The worlds of music, technology, and romance were turned upside down earlier this week, whenthat Kanye West and Kim Kardashian were unhappy with YouTube founder Chad Hurley.
TMZ first reported that Hurley had turned up at West's quite spontaneous proposal ceremony at AT&T Park in San Francisco and proceeded not only to film the event, but then to post 2 and a half minutes of footage to his new video-sharing site MixBit.
It was said that the anger was so great that a lawsuit would follow. Oddly enough, it has.
The Associated Press reported on Friday that Kimye -- or, if you prefer, KimKan -- have formally accused Hurley of hurling on their romantic moment.
It alleges that Hurley wasn't even invited to the ceremony. He was allegedly only allowed to remain because he signed a solemn promise not to post images or video from the event. Indeed, CNN reported that the lawsuit declares Hurley "finagled entry." Do rich people need to finagle?
The legal papers offer that Hurley was actually photographed holding the confidentiality agreement. Yes, it was allegedly signed. By him.
It seems, quite surprisingly, that footage was being exclusively betrothed to certain television stations for future broadcasting.
An emotional phrase from the lawsuit reads: "Exclusive rights, such as those sold by plaintiffs to publication of video of the event, are particularly valuable. If people violate these rights ... they are of substantially diminished value."
There is nothing worse in life than diminished value. Without value, who or what are we, if not diminished?
It so happens that the lawsuit plays a few notes on this theme. It suggest that Hurley is not a successful entrepreneur. It notes several allegedly failed business ventures.
Here's a quote from it: "Despite his extraordinary financial success in creating YouTube, which was sold in 2006, Hurley has ever since sought his 'second act.' This has become exceedingly elusive to Hurley."
Speaking of MixBit, the accusation adds: "Following a lackluster launch and unsuccessful ensuing debut, Hurley sought to salvage MixBit from its dour beginning."
Strangely, the video still adorns Hurley's site, which might mean that he is confident of his principles. Hurley himself has yet to comment.
I wonder whether this could ever be settled amicably. If KimKan is proved the winner, might Hurley offer, say, 40 percent of MixBit in recompense? Or might he have a sterling defense?
The case of Yeezus vs. Chad might be a sight worth filming, should it ever get to court.