The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute
2011–12 copyright infringement dispute
A legal dispute between webcomic The Oatmeal and content aggregator website FunnyJunk began in 2011. The Oatmeal creator Matthew Inman alleged in 2011 that FunnyJunk users repeatedly infringed copyright of The Oatmeal's original content. In June 2012, FunnyJunk's lawyer, Charles Carreon, sent Inman a letter demanding US$20,000 in damages from him, alleging the claims he made were defamatory. Inman responded by publishing the letter on his site, along with a response and announcement that he would be organizing a charity fundraiser through Indiegogo, donating the amount demanded by Carreon to the American Cancer Society and the National Wildlife Federation.
On June 15, 2012, Carreon filed a separate pro se lawsuit Carreon vs Inman et al against Inman, Indiegogo, both charities and a hundred Does for allegations related to The Oatmeal's response and related actions by other individuals. Carreon dropped this case on July 3 of that year. Mashable named the case first among their list of "silliest tech lawsuits ever." Carreon was also sued by the anonymous operator of a blog parodying him after Carreon sent letters to the site's web host demanding they reveal its operator.
Background
FunnyJunk is a website where users can upload content they find humorous. According to Ars Technica, key FunnyJunk personnel are Bryan Durel and Benjamin Bunker.
In 2010, The Oatmeal creator Matthew Inman found that FunnyJunk was distributing copies of comics from his website without permission.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute” is 2011–12 copyright infringement dispute. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Oatmeal, FunnyJunk and legal, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “2011–12 copyright infringement dispute” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 7, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7754617. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2011, 2012 and 2010.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute primary sources, The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute archive and Oatmeal research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “The Oatmeal and FunnyJunk legal dispute” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.