Subject: 2.5 of 3 for the Good Guys! X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] Date: Thu, 23 Feb

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Path: news.media.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news2.near.net!news3.near.net!nntp-hub.barrnet.net!nntp-sc.barrnet.net!news.fujitsu.com!amdahl.com!netcomsv!netcom.com!speaker From: speaker@netcom.com (ASC Missions Group) Subject: 2.5 of 3 for the Good Guys! Message-ID: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] Date: Thu, 23 Feb 1995 09:21:45 GMT Lines: 128 Sender: speaker@netcom14.netcom.com Note: This is the message I cancelled yesterday. It has been edited slightly. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi, I was at court today in San Jose. Dennis did well; things went quite well. The judge denied the CoS' request for a Temporary Restraining order against Netcom and Tom Klemensrud. That's 2 of 3. So now it's just Dennis and "them". But they didn't get anything more against Dennis either. The judge expressed concerns about protecting Dennis' rights to parody and fair use, and asked the lawyers to show how extensive Dennis' alleged infringements were, and to tell him which of the seized items were copyrighted and which were trade secrets, and they couldn't tell him! So he asked how long it would take to get that info together, and Small said 2 days. He told them to deliver it in 3 days (2/24), and gave Dennis till March 3 to respond to whatever they come up with. And he asked for detailed info comparing the portions copied or used by Dennis, compared to the sizes of the original. (One item they were complaining about was a single paragraph out of a whole book, that was on-disk in Dennis' notes.) So the judge didn't dismiss the whole thing, leaving Dennis to face whatever they come up with (their .5 point worth of win). But he did tell Dennis that he was free to continue posting, tho he should be careful to stay within the concepts of parody, fair use, &tc. So just this first step is not over. (our other .5 point) At one point Small tried a little character assassination by slipping, into an otherwise blatant non-sequitur, a comment about Dennis having a few beers and getting a little rowdy late during the search. Dennis had pointed out to the judge that he had early on in this whole posting thing asked them to tell him exactly what his violations were, and they did not. He had offered that if they showed him that he really was violating any copyrights or whatever, he would cease and desist, erase the offending data, and apologize publically. It was obvious that Dennis was talking about an exchange (or non-exchange) that took place quite some time ago, not just last week. Small time-shifted on that point and talked about how, Sure, Dennis was cooperative in the beginning, but then as the day wore on.... So Small attempted to muddy the point rather than respond, because he was talking about the day of the raid and not at all about what Dennis had said! And he may think he got it on because he got scoffed by the gallery for his personal attack. He may think that he sufficiently disguised his detour, but I think he's wrong about the judge. The judge (a) is not as stupid as Small seems to think, and (b) would have to have been the only person in the room to miss it, since everyone I heard from "our side" made it the first point of conversation afterward. I think they've bitten a rattlesnake in the face with this one, and now they have to try to figure out how to get away from it in some condition other than dead. To me, they looked tricky, but very inept. BTW, Dennis won the first point of the day before the hearing ever started. An error had resulted in some confusion about the starting time. The order read 10:00 AM. The judge set that time because he normally hears some criminal stuff at 9:00. But later he apparently said 9:00 to the CofS people, but only verbally. And it was on the docket for 9:00 when we got there. The problem with that is, that the defendants were served with papers that said 10:00. Anyway they tried to get the thing started before 10:00, and Tom's attorney wasn't there yet. Small even told the judge that he, the judge, had said and really meant 9:00. It seemed obvious to me that Small wanted to take advantage of this situation, for whatever reason, and was trying to manipulate the judge. The Netcom people said that their papers said 10:00, and Dennis objected that his did too, and that Tom's attorney wasn't there yet, and may believe it to be 10:00 as well. The judge decided to wait, and Tom's attorney showed up before 10:00, and they started. Summary: Netcom: } } No restraining order in place. (Still in suit till dismissed) Tom K.: } Dennis: gets to respond before a new hearing on the 3rd = decision postponed. For now, the net is still free. But RTC's ass may belong to Dennis. And I wouldn't hire Small to train a parakeet. -0- Speaker for Acceptance Acceptance Services Center Acceptance is appreciation without significance. | (415) 964-3436 Appreciation is willingness to experience as-is. --8-- PO Box 390696 Significance is interpretation, or added-on meaning. | Mtn Vw CA 94039 -- Speaker for Acceptance Acceptance Services Center Acceptance is appreciation without significance. | (415) 964-3436 Appreciation is willingness to experience as-is. --8-- PO Box 390696 Significance is interpretation, or added-on meaning. | Mtn Vw CA 94039 -------------------

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank