|
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:15:54 +0000, rumik <rumik@sympatico.ca> wrote:
stanlee_98@yahoo.com wrote:
You're right, Stanlee. He can't afford to pay you.
Anybody who recycles condoms can't afford to pay anybody.
Well, well, well...if it isn't old Sister Mary Nic-addict - why don't
you troll your own local groups huffer - piss off.
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:13:48 +0000, rumik <rumik@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Moonbug wrote:
Don't bother, honey.
He doesn't have any money to his name.
A failure in business, a failure in politics,
and soon-to-be-unemployed. Go figure.
Well shucks! I could have used it. I would have taken us away on a
little getaway.
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 05:15:54 GMT, "PRSmith" <prsmith@houston.rr.com>
wrote:
Bobo, you're late with the royalty payments.
In case you're not familiar with copyright laws,
you can be fined $100,000, and sent to prison
for unauthorized reproduction of intellectual property.
Pay up, or shut up.
Stanlee --
In case you're totally ignorant of copyright law, if you suffer
no financial loss as a result of the infringement, there is no
foul.
I know you're an idiot. If you don't think financial loss is a requirement,
file suit and see how far it gets if you can't prove loss.
You're an idiot if you think authors don't have a saying in where
their work is published. If you copy a newspaper article without
permission, and post it on the internet, you may find out that
it's illegal, with or without financial gain or loss. It's called
copyright. I suggest get familiar with the subject you're
posting about, or you may lose your credibility.
On the other hand, you have nothing left to lose...
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:23:27 -0800, Robert Broughton
<rbronews@brou8ghton.ca> wrote:
stan-LEE 98 wrote:
I don't rule out the possibility that you're stupid enough to regard Philip
Morris as "your favourite charity". However, if I were to send the $100,000
to you, you would then be able to buy $100,000 worth of Marlboros from PM.
Wouldn't that make a lot more sense? Problem is, as it says in the subject
line here, you're a sniveling, crawling, asswiping coward.
Thank you for sharing your distress. Now run along...
|
| |
| |
stanlee_98@yahoo.com wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 05:15:54 GMT, "PRSmith" <prsmith@houston.rr.com> wrote: You're an idiot if you think authors don't have a saying in where their work is published. If you copy a newspaper article without permission, and post it on the internet, you may find out that it's illegal, with or without financial gain or loss. It's called copyright. I suggest get familiar with the subject you're posting about, or you may lose your credibility. On the other hand, you have nothing left to lose...
infringement. Without financial loss, however, you're whistling Dixie into
the wind if you think you'll get any satisfaction in a court of law. OTOH,
there are countries that will chop your hand off if you are even accused of
stealing so YMMV.
|
| |
| |
PRSmith wrote:
Technically you are correct, Stanlee, copyright infringement is copyright
infringement. Without financial loss, however, you're whistling Dixie
into
the wind if you think you'll get any satisfaction in a court of law.
Also, a court wouldn't take a brief filed on behalf of "stan-LEE 98" very
seriously, and we know that stan-LEE 98 is too much of a coward to sign his
real name to anything.
And, of course, there are rules about attribution. If tou look at the .sig
below, you'll see that the quote from stan-LEE 98 is clearly attributed.
--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada
"Watch your mouth, if you ever want to cross the border. Bad things
can happen to Canadians who use foul language in the US."
mailto:stanlee_98@yahoo.com , Nov. 30, 2003
|
| |
| |
You're an idiot if you think authors don't have a saying in where
their work is published. If you copy a newspaper article without
permission, and post it on the internet, you may find out that
it's illegal, with or without financial gain or loss. It's called
copyright. I suggest get familiar with the subject you're
posting about, or you may lose your credibility.
On the other hand, you have nothing left to lose...
WHAT??? Paul has credibility??
Hummmmmm, he must have got it for Christmas........:-)
Chip
|
| |
| |
Uncle Samuel wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:15:54 +0000, rumik <rumik@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Well, well, well...if it isn't old Sister Mary Nic-addict - why don't
you troll your own local groups huffer - piss off.
This is a PRO-SMOKERS group, supposedly "owned" by Bawb.
It was set up especially to promote cigarette-smoking.
You don't belong here, dickhead! So @$#* off!
|
| |
| |
Moonbug wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:13:48 +0000, rumik <rumik@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Well shucks! I could have used it. I would have taken us away on a
little getaway.
That's okay, sweetie. We won't need any money
for OUR getaway. ;-)
|
| |
| |
|
