December 2022 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

1984: USA Launches Disinfo Ministry of Truth
by grarpamp 13 May '23

13 May '23

The USA Democrat Left just deployed 1984 to continue control the narrative, and program your mind... DHS Disinformation' Unit Headed by Woman Who Said Hunter Biden Laptop Story Was Disinformation https://summit.news/2022/04/28/dhs-disinformation-unit-headed-by-woman-who-… Houston, we have a problem. The Department of Homeland Security's new `disinformation' unit will be headed by a woman who says free speech makes her `shudder' and who falsely labeled the Hunter Biden laptop story disinformation. Oh dear. Just two days after it was revealed that Elon Musk had reached an agreement to buy Twitter, DHS chief Alejandro Mayorkas announced the creation of a "disinformation governance board." The new board will focus primarily on "misinformation related to homeland security, focused specifically on irregular migration and Russia." The board will be headed by Nina Jankowicz, a former advisor to the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry who oversaw related issued at the National Democratic Institute lobby group. "Cat’s out of the bag," Jankowicz tweeted. "Here's what I've been up to the past two months, and why I’ve been a bit quiet on here." Cat's out of the bag: here's what I've been up to the past two months, and why I've been a bit quiet on here. Honored to be serving in the Biden Administration [45]@DHSgov and helping shape our counter-disinformation efforts. [46]https://t.co/uN20vl7qqV [47]pic.twitter.com/JEn4FqLdck -- Nina Jankowicz <U+1F1FA><U+1F1E6><U+1F1FA><U+1F1F8> (@wiczipedia) [48]April 27, 2022 Jankowicz's view of free speech is particularly odious. Free speech apparently makes her physically shudder. "I shudder to think about if free speech absolutists were taking over more platforms, what that would look like for the marginalized communities, which are already shouldering disproportionate amounts of this abuse," she tweeted in response to Musk's Twitter takeover. NEWS: DHS is officially launching its own Ministry of Truth, or the so-called "Disinformation Governance Board." Nina Jankowicz will head the board as executive director. "Free speech absolutists" make her "shudder," so everything should be fine. [49]pic.twitter.com/wVc7hEBX11 -- Young Americans for Liberty (@YALiberty) [50]April 27, 2022 Jankowicz previously called Musk an "online abuser," while arguing for more censorship when she asserted, "The ‘free speech vs censorship’ framing is a false dichotomy." But crucially, the woman handed the role of deciding what constitutes "disinformation," previously labeled a completely truthful story "disinformation" because it was seen to be harmful to Joe Biden's presidential chances. Jankowicz promoted the actual disinformation that the New York Post Hunter Biden laptop story was a "Russian influence op." Back on the "laptop from hell," apparently- Biden notes 50 former natsec officials and 5 former CIA heads that believe the laptop is a Russian influence op. Trump says "Russia, Russia, Russia." -- Nina Jankowicz <U+1F1FA><U+1F1E6><U+1F1FA><U+1F1F8> (@wiczipedia) [51]October 23, 2020 She also wrongly asserted that it was a "Trump campaign product," while also claiming Trump supporters would show up at the polls with weapons to intimidate voters. Jankowicz's appointment once again underscores how moral panics about `disinformation' and `misinformation' are contrived frauds designed to bury legitimate information harmful to the regime's narrative. Both the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and the lab leak theory, two of the biggest news stories of 2020, were truthful yet branded "disinformation" so they could be buried by social media algorithms to prevent their viral spread. Along with `fact checkers', the new DHS disinformation unit is just another branch of the Ministry of Truth, which as in Orwell's 1984, serves a primary purpose of hiding and eliminating the truth.

1 13

Leaks: US Supreme Court Staffer Leaks Roe v Wade... WitchHunt Protests Police Ensue
by grarpamp 13 May '23

13 May '23

Batten down the hatches... https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opini… https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-874f-dd36-a38c-c74f98520000 Who Leaked The Supreme Court Opinion? https://summit.news/2022/05/03/who-leaked-the-supreme-court-opinion/ https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/05/02/leaked-supreme-court-opinion-… After a draft Supreme Court opinion overruling Roe v. Wade was leaked to the press, speculation turned to who was responsible, with calls for them to be arrested. The majority of the court has decided to vote 5-4 to overturn federal constitutional protection of abortion rights, with Justice Samuel Alito writing, “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” in addition to asserting, “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled.” In an unprecedented move, the opinion was leaked to Politico, presumably in an attempt to create massive social unrest that would lead to one or more of the justices being intimidated into changing their mind. “But it is not a binding decision of the court unless at least five justices sign it, and this looks like a transparent and unprecedented betrayal by one of the 45 or so people with access to a draft Supreme Court opinion to prevent this decision from becoming law by scaring off moderate justices and attempting to whip the political left into a frenzy,” reports Breitbart. Experts say the Supreme Court will lose the trust of a generation of Americans if the decision is walked back due to political pressure, but that didn’t stop whichever irate leftist leaked the document metaphorically pulling the pin on the grenade in an attempt to interfere in democracy. “The American people’s belief in the rule of law would be shaken if they lost respect for this Court as an institution that decides important cases based on principle, not ‘social and political pressures’,” states the leaked document itself. “But we cannot exceed the scope of our authority under the Constitution, and we cannot allow our decisions to be affected by the extraneous influences such as concern about the public’s reaction to our work,” Alito responds. Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust. You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court’s inner workings. Totally in shock right now. — Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 3, 2022 The only people with access to the original document were the nine justices and their 36 law clerks, meaning it’s almost certain that one of the 36 law clerks leaked the document. When you consider that each justice has four clerks working for them, that probably narrows it down to one of 16 clerks working for the four Democrat-appointed justices. “The fact that some are praising this leak shows how utterly craven we have become in our politics,” tweeted attorney Jonathan Turley. “There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage.” The fact that some are praising this leak shows how utterly craven we have become in our politics. There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage. — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 3, 2022 Other respondents highlighted how the leak is designed to intimidate the justices, via sparking potential mass civil unrest, into changing their mind. The perpetrator, who is already being lionized as a hero by the left, should face immediate arrest. Interference in a Supreme Court decision is a blow to democracy - like, say, stopping an electoral vote The conspirators must be rounded up and arrested and placed next to the J6 detainees — Jack Posobiec ☦️ (@JackPosobiec) May 3, 2022 Probably the greatest violation of unwritten "norms" in the history of the Supreme Court. And I absolutely guarantee you the leaker spent years railing against President Trump's undermining of norms. https://t.co/XSa9LaGb66 — Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) May 3, 2022 This is why they leaked: "Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading...The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months." (Politico) https://t.co/9k0JfLfYZd — Andrew "Leaked Majority Opinion" Kolvet (@AndrewKsay) May 3, 2022 Democrats are now expected to launch an attempt at court packing before they lose Congress in November, although the 5-4 decision should be rubber stamped before then. The leaking of the opinion is brazenly an attempt to subvert that process, create more chaos and violence in America, and derail the constitutional functioning of the Supreme Court. But that won’t matter at all to leftists, who think their moral right to kill babies supersedes all other concerns. 'Betrayal': Supreme Court Slams Leaked Roe Opinion, Says Does Not Represent "Final Decision" The Supreme Court issued a rare rebuttal to Monday's leaked Politico report on a draft opinion overturning abortion rights in the US. Yesterday, a news organization published a copy of a draft opinion in a pending case. Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court’s confidential deliberative work. Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case. Chief Justice John G. Roberts. Jr., provided the following statement: To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way. We at the Court are blessed to have a workforce - permanent employees and law clerks alike - intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court. This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here. I have directed the Marshal of the Court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said on Tuesday that the leaked draft ruling by the Supreme Court overturning Roe was "completely inconsistent" with what Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh told her in private during confirmation hearings when they were Supreme Court nominees. "If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office," said Collins. "Obviously, we won’t know each Justice’s decision and reasoning until the Supreme Court officially announces its opinion in this case." Collins defended her vote for Kavanaugh in 2018, stating that she didn't believe he would vote to overturn Roe. "I do not believe Brett Kavanaugh will overturn Roe v. Wade," she said at the time. "He noted that Roe had been reaffirmed 19 years later by Planned Parenthood vs. Casey. And that it was precedent on precedent. He said it should be extremely rare that it should be overturned." Meanwhile, the Supreme Court says yesterday's leaked report is authentic. Protests erupted outside the US Supreme Court overnight after a draft majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade leaked to Politico. Photo: Alex Brandon / AP Barriers were erected outside the courthouse as hundreds gathered outside to protest the news, the Washington Post reports. A smaller group of pro-life protesters also showed up, chanting "Pro-choice, that’s a lie. Babies never choose to die," while the larger group of pro-abortion protesters shouted "When abortion rights are under attack, what do we do? Stand up, fight back!" Breaking: Protests are beginning to form outside the Supreme Court. This is just the beginning. #GOPHandmaidsTale pic.twitter.com/8OYnmRxZyN — MeidasTouch.com (@MeidasTouch) May 3, 2022 A couple hundred people, most in their 20s and 30s, are now outside SCOTUS. There’s still not yet any organized protest or chanting, just folks standing around talking. Guy just whipped out a can of White Claw. pic.twitter.com/PCrXisy0Ys — Natalie Allison (@natalie_allison) May 3, 2022 Really rich hearing the Left trot out this old chant after the past 2 years of them cheering on vaccine mandates. pic.twitter.com/6yhay9YWaw — The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) May 3, 2022 A scuffle broke out shortly after midnight, as several 'masked protesters' tried to force the pro-life protesters to clear out. Neither group budged according to the report. 2nd clip from the scuffle, looks like someone in a suit gets clocked. pic.twitter.com/BATtQmE7Ms — Doge (@IntelDoge) May 3, 2022 "The first line in the draft is that this is a moral issue. If it’s a moral issue, you shouldn’t be depriving us of our choice," said Annie McDonnell, a student at George Washington University. President Joe Biden responded to the report with a statement he undoubtedly had zero involvement crafting, saying: "We do not know whether this draft is genuine, or whether it reflects the final decision of the Court." The statement adds that Roe is based on a "long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendments concept of personal liberty... against government interference with intensely personal decisions," adding that he believes a woman's right to choose is 'fundamental,' and that Roe has been the 'law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law' demand that it not be overturned." Biden then said that the White House's "Gender Policy Council" has prepared options to respond to "the continued attack on abortion and reproductive rights, under a variety of possible outcomes in the cases pending before the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Set To Overturn Roe v Wade, Leaked Draft Opinion Shows A leaked draft of a US Supreme Court decision reveals that the majority of the court has decided to overturn Roe v. Wade by a vote of 5-4, according to Politico, which calls it a "full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right." "Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," wrote Justice Samuel Alito in the draft which was circulated inside the court before someone leaked it to the news outlet. "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled." “No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending. The unprecedented revelation is bound to intensify the debate over what was already the most controversial case on the docket this term.” https://t.co/2os0uJWyUr — Eamon Javers (@EamonJavers) May 3, 2022 Politico highlighted these 10 passages from the draft opinion: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision....” “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” “In the years prior to [Roe v. Wade], about a third of the States had liberalized their laws, but Roe abruptly ended that political process. It imposed the same highly restrictive regime on the entire Nation, and it effectively struck down the abortion laws of every single State. … [I]t represented the ‘exercise of raw judicial power’… and it sparked a national controversy that has embittered our political culture for a half-century.” “The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973.” “In some States, voters may believe that the abortion right should be more even more [sic] extensive than the right Casey and Roe recognized. Voters in other States may wish to impose tight restrictions based on their belief that abortion destroys an ‘unborn human being.’ ... Our nation’s historical understanding of ordered liberty does not prevent the people’s elected representatives from deciding how abortion should be regulated.” “We have long recognized, however, that stare decisis is ‘not an inexorable command,’ and it ‘is at its weakest when we interpret the Constitution.’ It has been said that it is sometimes more important that an issue ‘be settled than that it be settled right.’ But when it comes to the interpretation of the Constitution — the ‘great charter of our liberties,’ which was meant ‘to endure through a long lapse of ages,’ we place a high value on having the matter ‘settled right.’” “On many other occasions, this Court has overruled important constitutional decisions. … Without these decisions, American constitutional law as we know it would be unrecognizable, and this would be a different country.” ”Casey described itself as calling both sides of the national controversy to resolve their debate, but in doing so, Casey necessarily declared a winning side. … The Court short-circuited the democratic process by closing it to the large number of Americans who dissented in any respect from Roe. … Together, Roe and Casey represent an error that cannot be allowed to stand.” “Roe certainly did not succeed in ending division on the issue of abortion. On the contrary, Roe ‘inflamed’ a national issue that has remained bitterly divisive for the past half-century....This Court’s inability to end debate on the issue should not have been surprising. This Court cannot bring about the permanent resolution of a rancorous national controversy simply by dictating a settlement and telling the people to move on. Whatever influence the Court may have on public attitudes must stem from the strength of our opinions, not an attempt to exercise ‘raw judicial power.’” “We do not pretend to know how our political system or society will respond to today’s decision overruling Roe and Casey. And even if we could foresee what will happen, we would have no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision. We can only do our job, which is to interpret the law, apply longstanding principles of stare decisis, and decide this case accordingly. We therefore hold that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Roe and Casey must be overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion must be returned to the people and their elected representatives.” Sorry one last thing for those wondering about Court procedure: After oral argument the Justices take a tentative vote. This would have happened in December. The senior most justice in the majority gets to assign the opinion. That might have been Roberts, but doubtful since... — Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) May 3, 2022 So there is the possibility an opinion can flip after oral argument and the tentative vote, so it's theoretically powerful the Alito opinion won't be the vote of the Court. But it would require a Justice BESIDES Chief Justice Roberts to flip. — Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) May 3, 2022 The magnitude of this report is so serious that Politico included this editor's note vouching for the authenticity of the draft decision. Via Ben Mullin The leak has completely wiped the headlines and Twitter is exploding with hot takes. Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust. You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court’s inner workings. Totally in shock right now. — Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 3, 2022 The fact that some are praising this leak shows how utterly craven we have become in our politics. There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage. — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 3, 2022 FWIW, there’s not much the GOP wants less than Roe to actually be overturned. If the Politico scoop is correct, the GOP is now the dog who caught the car. Roe was always a shiny thing to campaign on (much like repealing Obamacare) but never something they actually wanted to do. — Angry Staffer 🌻 (@Angry_Staffer) May 3, 2022 This is why they leaked: "Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading...The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months." (Politico) https://t.co/9k0JfLfYZd — Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKsay) May 3, 2022 Probably the greatest violation of unwritten "norms" in the history of the Supreme Court. And I absolutely guarantee you the leaker spent years railing against President Trump's undermining of norms. https://t.co/XSa9LaGb66 — Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) May 3, 2022 Interference in a Supreme Court decision is a blow to democracy - like, say, stopping an electoral vote The conspirators must be rounded up and arrested and placed next to the J6 detainees — Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) May 3, 2022 and. here. we. go. pic.twitter.com/5I9Ngxiz3U — Siraj Hashmi (@SirajAHashmi) May 3, 2022

1 17

Notice of Publication for U.S. Patent Application No. 17/232,016; Jim Bell
by jim bell 12 May '23

12 May '23

This includes the notification of the publication of the patent application for the isotopic hafnium dielectric patent. Instead of using ordinary hafnium in the dielectric under the gates of MOSFET transistors, Hf-177 or Hf-179 isotope hafnium can be used, to increase its dielectric constant. This will enable the thickening of the dielectric layer from 1.2 nanometers, yet maintain sufficient gate authority. This will enable the continuing shrinkage of feature sizes in cutting-edge IC's. See:. https://daltonium.com/ F Jim Bell's new patent application. ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: "Daltonium Isotopics" <daltoniumisotopics(a)gmail.com> To: "jdb10987(a)yahoo.com" <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> Cc: Sent: Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 1:56 PM Subject: Fwd: Notice of Publication for U.S. Patent Application No. 17/232,016; Our Ref. DAL21301 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: (snip) Date: Mon, Nov 8, 2021, 3:36 PM Subject: Notice of Publication for U.S. Patent Application No. 17/232,016; Our Ref. DAL21301 To: daltoniumisotopics(a)gmail.com (Snip) | Re: | U.S. Utility Patent Application No. 17/232,016 Title: ISOTOPE-MODIFIED HAFNIUM AND SEMICONDUCTOR DIELECTRICS Our Ref.DAL21301 | Good afternoon, The Notice of Publication of Application has been received from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, informing us that the above-identified patent application was published on October 28, 2021, under Publication Number US-2021-0336027-A1. Copies of the Notice of Publication and the published application are attached for your records. We will be separately sending you our invoice for services rendered. Please contact us(or Doug Wells, directly at 503-866-2749) if you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance. Best regards, Chloe Mike | On Behalf of McCoy Russell LLP Legal Assistant 1410 (Snip)

5 4

Re: FOIL DHSES-22-06-028
by Gunnar Larson 29 Mar '23

29 Mar '23

Mr. Callahan: There is an and/or argument to each definition. You are lieing about Sonic Weapons here and using Brody as a scape goat. For example, your office would have records on sonic weapons. How the FOIL was written is not a good enough defense because we are operating under and/or connotation. For these reasons, we seek to receive any and all records your department has concerning obstruction of justice. The same FOIL file can be used for organizing. Gunnar Larson On Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 5:01 PM Callahan, James (DHSES) < James.Callahan(a)dhses.ny.gov> wrote: > Dear Mr. Larson, > > > > The response to your appeal is attached. Your appeal has been denied. A > copy of your appeal and this determination is being sent to the Committee > on Open Government. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > *Jim Callahan* > > Senior Attorney > > *Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Services* > > 1220 Washington Avenue, Building 7A, Albany NY 12226 > > (518) 292-2849 | james.callahan(a)dhses.ny.gov > > www.dhses.ny.gov > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachments, may be > confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended > only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from > someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy > or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender > immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. Thank > you. > > > > *From:* Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 12, 2022 9:43 AM > *To:* DHSES, FOIL (DHSES) <FOIL.DHSES(a)dhses.ny.gov> > *Cc:* cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org> > *Subject:* Re: FOIL DHSES-22-06-028 > > > > *ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open > attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.* > > > > We would like to appeal this decision. > > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2022, 9:41 AM DHSES, FOIL (DHSES) <FOIL.DHSES(a)dhses.ny.gov> > wrote: > > Attached please find correspondence regarding the above Freedom of > Information Law request. Thank you. > >

1 1

[ot][spam][crazy] karl has stopped eating food
by Karl Semich 21 Mar '23

21 Mar '23

some time ago i posted to this list i was having trouble eating. i think it was during the crazy posts around my interaction with cecilia. after that post, i began eating again. i was using eating this past couple months to help me with other tasks. i didn't want to eat quite as much as i was, but i found a way to make it so incredibly helpful. i have now stopped eating again, and the other tasks these were basic tasks, like making a todo list, or taking a shower. thank you for your aid these past months and years. i have had nothing but 1 meal in the last three or four days. i know humans are fine for a week without food. due to my dissociation and historic experience with fasting, this isn't very uncomfortable for me. hunger is a small feeling compared to other things. i'll try to write here when i eat until i resume.

6 38

Russian State-Sponsored TV Network's Attempt to Dismiss Copyright Lawsuit On Fair Use Grounds Denied
by Gunnar Larson 21 Mar '23

21 Mar '23

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ff9f1af5-cc8a-473a-822b-8890… March 18, 2022 TV-Novosti, a non-profit operating the Russian state-controlled RT(formerly Russia Today) television networks and 38 associated RT YouTube channels, has been sued for copyright infringement by Business Casual, an American media company that creates documentary content, based on its use of translated clips of Business Casual's documentaries in its own videos posted to YouTube. Business Casual creates short original historical documentaries which it posts to its YouTube channel. Its documentaries frequently feature photographs of historical figures, using a process called “parallax” which “transforms century-old low-resolution photographs into dramatically restored high-resolution photographs” and “turn[s] two-dimensional images into three-dimensional models . . . simulating a depth-of-field. This optical illusion provides Business Casual’s videos with an immersive three-dimensional look and feel.” The lawsuit relates to two of Business Casual’s documentaries—“How Rockefeller Built His Trillion Dollar Oil Empire” and “J.P. Morgan Documentary: How One Man Financed America”—clips of which Business Casual alleges TV-Novosti incorporated into three separate videos on its "RT-Arabic" YouTube channel, including portions featuring parallax-enhanced images, altering the brightness and saturation of the copied content and replacing Business Casual's watermark with TV-Novosti's own in order to hide from YouTube's algorithms. TV-Novosti moved to dismiss the copyright claims, arguing that it's use of the clips is protected as fair use. However, after considering each of the four statutory factors, Judge Koeltl of the Southern District of New York denied TV-Novosti's motion, holding that while three of the four factors weighed against finding fair use, "[t]he fourth factor, which the Supreme Court has described as 'the single most important element of fair use,' cannot be determined without further factual development." Specifically, regarding the first factor, concerning the transformation of the use, Judge Koeltl found that while TV-Novosti's videos take portions of the plaintiff’s videos, re-arrange them, and add new commentary to them, TV-Novosti had not made any meaningful changes to the visual clips themselves, and "[m]erely overlaying new audio does not effect a sufficient transformation . . . to find fair use as a matter of law." The Court further noted that TV-Novosti had "not changed the purpose of the parallax-enhanced images," i.e., to provide visual illustration for the overlain audio commentary, but had instead "simply lifted the copyrighted depictions . .. for the purpose of illustrating [TV-Novosti's] own video." In addition, the Court found that the fact that TV-Novosti could have sought to pay for the clips, but didn't, and tried to hide its use of the excerpts from YouTube's algorithms, also weighed against a finding a fair use under the first factor. Regarding the second factor, concerning the nature of the copyrighted work, the Court initially noted that factual material such as that at issue, "cuts less closely to the core of copyright." Nevertheless, the Court held that the fact that source material for Business Casual's videos was in the public domain weighed against finding fair use, because TV Novosti could have simply used public domain photos of the historical figures, rather than the modified clips, to create its videos. Regarding the third factor, concerning the amount of use in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, the Court noted that while only "small portions of the entire copyrighted works were used"—excerpts of 7 seconds, 1 minute and 28 seconds, and 8 minutes and 50 seconds in length—the portions were "not so trivial as to warrant dismissal under the de minimis doctrine." Lastly, regarding the fourth factor, concerning the effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work, the Court noted that this factor “ask[s] not whether the second work would *damage* the market for the first (by, for example, devaluing it through parody or criticism), but whether it *usurps* the market for the first by offering a competing substitute.” With this framing, the Court thus found that while one the one hand, TV-Novosti's "videos are alternative ways of learning about the lives of J.P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller," on the other hand, they "have a broader focus and are in a different language, meaning that they cater to a different audience." These differences, the Court held, were significant enough to preclude the Court from "determining the effect of [TV-Novosti's] videos on the market for [Business Casual's] videos at this time." The Court's recognition of the weight of the fourth factor in determining fair use means that there may still be hope for TV-Novosti—time (and fact discovery) will tell. For now, the takeaway may very well be that parties seeking to raise a fair use defense should take care to emphasize any characteristics of their use that distinguish not just their work, but its target audience, including the scope of the work and the language (if any) which communicates it. *** *Business Casual Holdings, LLC v. TV-Novosti*, No. 21-CV-2007 (JGK), 2022 WL 784049 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 14, 2022)

1 7

RNC Funding of Trump's Legal Campaign Undermines GOP State AGs' Attack on Litigation Funding - Litigation Finance Journal
by Gunnar Larson 21 Mar '23

21 Mar '23

Check out my new article: https://litigationfinancejournal.com/rnc-funding-of-trumps-legal-campaign-u… Litigation Finance Journal recently reported on a group of 14 state attorneys general that have called for action from the Department of Justice to review potential threats to U.S. national security from foreign adversaries’ engagement of litigation investment. Litigation funders and industry advocates have new ammo in response to the AGs’ claims, given recent news of the RNC funding former President Donald Trump’s various legal entanglements. According to ABC News, RNC leaders earmarked $1.6M in legal funding to support President Donald Trump’s defense over lawsuits brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. Meanwhile, the United States Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform’s research has prompted 14 state attorneys general to ask for the Justice Department to assess national security risks of adversaries ‘undermining’ the United States by engaging litigation funding and third party investment vehicles. The group of 14 state attorneys general are concerned about foreign adversaries ‘weaponizing’ United States legal frameworks via litigation investment, to attack critical national industry and infrastructure, such as energy sectors. The group of 14 seeks the Department of Justice to detail how a network of federal agencies could engage a blueprint for defending United States independence from international litigation investors, hostile groups, agencies or governments such as Russia and China. This latest attack on the industry, prompted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is simply another attempt to undermine the nascent and growing litigation funding sector. It is ironic, given that in the case of Consumer Legal Funding–which the Chamber specifically targets–the funding in question does not go to support legal fees, but rather to finance claimants’ livelihoods while they remain injured and unable to work. While the RNC’s funding of Trump’s legal battles does not constitute foreign investment, it illustrates the acceptance of third party legal funding across political lines, and should be noted by industry advocates looking to respond to the negative publicity put forth by the U.S. Chamber.

1 2

Wikileaks: Julian Assange - Journalism, Leaks, Collateral Murder, Censorship
by grarpamp 20 Mar '23

20 Mar '23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVoUPnXqvNE The War on Journalism: The Case of Julian Assange Julian Assange MUST BE FREED. "If wars can be started by lies, then they can be stopped by truth. -- Julian Assange"

4 19

Key FBI informant in Michigan governor kidnapping case charged with fraud
by jim bell 14 Mar '23

14 Mar '23

Key FBI informant in Michigan governor kidnapping case charged with fraud https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fbi-informant-michigan-fr… In a fresh development to the high-profile Michigan governor kidnapping case, a key FBI informant has been charged with fraud. Wisconsin native Stephen Robeson was handed the charge last week, accused of defrauding a couple out of an SUV by convincing them to donate to a ‘charity’. He used a fabricated anti-child sex trafficking non-profit as a cover story, the criminal complaint states (via Buzzfeed).

2 5

Re: FreeSpeech and Censorship: Thread
by grarpamp 14 Mar '23

14 Mar '23

US Left-Dem Wokesters Forcibly Topple and Erase History to Prop Up Baphomet... Illinois State Capitol Approves Satanic Monument https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHFs6zPVIlY The separation of church and state is a principle fundamental to the United States' constitution. Along with sanctifying the free exercise of religion, the establishment clause forbids the state from advancing a singular belief system above others. Balancing the diverse religious demographics of the United States is no easy task and its difficulty is magnified during the Christmas season as nativity scenes and other decor often attract objections from those who do not adhere to the Christian faith. This year, the Illinois State Capitol finds itself marred in controversy yet again as Christmas approaches but for reasons entirely antithetical to any display detracted from for advancing the Christian religion. For the third straight year, the Illinois State Capitol has decided to approve a display erected by the Church of Satan. This is the third display approved by the Satanic religious group, with the first instance occurring in 2018 then again in 2019 with a pause during 2020 due to pandemic restrictions before being showcased again this year. The 2021 edition of the Church of Satan's display beneath the Capitol rotunda is to mark its holiday of Sol Invictus, which will be observed on December 25th -- Christmas day. The "deity" Baphomet is the centerpiece of the display, transformed into an infantile interpretation of the Éliphas Lévi illustration included in the French occultist's 1856 treatise Dogma and Ritual of High Magic by an Albuquerque-based artist named Chris P. Andres. Lévi's image of Baphomet was incorporated into the pentagram designed by fellow French occultist Stanislas de Guaita in his 1897 work The Key to Black Magic which would be adopted as the Church of Satan's official seal following its creation in 1966 by Anton LaVey. The Church of Satan's holiday of Sol Invictus is a vestige of the pagan origins of Christmas. Sol Invictus was the sun god within the Roman pantheon of deity's whose festival was observed toward the end of what was previously celebrated as Saturnalia. The Cult of Sol Invictus in Rome still remains shrouded in mystery. Some historians view it as a mystery school similar to the Mithraic order that Constantine The Great belonged to while others view it as an Aurelian era revival of the cult of the late Roman Emperor Antoninus, who took the name Elagabalus after the Syrian sun god who he worshiped. Elagabalus was the first and only transsexual Roman Emperor who was assassinated in 222 AD, decades before the Cult of Sol Invictus arose. Regardless of the history of its origins, the contemporaneous celebration of the Satanic iteration of the holiday of Sol Invictus has been met with expected opposition. Bishop Thomas Parocki of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois voiced his vitriol of the Satanic display vociferously. The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property supported the diocese dissent by convening for prayer at the Capitol. Despite the outcry against the Satanic monument, organizations opposing it would be hard-pressed to accuse the Illinois State Capitol of advancing one religion over another. Since November 30th, the Capitol has also hosted a nativity scene of the birth of Jesus Christ erected by the Springfield Nativity Scene Committee. The Capitol also hosted a ceremony of the nativity scene on its own grounds when it was completed. The Sol Invictus display is another instance of the Church of Satan's public relations efforts. The organization recently filed a legal challenge to the State of Texas Heartbeat Bill claiming that its ceremonial practice of abortion was protected under the first amendment and their rights were violated by the law accordingly. For all its effort on the public relations front, the Church of Satan would have been prudent to invest more in legal research. Laws which act in the general welfare of a state interest like public health affecting but not designed to specifically inhibit religious exercise have been ruled upheld as constitutional following the 1998 case Employment Division v. Smith and subsequent case law affirming the precedent it sent. For all the benevolent intent it espouses by consecrating its Sol Invictus monument, the Church of Satan is less enthusiastic about discussing the exploitative practices of its founder as well as the checkered history of its other founding members. Michael Aquino, who died in 2020, was a priest within Church of Satan before starting The Temple of Set following his departure from LaVey's order. Aquino was famously renowned for his role pioneering psychological warfare linked to the CIA's notorious Project MKUltra as well as connections to child molestation cases at the Presidio daycare center in San Francisco and others linked to Lawrence E. King's criminal enterprise uncovered by the FBI's investigation into the Franklin Credit Union fraud scandal. Although there is plenty of reason to debate the integrity of the Church of Satan, the central question of the constitutionality of their display at the Illinois State Capitol is less debatable. In 2019, the United States' government officially recognized the Church of Satan as a religion under federal law. That year, the Church of Satan was awarded tax exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service Code. Despite claiming that status, the Church of Satan has repeatedly contended that it is a non-theistic group with most members joining for entirely secular reasons. The decision of the Illinois State Capitol to display the Church of Satan's latest monument on its grounds is a perfect display of how difficult balancing the interests of different religious groups can become. While objections to the Baphomet monument continue to be raised, they are protected under the same amendment that protects the Church of Satan's freedom to exercise its religious beliefs. While the Church of Satan erected the display to symbolize its holiday of Sol Invictus, it does much more than represent an esoteric holiday -- it illustrates the starkly juxtaposed directions followed by citizens in an increasingly polarized society with eschatological undertones that are more becoming of the prophesized end times than the revelries of the holiday season.

2 111