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

[DSP's Tax Lawyer]

"Trolling Web Forum"? That is literally one thing this place isn't. The "no fucking with the cows" rule prevents that.

Journalists are retarded, don't do any research, and are generally the worst scum on earth. How does this surprise you?

 

[Mr. Manchester]

They're unlikely to be swayed by the press. But the press noticing it means it's at least interesting enough for them to write about, so maybe it's interesting enough for the court to take up.

Can't hurt it's chances I'd imagine. The court seems to like overturning blatantly retarded decisions lately.

Edit: Wait just a fucking minute. From the BNN article, "In 2013, Joshua Moon launched Kiwi Farms, quickly gaining notoriety for its contentious forums that have engaged in doxxing and harassment, particularly targeting minorities and LGBTQ individuals."

Stupid fucking journoscum. The site particularly targets retards and narcissists. Hate them a little more every day.

 

[mindlessobserver]

@Null, check this out. Your odds of appeal just went up 3%. The entire Supreme Court, the third branch of government is sitting here being berated in a State of the Union and are looking on seated in a mixture shock and horror while all the Democrats around them stand up and clap.



Also, this guys clerks are responsible for writing the brief on your case.

 

[AnOminous]

/r/supremecourt generally has much higher quality legal discussions than the rest of reddit, but it does have a bit of a conservative/originalist bias

So does the current Supreme Court so they're more likely to reflect the actual reality of what SCOTUS might decide on a given issue than delusional, retarded reddit morons approaching it from a reddit frame of mind.

 

[Imagine Reading This LOL]

Representatives for Greer and Moon did not return requests for comment.

@Null did these faggots even contact you to ask for comment? If so, when is it being posted to the legal notices subforum?

 

[Null]

@Null did these faggots even contact you to ask for comment?

Yes

 

[ye's Official KF Burner]

They're unlikely to be swayed by the press. But the press noticing it means it's at least interesting enough for them to write about, so maybe it's interesting enough for the court to take up.

I think since it's a law based publication that took notice and read it the same way, that's a bit more intriguing than run of the mill journoscum.

 

[mindlessobserver]

I think since it's a law based publication that took notice and read it the same way, that's a bit more intriguing than run of the mill journoscum.

I mean, legal scholars who follow copyright cases visibly had their jaws drop about the 10th circuits decision.

A quick google search of "Greer v. Moon" also shows that eyes are on this now. Justia has the 10th circuit summary right at the top. Stanford's Fair Use Center is also watching, as is the Trade Publication "IP Update", which have all started appearing in my searches of the case since the request for Cert was filed. Which means at the very least the Peanut Gallery is starting to get butts into the seats. Whether or not the curtain will rise is another matter though, as the Supreme Court routinely rejects meritorious and interesting cases.

 

[ye's Official KF Burner]

I mean, legal scholars who follow copyright cases visibly had their jaws drop about the 10th circuits decision.

A quick google search of "Greer v. Moon" also shows that eyes are on this now. Justia has the 10th circuit summary right at the top. Stanford's Fair Use Center is also watching, as is the Trade Publication "IP Update", which have all started appearing in my searches of the case since the request for Cert was filed. Which means at the very least the Peanut Gallery is starting to get butts into the seats. Whether or not the curtain will rise is another matter though, as the Supreme Court routinely rejects meritorious and interesting cases.

To be fair if they twiddle their thumbs with this one, the precedent it sets is dangerous. The people can say what they want about Kiwifarms but the ramifications of letting this go are significant.

 

[mindlessobserver]

To be fair if they twiddle their thumbs with this one, the precedent it sets is dangerous. The people can say what they want about Kiwifarms but the ramifications of letting this go are significant.

They could do it assuming someone "better" gets fucked over, and hope that someone is Xitter, Reddit or whatever. Then they can revisit the issue. In reality though, Xitter and Reddit will just delete links and ban the discussion upon receipt of a DMCA and not bother with going to the mat. So vain hope with that one. We shall see. One thing that goes in the forums is favor is that the Supreme Court has not taken up a major "copyright in the digital age" case in a long time now. The last big on was MGM v. Grokster, which was back in 2005. Everything since then has been largely procedural.

The big anchor on us though is Greer. His file is fucking retarded. Even despite the efforts of the 10th circuit to act as his lawyer. The Supreme Court may not want the case, simply because it would mean Greer is the respondent. A part of them has to realize, if Cert is Granted, fucking Greer would have to retain counsel and do the leg work necessary to BE the respondent. The Chief Justice has never had to send the Marshall's out to browbeat a respondent into doing the absolute minimum required to show up, but in Greer's case this is a possibility. I feel his reputation is more a detriment to the granting of Cert then our own.

 

[inception_state]

BNN breaking news (also known as the People's Network) (not paywalled):

This reads like a ChatGPT generated summary. There is just something about the word choice and structure that feels very artificial.

 

[Betonhaus]

This reads like a ChatGPT generated summary. There is just something about the word choice and structure that feels very artificial.

Probably because it omit's any investigation into the details? i wonder how many of these law journalists actually came to this website to get a better perspective of what's going on, much less found this thread that picks apart the case in fine detail?

 

[frari]

Trolling Web Forum Takes Copyright Feud To High Court​

An online forum notorious for supporting harassment is going to the U.S. Supreme Court with an argument that at least one court is wrong about what constitutes a notice of infringement, in efforts to shake off a copyright lawsuit from a self-published writer.

In a high court petition that was docketed Monday, longtime blogger and Kiwi Farms founder Joshua Moon is taking issue with the finding that "notice equals knowledge" after he lost a ruling last October at the Tenth Circuit.

The ruling forced Moon to continue fighting a suit from Russell Greer, a writer who got on Moon's radar with his self-published 175-page book titled "Why I Sued Taylor Swift: and How I Became Falsely Known as Frivolous, Litigious and Crazy."

Greer's book had "attracted critical attention from some of the users at Kiwi Farms," Moon's petition said.

Soon users of the site were posting both copies of Greer's book and links to some of his songs, with the Tenth Circuit saying "a Kiwi Farms user under the name 'Russtard' encouraged its dissemination on the site 'so no one else accidentally gives Russell [Greer] money.'"

Moon's petition also made no bones about his own actions. At one point, he said "the overall nature of his website" is focused "on hyperbolic mockery and criticism."

Moon would later rebuff Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown requests from Greer by posting the notices to his website, alongside Greer's address, and said he "mocked Greer's attempt to silence his critics by way of the takedown notice." Greer then sued.

The Tenth Circuit sided with Greer, pointing to allegations from Greer that Moon and his website's users "have been implicated in three suicides, a school shooting in New Mexico, and a clash with New Zealand authorities over information about terrorist attacks at mosques in Christchurch" and concluded that Moon "encouraged, and materially contributed" to the instances of copyright infringement alleged by Greer.

"In sum, the appellate court held that 'notice equals knowledge,'" said Moon's petition, which urged the high court to take up the dispute to clarify whether the receipt of a notice did, indeed, equal that.

He argued it would be bad news for the independent spirit of the internet if the justices allowed this ruling from the appeals court to hold up.

"The Tenth Circuit's decision thus expands the monopolistic power of both copyright holders and large [internet service providers] more capable of shouldering the resultingly higher compliance costs — it does so at the expense of fair use and free speech," he said.

"This court should clarify ... that both posting takedown notices and literary criticism are protected free speech," he said.

Representatives for Greer and Moon did not return requests for comment.

Moon is represented by Matthew Hardin of Hardin Law PLLC and Greg Skordas of Skordas & Caston LLC.

Counsel information for Greer was not available Tuesday. At the Tenth Circuit, he was represented by Andrew Grimm and Gregory William Keenan of the Digital Justice Foundation.

The case Moon et al. v. Greer, case number 23-958, in the Supreme Court of the United States.

--Additional reporting by Kelly Lienhard. Editing by Andrew Cohen.

FFS, how can you write so much and miss the main point.

i.e. the "copyrighted" material was not hosted on the farms, it was hosted on a google drive account, only links were shared on the farms.

 

[Trigger Me Timbers]

I like the way that they’ve all had to mention that apparently we “target” the LGBTQ, and then immediately go into Russell’s case. They’ve all essentially implied that Greer is indeed a gay homo faggot. Kinda based.

God, I wish for just one journalist who could maybe put 2 and 2 together and realize that anyone who gets “targeted” normally make themselves targets by spewing tons of retarded shit online.

“Hurrr durrr fuck all the chud kiwi haters. Here’s pics of me in a diaper and lmao I’m coming after your kids lmao stay mad!!”

(KF): Here is a post of this alphabet person saying shit

: “WHY ARE YOU TARGETING MEEEEEEE”

 

[TyrasGuard]

At least this time they didn't write "Alt-right neo-nazi forum" right in the title. Gotta include the allaged killcount though I guess.

 

[Free the Pedos]

@Null, check this out. Your odds of appeal just went up 3%. The entire Supreme Court, the third branch of government is sitting here being berated in a State of the Union and are looking on seated in a mixture shock and horror while all the Democrats around them stand up and clap.

View attachment 5795267

Also, this guys clerks are responsible for writing the brief on your case.

View attachment 5795269

What did Joepedo say about SCOTUS?

 

[Kumquat]

What did Joepedo say about SCOTUS?

Basically he went on a rant about the evil extremist ultra-super-duper-MAGA right-wing fascist supreme court and how they made abortion a state's issue took away a woman's sacred and unalienable right to murder her baby at-will at any stage of pregnancy.

 

[DHugo]

https://archive.ph/QP5oj

https://archive.ph/10DrA

Could someone post non-archive links?

For some reason the archive sites blocks my connection. I read up on it and it seems to be connected to public DNS resolvers, but I don't use them, I flushed the dns, nothing works.

 

[Al from Dadeville]

The famously silent Clarence Thomas speaks up to ask why there is a pubic hair on his copy of the filing.
“Sir, that’s Defendant Greer’s signature.”

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Justia has the 10th circuit summary right at the top. Stanford's Fair Use Center is also watching

This all was written like days after the 10th issued its ruling. It's not new.

For some reason the archive sites blocks my connection.

When archive.ph isn't working, change the url to archive.is. Helps most of the time.

Could someone post non-archive links?

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/kiwi-farms-owner-seeks-high-court-review-of-copyright-case

https://bnnbreaking.com/world/us/kiwi-farms-founder-appeals-to-supreme-court-over-copyright-infringement-cites-free-speech-concerns