Well, let’s test out this new format. Here’s the story.
The Court also ordered restitution of the Mateel’s attorney fees in making the motion (I think – the article’s not clear on just what attorney fees are being awarded, but it’s just over $1000.00) at the full $300.00 per hour rate rather than the $200.00 per hour discounted rate. I’ve seen that happen before. The law allows for “reasonable attorney” fees and doesn’t reward the breaching party when an attorney cuts a special deal to help a client. Judge Miles ruled $300.00 per hour “reasonable.”
Now, I will be watching this thread carefully and I have more administrative options (your first post may not go through right away, it seems that I have to approve some posters and not others – don’t ask me why). I can ban IPs. I’d rather not do that, but while I will allow expression of frustration, I’m not allowing name calling, libel, nor severe disrespect. I calls them as I sees them.
57 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 2, 2008 at 6:24 pm
anon
SO THEN ERIC,WHAT CAN THE MATEEL DO NOW TO GET ANY MONIES?
December 2, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Anonymous
test
December 2, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Moviedad
I still have a hard time believing that the Mateel Community Center can be violated like this, and still no justice. The partners had/have no right to put on a festival based on the Mateel-owned festival. Only in this “Uber-Capitalist” society could such a crime be perpetrated against a whole community, and those who cheated the community; get away with it. Why? Because it is business. And if the case is business Vs Community. then business wins hands down. Just like every other issue we are dealing with in the county. if you can get the issue framed into a ‘Business vs Community’ equation, business will always win. regardless of what an impudent court decrees.
The BS about “jobs,” which never really happen. huge projects bring out of town workers. business is designed to make money for the business owners, not employees. in fact, as we all know, its better business to get rid of employees wherever you can.
Those Neo-Cons who cry the loudest about Socialism are the very ones who get all the socialism they need. while the rest of us struggle, just to survive.
Will the Mateel get the event back, since the Partners defaulted? not a chance. Their only chance to get anything is what, Hire some scumbag collection agency that will give back ten cents on the dollar?
December 2, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Eric Kirk
Anon – the first step is usually a deposition of the judgment debtor in which the judgment creditor gets to query the debtor about his/her/its assets. Then the creditor can try to execute on the assets. Pretty basic really. Usually something is worked out before anything actually gets foreclosed on.
December 2, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Anonymous
It looks like in this case Business/Corporate did not win. Yes the show was taken from the MCC but look at the wreck the show is in that Tom Dimmick and Carol Bruno are in charge of. It’s in debt, they’re in debt, moral is at an all time low amongst coordinators, relationships with vendors have been compromised quite possibly beyond repair. It appears to be a sinking ship that would take a miracle to revive.
The MCC on the other hand appears to have done quite well for itself despite losing their show for a year. Membership and support has increased. Reggae on the River was a success for them. The SAMF continues to grow and thrive. Moral and support is at an all time high.
From my perspective the MCC despite the long legal battle survived and weathered the storm fairly well whereas PP/TD/CB appear not to have weathered the storm well at all.
I don’t think we should look at what was lost and can’t be regained but what we have gained and can continue to expand upon.
December 2, 2008 at 7:51 pm
anon
wow, moviedad…(can we still nominate for the board?)
December 2, 2008 at 8:06 pm
S. C.
Does anybody know why some of the folks nominated at the Annual Meeting, i.e. Sue Maloney and others, were not on the ballot?
December 2, 2008 at 9:27 pm
anon
no…er, maybe they read or heard about how they were getting trashed on eric’s blog here and thought fuck i don’t need this shit…not too excited about the list of candidates, doesn’t look good for the MCC…
December 2, 2008 at 9:28 pm
amelie
Just having’ a bit of fun here.
I just overheard that KMUD news reported that Carol Bruno made a statement to the effect that she could sympathize with the organizations that had not been paid by Dimmick. She stated that too had not been paid by Dimmick. Of course, this is no surprise to those of us who have been paying attention for a few years.
But in some parallel universe…Carol comes back to the Mateel and says” I’d really like to do reggae, but just not Dimmick.” So behind the scenes they meet and strike a deal. They talk to the Arthur Family and convince them to cancel Dimmick’s lease on French’s Camp and then petition the Planning Dept to move Reggae Rising to French’s for the safety of the community and because a smaller show is what we really want.”
OK I’m sorry… I just couldn’t help it. Sometimes life is stranger than fiction.
December 2, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Eric Kirk
no…er, maybe they read or heard about how they were getting trashed on eric’s blog here and thought fuck i don’t need this shit…not too excited about the list of candidates, doesn’t look good for the MCC…
I knew it was my fault. Somehow.
December 2, 2008 at 9:41 pm
amelie
To S.C.,
I do not know the particulars, but here are a couple of general reasons that a potentially qualified candidate would not end up on the ballot:
1. The nominee did not accept the nomination.
2. The nominee was not a “member in good standing” (read current paying member) for the past year, as required by the MCC bylaws.
December 2, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Anonymous
I, too, was disappointed when I got my ballot for the MCC board in my mail box. I wish I could have voted for Rio and Sue. I wish the MCC all the best with collecting money from Tom and Carol.
Please support Recycled Youth this weekend, it’s one of my favorite events of the whole year. The kids are doing yet another great performance and deserve all the support, love and encouragement we can give them. I am so proud of them, after all most of their peers are sitting on the couch and doing a lot of nothing productive.
December 3, 2008 at 9:03 am
S. C.
Thank you Amelie. Parallel universes do exist, at least I hope so because sometimes this one ….well, you know, doesn’t seem filled with manifested dreams. Vote for the best and wish for the best, seems to be what elections are all about. Oh….and by the way, thanks for the chuckle. That was funny!
December 3, 2008 at 10:20 am
anonamie
It looks like the payment schedule has be postponed again. Will it get postponed next year also? I certainly hope that PP doesn’t try again to do ANOTHER RR next year although I saw it posted on their website. I just don’t understand why for the fourth year in a row (the first two with ROR) they want to continue to putting on a money losing project and every year we hear about how they owe so and so in the tens of thousands of dollars each! I think they keep dreaming that things will get better- but it get sold out almost every time?
December 3, 2008 at 11:08 am
Nick Bravo
Moviedad has shown us his ignorance of the capitalist system. Please read Capitalism: the unknown ideal by Ayn Rand. There’s also some stuff on capitalism by Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan, and a precious few others who actually understand capitalism.
Yes, I know it will hurt to put down the communist manifesto but knowing what you think your fighting against will actually increase your intelligence on the subject.
December 3, 2008 at 11:17 am
Atlas Shrugged is just about the most boring novel ever written
Nick, anybody who would cite a nut like Ayn Rand for any reason other than parody is intellectually suspect himself.
December 3, 2008 at 11:37 am
Nick Bravo
There’s a parallel universe where the humboldt bloggers actually live according to their self-proclaimed ideals, rather than just ignoring the blatant contradiction between their words and actions.
December 3, 2008 at 1:23 pm
the last stone
Nick is right. You guys just don’t get it.
December 3, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Anonymous
Ayn Rand is a crank, but that doesn’t mean Nick is himself. He just needs to read some Marcuse and Chomsky to balance his intellectual perspective out.
December 3, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Nick Bravo
Atlas shrugged is boring to those who have no capacity for critical thought OR imagination. Thus they are doubly unintelligen t.
December 3, 2008 at 3:32 pm
anon
Just Asking
wow, wordpress is cool (those snapshots on the list of blog names are something the other wordpress blogs–heraldo, kim,etc– don’t have operating).
i wonder if the blog owner can go back to IP numbers from the old blogspot blog and ban some of the truly hateful obnoxious ones? can you get an obnoxious comment NOW, then go back and see all the comments made by that particular commenter here on wordpress? hmm…
where will it end? will he ban serially boring commenters too? ( i better shut up and go away, AWAY off topic…)
can you have a write-in candidate for Mateel board election? (whew! back on TOPIC)…
December 3, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Eric Kirk
Nick, I’m going to have to put you on moderation for awhile. That doesn’t mean I’m banning you. It does mean that for the time being that I’m going to have to approve each post.
December 3, 2008 at 5:18 pm
RePete
Mateel board elections.
Rio Anderson was not a member of MCC
Sue Maloney declined the nomination as did several other people
leaving 4 candidates for 3 positions.
I believe they all are good candidates and have a hard time choosing. Youth vs age ? Gender Balance? what issue pushes your button. Vote, volunteer , contribute , make your voice heard because its OUR community center.
December 3, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Moviedad
Mr. Bravo you name three anti-Americans; who are probably the most powerful enemies we have ever faced.
December 3, 2008 at 9:47 pm
anon
RePete you don’t know “anything”….at least one of those candidates will be severely disruptive if elected/ i pity us and the poor board if that is one of the winners…those who’ve been here awhile, in the know, know of whom i speak–spread the word, this cannot happen!…(how cryptic is THAT?)…
December 3, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Nick Bravo
The president of Iran, hillary clinton, and the international banking cartel.
December 4, 2008 at 4:09 pm
S. C.
Milton Friedman, the father of the subjugation of So. America, Central America, the former USSR, Poland and now the US via his Chicago School of Economics is responsible for the economic holocaust that has killed, maimed and tortured more people than the Third Reich. He is a fascist and his followers have created and supported more fascist regimes than and other ideology in history. Bush loved him. So does Exxon.
Free market? What a crock. Right up there with the Patriot Act. Nice sounding, but deadly.
Oh, and un-American to boot.
December 4, 2008 at 4:12 pm
S. C.
make that “any” other ideology
December 4, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Mr. Greenjeans
How can Bruno and PP and Carlo Bruno assign the debt responsibility to Dimmick without the Mateel’s input as it seemed in the article in the Independent? PP could theoretically find somebody somewhere and make a deal with them and then tell the Mateel that this new person is now responsible for PP’s and Carol Bruno’s Mateel obligation? It just seems that things don’t work out very well when it comes to these “people”. At every turn things go bad. I keep coming back to the arrogance of the famous Mateel meeting in 2006 and how they tried to paint the Mateel as so horrible and how since then it seems that the Mateel has been treated terribly. Remember “take the guarantee?” Is this the way the guarantee would have worked out? Once it was the gas prices and hurricane Katrina’s fault and once it was the move to the new site and then it was that the Mateel were too intrusive and wanted to know where the money was going and now it is because of the financial mess. Talk about an excuse at every turn!! This event was all set up and the permits in order (paid for by the Mateel) and they had the infrastructure (paid for by the Mateel of course) and all they had to do was take the money and park the cars and pour the drinks in the booze booth. They still could not do it. World class promoters?
December 4, 2008 at 4:46 pm
wondering
Slim pickin’s to be sure especially with three seats up for election! anon 12/3/ 9:47, I had similar concerns, but disruptions are the least of our worries. Sadly, a board of directors is practically a moot point when an organization is facing bankruptcy. For that, I hold Ms Bruno, Mr Bassis, Mr Dimmick and their many accomplices in this dishonorable turn of events responsible. They had 2 prior years of unregulated income, they got a sweet deal with the settlement, and all they needed to do was follow the terms of it. Can anyone explain to me how not one of the main players or their no-confidence crew, thought of setting the monies due as part of the settlement, aside? How unbelievable. That not one person had the conscience, and fore-thought to do just one act of dignity leaves me truly disappointed in this community.
December 4, 2008 at 6:54 pm
fromblobsblog2/18/07
REMEMBER THIS?
Will the judge revisit these obviously valid claims, in light of the failure on the part of Dimmick and PP to comply by the terms of the settlement? Is there justice? hmmmm seems like $500,000 would have been an ez buy out from the intense scrutiny of the law. What happened?
The“Mateel Community Center, Inc., a California non-profit corporation, Plaintiffs, vs. People Productions, LLC, a California limited liability company, Carol Bruno, an individual, Thomas Dimmick, an individual, and Does 1 to 20 inclusive, Defendants.”
“Complaint for damages for breach of contract, interference with prospective economic advantage, misappropriation of trade secrets, infringement of trademark, unfair business practices, conspiracy conversion, accounting, declaratory relief, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction.”
An intro simply states that the Mateel owns the trademark for Reggae on the River® and contracted with Carol Bruno and P.P. to produce the festival on Tom Dimmick’s land in 2006.
I assume adding 20 unnamed John/Jane Does as potential litigants is routine. I do not know who they might be. (Maybe you, if you are working on Reggae Rising.)
Then comes the meat, 13 causes of action:
Cause No. 1: Anticipatory Breach Of Contract (against People & Bruno)
The Mateel contracted with P.P to produce Reggae for 6 years starting in 2006, with an option for the next 4 years, with P.P. working for a set fee and the Mateel sharing the net profits.
In a roundabout way with lot of history, the suit basically says things did not work out as planned — not enough profit went to the Mateel.
The Mateel asked for an audit to try to explain why there was less profit than anticipated in 2005; they allege that P.P. did not supply sufficient information to complete the audit.
In Oct. 2006, Mateel heard from Dimmick, saying Carol told him, “in no uncertain terms, that she will not, under any circumstances again produce the ROTR event for the current Mateel administration.” The next day Bruno sent the Mateel Board a letter proposing an agreement to end the production contract, stating that “the reality is that I am finished with the fighting and the amount of energy the persistent bad relations takes is not worth it to me.” At the Mateel membership meeting Nov. 17, Bruno, again declared she would not produce Reggae for the Mateel under the then-active contract.
On Dec. 28, The Mateel served notice of termination of People’s production contract based on “anticipatory breach of the contract.” Because of that breach the Mateel “suffered damages in the amount not yet fully ascertained — to be determined…”
No. 2: Breach Of Contract (against People & Bruno)
PP contracted with the Mateel to handle all aspects of production and presentation of ROR, but ultimately breached the contract by “failing to pay for the equipment, supplies and assets needed for ROR, failing to deposit all receipts from ticket sales in the ROR account, and failing to inform Mateel in a timely manner of the extra expenses being incurred.” The result: “lost profits in an amount as of yet unascertained.”
No. 3: Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage (Against People & Bruno)
Under the contract with People, the Mateel “reasonably expected to continue hosting future ROR events and derive economic benefit therefrom.”
Knowing that, “People failed and refused to produce the event in a professional manner.” The Mateel “believes that defendants collected revenues from the sale of wristbands which were not reported as ROR revenues; failed to adequately monitor payments to subcontractors; failed to adequately monitor payments to employees; and failed to adequately monitor payments for supplies.”
Further, PP knew that the Mateel has contracted with a new producer (2B1) after terminating the PP production contract “with the intention of producing future ROR events and deriv[ing] economic benefits therefrom.”
“Despite such knowledge, defendant, and or its agents, interfered with plaintiff’s business by promoting a Reggae event at the same time and same place as ROR; conspiring with the landowner, defendant Dimmick, to terminate Mateel’s lease of his property; contacting prior ROR employees, contractors, coordinators, and performers in an effort to dissuade them from working for Mateel and the new producer; refusing to return property owned by Mateel which is necessary for the production of the event; and using plaintiff’s proprietary information to promote their own music festival” specifically Reggae Rising.
As a result of this “intentional conduct,” Dimmick has terminated the Mateel’s rental agreement and “many employees, coordinators and volunteers have informed [the] Mateel they will not work for the new producer” [Boots Hughston].
This will ultimately lead to “lost profits and loss of prospective future revenues in an amount as of yet unascertained but within the jurisdiction of the Court.”
The Mateel sees the actions of PP as “willful and malicious, in that defendants knew that their failure to produce the event in a professional manner, and intentional acts to disrupt the production with the new producer, would cause plaintiff to lose the benefit of the subject business” and that the Mateel “would be unable to continue producing ROR” make money from it. The Mateel asks for “punitive damages in an amount which the Court deems appropriate.”
Further, “unless restrained and enjoined by order of this Court,” PP will disrupt the business relationship with 2B1, because PP is “in possession of personal property, and plaintiff’s proprietary information that is necessary for the production of the event, which constitutes a misappropriation of trade secrets.” The Mateel also alleges that this interference with ROR will cause “injury to plaintiff’s reputation in the musical industry and its good will.”
No. 4: Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage (Against People & Bruno)
This seems to repeat allegations in No. 3, concluding, “As a proximate result of defendants’ conduct plaintiff suffered damages in the form of lost profits and loss of prospective future revenues in an amount as of yet unascertained but within the jurisdiction of the Court. Plaintiff prays leave of Court to amend this Complaint when such sums become known.”
No. 5: Conspiracy to Interfere with Prospective Economic Advantage (Against People, Bruno & Dimmick)
Incorporates all of the above (each cause does so) and adds Dimmick into the equation:
“Defendants People and Dimmick have formed a partnership for the purpose of conspiring to interfere with plaintiff’s business relations, by producing a Reggae festival at the same location and time as the annual ROR festival.”
Knowing that the Mateel had planned a festival to be produced by 2B1, “defendants, and or their agents, disrupted plaintiff’s relationship with its new producer by wrongfully terminating plaintiff’s lease of property from defendant Dimmick; purchasing an option to lease land previously used by plaintiff for parking and camping for ROR (French’s Camp); promoting a Reggae event at the same time and same place as ROR” (Reggae Rising) and hiring the old crew. Again, resulting in potential lost profits to be determined.
No. 6: Misappropriation of Trade Secret: Statutory (Against People & Bruno)
This section basically says that Carol Bruno’s legendary Rolodex (my language, not legalese) belongs to the Mateel since she was employed by the nonprofit when it was compiled, and she should not be using it to produce a festival of her own.
“The database has economic value in that it contains information not generally known within the trade and represented many years of research and communication.” Said database is “a trade secret which merits legal protection from defendant’s misappropriation” in that has reason to believe that PP “used this information to contact prior ROR customers, contractors, coordinators, volunteers, suppliers and performers with the intent to injure plaintiff.”
Dec. 28, 2006, when the Mateel terminated the PP contract, “due to defendant’s anticipatory breach” they asked PP to hand over the Rolodex, which at this point has evolved into a collection of digital databases. PP did not do so and “continue[d] using plaintiff’s database to try to produce their own event and to disrupt plaintiff’s ROR event, thus, “defendants will be unjustly enriched by obtaining business profits through unfair business practices.” The Mateel alleges that this also was “willful and malicious” meaning the Mateel is “entitled to punitive damages,” and “reasonable attorney’s fees.”
No. 7: Misappropriation of Trade Secrets – Common Law (Against People & Bruno)
Reiterates No. 6. again alleging that “defendants were willful and malicious in that defendants misappropriated plaintiff’s database with the deliberate intent to injure plaintiff and benefit itself. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to punitive damages.” (A lawyer can probably explain the difference between statutory and common law secrets.)
No. 8: Conversion (Against People & Bruno)
Here the Mateel adds “certain identifiable funds in an amount not yet fully ascertained” to the above, saying “plaintiff has expended time and money in attorney fees and staffing to pursue the converted property, all to plaintiff’s damage in an amount as of yet unascertained but within the jurisdiction of the Court,” which “justify the awarding of exemplary and punitive damages.’
No. 9: Accounting (Against People)
This portion of the complaint basically says that the Mateel hired PP to produce Reggae 2006, but has not received an adequate accounting of net profit. The Mateel believes it might have money coming.
No. 10: Breach of Contract (Against Dimmick)
The Mateel entered into a lease/rental agreement with Dimmick on July 27, 2005, “for the purpose of putting on the ROR festival.” The Mateel paid $33,000 in advance for ROR 2007, and notified Dimmick of a change in producer, “as provided for under the Agreement.”
Then, “on or about January 19, 2007, Dimmick breached the lease agreement by notifying plaintiff it had unilaterally terminated the agreement,” resulting in “damages in the form of lost profits in an amount as of yet unascertained but within the jurisdiction of the Court.”
No. 11: Declaratory Relief (Against Dimmick)
Since the Mateel leased land from Dimmick to put on RoR, “An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between plaintiff and defendant concerning their respective rights and duties.” The Mateel “contends that the lease does not require that … People be the exclusive producer for ROR.” Dimmick contends that “the lease requires Mateel to use defendant People as the producer for ROR, and plaintiff’s retention of a different producer directly breaches the lease.”
The Mateel asks the judge to sort out “its rights and duties,” and to declare “whether the lease requires defendant People to be the exclusive producer.” Again the Mateel “suffered damages in the form of lost profits in an amount as of yet unascertained but within the jurisdiction of the Court.”
No. 12: Unfair Business Practices (Against People, Bruno & Dimmick)
“During the relevant time period set forth herein, defendants committed, and continue to commit, acts of unfair competition as defined by Business and Professions Code 17000” including “intentionally interfering with plaintiff’s economic relations” by using the Reggae database to produce a non-Mateel Reggae “in violation of its duty of good faith and fair dealing,” due to this “unfair competition” the Mateel (and 2B1) have “been restrained in hiring performers, contractors, and coordinators and therefore … continue to suffer damages in an amount not yet fully ascertained but to be determined according to proof at trial — plus interest.”
No. 13: Injunctive Relief (Against People, Bruno & Dimmick)
In brief: The Mateel wants Tom, Carol, etc. to stop it right now.
Specifically, plaintiffs demand that defendants stop:
“1).promoting a “Reggae” musical festival on the same date and location as plaintiff’s Reggae on the River (“ROR”) musical festival;
2). denying plaintiff access to property on which they hold a lease with defendant Dimmick;
3). contacting contractors, coordinators and volunteers of prior ROR festivals, to discourage them from working for the current producer of the Mateel’s musical festival; and
4). using information defendant gained as agent for plaintiff, such as lists of contractors, coordinators, performers and volunteers, to promote their own musical festival.”
Otherwise “the Mateel will not be able to sell tickets, and its producer will not be able to contract with performers, hire coordinators and contractors for the 2007 ROR event, which will prevent the ROR festival from taking place and destroy the Mateel financially.”
“The full amount of damage is not now known.”
The rest of the suit goes back through the 13 causes, in short asking that the court stop People Productions, Tom Dimmick and associates from moving forward on their festival, “for a declaration that the lease [with] Dimmick does not require that People be the exclusive producer of ROR,” additionally The Mateel wants damages, general and punitive and attorney fees and “such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.”
December 4, 2008 at 7:32 pm
salmon girl
Milton Friedman, AlanGreenspan and Ayn Rand and their idiot philosophies have destroyed the world economy. Those babies should be tossed out with the bath water! I agree atlas shrugged was an incredibly boring read. And did you really expect anything else from dimmick and pp?
December 4, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Moviedad
This reminds me of the stolen election of 2000 and 2004. The media and public organizations kept going about their/our business. like everything was normal. Calling Bush “President,” and I kept yelling at the radio: “He is not the President! It is a crime! All other points are moot!” You know its serious when words like “moot,” are involved.
My point is that the crime against the Mateel is similar. People kept talking about the festival this, and the festival that. and I’m yelling at the radio: “They have no right! The Mateel paid for everything they are using! You can’t take it from a Non-Profit and hand it over to a gang of capitalista who “managed” the community’s property so long, they believe it belongs to them. Does a renter suddenly own the house because they have been allowed to rent it every year? Of course not.
Tanya Staupp screwed up as far as I’m concerned. She handled the situation very badly. She pissed off Ms Bruno. As an outsider on the inside during the last Reggae 2006, it looked like a pissing contest between two “high-maintenance” women. I realize there are a lot of other issues involved. But that is how I saw it that year. and the loss of money? As soon as they paid one sub-contractor in cash the day of the event, None of the others would take a check. Another wrong move.
December 4, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Nick Bravo
salmon girl, perhaps you should invite the russian bear to dinner.
December 4, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Nick Bravo
I’m sorry, I shouldn’t have said that. Truth is I love fish, what was it shakespeare said about fish…?
December 5, 2008 at 12:19 am
Anon
Sue maloney told me she initially wanted to accept the nomination and then woke up in the middle of the night realizing that it would be too much at this time, with a lot of her energy and available time are already committed elsewhere.
Being a Mateel board member demands beaucoups time and energy. For that reason, I’m glad she and Rio declined. The only other person nominated who declined was Doug Green who mumbled that he didn’t have the time. He’s been, and continues to be, actively supportive of the Mateel. Margaret Friedman, Andy Burnett and the other woman(whose name I am spacing) will all 3 be excellent board members, each with different strengths. Rainbow MW has already done time as a board member, my opinion: seems good intentioned but a little out of touch.
December 5, 2008 at 12:44 am
Sheesh
The “russian bear?” What is this, 1959? The next thing you know, he’ll be ranting about “comsymps” and “fellow travelers!”
December 5, 2008 at 6:58 am
Mr. Greenjeans
I just talked to my friend Jim Smith-Jones. He is going to take over my credit card debt as of last Christmas. I emailed my credit card company and told them they could collect from him (washing my hands in the air).
So, anybody know where I should go by a new car?
December 5, 2008 at 8:34 am
Anonymous
Anyone been following the Mattel toy company lawsuit? Where the person who was hired by the toy company had a great idea he worked on while employed by the company and then broke off and made the product (those almost as awful as Barbie Bratz dolls) and was raking in the dough–but his former employers sued?
And the courts upheld it, because the idea was researched and developed when he was an employee?
December 5, 2008 at 8:56 am
Anonymous
Mr green business are sold all the time and with the sale goes the debit standard practice . It is happing right now all over the country and world .The people with money and backing are picking up business all around the world and assuming debit .This is all happening at bargain prices
December 5, 2008 at 11:51 am
Nick Bravo
that course case sets a dangerous precident in that any profits, ideas, etc that you create while employed belong to your employer and not to you.
For example, say you work 40+ hours a week at McDonalds and during your time off you create a business plan for a restaraunt and eventually you start doing the research and preparing to get your business started (all the while still working at mcdonalds). Eventually you leave your job at McD’s and open your restaraunt which may or may not be a competitor for McD’s. McD’s can then legally demand a cut of your profits and can even demand that you shut you restaraunt down, thus destroying your chances for success.
December 5, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Anonymous
Dear Anon December 5, 2008 at 8:56 am
That may be true BUT Carol Bruno is NOT a corporation/business she IS a person and she still owes that debt.
I’ve done a little bit of research and an individual cannot sell their personal debt unless all parties agree to it. Carol Bruno the individual is still 100% responsible for this debt.
It would be like me borrowing 10K from you and then selling my debt to Joe the Plumber or Joe Six Pack and then sending you a letter in the mail saying I don’t owe you any longer go to talk to this person.
You could still come after me and I would still be the responsible for that debt.
December 5, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Mr. Greenjeans
My credit card company isn’t going for it either. In fact they raised my interest rate.
December 5, 2008 at 7:11 pm
S. C.
We need separation of corporation and state as well as church and state.
December 6, 2008 at 8:17 am
anon
key words Nick: “during your time off ”
That is entirely different than using information …gained as agent for plaintiff, such as lists of contractors, coordinators, performers and volunteers, to promote their own musical festival.
December 6, 2008 at 9:39 am
S. C.
What a great play last night at the Mateel. Recycled Youth rocks! A packed house and lotsa laughs, if you don’t mind laughing at yourself. Leave it to the youth to cut to the chase. Thanks Mateel.
December 6, 2008 at 9:50 am
anon
Thanks Mateel? Thanks Joani, Barbara, Susan, and the dedicated members of their capable crew. Thanks to the cast. Thanks to the parents who drove their kids to and from practice. Thanks to the people who fed the bunch of them every time they got together. Exactly what are you thanking the Mateel for?
December 6, 2008 at 10:50 am
Cristina
For the record, the Mateel doesn’t charge for use of the hall, either for rehearsals or for the performances. So in that sense, it’s an underwriter of the program.
I’m very much looking forward to seeing the show tonight.
December 6, 2008 at 11:02 am
Eric Kirk
My understanding is that the Mateel also made the initial grant applications to get Recycled Youth started. I don’t know if that level of involvement continues.
But it’s clear that Joani, Barbara, Susan, the kids, and others really put their hearts into this. Tonight is your last chance to see it. Don’t miss the opportunity!
December 6, 2008 at 2:24 pm
S. C.
Absolutely, cudos to Joani, Barbara, Susan and big ups to the youth. 13 weeks of work takes a lot of dedication from the entire ensemble….. I just congratulate the Mateel because even in hard economic times they seem to be bringing us some wonderful annual festivals, the Mateel Meal and some GREAT theatre like Al’s play last month and now Recycled Youth’s “Be It Ever So Humboldt”.
By “bringing us” I mean either producing or being a primary sponsor.
December 7, 2008 at 12:29 am
felix omai
12/ 06 – 9:50 am
Why so bitter?
December 7, 2008 at 8:57 am
Mr. Greenjeans
“Exactly what are you thanking the Mateel for?”
“But it’s clear that Joani, Barbara, Susan, the kids, and others really put their hearts into this.”
“Thanks to the parents who drove their kids to and from practice. Thanks to the people who fed the bunch of them every time they got together.”
“For the record, the Mateel doesn’t charge for use of the hall…”
“…big ups to the youth. 13 weeks of work takes a lot of dedication from the entire ensemble”
Thanks to all of them. Because they worked like a community can. They all pulled together and did something that the community had fun with, profited from, were taught, they learned, were given something to do after school, the community were entertained, were informed because of it and can’t wait for the next one. Every part of it was community was involved. Including the parents. It’s interesting because I have heard from four or five different sources, wholly independent and out of context and out of the blue, how well done this was. Thanks for letting me see it. Thanks to all of them.
December 7, 2008 at 9:03 am
anon
Felix. Where do you get bitter from? I simply placed the credit where it is due. The Thanks Mateel comment gave the kudos to the wrong people. The performance was great. Felix your question is as odd as your interpretation of mine. The cast rocks.
December 7, 2008 at 9:11 am
anon
9:03
so easy to identify the PP partisans–you’re the only ones who try to denigrate the MCC, whenever possible.
December 7, 2008 at 11:28 am
anon
Your assumption is incorrect. It is possible to praise the people who deserve it without being a side taker in the war of the vanities.
December 8, 2008 at 9:58 am
S. C.
Uh, folks, no harm or slight intended. Time for those two deep breaths.
December 8, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Eric Kirk
Believe me S.C. This is nothing.