Crossover @endomorphosis / Benjamin Jay Barber - Some revenge pornographer from Oregon is gunt guarding.

[MeltyTW]

she admitted that she made the porn for money. Moreover, the reason why you cant "post pics of her vagina against her will" is only if she owns the copyright in the images. If she doesn't own the images, then tough luck, there is no recourse.

At no time was it alleged that the images were taken against her will, and that is not even an element of the offense, but that doesn't prevent the retarded DDA trying to construe the law as a property crime law rather than a speech crime.

At the end of the day however, this theory fails because it is expressly preempted by 17 USC 301(a)

youre arguing why im wrong when you literally failed to defend yourself in court over this very issue.

 

[endomorphosis]

youre arguing why im wrong when you literally failed to defend yourself in court over this very issue.

 

[The Big Dream]

This thread

@endomorphosis, usually I like to offer new cows advice as an act of good will: you know, like avoiding posting personal information, getting off the internet, reforming themselves, but you're clearly already past that. God speed and thank you for the corn.

 

[endomorphosis]

This thread

@endomorphosis, usually I like to offer new cows advice as an act of good will: you know, like avoiding posting personal information, getting off the internet, reforming themselves, but you're clearly already past that. God speed and thank you for the corn.

I mean, I am working on professional development.
However, I would like to note, that i anticipate my ex wife will be seething when she reads this, which makes me happy. since I know she uses google alert to follow me around the internet, and thinks its a good idea to try to slander me on random software development forums when I'm just discussing software engineering.

 

[maize]

Dear Benjamin Jay Barber's Ex Wife:

Please don't feel obligated but if you want to tell some embarrassing stories about this mongoloid that would be pretty neat.

-Maizey R. Goodcorn

 

[endomorphosis]

Dear Benjamin Jay Barber's Ex Wife:

Please don't feel obligated but if you want to tell some embarrassing stories about this mongoloid that would be pretty neat.

-Maizey R. Goodcorn

Dear Meagan Vance:
I anticipate after the "exhaustion" of state remedies, there will be a new 42 USC 1983 lawsuit against you, tread softly. Also, as you are aware, I have much more damning evidence of you than you have of me. Like how about those fake rape allegations you made against your brother and ex boyfriend, should we discuss those text messages?

 

[MeltyTW]

View attachment 3235174

nigga your arguments will not hold up in court. you have ralphs issue of thinking courts run on incel logic where if you can prove the woman is a skank or a liar in general that that means she gets legally downgraded to second class citizen status for being a cunt bitch or something. "your honor she had no issue being nude or sexual here in these contexts" isnt a defense,

 

[endomorphosis]

nigga your arguments will not hold up in court. you have ralphs issue of thinking courts run on incel logic where if you can prove the woman is a skank or a liar in general that that means she gets legally downgraded to second class citizen status for being a cunt bitch or something. "your honor she had no issue being nude or sexual here in these contexts" isnt a defense,

Sure it is, have you even read the law, you retard?

https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_163.472

 

[maize]

Dear Meagan Vance:
I anticipate after the "exhaustion" of state remedies, there will be a new 42 USC 1983 lawsuit against you, tread softly. Also, as you are aware, I have much more damning evidence of you than you have of me. Like how about those fake rape allegations you made against your brother and ex boyfriend, should we discuss those text messages?

Meagan, as this post could present your asshole of an ex with any of several potential legal problems that are pretty obvious, in the event he decides to walk it back and delete, here's a convenient archive.

 

[TherapyMan]

again you are retarded and lack reading comprehension

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4773027535051883259&q=state+v+oidor&hl=en&as_sdt=6,38#p634

"We therefore conclude that Congress intended section 301's preemptive effect to apply to state criminal as well as civil laws. Our conclusion is consistent with that reached by courts in other jurisdictions on the application of section 301 to state criminal statutes."

From the case you cited:

Thus, section 301 provides that the Copyright Act preempts a state law if the work at issue is fixed in a tangible medium and comes within the subject matter of copyright as specified by sections 102 and 103, and the state law creates a right that is "equivalent to any of the exclusive rights within the general scope of copyright as specified by section 106."

In evaluating whether a federal law preempts a state law, the paramount consideration is Congress's intent. Wolf, 230 Or. App. at 276, 216 P.3d 316. The House Committee on the Judiciary explained that the purpose of section 301 was to create a single, uniform system of copyright protection by eliminating state and common-law copyright protections in favor of the federal Copyright Act.

The overall purpose of ORS 164.865(1)(b) is to protect the owner of a sound recording from injury caused by the sale of a reproduction of the sound recording without the owner's consent, that is, to protect the owner's federal copyright. . . In other words, the statute enhances or supplements the protection afforded to copyright owners by the federal act by prohibiting acts that can lead to the unauthorized distribution by sale of copyrighted sound recordings.

Hence, the Copyright Act preempts ORS 164.865(1)(b) if ORS 164.865(1)(b) creates a right that is equivalent to any of the exclusive rights that are within the general scope of copyright.

Wowzers, it's almost as if this is actual express preemption. The statute protected the owner of a sound recording from the injury caused by the sale of a reproduction of the sound recording. The Copyright Act preempts the statute if it creates a right that is the equivalent to any of the exclusive rights that are within the general scope of copyright.

Revenge pornography statutes do not "enhance or supplement" the protection afforded by copyright owners. Revenge pornography statutes are not aimed at vindicating an owner in copyright's reproduction or distribution rights. There is no "right" created by revenge pornography statutes. Let's look at the statute:

ORS 163.472 Unlawful dissemination of an intimate image:
A person commits the crime of unlawful dissemination of an intimate image if:
(a) The person, with the intent to harass, humiliate or injure another person, knowingly causes to be disclosed an identifiable image of the other person whose intimate parts are visible or who is engaged in sexual conduct;
(b) The person knows or reasonably should have known that the other person does not consent to the disclosure;
(c) The other person is harassed, humiliated or injured by the disclosure; and
(d) A reasonable person would be harassed, humiliated or injured by the disclosure.

There is absolutely zero intersectionality with federal copyright rights. Again, I know it's useless explaining this to you, since in doing my research, I've noticed that at the very minimum two very competent judges also had the misfortune of having to explain this to you. For their trouble, you named them in a lawsuit against the state of Oregon. Along with the District of Columbia, their Attorney Generals, and their District Attorneys.

Let me ask you a question, since you're so smart. How many times have you successfully asserted this argument?

Let's take a look at your record in federal court.

Barber v. Oregon, No. 3:19-cv-01631-YY (D. Or. 2019) (dismissed)
Barber v. Vance, No. 3:16-cv-2105-AC (D. Or. 2019) (attorney's fees granted for defendant VANCE in the sum of $3,412.50)
Barber v. Garrett, No. 3:18-cv-01870-AC (9th Cir. 2019) ("The request for a certificate of appealability (Docket Entry No. 2) is denied because appellant has not shown that "jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." )

Oh wait, here's a juicy quote:

"Plaintiff also objects that Magistrate Judge Acosta properly did not analyze Plaintiff's claims as being under copyright law, because copyright [*4] law preempts all other law and Plaintiff's claims are at their essence copyright claims. This objection is without merit. Magistrate Judge Acosta explained that he rejected Plaintiff's argument because: (1) challenges to the constitutionality of Plaintiff's criminal conviction or Oregon Revised Statutes § 163.472 are not evaluated under (or "preempted by" as argued by Plaintiff) copyright law; (2) Plaintiff's purported copyright claim is not an exception to the doctrines set forth in Younger or Heck; and (3) the Court previously found that Plaintiff failed to demonstrate ownership of copyright to the images."

Wow, I should be privileged to be in the presence of such a great legal mind that knows better than both a federal magistrate judge and federal district judge.

On an aside, what exactly did this have to do with your filing? I'd really like to know your motivation.

Barber asserts "Portland State University and Lewis & Clark College should be forced to remove all gender biased 'feminist' public services, and all services that utilize 'critical theory' because they constitute the use of federal dollars on civic religions not based on science, or are based on ideologies so intertwined with a suspect class that it violates equal protection of the law and freedom of conscience for those who do not believe in the theories." (Am. Compl. at 51.) Barber also alleges the State of Oregon "should repeal all of it's 'cultural compent[e]ncy' laws, as it is an ideological litmus test in both health care and higher education which is often diametrically opposed to scientific evidence, and as evidence based practices." (Am. Compl. at 51.)

 

[endomorphosis]

Meagan, as this post could present your asshole of an ex with any of several potential legal problems that are pretty obvious, in the event he decides to walk it back and delete, here's a convenient archive.

So obvious that you couldn't state what they were.

 

[An automatic clown]

I bet he got a lot of software engineering work done today and definitely didn't seethe on the farms.

 

[TheSword]

So obvious that you couldn't state what they were.

My dude, you’re fucking pretentious and retarded, that’s the most insufferable kind of retard. Just eat some lead and spare us of your pseudo-intellectual ramblings PLEASE.

 

[Mr Clark]

Hes a double retard.

Thinks he knows better than professionals in their field (lawyers and judges) AND guntguards for someond who would never give you the time of day.

Why would you simp for the bifurcated blob?

 

[McWeaeselton]

Holy shit this is great lmao. Russell Greer 2: Guntguard Boogaloo.

 

[endomorphosis]

Nice shifting the goalpost, first it was that copyright DOESNT preempt criminal law, now its another set ill informed arguments, but i at least applaud you in a little effort posting.

He did not go through the two step copyright preemption test which is required, and moreover this is dicta, because it was dismissed on younger/heck grounds without prejudice, and in fact this is exactly contradicted by 9th circuit holdings, go back and read the memorandum.

see e.g. Maloney v. T3Media, Inc., 853 F. 3d 1004, 1019 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2017
"Plaintiffs' publicity-right claims and the derivative UCL claim challenge "control of the artistic work itself." Laws, 448 F.3d at 1142. Pursuant to Laws, the subject matter of the state law claims therefore falls within the subject matter of copyright."


Younger and Heck are abstention doctrines, that do not allow you to bypass the state court, except in extraordinary circumstances, until you exhaust your state remedies. The state has been procedurally delaying the exhaustion of those remedies for so many years, again due in part because they don't hire enough lawyers, for example 3 years for the state to have a hearing over the post conviction relief petition after it was filed.

Moreover, the reason why i couldn't provide evidence of the copyright, was that I was unable to get the copyright registry from the copyright office, while i was sitting in jail. The Washington county jail itself also does not even have a set of federal reporters and federal laws in its law library, so it was difficult if not impossible for me to make the arguments i wanted, It took until 2020 for the jail to purchase law library computers, because the loss of the case was a direct result of them not having the reference material.

Regarding the rest of the stuff, I was trying to preserve my claims, so that I would not lose the statute of limitations, I thought it was kind of fucked up the state mandated my wife study this critical theory in school, and she went kind of nuts and shaved her head bald, and started accusing her brother, her ex boyfriend, and her ex boyfriends best friend of raping her. That in fact she has learned that she has Stockholm syndrome, and that she has been a lesbian her entire life, and trying to attempt suicide. Moreover when I forced her into therapy (provided by the school), the school handed me a bunch of critical theory bullshit in therapy with her, and eventually my wife moved in with her therapist.

 

[An automatic clown]

. Moreover when I forced her into therapy (provided by the school), the school handed me a bunch of critical theory bullshit in therapy with her, and eventually my wife moved in with her therapist.

How do you take so many Ls

 

[endomorphosis]

Nice shifting the goalpost, first it was that copyright DOESNT preempt criminal law, now its another set ill informed arguments, but i at least applaud you in a little effort posting.

He did not go through the two step copyright preemption test which is required, and moreover this is dicta, because it was dismissed on younger/heck grounds without prejudice, and in fact this is exactly contradicted by 9th circuit holdings, go back and read the memorandum.

see e.g. Maloney v. T3Media, Inc., 853 F. 3d 1004, 1019 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2017
"Plaintiffs' publicity-right claims and the derivative UCL claim challenge "control of the artistic work itself." Laws, 448 F.3d at 1142. Pursuant to Laws, the subject matter of the state law claims therefore falls within the subject matter of copyright."


Younger and Heck are abstention doctrines, that do not allow you to bypass the state court, except in extraordinary circumstances, until you exhaust your state remedies. The state has been procedurally delaying the exhaustion of those remedies for so many years, again due in part because they don't hire enough lawyers, for example 3 years for the state to have a hearing over the post conviction relief petition after it was filed.

Moreover, the reason why i couldn't provide evidence of the copyright, was that I was unable to get the copyright registry from the copyright office, while i was sitting in jail. The Washington county jail itself also does not even have a set of federal reporters and federal laws in its law library, so it was difficult if not impossible for me to make the arguments i wanted, It took until 2020 for the jail to purchase law library computers, because the loss of the case was a direct result of them not having the reference material.

Regarding the rest of the stuff, I was trying to preserve my claims, so that I would not lose the statute of limitations, I thought it was kind of fucked up the state mandated my wife study this critical theory in school, and she went kind of nuts and shaved her head bald, and started accusing her brother, her ex boyfriend, and her ex boyfriends best friend of raping her. That in fact she has learned that she has Stockholm syndrome, and that she has been a lesbian her entire life, and trying to attempt suicide. Moreover when I forced her into therapy (provided by the school), the school handed me a bunch of critical theory bullshit in therapy with her, and eventually my wife moved in with her therapist.

Here is proof i filed a copyright,


Moreover I would like to note, that Judge Acosta, is an obama appointee, who once advocated that we needed more affirmative action for judges like him, so that we could have "more equal equality", which reminded me at the time of George Orwell's Animal Farm "some people are equal, but some are more equal than others"

 

[MeltyTW]

Sure it is, have you even read the law, you retard?

https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_163.472

she admitted that she made the porn for money. Moreover, the reason why you cant "post pics of her vagina against her will" is only if she owns the copyright in the images. If she doesn't own the images, then tough luck, there is no recourse.

well obviously there is recourse because you lost, tough luck. also no you told me that she did other sexual things so that further justified you releasing a different sexual image. you cant just release revenge porn of one image because they had also done public orgies or whatever.

Also no a rinky dink homemade porn tape isnt commercial afaik you need actual oversight before its anything more than a naughty home movie regardless if you intended it to be porn studio tier, the fact you needed to try and copyright it after the fact shows how amateur it was.

 

[TheSword]

View attachment 3235302
Here is proof i filed a copyright,

View attachment 3235305
Moreover I would like to note, that Judge Acosta, is an obama appointee, who once advocated that we needed more affirmative action for judges like him, so that we could have "more equal equality", which reminded me at the time of George Orwell's Animal Farm "some people are equal, but some are more equal than others"

I just wanna say, I had delicious clam and corn chowder an hour ago and I’m 98% sure said corn was grown by watering the crops with your tears. So, thanks for the meal- pretty good. A bit salty and bitter at times but that’s just how it be.