Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: COPYRIGHT AND TRADE S Message-ID: <9509191352.0JHYU02@support.com> References: Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Tue, 19 Sep 95 13:52:48 -0700 Lines: 99 bill@scconsult.com (Bill Stewart-Cole) Me: > Ha. Your response it laden with irony, Andrew. Especially > considering that both Kane and Brinkima have already ruled > that no copyright infringement has occured in Wollersheim, > Lerma *or* Washington Post. I was wrong. It was only a ruling on the Post's use. > Brinkima and Kane have both ruled that no violation of > Copyright law has occurred. Your analysis of the issues was > flat out rong. This too is incorrect. The ruling on fair use was only relating to the Post. >Dennis, those rulings were NOT on whether any infringement occured. In the case of the Post, it certainly shows the court leans in that direction. >That >issue has not been tried, and it is still quite possible for all three >defendents to lose. As you know well, these cases don't play out in a >single month with one ruling. Right, but unfavorable rulings against the scienos tend to snowball as their cases roll back down the hill on top of them. >The Crutch lost on getting TRO's against all >three and has to hand back the seized materials, but the cases are all >pending. Of course. >Don't shoot the messenger. I'm not. Andy took offense at a joke and started pissing in my face. Has not stopped yet. >Saying that it is hard to legally justify the >posting of the full OT materials does not define one as a CoS >sympathizer. True. But calling it lawless civil disobedience and illegal and asking us to give up free speech rights does. >Arnie will have a hard time in court when this actually >makes it to trial. You will probably have it somewhat easier, if the >Crutch ever lets it get to a trial. It will never go to trial. They will never put it to a jury. >The Post will probably never have to >face a trial and have countersuits spreading the cheeks of Earl Cooley >before any of the other cases are decided. The pen is mightier than the Almighty Buck? >Someone in the mists of time (late 94 I think) described ARS as the >Crutch's Vietnam. There are good parallels, in that the VC and NVA were >tactically incompetent and lost far more battles than they won. And Ho >didn't stand for realism when it meant bad news. If I knew anything about history, I might be insulted at such a comparison. But I'll let the stretched out of shape analogy slide. :) >Andy is rather blunt and he generalized too much between the cases. He >also has a natural bias towards copyright holders. No one is perfect. But >the core of what he is saying is true, whether it is nice to hear or not: >full text use is hard to legally justify as fair use. If that was all he said, I would have wholeheartedly agreed. >Posting the full >text of the OT docs, even embedded in a court record, is going to be very >hard to defend within the law. That doesn't mean the law is ethically >right in this case. Maybe so, maybe no. Open court records are certainly a matter of legitimate public interest and concern. >It works in Arnie's favor that the Crutch doesn't really want a trial on >their copyrights on the OT materials. Too many pitfalls for them exist in >a trial situation. I doubt that Andy has considered that factor at all. Because he has not bothered to find out much about the cult beyond the narrow confines of his legal specialty. >Bill Stewart-Cole +--------------------------------------+ Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * dennis.l.erlich@support.com + inForm@primenet.com "tar baby"