Sorry, but I had to delete the post on Vahan Gureghian’s Mansion

This is what I recieved in my email:

Dear Mr. Forder:

We represent Vahan and Danielle Gureghian. It has come to our attention that you have posted on your blog (, without consent or approval, several unauthorized and misappropriated photographs of the Gureghians’ private residence in Gladwyne, Pennsylvania. Your unauthorized publication of these photographs, as well as intimate details of the Gureghians’ private residence, is in clear violation of the privacy rights of the Gureghians. Moreover, it appears that you are in possession of property that has been misappropriated, and your unauthorized use of this misappropriated property wrongfully and incorrectly suggests its endorsement by the Gureghians. Accordingly, if you do not immediately remove the unauthorized and misappropriated photographs from your blog, and notify us in writing that you have done so, we will have no choice but to pursue legal action against you.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I look forward to your immediate compliance with the essence of this cease and desist demand.


Mark E. Seiberling, Esquire


17 Responses to “Sorry, but I had to delete the post on Vahan Gureghian’s Mansion”

  1. Anonymous Says:


  2. Tony Says:

    Douchebags. apparently these 2 aren't too well liked in the community. i found an article after googling the name….only after sifting through the other dozens of sites talking about their residence. and why do that have to be notified in writting of compliance?? can't they just….come back and see it's not up?
    what's the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? one's a scum-sucking bottom feeder, the other's just a fish.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    Wow! That is surprising. You'd think that since these picture are really easy to find online, that the family and their lawyers would do a better job in keeping those much more private. The fact that most things public information poses a very good debate about what truly is private information. I completely understand from the family and lawyer's point of view, but really?? But I also agree that it is much better to just comply with their request and not get yourself into legal and monetary trouble.

  4. Kenny Says:

    yeah i know right! the pictures were really easy to find oline, thats why i didn't think there was anything wrong with it. they must be hiding something, because they don't even want the house's value and square footage to be spread out there, but if they haven't noticed, everyone knows about their home already. the laywer told me that he emailed all the other websites who posted an article about the house and told them the same thing he told me. whatever! lol. this is the 2nd time I was given a cease and desist order……regarding a HOUSE!lol. who would of thought, and I'm only 18! lol. oh well. on to the next post.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    Right on!
    I have to use a sports analogy:
    "Fall down 5 times, get up 6!"

    They can't hold you down.

  6. Anonymous Says:

    I noticed once on the site that a house of some celebrity was blocked something about privacy where I thought people can find my information on-line just looking at the local GIS…if mine and yours is out there why is it invasion of privacy to look up someone who happens to be a celebrity?

  7. Anonymous Says:

    Kenny, it is your legal right to post information already considered public information, so that was a bluff cease and desist order, and the lawyer who sent it knows that.

  8. Anonymous Says:


    The ONLY reasons guys build homes like that is to shout LOOK AT ME… then they send C&Ds.

    Losers, just throwing weight around however they can.

  9. Anonymous Says:

    I've been sent about half a dozen c&ds for my business, I usually just send them and email saying DENIED. Then I go on with my life.

    Just never lie. Use PUBLIC info. Don't defame.

    Lawer types (small dick types) bully people all the time with letters. You're only 18 but your skin will get thicker.

    For the sake of peace, I think you're smart to just delete the post like you did and just move on. You did nothing wrong–it just isn't worth the hassle of dealing with people like that. I think a lot of people now know what kind of people they are and they've hurt their own reputation by being so childish.

    Great blog, don't stop doing what you're doing.

  10. Anonymous Says:

    I agree with the poster above…while you have every right to post anything you can find on a public site, it's just as well that you take their stupid house off of your site. We will hardly miss it, you know? Excellent blog and tremendous work as always, Kenny. Keep it up.

  11. Anonymous Says:

    Some people have to be dickholes no matter what.
    I don't believe that they can really stop you from posting the photos anyway.
    If that was so, no celebrity blogs would exist or celebrity sextapes.
    They probably robbed and stole from people to make the money to build that home, that is why they are so sensitive about it.
    Keep up the good work and eff them.

  12. Kenny Says:

    Thanks guys for all your nice compliments!!! I agree with everything you guys said. I just decided to delete the post so that I wouldn't get into any drama. Yeah, they probably did something really bad in order to obtain the money to build the house. lol. look at the guy's picture.

  13. Anonymous Says:

    omg r u sure thats the same mark e seiberling? he's cute but seems like a lawyer nerd who would right letters 2 websites. drop the leash bro! just let this guy post his pictures! keep doing the blog stuff kenny because stuff with pictures is gr8!

  14. Anonymous Says:

    I'm pretty sure I've seen that guy at my gym. He benches around 325 lbs.

  15. Judge Dredge Says:

    I hope they get termites!

  16. Anonymous Says:

    hahaha fucking assholes

  17. aria Says:

    I remember looking at this house long time ago but from my recollection, the post didn't contain any blue print and as a matter of fact there weren't many images of it either. You should have asked him to elaborate on key words of his C&D letter like "privacy." At the end, you could also tell him that on the blogsphere, people usually don't response well to threats. He shouldn't have written "I'm going to sue you right way" statement when on the "first" exchange, people usually express their reason for the correspondence violating certain law and ask them to comply — rather than going apesh*t and bring all the guns out at once. Next time you ask the guy to expound on various issues mentioned in the letter for instance the code reference of what law has been broken. If he refused, write him how you can make a right decision when you don't have all the facts. I understand that it's not his obligation to school you on litigation but still if he has a head on his shoulder, he should know that resolving problems through civil discourse beats going down the rough path. In either case, I believe he had "partially" some legitimate rights but he couldn't ask you to remove "all" the information from your website, hence the reason I said you should have asked him for elaborated details.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: