C
cathyxyz
Guest
~patches~ wrote:
> That pic is legally mine, pure and simple. End of
> discussion.
>
Amen!
Cheers
Cathy(xyz)
> That pic is legally mine, pure and simple. End of
> discussion.
>
Amen!
Cheers
Cathy(xyz)
T
tert in seattle
Guest
[email protected] writes:
>
>"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>> "Glitter Ninja" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>
>>>> Here's the original post... since it's gone from Google. I think the
>>>> "patchwork" comment james made in the post was supposed to be a
>>>> little joke.
>>>
>>> Pfft, I saw that some guy posted that twice, I didn't bother
>>> opening it, something was off about the post ... then he posted
>>> it yet a third under a different name and I knew not to bother.
>>>
>>> Much ado about nothing.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>> Indeed. I've seen enough pizza pics; I didn't bother to look. In fact, I
>> don't bother to look at most photos of food (except to see if modem has
>> changed from the red plate and okra!). I stopped taking photos of food a
>> long while back. Unlike the folks on alt.binaries.food, I'd rather eat my
>> food than pose it and take photos of it. Unless I'm perusing a cookbook
>> that includes photos, I don't really care.
>>
>> Jill
>>
>>
>
>I've seen people in restaurants pulling out their stupid cell phones to
>photograph the food......oh boy....
OH my GOD the STUPIDEMIC is UPON US !!!
>
>"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>> "Glitter Ninja" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>
>>>> Here's the original post... since it's gone from Google. I think the
>>>> "patchwork" comment james made in the post was supposed to be a
>>>> little joke.
>>>
>>> Pfft, I saw that some guy posted that twice, I didn't bother
>>> opening it, something was off about the post ... then he posted
>>> it yet a third under a different name and I knew not to bother.
>>>
>>> Much ado about nothing.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>> Indeed. I've seen enough pizza pics; I didn't bother to look. In fact, I
>> don't bother to look at most photos of food (except to see if modem has
>> changed from the red plate and okra!). I stopped taking photos of food a
>> long while back. Unlike the folks on alt.binaries.food, I'd rather eat my
>> food than pose it and take photos of it. Unless I'm perusing a cookbook
>> that includes photos, I don't really care.
>>
>> Jill
>>
>>
>
>I've seen people in restaurants pulling out their stupid cell phones to
>photograph the food......oh boy....
OH my GOD the STUPIDEMIC is UPON US !!!
P
~patches~
Guest
Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 08:07:30 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Wertz wrote:
>
>
>>>In case anyone's wondering, It's *ME*. *I* did it. She didn't
>>>mention how I used them though. I'll let her fill in the gaps,
>>>when she's ready.
>>
>>Bullsh*t! Nice try at a coverup but no dice.
>
>
> Coverup? It's a conspiracy. We're all in on it. Who am I
> covering for?
>
> -sw
The two faced poster of couse who will be outed in all due time. Google
has taken action. Tinypics and the two faced poster's isp are acting on
it given the information I've given them. I suspect later tonight if
the two faced poster gets a new isp, we shall be hearing from them.
Then I'll set about getting that account terminated for a history of
abuse supported by google, tinypics and the former isp. Once things are
settled, check my sig as you can be sure the two faced nym will appear
there.
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 08:07:30 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Steve Wertz wrote:
>
>
>>>In case anyone's wondering, It's *ME*. *I* did it. She didn't
>>>mention how I used them though. I'll let her fill in the gaps,
>>>when she's ready.
>>
>>Bullsh*t! Nice try at a coverup but no dice.
>
>
> Coverup? It's a conspiracy. We're all in on it. Who am I
> covering for?
>
> -sw
The two faced poster of couse who will be outed in all due time. Google
has taken action. Tinypics and the two faced poster's isp are acting on
it given the information I've given them. I suspect later tonight if
the two faced poster gets a new isp, we shall be hearing from them.
Then I'll set about getting that account terminated for a history of
abuse supported by google, tinypics and the former isp. Once things are
settled, check my sig as you can be sure the two faced nym will appear
there.
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
R
rosie
Guest
-L. wrote:
>> You don't get it. Nobody *cares* if someone stole a pic of a pizza.
> For God's sake, get some perspective - both of you.
>
> .
>
> -L.
It certainly seems to bother you.
Rosie
>> You don't get it. Nobody *cares* if someone stole a pic of a pizza.
> For God's sake, get some perspective - both of you.
>
> .
>
> -L.
It certainly seems to bother you.
Rosie
S
Steve Wertz
Guest
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:37:03 -0400, ~patches~
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Sorry Dora, the sig will be changed often enough to hopefully not get
>boring. It's a lot shorter than some sigs and within acceptable sig
>length. I'm not even furious anymore. Now I'm going after the offender
>legally and I'm doing so in a very calm and rational manner. The
>offender thought it was a funny thing to do. I think the offender will
>have a change of attitude very shortly
So who is this person? It's clear that you have a certain person
under your magnifying glass, otherwise you couldn't have said:
>A two faced piece of **** ... The same two faced piece of
>**** likes to harass other posters and is an internet stalker. This
>gutless wonder tries to use intimidation to get those not conforming to
>rec.food.cooking standards to quit posting.
So who is this person? Certainly you didn't base all those
assumptions on just that one post.
-sw
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Sorry Dora, the sig will be changed often enough to hopefully not get
>boring. It's a lot shorter than some sigs and within acceptable sig
>length. I'm not even furious anymore. Now I'm going after the offender
>legally and I'm doing so in a very calm and rational manner. The
>offender thought it was a funny thing to do. I think the offender will
>have a change of attitude very shortly
So who is this person? It's clear that you have a certain person
under your magnifying glass, otherwise you couldn't have said:
>A two faced piece of **** ... The same two faced piece of
>**** likes to harass other posters and is an internet stalker. This
>gutless wonder tries to use intimidation to get those not conforming to
>rec.food.cooking standards to quit posting.
So who is this person? Certainly you didn't base all those
assumptions on just that one post.
-sw
D
Doug Kanter
Guest
"tert in seattle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] writes:
>>
>>"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> "Glitter Ninja" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> Here's the original post... since it's gone from Google. I think the
>>>>> "patchwork" comment james made in the post was supposed to be a
>>>>> little joke.
>>>>
>>>> Pfft, I saw that some guy posted that twice, I didn't bother
>>>> opening it, something was off about the post ... then he posted
>>>> it yet a third under a different name and I knew not to bother.
>>>>
>>>> Much ado about nothing.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>
>>> Indeed. I've seen enough pizza pics; I didn't bother to look. In fact,
>>> I
>>> don't bother to look at most photos of food (except to see if modem has
>>> changed from the red plate and okra!). I stopped taking photos of food
>>> a
>>> long while back. Unlike the folks on alt.binaries.food, I'd rather eat
>>> my
>>> food than pose it and take photos of it. Unless I'm perusing a cookbook
>>> that includes photos, I don't really care.
>>>
>>> Jill
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I've seen people in restaurants pulling out their stupid cell phones to
>>photograph the food......oh boy....
>
>
> OH my GOD the STUPIDEMIC is UPON US !!!
It's always here. But, it's like herpes - not always obvious.
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] writes:
>>
>>"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> "Glitter Ninja" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> Here's the original post... since it's gone from Google. I think the
>>>>> "patchwork" comment james made in the post was supposed to be a
>>>>> little joke.
>>>>
>>>> Pfft, I saw that some guy posted that twice, I didn't bother
>>>> opening it, something was off about the post ... then he posted
>>>> it yet a third under a different name and I knew not to bother.
>>>>
>>>> Much ado about nothing.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>
>>> Indeed. I've seen enough pizza pics; I didn't bother to look. In fact,
>>> I
>>> don't bother to look at most photos of food (except to see if modem has
>>> changed from the red plate and okra!). I stopped taking photos of food
>>> a
>>> long while back. Unlike the folks on alt.binaries.food, I'd rather eat
>>> my
>>> food than pose it and take photos of it. Unless I'm perusing a cookbook
>>> that includes photos, I don't really care.
>>>
>>> Jill
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I've seen people in restaurants pulling out their stupid cell phones to
>>photograph the food......oh boy....
>
>
> OH my GOD the STUPIDEMIC is UPON US !!!
It's always here. But, it's like herpes - not always obvious.
P
~patches~
Guest
Dave Smith wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>
>>>Still, it doesn't hurt to let it be known that the culprit was caught
>>>and shame him into recognizing that it was a stupid thing to do.
>>
>>What "culprit"? What photograph? I thought she just said the other day she
>>doesn't have time to photograph food?
>
>
> She pointed to Jame's post and picture in the "I Made Pizza" with a story about
> cooking a pizza and the picture he took of his pizza, which, in another post in
> that thread, she claims is her picture.
>
> What it amounts to is a guy showing up in the group, posting a message about the
> pizza he made and then posting a picture of his <?> pizza. Maybe he felt a need
> to include the picture to give himself some credibility, but that credibility
> was blown when it turned out not to be his picture. It sounds much too weird to
> me.
>
Well Dave, I find it really weird myself. I posted that pizza pic and
took a lot of negative comments because it wasn't round and the cheese
looked like supermarket cheese and the comments just kept coming. I was
one of the reasons I decided that posting pics is not a great thing
along with the fact that I'm on dial-up so pics take a long time to
load. The two faced poster posted a couple of posts claiming they made
the pizza along with the link to my pic. The pic I hold copyright to.
SKS alerted me to the two faced poster's post claiming the pizza pic as
his and under 3 different nyms so it was posted to get my attention.
There is no mistaking the two faced poster's intentions as per the
discription of the pizza either. Well it now has my attention The
poster is a reg here just using a different nym. They likely thought it
was pretty funny except it hit me the wrong way. Google, tinypics and
the two faced poster's isp doesn't think it is so funny.
BTW, I think the pic as it stands is really not all that great. That
someone could actually stoop low enough to use it against me or as a way
to intimate is astounding. !
>
>>I had someone plagerize some of my
>>recipes verbatim (including my typos) a number of years back and I called
>>her on it, but I also identified the person and called the person out. I
>>didn't ***** about some anonymous person. I still have no idea what or who
>>~patches~ is talking about.
>
>
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>
>>>Still, it doesn't hurt to let it be known that the culprit was caught
>>>and shame him into recognizing that it was a stupid thing to do.
>>
>>What "culprit"? What photograph? I thought she just said the other day she
>>doesn't have time to photograph food?
>
>
> She pointed to Jame's post and picture in the "I Made Pizza" with a story about
> cooking a pizza and the picture he took of his pizza, which, in another post in
> that thread, she claims is her picture.
>
> What it amounts to is a guy showing up in the group, posting a message about the
> pizza he made and then posting a picture of his <?> pizza. Maybe he felt a need
> to include the picture to give himself some credibility, but that credibility
> was blown when it turned out not to be his picture. It sounds much too weird to
> me.
>
Well Dave, I find it really weird myself. I posted that pizza pic and
took a lot of negative comments because it wasn't round and the cheese
looked like supermarket cheese and the comments just kept coming. I was
one of the reasons I decided that posting pics is not a great thing
along with the fact that I'm on dial-up so pics take a long time to
load. The two faced poster posted a couple of posts claiming they made
the pizza along with the link to my pic. The pic I hold copyright to.
SKS alerted me to the two faced poster's post claiming the pizza pic as
his and under 3 different nyms so it was posted to get my attention.
There is no mistaking the two faced poster's intentions as per the
discription of the pizza either. Well it now has my attention
Theposter is a reg here just using a different nym. They likely thought it
was pretty funny except it hit me the wrong way. Google, tinypics and
the two faced poster's isp doesn't think it is so funny.
BTW, I think the pic as it stands is really not all that great. That
someone could actually stoop low enough to use it against me or as a way
to intimate is astounding. !
>
>>I had someone plagerize some of my
>>recipes verbatim (including my typos) a number of years back and I called
>>her on it, but I also identified the person and called the person out. I
>>didn't ***** about some anonymous person. I still have no idea what or who
>>~patches~ is talking about.
>
>
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
E
elaine
Guest
> ~patches~ wrote:
>> That pic is legally mine, pure and simple. End of discussion.
I waded through 'some' of the stolen pizza posts. Plain & simple, you guys
are nuts!
Elaine
T
The Ranger
Guest
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 19:27:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> > OH my GOD the STUPIDEMIC is UPON US !!!
> >
> It's always here. But, it's like herpes - not always obvious.
>
Now there's a visual that's going to haunt me for a bit...
<[email protected]> wrote:
> > OH my GOD the STUPIDEMIC is UPON US !!!
> >
> It's always here. But, it's like herpes - not always obvious.
>
Now there's a visual that's going to haunt me for a bit...
P
~patches~
Guest
Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:37:03 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Sorry Dora, the sig will be changed often enough to hopefully not get
>>boring. It's a lot shorter than some sigs and within acceptable sig
>>length. I'm not even furious anymore. Now I'm going after the offender
>>legally and I'm doing so in a very calm and rational manner. The
>>offender thought it was a funny thing to do. I think the offender will
>>have a change of attitude very shortly
>
>
> So who is this person? It's clear that you have a certain person
> under your magnifying glass, otherwise you couldn't have said:
>
>>A two faced piece of **** ... The same two faced piece of
>>**** likes to harass other posters and is an internet stalker. This
>>gutless wonder tries to use intimidation to get those not conforming to
>>rec.food.cooking standards to quit posting.
>
>
> So who is this person? Certainly you didn't base all those
> assumptions on just that one post.
>
> -sw
Sorry Steve. I do know who the person is and I will reveal that for all
likely within the next few days. I want to give tinypics and the two
faced poster's isp a chance to take action so revealing the poster's
current nym is better left to a future date. There wasn't one post
either there were 3, same topic, same pic, different nyms. The two
faced poster is more than busted.
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:37:03 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Sorry Dora, the sig will be changed often enough to hopefully not get
>>boring. It's a lot shorter than some sigs and within acceptable sig
>>length. I'm not even furious anymore. Now I'm going after the offender
>>legally and I'm doing so in a very calm and rational manner. The
>>offender thought it was a funny thing to do. I think the offender will
>>have a change of attitude very shortly
>
>
> So who is this person? It's clear that you have a certain person
> under your magnifying glass, otherwise you couldn't have said:
>
>>A two faced piece of **** ... The same two faced piece of
>>**** likes to harass other posters and is an internet stalker. This
>>gutless wonder tries to use intimidation to get those not conforming to
>>rec.food.cooking standards to quit posting.
>
>
> So who is this person? Certainly you didn't base all those
> assumptions on just that one post.
>
> -sw
Sorry Steve. I do know who the person is and I will reveal that for all
likely within the next few days. I want to give tinypics and the two
faced poster's isp a chance to take action so revealing the poster's
current nym is better left to a future date. There wasn't one post
either there were 3, same topic, same pic, different nyms. The two
faced poster is more than busted.
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
N
notbob
Guest
On 2006-04-03, ~patches~ <[email protected]> wrote:
> Wrong, notbob according to DMCA of 1998.....
You may have a good grasp of the law, but you seem to deny basic
reality. I'm not talking about whether you are right or not or
whether or not "two-face" is wrong, I'm talking about reality. He
took it didn't he? He posted it didn't he? You've been wronged. No
doubt about it. Guess what! He just might do it again! Since
there's no $100K fine and 5yr jail penalty for stealing a pizza
picture (gotta bribe a few politicos for that kinda juice), anyone
just might do it again. The only way you can avoid it is to keep
those pictures hidden in your own tight little obsessed hands.
BTW, while your pizza looks like a good effort, the quality of your
picture pretty much sucks. Certainly nothing worth getting so upset
over and no doubt the reason everyone is giving you a ration. Get a
clue.
nb
> Wrong, notbob according to DMCA of 1998.....
You may have a good grasp of the law, but you seem to deny basic
reality. I'm not talking about whether you are right or not or
whether or not "two-face" is wrong, I'm talking about reality. He
took it didn't he? He posted it didn't he? You've been wronged. No
doubt about it. Guess what! He just might do it again! Since
there's no $100K fine and 5yr jail penalty for stealing a pizza
picture (gotta bribe a few politicos for that kinda juice), anyone
just might do it again. The only way you can avoid it is to keep
those pictures hidden in your own tight little obsessed hands.
BTW, while your pizza looks like a good effort, the quality of your
picture pretty much sucks. Certainly nothing worth getting so upset
over and no doubt the reason everyone is giving you a ration. Get a
clue.
nb
D
Doug Kanter
Guest
"~patches~" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sorry Steve. I do know who the person is and I will reveal that for all
> likely within the next few days. I want to give tinypics and the two
> faced poster's isp a chance to take action so revealing the poster's
> current nym is better left to a future date. There wasn't one post either
> there were 3, same topic, same pic, different nyms. The two faced poster
> is more than busted.
Would you please do me a favor? Stop using the phrase "two faced", unless
this mysterious person once claimed to be your friend. Otherwise, it's the
wrong term for this situation, and it's becoming as annoying as fingernails
on a blackboard.
news:[email protected]...
> Sorry Steve. I do know who the person is and I will reveal that for all
> likely within the next few days. I want to give tinypics and the two
> faced poster's isp a chance to take action so revealing the poster's
> current nym is better left to a future date. There wasn't one post either
> there were 3, same topic, same pic, different nyms. The two faced poster
> is more than busted.
Would you please do me a favor? Stop using the phrase "two faced", unless
this mysterious person once claimed to be your friend. Otherwise, it's the
wrong term for this situation, and it's becoming as annoying as fingernails
on a blackboard.
S
Steve Wertz
Guest
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:16:11 -0400, ~patches~
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Think it through, check the headers of the offending posts, then make
>your own decision. It's rather clear
I've had these moments of clarity sometimes when I'm up for 7 or 8
days on methamphetaminee. But then after I get a couple days
worth of sleep, I realize how paranoid and crazy I must have been.
-sw
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Think it through, check the headers of the offending posts, then make
>your own decision. It's rather clear
I've had these moments of clarity sometimes when I'm up for 7 or 8
days on methamphetaminee. But then after I get a couple days
worth of sleep, I realize how paranoid and crazy I must have been.
-sw
S
Steve Wertz
Guest
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 13:16:59 -0400, ~patches~
<[email protected]> wrote:
> It would serve no purpose to name names at this point.
Other than all your ex-friends think you suspect them.
-sw
<[email protected]> wrote:
> It would serve no purpose to name names at this point.
Other than all your ex-friends think you suspect them.
-sw
N
notbob
Guest
On 2006-04-03, ~patches~ <[email protected]> wrote:
> someone could actually stoop low enough to use it against me....
What, they cleaned out your bank account? Plundered your recipe box?
Tarnished your good name at the laundromat? What?
No, wait.... made you look the fool? Nope! You're doing that to
yourself.
nb
> someone could actually stoop low enough to use it against me....
What, they cleaned out your bank account? Plundered your recipe box?
Tarnished your good name at the laundromat? What?
No, wait.... made you look the fool? Nope! You're doing that to
yourself.
nb
S
Steve Wertz
Guest
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:33:39 -0400, ~patches~
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Thanks Jake. I'm pursuing this issue through tinypics, the offenders
>and legally. It's become a principal thing now. The offender thought
>is was a funny way to either mock or harass me. Let's see how funny the
>offender thinks it is now.
Even if the offender didn't use an open proxy, there;s no legal
recourse since they didn't post the picture.
You're wasting your time.
-sw
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Thanks Jake. I'm pursuing this issue through tinypics, the offenders
>and legally. It's become a principal thing now. The offender thought
>is was a funny way to either mock or harass me. Let's see how funny the
>offender thinks it is now.
Even if the offender didn't use an open proxy, there;s no legal
recourse since they didn't post the picture.
You're wasting your time.
-sw
P
~patches~
Guest
notbob wrote:
> On 2006-04-03, ~patches~ <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Wrong, notbob according to DMCA of 1998.....
>
>
> You may have a good grasp of the law, but you seem to deny basic
> reality. I'm not talking about whether you are right or not or
> whether or not "two-face" is wrong, I'm talking about reality. He
> took it didn't he? He posted it didn't he? You've been wronged. No
> doubt about it. Guess what! He just might do it again! Since
> there's no $100K fine and 5yr jail penalty for stealing a pizza
> picture (gotta bribe a few politicos for that kinda juice), anyone
> just might do it again. The only way you can avoid it is to keep
> those pictures hidden in your own tight little obsessed hands.
>
> BTW, while your pizza looks like a good effort, the quality of your
> picture pretty much sucks. Certainly nothing worth getting so upset
> over and no doubt the reason everyone is giving you a ration. Get a
> clue.
>
> nb
Agreed, the pic sucks and I'm the first to admit it. It is still my pic
and it will cost the dink an account. I'm not looking for jail time or
money. It's now about something else. This idiot figure it was all fun
and games. Heck I would not even have know about it if it were't for
SKS giving me the heads up. Let's see how funny the two faced poster
thinkg it is now and I will certainly be revealing the identity of this
poster very soon. Trust me on that one.
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
> On 2006-04-03, ~patches~ <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Wrong, notbob according to DMCA of 1998.....
>
>
> You may have a good grasp of the law, but you seem to deny basic
> reality. I'm not talking about whether you are right or not or
> whether or not "two-face" is wrong, I'm talking about reality. He
> took it didn't he? He posted it didn't he? You've been wronged. No
> doubt about it. Guess what! He just might do it again! Since
> there's no $100K fine and 5yr jail penalty for stealing a pizza
> picture (gotta bribe a few politicos for that kinda juice), anyone
> just might do it again. The only way you can avoid it is to keep
> those pictures hidden in your own tight little obsessed hands.
>
> BTW, while your pizza looks like a good effort, the quality of your
> picture pretty much sucks. Certainly nothing worth getting so upset
> over and no doubt the reason everyone is giving you a ration. Get a
> clue.
>
> nb
Agreed, the pic sucks and I'm the first to admit it. It is still my pic
and it will cost the dink an account. I'm not looking for jail time or
money. It's now about something else. This idiot figure it was all fun
and games. Heck I would not even have know about it if it were't for
SKS giving me the heads up. Let's see how funny the two faced poster
thinkg it is now and I will certainly be revealing the identity of this
poster very soon. Trust me on that one.
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
P
~patches~
Guest
Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:33:39 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks Jake. I'm pursuing this issue through tinypics, the offenders
>>and legally. It's become a principal thing now. The offender thought
>>is was a funny way to either mock or harass me. Let's see how funny the
>>offender thinks it is now.
>
>
> Even if the offender didn't use an open proxy, there;s no legal
> recourse since they didn't post the picture.
>
> You're wasting your time.
>
> -sw
Wrong, I could post the replies I've received regarding this issue.
Funny how all are more than willing to go after this two faced poster.
Keep an eye out here because there *will* be someone with a new account
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:33:39 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks Jake. I'm pursuing this issue through tinypics, the offenders
>>and legally. It's become a principal thing now. The offender thought
>>is was a funny way to either mock or harass me. Let's see how funny the
>>offender thinks it is now.
>
>
> Even if the offender didn't use an open proxy, there;s no legal
> recourse since they didn't post the picture.
>
> You're wasting your time.
>
> -sw
Wrong, I could post the replies I've received regarding this issue.
Funny how all are more than willing to go after this two faced poster.
Keep an eye out here because there *will* be someone with a new account
--
There is a thief amongst us who likes to steal other posters pics and
post them as their own. This constitutes copyright infringement and
theft of intellectual property. This is contrary to DMCA of 1998
punishable by law. The same thief likes to harass other posters and is
an internet stalker. This thief likes to use intimidation to harass
other posters on rfc.
M
Melba's Jammin'
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've seen people in restaurants pulling out their stupid cell phones to
> photograph the food......oh boy....
Hey, you! I use my camera, not my cell phone!
--
-Barb
<http://jamlady.eboard.com> Updated 4-2-06, Church review #11
"If it's not worth doing to excess, it's not worth doing at all."
"Doug Kanter" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've seen people in restaurants pulling out their stupid cell phones to
> photograph the food......oh boy....
Hey, you! I use my camera, not my cell phone!
--
-Barb
<http://jamlady.eboard.com> Updated 4-2-06, Church review #11
"If it's not worth doing to excess, it's not worth doing at all."
O
OmManiPadmeOmelet
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
Steve Wertz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:16:11 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Think it through, check the headers of the offending posts, then make
> >your own decision. It's rather clear
>
> I've had these moments of clarity sometimes when I'm up for 7 or 8
> days on methamphetaminee. But then after I get a couple days
> worth of sleep, I realize how paranoid and crazy I must have been.
>
> -sw
Well, that's one way to lose weight... ;-D
--
Peace, Om.
"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson
Steve Wertz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 12:16:11 -0400, ~patches~
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Think it through, check the headers of the offending posts, then make
> >your own decision. It's rather clear
>
> I've had these moments of clarity sometimes when I'm up for 7 or 8
> days on methamphetaminee. But then after I get a couple days
> worth of sleep, I realize how paranoid and crazy I must have been.
>
> -sw
Well, that's one way to lose weight... ;-D
--
Peace, Om.
"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson