The next kingsnake?

[HerpVenue]

Well someone said you were hot. And then you say you are gonna miss me. I can't leave a hot woman hanging. So I am back

Rakell
Let's approach this differently since you still want to dance around the subject.
Does the following quote appear in your forum?

Ritchie
Guest
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1
Posted: Today at 3:32 pm Post subject: Re: The
Drama Show

Mario wrote:
Come one, come all
Come to the greatest show on earth
Where members of all ages can intaganize and rip apart of the gecko community at large
Welcome to the BOI

Sir, is this the way you garner support in your defense? You lie to your members? No one on the BOI is antagonizing or ripping apart the gecko community.
There is nothing wrong with owning geckos. I have been an awner of a couple and have been part of the gecko community. What you are telling these people is a lie....unless of course you are the only member of aforementioned community.

Me position has been nothing but ethical. I am the one
being attacked

you chastised him in public and are now claiming he attacked you first.

If this is the attitude and way you want to display
yourself here, then I ask you not come around. Again,
I have been more then open and you have my email.

His response to you was proffesional. But since he disagrees with you...YOu are asking him to leave.

It is nice to knw that if you disagree with an
admin... Then you will be asked to leave. Thank you
hitler

Is the quote above the exact same thing that appears on your forum?

And if it is the same thing..........
why does Mario say this...
{note I will bold some of the stuff.}

It was just sent to you? I wonder who would have sent that? Only a few people would have had access to the moderators section to begin with. So where your proof? Or did you type this up OR DID YOU HACK MY SITE!!!
After all you claim this was sent to you. Theirs only a few people that would even have access and I know who’s been online and not. So again where’s your proof? Or is this all just typed up to cover something up?

It is right there in his forum. Why would he need to ask/assume/insinuate/imply that I typed/faked it? Does he not know what was in his very own forum? There is no way you can tell me he did not try to lie/deny.

And are you hereby telling the world that if we "question" an admin or say the word "Hitler" that we will be automatically banned? Because the post I just quoted was the first and only post I made on your forum...and then It was "moved" to cover your @ss and then I was banned.

Go back and look. You keep saying you want evidence of Everything. If I haven’t provided evidence what is evidence to you? I keep asking but I’m not getting answers.

Mario,
providing evidence does not mean you come here and say I hacked and sent you a trojan. That is not evidence. That is what is called an allegation. Evidence is a screen shot of the e-mail I supposedly sent you. Evidence is a screen shot of the logs that supposedly show me as hacking into your site. Evidence is showing that the quotes I posted above is different than what is posted on your forum. Mario, Do you know what the word evidence means? Because you have not shown any evidence.
And a little hint. Watch yourself. Do not accidentaly reply as Mario and be logged on as Cindy and vice versa.

 

[Rakell G]

Once again i will tell you. YES your post, in its exact forum is in the forum. Is there some other way i need to word this so i dont appear to be "dancing" around the subject?

Mario questioned it because you said "i just recieved this" and so he checked the logs, as did i, and there was no activity in that particular forum that day. YOU then said that it started its transit to your email the day before, so NO- when mario made his post he wasnt lying. THEN you clarified that it was sent on the 12th and he just didnt comment on it anymore. That does not make him a liar, read back through these 17 pages and see for yourself. THIS particual thread was prime candidate to be moved into a forum where regular members can't see it. He didn't do it to "cover his @ss" he did it to keep our forum tidy. You were the one whining because he made the first post in that particular thread, and sorry but unlike this forum we don't mind cleaning up our board and moving things that have offended people. We saw whineing because it was there, and even more whineing after it was moved from public view. What more do you want?

I know its there HE knows is there, so yes that "particular quote" is in the "hidden" part of our forum.

 

[WebSlave]

I have renamed the forum I set up specifically as a joke forum about kingsnake.com's bannings and message deletions. Now that the situation over there has progressed to the point where it is no longer funny, I feel the forum can be expanded to cover all topics related to issues with websites and forums (including this one) where people want to discuss such things.

That forum is now called Web Wars and Forum Foibles. Expect this thread to be moved there within the next 24 hours. This thread has been in the BOI far too long already and really is not appropriate for the material expected to be discussed in here.

 

[Pennebaker]

Thank you Webslave. I agree. Please move it!

Dana

 

[HerpVenue]

Once again i will tell you. YES "

So what I posted is exactly what appears and I did not "just type it up".
Good glad to know.

I know its there HE knows is there, so yes that "particular quote" is in the "hidden" part of our forum.

I am glad you verified this for me. Thank You.

Now to the heart of the matter.
Yes he has a right to question me about how I obtained that post.
But why "suggest" that I just typed it up?

Fact you keep insisting I said this or that when I have only may suggestions.

I bolded the important parts for you.

It was just sent to you? I wonder who would have sent that? Only a few people would have had access to the Or did you type this up OR DID YOU HACK MY SITE!!! After all you claim this was sent to you. Theirs only a few people that would even have access and I know who’s been online and not. So again where’s your proof? Or is this all just typed up to cover something up?

I guess suggesting that I typed/faked it....it is definately not the same as stating I typed/faked it.

You guys are definatley not back peddling. I am just suggesting, assuming and implying it.

 

[HerpVenue]

To Mario

This was his last strike and he has striked out by posting me and my site of here

Mario,
Am I to believe that you do not condone the posting of "business" from one forum to another?
Am I to assume that you think the business that happens on one forum should stay there and not be broadcast everywhere else??

I am asking this for a reason Mario.
Be careful what you answer
I have "BIG" evidence

Also
1. did you ever contact your lawyer because someone else used the name Mario?
2. You were a member of a certain site. The admin decided to send mass e-mails to his members. You considered this spam. Did you ever contact a lawyer because you recieved spam emails?
3. Did you accuse anyone else that you had an "arguement" with that they sent you a virus? Or am I the only one?
4. Did you ever get banned from a certain Gecko site and then go running to another to complain and b!tch about it?
5. Did you ever try to shut down your competition because he sent his members spam mail and one of the members happened to be you?

Mario,
you do not condone the trolling of another board.

acebeck: lmao kwikspell already registered at GE again
dafly_23: sweet 1
dafly_23: one sec brb
acebeck: kk
dafly_23: back
acebeck: yay
dafly_23: i think that pissed cassian off moving her topic
acebeck: cassian loved the troll, lol
dafly_23: lol
dafly_23: did she
dafly_23: whay what she say
acebeck: i didn't tell her it was me though
acebeck: but she thought it was hilarious
dafly_23: oh lol
dafly_23: i wouldnt 2
dafly_23: she may have a big mouth2
acebeck: well i'm friends with her, but i don't know if she'd tell anyway
dafly_23: i think shes kinda upset with me
acebeck: yeah, she doesn't like you. i doin't know why
dafly_23: i kinda thought she was
dafly_23: shes weired, one min shes fine then the next shes pissed off about something 3
acebeck: yeah. i pissed her off the other day over something stupid
dafly_23: it dont take much
dafly_23: with her
dafly_23: just be carful with her, shes very touchy 3
dafly_23: she has chemical imballeneces 3
acebeck: i know
dafly_23: ya she seems to like to tell people
acebeck: lol

Mario does not condone the trolling of the competitions board.
But
1. He says sweet when someone who got banned for trolling reregisters.
2. He tells a troller not to reveal his identity to someone for he might get caught and thus end his trolling career of the competitions board
3. He asks webslave to delete his stuff he says it is because it was an inside joke and did not pertain to the topic. But we know the fact of the matter is he wanted it deleted because, Not only does it show his ACTIVE support for trolling. It also shows his "friend" that he likes to talk about her behind her back.


Here is Mario telling a known troller that he does not have a problem with him.
dafly_23: hey, so did u really think i had a problem with you on ge?
acebeck: yeah i did at one point =)
dafly_23: lol, intresting
dafly_23: nope didnt

 

[Mario]

BTW. IT would be nice to include the WHOLE context.
Another thing, I stated my comments after 3 not to be removed as it would be misconstrued. I love the lack of morals in here. I also have a conversation after this as well with Cassian about this. It was after a serious of events have took place since this covo with Steve (acebeck).


But now to keep my evidence in tack I will show snippets of my covno That I promised her I would not tell. Why because theirs an obvious attempt to ruin my friendship with this person and to twist things around on me. I’m sure she will understand, as things are out in the open anyways and I believe values our friendship as much as I do.

adarkeclipse: you talk to waxwormfan alot?
dafly_23: ya
dafly_23: daily
dafly_23: why what he do?
adarkeclipse: he is playin all of you
dafly_23: oh?
adarkeclipse: you, LLH, the forum, everyone
dafly_23: why whats he doing?
dafly_23: i had a funny feeling
adarkeclipse: you remember the famous troll from GE?
dafly_23: ya
adarkeclipse: he is the troll
-----------
adarkeclipse: and now he's posting **** in GE worrying everyone saying they are gonna get hacked
dafly_23: oh?
adarkeclipse: and he talks to LLH on ims and helps him ban people who LLH thinks is the troll
dafly_23: oh
dafly_23: I know he talks to llh
adarkeclipse: and it is pissing me off
adarkeclipse: he told me everything the other night or last week or something
dafly_23: why did he say you were a troll?
adarkeclipse: to throw LLH off his scent and to try to appear neutral
dafly_23: hmm, thats not cool
adarkeclipse: it wouldn't bother me so much, but instead of letting it be, he is going out of his way to scare people into thinking the troll is gonna get them
dafly_23: I take it hes done the same to me and kell?
adarkeclipse: going out of his way to show it couldn't be him
adarkeclipse: and i registered as an alias on GE so i could sit and watch, then he was just gonna let LLH ban my alias cause he thought i was the troublemaker
dafly_23: actually his actions have been worrying me and kell
------------
adarkeclipse: why are you and kell worried?
adarkeclipse: first post. his ip is banned cause it is the same as the troll's. hmm
dafly_23: well becouse I know he was trolling, he went on and then told us
dafly_23: well his first posts that we ordignally seen where kinda funny
dafly_23: but then he got worse and worse
adarkeclipse: ifff he just kept quiet i wouldn't care, but posting **** like this in there is too much
dafly_23: something funny turned to be a major probelm real quick
adarkeclipse: he got on some kind of crazy power trip
dafly_23: and then he makes little comments
dafly_23: theat seem like hes possibly rying to make it look like us maybe
dafly_23: I seen a post on their that almost sounds like hes pointing the finger at us
adarkeclipse: yeah. that is what he tried to do with me
dafly_23: he does seem on a power trip
dafly_23: hes defently somone I wouldnt want to piss off too
-----------
adarkeclipse: he is playin everyone
------------
adarkeclipse: and he tells everyone everything, then says don't say anything, then goes and says **** behind everyone's back about them
dafly_23: hmm
dafly_23: why what he say about me or kell or our sites?
dafly_23: or what hes up to
adarkeclipse: yeah. he thought it was LLH and he said that LLH did everything but straight out admit he was cricket, so he thought LLH was cricket till i told him
-------------
adarkeclipse: and he tells everyone everything, then says don't say anything, then goes and says **** behind everyone's back about them
dafly_23: hmm
dafly_23: why what he say about me or kell or our sites?
dafly_23: or what hes up to
adarkeclipse: yeah. he thought it was LLH and he said that LLH did everything but straight out admit he was cricket, so he thought LLH was cricket till i told him
dafly_23: ya
dafly_23: that what he told us too
adarkeclipse: i know he HATES LLH and he couldn't wait to see the downfall of GE. he hates him with a passion, but plays his little cronie when LLH is around. when he isn't, it is war on him
dafly_23: ya from what he tells us too
adarkeclipse: doesn't give him the right to completely demolish someone's website.
dafly_23: nope
adarkeclipse: he said he was thinking about leaving GE anway, and he did all this **** so he could go out with a bang
dafly_23: me and kell been trying to play fair
dafly_23: actually llh sent me a appology
adarkeclipse: there is no playing fair if he does **** like that
dafly_23: and said he shouldnt have been so greedy
dafly_23: nope
adarkeclipse: imagine how pissed you would be if someone intentionally ****ed your site to hell just cause they didn't like you
dafly_23: but i do know llh doesnt like to play fair either
dafly_23: oh i know
adarkeclipse: it still gives no right
dafly_23: stves went way overboard
dafly_23: me and ell both said something
dafly_23: about toning it down
------------
adarkeclipse: he goes, can you keep a secret? i'm the troll. i said, does anyone else know? and he said, no, i haven't told anyone, and i want to keep it that way.
dafly_23: hmm
adarkeclipse: he played me just like everyone else
dafly_23: i knew that he ended up telling u
adarkeclipse: he has this secret thing for me
dafly_23: which even pissed me and kell off more
dafly_23: cause like i said it was funny at first
dafly_23: and then he justwent on a rampage
-------------
dafly_23: me and kell both worked hard on our reputations
adarkeclipse: he tells me everything though
dafly_23: we are pretty much lost on what to do
dafly_23: we also dont want to get him pissed at us
adarkeclipse: don't take his **** anymore. i am really surprised at you guys for not doing anything. i thought you and kell would do right in a situation like this. and who gives a **** if steve is pissed at you?
dafly_23: the problem is, hes smart, and knows how to do the same to us, and ruin our reputation
adarkeclipse: he can't ruin your reputation
dafly_23: like i said, hes very cunning with his words
-------------
dafly_23: you know, another thing is, when peopl were out to harm my repuation, cody did nothing
adarkeclipse: all he does is whine to me about how his girlfriend won't have sex with him and flirt his ass off with me
-------------
dafly_23: we did see that when steve did the troll attacks, he screwed up and left his ip
adarkeclipse: what makes you think steve won't turn on you sometime?
------------
adarkeclipse: you need to get him before he does
dafly_23: yup
adarkeclipse: the reason he got GE so bad is cause he got in real close with LLH. now he is tryin to get in real close with you
dafly_23: ya
dafly_23: so what makes u think hes playing us?
dafly_23: did he say something to u about it?
adarkeclipse: one of the first posts on your new forum was from the troll, boasting about how you guys ran to this forum with your hightech anti troll **** and you still can't get rid of him. everything he has done so far blatantly shows that all he cares about is himself. he doesn't give a **** about anyone else and doesn't care what happens to anyone else
-----------
adarkeclipse: steve was talking to me the other night showing me how i can scramble my IP address so they wouldn't be able to track me if i wanted to post some trollish stuff
dafly_23: and cody really pissed me off on ge
dafly_23: with all the crap that has happened
dafly_23: and called me compition
dafly_23: and such
adarkeclipse: he totally ripped off your forum layout
dafly_23: so I figured if he wants to say im compition, im going to give him compition
------------
dafly_23: ya, actually the reason i asked if u were mad at me before was steve said that u didnt like me or something
dafly_23: i figured maybe you were mad at me again or something
adarkeclipse: i wasn't mad at you. i never said that to steve. i don't know what he is tryin to do
dafly_23: hmm
-------------
dafly_23: i think you should tell kell everything too
-------------
adarkeclipse: you can tell her everything, and tell her not to say anything, and tell her i would be a good mod.
adarkeclipse: in fact you can just show her this whole conversation if you want
dafly_23: oh beleive me, her mouth is zipped
adarkeclipse: ok cool

Ok now you pieces of garbage of made me resort to breaking a promise. You people only want to hang someone you keep overlooking things. I just hope Cassian forgives me for posting this. I’m sorry Cassian, I hope you understand.

But my motives were not what you people make them out to be. Personally, if you think Steve is your friend, have fun.

Oh and by the way, as my evidence is for crap goes and screen shots are only evidence around here.
Enjoy.

 

[E2MacPets]

Well considering I am still good friends with Katie Lynn (Cassian/adarkeclipse) and this new "dialogue" conflicts with previous "dialogues" Mario has posted as to the timeline of events of my supposed vicious "trolling" as well as my motives, I will plainly deny it.

One convesation shows me talking to Mario about how I told Katie I was the troll, and another shows Katie telling Mario I'm "playing" him.


It's interesting to note that among the moderators at Geckonetwork, Katie (Cassian) is one. In fact she has been one along with me from the very start?

Why, because she was in on everything with me and mario from the start as well.


And now Mario shows that he learned I was "playing" him from Katie. Despite Katie knowing full well when I told her I registered "Troll" that I also let Mario and Rakell in on it.

I have also repeatedly mentioned here that Mario ran with the concept. And yet instead of defending himself it's just more of the same "look what i can pretend steve did" BS.

Lets face it, now that I have cut my ties from Mario he is trying to use me as a scapegoat and deny involvement or accept blame.


I guess it's pretty convenient for him.

 

[E2MacPets]

Let me correct a statement that came out wrong.

Katie was involved in this close circle of friends that were basically sick of GE and its greedy admin who did nothing to help us keep things professional or at the very least somewhat sane. That was Mario, Rakell, Me, and a few others as well.


Katie "trolled" once as "Cricket" basically to tell someone off. I can't really fault her for wanting to do that, and I just wanted to establish that to my knowledge that is the extent of her "trolling"


"Troll," as I have said before was a public name. In fact, it would be hard to prove anything by showing old GE posts, because GE was flawed so that anyone could post as Guest, but insert any title they wanted so long as it wasn't a registered name.



Oh, another thing I find interesting.. Katie is away with her boyfriend for this entire weekend. It's pretty convenient that Mario picks now to post more "dialogues" of hers at a time when she can't reply to verify the statements.



Go ahead Mario, sue me. That's a lot of hearsay you're posting to defend your case. But then, you don't have a case, do you?

 

[HerpVenue]

Mario you missed answering my questions so let me put it back up

Mario,
Am I to believe that you do not condone the posting of "business" from one forum to another?
Am I to assume that you think the business that happens on one forum should stay there and not be broadcast everywhere else??

I am asking this for a reason Mario.
Be careful what you answer
I have "BIG" evidence

Also
1. did you ever contact your lawyer because someone else used the name Mario?
2. You were a member of a certain site. The admin decided to send mass e-mails to his members. You considered this spam. Did you ever contact a lawyer because you recieved spam emails?
3. Did you accuse anyone else that you had an "arguement" with that they sent you a virus? Or am I the only one?
4. Did you ever get banned from a certain Gecko site and then go running to another to complain and b!tch about it?
5. Did you ever try to shut down your competition because he sent his members spam mail and one of the members happened to be you?

Now to your evidence.
A couple days ago you did not know it was from me. You just knew it was from my ISP. But isn't that my name on the e-mail?
Are we stupid enough to believe that you are to stupid to read who the e-mail comes from?
Also..the poo poo picture. How come it goes way past the window?


At about 1:00pm until 3:45 ish I was at work. I even have a post here from work that can verify this. Why would I send that out to you from work? Why would I put my name on it? Also.. our computers at work are monitored. Also sending viruses from a federal computer is a big no no. and all of a sudden I am gonna risk my career on your stup!d @ss and put my name on it?

NICE TRY I would like to see the properties and the message source of that e-mail.

The gall of some people.
You log on here as Cindy Lex because no one else but Rakell is dumb enough to defend your lies. Then you insinuate that I sent you a virus. Then you insinuate that I hacked your computer. Then you insinuate that what I posted in here is just typed/faked to cover my @ss. Then you come here and fake your one and only evidence.

The only thing you accomplished in this thread is to prove to the world that the admin of www.geckonetwork.com is a complete liar and a loser who can't even put coherent thoughts together much less spell. And the only thing he is good at is faking his evidence.

YOU ARE THE WEAKEST LINK. GOOD BYE !!

 

[HerpVenue]

Mario,

If you are gonna fake an e-mail from me.
At least spell like I do. Do not spell like you do.
sheesh... and he's an admin?

 

[Bobby Douglass]

Also..the poo poo picture. How come it goes way past the window?

That's a great question. Mario, please try to explain without insulting anyone's intelligence.

 

[Mario]

Would you believe me if I said my dog did it?

 

[hanoverherps]

Boy It Stinks In Here!!

Mario,
From an outside point of view.... I don't know you, you don't know me, and for the record, I know very few of the people here in/on this forum. You're poo-poo picture you say was made from your dog?? Are you sure you didn't do it?? I can say that every time I read one of your posts, they sure do smell like your picture!!
You keep speaking of trolls, I must say you make yourself look like one more than anyone else. Step up to the plate here and admit when you have made a mistake, as it will get you much further than what you seem to be doing now.
It seems to me that if I were in a sticky situation as you are, If I were right and I believed I were right, I would say my final words and move on. Put an end to all this clutter and quit bad mouthing this site and the people that participate in it. Threads like this with all the bickering are the ones that do no good for anyone or anything.
You and Ritchie should finish this thing privately as it seems you really have a beef with him.

These are just my opinions on this whole thing, take them as you will....

Good night,
Bob

 

[Glenn Bartley]

So, I have been taking a look here and there throughout this thread, and just wanted to point something out about copyright infringement - since one of the participants in this thread accused another of such. I am in the law enforcement field. Among other things my agency sometimes deals with copyright infringement. I am also a college student at the graduate level. I have to be very careful not to violate a copyright when I write up my term papers, which are numerous.

As far as I can see it is a very gray area as to whether or not there was a copyright infringement. Credit was given as to the source of the so called copyrighted material. The name of the author was noted, the site where it was found was noted, a link was supplied to it and so on. Yes, on the other hand, the written material that was copied was quite extensive. Yet I wonder if this could be considered copyright infringement. I wonder if the material was actually ever copyrighted?

Now if the material was not copyrighted, or if there was no infringement of copyright, then it is quite possible that the accused party has redress in the form of a counter suit (should law suits be initiated) claiming slander by the original accuser.

It certainly does get interesting when people on the Internet start to threaten others with lawsuits and the like, doesn't it.

Hopefully I have not echoed someone else's sentiments; I just could not bear to read through an entire 18 pages of this stuff.

Best regards,
Glenn

 

[Glenn Bartley]

So tonight when I signed on to the Internet, I received an email in which the person's identity was apparently, in my opinion, hidden like a snake in the grass. Since I am an avid snake hunter, that was not too well hidden as far as I can see. The following is the email I received, I would attribute it to the person who wrote it, but I am not certain of his/her identity (I can only guess) except for an email address that anyone could make up:
****************************************************
"Subj: And your motives are?
Date: 2/16/03 12:49:08 PM Mountain Standard Time
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Sent from the Internet (Details)


Glenn Bartley,
For someone that seems well versed in copyright law, why is the basic obviously not known?

Copyright exists from the moment the work is created.

So I ask you, what are the motives of your statment?"
****************************************************
That was it as I received it (but without the lines of asterisks). My reply follows, but please note that my reply follows here in this forum where all can see it:

Sir or Ma'am,
My motives - you question my motives apparently expecting a reply! I do not even know to whom I am writing because you failed to place you signature at the end of your email questioning my motives.

As for copyright law: if you do not claim an item as copyrighted in some form then, as I understand it, by law you will have a hard time claiming copyright. In other words you would have to have let someone know beforehand in some fashion that your work was copyrighted. After all, is it not possible to write a work for which you do not intend to hold a copyright? Cannot you allow a work to become public domain? Sure you can. Correspondence between parties likely has no expectation of privacy, if I understand correctly, since you gave the correspondence to another by sending it to them and can have no expectation that such will not be posted for all to see. It is meant for them and I am pretty sure they can do with it as they please without fear of copyright reprisals. That is unless, of course, you noted beforehand that it was copyright material or if it is a work that would qualify for copyright protections. A letter admonishing someone for something may not have copyright protections; whereas a letter explaining how you just discovered a cheap and efficient way to get 300 miles to the gallon of gasoline in a regular car would possibly receive copyright protection. If someone attributes the work to you, and says hey look at what so and so wrote, there is also no likely violation of copyright, as I see, because after all they gave you credit. So long as they are not attempting to gain from use of your material, let’s say by stealing your invention (for example) then I do not think this would necessarily make a copyright infringement.

Now as to my being well versed in copyright law - did I say that? I certainly did not claim such nor mean to imply such. I thought I stated my knowledge of the subject pretty plainly in that it is limited to my knowledge from school requirements and to some knowledge through my agency which in part enforces such laws. I speak and write plainly and not by implication; so if you inferred that I am well versed in copyright law that was an inference that you made and not an implication that I made. Such form of writing by implication may be the writing style with which you are familiar, and I am only guessing this because you seem to have inferred that I am some sort of self proclaimed expert. I can assure you, however, that such a writing style is not my style. I try to say what I mean quite plainly. I may sometimes fail at this, but as I see it, it is usually the reader who misinterprets me – this most likely due to expectations based upon the writing style of the majority of others (other than me).

Now your act of questioning my motives is, in my opinion, rather absurd. Why would you suppose that I had some sort of motive other than to join in on a forum which had an interesting subject? Do you imagine for a moment that there is some sort of conspiracy with dark motives? If that is the case, I wonder do you imagine my motives were aimed at you? Please don't see yourself or this issue as being of such importance in my eyes as requiring me to aim barbs at you. It just is not so. I do not even know you, nor do I know the other people involved in this forum. (I am familiar with many of them only by my having previously written in these forums before and, by having read some their posts before. I may know one or two personally, but it would be a bit of a surprise to me, because no one I know has ever told me hey that was me writing to you on the forums). Please do not over inflate my words with your meanings - as I have explained - I pretty much try to say it as I mean it. If you reread my original response to this thread, with an air of objectivity, you may realize that my original response after all was not aimed at one side or the other. Instead it showed that I wondered if maybe there was no violation or if maybe there was a violation. If I recall correctly, I said it was a gray issue - meaning that I was uncertain as to whether or not a copyright violation could in fact be claimed. You for some reason seem, in my opinion, to take issue with that by questioning my motives, and then seemingly imply that I am some sort of self-proclaimed copyright expert who does not see the obvious. You say "...why is the basic obviously not known...". Of what basics do you speak? Do you mean the ins and outs of copyright law, or just what you called basic, that: "Copyright exists from the moment the work is created." Is a letter, or an email, or a forum post to someone else a "work" as far as copyright law is concerned? If so is that under federal copyright law? If so please point out to me, the "basic" statute that says such. I would be interested to read it, and hopefully my rather straightforward type of mind would be able to decipher the legalese of the lawmakers. Being in federal law enforcement for over 23 years I would not think that such knowledge is basic unless, of course, you are a copyright lawyer. Oh, did I say: "copyright lawyer"? Can you imagine that a thing as “basic” as copyright law would require attorneys who specialize in that particular type of law.

Do you know why lawyers make so much money arguing the law? Take a guess - really go ahead and guess. If you guessed one of the reasons is that the law is so hard to interpret then you guessed correctly. I will give a quick example of just how confusing copyright law can be even for an attorney. I, not too long ago, had registered for a college class in a graduate studies program. The professor in that class was an attorney who claimed to have one specialization being in copyright law. She arranged to have copied large parts of journal articles and books which she distributed in class. She made the copies not through the school, but through a private office copy company. She passed the cost onto the students. In class she told us about this and I asked her about whether or not the material was copyrighted, and if she had obtained permission of the copyright holders to make the copies. To this she replied that she had every right under the authority of the school, and under exceptions made for colleges, to copy it and to charge us for the copies. I contacted the school. The school determine otherwise than had the professor. Despite it being past the deadline for any refund if a class was dropped, I received a full refund. She was reprimanded and possibly censured. I am very careful not to copyright someone's material as I understand copyright law, and am also very careful not to jeopardize my career by such actions as those of said professor. I am also quite careful to mark, in some form, all of my own written works or photographic works, as copyrighted, all rights reserved by me, etc. Despite this, and regardless of what you may have implied, I certainly never said or meant for you to infer that I was an expert on copyright. I pointed out that I have some familiarity with it based upon my job and my current degree program among other things. I based my answer upon that familiarity. I am the first to admit that I could be wrong, just as I imagine you could be. I told you what I based my answer upon. What is it upon which you base your answer? As I said I am interested to read it. I am always willing to learn even at the expense of my possibly being wrong. TICSMYD - talk is cheap, show me your data!

But enough of this, I do not even know why I favor you with a civil answer when you do not show the courtesy of signing your email to me, and when you affront me by questioning my motives! My motive, sir or ma’am, was no more than educated discussion on a forum which interested me. If you wish to address me further on this issue please do it, so to speak, in the light of day, where everyone involved can see it, on the forum where the issue was originally addressed. This was not a personal thing to begin with, and you have, in my opinion, no call to make it personal by sending me email messages off forum.

Best regards,
Glenn Bartley

 

[Glenn Bartley]

I would like to clarify something. I may actually have met the person who started this thread at a meeting of my local herp society. This was only made apparent to me a moment ago, when I found out that aid person is also a member of the LIHS. I did not this when I wrote my previous replies; and in fact I am still not certain that I do know this person - but I am sure he is a member of the same herp society as me. So, I am guessing I probably know him at least to say hello to him at a meeting, if he has been a member for any considerable amount of time and has attended past meetings. I still do not know what face goes with the name, I really do not have a clue.

I wanted to make this clear, lest someone again question my motives for my previous posts based upon my possibly knowing, by association at a society meeting, the person who initiated this thread. My original reply to this thread was placed, as I stated in my last post, because I was interested in the subject matter. Nothing more or less.

best regards,
Glenn

 

[Ken Harbart]

Well Glenn, that would be from Mario.

The knee jerk reaction of questioning your motives merely keeps in line with his trend of pseudoreasoning.

To clarify though, a given piece (including email) is protected from the moment of creation.

However, 17 USC 107 does provide some guidelines on determining what constitutes fair use. Reproducing an email or forum post for purposes of commentary/critique would constitute fair use, IMO.

 

[Glenn Bartley]

Ken,

Thanks for the info, especially on the statute. Now I am on stronger footing than before, although my belief as to what has copyright protections may yet be wrong. I am not trying to start an argument, but just wanted to point out that according to how I interpret this statute, it does not necessarily cover something like a personal email that was in essence a simple letter. What it covers is listed below:

(a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Works of authorship include the following categories:
(1) literary works;
(2) musical works, including any accompanying words;
(3) dramatic works, including any accompanying music;
(4) pantomimes and choreographic works;
(5) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works;
(6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works;
(7) sound recordings; and
(8) architectural works.


The applicable coverage for an email or a letter would seem to be number 1, literary works. The following is from the definitions section, and describes literary works:

"Literary works" are works, other than audiovisual works, expressed in words, numbers, or other verbal or numerical symbols or indicia, regardless of the nature of the material objects, such as books, periodicals, manuscripts, phonorecords, film, tapes, disks, or cards, in which they are embodied.

Now one would have to determine if an email or a letter was in fact a “work” as fitting this definition of literary works. I did not see a definition of ‘works’ in the statute. That is how lawyers remain self perpetuating. Lawyers probably wrote the statute, and they probably did so, so that only lawyers would be able to interpret it, but only after much debate in a courtroom where they make lots of money! It would seem that the whole intent of this part of the statute is dependent upon the definition of “works”.

Anyhow, someone could spend a long time figuring out all of the above. I was involved in a case once where the operative word in a statute became 'knowingly'. It seemed apparent to everyone, for many years, that this meant the person had to be 'knowingly transporting' the item that the statute was written about. In other words to be guilty you had to know you had the stuff, and you would not be found guilty if you had it planted on you. So what did his lawyer do? He said to the court, how do we know this did not mean that the subject had to be knowingly transporting the item when knowingly referred not to knowledge of having the item but knowing that to transport it was a violation of law. Do you see the difference. If not then forget about becoming a lawyer because the court sure did and it was a big one. This case went on for a few years, I believe all the way to the US Court of Appeals. He lost, the government won, but it went on and on over the definition of a word. In fact, congressmen and senators have sometimes been questioned by the courts, years after a statute has been enacted, as to what their meaning of such words were back at the time they wrote the statutes.


In reference to my post immediately prior to this one: By the way, I stand corrected, the person who started this thread, Steve, is not yet a member of my herp society but plans to join; so I probably have never met him that I know of.

Best regards,
Glenn

 

[Mario]

You people keep playing in your pretend courtroom.
Actually Glenn Bartley, My name should be included with my email address.
It was obviously in concern to your post.
I had a question that I took via email. Because you sure do lead believe to believe you are well versed in copyright law. Not to mention you go one step future to insinuate that the accused has the right to file a counter suit. Your post leaves me to believe there was clear motive and intent to future aggravate the problem/problems at hand. And this is “supposedly” after not reading everything in its entirety.

I for one am not a layer. Nor am I judge, or a cop that was sworn to protect.
I do find it interesting though for people without your degree of knowledge in the area of copyright law or your training in law, to know that “Copyright exists from the moment the work is created”. Yet these seem people are not as versed in the grey areas of copyright law as yourself.

As with the majority of the lack of intellect that has been displayed in this thread amongst other issues. I find it intriguing that instead of simply replying to a concern I had with your post, you have chosen to some on the public forum and insult my intelligence.

I would also like to point out, the forum has when through some major restoration just recently as due to error in proper advanced notification of my web host provider which as caused loss of data. So we are still working to correct the forum to correct state. Steve was well aware of the problems at hand.

I would also like to point out. Steve was well aware of the rules he was breaking. This sentence “But please remember. Anything discussed in here is for us only, and not to be shared with non-mod’s.” is in fact past of the rules and or policies in which he is in clear violation of as well. Steve was quite aware of what he has done and why he was banned. It has always been in that section as well to be a reminder and reference of some of the things that is expected.

Your attitude displayed to me was not appreciated.

As far as your latest post that seemed to come out of the blue. That was very interesting. Seemed to go out of your way to make this apparent. That’s makes it sound to me as a cover up of some kind.

So again, this document was not fair use. Steve was fully aware that he was not to share the post’s or discussions in that section.

It’s plain and simple. He violated the rules, he was banned.

Frankly I feel I was more then fair with Steve. He had violated the rules a number of times before he was even banned.

As far as Bob Fishers post goes. I’m sorry, but I am far from a troll. Cody new the situation we were at with one an other, but he also knew I would moderate his forum. I believe Steve was quite jealous to tell you the truth. Why you might add? Well being that I was “Cody’s competition” as I was told, I became a moderator for a number of forums when Steve has lost his position. And an other interesting note, Rakell was also able to keep her position.
As far as say my final words and move on goes. This might be easy for you to do. But it’s also you not being repeatedly accused of many wrong doings. I have worked to hard to earn my name and reputation then the let a disgruntled ex mod that was dismissed for violating the rules and my copyrights get away with tarnishing. It was the way I treated my members to earn the respect and trust from. And it is the way I will defend my members from moderators that deem it appropriate to abuse them for concerns they may have with me.
As for bad mouthing this site goes. I have the right to form my own opinions. It is the members here that have mad mouthed me. It is the moderators here that have bad mouthed me. It is that administration that shows any lack of concern for ones rights or freedoms. It is the lack of respect and courtesy anyone with the small exception of maybe a few people that have showed me. That has changed the way I feel about this place.
What the people do here are wrong. It is unethical and without morals. I have been nothing but accused and harassed. I have even had a harassing phone call once this whole thing started. I have gotten a worm sent to me. I have had my site hacked into. And my reputation falsely destroyed. I have even had a other person that was probably falsy done buy this board also get a phone call during all this as well.
Even my privacy are in violation here. And when I come on and make a post to say I got one coming, and get attacked on my English skill’s right off the bat, I am not one happy camper. I seen the brutality that goes on in this place. But it was the lack of respect and courtesy people here show that has changed my feelings and thoughts of this place.
As for my beef, it is more then just with him.
Heck, even when I do, as Glenn has completely pointed out, it is impossibly for anything to be handled privately to but this matter to rest. I simply emailed him my concern on his post. He chose not to show the same respect.

Now again back to Glenn
I just got done writing the above and hit refresh. And quickly read through your post. This is the type of post’s I would rather see here. This is a post I can respect someone for saying. One with some intelligence. Their has been a lack of post’s like this on this thread.
This is probably the first one if any that has shown any intelligence by someone that has came in here.

But anyways with the exception of this last one I am probably done here. I am trying not to say anymore cause the way the whole thing went. Even though their has been a slight change here as far as tone.