Need some Advice: Facebook Fanpage someone wants to Sue me.

I actually am an attorney, with an LL.M. in Entertainment and Media law.

Without more details I couldn't give a definite opinion, I would say that depending upon the kinds of copyrighted material you have used, and whether it was used for "the purpose of criticism" for example, YOU MAY fall within the fair use exceptions under copyright law, YOU ALSO MAY NOT.

The next question is whether or not you fall under the fair use exceptions regarding trademark law in the event the program IS making commercial use of their marks in commerce online. If they are, it seems POSSIBLE that you would again fall within fair use exceptions to the Lanham Act. I mean McDonald's was able to compare itself to Burger King in television advertisements and that was appropriate fair use, so a fan page likely falls within similarly protected fair use, ESPECIALLY as you suggested that you disclaimed any actual association with the show.

This DISCLAIMER would seem important.

Ultimately, FACEBOOK'S Terms of Use MAY BE the most important governing laws in regards to this particular dispute.

There is quite possibly a fair use argument to be made regarding the LIMITED USE of copyrighted images for the purposes of criticism, IF IT WAS NON-COMMERCIAL. If you are not making money as a result of the use of the images, then your fair use defense under the copyright law MAY protect you if the page provides criticism, or IF THERE IS A NEWSWORTHY ASPECT TO THE USE OF THE IMAGES. There are some interesting cases surrounding images of the Los Angeles Riots and the beating of Rodney King regarding fair use for the purpose of news which could likewise provide protection from claims of copyright infringement.

If you were utilizing someone else's trademark, for example the shows name, in a product or service category where that same organization used the trademark to make money, your protections under the Lanham Act may be non-existent, OR if YOUR USE WAS FIRST, in that particular medium and in that particular commercial category, YOUR RIGHTS in the trademark MAY BE SUPERIOR to the originator of the mark who used the mark in a DIFFERENT commercial category. Trademark law has more caveats than can be explained effectively in a brief internet forum post, but I mention these because you NEED professional advice based on ALL of your specific circumstances before a REAL answer can be given to your questions under CRIMINAL and CIVIL statutes that protect intellectual property rights.

Of course, once you have those questions answered, THEN, Facebook's "Terms of Use" will come into play in a huge way, and you may have legal arguments with not only the show, but also the MULTI-BILLION Dollar bohemoth that is Facebook if YOU WANT TO RETAIN CONTROL of the PAGE AND, YOU HAVE A CLAIM THAT STANDS UP BOTH UNDER FEDERAL LAW, AND FACEBOOK'S TERMS OF USE!

My first piece of advice would be READ THE FACEBOOK TERMS OF USE. They are important in terms of your rights, which are fleeting, because having previously read the Facebook terms of use, I know they are subject to amendment at any time by Facebook, at their whim, not yours. If you have a right under their terms of use to retain control of the page you created, then you can worry about the federal trademark and copyright laws. If it is clear that you don't, then fighting a battle with anyone would seem to be a bad idea.

If there is a gray area, FOR EXAMPLE, when Facebook's terms say that the owner of a trademark can stop others from using their mark, you need to understand first that trademark rights are limited to the services or products that trademark owner was the FIRST COMMERCIAL participant in. If you used the term for commercial purposes in terms of internet marketing before the radio show, YOUR CLAIM to the mark MAY be superior to theirs. Of course if the mark is "Coca-Cola" you probably are going to lose that argument, but you MAY not. Like I said, trademark is a stange area of law.

As to copyright issues, the key questions are how much material did you use, was it for commercial purposes, was it for the purpose of criticism, was it a use that was in regards to something newsworthy, or did it fall inside any other accepted fair use defense???

One of the reasons that I used a picture of Charlie Sheen I found on the wikipedia that was Creative Commons Attribution licensed on a joke site I made a few months back in regards to what at the time was a newsworthy topic, and a criticism site, that had no commerical purpose, which I don't have enough posts to provide a link to, but I will say that a while back the term recast charlie was one I had a pretty good google rank on, I think #2, was because it shouldn't have copyright issues, and even if it did, the picture was probably fair use. Most importantly, its non-commercial nature meant I wasn't violating PERSONALITY RIGHTS that Charlie Sheen had in his own likeness for commercial and advertising purposes.

Which is a nice way of saying even if the trademark and copyright issues aren't enough to think about their are 50 sets of state laws regarding personality rights that could come into play TOO!!! Not to mention the possiblity that someone could SUE you in London where the personality rights laws and some other things don't have to conform to the FIRST AMENDMENT and the Constitutional protections it provides Americans. That World Wide Web part opens you up to litigation in ANY jurisdiction where you might have harmed the "celebrities" associated with the show too!

All of this was a nice way of saying, unless the page has exceptional value for you, if there is a way you can avoid litigation, WITHOUT losing your personal connections on Facebook, IT MAY be your best route. IT MAY not too. I don't know enough about your situation to give you specific advice and unless you reside in the state I'm licensed to practice in, it would be unlawful for me to give you specific advice anyway.

What I can recommend is that you weigh the value to you of the page, and determine whether or not it is worth examining your options with a qualified Media Attorney. If it is worth something to you, it may be worth a few hundred dollars that it would cost you for an initial consultation with a good media lawyer. The best are in New York City, Los Angeles, and Nashville, but of course, depending on where you live, it may be unlawful for an attorney in those jurisdictions to give you a consultation, unless they are also licensed in your home state.