Cultcow Russell Greer / Mr. Green / @ just_some_dude_named_russell29 / A Safer Nevada PAC - Swift-Obsessed Sex Pest, Convicted of E-Stalking, "Eggshell Skull Plaintiff" Pro Se Litigant, Homeless, aspiring brothel owner

If you were Taylor Swift, whom would you rather date?

  • Russell Greer

    Votes: 117 4.5%
  • Travis Kelce

    Votes: 138 5.3%
  • Null

    Votes: 1,449 55.9%
  • Kanye West

    Votes: 283 10.9%
  • Ariana Grande

    Votes: 607 23.4%

  • Total voters
    2,594
And remember, they're just working on the copyright violation claim, not any of the hurt fee-fees part which is obviously more important to him.
Screenshot_20211221-213044_Drive.jpg
 
Oh they are taking on the defamation claims? Neat. Wasn't his quibble that we said he had victims and he said he only had one? Can Null's lawyer bring up the ROs he was revealed to have issued against him in the AGT suit, or is it too late to introduce new evidence?
 
Wasn't his quibble that we said he had victims and he said he only had one?
He had many issues with our statements including that one, yes.
Can Null's lawyer bring up the ROs he was revealed to have issued against him in the AGT suit, or is it too late to introduce new evidence?
You generally can't introduce new evidence on appeal.
 
As for #1, denial of leave to amend is generally reviewed for abuse of discretion.

#2 is law, not fact, and probably will be addressed de novo.

#3 is similarly law, but the law is abundantly clear.

#4 is whether the District Court erred in applying the CDA to those very state law claims, all of which are well within the ambit of the CDA.

Luckily, the issue isn't whether there was actually infringement but whether it was adequately pled. Russ pled to the wrong standard, so they're either going to have to argue it should have been interpreted leniently, even though that would have left the defendant with no clear statement what he was actually being accused of.

Finally, the DMCA doesn't add any additional copyright liability for infringement, just provides immunity if you actually comply with the safe harbor provisions. If not, you're just dumped into the same copyright hell that preceded the DMCA's existence. The plaintiff still has to prove infringement.

For a third party to be held liable for infringement, there needs to be a theory supporting it. In this case, that's contributory and indirect. The trial court found below he hadn't adequately pled either.

Despite it being an abuse of discretion standard, I actually think the first point is probably the best, specifically that it would have been possible to amend the pleading to cure the defects cited by the trial court. Apparently so do they because they led with it.
You generally can't introduce new evidence on appeal.
You could introduce the sort of supplemental record that is not subject to factual dispute, i.e. material subject to judicial notice. It's not really relevant to anything on appeal though. The court doesn't have to reach the issue of whether any of these statements were defamatory, only the issue of whether or not the CDA would even allow a suit under these circumstances.

I think it is pretty clear it does not.
 
Last edited:
Prepare for disappointment if you think Pipsqueak tries to run for any office. It's more likely he'll wait for any local libertarian or particularly dumb democratic candidate who shares the same views and donate to/endorse them. Honestly can you imagine Pipsqueak here trying to slurp out a speech at a rally or something?

Also I'm most likely wrong but I think therapists have certain protections from clientele so if Pipsqueak tries anything funny she can refer him to a ward or something. I'm not sure how it works from state to state though.
Pardon if three days is too late to reply to this, but I think that Russ is too anxious to ever run for office. He claims to have anxiety, and I actually believe him for a number of reasons. One of which is the way that he keeps editing and re-editing his posts. If he had actual confidence, he wouldn't feel the need to compulsively do that, but would stand by what he said. Anxiety is also a very common co-morbidity with autism, which I'm pretty sure he has but I won't belabor that particular point for the nth time.

Also, narcissistic people are generally abnormally anxious whether openly or secretly, with fellow narcissist cow Patrick Tomlinson being another good example. (Pat's refusal to let any allegation, no matter how ridiculous, go unanswered is downright obsessive-compulsive. No sane person would worry that other people would believe allegations that he grinds up black babies to make pepperoni, or feel the need to say absurd things like, "No, child, you did not fart in my wife's vagina", or spend hours at a time arguing with a troll impersonating his toilet on Twitter.)

In fact, Russ's anxiety is probably part of the reason that he thinks he is somehow so "inspiring"; Russ knows how hard he has to work to overcome his anxiety to to do his performances, and with his lack of theory of mind, he just automatically assumes that everyone else knows it too. He was undoubtedly told as a child how brave he was by his parents and/or teachers (who would have known about his condition and/or been able to imagine how much worse stage fright could be for someone who looks as weird as Russ). In fact, his willingness to repeatedly brutally and publicly humiliate himself perform for an audience in spite of everything could be viewed as one of his few good qualities if not for the fact that the way he does it is, by pumping his ego up with narcissistic self-delusion, is so incredibly unhealthy.
 
is whether the District Court erred in applying the CDA to those very state law claims, all of which are well within the ambit of the CDA.
One of the things he raised issue with was with statements Null himself made which would not be affected by CDA.
Screenshot_20220607-122409_Drive~2.jpg

But like we know, there really wasn't anything Null said that was defamatory (not to mention that his argument was at one point "he talked about me so even if I dont know what it is it must have been defamatory!")
Screenshot_20220607-122930_Drive.jpg
Screenshot_20220607-123001_Drive.jpg
 

Okay, maybe I'm actually glad Russell is back on Facebook, this post alone is funnier than all the desperate tag-filled self-promotion he posts on Instagram. You just KNOW Russell thinks he has a chance with Amber now that she took a huge financial hit. That gourd-shaped head is already fantasizing about her sleeping on the couch of Vegas's coolest, most musically gifted stud.
 
People should mark the 21st on their calendar. It's going to be big, Not only are we likely to get a pretty big doc brief from Russ, we will be able to compare the work of his lawyers with the work Russ submitted to the district court. This will be a historic occasion, finally we can see what Russ can do with help of some lawyers
 
But like we know, there really wasn't anything Null said that was defamatory (not to mention that his argument was at one point "he talked about me so even if I dont know what it is it must have been defamatory!")
That's why #4 but you can tell counsel considers it the weakest. I believe both #3 and #4 are absolutely hopeless. 3 for obvious reasons, 4 for the lack of anything pleading any actual damages for statements that are not per se defamatory.
 
Back