Greer v. Moon, No. 20-cv-00647 (D. Utah Sep. 16, 2020)

[Doctor Socrates]

how long will it last will it be Hughes v akkad or h3h3 vs bald guy again or will it be a quick court case lasting few weeks at most

​

 

[AnOminous]

Stay positive and good luck.

Yeah we all heard that shit, stayed poz, and then ended up with FULL BLOWN AIDS.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

or will it be a quick court case lasting few weeks at most

On the district level? Most certainly on the longer end. For reference it took well over a year just to get the case dismissed before trial, and that would be further longer still. The case originally was filed on September 16th, 2020, and dismissed a year later on September 21st, 2021. Then it spent two years in appeals. And, well, now we are here.

Yeah we all heard that shit, stayed poz, and then ended up with FULL BLOWN AIDS.

Will you update your OP?

 

[AnOminous]

Will you update your OP?

Yes, but not right now. I have to finish crying.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Its really annoying trying to make sense of the hash the 10th circuit has just made of the FRCP. I think I am as confused as they are as to where this case is. Are we at Summary Judgement or Pre-trial dismissal to state a claim? It seems like the rules are functioning under Schrodinger's principle of quantum super position. They exist in a binary state until you actually try and observe them.

 

[Lubby Smith]

Lawtube Kurt, aka Uncivil Law, always mentions being in the SCOTUS bar and he was some kind of patent lawyer. He should do the Petition for Cert pro bono and channel his formidable lawtism into this righteous cause. It would boost his streaming numbers and stick it to the balldo lawyer, whom Kurt deep down resents with a burning incel rage. And there's literally nothing to lose. I'm joking around, but it would actually be perfect.

That being said, what an unbelievably aggravating turn of events. Don't hesitate to ask for assistance, Josh.

 

[Farmer9876]

I don't feel so good kiwi bros *licks whiskey bottle*.

Seriously, wtf? Did they all gone crazy in there?! Do judges in America become so obese, that fat started to mess with there brains?

 

[Null]

Don't hesitate to ask for assistance, Josh.

What the fuck does this even mean bro? Who's going to jump in and help? What are they going to do? You going to channel the ghost of Scalia and pull a favor?

 

[Useful_Mistake]

I have to finish crying.

Russ made a former staff member cry? Rare Russ W.

would be a Rule 19 rejoinder. Greer failed to include Google in the lawsuit, and since the causal action of his case was Google Drive, the case cannot proceed because Null is literally incapable of giving Greer what he wants without Google also being made to comply.

Good theory, but I think I see a fatal flaw. You are basing this on Rule 19 (1) (a), correct? "in that person's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties"? Therein lies the problem. Russell can get the relief he seeks without Google. He seeks damages (available without Google), and removal of his work. He can completely get the relief requested from Kiwi Farms, and if not he can amend his petition to remove the removal request (though perhaps Rule 19 forecloses on that, I am not certain) of the swift book (language in his request is vague enough that it could require Google's intervention).

However, there is caselaw supporting your point of view. U.S. v. Magnesium Corporation of America, Case No 2:98-CV-281TC (D. Utah May. 15, 2003) presupposes that there is not any need to fully answer whether or not Russell Greer could get the relief sought without Google, the mere uncertainty about that fact may be enough. If there is more persuasive caselaw to that effect, you may have hit gold (though he could always refile if dismissed.)

I think I am as confused as they are as to where this case is.

Given that the findings of the 10th Circuit included Time Travel, God only knows.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Good theory, but I think I see a fatal flaw. You are basing this on Rule 19 (1) (a), correct? "in that person's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties"? Therein lies the problem. Russell can get the relief he seeks without Google. He seeks damages (available without Google), and removal of his work. He can completely get the relief requested from Kiwi Farms, and if not he can amend his petition to remove the removal request (though perhaps Rule 19 forecloses on that, I am not certain) of the swift book (language in his request is vague enough that it could require Google's intervention).

However, there is caselaw supporting your point of view. U.S. v. Magnesium Corporation of America, Case No 2:98-CV-281TC (D. Utah May. 15, 2003) presupposes that there is not any need to fully answer whether or not Russell Greer could get the relief sought without Google, the mere uncertainty about that fact may be enough. If there is more persuasive caselaw to that effect, you may have hit gold (though he could always refile if dismissed.)

You were far more charitable to my theory then I was myself since I deleted it after I thought of it. But yes, that was my theory. Greer was claiming "Contributory copyright infringement". But the causal agent of the infringement was not Null, it was Google. Contributory infringement implies a kind of conspiracy between the infringing parties. Where the actual infringing party is the nexus of the infringement. You cannot prove Null "contributed" to copyright infringement without also proving there was infringement in the first place.

And how can Greer prove with a preponderance of the evidence that Null "contributed" to copyright infringement without also implicating "copyright infringement" itself.

So yes, a Rule 19 motion would actually be possible here. But alas I am like @AnOminous crying into my keyboard right now. Because its all so academic, when, lets face it. This lawsuit is political. Which means there really are no rules.

 

[Treasure Champs]

Its really annoying trying to make sense of the hash the 10th circuit has just made of the FRCP. I think I am as confused as they are as to where this case is. Are we at Summary Judgement or Pre-trial dismissal to state a claim? It seems like the rules are functioning under Schrodinger's principle of quantum super position. They exist in a binary state until you actually try and observe them.

Nah, it's the farms. Our polarity of ebil is so strong that whenever you involve the farms in something it just bends shit. Mostly principles. As soon as you wave the farms at things like free speech, precedent, principles, rules, and apparently even law, morality suddenly becomes relative. It's our special magic quality. Who knew mocking troons had such power.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Contributory infringement implies a kind of conspiracy between the infringing parties.

In the colloquial sense, perhaps, but that is not a requirement in law as far as I am aware.

Where the actual infringing party is the nexus of the infringement. You cannot prove Null "contributed" to copyright infringement without also proving there was infringement in the first place.

See, I actually agree here. But literally any and all caselaw on this I found points to opposite direction. It's stupid is what it is.

 

[Lubby Smith]

What the fuck does this even mean bro? Who's going to jump in and help? What are they going to do? You going to channel the ghost of Scalia and pull a favor?

I wish, but I meant set up a fundraiser.

 

[mindlessobserver]

See, I actually agree here. But literally any and all caselaw on this I found points to opposite direction. It's stupid is what it is.

So flip the table IMO. This is stupid. @Null should take this all the way. You lose nothing by appealing to the Supreme Court. You can gain everything. The worst that happens is they say no and you proceed to do what you were going to do anyway.

 

[NoReturn]

If we throw coins at Null's lawyer will that help?

 

[Useful_Mistake]

If we throw coins at Null's lawyer will that help?

Throw coins at Null. Buy merch when available, donate via mailorder or crypto when not

 

['Ole Dente]

Get a large YouTuber like @NotATurkey to make a video explaining why and how Kiwi Farms became the most lied about website on the Internet. Create actual outrage. Make normies angry.
Rate me optimistic for this but theres a possibility that could happen.

@NotATurkey could not, nor would not, ever jeopardize his channel and his financial success to defend us in any way, shape or form. Even though his success can largely be attributed to our thankless, tireless archival work on every weird freak he talks about, even though he’s content to rip off our efforts for his personal benefit while giving absolutely nothing back and we are at the very least owed some slight deference, it would not ever happen.

That would require bravery and integrity. I hope for the day people like him prove me wrong.

You know who DOES defend us? Who actively credits us over and over and over? Cecil Mcfly. That poor woman deserves some respect.

 

[Neetorino]

@NotATurkey could not, nor would not, ever jeopardize his channel and his financial success to defend us in any way, shape or form. Even though his success can largely be attributed to our thankless, tireless archival work on every weird freak he talks about, even though he’s content to rip off our efforts for his personal benefit while giving absolutely nothing back and we are at the very least owed some slight deference, it would not ever happen.

One can hope that he has maybe at least donated some crypto to the site as a pittance for helping him earn big YouTube Bux. Maybe he already has and we don't know it. But then, zoomers don't understand the stuff so probably not.

He could ask his mom to help him send a money order to the PO box!

 

['Ole Dente]

One can hope that he has maybe at least donated some crypto to the site as a pittance for helping him earn big YouTube Bux. Maybe he already has and we don't know it. But then, zoomers don't understand the stuff so probably not.

He could ask his mom to help him send a money order to the PO box!

Maybe he can send Null some good American cheese. I have a feeling he’s just jealous that we can dine in decadence on Velveeta and he’s stuck trying to eat his crackers with some fuckin’ goat excrement.

 

[World in Scarlet]

But then, zoomers don't understand the stuff so probably not.

He is indeed one of those internet people who think stealing someone else's work for your own content is legit and they should cry about it; there's no moral duty to attribute, much less give back for anything. He said that in one of his videos about the content theft drama a while back.
Dunno why they don't see the contradiction between claiming something is worthless and doesn't deserve recognition, and taking it and making money off of it.