Re: Guy, anti-copyright hacker (Re: Advertising Creepiness)

[Information Security <guy@panix.com>]

   >   From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
   >
   >   Information Security <guy@panix.com> writes:
   >   > Declan writes:
   >   > >   Willfully redistributing copyrighted material in violation of fair
   >   > >   use principles is, depending on the value, also a federal
   >   > >   crime. Redistributing a $1 article to thousands of people would be
   >   > >   a felony. (Note I don't endorse this law, but it's useful to know
   >   > >   what the law is.)
   >   > 
   >   > I guess that qualifies as a request for more color.
   >   > 
   >   > In the local Panix Usenet groups, I've reposted quite a few whole articles,
   >   > often from the IP list.
   >   > 
   >   > Finally, a couple people made a stink, and officially complained to Panix.
   >   > 
   >   > [snip panix owner backing down and not interfering with Guy's posts of 
   >   >  whole supposedly copyrighted material]
   >
   >   Nice one Guy!
   >
   >   The zen approach, it reminds me of a tactic to do with USENET cancel
   >   forgeries used by a recentish poster to this list who you made much
   >   a-do about being a terminator of.

Ugh, um, ...but he was a nutter, unlike me. ;-)

The other half of the reason I chose the IP list is because
of my dislike of its owner, nutter Michele Moore.

She is trying to profit from a book claiming various government agencies
knew full well the OK Murrah building was going to be blown up, and
purposely did nothing. Trying to profit from other's misery.

(At least my nutter anti-ECHELON "Cryptography Manifesto" is free.)

She also terminated my list subscription when I made a single post
asking for people not to make homophobic posts. She was 100% unforgiving
on this, even though I promised not to make such a post again. She
described the homophobic posts as "Christian". (This was around the time
Pat Robertson made comments about Florida's Disney being hit by God with
hurricanes because of its "gay days" promotion.)

It's also a very high-volume list, and I recently asked her about
posting about car antennas...

#   From believer@telepath.com Fri Oct 30 06:47:36 1998
#   To: Information Security <guy@panix.com>
#   Subject: Re: IP: New Radio Antennas May Cool Car Interior, Defrost Car Windows
#   
#   Dear Guy:
#   
#   Regarding:
#   >What does this have to do with IP's charter?
#   >---guy
#   
#   Once again, as you are a non-subscriber receiving posts by forwarding
#   (which is fine), it's none of your business.  Enjoy the posts that you
#   receive, feel free to forward them wherever you wish, but please do not
#   contact me again for any reason.

Bitch.

   >   > Then, the Digital Copyright Massive Federal Interference Act...
   >   > 
   >   > >   Fair Use vs. Intellectual Property: The U.S. Congress
   >   > >   passed the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, a bill designed to
   >   > >   distinguish between fair use and protected intellectual property
   >   > >   in cyberspace.
   >   > >   
   >   > >        <http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:s.01146:>
   >   > 
   >   > I chose the IP list as the next-level test case...
   >
   >   I'm curious ... how have you faired since the millenium copyright act
   >   with panix?  Any results?  Or is this still on-going?

I've been snipping down articles a bit since then.

As far as I know, no one has complained about my posts
relative to the new law.
---guy