Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: Re: Hello 60 min readers: read about atty Kendrick Moxon From: mgarde@mars.superlink.net (Maureen Garde) Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 22:39:57 GMT -------- I went to Seton Hall Law School in Newark, N.J. I graduated in either 1977 (when I finished classes) or in 1978 (when the degree was conferred). The confusion arises because I graduated mid-year, I think. Helena Kempner Kobrin also went to Seton Hall Law School, graduating in 1978. She was in my law school class. We were friends. We were on law review together. She attended my wedding, and I have the photo to prove it. :-) But most of you know that already. (another netizen) Hey, what's HKK like, anyway? :-) I only know what Helena _was_ like. Hardworking, dedicated parent, smart. I'm sure her personality hasn't changed any. That's why it grieves me so much to see how her ability and dedication have been harnessed by an organization so dedicated to inflicting harm.
Maureen's background knowledge is embarrassing for the Scientologists' official line that their attacks on the internet are a legitimate campaign against "copyright terrorists".
========
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Copyright criminal -- Grady Ward
From: mgarde@mars.superlink.net (Maureen Garde)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 11:54:26 GMT
--------
Dear Justin:
We haven't met. I haven't been around on a.r.s. for a while. When I do
keep track of what scientology is doing, one of the things that really irks
me is scientologists accusing people of being "copyright criminals." Here
is a communication I sent to Helena Kobrin, scientology attorney, with whom
I went to law school. It reflects my views on the practice of
scientologists accusing people of being "copyright criminals." Perhaps you
can pass it back to your superiors so you can put it in Helena's DA file
for possible future use.
See ya.
Maureen
Begin email message entitled "Helena Kobrin, electrostatic copy criminal?"
On 22 Mar 1996 10:16:59 -0800, in alt.religion.scientology Andrew Milne wrote:
Helena Kobrin, one of the lawyers who filed today's
lawsuit, explained further: "It is important that freedom of
speech is preserved. Cyber-anarchists like Ward will not
admit their guilt but hide behind a smoke screen of free
speech. The fact remains, he violated the law. As long as
Ward limited himself to critical comments, no matter how
vulgar, venomous or unfounded they were, we took no action.
It was only his defiance of copyright law that left us with
no choice but to sue him."
Helena, do you actually say these things, or does Milne just write them and
put your name on them?
I must say that the temptation to "out" you personally on this issue is
almost more than I can bear when this kind of self-righteous crap about
"copyright criminals" and "cyberanarchists" is attributed to you. What
were you when you when we were on Law Revew, a "electrostatic copier
anarchist"? Or just a stupid booby like the rest of us?
Milne, and others acting on behalf of the COS, continually post messages on
a.r.s. that purport to document the "crimes" of various scientology
critics, with respect to alleged acts going back many years. Do the
same rules apply to you? Is it "fair game" to point out to the world that
you infringed copyrights over and over again when you were a student?
Here's a little something I posted to a.r.s. some time ago. Did you ever
notice it?
***
Was I a Copyright Criminal?
Public confession:
When I was in law school during the period 1976-77, I was on the staff of
the Law Review. In reviewing the work of student authors and outside
authors, every single citation had to be checked in the original source to
which it was cited. It was a real drag to do this in the library from the
original books, so we made copies. In fact, one of our main jobs was to
assemble "source books" of materials cited in the work being checked.
Second year student writers were required to assemble their own source
books. Then they had to help assemble source books used in reviewing the
work submitted by outside authors.
These "source books" consisted of photostatic copies, frequently multiple
copies, of such materials as entire published, copyrighted law review
articles, large portions of copyrighted legal treatises and other books,
even entire newspaper articles, as well as copies of cases from West
Reporters (whose headnotes and key numbering system are copyright
protected), and statutes from copyrighted sources. "Copy, copy, copy"!
You might say that was our motto.
I've read many, many posts of statements from the COS that the Copyright
Act is a strict liability statute, and accusations that persons who violate
it are "copyright terrorists" and "copyright criminals." Does this mean
that I and everyone with whom I worked on law review was a "copyright
criminal"?
I don't think we thought of ourselves as criminals, or even as violators of
the copyright laws. Although, considering that we were all law students,
you might assume that we were at least on notice that there might be a
problem with what we were doing. Some of the staff members were even
taking the course in Intellectual Property at the same time we were doing
this!
What should I do? Should I go down to the U.S. Attorney's office and turn
myself in? Will I get a better deal if I give the AUSA's a list of the
people with whom I worked on the law review? Or should I just turn in all
of the information to West Publishing company so that they can bring civil
suits?
I guess L.Ron Hubbard was right. If you dig deep enough, you'll find that
every SP (I guess I must assume that I qualify for that sticker) has
committed crimes. Does that mean that everyone who committed the same
crimes as I did is also an SP?
It's something to ponder, isn't it. There are copyright criminals
everywhere, and not just on the Internet!