Cuomo ‘ameneins 200 OLD COUNTRY ROAD | SUITE2SOUTH | MEREOLA, NY 1501 | 5167413828 [195163413395 Apri 13, 2015 Page, Scrantom, Sprouse, Tucker, Ford 111 Bay Avenue Third Floor Columbus GA 31901 ‘Attn: Elizabeth McBride Re: Chan v, Elis and subsequent conduct of Linda Ellis Dear Ms. MeBride: Attached is the Supreme Court of Georgia's decision in Cham v. Kis; Lwrite to bring your attention to comments made by your elfent on various forums that ate false, misleading and damaging to Matthew Chaa's reputation, Demand is hereby mede that she cease and desist from making such false and defamatory comments and I further ‘demand that she retract ot remove those comments ftom the sites where she posted them. 1, “He [Matthew Chan] posted pictures of my home” In many place throughout the Internet — since the ruling- Ms. Elis has stated that iy client had posted photos of her home on extortionletterinfo.com (ELI, for example, ‘on {TAlive’s page, http://www. ali ynews/local 1015/03/28/hi our-rules-against-woinan-claiming-to-be-stalked-online/70584054/. She knows that this is false. You know that this is false. My client never posted a photo of Ms. Ellis’ home anywhere. It was another ELI user who posted a link to a Google Street View of Ms, Ellis’ home. In addition, wien you and she submitted that evidence to the trial court, you submitted a cropped version thet tool the post out of context, You can see your court exhibit and the aetual screenshot of the image on Defiantly.net, Furthermore, your ‘eropping of the post took the post out of context asthe main reason her address was discussed was to highlight that she was apparently using that address as a business address for a company called Kindercare; to my knowledge she still uses that address for this business of hers so that she herself’ putting her home address out there. Had Mr. Chan seen the entire screenshot at the hearing as opposed to a purposefully and carefully cropped version, he would have been able to establish the context of the photo and home address as well 2s establish that he did not post the link 1 therefore demand that Ms, Elis cease and desis fom making this false statement inthe future and remove all instances whore she is recorded orally of in writing ‘making this statement.CuoMOe 2. “He posted my financial information” Again, on L1Alive and other locations Ms. Elis sated that my client posted “Financial information about her." She knows that tis is false, You know that this is false, My cient never posted Ms, Elis’ financial information anywhere. The only thing she could possibly be referring to is thatthe name of her morigage company Was posted ‘on BLI, The details of the mortgage were not revealed, The name of her mortgage ‘company is public record and of course does nat constitute financial information therefore demand that Ms, Elis cease and desist from making this false ‘statement in the future and remove all instances where she is recorded orally or in writing ‘making this statement. 3. “The Hearse Song” In various places, including on a post made in February 2015 on hee blog, Ms, Ellis has claimed that my client posted the video and the words of The Hearse Song” on ELL. Again, you and your elient know that Mr. Chan did not post the link to this video on ELI, another ELI user did, Furthermore, the words were never pur of the post made by the user yet you introdace an exhibit which had the words superimposed upon the post ‘ached are your trial exhibit and the original post. The exhibit gave the false impression thatthe words were part of the ELI user's post of The Hearse Song. You ean see the exhibit and the actual post on Defantly.net Of course, I again remind you that there was no evidence that he “encouraged ot participated” in the posting of The Hearse Song and only Ms. Ellis can think that this ideo constitutes a “true threat.” Lam sure I need net remind you of how the judges saw ‘hat claim at oral argument on this matter. No rational person could believe that the person wiho posted the video meant it as true death threat. | therefore demand that Ms. Elis cease and desist from making this false ‘statement inthe future and remove all instances where she is recorded orally or in writing ‘making this statement. 4. References to “threats on her life.” In comments tothe 11 Alive story Ms, Elis stated that she sought the protective order due to “threats on her life.” For example on March 29 at 5:31pm she falsely wrote: “only sought to receive protection for my life and my family due to actual threats and is where it wound up.” She has perpetuated this lie before as wellCuoMe {In further example, in a blog post dated February 4,2015 on her website she ‘stated there were “threats to the safety of [her] Family." This agua i false, There were never any threats to the safety of her or her family. Your side tried to prove “true thrests™ {in your briefs and at oral argument yet you could not produce anything that remotely resembled an actual threat and never submitted such proof to any cour ‘Read for their plain language and taken in context all the posts about Ms. Elis" family, including the “collateral damage” post which Ms, Elis repeatedly makes reference to, were about ther personal (and public) information being mentioned. T therefore demand that Ms, Ellis cease and desist from making this false statement i the future and remove all instances where she is recorded orally or in weting ‘making this statement ‘5. References to Mr. Chan as a “stalker” or tothe situation as “Stalking” ‘Mr. Chen di not stalk Ms, Bilis. Tht isa fict and ii also now the legal determination of the highest court inthe State. The few posts you and Ms. Pllis relied ‘upon at tral and before the Georgia Supreme Court did not constitute stalking. That isa fact and its also novr the legal determination of the highest court inthe State and the crux of the Supreme Courts devision. Yet Ms. Elis stil refers to Mr. Chan as her “stalker,” and to the situation as “stalking.” See, for example her blog post of February 4, 2015. Those terms may have been accurate when she won inthe trial court, but they are row defamatory and false as they accuse Mr. Chan of leit conduct for which he bas ben cleared by the Siate’s highest court, Ms, Elis also stated on a new, recent video that Mr. Chan appealed to fight forthe right to engage in “inceraet stalking." That is patently false andthe exact opposite is true: Our appeal sought to establish and ultimately did cestubsh that what ME. Chan engaged in was not stalking but speech. ‘We argued before the Court thatthe ations of Mr. Chan did not come close to ‘meeting several ofthe elements of Georgia's Ant-Stalking Statute. We argued that there ‘were procedural defects in the issuance ofthe order fom your use of the MeCormack alfdavit to your use of section (2)(2)’s language which was never in issue. We also sngued thatthe oppressive and overbroad order violeted the First Amendment and The Communications Decency Act of 1996. Our position was joined in and supported by some of the most prominent and wellrespoeted legal scholars in the country. The Court \wile discussing most of our arguments favorably, never made it past Point I: that Mr. Chan never “contacted” Ms. Ellis. So for Ms, Elis say that we sought to protect “a right to intemet stalking” strays from opinion and commentary and instead amounts toa false and defamatory statement of fact,Cuomo ‘Therefore, it is hereby demanded that Ms. Bllis stop referring to Mr, Chan as a “stalker” or make reference to tis situation as “stalking” including aay mention of “eyberstalking” or “cyberstalker” or that Mr. Chan sought to create a right to “internet stalking.” 66. Mailing a letter with threats and calling John Jolin’s girlfriend ‘Ms Bills posted this on her Facebook account in reply to someone who ‘commented om her post about the decision: Cindy Sparks: Smith Lind... would NOT tae i pereona eat hy ‘ont bale vare safe and pease ktop fgg ti cansat imagine anyone saying u are notin danger here. please pole youre Like Reply 8 Maren 38 ate. c30% {BBY Une ens AUTHOR, SPEAKER, POET Thankyou Cindy Spais- ‘Suh = am ying to stp uti otis and Bok Now any aon! etsoncoultread al hate posted ane Uke tigi He hac ‘eataring eters mate omy heme, Phone recor prove In cout that ced my eoployee's win at ome while she was none wha ‘mal cid fad ne knew i, He encouraged ae partepatd in posts “nis web ste were te hearse song was posted tomy atlenbon Under te te. WE ARE COMING AFTER YOU! Theres chante: ‘Youve be eesti» DI (Oh no.no reals Were, what Be heck?) Uke aren 35 at Gm Eases [Never in all of the litigation in this matter have you or Ms, Ellis ever established, proven or shown that Mr. Chan maifed a letter oF any kind ~ much less a threatening letter-to Ms. Fllis” home. There is no chance that Ms. Ellis would have roveived such a letter and not kept a copy of it This statement is « complete fabrication and is per se defamatory, [therefore demand that Ms. Elis cease and desist from making this false statement inthe future and remove all instances where she is recorded orally or in writing ‘making this siatement "Never inal ofthe ligation inthis matter have you or Ms. Ellis ever established, proven or shown that Mr. Chan calfed John Jolin’sgilfiend; trough hearsay evidence you showed that a phone number associated with Mr. Chan appeared on his giefrend’s phone. As@ litigator, 1am sure you know that showing that « phone number came up on someone's phone isnot proof of who made the call. There was certainly no evidence atCuomo all that showed that Mr. Chan knew tht she was “alone witha small child.” This is pune {fantasy and fabrication on Ms. Elis pert and she must stop making these false Lnprovable claims in a vain attempt to coatinue to paint herself ws a viet, | therefore demand that Ms. lis cease and desist ftom making these false statements inthe future and remove all instances where she is recorded orally or in ‘iting making these statements. 7. Use and dissemination of the YouTube of Mr. Chan ‘This whole episode between our clients arose out Ms. Elis’ attemps to collect on infingement claims over the unlicensed use of “The Dasb.” Yet Ms. Elis readily and repeatedly disseminates and makes wse of apiece of a video ereated by Mr. Chan where he discusses, with a man named Robert Keausaakas, his issues with Mis, Ellis, While this video has not been registered us of yet with the Copyright Office, copyright in the video rests exclusively with its creator, Matthew Chan. Mr. Chan, however, wll not actin the ‘manner that your client has in the past by sending out DMCA notices tothe webhosts of the sites where Ms. Ellis has posted this video, inchuding YouTube and possibly other sites, However, asa professional courtesy, I do request that you advise Ms. Bis take down the video to prevent any more unnecessary legal disputes and entanglements, Of course ike so many of your clients posts and comments about this case and this decision ~ indeed, like so much ofthe evidence that was presented by you and her before Judge Jordan the video segment she chooses to disseminate is taken wholly out ‘of context, But Mr. Chan and T have come to expect this as Ms. Ellis’ modus ¢perandh ‘She continues to post only the short snippet of the video having most recently done soto four knowledge on April 11, 2015 on the website Cincinnat.com, ‘This letter serves to notify you and Ms. Ellis that Mr. Chan claims copyright ia the videos reserves all rights and remedies; and does not waive any of his rights and remedies by choosing not to demand that Ms. Elis take the video down wherever she has posted i Conclusion Rest assured that Mr. Chan does not seek to restrict Ms. Elis’ speech in any way. He is and will always be a staunch defender of a person’s First Amendment rights. He, in. fact, welcomes a continuing dialogue over Ms. Ellis’ copyright infringement methods and has no issue with Ms. Els accurately and fairy describing the events that occurredCuOMe ‘hich led to the protective onder an its subsequeat vaca ‘and “fairness.” But the key is “aceuracy”™ Inall your many pleadings, brief, arguments and Ms, Elis" writings against my client and ELI, there was never an instance in which you or she claimed Mr. Chan stated anything about Ms. Elis that was false er even misleading. Instead, you and she relied on cropped versions of posts made by others and statements about Ms, Ellis made by Mr. (Chan that were taken wholly out of context and which have now been determined to be completely legal and to not constitute stalking, So iet the dialogue continue if they so choose to do so, but lt it continue based on facts and truth. My client will not sit ily by if Ms, Ellis continues to rely on demonstrably false and misleading statements of fact; le will take such legal action as he deems proper and appropriate. Here are links to my client's website that set out some of the many inaceuracies and misstatements Ms, Elis has made since the decision: tata aenecunn a Meek