2018-03-08 - Victoria Jones: "This information has not been authorized to be released"

Status
Not open for further replies.
In addition to all that's been said here about the validity of DMCAing a dox, Shouldn't the cow be filing this DMCA themselves?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ConSluttant
This anti-doxing measure is about as legally viable as Chris' "trademark" on Sonichu.

"Ha-ha, the Kiwis will never be able to doxxxxxxx me now!!1!!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: TinBean and NIGGO KILLA
I wonder if the "Suffolk University Law Center" authorized this person to represent itself as affiliated with the University in what sounds suspiciously like a veiled legal threat. Wanna bet no?

Edit: all seems like made up bullshit, could Garrett be stupid enough to think he could pull this and make it work?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvin and Dorsia.Reservation
HomeAloneTwo said:
>Reporter's Company Name: Trans-advocacy of Massachusettes (Suffolk University Law Center)
:story:
Click to expand...

This moron needs a few remedial courses. Let me guess it's some troon admitted just for being a troon despite clearly being unqualified.

Actually, it's so shockingly bad and Russell Greer-tier that I wonder if it's even really from someone at a law school and wasn't just written by the troon itself.
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Informative
Reactions: Essay2414778, Daughter of Cernunnos, purepowerlevel and 3 others
Null said:
This information has not been authorized to be released and is a violation of the DMCA. That information is confidential and has not been authorized for release. The posting of personal address info without consent of the individual is felonious.
Click to expand...
The DMCA form is a legal form.

Why is someone from a law center committing what appears to be perjury here?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Francis York Morgan, purepowerlevel, Kiwi FBI Liason and 8 others
yawning sneasel said:
The DMCA form is a legal form.

Why is someone from a law center committing what appears to be perjury here?
Click to expand...

Also you can't "violate the DMCA" by infringing copyright. The provisions in question apply to the ISP, and there's no liability for "violating" the DMCA. It just means you're taking your chances in an actual copyright lawsuit if there ever is one, according to the law on vicarious liability. This idiot apparently doesn't know what the DMCA does, and also bizarrely believes copyright infringement is "felonious."

I'm at a loss that anyone even attending a law school could write something this flabbergastingly idiotic, but hey lol trannies.

Null said:
More importantly than filing a bullshit DMCA complaint is filing a bullshit DMCA complaint regarding someone else's alleged copyright. Unless they're your client and they hired you to do this they can't.
Click to expand...

You don't actually need to be a lawyer to file one of these on behalf of someone else, but you do need to be an authorized agent. I wouldn't be surprised if this actually does come from that entity, but I also wouldn't be if the troon wrote it and then got this entity to send it for whatever reason. I'm just surprised anyone would sign off on anything this incompetent.

If this was drafted by an actual law student they should be immediately flunked out.
 
  • Informative
  • DRINK!
  • Agree
Reactions: King Shitlord, Daughter of Cernunnos, multiverse and 14 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back