Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: WHYTE RULES ON ERLICH Message-ID: <9510032108.0TPCU04@support.com> Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Tue, 03 Oct 95 21:08:40 -0700 Lines: 71 ckaun@deimos.ads.com (Carl Kaun) >I have obtained a copy of the Judge Whyte's September 22 order in the >case of RTC vs. Netcom (C-95-20091-RMW). I have only glanced at it, >and while the Writ of Seizure has been vacated, I saw little else >to find joy in. I fear Dennis is in for a tougher time on this one. >(Hang in there, lad, we'll do what we can.) I'm not going anywhere. >the following is the final section of Judge Whyte's order, pages 46-48, >as hand-typed by me from the order. > > VII. Order > > For the reasons set forth above, the court orders as follows: [snip] > ii. Nothing in this section of the order shall be construed to > prohibit fair use of such works, as set forth in 17 U.S.C. % 107 and > interpreted by applicable case law. Fair use of the copyrighted > material for the purposes of this order includes use of the > copyrighted work for the purpose of criticism, news reporting, > teaching, scholarship, and research but does not include: (1) use of > the material for a commercial purpose where the user stands to profit > from exploitation of the copyrighted material without paying the > customary price or giving the usual consideration or use that would > have a significant effect on the potential market value of the > copyrighted work; (2) use which fulfills the demand for the original > work; or (3) use of the heart of the work -- no more of a work may be > taken than is necessary to make any accompanying comment > understandable. With respect to unpublished materials, the amount of > copied material must comprise only a very small percentage of the > copyrighted works from both a quantitative and a qualitative > standpoint. > > iii. The prior postings by defendant Erlich that form the basis of > this order do not qualify as fair use primarily because of the > quantity of the material posted and the very limited transformative > use made of these materials. Identical or similar postings are > therefore enjoined. Gee, that's specific. > c. A condition of this preliminary injunction is that a $25,000 bond > shall be posted (or continued in place) pursuant to Federal Rule of > Civil Procedure 65(c). This was posted to get the unconstitutional raid approved. It stays in place. >2. Plaintiffs' application to expand the TRO is denied without prejudice. > >3. Plaintiffs' motion for a finding of contempt against defendant Erlich > is denied. > >4. Plaintiffs are order to return within ten (10) working days of the date > of this order to defendant Erlich through his counsel all items seized > pursuant to the writ of seizure issued February 10, 1995. That day passed on Monday. Nothing was returned. Oh, Judge! +--------------------------------------+ Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * dennis.l.erlich@support.com + inForm@primenet.com "tar baby"