To: "Linda Donegan" <acrobat76@u2.com>
From: mjr@ranum.com
Subject:

> Dear Geekboy,
>   My name is Anna Donegan nee Hewson I am euan Donegans wife.

Hi! Nice to "meet" you. You can call me 'Marcus' - I haven't answered
to 'geekboy' since college.

I wonder if you'll actually get this response, since your original message
originated from sky.net (where all of Euan's other Emails originate)
but it claims to come from u2.com. Anyhow, I'll post this on my
web page so you can read it later in the event that you don't get it
directly.

> Iam writing to
> you because i am sick to death of your campaign of lies and wild accusations
> against my husband.

Lies and wild accusations?
What am I lying about?

> I want you to put on the net every photo that euan
> supposedly sold who he sold them to what he got for them and the dates he sold
> them.

I have no idea if he sold any images. The fact, however, that he was
offering images for sale on J.S. Library, is proof of copyright violation.

The fact that, in his print listing on J.S. Library he offered a print
for sale (by "Marta") on which Marta's logo was removed - that's
rather damning, isn't it? I don't know (or care) if he sold any of
the images he was trying to sell - do you deny that he was offering
them for sale? And, further, that he was offering them as "by
Euan Donegan"?  I took the liberty of preserving and posting
screenshots of some of Euan's attempts to sell other people's
work as his own. They are:
http://www.ranum.com/fun/weirdness/stolen-2.jpg
and Euan's version:
http://www.ranum.com/fun/weirdness/possible-stolen-2.jpg
where he's asking 12 pounds sterling for it.

What about that is a "lie"?

I can only refer you to US Copyright law (we're signatories to
the Berne convention so it's standardized with the UK)
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap12.html
(b) Removal or Alteration of Copyright Management Information.
Not only was Donegan violating copyright, by removing Marta's
logo, he became liable for additional statutory damages of
between $200 and $2,500 per instance - in accordance with
Section 1202.

> If you cant produce this info then you better keep your mouth shut.Put up
> or shut up dorkface.And that goes for your pals as well.

I don't need to produce any evidence of his success or
non-success at selling other people's work as his own.
I suggest you review Section 106a of US Copyright:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106a

>   My husband never sold any of your crappy and i must say pervy pics.Who
> would buy such garbage.And by the way how much money have you made from them?

What does that have to do with anything?

I don't care whether you like my photography - although, apparently,
Euan liked it enough to try to claim it was his. And it's irrelevant whether
I have sold any or not. In fact, I prefer to post my work online for my
own enjoyment and that of others. Although occasionally I have to deal
with people like Euan violating my copyright.

> Probably nothing.They belong on porno sites.You are strictly amateur and
> always will be.You have a very high opinion of yourself.And also are your
> models the age of consent?They look awful young to me.

If anyone ever serves me with a warrant, I can produce signed
model releases and proof of age where necessary. Not that
that's any of your business.

> If you can accuse euan
> of being a thief i am calling you a paedophile.

You can call me whatever you like. You'll have absolutely no
evidence to back it up, though, so it'll simply be defamation if
you do.

> i know where you live.

You must be very smart. That information is on my web site.
Maybe you should quit your day job and start working as a
detective!

mjr.