Here is Hustler's position on Acacia
 

Ok,

Just got off the phone with Jimmy Flynt Jr. We know each other pretty well and he gave me the down low on the Hustler/Acacia deal.

J. Fly wanted to know as much as everyone else where the Acacia leak was. I mentioned GFY and the general consensus that it was Matrix. He had no personal knowledge of where the leak originated.

I was curious as to the details of the Hustler/Acacia deal. I had two simple questions, how much, and could they get out of it if the patent is not upheld in court? Jimmy said it works out to about $250,000 a year for Acacia. That's peanuts in the picture of potential litigation costs.

Jimmy also said the licensing agreement would eventually expire, and if the patent was not held valid by the courts they would have no need to renew.

In my opinion, if the Acacia patent is not held, then anyone who had previously signed could then turn around and not pay their fees. At that point Acacia would have little contractual merit in which to pursue their claim and sue again. In fact one could theoretically sue Acacia for a frivolous and fraudulently intentional law suit. Of course all this would be messy and somewhat moot.

It's unfortunate it works out that it's cheaper and less time consuming for Hustler to sign up but business is business.

On another note, looks like I'll be at the Halloween party tonight. Being the cheap bastard I am I asked Jimmy to put me on the list. Actually, it wouldn't be very Hollywood of me if I either paid or stood in line for a club. LOL

ciao,

sounds good dude :thumbsup

it doesnt make sence to me that larry flynt wouldnt find a way to help out the fight against the pattent. i mean, if the court upholds the patent (possibly because hustler did not put their power behind the fight) then hustler will be out an assload more money than if they did help the fight.
it seems uncharacteristic to me to see hustler submit like a bitch instead of fight for something that is obviously extortion.

I don't see what info you got that everyone didn't already know. We all are aware that these big companies that signed did so for reduced license royalties and it works out to be cheaper than litigation would have likely been. However in their deals they are all offering up their affiliates regardless of what anyone tells you, they are all doing it to get the deals they got. They also wil face fines and penalities for supporting the IMPA so that's why none of them that have signed have continued to support as Far-L just recently stated.

They are all and have been playing both sides of the fence, they don't care about anything but money and if you ever thought they did then you were crazy. They'll sell out anyones ass to save a dime and they all have so far and there will be more that do the same further strengthing ACACIA's hand while at the same time fucking all the people of the industry they make their money on.

They all know that most of the webmasters are such greedy bastards that the bottom line is they will promote whoever even if they've been sold out as long as they can make money. So that's why they do it.

Interesting post! Thanks man! :thumbsup

Well, I can't speak for Larry Flynt but it seems to me he has been more of a free speech advocate and an anti-big brother figure.

This case doens't involve either of those issues.

In this business there is always someone nipping at your heals, or stealing your content. It's just something you deal with on a case by case basis.

It's my understanding that Flynt Digital was hit with this early on. The case didn't have the scope it does now. Perhaps Larry will change his position in the long run. For all we know, Flynt Digital may not actually ever give them a dime.

"Sign where? Sure. Oh yeah, checks in the mail buddy!" LOL

:321GFY hustler

I was interested in what Flynt Digital actually argeed to pay, and what that worked out to a year.

That was my point but I expounded and recapped.

Agreed. The point is not whether or not they ever pay them though, it's that they signed and signing alone strengthens ACACIA's position. Once you've signed you have basically agreed that their patents are valid and signed away your rights to contest them, that's part of the license by the way. So if you signed a license and then refuse to pay you can easily have an injunction placed against you to prevent and or fine you from using the technology.

So basically if you don't believe the patents are valid you have to refuse to sign even if it's cheaper to do so initally, then support the IMPA and together everyone can share the burden of the costs and get these patents invalidated.

I do not believe that signing it helps Acacias court case on it's merit

Quote:

So if you signed a license and then refuse to pay you can easily have an injunction placed against you to prevent and or fine you from using the technology.

I don't believe a injunction would be somehting that would be handed over in a Summary Judgement. It could easily be argued that you were duped.

Contract law is a complicated jurisprudence.

I seriously don't think that Acacia has a low term chance of staying in business. If they did they might stay the course rather than offering this up from deal.

Don't know if you remember this or not, but there WAS a guy who claimed to own the patent on the personal PC...

Oh, and Pac Bell was leasing out the right of way for underground cables from the City of Los Angeles. One day they just stopped paying their bill and the City was forced to sue. Phone service didn't exactly come to a stand still.

:321GFY

You need to stop posting Justin...

you are not in a position to speak for LFP or it's legal stance, or opinions on it's business practice.

Don't get shitty with me I am simply trying to do you a FAVOR

This is a pretty funny thread....

Wonder how long ti will last.

For the record, I do not beleive in the 250k a year number. But hey what do I know?

I love it when people come out and say "I seriously don't think..." in regards to anything to do with the law.

You are not an attorney. Given that, nobody gives a rat's ass what you "think". serious or not.

I don't care if it saves Hustler money, giving Acacia $250,000 makes them appear more legit and therefore hurts us all. Hustler is admitting that they're taking the cheap way out to save themselves some trouble, no matter how badly it hurts the industry. Fuck Hustler and anyone who pays these extortionists. Everyone should be sending their traffic to companies who care about the big picture, not just saving themselves a legal bill.

Not to mention from his last post to me he doesn't know what he's talking about either it seems.

The facts are you sign, you strengthen their case, that's how it always works. You don't sign then you fight them which is what the companies that truly believe the patents are bullshit are doing.

What you and many others have yet to realize is that what Berman is doing is attempting to secure all these deals to bolster his case and secure the validity of the patents in court by taking on the big guys who have the money to fight and offering them discounted deals so they won't even bother to fight. Then the little guys can't fight so they lose.

All the while he's hoping to build his case and ultimately do one thing generate revenue to increase his stock pricing readying his company ultimately for a buyout by a larger entity such as a Time Warner, Microsoft or whoever it may be in which he will receive new stock and money in exchange. Then the patents will have some validity, the stock some value, the new company with huge money and no one will be able to fight it very well at all.

...and if IBM had signed his license agreement he probably would have had a lot better change shaking down the rest of the companies.

They should have fought, but I think hustler wants to see their competitors fucked with. They could care less about the 'adult industry'. They are basically mainstream, hustler.com barely even has any nudity.

People who think Flynt is some kind of superhero are living about twenty years in the past. Hustler now is just a corporate machine.

If this is true, then it's $250,000 that they can use to attack Homegrown and other good people fighting the patent.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/images/icons/frown2.gif

ASSUMING what you posted is even partially true, then it only reiterates that Hustler SOLD OUT the adult community...

Why would Hustler offer to pay Acacia $250,000/year when simply going to court would cost much less? Not saying winning will cost $250K, but "winning" would most likely not be necessary considering Acacia's past track record...

As many have already posted, it very much appears Hustler really wants to see the rest of us adult folks, especially webmasters, pushed out...and thus is taking full advantage of the Acacia situation to help make that happen. :(

Ron

Fuck that it's not just Hustler don't be so quick to forget on all those little mailers we got there were several other motherfuckers names on there. They sold out the same on a cheap deal like Hustler did and they're turning your ass over. That's right Matrix, Platinum Bucks, CE, Hustler, Vivid, Wicked and 40 some other motherfuckers. Don't forget they sold out too.

ummm, does jimmy really know or, or maybe you just know him... I heard your cold call lasted then 2 mins..

you are off your rocker if you think you know what hustler's postion with acacia is...
and ppl would have to be crazy to belive any "offical" hustler/flynt statements from you...

have fun at the party tonight.....

That was a worthless post. This is old news, man.

:thefinger

old, but timely and relevant

Hustler made the best business decision for them. I read where they make $12mils a year off the net. They make many many times that a year off the net, so why expose their entire business to litigation? I seriously doubt they are paying $250k, or even $100k a year. No doubt, some people (cough couch levi) signed sweetheart deals.

This is a good read though, looks like someone MAY have had some inside info of this and other settlements:

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bb...0497&mid=23397

Hardly a cold call. Jimmy II knows exactly who I am.

But that's not the point. I was simply quoting what Jimmy told me.

And no, I am not claiming to be a spokesperson for Hustler. I happen to be a Rep. for another company. I believe my wording was quite clear and nowhere did I use the word "official".

Quite frankly I think it would be a good move if Flynt Digital did issue a statement.

Justin, I don't know you, but I have paid Larry Flynt 7 figs in buying ads in his magazines for a long time and one thing I know about Larry is he watches his pennies and is known for running a tight ship.

Not saying anyone is lying here, but for you to say Larry laid down for a 1/4 mil a year to Acacia, I'd have to see the cancelled check to believe it.

That just is not Larry's style.

I worked as a law clerk for 2 years, and I've spent my fair of time in court rooms, etc. I'm also an engineer and have extensive knowledge of many forms of technology. Furthermore, I was around back in the days of the adult BBS. I've watched this technology grow. It would appear I am at the least qualified to express an opinion.

This is an open forum and thus if you don't want to hear what I have to say, scroll on by.

You know what, the fact that I'm not an attorney, and have a basically unbiased view of this isssue makes what I have to say of some merit. No?

Nevertheless, I don't actually gie a rat's ass about this issue, so I'm just going to shut up at this point. (unless someone posts something to me) :)

An official statement has been posted

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...hreadid=183127

My sister's husband's 2nd Cousin was on People Court 10 years ago. So that gives me the legitimacy to say:

YOU DON'T KNOW DICK!!

:)

hustler aint hustling no more

Well, I'll defer to that thread again. I still don't think it tells the whole story. And I think a lot of people want more details.

If anyone wants to sit down over drinks at the party tonight, or the Nov.21st, or an Internext party, I'll be happy to babble on. LOL We'll have plenty of time as this case in it's entirety is likely to drag on for many years.

In the meantime, I'm staying out of this hornets nest! :)

Better not elaborate on this one bro :-)

Heh.

:)

no

So basically they donated 250k to acacia to help them get the rest of us!

Thanks a ton!

I doubt they pay as much as $250k. Look at Acacia's 8-K filled with the SEC on Oct. 22. In the 3rd qtr they took in a total of $186k in license fees from 56 compnaies or so. During the 3rd qtr of last yeat they already were receiving license fees of $46k, so that means for the first 3 qtrs they signed agreements for an additional $120k per qtr. If Hustler is paying $250k a year that is about $60k a qtr. or half of Acacia's new license fees per qtr.

So you are telling us that from the recent groups that signed license agreements:

Licensees include LodgeNet Entertainment Corporation, the industry-leader for hotel video-on-demand, Grupo Pegaso, a partner with Spain"s Telefonica in Mexico"s second largest mobile telephony company, Virgin Radio, a leading digital broadcast company, CinemaNow, Inc., a leading Internet movie company and Internet Streaming Companies including Interactive Gallery, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of New Frontier Media, Inc.,

Hustler pay as much as the above companies combined? C'mon.

Looks like someone found the spare change here:

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bb...0497&mid=23397

I cant imagine the FTC is blind to all this..especially with Acacia having been in trouble with FTC before..

Can larry or jimmy or billy or timmy etc.. comment on any stock purchases made and sold?

Hey Jim.. you guys have a case pending against Acacia in California right? Care to tell us what that case is about?

I agree. Wasn't the opt in with IMPA case starting at $35k or so? Seems like it would cost less to fight then to settle. IMO

One fact that many are missing... Acacia's patent claims are not limited to internet-based audio/video.

They have also INTERPRETED their patent to lay claims to Video-on-Demand as evident by LodgeNet.com signing up.

Lodgenet is the largest VOD provider to hotels.

Hustler makes alot of money on the VOD side (ie. pay per view), so that would also be covered by Acacia.. so therefore more reasons for them to fight than to settle.

I have heard so many times that in defense of Hustler's actions to settle was that Internet revenue was so smalll compared to the rest of the company..... but, as i stated above, Acacia also covers VOD...which is a larger part of their revenue stream.


Fight the Patent!