The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: Greg Pierce
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020921 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
Subject: Re: What's going on in Australia?
References: <3E08564F.F1FFF559@bigpond.net.au> <3E09530E.9308C136@bigpond.net.au> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <8_4P9.10894$jM5.email@example.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 05:40:12 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 00:40:12 EST
Organization: Cox Communications
Phil Allison wrote:
> ** How does this drivel relates to the Gutnick v Dow Jones case ?
> Not at all.
> The published words about Mr Gutnik constitute "gross defamation"
> since they make him out to be a criminal. That is an *illegal* thing to do
> in any country. All Mr Gutnik has won the right to do is have his case heard
> in a Victorian court rather than a US one.
> If he gets a judgement against Dow Jones it can be enforced in a US
> court later since Australia and the US have such an arrangement in place in
> A person without his considerable financial resources could not get
> to first base with any of this. They would have to cop any defamation some
> US internet assholes decided to dish out.
Mr. Gutnick, like most people who sue for defamation, is a sniveler. He
is acting like a child: "Mr. Juudddgggeeee... Dow Jones called me this
and that.. Whine, whine, whine, sob, sob, sob" He needs to get over it.
If he is a person of good character, then people who know him will know
the Dow Jones article is BS. However, if he IS dirty.. well... in that
case he made his own bed, so he can lie in it. Hey, if someone doesn't
want any of their dirt exposed, the best thing to do is to not make any
dirt in the first place.
>>The recent ElcomSoft case is a perfect example:
> ** Of an entirely different nature.
Yes, but it is just as disturbing.
> > a Russian programmer wrote a program which was legal in Russia,
> ** Since they recognise no copyrights.
Are you sure?
> >but he was nabbed and tried in the USA for violating the DMCA laws.
> ** Good.
Nabbing a foreign national and trying him for something that is not
illegal in his country is good? That sets a disturbing precedent. Where
does it end?
> > Luckily, the jury was smarter than the US Congress
> ** More idiocy - the two are not even faintly related.
>>and found him innocent.
> ** There is no such thing. Only charge not proved on the evidence.
Ahh... so everyone is guilty huh? If there is no such thing as being
found innocent, then Dow Jones could easily make the case that Gutnick
is indeed a dirtbag. Since Gutnick couldn't prove that he hasn't done
anything shady, then Dow Jones is not being defamatory... works for me.
> John Larkin has a hidden agenda going here - maybe he would like to
> own up what his personal interest is.
His only agenda is to make you look like an idiot. His job is made much
easier since you are fully cooperating by showing what a knob you are
"I have seen things you losers wouldn't believe.
I've seen lights glitter in the dark near the Mail Gate.
I've seen monitors on fire off the side of the multimedia lab.
All of these moments will be lost in time, like the root partition last
Time to die."
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup