Ex Mudder Responds to a 'Ho-note
...and flirts as well!
>To: dkeith@best.com
>Subject: Unauthorized use of copryighted material
>From: Helena Kobrin
>Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 02:14:02 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>Dear Mr. Bennett,
Congratulations in disocovering my correct name, 'Ho. I was Mr.
Best last time
>
> As you are aware, I represent Religious Technology Center ("RTC"),
>the owner of the confidential Advanced Technology of the Scientology religion
>and the holder of exclusive rights under the copyrights applicable to the
>Advanced Technology materials.
And as you are aware, Email is not a proper conduit for legal
complaints. You run the risk of being considered a net.kook when you
Email lawsuit threats.
Oh, wait, you are ALREADY considered a net kook. My mistake.
>The Advanced Technology materials are confidential, unpublished, copyrighted works.
Don't forget fraudulent incoherent gibberish.
> RTC's works include, among
>others, the individual works comprising a level known as "NOTs."
Sorry, wrong answer, try again.
David Miscavage, aka the Poode Boy (*) stole the AT from Hubbard
after he went into hiding from the US government and angry creditors.
Since then, RTC has consistantly ignored statutory requirements to
register these documents, and they have ALL lapsed into the public
domain.
Especially the NOTs, which were written primarily by David Mayo
(even more supressive than Mary Sue, who was jailed for espionage).
These belong to CSC, which is in recievership to Larry Wollersheim
awaiting payment of a 5+ million dollar judgement against your
destructive cult.
You have no standing.
>
> I have been informed that you have posted certain NOTs works to
>the Internet and have also placed certain NOTs works on your home page at:
>
The last time you send me message IDs like this, you fucked them up.
> <3353cdb9.2474700@nntp1.ba.best.com>
> <33504198.229916@nntp1.ba.best.com>
> <334f4169.184053@nntp1.ba.best.com>
Please include full headers next time. I can't find any of these,
except in cmsg cancels.
>
You neglected to place the path name of the NOTs on my web page. In
addition, these messages have been canceled by individuals under your
direction.
This is criminal AND a RICO predicate act.
If you do not wish to be sued, I suggest you tell your puppet to
stop cancelling my articles.
> These works have been placed onto this web site without the
>authorization of my client. The works are registered with the US Copyright
>Office under registration numbers Txu 257326 and 257527.
Falsely registered with the US copyright office, after the reaquired
date.
>
> These postings violate US copyright law and are copyright
>infringements for which you can be held liable.
>
Bullshit. YOU can be held liable for perpetuating fraud upon the
court.
> As you are also well aware, because you appear regularly at hearings
>in several cases, we are currently involved in litigation over the same and
>similar materials in several lawsuits.
Yeah, and you are losing them. Did you enjoy it as much as I did
when Milgram started arguing Henson's case?
>Preliminary injunctions
>based on copyright infringement and trade secret misappropriation are in
>place in three of those suits in the United States District Court in San Jose,
Thats nice. Shall we try for 4? Do you want me to get an
injunction against YOU to stop filing baseless copyright claims in the
US courts?
>California. And a United States District Court in the state of Virginia has
>granted judgment in favor of my client, related to copyright infringement
>of some of these works.
A whole $500. BFD.
>
> We are not seeking to become involved in litigation, but we will take
Thats a laugh
>all necessary measures to protect my client's intellectual property rights.
Well, if you had done so during the 80's and 90's, you wouldn't be
having these problems. By your own incompetence, these materials were
publically available and public domain since 1986.
Would you like to see the legal cites? Many of them are on my web
page too.
>We presume that you do not want your system to be used as an instrumentality
>of infringement, and that we can resolve this amicably.
>
Is this directed at me, or at my ISP?
Just because you butt fucked Netcom doesn't mean you'll accomplish
shit with Best.
> Please confirm that you have removed the copyrighted material as requested
Well, I'm sure your cancel bunny has already killed them. I was
unable to find any of them on the 'net.
>above. I must urge you that speed in dealing with this situation is critical in light of the
>fact that unpublished materials are involved.
Sorry, no. These materials became publsihed when they were licensed
for distribution to RTC in 1982. They lost their trade secret staus
when the court found that Mayo and Scott had copies of them all, and
the Judge decided against you.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Helena Kobrin
Can I add that someone felt that you were looking quite sexy in
Court the other day?
Xenu's Mother
