Documents of Project DoD Federici DMCA Takedown lawsuit now available
in [Math]
|
Prev: Exactly why the theories of relativity are complete nonsense - the basic mistake exposed!
Next: Anti-Einsteiniana: Natural Philosophy Alliance?
From: Gregory Hall on 4 Jan 2010 16:26 "Monica Pignotti" <pignotti(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:94bf9c54-8a32-4b95-96be-016956f0df2e(a)c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... On Jan 3, 6:52 pm, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...(a)home.fake> wrote: > "Monica Pignotti" <pigno...(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > > news:5d4182d3-30d0-4b31-b329-92fbe0c6110e(a)e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 15 2009, 8:11 pm, didacticderivative > > <didacticderivat...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > United States Court, District of Maine. Case 2:09-cv-00213-DBH > > > Project DoD, hosting company of the likes of Larry Sarner (voting > > machine scam artrist), Linda Rosa (she who followed Sarner into > > bankruptcy) and Jean Mercer (the psychologist who never treated a > > patient) lost their "landmark reverse DMCA" case. > > > What are they going to do now, invent the iPigno, a device that > > refuses to read the works of Charles Sanders Peirce, Claude Levi- > > Strauss, and Stanislaw Lem? > > > Attorneys Rufus Brown, Robert Mittel, and Tiffany Rad are > > reconsidering the wisdom of believing everything Christopher Mooney > > tells them� > > For people who are actually interested in the facts of this case, the > documents are all available here. This should be of interest to people > on ARS, as it involves freedom of speech on the internet and details > harassment that has occurred. The case was only dismissed due to an > issue of jurisdiction, not because DoD was wrong. Documents can be > downloaded people can read about the facts of this case at: > > https://chris.dod.net/?p=387 > > So yes, this particular battle has been lost but at least attention > has been brought to this important issue and the war for free speech > on the internet is far from over, rest assured. > > ================================ > > [REPLY] > > You're a proven censorship advocate, Monica. You actively engage in > censorship. Stop being such a hypocrite. > > -- > Gregory Hall Wrong. My protesting your abusive misappropriation of my image by requesting a private website to remove it is not "censorship". I did not misuse or even evoke DMCA. It is not the same thing at all. The private website made the decision to remove your abuse of my image, something they had every right to do. It is not the same thing at all. Free speech does not include a right to abuse and harass, as you seem to think it does. ================================= What about the many parody sites with the Pignotron you whined and complained about and hollered abuse? You got those shut down just because the squeaky wheel gets the grease. That is censorship pure. Poor wittle Monica. Act like she's got her wittle feelings hurt so run to Daddy and bawl your wittle eyes out and get it made all better. You really ARE pathetic. You never grew up. Your definition of abuse and harassment is paranoid delusional, victim mentality pure and simple. How thick is your skin. Probably less than a nanometer (less than one billionth of an inch - sort of like your reneging on your one billion year contract.) -- Gregory Hall
From: Monica Pignotti on 4 Jan 2010 17:48 On Jan 4, 4:26 pm, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...(a)home.fake> wrote: > "Monica Pignotti" <pigno...(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > > news:94bf9c54-8a32-4b95-96be-016956f0df2e(a)c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 3, 6:52 pm, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...(a)home.fake> wrote: > > > > > "Monica Pignotti" <pigno...(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > > >news:5d4182d3-30d0-4b31-b329-92fbe0c6110e(a)e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com.... > > On Dec 15 2009, 8:11 pm, didacticderivative > > > <didacticderivat...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > United States Court, District of Maine. Case 2:09-cv-00213-DBH > > > > Project DoD, hosting company of the likes of Larry Sarner (voting > > > machine scam artrist), Linda Rosa (she who followed Sarner into > > > bankruptcy) and Jean Mercer (the psychologist who never treated a > > > patient) lost their "landmark reverse DMCA" case. > > > > What are they going to do now, invent the iPigno, a device that > > > refuses to read the works of Charles Sanders Peirce, Claude Levi- > > > Strauss, and Stanislaw Lem? > > > > Attorneys Rufus Brown, Robert Mittel, and Tiffany Rad are > > > reconsidering the wisdom of believing everything Christopher Mooney > > > tells them > > > For people who are actually interested in the facts of this case, the > > documents are all available here. This should be of interest to people > > on ARS, as it involves freedom of speech on the internet and details > > harassment that has occurred. The case was only dismissed due to an > > issue of jurisdiction, not because DoD was wrong. Documents can be > > downloaded people can read about the facts of this case at: > > >https://chris.dod.net/?p=387 > > > So yes, this particular battle has been lost but at least attention > > has been brought to this important issue and the war for free speech > > on the internet is far from over, rest assured. > > > ================================ > > > [REPLY] > > > You're a proven censorship advocate, Monica. You actively engage in > > censorship. Stop being such a hypocrite. > > > -- > > Gregory Hall > > Wrong. My protesting your abusive misappropriation of my image by > requesting a private website to remove it is not "censorship". I did > not misuse or even evoke DMCA. It is not the same thing at all. The > private website made the decision to remove your abuse of my image, > something they had every right to do. It is not the same thing at all. > Free speech does not include a right to abuse and harass, as you seem > to think it does. > > ================================= > > What about the many parody sites with the Pignotron you whined and > complained about and hollered abuse? You got those shut down just because > the squeaky wheel gets the grease. That is censorship pure. Poor wittle > Monica. Act like she's got her wittle feelings hurt so run to Daddy and bawl > your wittle eyes out and get it made all better. You really ARE pathetic. > You never grew up. > > Your definition of abuse and harassment is paranoid delusional, victim > mentality pure and simple. How thick is your skin. Probably less than a > nanometer (less than one billionth of an inch - sort of like your reneging > on your one billion year contract.) > None of those were DMCA complaints. Free speech does not give people the right to make libelous statements about others. It was not a "parody" and anyone who sees the huge volume of personal attacks on me can readily see that it was not a "parody" -- it was part of a malicious smear campaign against people who are taking a stand against abusive quack therapies and anyone who actually looks at what has been done to me on the internet can readily see that it is not paranoia on my part to call it that. You wouldn't know anything about taking a real stand for something, Neal, because you don't care about anything -- all you do is troll and make ugly, misogynist comments and then scream "Censorship!!!" when moderators delete you. And no, I don't "bawl". I stand up for myself and that's what drives you absolutely nuts, Neal. A strong woman who refuses to take abuse who refuses to submit to misogynist creeps such as yourself. There is nothing even remotely similar to the DMCA case I am discussing where fair use quotes were used to expose abusive therapists, very different from the abusive, libelous smear campaign directed against those who do that. I have never, in my life, ever filed a DMCA complaint against anyone. You're just upset, Neal, because the moderator on Indymedia deleted your misogynistic comments. I did not complain to her about you. She initiated that because she was disgusted by you and people have every right to delete any comments they so choose from their own websites and that's what the moderator of Indymedia chose to do. Deleting a comment from one's own website is not "censorship". People have the right to have on their websites whatever material they choose to and delete whatever they choose to and the Indymedia moderator chose to delete your disgusting comments about me because she considered them misogynistic. Again, that was her call that she made, not mine. Face it, Neal, your behavior is a big turn off to many women. You should take Barbara Schwartz's advice and write a book, 101 ways to turn off Women. I'm sure it would sell very well. You are an ugly human being, Neal Warren and I can see that now that you don't have Barbara Schwartz to respond to you seem to be shifting your attacks to me. Well no more, because from no on I am going to ignore you too. Barbara had the right idea here, ignoring you. I expect that when I stop responding to you, your ugly obsessions will switch to someone else. Whoever he switches to, my advice is to not respond to him.
From: Gregory Hall on 4 Jan 2010 17:59
"Monica Pignotti" <pignotti(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:918c5e39-225e-4fb5-a738-7bd0f0314e06(a)22g2000yqr.googlegroups.com... On Jan 4, 4:26 pm, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...(a)home.fake> wrote: > "Monica Pignotti" <pigno...(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > > news:94bf9c54-8a32-4b95-96be-016956f0df2e(a)c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 3, 6:52 pm, "Gregory Hall" <gregh...(a)home.fake> wrote: > > > > > "Monica Pignotti" <pigno...(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > > >news:5d4182d3-30d0-4b31-b329-92fbe0c6110e(a)e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > > On Dec 15 2009, 8:11 pm, didacticderivative > > > <didacticderivat...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > United States Court, District of Maine. Case 2:09-cv-00213-DBH > > > > Project DoD, hosting company of the likes of Larry Sarner (voting > > > machine scam artrist), Linda Rosa (she who followed Sarner into > > > bankruptcy) and Jean Mercer (the psychologist who never treated a > > > patient) lost their "landmark reverse DMCA" case. > > > > What are they going to do now, invent the iPigno, a device that > > > refuses to read the works of Charles Sanders Peirce, Claude Levi- > > > Strauss, and Stanislaw Lem? > > > > Attorneys Rufus Brown, Robert Mittel, and Tiffany Rad are > > > reconsidering the wisdom of believing everything Christopher Mooney > > > tells them� > > > For people who are actually interested in the facts of this case, the > > documents are all available here. This should be of interest to people > > on ARS, as it involves freedom of speech on the internet and details > > harassment that has occurred. The case was only dismissed due to an > > issue of jurisdiction, not because DoD was wrong. Documents can be > > downloaded people can read about the facts of this case at: > > >https://chris.dod.net/?p=387 > > > So yes, this particular battle has been lost but at least attention > > has been brought to this important issue and the war for free speech > > on the internet is far from over, rest assured. > > > ================================ > > > [REPLY] > > > You're a proven censorship advocate, Monica. You actively engage in > > censorship. Stop being such a hypocrite. > > > -- > > Gregory Hall > > Wrong. My protesting your abusive misappropriation of my image by > requesting a private website to remove it is not "censorship". I did > not misuse or even evoke DMCA. It is not the same thing at all. The > private website made the decision to remove your abuse of my image, > something they had every right to do. It is not the same thing at all. > Free speech does not include a right to abuse and harass, as you seem > to think it does. > > ================================= > > What about the many parody sites with the Pignotron you whined and > complained about and hollered abuse? You got those shut down just because > the squeaky wheel gets the grease. That is censorship pure. Poor wittle > Monica. Act like she's got her wittle feelings hurt so run to Daddy and > bawl > your wittle eyes out and get it made all better. You really ARE pathetic. > You never grew up. > > Your definition of abuse and harassment is paranoid delusional, victim > mentality pure and simple. How thick is your skin. Probably less than a > nanometer (less than one billionth of an inch - sort of like your reneging > on your one billion year contract.) > None of those were DMCA complaints. Free speech does not give people the right to make libelous statements about others. It was not a "parody" and anyone who sees the huge volume of personal attacks on me can readily see that it was not a "parody" -- it was part of a malicious smear campaign against people who are taking a stand against abusive quack therapies and anyone who actually looks at what has been done to me on the internet can readily see that it is not paranoia on my part to call it that. You wouldn't know anything about taking a real stand for something, Neal, because you don't care about anything -- all you do is troll and make ugly, misogynist comments and then scream "Censorship!!!" when moderators delete you. And no, I don't "bawl". I stand up for myself and that's what drives you absolutely nuts, Neal. A strong woman who refuses to take abuse who refuses to submit to misogynist creeps such as yourself. There is nothing even remotely similar to the DMCA case I am discussing where fair use quotes were used to expose abusive therapists, very different from the abusive, libelous smear campaign directed against those who do that. I have never, in my life, ever filed a DMCA complaint against anyone. You're just upset, Neal, because the moderator on Indymedia deleted your misogynistic comments. I did not complain to her about you. She initiated that because she was disgusted by you and people have every right to delete any comments they so choose from their own websites and that's what the moderator of Indymedia chose to do. Deleting a comment from one's own website is not "censorship". People have the right to have on their websites whatever material they choose to and delete whatever they choose to and the Indymedia moderator chose to delete your disgusting comments about me because she considered them misogynistic. Again, that was her call that she made, not mine. Face it, Neal, your behavior is a big turn off to many women. You should take Barbara Schwartz's advice and write a book, 101 ways to turn off Women. I'm sure it would sell very well. You are an ugly human being, Neal Warren and I can see that now that you don't have Barbara Schwartz to respond to you seem to be shifting your attacks to me. Well no more, because from no on I am going to ignore you too. Barbara had the right idea here, ignoring you. I expect that when I stop responding to you, your ugly obsessions will switch to someone else. Whoever he switches to, my advice is to not respond to him. ==================================== Indymedia????? Never heard of it. -- Gregory Hall |