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

[Not a bee]

"YOUR HONOUR IT'SH NOT FAIRR THEY HAV MONEY AND A LEGLE TEEM AND PUSSY AND MONEY AND I AM DISOOBLED AND AND AND IT'S NOT FAIR!!!"


"Oh, it's okay sweet little tator tot, we will give you 23 more extensions, a lifetime of Null's income, and a free nintendo switch~"


"We would like to object that your honour, that is not legal and-"


"INTO THE DUNGEON- IT IS SO ORDERED!"

Sorry for the random resizes

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

At what point can Null consider an interlocutory appeal?

Seems like a waste. I disagree with the judge's decision on Russ's neglect being "excusable", but it's not the kind of thing a higher court is going to look too closely on; especially given that it's going to be a moot point since the deadline will be well and truly passed by the time they even get a look at any such appeal. It may not be fair that Russ doesn't have to play by the rules and has shirked his responsibility for months but we are where we are. And, as the court notes, the fuckery over venues was the cause of the most delay. Left unsaid- without the venue game starting, this whole thing should be further along. If the goal is to get shit moving, more appeals is not the way to do it.

Rereading the 10th circuit opinion, they do seem to make a distinction between the book and the song, with the book being on the drive and the song being shared by users. Greer also makes this allegation in the complaint but makes no reference links in his DMCA and simply links the OP, which does not contain the song. The core thrust of his complaint is that third-party users on the forum were doing it. Not the forum or Null.

I think you're referencing one of his aborted/rejected DMCAs?

Last decade(!), he eventually referenced the link (now gone) in a takedown notice. To which Null replied (after discussing the google link) "Your second link is to a song which is unarguably your copyright. I will not be removing it because I believe in good faith it is fair use. In this specific instance, I will waive whatever safe harbor protections I have and personally burden liability for posting it."

I think Russ included this exchange in his many, many exhibits (no hitler included). In any case, it's fair to say that- however deficient his dmca MAY have been- it was accepted as valid at the time with a pretty declarative statement. Null then explained his fair use position (which I think may be more expansive than the courts are willing to go), challenged Russ to "try him" and bob's your uncle.

 

[Null]

The lessons learned are thus:

1. Do not talk to belligerent copyright abusers like they're real people.
2. Do not expect the court to follow its own rules.
3. Don't be the Kiwi Farms.

 

[Kosher Salt]

On the upside, having now filed something just to petulantly proclaim "I will too have my homework done on time", he'll manage to look extra bad and disrespectful of the couet if he misses the deadline... he's actually acknowledged that it exists for once.

Probably massively optimistic and it'll turn into more demanding extensions upon extensions, but it would be exciting to actually see some forward movement on the 5th.

Surprising as it has been to see the court rule not just once but twice to say that no, it's not reversing its Aug. 5 deadline extension, I still maintain that it's poised to give this whole thing a curb stomp on Aug. 6.

Aug 5 is only 5 sleeps away! this is like christmas!

I feel like the court has more or less the same perspective on this.

Should we hope he files something incredibly funny, or should we hope he blows past the deadline entirely? I'm not sure...

 

[Dr. Henry Armitage]

My

Surprising as it has been to see the court rule not just once but twice to say that no, it's not reversing its Aug. 5 deadline extension, I still maintain that it's poised to give this whole thing a curb stomp on Aug. 6.

I feel like the court has more or less the same perspective on this.

Should we hope he files something incredibly funny, or should we hope he blows past the deadline entirely? I'm not sure...

prediction is he either blows past the deadline and asks for another extension. Or he files at 11:59 pm and asks for another extension. His reason will be the same regardless. “Your honor the kiwi farms made me homeless and unemployed by not mooving on about my past behavior. Can I haz more tim pls?” I just pray your right and the judge curb stomps him instead of what he has been doing and helping rat face.

 

[Debbie Macomber]

If Russ misses this deadline, Hardin's objection should say "If he hasn't responded in 7 months, he isn't going to respond in another 7 months or 7 years!"

 

[Sexy Senior Citizen]

"If he hasn't responded in 7 months, he isn't going to respond in another 7 months or 7 years!"

"I sentence defendant Moon to seven months in prison for failing to respect the plaintiff's plights!"
"Wait, that's against-"
"Seventeen months!"
"Are you extending it for every time I-"
"Seventy months!"
*stress sigh*
"SEVENTY SEVEN MONTHS!!!!!!1!!"

 

[mindlessobserver]

I think Rusty will make the deadline and shit out something retarded. The court will act as his lawyer again and translate his nonsense into something coherent and then rule against the defense.

 

[TractorGirl]

"I sentence defendant Moon to seven months in prison for failing to respect the plaintiff's plights!"
"Wait, that's against-"
"Seventeen months!"
"Are you extending it for every time I-"
"Seventy months!"
*stress sigh*
"SEVENTY SEVEN MONTHS!!!!!!1!!"

100% most likely outcome of this case

 

[WelperHelper99]

"I sentence defendant Moon to seven months in prison for failing to respect the plaintiff's plights!"
"Wait, that's against-"
"Seventeen months!"
"Are you extending it for every time I-"
"Seventy months!"
*stress sigh*
"SEVENTY SEVEN MONTHS!!!!!!1!!"

I would say they can't because this is a civil case, but I mean... we're the Kiwi Farms, a website lol, the niggers of the internet. Its all fair game. Dungeon. 7000 years in a concrete cell for the crime of having a google drive link.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

I would say they can't because this is a civil case,

You can actually get jailed in civil cases.

 

[WelperHelper99]

You can actually get jailed in civil cases.

I would kill myself first if they tried sending me to jail for copyright.

 

[Harvey Danger]

The lessons learned are thus:

1. Do not talk to belligerent copyright abusers like they're real people.
2. Do not expect the court to follow its own rules.
3. Don't be the Kiwi Farms.

I can handle two of those, but #3 is a non-starter.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

I would kill myself first if they tried sending me to jail for copyright.

You can't get jailed civily for copyright violation, but you can for contempt/ignoring of court orders

 

[Pascal's Wagie]

Because to them, josh is a nigger.

Josh, to an extent similar to that of "Woman," is "the Nigger of the World."

 

[Your Starter for 10]

You can't get jailed civily for copyright violation, but you can for contempt/ignoring of court orders

You are thinking of normal court, not clown court.

 

[Dizzyuntildeath]

"I sentence defendant Moon to seven months in prison for failing to respect the plaintiff's plights!"
"Wait, that's against-"
"Seventeen months!"
"Are you extending it for every time I-"
"Seventy months!"
*stress sigh*
"SEVENTY SEVEN MONTHS!!!!!!1!!"

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

If there's a betting pool, I would go for: Russ responds inextricably late, blaming some kind of technical snafu or his living situation (the fault of kiwifarms!) but only by a day or two and suffers no immediate consequences of it. He spends much of the response complaining about Hardin trying to bury him in paperwork and how unfair it is that KF, which has ruined his life, gets to have a lawyer when he doesn't. If he addresses the actual things he's supposed to, it's at the end and only like 10% of whatever he shits out.

I would kill myself first if they tried sending me to jail for copyright.

yourself? seems like a waste

 

[Debbie Macomber]

If Null wants to sue Russell, why not sue him for libel and defamation in the book itself?

In it, Russell claims "kiwiorchards" hacked and destroyed all the computers in his office, bullied Bailey Barnard into suicide just because he followed her, and Molotov cocktailed his friend Ken, all of which are demonstrably false, libelous accusations.

Changing kiwifarms to kiwiorchards would be enough to make it a "parody" in a fiction book, but Why I sued Taylor Swift is presented as a 100% true story.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

If Null wants to sue Russell, why not sue him for libel and defamation in the book itself?

https://code.wvlegislature.gov/55-2-12/

http://leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0095/Sections/0095.11.html

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title78B/Chapter2/78B-2-S302.html?v=C78B-2-S302_2017050920170509

https://nevada.public.law/statutes/nrs_11.190

When was the book released?

https://www.amazon.com/Why-Sued-Taylor-Swift-Frivolous/dp/069297010X

You do the math.