<![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @missnormadesmond: I'm not familiar with that website but am pretty good at google - I'll give it a shot and see what I can find

Catsandbeer.com

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I believe that your response is valid and a good argument. BUT you could really obfuscate things by playing their own game; get yourself ordained by the Universal and Progressive Life Church (mine cost $20; it may have gone up) and claim that you're putting it on the website for religious reasons and for the purposes of religious education.

xiphoguy

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> make sure your lawyers get a good look at this link. I think it will help them in your defense particularly with respect to Scientology's willingness to dismiss the trademark claims which may provide authority for waivers.

[www.factnet.org]

HomerPupPup

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @catsandbeer: While you're at it, why not give us the URL for the Mafia's "Law Enforcement: an Industry of People Getting in the Way of Our Making More Money" website?

MissNormaDesmond

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> wow. You sure you wanna go to court with people who got lawyers that take on the IRS? that will be a uphill battle. but goodluck n down with the cult.

xenuth3mighty

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> "Sub-licensees"? Seriously? You mean the one guy who runs the itsy video booth at the strip mall "church" location?

jood42

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Anybody got a Xanax?

Ummwhat

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @LittleLolly: wish i said that

Ummwhat

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> the theme differs by one beat-or something to that effect, but i bet schifrin could get them to cave by pure public outrage in their handling of this all around.
and even so- a good copyright atty could win this.

kc23

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> lawyers are truly the devils agents

ATETHELIST

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> My apologies, the website referenced that Scientology tried unmercilessly to shut down is www.xenu.net, its heading on the page is Operation Clambake. Please note that Church of Scientology does NOT, NOT have a trademark on the likeness of Tom Cruise, so I cannot see how they can claim trademark/copyright infringement for showing it. He is a public persona. This is analogous to those sex tapes being made public. Unless the Church of Scientology can claim a trademark on Cruise (which clearly they cannot), they should not win. The same nonsense they used to pull with the DMCA, which they do not claim anyore. (They used to claim DCMA protection on any LRH stuff following its passage in 2000).

HomerPupPup

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Go Gaby! The scientologists used to use the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DCMA) in order to shut down negative web traffic. I agree with your response to fair use. The problem is the costs of defense are prohibitive. For some interesting legal history, see www.operationclambake.com (a mirror site run in Europe) in which the Scientologists spent big, big bucks to shut down and did not succeed. Good luck and keep FREEDOM OF SPEECH. The net knocks all kinds of religions, but the difference between other religions who laugh off any criticism, the Scientologists have issues and of course, make themselves look suspicious by engaging in such litigation. But what could you expect from a religion founded by LRH who famously stated (not an exact quote), if you want to be rich, start a religion. I think the IRS gave up after 10 years of litigation for them to get the religious organization status merit badge.

HomerPupPup

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> One thing that this shitstorm has accomplished.... I now have every intention of reading Morton's book, where I wouldn't have considered it before. I have always thought Cruise was a few pucks short of a shootout.

Retribution? I'm Canadian, I've already been downsized, my horse died years ago, and my kids are scary/crazier than the CSI. I fear nothing.

mielikki

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> LOL What a nutbag! LOL Good for you, Gawker, for standing in there. Have they accused you of being a child molester yet? That's their favorite thing: ruining one's reputation by simply "leaking" that you're a child molester. Good luck with that. No, really! LOL Seriously, good job. I only got to see this video because you had the courage to leave it up. Thank you.

doncobb

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Isn't this something.... I believe all of us here (I'm in) here could be of help to Gawker by putting our support forth; by comment, giving $ support, taking up protests of Scino orginazations and any other necessary legal means if in fact a law suit or harassment surfaces. The only reason the church of $ has been so successful in intimidating and harassing decent people is because not enough "spectators" have come forth to bear pressure upon them. Tommy boy says, (in effect), "we can't just be "spectators"- "we see a problem (like injustice)- we have to do something about it". Well I suggest.. let's try Tom's advice.... :) Perhaps the "Church's" concern here is the "Trance State" Tom appears to be in... a symptom which is widely reported on various web sites and poses the very danger that so many warn about... Ummmm.

JackeeBlake

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I look at this manipulative, vindictive, ruthless sociopath who plays games with the truth and profits from the misfortune of his betters, and I think... He's the perfect guy to stand up to Scientology!

Jim Treacher

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> you guys need to stop trashing scientologists - they're the good guys - check out a fun photo field trip to their cool psychiatry museum: Scientology's "Psychiatry: An Industry of Death" Museum!

Catsandbeer.com

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Gaby, let me know if you need any help from a former insider.

JustmeHere

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I thought Scientologists were required to put "SHOW ME THE MONEY!" in their e-mail signatures.

stop complaining about gas prices

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> so nice of them to provide the direct link to the video in their request to have it removed. that way we can all download our own copy and spread the nuttiness.

here ya go if you'd rather click than type:
[cache.gawker.com]

bajeje

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> It will be taken down again soon.
[tinyurl.com]

xenovis

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Here's an idea for those who wish to monkey wrench the Assault Lawyers. Since Gawker was so nice as to provide the address for said same lawyers, please pick up all your old empty tin cans and batteries (of every size), box 'em up and send 'em to the attourneys office. Don't use your real return address, but do PLEASE send something to help those poor Scientologists in their quest to electrocute the THETANS.

libguy

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Nick,

I do have to say you are "THE MAN" honestly, I am so happy you did this, and Gaby's response is perfect!

What a bunch of bloated head freaks, you are doing the right thing and finally shining a light into a VERY DARK abyss of lies and deceit.

juhbuh

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Mrs Darbyshire needs to cite examples of other news organizations that have used copyrighted material as part of their broadcast. It is commonplace to do so.

I've seen videos of Scientology's PR people mercilessly harassing anyone that expresses an opinion about them that isn't approved by the church. They are bar far the most malicious cult around in the US today. They are made more dangerous by their relatively convincing facade.

Just wait until they start getting involved in public policy making, that should be fun.

cobweb

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Dr. Nut: ROFL!

Kalessin

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Team SP!

raincoaster

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I would like to dedicate an AC/DC song to you, Nick Denton. And, it isn't even highway to hell.

dubiouswonder

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Calitri:
So it doesn't mean Cunty Stinking Idolaters?

andheartss nom noms cold hearts

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Talking of copyright infringement, I wonder if the scientologists have paid to use the Mission Impossible theme as the background music through that video?

clickety6

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @bettycrocker: "She should Paquette in."

That comment alone is reason enough to Digg this story.
Nice.

Foamator

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Go Gaby, go!!! Fair use has a posse!

Annalee Newitz

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Good job, Gaby!

For your efforts, I hereby award you with the Freedom Medal of Valor! Wear it proudly.

fuzzycuffs

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> That lawfirm is awesome. "During Operation Snow White, in which eleven Scientologists pleaded guilty or were convicted in federal court; Moxon was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator for providing false handwriting samples to the FBI in response to a Grand Jury subpoena." They sure have integrity. $cientology is the best! GO XENU, esquire!

Mobius

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Brassservices:
You're reading way too much into the supposed incompatibility of CSI claiming to have a good faith belief *and* actual knowledge. "Good faith belief" is a legal term-of-art threshold for the claim she's making, and not much more. As objectionable as you might find the legalese and convention, lawyers routinely claim to have both good faith beliefs and actual knowledge without incurring criminal and civil penalties.

tikk

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Sorry if these have already been posted - they're worth a look if you are interested in seeing how nuts Scientology is:

[theunfunnytruth.ytmnd.com]

[www.youtube.com]

[www.youtube.com]

voicegy

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Karion:
no law degree here. this is as complexed an issue, or as simple an issue as Al Capone being brought down for tax evasion instead of violating prohibition, or Clinton impeached for perjury, or any antitrust action. yes the legal issue is complex, but the crux of my point is that they committed perjury in this letter with the intent to defraud and that their officers have failed in their legal duties. there are criminal and civil penalties that can attach to these things, AND if individuals like you and I petition OUR government(s) for redress of grievances, maybe some regulatory investigations and other legal actions might occur. because you don't understand words written in plain English don't assume that your peers here are quite as dense as you, or that they don't know how to exercise their rights

BrassServices

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> KMA Scientology! You can SMD and GFY!

I'm going to incorporate acronyms into my speech just like Miss Cruise!

itmustbeken

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Dont worry, I have seen this video has also made it to the newsgroups were it pretty much can not be deleated. I was in alt.binaries.divx . Search for Tom cruise scientology babble.avi and you can find it.

bobjr94

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Nick, whatever you do, don't cave to the legal harassment. Forcing a dialog about religious lunacy is a great public service, because the mythology and magical thinking of Scientology is qualitatively no different than that of all the rest of the world's religions. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and claims proffered without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

joeseither

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I wish your reply letter had said "We choose not to comply with your request". To say you cannot comply implies that somehow your hands are tied, because the request was too bogus. Fuck'em! You choose to keep it online!

And yes, it's bogus. She has a good faith belief, AND knows it for a fact? That makey no sensey. You'd think the people at CSI, who can analyze blood samples so quickly, would be more fact-oriented.

Urbania

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Ah, the legal way of saying:

"Yeah, um, no."

Love it.

Dusty in the Wind

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Tom Cruise is the only example I will ever need to prove my point on Organized religion being evil. All I will have to say as an argument is -"Well, look at Tom Cruise." Nuff said. And for that you crazy bugger, I say Thank you.

killah68

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I say this should be settled in a fight: Drizzt Do'Urden and his Army of LOLcats vs. Lord Xenu and the Thetans.

amplesufficiency

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> There is a parody of Tom Cruise scientology speech on myspace videos. It is friggin hilarious! And I've been thinking- We mere humans should get a counter cult going to rebel against the evil force of scientology. We could call ourselves "R.A.S.P.B.E.R.R.I.E.S."-Rebelling Against Scientologist Preaching Bastards Endangering Rational Reasonable Individuals Emotional Stabilty. I thought of that last night and woke up with a cold this morning, coincidence? I think not!!!

killah68

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> What are you so afraid of you freaks? Afraid all us over-medicated, non privelaged, permission asking people will see you are nutjobs? Too Late! Eat it bitches.

killah68

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> word.

What it is

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> please let this become an ongoing battle. i just want to see them get their ufo's and lazers out. i believe this could become the next holy war. (and yet have nothing holy about it)

abi

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I got some things I want to say, but honestly, the idea of these people having the resources to be everywhere and see everything creeps me out beyond belief. I want those of you who spoke up against Tom and his cult to come back in a few months and tell us if anything weird has happened in your lives, like if your tax return gets audited for the first time, or you start getting pulled over by the cops more often, or your position at work is suddenly eliminated by corporate, or your childs college scholarship is revoked for no good reason. I bet it happens. We hear about the negative way these cult members influence society with harrassment and law suits, but where is the proof they're doing anything positive for anyone outside their own little circle?

Hey Tom, what's your theory regarding the frightening increase of autism? How do we fix THAT little problem? Am I truly NOT supposed to put my child on medications when it's the only affordable option? What are YOU doing to make other treatment options available to the lower & middle class income parents of kids with autism? You say you and your church members are the ONLY ones who "know" and who can truly help. So help ME! Help MY child! You want to make believers out of the rest of us? Then give us a reason to believe. Reach out to those of us who struggle to help our kids in the only way we can afford........with prescription drugs that help control their behaviors. Vitamins aren't covered by insurance, you know. Either is ABA therapy. And food stamps meant to be used for the entire family disapear pretty fast when using them to purchase the foods required to meet the needs of a special diet for one autistic child.

You want to make a difference? Use those resources to be everywhere and see everything to find ME and help MY child live a better life without the use of medications!

SueBoo

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I am waiting for the Tionna Smalls Scientology indoctrination tape.

FORGETITJAKE

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> CSI
Cruise Shamanism Inc.

WordSalad

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> It's times like this when I think to myself, "Thank God for the Jews".

BaronBo

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> So, they get it pulled here. It's already on YouTube multiple times. Thousands of us have downloaded it. What's the point? The cat's out of the bag, their star evangelist is batshit crazy.

EddyHorse

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> If I was the producers of of CBS's CSI - I would be really pissed and sue those Scientologists for stealing the name of their show.

PatriciaM

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I guess Tom wasn't able to "cancel" Gabby in his "area". This woman rocks.

PatriciaM

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @bananappeal: NOT used to the media.

bananappeal

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Gawker has lawyers? Scientologists are used to the media having them law-talking guys. Usually they just send off a form letter and the editor of whatever publication runs around the office screaming 'They're going to sue!' and then kills the story.

bananappeal

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> 1, 2 Ava's coming for you
3, 4 better lock your serverdoor(?)
5, 6 grab your prozac pills
7, 8 better stay up late
9, 10 never sleep again.

Henifer Hropes

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> How ironic that the video steals the theme from Mission Impossible as its background music...

birdmantle

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Please have backup Gawker, Jezebel, and Gizmodo's ready for when they have your host/datacenter shut off your accounts.

EricaJoy

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> A few points regarding fair use here. As others have pointed out, fair use is not quantifiable and is usually considered within a larger context (and varies court to court, minute to minute, etc.). One point in Denton's favor is that the 9+ minute clip is part of a 1 hour video; it is an excerpt, despite the new life it's taken on as 'that creepy Tom Cruise video.' That does help Denton's fair use argument but I question how much; nine minutes is substantial, and the piece is uninterrupted by commentary. Publishing 1/6 of a medium size book would almost definitely not be considered fair use.

But Gaby Darbyshire's response indicates that Denton plans to argue something more interesting: Because everyone was talking about the clip it somehow transformed itself into news, and can therefore be published as fair use. The problems with that argument are that (1) Denton helped turn it into news, and (2) there is a lack of case law supporting it. Indeed, the most obvious case on point works against Denton, that being Los Angeles News Service v. KCAL-TV Channel 9, 108 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 1997) (unlicensed broadcast of Reginald Denny beating during LA riots not fair use). So I don't think this fair use argument will work if CSI decides to actually sue.

In Denton's favor, it will be difficult for Scientology to show substantial damages, since the purpose of this video is by their own admission non-commercial, not to mention four years old. And while it's obvious they're being "damaged" in the sense that its airing is bad publicity for them, bad publicity isn't calculated as damages in copyright law. Scientology can show enough damages to keep the suit from being dismissed, however, and since they're not rational actors in the economic sense (they'll spend $1000 in legal fees to get your $1 in order to either set a precedent or brand you a criminal), the possibility that they would bring a complex suit to bleed Denton of legal fees is real.

tikk

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I think Cruise is a shitty actor that plays the same character in pretty much everthing he does--himself. But even if I thought he was good, I wouldn't want to give scientology any money by attending his movies. When you spend money on entertainment involving Tom Cruise, some of that money will find its way to scientology! I did however, buy the unauthorized bio by Andrew Morton that just came out, courage like this should be rewarded.

donocaster

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Nobody puts Gawker in the corner!

Rock hard...

guruscotty

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Thank you, Gaby, for helping school the Thought-Nazis in the part of copyright law they willfully ignore.

Gawker, stand your ground and let me know if I can help.

economy1

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Keep it up Denton. The BBC is playing a clip of it. You can't be all wrong.

nolatoseatac

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Litigious and Scientology go together like a horse and carriage.

miss_msry

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> This is my first ever comment on gawker.
hmm.

Rock on Mr. Denton.

nickybee

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I don't think it's worth it to fight for your right to display an entire copyrighted video on a fair use basis. It isn't covered. You have to either excerpt it or forget about it. Unfortunately, if you get gawkish with them they'll hound you to the ends of the earth. If your invocation of the fair use principle was sound or the video was compelling, I'd support you.
Good luck.

jousterusa

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Creepy, I could say so much, but I'll say this, I've been deposed by Ava's Boss Elliot Abelson, I've had my business phones tapped by this church and I've had friends harassed into bankruptcy by them. Scientology Sycophant Ava is fond of sporting her red power suit (think Dynasty shoulder pads), and greeting you with fake sickening grins which make you want to check on your children. There needs to be a concerted public effort against this crazy racket! They need to be harassed into spending all of their money on frivolous lawsuits. Retake Hollywood before they spawn another Tom Cruise or worse..."Battlefield Earth 2"!

zibgot

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> CSI has pushed critics around for years with frivolous lawsuits. Happily, you are a high profile site and your story is already proliferating across all of the top social news networks. Let them come at you and turn this into the biggest anti-scientology internet shit storm ever. The internet hates scientology like nature hates a vacuum.

I think this is one where they are going to lose. Dig in and let it escalate. Fight them every inch and aim for the front page of Digg and Reddit. Isnt there some kind of proactive anti-scientology activity we can engage in while this goes down? This could be a great lesson to them not to mess with the internet.

ironchef253

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> oh, and watch out Gawker too, I suppose...

Lady Shrimpton

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I found this article re: the Church of Scientologies revenge tactics chilling: [en.wikipedia.org]

All I can say is, Watch out Andrew Morton.

Lady Shrimpton

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> This is probably the best thing Gawker has ever done. You are redeemed in my eyes. Congratulations.

Avery

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @maggiesfarmer: I'm unfashionably late to this party, but I've gotta say, that was an exquisitely apropos comment.

Lysergic Asset

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Mr. Cruise and the vessel of L. Ron Hubbard's star trekking spirit (formerly known as Katie) must be stopped! For anyone needing their daily allowance of neo-religious bullshit!.......

[youtube.com]

Ah, the magic of the internet!

stuff_it

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> totally baseless. you could hit the *motherload* here, denton.

exleysdavenport

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Can I be deposed from my built-in videocam with my cat Fluffy on my lap?

belltolls

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> you go! So many sites cowtow at the drop of a hat. Where are good old fashioned American balls???

BMNB1tches

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Please try and convince Ava Packardbell that Julia Allison is the true power behind GawkerMedia. Then sit back and wait for the toaster to fall in her shower - 2Birds,1Stone etc...
Srsly - props to GawkerMedia on this one. I admire your balls, Mr Denton - I also hear that I'm not the first one, either.
I can see this elevating to an "I am Sparticus" moment, but I think that's from lack of sleep.

VirusWithShoes

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Denton's top brass taking on CSI. Dramatic groundhog turns eye on Xenu now.

BalknChain

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I <3 Gawker 100 times more than before for not taking this down. Keep up the good work. You all rock my world!

Lady Di

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Cruise's snappy little salute at the end of the (ahem) Award Ceremony reminds me of another time and place: 1933 Germany,

OILCANHARRY

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @crookedlawyer: Borderline?

BMG v. Gonzalez does not stand for what she claims it does in the slightest. The holding there related to the right to have a jury decide damages despite a grant of summary judgment in a copyright-infringement case where the plaintiff seeks statutory damages upon such grant. Sure, there's supplemental discussion of the infringement itself, but the laughably broad concept that our Ms. Paquette throws out there is nowhere to be found. Besides which, along the lines of Truculent's comment: Denton's dead-on about the newsworthiness here, which would at least serve for a fun- and solid- defense if CSI could find a crazed judge in some District Court willing to call this "infringement."

As for the "criminal charges," just have a look at 18 U.S.C. 2314. How, exactly, would one shoehorn this video clip- any video clip- in there? Can you actually call a video clip culled from YouTube a "good?"

flipper baby

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Dear Ms. Paquette:
Fuquette off.
Sincerely, Gawker

TheBigDoggy

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> we love you G A W K E R. Keep up the battle against the creepy crawlers of Scientology. Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, they're so GROSS!

[www.theweeklydonut.com]

D.O.D.

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> hell yes.

rock out with your gawk out.

jlowe413

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> L Ron Hubbard was doing booze and pills when he wrote a lot of the tenets Scientologists now follow. Hubbard also once told his son, "Religion- that's where the money is." Sounds like ol' Ron could be pretty smart when he wasn't drunk and/or stoned. Speaking of which, I wonder if one of the requirements of the cult is to act drunk and/or stoned when doing video-taped interviews. Tommy boy certainly sounds that way, like a Deadhead grooving to a concert. No wonder Nicole left him, and Penelope's father disapproved of him. And it's also not a wonder that he distrusts psychiatrists- he's as loony as the Legend of Xenu. I can picture him now, sitting on a folding chair at a movie location, singing, "I'm a little teapot, short and stout."

paskunia

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Tell the Scientology lawyers to take their thetans and stick it where the sun don't shine! This is a FREE country... you can post whatever you want! Don't give in!

Xenu.Alien

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> So, can CSI use the DMCA to have Gawker's ISP shut down their OC-48?

Whyaduck

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Oh, good for you, Gawker! Save Katie!

beppolina1

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Dear Ms. Paquette:

I still want my $5.50 back for Days of Thunder. Your client didn't have my express written consent to suck. It should have never been authorized to be distributed or authorized to be shown. What is the statute of limitation on pompousity?

rtisovec

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Was someone's dick stolen? They say "since this work was stolen" and then talk about Penal Code.

Tyler_Durden

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> You can send the Gizmodo TV prankster to shut down all thier E-meters.

trollkiller

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Mark Ebner: and when they break into your house, drown your cat, and shit on your dinner plates, you get the medal of extreme excellence and excellerinity from the world blogging community.

Truculent

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Congratulations on your first "Ava-Gram" Nick -- you have reached the first level of Scientology legal harassment! You will receive similar empty missives from Kendrick and Moxon, and when you hear from their outside counsel Eliot Abelson, you'll have reached true enlightenment.

Mark Ebner

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Ava Paquette is an SP

uncle_wiggly

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @karion: Servicey!

lilyb

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Apparently, the body theton with a wire up Ava's ass to eat her brain has already deleted her understanding of the "fair use" provision of copyright law ...

DonLaFontaine

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> this is like the time mary magdalene's tape was leaked...it was way hotter though.

ellagood

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> The only situation I can relate this to is in "Hackers" when a call goes out for hackers to unite and help prove Joey's innocence.

Tom Cruise = Eugene Belford (aka The Plague)
Ava Paquette = Richard Gill
Gaby Darbyshsire = Crash Override
Gawker = Razor AND Blade, with "Hack the Planet"

"Hack the Gibson!"

Done geeking.

jack-of-all-trades

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> "Gaby Darbyshire"? Oh my. I'm picturing Miss Moneypenny with a J.D. ... Stabby Balls-for-Hire?

CasadelCarajo

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @BrassServices: With due respect, that is as difficult to understand as Tom in the video, and I evens speak legalese. But good luck on polishing your law school essay.

karion

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Michael Jahn:

That's actually kind of an urban legend. There is no magical amount that is "fairly usable." It is the big gray area of copyright law and no copyright attorneycan quantify it.

@crookedlawyer: It was kind of breathtakingly bad, wasn't it? Hard to believe this is the ace legal team that instills fear in the hearts of Scientology critics.

karion

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Their "belief" that the use was not authorized undermines their subsequent allegation of "knowledge" regarding this matter, as the definition of belief to make a leap of faith from the known, empirically testable, natural world to the supernatural (aka unknown, untestable, unscientific, unprovable realm of mystical "revelation"). The two are mutually exclusive statements and wholly incompatable with each other, making their subsequent sworn statement false and hence subjecting them to criminal culpability and civil liability. In essence, they stated that the cat is alive and that the cat is dead at the same time (and no, this is not subject to some quantum "uncertainty principle" [Schroedingers cat, anyone?], as they have stated a matter of observational fact as the point of their statement). CSI appear to have lied in this reasonable interpretation of their agents' statement(s). Their officers, having allowed these lawyers to represent them in this regard, appear to have acted with negligence in hiring such a slip-shod legal firm which may encumber them with undue potential for civil and criminal claims against their cult. This is, in effect, an abrogation of at least one of their legally-mandated corporate officership duties which is to maximize profits on behalf of their corporate shareholders. Putting their corporation in unnecessary legal jeopardy and running up unnecessary legal expenses with a high cost lawfirm fails to serve this duty and would seem to be a criminal act of negligence at best and malfeasance at worst. Perhaps state and federal agencies would like to receive some anonymous complaints regarding such activities. State investigative scruitiny might do the cult some good.

BrassServices

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Truculent: I think it's 500 words worth of a book. Thanks!

Michael Jahn

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I'm trying to decide here...would I want to get a letter from the Earl Grey or from a CSI lawyer? Hmmm...they're both nuts.

ZiggyStardust

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> COUNTERSUIT! COUNTERSUIT! COUNTERSUIT! COUNTERSUIT!

foodiefoo

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Absolutely do not back down on this. He's a public figure subject to public comment, parody, and ridicule; your site is reasonably construed as a press forum for commentary and editorial prose on current events, protected by "fair use" under Title 17, USC. I would respond also that filing frivilous claims is also illegal and you reserve the right to further remedy in connection therewith. They have no claim and cannot suppress even if they sue. Git 'em!

myracleworks

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Someone needs to take these Scientology nuts down a peg.

NewRider

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @crookedlawyer: I would have quoted Heywood v. Jablowme. Seems appropriate in this situation

Truculent

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @asketchymess: The kind of quality lawyer who tries to impress the target with two case cites from a distant circuit along with relatively misleading parentheticals about their contents.

In other words, a borderline illiterate one.

crookedlawyer

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Gawker has a VP of Finance & Legal? I thought it was all hipster bloggers over there...

dcd829

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Michael Jahn: Times v. Sullivan deals with reckless disregard for the truth, generally speaking. You, the publisher, cannot be held liable for printing something about a public figure that is not true or defamatory, unless you knew it was untrue or defamatory and went ahead anyway. Fair comment, which is in play here, is covered by the Copyright Act of 1946. Basically you can use a portion of a copyrighted work in a review, criticism, news story, etc. Case law limits the size of the "portion" but Denton and his ugly bunch seem to be on solid ground here

Truculent

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @AndIAmTellingYou: You speak the truth. I think they are famous for denial-of-service attacks.

Sargasm

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Mean_Ol_Liberal: Well said. Isn't this situation covered under Sullivan v. New York Times? Did I get that case name right?

Michael Jahn

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I misread the name as "Garby Darbyshire" and my mind was blown.
Then I saw that it was actually "Gaby Darbyshire," and my mind was still blown.

centaurfarm

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Dear Ms. Darbyshire,

Mr. Hubbard is a man who insists on hearing bad news immediately. Thank you for a lovely evening.

Ava Paquette

Nick: Check your bed before you crawl in tonight

Truculent

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Funny how crazy spreads. Anyone know where I might find The Church of Chaka Khan?

AndIAmTellingYou

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> WHAT religion or denomination wants to STOP distribution of an explanation of its doctrine to the general public?

Any of thousands of denominations would virtually KILL to have an internal video for aherents get worldwide internet distribution to be viewed by god-knows-how-many potential new converts. Are you kidding me??

Good for you Gawker. Their "copyright infringement" claim is BS. In my opinion, it IS fair use because Tom Cruise MAKES them news all the time. They want these rich and famous adherents to enrich their institution and give them validity. Then they go crying when a voluntary public figure's endorsement of them makes them a public affairs topic.

Cry me a river of datum, COS.

Mean_Ol_Liberal

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Gawker, I'd watch your servers tonight, if I were you. Just sayin'...

AndIAmTellingYou

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I love Gaby. You shoudl see some of the reply letters she wrote on behalf of the Consumerist.

Kos

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Silly old cult...

blackpanic

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Nick and Gaby FTW!!!

nat lyon

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!

DorothyMantooth

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Taking money from people is the MO of the CSI - they take it from members through audits, etc. and from anyone who dares speak out against them in the form of never-ending legal battles. They wont be happy until they break you and leave you penniless.

Yippee! I am all for a big public battle against someone other than undeserving indivuduals who have ended up destroyed and destitute or worse - dead. Gawker, watch your back and start your legal fund now - and most of all dont trust anyone from Clearwater/Tampa!

(oh and please dont give out my IP address)

LilyWhiteTrash

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Caution: If your California Penile Code lasts longer than 4 hours, call a physician.

pezkills

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Fucking Scientologists! What am I supposed to do now?!? Work?!?!?

Swank33

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Lalo Schifrin's estate should write a nasty gram to the CSI "attorney" for using his score behind the nut-job. Doubt they own the rights to the MI theme, that was incessently looped.

dmonte

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Screw that. COUNTERSUIT. Sue the shit out of them for being batshit and harassing you or something. I dare you, Denton/Gaby.

sassypants

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @the supergoddess: I had bourbon balls once. A little massaging and they were right as rain!

Clarence Rosario

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Jessica: That needed saying. And I'm on his side on this one.

KarenUhOh

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Damn, Nick. You just might make bonus this quarter.

Jessica

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> F--k 'em.

PandoraSpocks

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @scarletmenace: Wait, please don't tell me this is what Cloverfield is all about.

The Glad Family of Products

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I'm expecting a spaceship from Xenu full of Thetans to appear over Manhattan momentarily to zap the Gawker office with a death-ray. I'll miss you guys.

scarletmenace

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I'm sure Tom will rest easy tonight, knowing the genie has been firmly put back in the bottle, and the barn door is secure.

Arundel

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @HookerfaceAnon: I agree!

mathnet

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> This is ridiculous. What kind of organization (or "religion") would be so ashamed of a tape from an awards ceremony that they held to honor one of their most famous members? They should be happy that it's making the rounds and getting so much air time (it was on the Today show this morning, for Christ's sake). Instead they are threatening all kinds of media outlets. Whatever.

HookerfaceAnon

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> uhhh..CSI will find you, if they need/want to, with ease. they found my new address within a month of moving..it took the DMV a year and a half.

See we should just but the CSI in charge of Home Land Security...foreigners will be so scared they will not dare cross these borders.

spielarama

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Are there any reasonably documented cases of someone committing suicide after having been inspired by Cruise to go off his or her antidepressants? Or of going off antipsychotic meds and shooting up the post office?

Michael Jahn

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I don't know if this story was getting much attention other than on the interwebs. I was surprised to see it on the local morning news in my home town of Hinterland. Ms. Paquette is going to have a hard time putting this genie back in the bottle.

Sargasm

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> I'm surprised they haven't tried to sue the creators of all those lucrative CSI tv shows. The very same three capitalized letters in succession!? how dare they!

krazykarot

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> This almost makes up for all the useless and slightly sickening coverage of Julia Alison. Go get the cult, Gawker!

skepchick

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @karion: I love that their lawyers are all bat-shit crazy too! Operation Snow White and Operation Freak Out should both be made into movies -- those I would see!

TheUSEFULfailure

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Operation Snow White is pretty scary. Nixon would have been jealous of the manpower.

RocketSurgeon

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Nice return volley, Gaby.

You're not playing in LA LA land anymore Ava - this is the east coast and we'll be having you for lunch.

worth79

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Surprised it took them this long.

scarcat

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Ms. Darbyshire,

Lord Xenu does NOT ask twice. Your failure to comply leaves me no choice but to elevate the galaxy to Crazy Force Delta IX.

Sincerely,
Ava Paquette
Moxon & Kobrin

sargent

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @JustTryAndEnjoyAnEffingMinuteWithoutAnno...: FTW

mathnet

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Hot Foot: fucking classic

The Dewd

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @The Dewd: best. reality show. ever.

CrapTractor

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Nick, don't be glib.

Soup

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @AvengeMe: AvengeMe: HA

Sargasm

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @moff: Sounds euphoric.

Calitri

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @KarenUhOh: Ha!

The Glad Family of Products

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @The Dewd: Why would he have to give them up? We didn't post the film in question. Some of us only watched it. That being said, I'm hightailing it to Guam in about an hour, just to be on the safe side.

@maggiesfarmer: Ha ha ha! You just can't handle the truth!

PimpMyCouch

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> OK, it's ON!

mackensie

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @The Dewd: Wait... my brother/sister is a commentor on Gawker? Why wasn't I informed of this?

To Sibling:

Yo 'dude', whats up?

Intern Kevin

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Isn't Scientology taking credit for Cruise a bit like the Vatican taking credit for Torquemada?

Michael Jahn

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> You guys are getting a lot of this lately, aren't you, Dent...

The Glad Family of Products

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @The Dewd: Awwwwesome.

Moff

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> They only like the First Amendment as concerns the part where they get to masquerade as a religion, not as concerns the part where you get to publish the truth about the fact that they're bullshit.

Mediahohoho

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Don't know about you all, but I'll be hanging with Zoltan and the continuum transfuctioner till this blows over. It's the only thing powerful and mysterious enough to protect me. Zoltan!

Calitri

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @TedSez: Thanks, you just made me sincerely laugh out loud at work. Well done, sir.

Soup

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Tonashideska -- I was thinking the same thing, reading the cease and desist letter from the church.

edithdoll

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @moff: I think we probably have a few commenters that can show them what a true sir/madam looks like as well.

The Dewd

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> There's a whole section on Scientology's use of Copyright Law to silence online criticism at [en.wikipedia.org] Those folks dont fool around Denton! And by the way, as any good thetan knows, if you're from outer space then "Esq." isn't required on your correspondence.

Rogerthatz

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @the supergoddess: Excellent. And my roommate is teaching me to make black-tar-heroin milkshakes, so we're covered on that front!

Moff

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Why don't you settle for $12 a post?

KarenUhOh

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @moff: oh my god yes! I'll bring the pot brownies & bourbon balls!

the supergoddess

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Isn't "CSI" copyrighted by CBS?

tonashideska

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Way to go, Gawker! Chris Crocker should play Tom "Little Bitch" Cruise in the film adaptation of the epic legal battle to follow.

WideStanceRomancer

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Interesting that Paquette doesn't have an "Esq." suffix - you'd think that if the CSI truly believed it had a legitimate claim, they'd have sent in a real lawyer to cite legal precedents.

Or something.

kpsquare

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @Bercovici:

I'm the public, I'm interested, and I've been served.

In Other News...

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> THE RETURN OF GABY DARBYSHIRE! Not that Gaby ever went away... but, I do love seeing that name in print or on the interwebs!

In Other News...

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> When will they accept that we already know about the Thetans and Xenu? Operation Clambake saw to that!

Carol Gardens

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> @The Dewd: Yes! We'll show those fuckers what a cult is. And also what substance abuse is.

Moff

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Strange to me that this "Church" has no tangible tenets of forgiveness and seemingly only believes in litigious redemption (I guess that's why Germany considers it a cult). Heh. If only the Thetans had lawyers, damn Xenu would never have gotten away with the thermonuclear volcano holocaust. Bummer, dudes. More Kool-Aid.

MickFNS

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> Denton, FTW!

I don't know why people are so scared of Denton having to give up our IP addresses. Actually, I think it would be great fun if they decided to round up all the Gawker commenters and put them in a courtroom together against the church of scientology.

The Dewd

]]> <![CDATA[Church of Scientology Claims Copyright Infringement]]> If Gawker's mission is now to "se