In common with all Internet photography specialists I have written extensively on the recent Jay Maisel – Andy Baio legal controversy. And like other leading copyright experts I have concluded that a world in which entrepreneurs cannot use other people’s work for free is truly fucktarded™.

In posts such as “Photographer Jay Maisel Extorts [Opinion] $32500 Out Of Andy Baio”, “Photographer Jay Maisel Ties Andy Baio To A Chair And Pours Gasoline Over Him”, and “Photographer Jay Maisel Hires Tony Soprano To Put Andy Baio’s Head In A Vice” I revealed how one of the world’s wealthiest men plotted in his 70 room mansion to crush the dreams of a starving young artist. I also published the only eyewitness account of how Maisel personally “held his feet over the fire and tormented him and hung him upside down to shake $32,500 out of his pockets” in order to buy new a new couch to match the drapes in that mansion.

I am now shocked and distressed to learn that some readers may have misinterpreted these posts to imply that Mr. Maisel, rather than exercising his legal right to defend the copyright of his life’s work, was engaged in some kind of criminal protection racket. I have further become aware that I may have inadvertently led people to believe that I somehow disapprove of the legal settlement between Mr. Baio and Mr. Maisel.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

On the contrary, as the World’s Fourth Most Influential Photoblogger™, I welcome Mr. Maisel’s defence of his intellectual property, and his insistence on his right to be paid for the use of that property. Why, I myself in the past have campaigned long and hard to be paid with a byline in Forbes magazine.

I also wish to stress that my description of Mr. Maisel as “a hack photographer” and “the worst kind of artist” in no way implies that he fails to measure up to my own high standards. While Mr. Maisel cannot match my 60,000 publications on flickr, I recognise that his 55-year career shooting annual reports, magazine covers, advertising and more for clients worldwide is an accomplishment in its own right.

It is for these reasons that I am delighted to announce that I have now deleted all my previous posts on Mr. Maisel to make space for a permanent exhibition of his work on my blog at its new home in the Utah desert.

It would be entirely wrong to suggest that this sudden reverse ferret is a result of discussions with Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Runne, attorneys at law, or because my employers at Stone & Youngberg have torn me a new asshole.  On the contrary, as I wrote in one of the deleted posts, “as a blogger disclosure is important”; my attempt to hide the posts and pretend that none of this ever happened is a clear demonstration of my commitment to disclosure and transparency. It is also entirely consistent with what Mr. Baio himself has described as my questionable grasp of copyright law and leaps of logic, and my history of publicity seeking by making vicious and unfounded attacks that are subsequently withdrawn and replaced by a grovelling apology.

Bookmark and Share

21 Responses to “Stockbroker Thomas Hawk [Parody] Apologises To Photographer Jay Maisel For Smear Campaign”

  1. E. J. Thribb E. J. Thribb says:

    Well Mr Hawk, I know not why
    I didn’t want to make you cry
    But, You deemed it ok
    To shout and Scream
    At a man who was just
    doing what the law did deem

    Now it looks like you
    Have binned your crap
    So to all the world that is that

  2. Caroline Caroline says:

    Thanks to the link to the “most influential photobloggers” editorial.

    I didn’t realize that the author’s criteria were so personal and subjective.

    I had assumed it w asto do with some measure of real influence on other photographers.


  3. Jake Jake says:

    This would have been a lot funnier a couple weeks ago, or at least before someone declared, “this subject is well and truly done.”

  4. Caroline Caroline says:

    Why stop beating a dead horse? Live horses make too much noise.

  5. Tom Tom says:

    Fantastic Jeremy. As someone wrote previously on another post, You take good pictures for a writer!

    Love it :o)

  6. Tony Sleep Tony Sleep says:

    “fourth most influential photoblogger”. Hawk is in great company on that eminent list. Here is what it didn’t say about number 1, Scott Bourne This produced an apparent grovelling apology[tm] from Bourne at Photography 2.0 seems to involve a lot of artistry with smoke and mirrors.

  7. Bob Croxford Bob Croxford says:

    The most influential photobloggers list is remiss not to include this blog by Jeremy Nicholl. How many other of the bloggers have been quoted in Parliament or Congress in a successful debate which protected photographers rights.

  8. Caroline Caroline says:

    Mr. Nicholl’s blog is set to become the next FB at this rate. Oops, I meant the next G+.

    Must stay current.

  9. […] Stockbroker Thomas Hawk [Parody] Apologises To Photographer Jay Maisel For Smear Campaign » The Rus… No Comments Monday 18 July 2011 This entry was posted in Field Notes & Essays and tagged Andy Baio, copyright, Jay Maisel, Miles Davis, Thomas Hawk. Bookmark the permalink. […]

  10. dempsey dempsey says:

    Damn good job you are a stockbroker and not a lawyer. And as for the 60,000 of whatever, that proves nothing. I would much rather salute the photographer who shot the 1 parefect defining shot of the century, than the wannabe who shoots 60,000 average ones. And damn good job you arn’t a photographer either, because based on your philosophy you’d starve.

  11. Sid and Doris Bonkers Sid and Doris Bonkers says:

    Dear Mr Dempsey

    You know that Mr A Russian Photo is a long est. and hard working photographer and has been for over 40 years ?

    And this is a parody of a Mr T Hawk/ Peterson …who is a stockbroker?

    Just checking

    best wishes

    Sid and Doris

  12. Jamie Jamie says:

    ‘Kind of Updated’

    July 21, 2011 – Kickstarter has changed (again) their ‘Kind of Screwed’ blog post by Kickstarter employee Meghan O’Connell (the tittle is back, so is her by line), but the wording has changed, again. (but still with no mention of the edits or dates or explanation for the changes)

    NOW her blog says:
    “And this is just as good a time as any to reiterate what we say in our Project Edit page:

    Don’t use music, images, video, or other content that you don’t have the rights to. Reusing copyrighted material is almost always against the law and can lead to expensive lawsuits down the road. The easiest away to avoid copyright troubles is to create all the content yourself.”

  13. Caroline Caroline says:

    Jamie, what is the gist of what it said before the editing?

  14. Caroline Caroline says:

    This is what “Thomas Hawk” can’t stand: Uppity women outing online trolls/harassers in his Flickr group.

    The user “HarborLit” was banned from the group minutes after her exchange with Anderson/Hawk ended.

  15. Jamie Jamie says:


    I wish I could give you the gist, but Meghan O’Connell’s/Kickstarter’s ‘Kind of Screwed’ June 23, 2011 blog post has changed a few times.

    If enough people feel like asking Kickstarter, maybe they will respect their audience/customers enough to repost it and explain the changes themselves.

    How about it Yancey?

    I haven’t read anything where he or the company has been critical of Andy’s behavior, but here is what was said back on July 20, 2009 ‘Kickstarter’s New CTO: Andy Baio”

    “Obviously we are thrilled by the addition of Andy to the team (he has served on our board over the past year), as well as the values that he brings: openness, transparency and a history of consumer advocacy. We look forward to growing Kickstarter together.”

    WAIT! You mean as a board member, Andy Baio was using the KOB image on the internet months BEFORE he was announced as the CTO of Kickstarter, and still he got promoted?

    Speaking of openness, transparency and a history of consumer advocacy, has any one heard from Andy about KOB since July 10, 2011?

    How about Kickstarter since June 23, 2011?

    Consumer advocacy as in, the user/customer agrees to Kickstarter’s terms and conditions, Kickstarter expects users/customers to respect ©/IP, they stipulate that both parties agree users/customers keep 100% ©/IP for what they create, Kickstarter gets certain usage rights, but the former CTO was using an artist’s work with out asking the registered copyright image creator/owner BEFORE he came aboard? And used Kickstarter to sell the same product? And used the product to promote Kickstarter?

    Lost in all the anger and frustration we’ve seen on-line recently, what has been missing most is that Kickstarter has had public ©/IP policies in place for long time. They ask everyone else to respect them, and most importantly the people who do, the creative-minded artists with original ideas who need Kickstarter’s help in raising financial support for their projects are the ones at risk if Baio philosophically does not feel the responsible thing to do is simply ask an artist for permission to use their work.

    The arguments on both sides have gone in many different directions, but ever come back to ever mention any date when Andy Baio asked Jay Maisel if he could use any image as part of anything. Nothing about KOB, nothing about Kickstarter. Nothing until there was a legal dispute, but I feel most people are under the impression Baio’s story only began on the date he said it did – February 2010.

    But, thanks to the internet, you can always read Andy Baio’s June 23, 2011 blog called ‘Kind of Screwed’ and judge for yourself – see any mention of any dates PRIOR to February 2010?

    Kickstarer’s blog was published on the exact same day (6/23/11), with the exact same name, as the post on Andy’s website. What is one obvious difference? Now a month later, Andy’s is the only one that is unchanged.

    How come Kickstarter didn’t expect Andy Baio to behave the same way they require their users/customers to behave? Shouldn’t Kickstarter be standing up for the ©/IP rights for ALL artists?

    Not just because of any legal or moral obligation, but because artists are their customer base who they say they are helping to support! I guess 5% isn’t worth what it used to be…

    Instead they post a sympathetic blog about a former CTO who has spent years fighting with artists because he doesn’t feel he should have to ask or need permission to use anyone else’s work? (Anyone except a major record label’s legal department.)

    As a company that values open, transparent consumer advocacy, I’d rather leave it to Kickstarter to explain what the original post said, why they didn’t leave it as it was originally written, or perhaps explain why a month later they felt the need to keep changing the wording with no explanation.

    I have no intention of being a spokes person for Andy Baio’s behavior, but as a CONCEPT, I do believe Kickstarter has a great product and that is why I have chosen to support friend’s projects in many ways – including with my credit card thru the Kickstarter website.

    This entire sweep it under the rug/KOB thing has made me question if I will continue to do so in the future – maybe yes, maybe no – depends on what else they decided to say publicly about the rights of the artists who make up their core customer base.

    According to Andy’s bio from May 9, 2011, he is the former CTO Kicstarter and “He’s received legal threats from The Beatles, Disney, and Bill Cosby and framed each one.”

    Quite a collection – before or after he was hired by Kickstarter?


  16. Jake Jake says:

    Oh boy, I bet Kickstarter is shaking in their boots now!

  17. Jamie Jamie says:


    Howdy partner!

    I hope that you always have the freedom to express your opinion. Wish I could say the same for myself.


  18. Caroline Caroline says:

    Kickstarter motto: Don’t be civil?

  19. “reverse ferret” 😉

Leave a reply: usual Marquess of Queensberry rules apply.


(required: will not be published)

What I’m thinking…

    Translate this Page