Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article

from Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 14:08 (Agree/Disagree?) For your info, the following link has copies of the tax returns from 1997 to 2003 for FCF. The forms are #990 which are the forms tax exempt organizations such as FCF use. 2003 revenue was over $3M alone!!! Get all you can http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Family_Care_Foundation#Documents (reply to this comment)

from exister Monday, January 23, 2006 - 11:59 (Agree/Disagree?) Verily, verily my children. Let us all learn a heartfelt lesson from the Taster's Choice Coffee Dude, who, because his countenance was cast about on grocery store shelves for many days and many night, did receive mad cash in a lawsuit for use of his likeness without his blessing. Amen. (reply to this comment)

from JohnnieWalker Monday, January 23, 2006 - 07:19 (Agree/Disagree?) When my wife and I left, our photos were still on their homepage as well. We wrote them an email at the contact address on the site and asked them to remove the photos, which they did. If the person who replied to us is still at the other end of that email address, they might just comply with your request as well. (BTW, unless you signed a model release form, this should apply to anyone who is on the videos as well.) (reply to this comment)

From Monday, January 23, 2006, 10:42 (Agree/Disagree?) I don't know how valid those releases are if there was undue influence orcoercion. If it is unconscionable, some western courts wouldn't enforce it.(reply to this comment)

from SeanSwede Monday, January 23, 2006 - 01:39 (Agree/Disagree?) Yeah, just try to sue them somehow. You can get some serious bucks out of it for sure. (reply to this comment)

From Nick Monday, January 23, 2006, 15:43 (Agree/Disagree?) Dude, you can't go and sue someone just because they posted your pic on their site. Just the same way they can't sue this site when we put up pic's of Zerb and Peter and the rest of them. Or just the same way you can't sue your local paper when they take a pic of you and publish it for all to see. Maybe after you had a long paper or email trail showing how you requested multiple times that they remove your pic you could then sue them to make them take it off the site. (reply to this comment)

From Pro Photographer Monday, January 23, 2006, 16:16 (Agree/Disagree?) Perhaps you haven't heard of model releases. That is what a photographer uses to get permission from a subject to publish their image. No newspaper or other publication is going to print a picture of you without a release. This rule is sometimes flexible when you, the subject, are being photographed in a public venue like a street protest or a parade. But even then photographers make a big deal about getting those releases. One additional exception is for public figures; people who are famous or newsworthy and expect to be photographed don't require releases. You can always refuse to be photographed by anyone who tries. Put your hands in front of your face or threatening to punch the photographer usually worked pretty well. Publishing on the web is a kind of gray area right now. Mostly people should follow the same basic rules as for print publications but because of the flexibility of the web you can usually just write the webmaster and ask her to remove your picture. Copyright is another issue. Photos are owned by the person who takes the picture, not the person in the picture. Technically you can't take another photographer's image and use it on your web site just because you want to. In fact this is done frequently. But it's not exactly ok. A commercial site like TF's may have carefully collected model releases from all subjects but because they are using your image for commercial (fund raising and selling of goods is done on that site) gain you may, in theory, be able to sue them for using your image for commercial purposes if they don't have a model release.(reply to this comment)

From jack420 Tuesday, January 24, 2006, 17:19 (Agree/Disagree?) I have been through this process many times before. Write up and send a Cease & Desist giving them 72 hrs to remove them photos. If the photos are still up, you have grounds to sue for unauthorized use of your image.(reply to this comment)

From Ne Oublie Monday, January 23, 2006, 15:50 (Agree/Disagree?) Apart from France, apparently.(reply to this comment)

From Wolf Monday, January 23, 2006, 12:44 (Agree/Disagree?) I hope you're not serious. You should know that you can't get a cent out of TF because it's not registered anywhere.(reply to this comment)

From ESJ Monday, January 23, 2006, 15:29 (Agree/Disagree?) Are you sure they're still not registered anywhere? They would have to be registered somehow as something in order to carry on as FCF and all their other fronts. If they're still not registering themselves in any way, and are operating as fund-raising 'tax-exempt charities' (as they always have and still do), then, oohh boy, are they gonna be in so much trouble with the authorities for tax evasion and charity fraud! If they're registered in any way, you can probably sue them. If they're not, then you can report them for fraud. Either way, they're goin' down. Oh! I just thought of a third option! - Blackmail!(reply to this comment)

From rubeingserved Monday, January 23, 2006, 19:15 (Agree/Disagree?) Eva isn't that greenmail you were thinking of?(reply to this comment)

From ESJ Monday, January 23, 2006, 22:34 (Agree/Disagree?) I never heard of that term before until recently, and still don't understand what it means. Is it the same as blackmail? What's the diff between blackmail and greenmail? And why is it called greenmail?(reply to this comment)

From Jesus Crust Tuesday, January 24, 2006, 08:38 (Agree/Disagree?) Blackmail doth usually imply that party A. shall release damaging information about party B. unless party B. leaveth town, shooteth the prime minister of propecia, or quit the campaign for governor of Nazareth. Greenmail doth usually imply that party A. shall release damaging information about party B. unless party B. kicketh down the frog skins, greenbacks, scrillah, dough, or money, whichever term thou doth prefer. My personal preference doth be legal action finding Party B. libel for their iniquities so that they are publicly scrutinized. After all, receiving money hath nothing to do with justice. In accountability doth lie the victory. (reply to this comment)

From Nick Monday, January 23, 2006, 15:48 (Agree/Disagree?) FCF is registered and does have up to date tax records that are public domain. Somewhere on this site was a transcript of that and it showed their income from 97 to 03 to be around the $10,000,000.00 mark. (Those dates and $ amount may be off by a slight amount, but I know it was around that much.) (reply to this comment)

From Nefarious Nosferatu and the Mystic Mefist Tuesday, January 24, 2006, 09:57 (Agree/Disagree?) So they actually have records of receiving that much money, and then paying it out to TF, all legal and kosher? Paedophilia, porn films, international prostitution, money laundering.... Zerby must have a good life. No wonder they have money for court cases. If they paid me 3 dollars for every hour I stood in the snow canning...... grrrr! Darnit!(reply to this comment)

From Nick Tuesday, January 24, 2006, 10:55 (Agree/Disagree?) Yes, there are actuall reccords of around that much money. I know it's somwhere on this site. The thing is that it did not go to TF. It went to Zerb and all the leaders of the cult. How many times do you think they actually sent money to the poor little homes on the field that are living in poverty and sending in their 14%.(reply to this comment)

From Hush Hush Tuesday, January 24, 2006, 17:21 (Agree/Disagree?) Don't think it is perhaps wiser to not express the extent of our knowledge, lest they tighten their security measures and their purse-straps. Just a thought.(reply to this comment)

From solemn Monday, January 23, 2006, 15:32 (Agree/Disagree?) Tsk tsk Eva, blackmail is against the law you know.(reply to this comment)

From ESJ Monday, January 23, 2006, 22:55 (Agree/Disagree?) Teehee.... - Speaking of blackmail though, I'm positive TF leaders use blackmail a lot on the FGA's and even some SGA's still in TF to a) keep them in TF and b) silence them and keep them from defecting and blowing the whitsle. Like, "We know that you shared with that under-aged girl back in 1990, Paul, and you know we'll have to report you or allow the SGA to report you if you should ever leave. But we'll keep covering for you as long as you stay in and submit to 'the Lord's' will." etc. TF uses blackmail all the time. They've used it to escape investigation and get out of court cases, too. So it just occurred to me, there's plenty of ways of legally 'blackmailing', such as threatening to take specific leaders to court unless compensation is paid, etc. In legal jargon its just called 'settling out of court'. (reply to this comment)