Bad Guy Guy Brunke AKA Guyco Gecko - Theif, liar, flipper

[Kirklandj]

My photo was taken off of the page by the web-designer and I was in contact with Guy via e-mail last night. He was quite responsive. He was very polite and promised to get the photo down by the end of business today and he did so late last night. Honestly, this is the quickest I have ever had someone taken a stolen photo down. It never should have been up there in the first place, but it is down now with apologies. I will never figure out who was responsible (Guy or skanndulus) for the image appearing on the web page to begin with, so I am just going to have to move on without being able to place blame.

I will add that my situation can be confusing as I license my images under a Creative Commons License with only some rights reserved. Some people do not understand non-commercial or non-derivative use to be as broad as it is so violations of the terms of use can be somewhat innocent. That would not explain the use of a watermarked image, however.

As far as the low-balling goes, you guys need to drop it. It may be annoying and it may even be insulting, but it has always been a part of this business. I have been doing this commercially for a decade now, which almost makes me an old-timer and it has always been around. All you have to do is say "No!" It may be in poor taste, but hardly worthy of a bad-guy post. The original post to this thread had merit, but the discussion has devolved into an argument about bartering tactics which agree with them or not, are not a matter of fraud or misrepresentation

I will suggest that anyone who has had a valid issue with Guy personally contact him via e-mail and he will most likely work with you as he did me. As a final disclaimer, I do not know Guy, have never met him as far as I know, have never done business with him, etc until last night, so everything I have said is based on a few e-mails exchanged last night solely in regards to use of my photo.

Jacob Kirkland (sorry forgot the full-name in previous posts)

 

[SamanthaJane13]

My photo was taken off of the page by the web-designer and I was in contact with Guy via e-mail last night. He was quite responsive. He was very polite and promised to get the photo down by the end of business today and he did so late last night. Honestly, this is the quickest I have ever had someone taken a stolen photo down. It never should have been up there in the first place, but it is down now with apologies. I will never figure out who was responsible (Guy or skanndulus) for the image appearing on the web page to begin with, so I am just going to have to move on without being able to place blame.

I will add that my situation can be confusing as I license my images under a Creative Commons License with only some rights reserved. Some people do not understand non-commercial or non-derivative use to be as broad as it is so violations of the terms of use can be somewhat innocent. That would not explain the use of a watermarked image, however.

As far as the low-balling goes, you guys need to drop it. It may be annoying and it may even be insulting, but it has always been a part of this business. I have been doing this commercially for a decade now, which almost makes me an old-timer and it has always been around. All you have to do is say "No!" It may be in poor taste, but hardly worthy of a bad-guy post. The original post to this thread had merit, but the discussion has devolved into an argument about bartering tactics which agree with them or not, are not a matter of fraud or misrepresentation

I will suggest that anyone who has had a valid issue with Guy personally contact him via e-mail and he will most likely work with you as he did me. As a final disclaimer, I do not know Guy, have never met him as far as I know, have never done business with him, etc until last night, so everything I have said is based on a few e-mails exchanged last night solely in regards to use of my photo.

Jacob Kirkland (sorry forgot the full-name in previous posts)

The blatant flipping is also still a legitimate point as far as I'm concerned.

I feel it was deliberate on Guy's part. I believe he bought the animals with the sole purpose of re-selling them for a profit, and had no intention of keep/breeding them.

 

[Kirklandj]

The blatant flipping is also still a legitimate point as far as I'm concerned.

I was not disagreeing with that hence writing "The original post to this thread had merit"

 

[hupababy_83]

He's watching why isn't he responding

 

[skanndelus]

why isn't he responding? i don't know, maybe the pitchforks and torches are scaring him?

but seriously, i think the crucification is over now, the "bad" guys have been punished

it is safe to step down from your pedestals now, we won't bite

now, i'm sure meg90 is still googling our names and playing csi:no life, but seriously... it's over

 

[Wolfy-hound]

Erik(or Guy) care to explain why you thought it was okay to build a website with photos that were not taken by Guy? You stated earlier that you thought they were taken by Guy, yet there's one right there with the mark showing someone else's logo.

You argued earlier that it was just fine to use the photos, but now you say you know it's not. So did you suddenly learn it's wrong to steal pictures, or are you trying to smooth over the whole issue so it can be forgotten until you guys get caught stealing something else?

 

[Leif]

why isn't he responding? i don't know, maybe the pitchforks and torches are scaring him?

but seriously, i think the crucification is over now, the "bad" guys have been punished

it is safe to step down from your pedestals now, we won't bite

now, i'm sure meg90 is still googling our names and playing csi:no life, but seriously... it's over

Both you and Guy have shown that you're lacking what is commonly referred to as business ethics. I would ask that you step down from your pedestal and ditch the attitude.

 

[AndrewLiu]

The original post to this thread had merit

and do still believe that it has merit albeit slightly side tracked. Lets get it back on track.

the "bad" guys have been punished... seriously... it's over

This issue to me is not over till Mr. Guy Brunke apologizes for his exploitation of Rick Mcjimsey. Guy Brunke lied, he cheated, and he stole from Mr. Mcjimsey and others. He deliberately lied to acquire Mr. Mcjimsey's leachianus gecko. He cheated Mr. Mcjimsey when he pissed all over the explicit Terms of Sale outlined in the original ad and justified it as "Free Enterprise". He clearly stole the intellectual property not just from Mr. Mcjimsey but at least three other hardworking, good and reasonable hobbyists. If these facts of Mr. Brunke's actions do not constitute exploitation i don't know what does.

I am glad the photos that Guy Brunke stole have been removed from their illicit use, and that Mr. Brunke has sincerely apologized to those victims in a satisfactory and timely manner. Now i want to know where is Rick Mcjimey's apology; where is Derek Dunlop's apology?

I don't want to hear explainations of GUY's actions from anyone but GUY BRUNKE.

Mr. Guy Brunke you owe Rick Mcjimsey your deep and sincere apologies for exploitation of him.

Now, thanks to the almighty, do no wrong Derek, we're on to another subject, a future breeding group of Gargoyles that got thrown into the mix. If you read the title reads: "Awesome Gargoyle Deal 1.3 Striped Group". Maybe the text part should have said future breeding group but that's what I meant. To say I didn't know that is just another one of your inncurate and slanderous statement which you may be held accountable for.

Mr. Guy Brunke you owe Derek Dunlop your sincere apologies and a retraction of your statements accusing him of "innaccurate and slanderous statements".

I believe the New Caledonian Gecko community to be composed of good and reasonable people. Apologize and they will be good and reasonable to you.

 

[skanndelus]

Erik(or Guy) care to explain why you thought it was okay to build a website with photos that were not taken by Guy? You stated earlier that you thought they were taken by Guy, yet there's one right there with the mark showing someone else's logo.

You argued earlier that it was just fine to use the photos, but now you say you know it's not. So did you suddenly learn it's wrong to steal pictures, or are you trying to smooth over the whole issue so it can be forgotten until you guys get caught stealing something else?

the circumstances were different, i've already said this in a different post. i never said it was okay to take photos from one website and use them on your own with the intent of using them to make money, if that's your perspective on how they were being used.

 

[skanndelus]

it is so easy to sit there and critique us together, behind your keyboards. could you imagine if people responded to you this way for every questionable, possibly unethical, or technically illegal act you were a part of. give it a rest. the photos were replaced, the leachie was offered back to the original owner and guy has taken his own photos of it. there's nothing else any of you can do besides type about how bad we are as human beings, together, behind keyboards. you guys won, guyco gained publicity, even made some sales because of this thread... i don't know what else there is to say?

 

[Wolfy-hound]

Apparently the only thing left to say from the two(or one) of you is "Hey, I don't mind stealing stuff, but if I'm caught, we'll act like it's no big deal and hope everyone forgets." It's a lot shorter version of all the posts on the thread.

I'm so glad to hear that it's okay to steal as long as I don't make money off it. *eye rolling*

Are ALL the stolen pics taken down yet? Or just the ones that someone made a fuss over publicly?

 

[skanndelus]

no one acted like it wasn't a big deal... we changed the photos IMMEDIATELY when we realized what was going on.

all the photos that we weren't certain were taken by guy have been removed, you guys are making a bigger deal out of it then who the photos actually belonged too. what do you want, a vial of his blood? just let it go or do something about it beyond typing.

concerned citizens, disperse!

 

[AndrewLiu]

you guys won, guyco gained publicity, even made some sales because of this thread... i don't know what else there is to say?

Oh really did Mr. Guy Brunke tell you that this thread got him more sales?

 

[Italianlnm]

no one acted like it wasn't a big deal... we changed the photos IMMEDIATELY when we realized what was going on.

all the photos that we weren't certain were taken by guy have been removed, you guys are making a bigger deal out of it then who the photos actually belonged too. what do you want, a vial of his blood? just let it go or do something about it beyond typing.

concerned citizens, disperse!

By the highlighted part, do you mean changed them with more stolen photos?

I have yet to figure out why Guy isn't responding anymore since you came to his rescue. He has let you, and you alone do the talking. This is a thread that involves him and his ethics. Not you. I understand you coming in and giving him a good work, or whatever it is you did, but I don't understand why he can't respond to other's questions himself.

I have to agree with a few others that flipping is a part of this trade. It is going to happen whether we like it or not, and once an animal is out of our hands there is nothing we can really do about it.

Though I do think it was bad morals(I think that is the word I want to use) For him to say that the gecko was for his own collection and he wasn't going to resell, but yet he did. He blatantly lied to Rick.

I also must say that stealing photos for any purpose is illegal. Not only that but it is wrong. I take pride in the photos that I take. I work hard on them, and I don't want anyone stealing them or using them with out my permission.

I think that you, Scan, would know more about laws that most because of your design business. You should know about CW laws, but yet you still defend his usage of them.

 

[Mister Internet]

no one acted like it wasn't a big deal... we changed the photos IMMEDIATELY when we realized what was going on.

Haha... you honestly think we're that stupid? Let me refresh your memory (you can click on the little blue arrow by your name if you need to see the original post in context):

i read the whole thread. he isn't selling your photo, he is selling a gecko you have a photo of. you posted the photo on a public website. technically anyone can use that photo for non profit purposes... e.g. not selling the PHOTO.

if you KNOW differently and can prove it with legal docs online or wherever go ahead, otherwise it's a pointless discussion to have... this whole thing is.

i do KNOW that calling someone a THIEF is in fact LIBEL, not slander, published false written statements about someone. i don't think any of you can prove that this guy STOLE from anyone.

grow up people.

everyone PLEASE stop pulling the word illegal out of your ass and post some actual REAL info on ACTUAL laws, i don't trust some random person on the internet to tell me what the laws are.

even if i'm wrong, big deal. the guy's butthurt that someone might make more money on a gecko he sold for less. that's the issue. you're all a bunch of cry babies with too much time on their hands.

*cry* *cry* copyrighted *cry* *cry* making more money than me *cry* *cry*
*life's not fair*

get a life

as for the photos under the geckos page, that page, as far as i can tell, is for educational purposes only. guy did not need to include a page with information regarding the different geckos but he did so for the betterment of the community... you cannot purchase any geckos from that page and the photos are used to merely to show what that particular species of gecko looks like, typically.

my 2 cents

Now, juuuuuust so we're clear here... immediately getting defensive, spouting off a bunch of incorrect and ILLEGAL information about copyright law, mocking people for being concerned about a BONA FIDE LEGAL ISSUE, and threatening to SUE the people who were CORRECTLY CONDEMNING YOUR ILLEGAL ACTIONS is your idea of considering this a "big deal" and "dealing with it immediately"?

You make me puke. I actually make a living helping small businesses with their websites, and 90% of the time, I'm cleaning the mess after a shyster like you has screwed around with them. You are just plain backpedaling now... you realize that you were wrong all along, and you just won't admit your fault and apologize for the totally uncalled for tirades against people who WERE CORRECT in their assessment of the situation. What a big boy you are... can't even man up and apologize for getting caught up in defending your "friend", gotta be a wolverine about it, digging your claws in for no better reason than when my 2 year old throws a temper tantrum... of course, he doesn't really know any better yet. Maybe you don't either, who knows. I wouldn't call you the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree.

Every post you make at this point just makes you look worse. I guarantee you people's appraisals of your mental faculties are growing dimmer by the moment, and there is no way you're going to actually get business from an exchange like this if you continue to try to lie your way out of it... first by claiming it was no big deal, then by claiming you never said it was no big deal. Oh, and send the person whose name is in the title of this thread back here to speak for himself while you're at it... we're getting tired of you speaking for him.

Man up. Apologize for incorrectly defending your "friend", for incorrectly attacking people for pointing out your LEGAL VIOLATIONS, and for incorrectly stating that you actually handled things correctly to begin with. Square One. Try to keep your story straight this time... telling the truth helps a lot, then you only have to keep track of one version.

 

[skanndelus]

By the highlighted part, do you mean changed them with more stolen photos?

no, we changed them with photos guy was certain he took, i believe i stated this earlier in the thread, but feel free to search every gecko site on the internet to verify, lord knows you have nothing better to do

 

[bobtard]

no, we changed them with photos guy was certain he took, i believe i stated this earlier in the thread, but feel free to search every gecko site on the internet to verify, lord knows you have nothing better to do

So Guy took the photo of the crested gecko jumping on the top of his site? The same one what was featured on the front page of Bing not too long ago? Amazing!

 

[Meg90]

Funny that the gargoyle and crested photos were changed as well as the trachy, leachie, and sara. Was he suddenly SURE that he didn't take ANY of those photos?

Yeah, you guys are fooling everyone. Keep up the act. This circus isn't nearly complete.

 

[skanndelus]

Haha... you honestly think we're that stupid?
no comment

and threatening to SUE the people

no, i never threatened to sue anyone, on my behalf or anyone else's

who were CORRECTLY CONDEMNING YOUR ILLEGAL ACTIONS

my illegal actions? what illegal actions? i have stated various times that i did not know the origin of the photos used on the website or whether or not guy had permission to use them

is your idea of considering this a "big deal" and "dealing with it immediately"?

by immediately i meant the same night it was brought to my attention and we were contacted by the owner's of the photos in question

You make me puke.

i'd be afraid to see how you react to a serious crime like murder and rape, but i'm glad i had such a strong effect on someone on a message board, hope you cleaned it up...

I'm cleaning the mess after a shyster like you has screwed around with them.

unfounded statement, my clients have always been happy with my designs, professionalism and timeliness. i didn't "screw around" with anything, i built a high quality website in a very reasonable amount of time for a very reasonable amount of money. i am far more concerned with my clients feel about my word than you, and so far they have been very pleased.

won't admit your fault

What a big boy you are...

thank you *blushes*

gotta be a wolverine about it,

this thread was out for blood, look at the title, i may not have been the mature one, but it was definitely par for the course here

digging your claws in for no better reason than when my 2 year old throws a temper tantrum...

i certainly hope when i have a child that i have more important things to worry about than this situation...

I wouldn't call you the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree.

i'd be offended if you weren't a complete and utter absolute stranger

I guarantee you people's appraisals of your mental faculties are growing dimmer by the moment,

i'd be offended if they weren't complete and utter absolute strangers

and there is no way you're going to actually get business from an exchange like this

i never asked for anyone's business on this forum, most of my sites are probably out of the price range... i don't typically build sites for reptile hobbyists and most of my clients have met me face to face or are referrals

if you continue to try to lie your way out of it... first by claiming it was no big deal, then by claiming you never said it was no big deal.

using the leachie on the forum post i saw as no big deal, i had a different opinion altogether of using photos on a website without permission, if i hadn't said so yet, which i thought i did, i do believe it to be wrong

Oh, and send the person whose name is in the title of this thread back here to speak for himself while you're at it... we're getting tired of you speaking for him.

i think it's obvious that he's a tad smarter than me, or anyone else who is posting in on this thread. he knows it won't do any good and he's mature enough to avoid the drama.

your LEGAL VIOLATIONS,

my legal violations? what legal violations? i do not own or operate guyco gecko, and i am not an employee.

telling the truth helps a lot, then you only have to keep track of one version.

when exactly did i lie?

 

[illuminati]

I for one was planning to buy from Guyco and BECAUSE of this thread I will have to change that. And aren't we supposed to sign every post with our name?
Shelby Harris