The Schulz & Schulz Version...
quoting from their website...
"Our story in the UK
www.art-prints-on-demand.co.uk
is now
www.myartprints.co.uk
We have started to sell online in 1999 with the launch of the well known and highly regarded German site www.kunstkopie.de. Our English site www.art-prints-on.demand.co.uk was launched soon after by one of our former affiliate-partners, Mr. Jeremiah McCrory. As he launched a competing site using a very similar web-adress later on, we changed the name of our name to www.myartprints.co.uk in January 2005 with our country representative, Fabienne B. We are happy to have found a name which highlights our dedication to our customers.
(We wish Mr. McCrory good luck and hope that he will no longer spread lies about our company. There are more efficient and ethical routes to market a product in the end.)"
- And Mr McCrory says... Schulz is full of shite!
- Lies! Lies! What Lies Exactly? Eh Schulz? Eh?
i could of course spread lies like these, but who on earth would believe them?
lie #1 - german women are really beautiful (ok, i admit to once having had a thing about steffi graf)
lie #2 - germany plays really attractive football (ok ok, beckenbauer was good)
lie #3 - german cuisine is the best in the world
lie #4 - hamburgers are an honourable people
Just so there's no confusion...
in the marketplace, on the internet, wherever
these are the germans
kunstkopie.de
kunstkopie.net
kunstkopie.com
kunstkopie.at
kunstkopie.ch
kunstkopie.co.uk
copia-di-arte.com
repro-tableaux.com
poster-und-kunstdrucke.de
art-prints-on-demand.com
art-prints-on-demand.co.uk
myartprints.com
myartprints.co.uk
my-art-prints.co.uk
reproresim.com
reprodart.com
all owned by Schulz & Schulz of Hamburg
That's st ives that is, in cornwall, uk
![[St Ives, Cornwall]](st-ives.jpg)
There was this german magazine based in offenburg running a spread on rosamunde pilcher, and they write and ask if they can use the picture in their magazine. at first i say, ok... but then such is the level of contempt i have for schulz & schulz of hamburg, and by illogical extension, to all things german, that i was forced to say, no, thanks.
The german magazine were very understanding of my change of mind, telling me that not all german companies were like schulz & schulz
Well... i know it's hard to believe, but there's germans in hamburg who seem to think i'm poland. either that or they seem to think i'm a dutch bicycle, or both.
These germans think they can just march into my domain, take what they want, and then, wait for it, claim that they're entitled !
what, germans? GERMANS?
they do that sort of thing?
isn't there a law?
Spot the difference...
this is me after having moved to...
fineartprintsondemand.com
when along come the germans with...
No, no difference at all. Pure coincidence of course!
Pictures for a better world...
for it is good to dream...
and dream again...
and then some...
The Correct Information...
I did not launch art-prints-on-demand.co.uk
I did no work for art-prints-on-demand.co.uk
art-prints-on-demand.co.uk is registered to schulz & schulz and was registered by them on august 27th 2002
artprints-on-demand.co.uk is registered to me and was registered by me (with the full knowledge of schulz) on september 18th 2002
During late 2002 and through 2003 i designed and uploaded pages to my domain, with images linked from and affiliate links going to, kunstkopie-server.de and then to poster-und-kunstdrucke.de - i was to be paid 30% for uk sales and 10% for usa sales. i was, in effect, their uk 'representative'.
I did not have a contract with schulz & schulz. i did not want a contract with schulz & schulz. i did not click on anything to accept any contract with schulz & schulz. i signed nothing. We learn from a very early age in this country, the uk, not to sign pieces of paper with germans. And i never have. And I never will.
Mid 2003 they decide they are not going to pay me anymore for usa sales. this amounted to a few hundred dollars a month. i decide not to add any more pages to my site. i stop at 1800 pages or thereabouts.
I learn that stories about german efficiency and german workmanship are not just myths, but laughable.
Months pass. disillusioned. by the middle of 2004 it's obvious to both parties i'm not in the least bit interested in continuing with a company like them. it's decided we finish at the end of 2004. they get themselves a new uk 'representative'.
December 2004 and schulz proposes i leave my pages up and that i be paid as an affiliate in the usual affiliate way, at 20% for uk sales and 15% for usa sales.
It is at this time that i discover that schulz has downloaded (copied) ALL my web pages at artprints-on-demand.co.uk and uploaded them to his domains at art-prints-on-demand.co.uk, myartprints.co.uk and my-art-prints.co.uk
Naturally, i'm not best pleased. i confront him with this information. he claims he's entitled to copy them. he even claims that he's paid me for them. it's just, totally amazing! AND TOTALLY UNTRUE !!!
I spend 2005 making other arrangements for my livelihood.
October 12th 2005, getting away from them at last, i register the domains, and launch...
fineartprintsondemand.com
and
fineartprintsondemand.co.uk
And then on december 14th 2005, hardy schulz registers...
fine-art-prints-on-demand.com (abusive registration #1)
and
fine-art-prints-on-demand.co.uk (abusive registration #2)
And then on april 9th 2006, the schulz registers...
fine-art-prints-on-demand.eu (abusive registration #3)
and
fineartprintsondemand.eu (abusive registration #4)
Oh yeah, and they haven't paid me thousands of pounds affiliate-commissions owed for october and november and december 2005.
WARNING - You are advised not to join their affiliate programme, or if you're from the usa, their affiliate program !!
And so it went...
Email from me to schulz & schulz and their lawyer, march 21st 2006
1. With regard to your claim of defamation, I would ask you to read this and if you wish to continue with your alleged claims, send a formal 'Letter of Claim'
2. There is no exemption for germans with regard to copyright law. By copying 1,800+ webpages from my website, artprints-on-demand.co.uk, and copying them to more than one of the websites owned by Schulz & Schulz, Schulz & Schulz breached my copyright on those pages.
3. Schulz & Schulz owe me the following amounts... 1,678 UK Pounds AND 3,268 US Dollars. I look forward to receiving full payment within the next seven days
The german lawyer emails back, from which i quote...
"... once again you
are fundamentally wrong concerning your role as alleged "author" of the
website, it's (sic) content and domain in dispute. Once again I would suggest that
you seek competent legal advice."
So, i forward the german lawyer's email to my 'competent legal advice' in cornwall and my 'competent legal advice' in cornwall advises me he'd like another 300 quid up front before advising me further. i decide to get off that particular merry-go-round
So, it's down the co-op, get some cans
So, is it that the germans are alleging, that i'm merely an alleged author? a chimera thing? or is that they are alleging that i'm alleging, that i'm the alleged author of artprints-on-demand.co.uk, when in fact, the real author is... somebody else?
Let's get this out of the way... i post a few pages back up... eg. alma-tadema, for test purposes (i'm able to do this because, not only am i both the alleged and real website author here, i'm also the domain owner, the webspace owner, the webhost payer, the ftp-er... in short, everything here)
this is me, the alleged author here, doing my... competent web-authoring
and this is the germans, doing their... not so competent web-authoring
and this is the german lawyers, doing their... oh dear
I wonder if i shouldn't email the german lawyers back and suggest they seek some 'competent web-authoring advice' ?
i slot a dvd in and play 'where eagles dare' on a loop in the corner of the screen. i'm richard burton. i allege. no, but really.
I re-read an email from schulz, dated december 13th 2005...
"... And monkey see... you are planing (sic) a thing, you never will succed (sic) with."
That'll be...
Fine Art Prints on Demand, (www.fineartprintsondemand.com) i guess - doing just fine thanks, for a lesser primate anyway
And it's the day after that 'monkey see' email, schulz goes off and registers...
fine-art-prints-on-demand.com
and
fine-art-prints-on-demand.co.uk
whatever can he be planing (sic) ? confusion in the marketplace?
I go out for some fresh air, take a swing in the trees.
But alas, i'm confused... my monkey-brain seems unable to grasp the legal complexities. I decide i need to try and understand things, in my simple simian way
So, i email the german lawyer back, dated march 26th 2006
1. If I am not the author of these web pages, who is? (and please, no French Structuralist stuff, and no Hegel)
2. Concerning these authored web pages, who owns the copyright?
3. If it is not I who owns the copyright, but somebody else... could you please explain how they came to own that copyright?
4. If there was a signed contract... could you please supply me with a copy of that contract? (I quote from an email from schulz dated december 15th 2005 - 'Again, I have no contract with you and I will never ever send you one cent.')
5. If they paid for the pages... could you please supply me with a copy of the invoice?
6. Again, I must insist on payment of commissions owed within the next seven days.
yours faithfully, etc
Oh well...
The seven days pass, and from the germans...
... NO payment received
... NO copy of a signed contract
... NO copy of a relevant invoice
... NOT a word. Zilch. Nothing
Then, lo and behold, another copier of my web pages... and guess what, he's teamed up with the germans (i somehow summon the strength from somewhere to be calm and collected, and then, email schulz again, dated april 12th 2006
"i'm sorry to trouble you again, but i must inform you that you are now partnering with an affiliate who, like yourself, has copied my pages and therefore infringed my copyright on them. can you explain this? also, i'm sorry to report, but i have had absolutely no response from your lawyer to the questions i put to him in my email to him of march 26th, 2006. i would be grateful therefore if you could answer the 5 questions i put to him."
Yeah, you guessed it... Not a word from any of them!
