Laurie Holmes Vs. Denise LaFrance

1/22/05

Laurie Holmes, President of John Holmes Enterprises, writes: "Do you know if Denise Lafrance has published her book yet? Loop Holes my ass, I worned her specifically that I was not granting her the right to use John's name and image in her stupid silly art book. Clearly her talent is not worthy of The John Holmes Brand Name. I don't care if she draws a picture of Jesus, frankly, if she references it to my late husband physically or in typeset I will take her to court. The funny thing about it is that after I thought about it for a while I was going to give her permission, but then she bad mouthed me all over that stupid Wonderland Movie Chat Site. She clearly doesn't understand the law, intellectual property and trademarks. Is she looney or what? God, I even sent her the ruling numbers and spelled it out for her."

Denise LaFrance writes:

Thanks for the breaking news Luke. I hope you didn't waste your time mentioning anything regarding my book to this raving lunatic. I am sorry to hear the grand wizard czar mistress of the Art World deems my art as "un-worthy" of the good household name of John Holmes...

Many of Holmes' fellow legends would beg to differ. I wish I could muster up the energy to care about this woman's blathering but I really must continue to create the logo I have volunteered to design for the orphanage's charity run I am volunteering for.

John Holmes or no John Holmes, my book will be made and you know that as well as I do. The reason for his absence will be published, if need be--which I doubt it will. This woman needs to stop the all-consuming hate. It is detrimental to one's health to be so obsessed with negativity.

With the state of disarray the world is in today, I choose to focus on the positive things in Life...a practise I recommend to anybody.

There is no evidence anywhere on any message board of me ever having "badmouthed" Laurie Holmes. The point should be made that the entire reason why she refuses to "allow" me to use the portrait I painted of John Holmes is because I refuse to cough up a huge percentage of my book's profits to line her pocket-book...(15% of which I am already donating to Protecting Adult Welfare).

No OTHER legends are demanding a "fee" to have their portrait in the book and so why should I give John Holmes any favouritism? The legends I have painted have expressed gratitude to be honoured in my art book. Also note that EACH legend is receiving their ORIGINAL painted portrait ($1000 value) for FREE as a "thank you" gift from me along with the permission from me to use the portrait for any FUTURE endeavours they see fit.

I am asking NO residuals from this privilege, only that I be credited somewhere for the art work on the product/book-cover, or item they choose to reproduce the image on.

Here are photos of Denise's watercolors of Eric Edwards, Ron Sullivan, Candida Royalle, Herschel Savage.

Joe writes:

Laurie Holmes's claim to own everything related to her departed husband reminds me of Caroline Kennedy's claim that Rush Limbaugh couldn't quote JFK's statements in favor of tax cuts...because it's the family's intellectual property. And both claims are equally nonsense.

Laurie, you were cute in the movie where you met John. The world has moved on and you need to get a life.