On 29 Sep 1996 19:01:02 GMT, Schoedel wrote:
>[email protected] (Jamie McCarthy) blubbers:
>>Schoedel wrote:
>>So Mr. McVay is not entitled to voice his opinion, namely that you are not
>>especially sincere? He’s not entitled to collect together your own writings
>>and say what he likes about them?
>Nope.
>>I could have sworn you once even expressly stated:
>ONCE. As copyright owner, I happen to be allowed to change my mind as to whom I give
>permission to use my materials. Consider NIZKOR’s permission REVOKED. Permanently.
>Do I have the right to use Nizkor’s pages (all of which bear a copyright label) to my
>own devices??? Why not?
Do not bother playing the game. You have made your case.
What you are missing here is that they would have stolen your material whether
or not you ever gave permission and would have continued to do so despite your
objections.
They are common criminals. Realize what you are dealing with.
More than that your constant protests are a source of amusement if not sexual
arousal for them. You are giving them satisfaction by doing so. Your best bet
is to take up hacking and see if you can cease the harm being deliberately done
to you in that manner.
It will be much more productive in addition to being educational.
=From [email protected] Mon Sep 30 11:57:48 PDT 1996
Article: 70260 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!
news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!l
aslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.
sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!
news.mathworks.com!uunet!
in1.uu.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,
alt.censorship,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Re Schoedel states his case
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 15:13:31 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 39
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 119.tampa-2.fl.dial-access.att.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: revisionism:70260 alt.politics.white-power:45266 alt.censorship:103279 comp.org.eff.talk:70409====
Read the information holohuggers fear
http://www.kaiwan.com/~ihrgreg (page doesn’t exist)
http://www.codoh.com/
http://www.webcom.com/~zundel (page doesn’t exist)
From [email protected] Thu Oct 3 08:36:58 PDT 1996
Article: 71021 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!nntp.portal.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!
news.mathworks.com!hunter.premier.net!netnews.worldnet.att.net!newsadm
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.censorship,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Re Schoedel states his case
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 23:19:20 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 66
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 249.tampa-1.fl.dial-access.att.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:71021 alt.politics.white-power:45590 alt.censorship:103681 comp.org.eff.talk:70542
On Mon, 30 Sep 1996 19:51:08 -0300, Keith Morrison wrote:
>Matt Giwer wrote:
>> More than that your constant protests are a source of amusement if not sexual
>> arousal for them. You are giving them satisfaction by doing so. Your best bet
>> is to take up hacking and see if you can cease the harm being deliberately done
>> to you in that manner.
>Oh oh. Matt went and did it again.
>Section 430 of the Criminal Code of Canada states:
>(1.1) Every one who commits mischief who willfully
>(a) destroy or alters data;
In this case Nizkor has stipulated that it is the property of Schroedel
>(b) renders data meaningless, useless or ineffective;
>(c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use of data; or
Nizkor has stipulated that its use is unlawful.
>(d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful
>use
> of data or denies access to data to an person who is entitled to
>access thereto.
And Nizkor has stipulated it is not entitled to access to the data.
As you can see this law is inapplicable.
>(5) Everyone who commits mischief in relation to data
>(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a
>term not
> exceeding ten years; or
>(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
>That would apply to anyone caught hacking Nizkor. However, in
>Mattie-poo’s case
>the applicable section is 22 of the Code, “Person Counselling Offense”.
>By telling
>someone they should commit an illegal act Matt has himself committed a
>crime
>under Canadian law. As the offense, if it occurred, is directed against
>a Canadian
>citizen and a computer residing in Canada, the law applies.
If the hacker only deals with the material that Nizkor has stipulated is his and
under his control then, as you can see, there would be no crime.
And I suggest that some day you learn the difference between, I advise you, and,
you would be better advised. There is a whole world of difference.
=====
Read the information holohuggers fear
http://www.kaiwan.com/~ihrgreg
http://www.codoh.com/
http://www.webcom.com/~zundel
