, and unavailable to defend himself, I am delighted to foot the legal bill and defend his rights on his behalf.

Furthermore, who I am (or who Mr. Samet is, for that matter) isn't important here. If you want to think of me as some 22-year-old with pretensions to Howard Stern, so be it. What's important here is who you think you are ... a 37-year-old hack with delusions of grandeur able to scratch out a 72-page screenplay, maybe with a friend or two with an 8mm camera passing themselves off as a production company ... maybe you read some article in the National Enquirer or a chapter in a paperback on 'how to be a screenwriter' that told you to go out and 'vigorously defend your intellectual property' (something scarce enough in you case that I can see wanting to jealously defend). Maybe you think this is your ticket out of some go-nowhere town in New Jersey, or Florida ... perhaps with this one small accomplishment in life - a single screenplay - you fancy yourself an accomplished writer, commanded by fate to sign her correspondence 'Author'. Bravo! We all need rich inner lives. I'm sure that I don't need to point out to you that if your little screenplay had been optioned by a legitimate production company, THEY (or their lawyers) would be corresponding with me, not YOU. Or at least, one of your legion of lawyers poised to enforce your delusionary rights, and right your imaginary wrongs.

I don't care what your 'deal' is, you still haven't asked for anything that I can reject. I can assure you that although you may have copyrighted (note the spelling - it's 'right' not 'write' - as in 'right to make and distribute copies') your little screenplay, you haven't have trademarked or copyrighted the title. Not only haven't you, I happen to know you can't. As my attorney put it to me:

1. ... if titles, rather than original works of authorship, were copyrightable, two other works called murder.com were registered before hers.

2. titles aren't copyrightable.

My attorney will be in contact with you on these points, if only to improve your evidently feeble grasp of intellectual property law. I wish you the best of luck on that; these concepts are no doubt difficult for you. With patience, I'm sure they will become clear.

Suffice it to say, you will be hearing from my attorney. "We" would be delighted to hear from your attorneys, real or imaginary. Myself, I eagerly await the promised "paperwork" - its been at least five years since anyone threatened me with a real lawsuit (for the record, the judge dismissed it out of hand). I expect that you will provide me with the name and address of the attorney I should be discussing the "paperwork" with directly.

I'd like to invite you to apologize now before this goes any further. Perhaps this would be a good time to re-read your correspondence, soak in it, and meditate on the error of your ways. I can assure you that I would be most receptive to apologies and acts of contrition. But as long as we're swapping advice for living, you might want to consider not going through life pissing people off. Failing that, you might want to gauge the resources and inclinations of others better before doing same. As for me, I don't have to grow up if I don't want to; I'm not the one fucking with strangers (or at least, wasn't before you bothered me). And I look good when I pout, in any event.

So in conclusion, "go fuck yourself". By which I mean of course, 'go masturbate yourself into an ecstatic state, and don't bother to tell me about it'.

Sincerely,

Kevin

From: Monster328@aol.com
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 08:57:59 EDT
Subject: Re: murder.com redux
To: kmaples@lfino.com

Well, hello back!

I will admit that you are very good at writing a nasty letter. Bravo! You must write a lot of them. I am just a novice, as you have pointed out. I will write my retort to you in a number format. This is not in any particular order which, if you decide to write back, will probably have more fun with.

1. You are right. A title cannot be secured. As I wrote, this was "trademarked". A trademark cannot be used.

2. I was not threatening you. I was informing you. The lawyer remark wanot a threat. This was a way to let you know I can back up with paperwork, not a lawsuit. Yes, of course your lawyer would read my letter as a threat, they always so. I have reread my e-mail, it was not threatening by any stretch of the imagination.

3. If you want my imaginary lawyers to contact you, so be it. I will let Michael Madsen, Danny Aiello and Dennis Hopper know that my story is just a hack job and they should not appear in the movie because I am just a want-a-be who wants to get out of my mundane existence with delusions of grandeur. I will let them know that you said so. That should put everything into perspective.

And, no, I don't think of myself as an accomplished writer. I think of myself as a successful business owner who got a really good idea for a movie. Me and 2 million other fucking people (including Samet) who have a story. I am not a want-a-be-elitist either who spends time trying to piss people off with my command of the English language. I am just not that pretentious. So, keep on correcting me. I am amused by this. Anyway, I have had to fight very hard for this title and story because it keeps on popping up. People are out and out stealing, not only the title, but the story itself. I am working with a Production House and we will just keep sending cease and desists out until this story hits. Maybe I am just worn out and need to make sure I check my email tone. Perhaps, I got lazy. (Read below)

4. I will work on my English as a second language. I admit, this was very good. I wish I thought of it. Perhaps in the future, I will adopt this into my repertoire.

5. You are right. I haven't asked you for anything to reject. You get it. It was only an informative email to let you know and I have the paperwork to back it. The statement about checking the stories before they are posted. I can see how that woaken in a different way than how I intended. E-mails have limitations with inflection. For that, I apologize. I will take responsibility for that.

6. As far as me going away. No one tells me what to do. Keep telling me. I will decide when and if I go away.

Are we having fun yet?

PS: Thank you about the thus, therefore tip. I really didn't know that. Good to know.

To: Monster328@aol.com,
From: Kevin Maples
Subject: Re: murder.com redux

Dear Ms. Landgraf, aka "Author", aka "successful business owner", aka "one-trick-pony":

Thanks for the compliment. I don't actually get much opportunity to write nasty letters, but I am familiar with the language we nominally have in common. For your sake I'll try to keep things simple and concrete; this way we should be able to avoid the problems you have with abstract concepts. Let's see here:

"1. You are right. A title cannot be secured. As I wrote, this was "trademarked". A trademark cannot be used."

Wow. Not a single clear and comprehensible English sentence in the bunch, except "You are right" (which was never in dispute). I assume that you are conceding that you MISREPRESENTED YOURSELF when you wrote, "unfortunately, this is a working title and not only copywrited (before yours) but trademarked." If you're not familiar with the term, it's a polite way of saying YOU LIED. Furthermore, since you've repeatedly pointed out what you can 'back up with paperwork', I think we can infer that you KNOWINGLY MISREPRESENTED YOURSELF, claiming that you can 'back up with paperwork' things which are clearly false. Ergo, ALL of your claims are suspect until substantiated. Not only that, but inquiries have brought to light that you have made the same false claims to others. Some might say that fits the definition of "pathological liar", but I would hardly be amongst them.

Now please don't go insulting my lawyer. He's such a nice fellow, and it's really all he can do most of the time to dissuade me suing people. If you can't see the threat implicit in your original email, perhaps that speaks to the extent to which your imagination can stretch. Again, this does not bode well for your screenplay. As for your lawyers, real or imaginary, I would be delighted to receive whatever you would care to send - you obliged yourself when you initially asserted that, "Our lawyers will be in touch with the paperwork". Neither I nor my lawyer has the slightest idea what paperwork you could possibly referring to, but we await its arrival with bated breath. The owner of the www.murder.com has indicated that despite your having made similar dubious claims to her, you failed to produce anything to substantiate any of your claims. I am reasonably certain that outside of the registration of your little screenplay, you don't have a damn thing. Well, you do have one thing - a proven record of misstating and misrepresenting the truth - a fact which makes the remainder of your self-important claims all the more sad and pathetic.

Now I don't know if you have a string of second-rate B-movie actors lined up to 'go into production' with what is undoubtedly a straight-to-video piece of crap, at best. And I don't give a fuck who you tell what, though you might tell Hopper if you talk with him that it isn't doing his career or reputation any good by acting in the sort of abominable crap he's been doing since "True Romance". Too bad, at least he used to be a passable actor. But I am glad to hear that you don't actually think of yourself as what you attempt to pass yourself off as - that is to say an "Author" - this at least indicates that your psychological state is not as bad as I had feared, and puts your statements back in the realm of lies and misrepresentations rather than the world of the truly delusionary. But this only means that you need a different kind of help. And I'd be inclined to say that I don't care what you actually think of yourself as, but I am reassured by the notion that you have your life as a "successful business owner" - likely a franchise fried-chicken joint or some such - to fall back on when your career as a screenwriter comes to its inevitable conclusion. But then I remind myself, so little that you say is true and accurate that it may be the case that all you actually have to fall back on is washing people's windshields by the freeway off-ramp. But THEN I remind myself that I don't really give a fuck, in any event.

Speaking of paranoia, it would appear that there's a whole world of things I could learn from you in this area. Oh, yes ... we're ALL trying to steal your stunningly original idea! Why, Woodruff, Samet, and I regularly sit around conspiring the theft of your intellectual property! We've been doing it for years! It's really all that keeps most of us going! And it's not just us, but EVERYONE! Some of us do it just to collect the cease-and-desist orders! Which reminds me - where the hell's mine? Oh, yeah - I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING WRONG. And I wasn't bothering anybody with anything until your little paranoiac consciousness wandered into my site and started seeing all sorts of grievous wrongs being perpetrated against your precious little screenplay. And the very notion that you might have an idea worth stealing is itself painfully laughable.

Now this last bit of your 'retort' I really need to address as a chunk:

"5. You are right. I haven't asked you for anything to reject. You get it. It was only an informative email to let you know and I have the paperwork to back it. The statement about checking the stories before they are posted. I can see how that would be taken in a different way than how I intended."

No, I don't "get it". Nothing you say there makes any sense to me, and I appreciate the "informative email" about as much as I appreciate spam - which is to say that it enrages me. Now I will again invite you and your imagined wrongs to either apologize altogether and fuck off, or have your lawyers send me whatever the hell you have to back whatever claims you're making. As far as your statement that, "You really need to investigate your titles before publishing them as your own", that's pretty unambiguous, and looks suspiciously like you telling me what to do, which I believe is something you yourself have a problem with.

And as far as me being a "want-a-be-elitist", you completely missed the mark there. I AM an elitist, and that's why I'm able to perceive you as beneath me.

Fuck off,

- Kevin