Skitzocow David Anthony Stebbins / Acerthorn / stebbinsd / fayettevillesdavid - Litigious autist, obese livestreamer, elder abuser, violent schizo, ladyboy importer, hot dog enjoyer, wereturkey.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

How much will David sue the farms for?

  • $0/no suit

    Votes: 118 5.3%
  • Hundreds

    Votes: 17 0.8%
  • Thousands

    Votes: 45 2.0%
  • Millions

    Votes: 184 8.2%
  • Billions

    Votes: 136 6.1%
  • Trillions

    Votes: 483 21.6%
  • A steamy night with Null in a lace negligee

    Votes: 1,255 56.1%

  • Total voters
    2,238
Look I'm glad Stabby got crushed yet again by the Justice system but I don't like that the furry's and the Owl Fucker are crowing like they had something to do with it.

Yes yes, I'm happy your not going to get raped by a were-turkey and I will relish his impotent malding as much as the next Farmer but come on it was Jew Tube that did this not you guys.
 
Look I'm glad Stabby got crushed yet again by the Justice system but I don't like that the furry's and the Owl Fucker are crowing like they had something to do with it.
Without Cree's livestream there wouldn't be a lawsuit, and therefore there wouldn't be a victory. One cannot make gold out of shit, afterall. So, cheer up, and celebrate instead of glooming.
Part 1:

Part 2:
I went through the effort of cutting down this 3 and a half hour livestream into only 30 minutes. If you wanted to watch it, but don't like the side tangents, then enjoy:
 
ZellZander's motion to temporarily suspend payments DENIED because he didn't meet and confer.

Also contains one of the most:optimistic: paragraphs I've seen in a court order recently.

kek.webp

Know they didn't need to, but I would've enjoyed them addressing Stabby's arguments on this bullshit though.

really wished.webp
 

Attachments

This is basically the court saying "quite being so childish and deal with this minor shit yourselves".

Yah...good luck with that one judge. You don't know Mr Stabby, his autism won't allow any deviation from the contract without massive amounts of squealing.

It's nice to know that Sid hasn't heard from Stabby in over 3 years, that case must be deader then fly on David's face. I wish we'd get an update on the docs, as far as I can see nothing has happened at all expect the expected retarded filings from Stabby looking for Sid's dox.
 
  • Like
Reactions: koos koets
Also contains one of the most:optimistic: paragraphs I've seen in a court order recently.
I get what the court is trying to do here, and in a normal case with normal participants it would probably work. However Stabby has made it abundantly clear in his filings he's not a normal participant he's the most belligerent assburger I've seen in a while and he's not going to compromise or give up anything willingly.
Honestly I think the worst part of this is them bringing up the possibility of using a loan to pay if off early because you know Stabby is going to start demanding that anytime there's an issue with a payment going forward.
 
to me this reads like the court being strict yet giving everything jarrod needs to to.. this almost between the line reads to me like the court wanting to help a bit with the advice they give to me .. no idea why, just reads like that to me. I would not be suprised because if jarrod would get a stay on the payments then david would appeal it and there it might not stick if its not done to the strict rules of the court
 
Stebbins v. Alphabet docket #76
StebbinvAlphabet76.webp

Acerthorn responds to the dismissal of his case and the Court's finding that Creetosis' criticism was fair use. He complains that if it's so obvious he has no case why did the Court take so long to come to that conclusion?

Reminder, there's a hearing that might be viewable to the public tomorrow, July the 15th, at 10:30 PST.
But the whole point of this line of discussion is the court did tell him to upload them to the location the clerk provided so they could be reviewed and not disappear during the case.

I missed seeing this in the earlier post of this document, or maybe the court just added it:
View attachment 7615085
Conference on the 15th for this motion. Should be open to the public, but as usual don't record the court, unless you're Stabby who rules don't apply to.

Here it is on the Judge's calendar.
View attachment 7615104
Should be the "Public" hearing link here, I think.
 
On the Baz case, Stabby has uploaded his files and provided the alleged infringement information in timestamps.
2025-07-14_09-36.webp
2025-07-14_09-36_1.webp
 

Attachments

Stebbins v. Alphabet docket #76
StebbinvAlphabet76.webp

Acerthorn responds to the dismissal of his case and the Court's finding that Creetosis' criticism was fair use. He complains that if it's so obvious he has no case why did the Court take so long to come to that conclusion?
David, I wish the court responded much faster to your bullshit. If we could just speed up the process and banish you to a remote island to have you fend for yourself now instead of in 30 years, that would be great
 
It’s too bad Baz isn’t responding to this. He could ask the court to take judicial notice of the latest ruling in the Creetosis case and maybe get some help from there.

It’s all so slimy. Pay a fiverr artist to make some quick tunes, then use them as a cudgel to file endless copyright lawsuits because people are discussing your videos.

Since they’re being used exclusively as background music in the original video I wonder if that doesn’t count against them when trying to sue for copyright. The song itself has been embedded in another medium so you don’t have a clean copy of the actual song, it’s been talked over by Stebbins. This shouldn’t trigger any kind of violation but copyright law is a murky mess.

Hopefully the courts can clarify at some point whether background music in a video that’s primarily full of talking count for copyright claims. It would be nice to see this avenue get shut down.
 
This shouldn’t trigger any kind of violation but copyright law is a murky mess.
To take it a step further. Let's say I license a song for use in my video. Then someone does a commentary video on my video allegedly in violation of copyright. Can that third party who I licensed the song from now go after the alleged infringer as well?

What a mess.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: TurboNAS
Back