"'It's nice to see someplace that doesn't ask you if you like it up the ass, when they are SUPPOSED to be asking you about your art'- Ugly Shyla, dark artist"
Forced to remove a review re edit
Fri, 06/27/2008 - 21:52
I removed a review and a forum thread this evening -
I had to delete not only my review but my forum thread as well because I was threatened legally. For all of you who followed the story, imagine finding this in your inbox:
To: Ms. Heidi Martinuzzi
From: NAME REMOVED
Date: Friday, June 27, 2008
Re: Continuing breaches
Delivered via email
Dear Ms. Martinuzzi,
It has come to my attention that in after leaving NAME REMOVED, you have continued to divulge confidential information to third parties, including postings on the internet, in contravention of the non-disclosure agreement you had signed as part of your consideration for joining NAME REMOVED. One pertinent clause from that agreement is:
I agree that I shall not during, or at any time after the termination of my employment with the Company, use for myself or others, or disclose or divulge to others including future employees, any trade secrets, confidential information, or any other proprietary data of the Company in violation of this agreement. (Emphasis added).
I am not quite sure what the nature of your disagreement is with the filmmaker in question, but you are doing irreparable injury to NAME REMOVED with your actions. In the event that the letter you received upon your termination is not clear, or that you do not remember what was in the employment agreement or the non disclosure agreement you signed, please allow me to make it clear, you cannot discuss confidential information gleaned during your employment, this includes any and all film submissions made to NAME REMOVED and business conversations you may have had with NAME REMOVED or NAME REMOVED concerning the business. This is not a matter of ââ"šÂ¬Ã…"free speechââ"šÂ¬Ã‚ÂÂÂ. It is, however, a matter of contractual obligations you took on.
This matter really does not need to go any further. NAME REMOVED is requesting that you immediately cease and desist from any mention of the film or filmmaker in question, and any discussion of NAME REMOVED, especially in open forum on the internet, and that if any such postings still exist, that you have them summarily removed. I pray you understand that this is not only in violation of your agreements, but also causing NAME REMOVED irreparable injury to their good name and reputation and disrupting their business.
Naturally, NAME REMOVED reserves its legal rights.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly,
Sincerely
NAME REMOVED
This isn't a public forum, in case they were wondering. It is a private forum where membership is approved by me.
Fri, 06/27/2008 - 23:26
#2
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 04:01
#3
anyone else think ALL OF THEM, company and filmmaker, are making way too big a deal about a review?
let's face facts: there's no way this movie is going to be big, or even profitable. it's one speck in a sea of cheap dvd movies.
Agreed...they probably shot their margin having a lawyer draft a letter.
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 05:17
#4
I have to look into it, but I don't believe a Non Disclosure Agreement means you can never mention the company ever again in your life. I have a feeling personal opinions, as long as they don't divulge any company secrets or inner-workings (not that I was privy to any) are exempt. certainly, me saying that i worked there and in what capacity is not against the law. I have a feeling me posting my own confusion over the events of my firing is not illegal either.
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 05:30
#5
anyone else think ALL OF THEM, company and filmmaker, are making way too big a deal about a review?
let's face facts: there's no way this movie is going to be big, or even profitable. it's one speck in a sea of cheap dvd movies.
Controversy is a great way to get people interested in something that is more or less nothing more than bullshit (sometimes). And quite possibly spend money on it.
Heidi, I wish with all my bones that you at least screen captured some of the stuff "that guy" said before you took down your review. If not, oh well. I'm just sayin' that I personally did not see anything wrong with what you said or your review. He just wanted only GOOD reviews to pop up on Google.
And hey, they barred YOU from discussion of it, but WE can still discuss it, right? I mean like...we didn't sign any fuckin' contract. We should all go to OTHER public film discussion forums and say something. Anything. That's what I say.
Major good thoughts floating your way Heidi.
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 05:54
#6
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 05:54
#7
Yes, Mary, you are all welcome to discuss the film, and the filmmaker. I believe it is only myself who can't discuss him.
I am not going to retaliate, because I need to keep my heart clean, and revenge is just a way of keepng it dirty. I am irked, though, and feel really betrayed by the company's lack of communication with me and cold attittude. I guess I am not made for working in an environment like that.
I am also pretty sure that as long as I don't mention or aknowledge the company name or the film name in this thread, I can't be sued.
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 09:19
#8
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 10:01
#9
NDAs typically are only good for the duration of your employment or for a specified period of time after employment. And if the company goes belly up (like I suspect they will given their current business practices), then it's a moot point.
What's really bizarre about this is that the movie has already screened at festivals so it's not like it's some deep, dark, secret project that no one has seen outside the distributor.
Jessica
Sat, 06/28/2008 - 19:59
#10
Yes, Mary, you are all welcome to discuss the film, and the filmmaker. I believe it is only myself who can't discuss him.
I am not going to retaliate, because I need to keep my heart clean, and revenge is just a way of keepng it dirty. I am irked, though, and feel really betrayed by the company's lack of communication with me and cold attittude. I guess I am not made for working in an environment like that.
I am also pretty sure that as long as I don't mention or aknowledge the company name or the film name in this thread, I can't be sued.
Whatever allows you to sleep at night and be able to look at yourself in the mirror...(That is not sarcasm)
Sun, 06/29/2008 - 10:19
#11
Thu, 11/13/2008 - 21:29
#12
Fri, 11/14/2008 - 09:52
#13
Fri, 11/14/2008 - 11:44
#14
I feel bad for the guy. The idea behind his project was OK, but it was poorly executed. For what he was hoping to accomplish, he needed to have assembled a better team behind him, plus the script definitely needed a rewrite.
I've seen very similar results from first-time filmmakers who try to do everything on the cheap - they have the "that's good enough" attitude, which just kills their project and leaves them scratching their heads wondering what went wrong.
Jessica
Fri, 11/14/2008 - 13:37
#15
Fri, 11/14/2008 - 14:03
#16
I suspect they're not the most professional of companies to work for.
Jessica