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

[DHugo]

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

Nah, this is some extra spicy shit all these archive sites are doing, more specifically this (with fix that might work for other kiwis):

https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/118haqg/archiveph_webpage_archive_as_site_is/jwhqbsh/

Thanks for the direct links btw

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

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

"Kiwi Farms—a website" - fuck, that has to be an intentional way to start the article ...

Furthermore the intentional quoting makes Greer seem insane, this ars bitch might be one of us ... or just another peterb

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.

If you are using cloudflare DNS or another DNS that blocks EDNS, you can't see archive links; change your DNS servers to something else (there are a number of public ones, but the one you have may be using cloudflare somewhere).

The archive dude has said it is needed to make sure that you NEVER access an archive server in your country, because he wants ALL takedown requests to be international (which forces them to follow certain procedures).

 

[NoReturn]

The famously silent Clarence Thomas speaks up to ask why there is a pubic hair on his copy of the filing.

Ah yes, Clarice Thomas.

 

[Napoleon III]

I'm not sure SCOTUS will be reading that, tbh. That said, its interesting that Law360 points out that 10th Circuit ruled the way they did because of bad press against Null. That's exactly how Null read their decision too.

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 have heard one of the levers that one could use to influence the Supreme court is the press and by controlling the narrative around it. Specifically if you can get a lot of the media to come to a conclusion on something it means it is extremely likely the Supreme Court will rule that way.

I'm not a lawyer so take that with a grain of salt. I'm also not saying it is 100% true just conveying things that I have heard.

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.

This makes me ask the question of how bad is the ruling in terms of Precedent? One thing that has changed in recent years is that there are actually powerful people who want looser copyright enforcement. Moon's filing that asked Greer to bring in Google if he actually would like to prosecute Copyright infringement cuts to the heart of the Issue.

That being said I suspect these forces won't be too useful for a case like this. Especially because this site is too TAWKSIC to support openly even on something super important. I don't know though and for anything like this to happen cert has to be granted.

I would like to be proven wrong but I think the actions of places like the EFF have shown that this is true sadly. I would be glad to be proven wrong though.

 

[Mr.F]

"Greer's troubles with Kiwi Farms started when he sued pop star Taylor Swift in 2016. That's when Kiwi Farms users "began 'a relentless harassment campaign,'" Greer alleged,"

Pfwahahahah

 

[Windy Moors]

For any potential lurkers looking into this story. Greer's thread was created in 2017. It's another provable fact that Greer lies about and is parroted by the media, without fact checking.

 

[Betonhaus]

For any potential lurkers looking into this story. Greer's thread was created in 2017. It's another provable fact that Greer lies about and is parroted by the media, without fact checking.

I'm going to guess that the media is going to let him explain

 

[teriyakiburns]

I'm going to guess that the media is going to let him explain

I hope they brought their umbrellas.

 

[AnOminous]

I have heard one of the levers that one could use to influence the Supreme court is the press and by controlling the narrative around it. Specifically if you can get a lot of the media to come to a conclusion on something it means it is extremely likely the Supreme Court will rule that way.

Not this Court. Especially since the balance went to 6-3 they have not hesitated to do things that cause journotards to yowl in anguish.

 

[SargonF00t]

I genuinely wonder what Clarence Thomas thinks of Kiwi Farms.

He wants to know why the owner was calling him "Clarice"

 

[GaryGray]

They reversed Roe V. Wade which shows that enough of the current sitting justices do not care about press.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Russ' address still doesn't work.

 

[ScooterL]

Having provided a false address for service, it's entirely possible Russell doesn't even know a writ has been filed with the Supreme Court.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Having provided a false address for service, it's entirely possible Russell doesn't even know a writ has been filed with the Supreme Court.

While Mr. Hardin (technically Renee Goss did it on his behalf) indeed did not email him (falsely stating that there is "No available phone or email address" (a lie, because his email appears on every single one of his filings, including a specific motion to the clerk (docket entry nr. 5) informing him of his email for purposes of receiving documents via it) ), the clerk does successfully email Russ documents on docket, which would include the letter from the Supreme Court, informing the district court about Null's appeal. For purposes of archiving, in his documents (including docket 5) he uses this email:
russmark@gmail.com

In only two documents (7, 8) did he use alternative email:
russellgreer30business@gmail.com

 

[obsdj]

Having provided a false address for service, it's entirely possible Russell doesn't even know a writ has been filed with the Supreme Court.

I mean, he reads here, doesn't he? Sure, he could pretend not to know but there's no way he doesn't know.

 

[Sexy Senior Citizen]

I mean, he reads here, doesn't he? Sure, he could pretend not to know but there's no way he doesn't know.

Do not underestimate his retardation. When we were forced onto the dark web, and then after when we were domain hopping, he genuinely thought we were taken down for good.

 

[The Dude]

I mean, he reads here, doesn't he? Sure, he could pretend not to know but there's no way he doesn't know.

I've never been convinced that Russhole actually checks the Farms all that frequently. Especially his thread since we don't cater to his ego and his thread is full of inconvenient and hurtful truths. He obviously has come here in the past to gather screenshots of our "harassment" to put in his ridiculous lolsuits, but I don't think his fragile ego and narcissism would allow him to come to the site often.

 

[mindlessobserver]

I mean, he reads here, doesn't he? Sure, he could pretend not to know but there's no way he doesn't know.

He's in no position to pretend not to know since the fact he can't legally know is entirely his fault, and has been pointed out to him repeatedly.

 

[he who has thus come/gone]

falsely stating that there is "No available phone or email address" (a lie, because his email appears on every single one of his filings, including a specific motion to the clerk (docket entry nr. 5)

What, you think a journalist writing about a legal case should actually look at any of the filings in the case? Are you crazy—they wouldn't be a journalist if they did something like that.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

What, you think a journalist writing about a legal case should actually look at any of the filings in the case? Are you crazy—they wouldn't be a journalist if they did something like that.

Negroid, show me where my comment talked about Journos. I clearly and specifically mentioned Mr. Hardin and the person paid to serve all parties with the petition