It's not even finished. I stopped midway because it was pissing me off so much lol. I am my biggest critic I think. I'm sure I'll finish it though and post it this week. Just need to think of a topic... to talk about over it.
Seems you have an admirer... It can be a pain to draw on the comp.... but I know people who can do magic on photoshop and couldn't draw a circle on a piece of paper to save their lives. I'm debating on posting my latest adventure... if I do you can see the frustration I often have.
np. I thought if someone could keep up with the speed they might be able to figure something out lol. I think my next one I'll try a different method though.
I'm not making out like anything. I stated by his reasoning "I" could DMCA anyone for any reason as long as I intended to take them to court. You obviously misunderstood. I don't believe he would DMCA everyone that uses his content. Even if he wanted to I doubt he would have the time.
Well no you could not DMCA anyone, they would have to be using your content. So your reasoning is bull. Also they would have to be able to prove they did not abuse fair use.
However why are you so afraid of the judicial process? Taking somone through the judical process is censoring? Whats the piont of hasving the DMCA at all then? According to your logic all DMCAs are censoring. Whatr exaclty is a true DMCA in your opinion?
Why would I be afraid of the judicial system? It's not MY reasoning that is bull. That has been one of his arguments of the past. I never stated he used it in that manner, just it has been one of his arguments. I don't pretend to be an expert on the DMCA. I'm not a lawyer... but neither is Inmendham. I do know the DMCA was created to prevent companies from losing monetary gain. What is Inmendham losing?
If Inmendham wants to change (or more define) the law he has to use the judicial system. It doesn't make it right. Changing a law for your own desires is BS. It is more self serving than anything. I doubt he cares about the intellectual property of others. I have watched actual copyright lawyers on youtube and they would seem to disagree with Inmendham and they have degrees on the subject.
Inmendham owns a registered corporate copyright, monetary gain is not calculated in what you are currently earning but in possible future profits as well, what is Inmendham loosing? possibly alot.
It seems to me your making of this video is piontless because the judical system will decide the fate of this whole matter. Your making positive assertions on the law and It is like your trying to prempt the outcome of the matter even though its going to be decided by a court ruling.
And every video Inmendham makes is pointless too. I mean why make a video on the subject if the courts will decide? Why make any video for that matter... How many court rulings has Inmendham won to date. I've been away for a bit but last I knew he had more cases than anyone I've ever known and hadn't won a thing. Not just this DMCA stuff. Isn't he on some watch list for making a derogatory video about a judge... hmmm... but of course he's the rational one in all this.
I don't know if you noticed but hes been making videos in defence of people making false accusations, if it was not for people like YOU, he would not need to make those videos.
Further more yes he made video about judge throwing his case out of court unfairly. He also won an appeal to get that federal judges decision overturned. So in the end he was right. He did have a case. You know how strong a case you need to get a federal judges decision overturned? oh and it was a DMCA case.
Inmendham misrepresents that appeal success as a victory. Winning an appeal is not the same as winning a case. Inmendhams successful appeal is comparable to a creationist winning an argument with an evolutionist because the evolutionist spelt evolution incorrectly.
Oh and of those 3 people he invovled the DMCA case in, 2 of them are up for federal charges for trying to evade the courts. 1 of them has been ordered to pay Inmendham 4500 dollars.
Inmendham has no victories? Yeah it shows you how much you know.
I stand corrected. The 2 "up on federal charges" doesn't mean a victory because obvioulsy there hasn't been a ruling. I don't know about this 1 win of his but I'll concede I don't have all the facts about his legal situation. What I do know is the difference between someone using the courts for good intentions and someone who is just a litigious MF. Inmendham has a track record. And I'm talking about outside of YouTube.
Hes right, Cindy Keanster has to pay the fed 450 bucks (not 4500, amazing how chinese whispers works). Unfortunately, it is unlikely they will ever find this evil mastermind that is Cindy Keanster :)
No idea who the other person is since jonesr has followed the process and the other was mexican...
The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author.
Legal definition of "parody"- A form of speech protected by the First Amendment as a "distorted imitation" of an original work for the purpose of commenting on it.
I'm not trying to prove anything, only my understanding of the situation. I agree no matter the outcome a court case would be beneficial. I wouldn't even mind if Inmendham won... atleast the law would be more defined. I'm only stating on how it looks now to me (who is a complete layman on this subject).
Of course no matter what verdict is reached we will most likely have to wait years on appeals to see a real answer.
@FriendOregon sources please. i think what you say is bs. there are no charges. no judgment. there hasn't even been a dern scheduling conference fool.
i don't consider that a valid source. i was hoping you could point me to some particular public records, like the court system and the copyright office; those databases are searchable. you should check your sources homer.
Taking someone who has a clinical mental illness and obvious dilusion on their word would be a mistake. Inmendham has lost every single case he has ever filed, and to my knowledge, after losing the cases has proceeded to sue the judges for not ruling in his favour. Judges who, by the way, have complete judicial immunity.
He has utmost contempt for the law and will never see anything in any way other than the way he perceives it internally.
"Inmendham has lost every single case he has ever filed, and to my knowledge, after losing the cases has proceeded to sue the judges for not ruling in his favour. Judges who, by the way, have complete judicial immunity."
This is absolute bullshit. He has apealed judges decisions not sued judges. Lost cases? well maybe, but not a DMCA case.
Really your type of illinformed comments are the reason why people are so confused about him,
You call me uninformed? There are cases on inmendhams own website where he is suing 4 judges and a local TV channel. You might want to get to know people before you start defending them.
Defendant: The State of New Jersey, Office of The Attorney General
Defendant: Judge William Hunt Dumont, Morris County Superior Court
Defendant: Judge Deanne M. Wilson, Morris County Superior Court
Defendant: Judge Dennis Cavanaugh, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Martin Luther King Jr. Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse, 50 Walnut Street, P.O. Box 419, Newark, New Jersey 07101
All the cases inmendham has filed have been dismissed because he has failed to present the reason UNDER THE LAW, why he has a claim. The DMCA is no different, if he goes to court with his intuitionally derived meaning of the LEGAL TERM 'fair use', then he will again fail to establish a cause for claim UNDER THE LAW since the the videos hes DMCA'ing have all met nearly all of the 4 LEGAL CRITERIA to achieve fair use.
A judges decision was overturned because he wouldnt let inmendham sue over the phone. The judge saw an easy way to dismiss the case and got ahead of himself.
Unfortunately for those with real cases in the court system, that decision was incorrect. The appeal, AS IVE ALREADY SAID, had nothing what-so-ever to do with his case and was only a procedural dispute.
There are 4 very specific criteria that need to be met to prove fair use. Non of the videos inmendham has ever taken down have ever not achieved at least 3 of them.
Inmendham is the one forwarding this case on HIS OWN definition of fair use that doenst have any correlation to the actual meanings that the court is going to use to establish the validity of his claim.
Yes I know what the fucking 4 criteria are and it is up to the DEFENDANT that they met all 4. AGAIN the burden of proof is on the DEFENDANT. Get that through your fucking thick skull. Gary's own fucking definition doesn't fucking matter, he doesn't need to do shit.
The best inmendham could do is claim that his videos are like a work of fiction that he is working towards selling in the future. But that position would be easily to argue against. And even then wouldnt put the DMCA'd videos in a bad position considering the other factors.
I wont say case closed on the inmendham lolsuits, i look forward to the conclusion. I will say case closed on your infatuation with inmendham and stupidity in being willing to take a litigious arsehole at his word. :)
You are again wrong. Inmendham, having brought the case will have to establish exactly what law gives him a legal claim for compensation. He will have to show that he is suing under copyright law and will have to present evidence to support his argument that the material is not covered under fair use, since, its pretty obvious the defendants will be using fair use to defend themselves.
He will have to rebutt the defendants case that the videos in question fall into fair use, thats the legal meaning of the term not inmendhams, i.e. the four categories. If he fails to suggest why, then its pretty much a foregone conclusion that his suit not only will fail, but that he has again, gone to court, with no understanding of the written law that he is using to prosecute someone.
"He will have to rebutt the defendants case that the videos in question fall into fair use, thats the legal meaning of the term not inmendhams"
The judge will read the plaintiffs statement. He will review the criteria for fair use. Then the defend must prove that they where working within the bounds of fair use.
Thats how it works you ignorant little childish fool.
And then i am in little doubt that he will continue to sue the judge in this case like he has done in many of his previous cases, even though he already knows they have judicial immunity. He sues them because he is an angry man, and cannot control his urges to lash out at people in the only ways he can, verbally and legally.
Ill give you a little foresight into this; have you ever heard inmendham address the 4 criteria of legal fair use? no you havent. You know why? because he doesnt have a case to make against fair use so as is stands, this is all a waste of time. Just drama for us and a tool for inmendham to use to bully people into silence because his large but fragile ego cannot take criticism.
Foresight? Your can't see the forest for the trees mate and you giving me foresight? yeah thats a joke and a half.
Also I have heard him adress the criteria for fair use all over his videos. His videos are proof that he understands it far more than little ignorant trolls like you.
The truth is you presume to much. You aren't a lawyer and from what you have stated so far you most likely never will be. All you have done it drawn from irrelivant cases and opinions.
You have never heard him address the criteria of fair use in his videos. You have heard him assert that people making videos that mock him are malicious. Unfortunately for inmendham, the intent of the person who takes copyrighted material is never in question on copyright law unless A-they intend to make money from it, or B-They are reducing the copyright holders ability to make money from it.
His videos around these DMCAs show that he is butthurt and a poor fragile emotionally childlike person
Really your just an ignorant little troll that can't help but see your world view threatened. So you go around trying to prove Gary has no case even though he still has an "active" case due to the appeals court saying he does! that is clearly going to be decided in court!
So keep whining you butt hurt bitch. However you have 0 power in deciding this case. The courts will and Gary is going through the PROPER procedures unlike you who seems to stipulate alot of ballocks with 0 credentials.
I never said i was going to decide it. I do notice how you are the only one who is getting frustrated here :) Thats a sign that you are finding it difficult to maintain your position with decent points :)
Also, you are now falling back on the 'he won an appeal' argument, like ive already told you is nothing to do with the validity of his case lol.
Next you will tell me hes never sued any judges again and we can keep chasing your circular argument all day :)
anyway, im sure you will see things a little differently when the judge follows the letter of the law and dismisses inmendhams case (again, but for the right reason this time).
Although, who knows. You might be one of the mad ones who stand by inmendham with no knowledge of the law or the events but just 'take his word for it' because he talks with absolute conviction :)
Who knows you might be petty bitch that stands by what you say with pure conviction even thoug your not a legal professional even though I have pionted out why inmendham has a case and all because you hate him because he probably blocked you or something minor like that. Poor poor petty but hurt bitch.
Willfull ignorance.. I sometimes wonder if all inmendrones have a similar level of depression / mental illness as inmendham himself.
You havent even accepted that you know fuck all about his court actions even though you claim others are ignorant of it LOL.
Well, at this stage all that is left to be done is for the judge to dismiss inmendhams lolsuit (like usual) and explain to you inmendrones exactly what the law is there to protect.
You can say im trolling for mentioning his mental condition, but it is a prime factor in nearly all his 'philosophy' videos and also his interactions with people inside and outside courtrooms.
He might not care (or even notice). He seems to be in a good mood since getting his account back. Not that I am too worried about it. I've been called worse by better people I'm sure :)
I don't know what the fuck you just said because I was looking at what you were doning...but then again i don't have a clue as to what you were doing,,,,but it was cooler than what you were saying.
It's not even finished. I stopped midway because it was pissing me off so much lol. I am my biggest critic I think. I'm sure I'll finish it though and post it this week. Just need to think of a topic... to talk about over it.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
Seems you have an admirer... It can be a pain to draw on the comp.... but I know people who can do magic on photoshop and couldn't draw a circle on a piece of paper to save their lives. I'm debating on posting my latest adventure... if I do you can see the frustration I often have.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
@picklepumpers
you are trying to learn alot......you thick head.....well maybe you should of went to school when you was young!
you can not draw....but you are ok drawing Welfare Benefits....
oH and you need new white lip stick Gloss !
JOHNCONNELLGROUP 2 years ago
Thanks ive never seen how to work like this in photoshop .... real eyeopener thanks for the share
magazinestock 2 years ago
np. I thought if someone could keep up with the speed they might be able to figure something out lol. I think my next one I'll try a different method though.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
It is like your making it out that Gary DMCAs anyone he disagrees with. Thats absolute bullshit.
He doesn't even DMCA everyone that use his content when agrueing with him.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
I'm not making out like anything. I stated by his reasoning "I" could DMCA anyone for any reason as long as I intended to take them to court. You obviously misunderstood. I don't believe he would DMCA everyone that uses his content. Even if he wanted to I doubt he would have the time.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
Well no you could not DMCA anyone, they would have to be using your content. So your reasoning is bull. Also they would have to be able to prove they did not abuse fair use.
However why are you so afraid of the judicial process? Taking somone through the judical process is censoring? Whats the piont of hasving the DMCA at all then? According to your logic all DMCAs are censoring. Whatr exaclty is a true DMCA in your opinion?
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Why would I be afraid of the judicial system? It's not MY reasoning that is bull. That has been one of his arguments of the past. I never stated he used it in that manner, just it has been one of his arguments. I don't pretend to be an expert on the DMCA. I'm not a lawyer... but neither is Inmendham. I do know the DMCA was created to prevent companies from losing monetary gain. What is Inmendham losing?
...
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
(cont)
If Inmendham wants to change (or more define) the law he has to use the judicial system. It doesn't make it right. Changing a law for your own desires is BS. It is more self serving than anything. I doubt he cares about the intellectual property of others. I have watched actual copyright lawyers on youtube and they would seem to disagree with Inmendham and they have degrees on the subject.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
Inmendham owns a registered corporate copyright, monetary gain is not calculated in what you are currently earning but in possible future profits as well, what is Inmendham loosing? possibly alot.
It seems to me your making of this video is piontless because the judical system will decide the fate of this whole matter. Your making positive assertions on the law and It is like your trying to prempt the outcome of the matter even though its going to be decided by a court ruling.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
And every video Inmendham makes is pointless too. I mean why make a video on the subject if the courts will decide? Why make any video for that matter... How many court rulings has Inmendham won to date. I've been away for a bit but last I knew he had more cases than anyone I've ever known and hadn't won a thing. Not just this DMCA stuff. Isn't he on some watch list for making a derogatory video about a judge... hmmm... but of course he's the rational one in all this.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
I don't know if you noticed but hes been making videos in defence of people making false accusations, if it was not for people like YOU, he would not need to make those videos.
Further more yes he made video about judge throwing his case out of court unfairly. He also won an appeal to get that federal judges decision overturned. So in the end he was right. He did have a case. You know how strong a case you need to get a federal judges decision overturned? oh and it was a DMCA case.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Inmendham misrepresents that appeal success as a victory. Winning an appeal is not the same as winning a case. Inmendhams successful appeal is comparable to a creationist winning an argument with an evolutionist because the evolutionist spelt evolution incorrectly.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Oh and of those 3 people he invovled the DMCA case in, 2 of them are up for federal charges for trying to evade the courts. 1 of them has been ordered to pay Inmendham 4500 dollars.
Inmendham has no victories? Yeah it shows you how much you know.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
I stand corrected. The 2 "up on federal charges" doesn't mean a victory because obvioulsy there hasn't been a ruling. I don't know about this 1 win of his but I'll concede I don't have all the facts about his legal situation. What I do know is the difference between someone using the courts for good intentions and someone who is just a litigious MF. Inmendham has a track record. And I'm talking about outside of YouTube.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
Hes right, Cindy Keanster has to pay the fed 450 bucks (not 4500, amazing how chinese whispers works). Unfortunately, it is unlikely they will ever find this evil mastermind that is Cindy Keanster :)
No idea who the other person is since jonesr has followed the process and the other was mexican...
Aspartame69 2 years ago
what I know and how I understand it.
The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author.
Legal definition of "parody"- A form of speech protected by the First Amendment as a "distorted imitation" of an original work for the purpose of commenting on it.
That definition leaves a HUGE amount of leeway.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
Listen there is nothing you can prove here that will not be proven in court in a few months and available for the whole of YouTube to masterbate over.
In a court of law anything is possible the ultimate outcome of the copyright case will turn on the application of the four fair use factors.
As far as I am concerned i have not seen a case specifically regarding the DMCA and Youtube and it will be benefital to all of us to see the outcome.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
I'm not trying to prove anything, only my understanding of the situation. I agree no matter the outcome a court case would be beneficial. I wouldn't even mind if Inmendham won... atleast the law would be more defined. I'm only stating on how it looks now to me (who is a complete layman on this subject).
Of course no matter what verdict is reached we will most likely have to wait years on appeals to see a real answer.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
fair enough
FriendOregon 2 years ago
@FriendOregon sources please. i think what you say is bs. there are no charges. no judgment. there hasn't even been a dern scheduling conference fool.
floydstinkyboy 2 years ago
@floydstinkyboy
I'm not spending my time to look up videos for an ignoramous that calls me a fool.
It all in donotgods videos on the subject. Why don;t you bother your lazy ass you watch them.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
@FriendOregon Inmendham owns a registered corporate copyright>>> sources please.
floydstinkyboy 2 years ago
Again in his videos. I think the specific one where he meantions this was on his website.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
i don't consider that a valid source. i was hoping you could point me to some particular public records, like the court system and the copyright office; those databases are searchable. you should check your sources homer.
floydstinkyboy 2 years ago
Really? Are you kidding me?
Oh yeah i should go all private detective on this shit..... lol
Really I'll take him on his word. If your so paranoid go check it yourself.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Taking someone who has a clinical mental illness and obvious dilusion on their word would be a mistake. Inmendham has lost every single case he has ever filed, and to my knowledge, after losing the cases has proceeded to sue the judges for not ruling in his favour. Judges who, by the way, have complete judicial immunity.
He has utmost contempt for the law and will never see anything in any way other than the way he perceives it internally.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
"Inmendham has lost every single case he has ever filed, and to my knowledge, after losing the cases has proceeded to sue the judges for not ruling in his favour. Judges who, by the way, have complete judicial immunity."
This is absolute bullshit. He has apealed judges decisions not sued judges. Lost cases? well maybe, but not a DMCA case.
Really your type of illinformed comments are the reason why people are so confused about him,
FriendOregon 2 years ago
You call me uninformed? There are cases on inmendhams own website where he is suing 4 judges and a local TV channel. You might want to get to know people before you start defending them.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Plaintiff: Gary ******, *** *****Rd, Mendham, NJ,
Defendant: The State of New Jersey, Office of The Attorney General
Defendant: Judge William Hunt Dumont, Morris County Superior Court
Defendant: Judge Deanne M. Wilson, Morris County Superior Court
Defendant: Judge Dennis Cavanaugh, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Martin Luther King Jr. Federal Bldg. & U.S. Courthouse, 50 Walnut Street, P.O. Box 419, Newark, New Jersey 07101
Defendant: Patriot Media, 100 Randolph Rd., Somerset, NJ 08873
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Well it wasn't anything to do with a DMCA case anyway.
Your arguement isn't relevant.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
But well informed :)
All the cases inmendham has filed have been dismissed because he has failed to present the reason UNDER THE LAW, why he has a claim. The DMCA is no different, if he goes to court with his intuitionally derived meaning of the LEGAL TERM 'fair use', then he will again fail to establish a cause for claim UNDER THE LAW since the the videos hes DMCA'ing have all met nearly all of the 4 LEGAL CRITERIA to achieve fair use.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
@Aspartame69
Are you a lawyer? really? even if you are lawyer can you state he has no case?
A judge threw his case out and he got the federal judges decision overturned by an apppeals court. So obviously some people thought he had a case.
duh....
FriendOregon 2 years ago
A judges decision was overturned because he wouldnt let inmendham sue over the phone. The judge saw an easy way to dismiss the case and got ahead of himself.
Unfortunately for those with real cases in the court system, that decision was incorrect. The appeal, AS IVE ALREADY SAID, had nothing what-so-ever to do with his case and was only a procedural dispute.
And you call me illinformed lol.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Futhermore. Gary doesn;t have to prove anything. There is criteria for "fair use" that every DEFENDANt has to meat.
the burden of proof is on the DEFENDANT. Sinc ehe has used the other persons copyrighted material...
duh....
FriendOregon 2 years ago
There are 4 very specific criteria that need to be met to prove fair use. Non of the videos inmendham has ever taken down have ever not achieved at least 3 of them.
Inmendham is the one forwarding this case on HIS OWN definition of fair use that doenst have any correlation to the actual meanings that the court is going to use to establish the validity of his claim.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Just like he used his own definition of the constitution to sue all the judges and the state of new jersey...
lol, you have no idea who you are defending here mate .
Aspartame69 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Just like he used his own definition of the constitution to sue all the judges and the state of new jersey..."
Again you keep going back to court case that has nothing to do with the issue. However I guess thats allyou got.
Personally I hope judge breaks the law to fuck you over one day because I know you'll just take it like a butt hurt bitch.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Yes I know what the fucking 4 criteria are and it is up to the DEFENDANT that they met all 4. AGAIN the burden of proof is on the DEFENDANT. Get that through your fucking thick skull. Gary's own fucking definition doesn't fucking matter, he doesn't need to do shit.
Thats where your fucking WRONG again dipshit.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Well, all the videos that were DMCA'd were;
1. Non-profit
2. Based on non-fiction (very hard to copyright something you claim to be a fact)
3. Small portions of the original work
4. Did not effect the commerical value of the original work...
So what part of fair use do you not understand?
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Your are so fucking ignorance of the law is unreal.
1. the purpose and CHARCTER of the USE (this does not just include for or not for profit).
2. the NATURE of the copyrighted work (not fucking public domain, individual inteectual copy righted work, copy righted under a register copyright)
3. Small portions (in some case not)
4. the effect of the use upon the POTENTIAL market for or value. (read between the fucking lines)
FriendOregon 2 years ago
The best inmendham could do is claim that his videos are like a work of fiction that he is working towards selling in the future. But that position would be easily to argue against. And even then wouldnt put the DMCA'd videos in a bad position considering the other factors.
I wont say case closed on the inmendham lolsuits, i look forward to the conclusion. I will say case closed on your infatuation with inmendham and stupidity in being willing to take a litigious arsehole at his word. :)
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Also it is up to the DEFENDANt to prove they did not violate any of those criteria as the burden of proof lie with them.
inmenddrons.... lolsiute... yeah grow up you moron.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
You are again wrong. Inmendham, having brought the case will have to establish exactly what law gives him a legal claim for compensation. He will have to show that he is suing under copyright law and will have to present evidence to support his argument that the material is not covered under fair use, since, its pretty obvious the defendants will be using fair use to defend themselves.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Yes he will state his case at the outline but apart form that he doesn't need to PROVE anything. The key word being PROOF.
As I have laid out in the giudlines below he quiet cleary has a case.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
He will have to rebutt the defendants case that the videos in question fall into fair use, thats the legal meaning of the term not inmendhams, i.e. the four categories. If he fails to suggest why, then its pretty much a foregone conclusion that his suit not only will fail, but that he has again, gone to court, with no understanding of the written law that he is using to prosecute someone.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"He will have to rebutt the defendants case that the videos in question fall into fair use, thats the legal meaning of the term not inmendhams"
The judge will read the plaintiffs statement. He will review the criteria for fair use. Then the defend must prove that they where working within the bounds of fair use.
Thats how it works you ignorant little childish fool.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
And then i am in little doubt that he will continue to sue the judge in this case like he has done in many of his previous cases, even though he already knows they have judicial immunity. He sues them because he is an angry man, and cannot control his urges to lash out at people in the only ways he can, verbally and legally.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Ill give you a little foresight into this; have you ever heard inmendham address the 4 criteria of legal fair use? no you havent. You know why? because he doesnt have a case to make against fair use so as is stands, this is all a waste of time. Just drama for us and a tool for inmendham to use to bully people into silence because his large but fragile ego cannot take criticism.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Foresight? Your can't see the forest for the trees mate and you giving me foresight? yeah thats a joke and a half.
Also I have heard him adress the criteria for fair use all over his videos. His videos are proof that he understands it far more than little ignorant trolls like you.
The truth is you presume to much. You aren't a lawyer and from what you have stated so far you most likely never will be. All you have done it drawn from irrelivant cases and opinions.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
You have never heard him address the criteria of fair use in his videos. You have heard him assert that people making videos that mock him are malicious. Unfortunately for inmendham, the intent of the person who takes copyrighted material is never in question on copyright law unless A-they intend to make money from it, or B-They are reducing the copyright holders ability to make money from it.
His videos around these DMCAs show that he is butthurt and a poor fragile emotionally childlike person
Aspartame69 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"B-They are reducing the copyright holders ability to make money from it."
lol your a complete moron.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Really your just an ignorant little troll that can't help but see your world view threatened. So you go around trying to prove Gary has no case even though he still has an "active" case due to the appeals court saying he does! that is clearly going to be decided in court!
So keep whining you butt hurt bitch. However you have 0 power in deciding this case. The courts will and Gary is going through the PROPER procedures unlike you who seems to stipulate alot of ballocks with 0 credentials.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
I never said i was going to decide it. I do notice how you are the only one who is getting frustrated here :) Thats a sign that you are finding it difficult to maintain your position with decent points :)
Also, you are now falling back on the 'he won an appeal' argument, like ive already told you is nothing to do with the validity of his case lol.
Next you will tell me hes never sued any judges again and we can keep chasing your circular argument all day :)
Aspartame69 2 years ago
anyway, im sure you will see things a little differently when the judge follows the letter of the law and dismisses inmendhams case (again, but for the right reason this time).
Although, who knows. You might be one of the mad ones who stand by inmendham with no knowledge of the law or the events but just 'take his word for it' because he talks with absolute conviction :)
Take care my gullible friend...
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Who knows you might be petty bitch that stands by what you say with pure conviction even thoug your not a legal professional even though I have pionted out why inmendham has a case and all because you hate him because he probably blocked you or something minor like that. Poor poor petty but hurt bitch.
Take care my retarded friend =)
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Why dont you take some time to read the past cases on inmendhams website to see whos teh retarded bitch here.
Ill give you a clue, its neither of us :)
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Absolute bullshit is what you will spout if you just constantly repeat what inmendham tells you...
You repeating exactly what he tells you and taking his word for it is exactly why people like you are confused about him...
Aspartame69 2 years ago
There is a guy down the street from me that i just know is pedophile. You know why I know this, because he hit a dog in a car the other day...
Relevance? none.
FriendOregon 2 years ago
Willfull ignorance.. I sometimes wonder if all inmendrones have a similar level of depression / mental illness as inmendham himself.
You havent even accepted that you know fuck all about his court actions even though you claim others are ignorant of it LOL.
Well, at this stage all that is left to be done is for the judge to dismiss inmendhams lolsuit (like usual) and explain to you inmendrones exactly what the law is there to protect.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
You can say im trolling for mentioning his mental condition, but it is a prime factor in nearly all his 'philosophy' videos and also his interactions with people inside and outside courtrooms.
Aspartame69 2 years ago
Yup
rozeboosje 2 years ago 2
another awesome video. I love the combo.
borgincest 2 years ago
Thanx... it seemed fitting.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
I just commented on his latest video linking to this one hehehehe
borgincest 2 years ago
I appreciate you spreading the video around, but lets not start anything that isn't there :)
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
wonder if gary is going to make a video about you... He seems to like maiing them about everyone who criticises him :S
unassumption 2 years ago
He might not care (or even notice). He seems to be in a good mood since getting his account back. Not that I am too worried about it. I've been called worse by better people I'm sure :)
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
Another great video!
You should sell prints.
kosherzombie 2 years ago
I appreciate the vote of confidence but this stuff isn't worth selling really lol.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago
You're silly!
I take it you never heard of a Snuggie before!
People will buy ANYTHING!!! :-)
kosherzombie 2 years ago
I don't know what the fuck you just said because I was looking at what you were doning...but then again i don't have a clue as to what you were doing,,,,but it was cooler than what you were saying.
zenguin13 2 years ago 2
lol.... as long as you were entertained one way or another.
PiratedLogic 2 years ago