Frank,

I'm not an attorney. But, I would first respond by not using TweetPhoto and encourage others not to deal with a company that's so quick to threaten a lawsuit!

Second, I find it unconscionable that any attorney would put his/her interests above the Bill of Rights (I guess I'm just naive). Imagine if Dan made his statements to CNN or CNBC - do you really think those networks would stand for this bullying and coercion?

I think Mr. Koeppen even realized his weak position by the fact that he writes, "and *may* constitute a violation of the laws prohibiting..." By using the word "may", I believe that he feels that he has a weak case. If this case ever saw the inside of a courtroom it would be dismissed with prejudice.

It's especially infuriating because you not only perform this service for free, as a volunteer, acting in good faith, but now your legal fees will increase. I imagine that you'll now require interviewees to sign a consent form, etc.

Even if there are factual inaccuracies and disparaging statements in the interview, they weren't made, enticed, or encouraged by you (a reporter). You simply reported the news (you were not an agent or subject of the news).

If I was TweetPhoto, I would have used the legal fees to purchase the podcast rights from you for that episode instead of pursuing legal action. It's your intellectual property - you created it and you own it.

Of course, just being right isn't enough since only you will bear the emotional and financial stress of dealing with this unfortunate and unnecessary situation.

Best of luck,
Joe Moreno

PS - I just made a donation to your "legal fund" via PayPal.

You conducted the interview in good faith - this is a scare letter to control the spread of information.

The CEO is the only one who can get fucked here - you aren't the one who signed nondisclosure agreements.

I would respond exactly in this manner - name and shame these idiots.

They've got a point. He appears to have violated an NDA. Being uncooperative may be your right, I don't know, but either way it would be in rather poor taste to assist in the revealing of company secrets. Sounds like they did what they had to do, and are continuing to [try to] do so. I'd play ball, otherwise you look like more or a dick than a unmovable-wall.

Tell them to call Barbara Streisand. She has some advice for them since the internet just started seeding the podcast...

UHH and Blah,

You're asking Frank to "play nice" when TweetPhoto didn't even have the courtesy to first contact Frank about the podcast before threating legal action.

- Joe

They've got no case if it were to go to court, its just that simple. They're just bullying and attempting to scare you into pulling the audio interview.

Personally it's disgusting and shows very poorly of their company. If they want to do right by you, they should just drop it, or offer to buy out the recording for a fair price given the time and hassle invested now.

As for the CEO, seems they were already intending to fire him and just wanted an excuse, otherwise there would have been much better ways they could have handled this.

Frank,
If there are any legal ways to have a judge order you to pull the interview, a law firm will find them and use them against you.

Otherwise, they will probably cause you so much trouble that you will do it anyway.

I suggest you:
[1] to release the interview and the article under CC licence; and
[2] to pull down the article and the interview [though not immediately] and to blog later about how the article and the interview has magically appeared elsewhere [make sure you post links to these "alternative publishers"].

Keep in mind that the I am not a lawyer and the above is only a "fellow blogger" 's advice.

In any case, good luck and keep up the good work!

I'm pleased to note that Michael Arrington has risen to the challenge, covering this post on Techrunch (link in sig) and ensuring that Frank is now the least of their worries.

Bullying a lone journalist may be easy, but intimidating a team like TechCrunch? Good luck to you.

Besides, the damage has already been done. I, like most of their readership, would never have heard about this interview, less still cared, had the legal kerfuffle not given them cause to cover it.

We should thank TweetPhoto for the entertainment.

You might contact the new Online Media Legal Network at Harvard's Berkman Center:

http://www.omln.org/