Cultcow Russell Greer / Mr. Green / @ just_some_dude_named_russell29 / A Safer Nevada PAC - Swift-Obsessed Sex Pest, Convicted of E-Stalking, "Eggshell Skull Plaintiff" Pro Se Litigant, Homeless, aspiring brothel owner

[The Great Citracett]

He needs to keep the sacred name of Jimmy Carter, peanut farming house builder, out of his vile, stinking mouth.

Yeah Russ has hated Carter for quite a while now.

I guess supposedly he once said something to the effect that men who pay hookers are disgusting, and just like that, he's an enemy of Russ.

 

[TaserLaser21]

Yeah Russ has hated Carter for quite a while now.

I guess supposedly he once said something to the effect that men who pay hookers are disgusting, and just like that, he's an enemy of Russ.

Yeah he did Rekieta and Sriracha talked about it in one of the greer streams.

 

[repentance]

I sure hope Russ isn't using the money he should be using to pay his fine on attempts to DDoS us.

 

[Skullshatterer]

I've read all 30 pages of his ramblings and previous kiwi comments. He didn't write a legal document, he wrote a fantasy story about himself and sprinkled some legal terms in it. And wtf is his signature, it fucking sucks.

Even if he found whatever place Josh lives in and done everything correctly, which we all know it's sooo unlikely to happen, what can he even sue Josh for? Isn't the full book not hosted on wiki but in google drive? The only screenshots of his book here would be protected under fair use. And his songs are on youtube - when I first listened to it the kiwi that posted it directly from his youtube channel. Even if his songs were somehow "leaked" before he uploaded them on youtube, is there anyway you can even sue for that?

Plus all his "harassment evidences" don't have anything to do with his lawsuit copyright, but he still added them thinking it would help his case, somehow. And even if it were a lawsuit for that cause or defamation it wouldn't work either way. I like how his argument is that "hate/trolls site" shouldn't be protected under the law which they are currently protected because he thinks they shouldn't! He thinks they would make an exception for him and force Nool to delete the whole website or "at least" freeze it or make him delete the thread and everything that mentions him! It's pure, pure insanity u can't just make this up.

Russ should maybe consider paying off all his court fees that he accrued from his previous losses before taking on another lawsuit he'll inevitably lose. I'm glad he's doing this though, because when this gets thrown out his head will tighten even more than it has from his criminal conviction, and he will really increase in his craziness. Sit tight, folks because we're going to see an assault charge within a year.

Did he actually paid any of his other fines/court fees like the 1500$ he owned Skordas for the AG suit?

Also i've seen it's not likely Russell isn't allowed to mention Erika's name - just that he can't contact her - but it's still not a violation if he tries to slander her in a lawsuit to try - not successfully - and make him look good? Or there is nothing against that, or he just can't mention her name?

 

[I Love Beef]

don't @ me if im late

this is the complaint, the zip has exhibits too.
View attachment 1620249View attachment 1620250View attachment 1620251View attachment 1620252View attachment 1620253View attachment 1620254View attachment 1620255View attachment 1620256View attachment 1620257View attachment 1620258View attachment 1620259View attachment 1620260View attachment 1620261View attachment 1620262View attachment 1620263View attachment 1620264View attachment 1620265View attachment 1620266View attachment 1620267View attachment 1620268View attachment 1620269View attachment 1620270View attachment 1620271View attachment 1620272View attachment 1620273View attachment 1620274View attachment 1620275View attachment 1620276View attachment 1620277View attachment 1620278

TL;DR

Russell Greer is a manlet stalker who can't get laid and a lanky twigass soyboy faggot who deserves a place in prison for being a white knight male feminist pussy chasing simp who will eventually turn out to be a future rapist.

Sue me for this, Qreer. Go stick a dildo up your ass.

 

[The Dude]

Oh man, this is great! I don't know what I'd rather have more: this actually getting to court with Null and Skordas showing the judge all of Rat-mouth's social media posts to establish proof of Russhole's character, or for the judge to toss this bullshit suit out, sending it back to Russhole with an attached note that says "LOL It's not illegal for people to screen shot your publicly available social media posts that you made of your own volition. It's not illegal for people to say mean things about you or criticize you. The defendant and his site aren't hosting the material you claim violates your copyright. Go cry to Google, Shit-lips. XOXO, the Honorable Judge Judgiekins"

But I guess I'll just settle for it to be thrown out because it's baseless, poorly done, and asinine.

Russel's signature looks like a bent paperclip

Hey, watch your whore mouth about Rom. That's the only actual endearing thing about Shit-lips.

 

[Cranky Hermit]

Yeah Russ has hated Carter for quite a while now.

I guess supposedly he once said something to the effect that men who pay hookers are disgusting, and just like that, he's an enemy of Russ.

Carter is strongly anti prostitution. While I actually disagree with him for the most part (I think it probably should be legalized and regulated), he does bring up good points. With the legal system the way it is would regulation actually mitigate harm, the point that legal markets always create black markets, etc. It's the type of thing that gives you pause and makes you consider your position. I mean if you're a functional adult. Russ just heard "prostitution bad" and responded with weapons grade tard rage.

 

[Gorillad Cheese]

Greer's DMCA claim may actually have some merit to it. The biggest problem is personal jurisdiction over Null, I doubt that merely running a website is sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction in a given state.

 

[Yellow Yam Scam]

Greer's DMCA claim may actually have some merit to it. The biggest problem is personal jurisdiction over Null, I doubt that merely running a website is sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction in a given state.

Maybe if he'd properly filed the DMCA. Shooting off e-mails that say "I DECLARE COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT" doesn't get the job done.

 

[Gorillad Cheese]

Maybe if he'd properly filed the DMCA. Shooting off e-mails that say "I DECLARE COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT" doesn't get the job done.

I thought he did manage to file a proper claim after like 5 tries.

 

[Shaka Brah]

I thought he did manage to file a proper claim after like 5 tries.

Did he ever link to the right thing? Null took responsibility but he mentioned in this week's MATI episode that he wasn't sure anymore that the link ever worked, since it goes to the wrong page now and XenForo has direct post linking with numbers that will never change.

 

[The Littlest Shitlord]

I sure hope Russ isn't using the money he should be using to pay his fine on attempts to DDoS us.

He has no idea how to find a hacker unless a certain tubby psychopathic Brit tells him, and even then he screws it up somehow. Most likely, he insists on trying to hire a attractive female hacker, just like he wants an attractive female landlady and an attractive female therapist. But there aren't a lot of those, so he ends up getting scammed by some 'geek girl' e-thot and gets nothing.

 

[I can't imagine]

I've read all 30 pages of his ramblings and previous kiwi comments. He didn't write a legal document, he wrote a fantasy story about himself and sprinkled some legal terms in it. And wtf is his signature, it fucking sucks.

Even if he found whatever place Josh lives in and done everything correctly, which we all know it's sooo unlikely to happen, what can he even sue Josh for? Isn't the full book not hosted on wiki but in google drive? The only screenshots of his book here would be protected under fair use. And his songs are on youtube - when I first listened to it the kiwi that posted it directly from his youtube channel. Even if his songs were somehow "leaked" before he uploaded them on youtube, is there anyway you can even sue for that?

You still have copyright on something even if you make it freely available, so you can sue for it. Though in that situation it's usually because someone was stealing it and passing it off as their own, or using it in some profit-making enterprise like an advertisement. You hypothetically could sue for it regardless, but I doubt it's a registered copyright so he wouldn't get statutory damages, and actual damages would be effectively nil. So even in a dreamworld scenario where he did manage to get Null for the songs in court, I don't think he'd get anything more than a nominal amount.

 

[ShortBusDriver]

Maybe if he'd properly filed the DMCA. Shooting off e-mails that say "I DECLARE COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT" doesn't get the job done.

Take this off the dang internet

 

[Gorillad Cheese]

You hypothetically could sue for it regardless, but I doubt it's a registered copyright so he wouldn't get statutory damages, and actual damages would be effectively nil. So even in a dreamworld scenario where he did manage to get Null for the songs in court, I don't think he'd get anything more than a nominal amount.

Copyright law lets you recover between $750 and $30,000 per instance of infringement, regardless of actual damages. Furthermore, the judge can award up to $150,000 extra if the infringement was willful. See 17 U.S.C. § 504(c).

 

[Snusmumriken]

Greer v. Moon: Winner Gets Taylor 2: Electric Bogalloo: Trial of the Century

The Ace Attorney series has really gone off the tracks recently...

 

[Skullshatterer]

You still have copyright on something even if you make it freely available, so you can sue for it.

That I understand, but I believe this doesn't apply here in particular because downloading the song and uploading here is one thing, but putting a link to a video that Russ himself posted isn't grounds for copyright infrigiment.

The book isn't posted here, it's on someone's google drive. The content itself is not on Kiwi Farms.

I don't know much about legal matterd but I though this is obvious? Anyone tjat knows better feel free to correct me.

 

[Honka Honka Burning Love]

View attachment 1620329
I know the phrase "I can't believe Greer actually submitted this into a legal document" gets said a lot on this thread, but holy shit.
So much of this just comes across as insane.
Man, it's a good thing that all Judges know that crazy people exist, via experience, otherwise Russ would be legitimately dangerous.

I can not believe that we live in a timeline where "Fighting Words" was a phrase used in a legal brief.

 

[Hollywood Hitler]

I can not believe that we live in a timeline where "Fighting Words" was a phrase used in a legal brief.

Really? I was always under the impression that "Fighting Words" was used in legal cases before. If you go back a couple hundred years ago, I'm sure the term was used to justify duels. This could simply be a misinterpretation of history though.

 

[Gorillad Cheese]

Really? I was always under the impression that "Fighting Words" was used in legal cases before. If you go back a couple hundred years ago, I'm sure the term was used to justify duels. This could simply be a misinterpretation of history though.

"Fighting words" is indeed a legal term. It means words which by their very nature will lead to violence, and it's one of the few exceptions to the First Amendment (along with obscenity, incitement, defamation, etc.). It's more recent of a doctrine than you'd think; Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, for instance, was in the 1940s. However, laws against fighting words are almost never enforced anymore.