Liars & Lawyers

So I start the day with idle threats from both Souza and Badkolo. Always great to wake to some funny shit that makes me laugh.

Both claim they are going to get a lawyer involved; and have this blog removed. Both have absolutely no understanding of the law and how a policy really works.

So for their advice, and for anyone else that cares, here is the recap:

Badkolo said: "Now there is a seperate issue with this site and MJHD.net. I already contacted my lawyer and he will contact the owners of this site, mjhd.net and your Hosting and registrar companies. We will not allow you to blurb our names out whenever you feel like it and letting others post our personal info. A cease and decist will be sent out and suit for defamation will be started, I hope you have the resources to acquire a good lawyer."

Souza said: "May I remind you of the Content Policy of blogspot.com? Personal and confidential information: It's not ok to publish another person's personal and confidential information. For example, don't post someone else's credit card numbers, Social Security numbers, unlisted phone numbers, and driver's license numbers. Also, please keep in mind that in most cases, information that is already available elsewhere on the Internet or in public records is not considered to be private or confidential under our policies. We have contacted Blogspot as well as a lawyer and we advise you to immediately remove all the personal info from this blog. I don't think Monique and Anouska would appreciate it."

I said: "May I remind you so far nothing has broken the Blogspot Policy. And as you stated information that is already available elsewhere on the Internet is fine. Contact a lawyer, and Blogspot, I think you'll find as Blogspot is hosted in the US, the 1st Amendment will kick in. Funny how everyone jumps on the "I'm getting a lawyer" wagon. No laws have been broken so have fun with that. And as you have posted your first names on this very blog, that means it is now public information."

I also said: "I await your lawyer to contact Blogspot. As I stated in reply to Souza everything is covered by the 1st Amendment. It is merely opinion and that is covered. Enjoy. Now if you really want me to dig you are going the right way about it. There is enough public information on the Internet. So I suggest you scurry off back to your hole before I start digging. Thanks."

I then said: "Souza, Mo, & Badkolo - Just so you know I had a lawyer look at the whole of this blog, including code, and it is fine based on US law. Now if you read the Blogspot policy correctly it states it is governed by US law. So therefore as stated, the first amendment right to freedom of speech is mine and this blog has done nothing to break that freedom; or the Blogspot policy. So keep fucking dreaming, grow up, and shut the fuck up. Defamation of character? You bunch of hypocrites are fine ones to talk about that. LMAO. Thanks for starting my day off with a laugh."

So that is the recap complete. Everyone supposedly wasting money on a lawyer; everyone except me that is I know a few that assist me when needed.

So lets look into these claims a little further. Supposedly I may be breaking the terms and conditions of the Blogspot policy. No. I had a lawyer check, and as the Blogspot policy is governed by California law then the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution comes in to effect. And that amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Which gives me the right to exercise my freedom of speech. Which means that I can say anything I want. See you have to love the law - I get the right to voice an opinion.

So the rest of Souza and Badkolo's arguments become moot points and have no basis for any action whatsoever. But just to be safe I checked with both a lawyer and Google with regards to laws this blog breaks. Surprise surprise there are none. I never posted FULL names so that doesn't bother me. And the commenter that did post the FULL names was anonymous and therefore untraceable unless you ask Blogspot for the IP address which posted it, and then ask the corresponding ISP for further details. Good luck getting an international subpoena on that one.

You really think I didn't think about all this before. I posted Auntie Amy's details, who said a lawyer would contact me (by the way I'm still waiting on that one), I did my homework. As long as it exists on the Internet then it is basically public information, if I then post that public information I break no law. If you have a 'beef' with that information being out there you can politely ask me and I can, in theory, tell you where I got it and then you go after them.

As for what a person comments - sorry your shit out of luck, it is, as I stated, practically untouchable.

So Badkolo and Souza, print this post off and show it to your lawyers. Who in turn will charge you to tell you I am right. Think before you bitch at me. Actually think point blank, that way some of your theories would make more sense.

Peace.

Is MichaelJacksonHoaxDeath Illegal?

Auntie Amy may have been quick out of the gate in setting up MJHD; but was she too quick?

Back in the latter part of September this year, Michael's estate started proceedings, which were eventually filed September 29, 2009, in a Los Angeles court.

The basis of the filing, is that "Allegedly using Michael Jackson's name and likeness without permission, as well as cybersquatting and trademark infringement."

Also, the suit states, "It pertains to the foundation allegedly using Jackson's name. Apparently, they've been doing it to get fans' donations for what appears to be a Jackson-related cause."

The question, therefore, is this: Is MichaelJacksonHoaxDeath.com illegally taking donations because of the words Michael Jackson in the web address?

Surprisingly enough most Intellectual Property lawyers seem to think that all the websites which sprung up after the 'reported death' are illegal; whether they accept donations or not.

The drama, and in-house arguing, over at MJHD could soon be the least of their worries as the Michael Jackson Estate has reportedly said they are looking into this and more lawsuits will be filed so that unscrupulous people cannot defame, or misuse, Michael's name.

Peace.