Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: OT MATERIAL Message-ID: <9510041746.0OZ4H02@support.com> References: <9510041842.AA13197@next.ocsg.com> Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Wed, 04 Oct 95 17:46:42 -0700 Lines: 109 raoul@cacciatore.mit.edu (Nico Garcia) >(Keith A. Schauer) writes: > > this is what dennis said. interpret for yourself: I guess this is what Cooley is so hotly complaining about. > From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com > Subject: RE: please read > Message-ID: <9509270901.0COE900@support.com> > References: <19950926091424EEL4ACQ@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU> > Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 > X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 > Distribution: world > Date: Wed, 27 Sep 95 09:01:27 -0700 > Lines: 23 > > > EEL4ACQ@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU > >WHERE CAN I FIND A COPY OF THESE COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS THAT EVERYBODY >IS MAKING sUCH A BIG DEAL OUT OF? > > As soon as the scienos return my research to me, I will > commence a fair use posting of all the materials I am being > sued for having posted in the first place. > > This thread I will begin, Oat Tea - Fair Use, will > systematically explain and criticize every paragraph and > sentence, point by point, that El Rotundo makes. I will > review all of the material on both Exhibit B and A of the > suit. > > So get ready for fireworks. > > +--------------------------------------+ > Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * > dennis.l.erlich@support.com + inForm@primenet.com > > --------- > > and it looks like the cos wants to rain before the > fireworks get started. will the systematic explanation > of the ot levels go beyond fair use? Of course it cannot. I am under injunction to follow Judge Whyte's guidelines. Sheesh! You think I'm interested in giving MoFo more work? I read the ruling and of course I will abide by it (whether I think it's right or not). That is called being a good citizen. Letting justice take its course, even if it appears unjust for a time. > it will be an interesting test of the law. It's interesting to watch, I'm sure. It's less interesting to *go through*. > paraphrasing elron's writings would violate > scietologies own commandments (verbal tech and all), I've been trying to be a good Cramming Officer for ars and only give the verbatum droppings. Oh well. I can do the job another way. > it's as if the cos demands full quoting and examination as > the source wrote it himself anything else would almost > be an insulting slap in the face to milne. Hmm. That sounds appropriate. >They're trying to use a "cleft stick". If you quote it extensively, >it's "copyright violation". If you use short quotes only and analyses, >it's "out of context". It's their problem. They want to create a catch-22 for me. But Homie don't play dat. I will follow the guidelines set by Judge Whyte's ruling. But I also *will* review all my previous postings and ensure each has sufficient commentary and paraphrase to convey the points of my critiques, and no more than is necessary to make them. > Nico Garcia > raoul@mit.edu NOTE: The scienos are currently in contempt to Judge Whyte's order to return my material. Let's see if *my* rights are gonna get protected, or it's only the scienos that have the right to continue to defraud people with their bait-and-switch Trade Sekrit Exorcism Tek. I'm still waiting for them to comply with Judge Whyte's order to return the material stolen in the unconstitutional raid on my privacy. Don't the Fourth Amendment apply in civil cases? +--------------------------------------+ Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * dennis.l.erlich@support.com + inForm@primenet.com "tar baby"