I, and my ISP, received Kobrinagrams, or as I like to call them 'Scarymail'. These were apparently sent after I commented on a post made by someone else on ARS that supposedly contained copyrighted material written by L. R. Hubbard.
My ISP wanted me to cancel the posts, but I demurred, for good and valid reasons, which my ISP eventually, it seems, has accepted.
Here for your amusement and education are the relevant posts from and to the Kobra, myself and my ISP.
Part One:
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 22:52:17 -0400
(Posted and Mailed)
I find it hard to believe any real Lawyer would possibly think that anyone
However, since the infamous Ms. Kobrin has been known to audit
>Received: from netcom6.netcom.com (hkk@netcom6.netcom.com [192.100.81.114])
>Dear Mr. Hagglund:
> I represent Religious Technology Center ("RTC"), the owner of the
confidential
> You posted to alt.religion.scientology, and nl.scientology RTC's
copyrighted materials,
> elrond-0906971705360001@cgowave-7-50.cgocable.net
> These postings violate United States and Canadian copyright law.
We therefore request that it be removed immediately.
> We are currently involved in litigation over the same and similar
materials in several
> We are not seeking to become involved in litigation, but we will
take all necessary
> Please confirm that this posting has been removed.
> Sincerely,
Dear Ms. Kobrin,
As I believe you are known to be one of the 'lawyers' of the RTC
I will
It is a common legal concession in both Canada and the U.S.A. that
According to Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, the purpose of litigation
Should you wish to contact me again please do so by regular post as
As to the content of your communique, I am equally disappointed to receive
I am not foolish enough to accept any claim of legal copyright from
First I would like to point out, since I have no resource guide to
Second, I would add as well, that it is hardly possible for I or
Third, I would point out since many Usenet providers do not accept
Fourth, I am not bound by any court injunction made in any case which
Fifth, as you are well aware RTC has conceded in the current litigations that
Therefore I would expect to receive a communique from you,
1. A Canadian Court Certified copy of the court ruling in the United States
Subsequently:
2. A Canadian Court certified copy of "NOTs Series No. 7" which
Further, if we do not wish to go through this dance eternally, then I suggest
This material should be on CD ROM in Power Mac Native Code. I will then be
In the alternative, RTC might chose to communicate to me the authenticity of
It will, of course be interesting to read any explanation that RTC may have
I, too, do not wish to become involved in time wasting litigation, however,
Lastly, I would like to caution you and your clients to become more familiar
Some of these criminal acts for which the Church of Scientology was found
So now that you have threatened me and tried to 'shudder me' me into silence
Just order the OSA to provide you with a copy of the cancel my post
The rest has been all an automatic act of intimidation.
Yours truly,
Gregg SP4
--
" I'm sure it's obvious to all who read my stuff, that I have
$cientology Lawyer Bait: Co$ cures Cancer?:
[ADDENDUM: Cancel faq - in part-
No. Many news sites have decided that, for whatever reason,
[ADDENDUM: The RTC has sought to drop all Trade Secret
To:abuse@netcom.com
I find it hard to believe any real Lawyer would possibly think that anyone
However I am not sure.
The Co$ has my full name and address in their OSA intelligence files
In the alternative, a simple Net Search of Canada 411 produces my
On the otherhand I am led to believe that Ms. Kobrin is taken to fits
Not wishing to see Ms. Kobrin getting into any trouble with either
Of course, should she properly communicate, legally, her clients
Additionally a real lawyer for RTC would not fail to remove from the message
A real lawyer would know all this, that is why I am leaning towards
Your attention and help in this matter would be appreciated as it may
Sincerely yours,
William G. Hagglund
From: elrond@cgo.wave.ca (Gregg Hagglund)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re:Purported Claim of Unauthorized Use of Copyrighted Materials
Organization: ESI Council
NNTP-Posting-Host: cgowave-7-50.cgocable.net
Lines: 244
with half a brain would accept as valid any purported legal document or
claim sent via the common and easily manipulated medium of e-mail.
tomatoes and command ashtrays to fly, it is not an impossibility that
this is a real posting.
> by mail.cgocable.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA29637
>
>Received: (from hkk@localhost) by netcom6.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom)
> id PAA07931; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 15:51:15 -0700
>Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 15:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Subject: Unauthorized Use of Copyrighted Materials
>To: elrond@cgo.wave.ca
>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>X-UIDL: d1e570ce526a71ae8c2e09d53d05b961
>Advanced Technology of the Scientology religion and the holder of
exclusive rights under the
>copyrights applicable to the Advanced Technology materials. The Advanced
Technology
>materials are confidential, unpublished, copyrighted works. RTC's works
include, among others,
>the individual works comprising a level known as "NOTs."
>known as "NOTs Series No. 7" using the following message ID:
>
> These works have been posted to these newsgroups without the
authorization of my
>client. The works are registered with the US Copyright Office under
registration numbers TXu
>257326 and 257527.
>lawsuits. 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, 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.
>measures to protect my client's intellectual property rights. We presume
that you would agree
>that we can resolve this amicably.
> Helena Kobrin
have to express my extreme disappointment in receiving your communique.
electronic communications of this sort are not legal notification of any
kind and are simply done for the sake of harassment.
"is to harass and discourage rather than to win. The law can be used very easily
to harass and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the the edge
anyway, well knowing that his is not authorised, will generally be sufficient
to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly."
I shall be configuring my E-Mail software to filter anything further from you
or any other of the list of known RTC legal representatives.
such misinformation from a purported legal representative of the RTC.
anyone on any material which I can buy for 60 Kroner, by mail, from
the Swedish Parliament. Material which has been available for over
half a year on the Internet!
consult as to what is actually a true document originating from
those documents which RTC claims copyright from, I must point
out to you that any claim made by you of copyright will have to be
accompanied by a Canadian Court certified original of same before
I may be compelled to withdraw anything from the Internet.
anyone else to constantly check for possible copyrights on any Usenet
posting if such documents are not readily available in the public library
or a book store. It is also impractical and ludicrous to suggest, or imply,
that I, or anyone else, must needs spend considerable time and effort
checking the authenticity of and authority of the content of any Usenet
posting which I do not originate.
or recognize cancels, then any effort I would make to cancel any message
I have originated would be less than perfect and therefore pointless in a
medium whereby such a message may be disseminated repeatedly in quotations
until the end of time.
RTC is a part of in any jurisdiction outside of the one I reside: Ontario
Canada.
it has no answer to the KOLT RULING that recognises the NOTS series as a
work for hire owned by CSC, which, despite being a bankrupt corporation and
in debt to one L. Wollersheim for a sum exceeding 5 million US dollars,
was able to loan the CoS Toronto Org several millions to pay its fines for
Criminal
acts and Libel Awards against it.
via the regular posts which accomplishes the following:
that overturns the KOLT RULING or recognises that CSC transferred such
rights to the RTC and the date of that transfer and the *clear acceptance* by a
U.S. Court that such transfer was legal.
clearly establishes the RTC copyright as valid pursuant to 1., above.
you either provide to me Canadian Court certified copies of all copyrighted
materials held by the RTC which are not affected by the KOLT RULING or,
should you be able to fulfil 1. above, then provide me with all RTC copyrighted
material.
able to effectively screen any Usenet posting for its copyright content
as an automatic process via a filtering program. The costs of same I would expect you to
bear as it is your obligation to show bonafide and legal claim to copyright of any
document which is not readily available to the public in a recognisable and open manner.
Otherwise one might as well expect individuals to be able to read the minds of RTC
lawyers to ascertain the validity of and copyright of unavailable material.
those documents available on the Internet and through the Swedish Parliament
as true accurate copies of documents RTC claims legitimate copyrights upon,
provided of course you first satisfy 1., above.
for requesting anyone, including myself, to refrain from publicly
examining or
commenting on in the Usenet Medium any such documents which have been and
continue to be disseminated, unobstructed by the RTC, in the public domain of
the the Internet and the State of Sweden by its Parliament.
since it is your position that I should comply with what you claim to be a
simple
request to accomplish two impossibilities, that is 'unring a bell' and
discern the
hidden ownership of the content of every quoted Usenet post I encounter, then
it becomes your obligation to make these impossibilities either worth attempting
or possible at all.
with Canadian Law as it has currently evolved in our courts in particular
to the
Church of Scientology and its associated business ventures.
One should note that the largest libel settlement in Canadian History was
wrung from the CoS Toronto by a Crown Counsel; and the Ontario Court of
Appeal has ruled in effect that criminal acts performed *by* members or
employees
of the Church of Scientology *for* the benefit of the Church of Scientology
are to be considered as criminal acts *of* the Church of Scientology.
responsible for and paid fines for, involved the infiltration of and
espionage upon
leading Law Firms here in Toronto. And they will accept Legal Aid for which I am
qualified as my only assets are my tools of trade which by Canadian law
may not
be lost by me as a result of the necessity of financing a Defence or
launching an
Action or to satisfy any Judgment. This includes my computer as, amongst
many
things I am a contract computer artist.
and I have indicated to you that it is neither likely or possible that you
will be
able to do so without incredible cost, no possible recompense and every
likelihood of your clients losing any countersuit for frivolous and malicious
prosecution, then there is only one simple recourse for you to take.
which they already have done themselves.
That should satisfy the needs and claims of your client RTC.
http://www.cgocable.net/~elrond
serious problems when it comes to being able to communicate."
- -RonsAmigo, Official OSA Shill on ARS
"Step Four - Cures for Illness You will now find BTs and clusters
being cures for illnesses of the body part. Handle all such BTs and
clusters by blowing them off. 'Cures for Illness' will then cease to read."
--- ררר L.R.Hubbard (c) ??? ---
II part D. Do all news sites accept cancels?
they do not want cancels; others merely do not want certain types of
cancels. Dave Hayes, for example, runs a "Site of Virtue", which not
only ignores cancels but drops them without distributing them; patches
for INN to do this are available from his Freedom Knights Homepage, at
http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet.]
claims in its US litigations.
Of course I just had to contact: abuse@netcom.com about this abuse.
From: Gregg Hagglund, elrond@cgo.wave.ca
Subject: Possible Fraudulent Appropriation and Use of a Netcom Users Account
with half a brain would accept as valid any purported legal document or
claim sent
via the common and easily manipulated medium of e-mail.
However, since the infamous Ms. Kobrin has been known to audit
tomatoes and command ashtrays to fly, it is not an impossibility that
this is a real posting.
As a Canadian Citizen, where Church of Scientology has recently had their
criminal conviction of the entire organisation here *upheld*, I have to
believe that no one who really represents the RTC which is part of the
Co$ would send such a rant/request via unauthenticated email, instead
utilizing next day courier post.
This would be considered barratous and still another fine could be imposed by
the Crown upon the woe-be-gotten Church of Scientology.
so communicating to me via the proper legal channel of the Post Office
would be a simple feat to accomplish.
singular name and pertinent postal data. Any idiot can accomplish this
simple task. Even one such as I, who can barely master a Mac CPU.
of haste and stupidity upon occasion, such as attempting to cancel an entire
news group and threatening to sue all the inhabitants of planet earth who access
alt.religion.scientology. More likely she has let some junior over
achiever in her office have access to her account. But I am not sure.
the Crown or her employers, would you be so kind as to remind her
that she should not let another post from her account, no matter how well
intentioned such lending might be. (And, I might add, that unathenticated
email postings of this flawed nature into the foreign jurisdiction of Canada not only
do not constitute legal notice of any kind but may lead to Crown initiated litigation
for herself and her clients in light of the recent court rulings here.)
notice and incontrovertable proof of undisputed copyrights, if any,
in this matter, I would consider canceling the post in question as useless
as said gesture would be.
below the claim of the existence of injunctions based on Trade Secrets.
Any lawyer involved in these cases knows that RTC has withdrawn
such Trade Secret Claims in the litigations mentioned, as does any
regular reader of alt.religion.scientology.
thinking this may be someone else using her account to do stupid
legal tricks.
save Ms. Kobrin considerable embarassment with her employer
or further abuse of her netcom account, whichever.
Previous
Next
Top of Page
Main Site Index
This Section Index
