January 3, 2012 @ 22:01pm
The “[b][url=http://www.google.com/search?q=Richard+Prince&hl=en&prmd=imvnso&source=univ&tbm=nws&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=8NwDT_PmAeGksQLpgI2RCg&ved=0CJwBEKgC&biw=1024&bih=678]Richard Prince[/url][/b]” decision will impact little regarding how copy[rite] law is amended to deal with artists asserting [b]individual personal rights[/b] today or how the modern world deals morally and ethically with IP-backwards United States’ copy[rite] law. Curtis Neeley advocates strictly re-structured copy[rite] rituals for corporations but doubts such systems will work around the unrecognized personal right currently missing in the IP-backwards United States once this Berne Convention Treaty recognized “right” is more commonly demanded honored.
“Virginia Rutledge said she believe[s] the problem facing the art world was as much a “cultural attribution crisis” as a legal crisis and that the problem could be at least partly addressed by cultivating a stronger climate of simple acknowledgement and credit.” - NYTIMES.com [b][url=http://www.google.com/search?q=Richard+Prince&hl=en&prmd=imvnso&source=univ&tbm=nws&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=8NwDT_PmAeGksQLpgI2RCg&ved=0CJwBEKgC&biw=1024&bih=678]SRC[/url][/b].
Virginia Rutledge Esq may believe acknowledgement and crediting may partially address the IP-backwards United States’ copy[rite] problem but only tangentially. Proper acknowledgement and crediting address the current IP-backwards United States’ copy regulation, but entirely misses the moral and ethical rights not yet addressed.
The attribution problem is not easily addressed and muddles cultural and moral issues. Proper attribution of art can be disparaging if the viewer is anonymous as is often alleged online.
Did anyone EVER pay attention? Online and offline pornography will soon require authenticated adult viewership and viewership dates/times being stored local to the computer used to display the adult art. Did you catch the online and offline part of the above? It is already trivial and has been trivial for twenty years or more.
Michael Henry Page Esq misled the Western District of Arkansas Magistrate Judge Honorable Erin L Setser and described the Google Inc search engine as, "For one thing, search is completely automated. It goes out, it crawls the web, it sees what's there, and it reports it back. The machine has no way of knowing whether a picture is nude...", as is totally incorrect and malicious. See Dkt 216: pp(71-75) and read the fairytale told by the Google Inc counselor in open Court. [b] http://www.curtisneeley.com/NameMedia/docketPDFs/216.pdf[/b]
[b]DIGITAL FILES CAN HAVE “META-DATA” THAT DESCRIBES THE BINARY MACHINE-READABLE DATA INCLUDED.
This has been true since before internet wire communications were developed to generally replace telegraph wire communications. [/b]
How long does it generally take an Eighth Circuit Panel to rule? The laws that must be subverted to affirm the District Court’s CLEARLY erroneous rulings are plain, clear English.
An altogether new claim of detrimental reliance on the advertised robots exclusionary protocol is currently EXTREMELY ripe for action. See “jpg site:curtisneeley.com” on GOOG. In case GOOG feels lonely, - see “jpg site:curtisneeley.com” on MSFT and note the defendant sought added besides the FCC in the briefs linked below.
Michael Henry Page, the curtisneeley.com robots text has been prohibiting GOOG “bots” for years as is advised currently for the panel to ignore or notice in the reply brief. Microsoft was recently banned from indexing curtisneeley.com after MSFT resumed returning nudes in “Curtis Neeley” searches AFTER the District Court’s CLEARLY erroneous mistake of law or ruling in error.
[b]jpg site:curtisneeley.com on [url=http://images.google.com/search?q=curtis+neeley&biw=1024&bih=658&tbm=isch#hl=en&safe=off&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=jpg+site:curtisneeley.com&pbx=1&oq=jpg+site:curtisneeley.com&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=151647l152581l0l155033l3l3l0l0l0l0l151l403l0.3l3l0&fp=1&biw=1024&bih=678&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&cad=b]GOOG[/url][/b] still About 49 results (0.41 seconds)
[b]jpg site:curtisneeley.com on [url=http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=jpg+site%3Acurtisneeley.com&go=&qs=n&sk=&sc=8-25&form=QBIR]MSFT[/url][/b] now already only 7 results
This mess is all over except for the Supreme Court appeal. Hmm Libraries generally agree that “electronic publications” can be mailed and physically collected. Has any opposing counselor thought of this plain, un-convoluted fact? This is only sent to one GOOG counselor, Michael Henry Page Esq, but might should be forwarded to NameMedia Inc to keep them aware of how seriously Neeley continues pursuing this action. NameMedia Inc ceased display of the requested figurenudes after nine months in District Court. This was NameMedia Inc mitigating.
[b] http://listphotographers.com/[/b] is perpetually upgrading after they were contacted and invited to join NameMedia Inc and Google Inc in court.
[b] http://artnude.pp.ru/ [/b]no longer exists or is inactive. They were contacted along with all their hosting servers and advertisers and contacted in Russian! Look at “[b][i]curtis neeley site:artnude.pp.ru[/b][/i]” on [b][url=http://images.google.com/search?q=curtis+neeley&biw=1024&bih=658&tbm=isch#q=curtis+neeley+site:artnude.pp.ru&hl=en&safe=off&tbm=isch&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=9ea5c770e05039ff&biw=1024&bih=658]GOOG[/url][/b] and “[b][i]curtis neeley site:artnude.pp.ru[/b][/i]” on [b][url=http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=curtis+neeley+site%3Aartnude.pp.ru&go=&qs=n&sk=&sc=4-32&form=QBIR]MSFT[/url][/b] and see how clear it is that “nudes” are slow to be removed although not supported by a third party. See “[b][i]curtis neeley site:en.artring.net[/b][/i]” on [b][url=http://images.google.com/search?q=curtis+neeleyhl=en&safe=off&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=curtis+neeley+site:en.artring.ne&biw=1024&bih=658#q=curtis+neeley+site:en.artring.net&hl=en&safe=off&tbm=isch&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=9ea5c770e05039ff&biw=1024&bih=658]GOOG[/url][/b] to see original figurenude photos remaining though removed half a year ago or more. Long enough for “[b][i]curtis neeley site:en.artring.net[/b][/i]” on [b][url=http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=curtis+neeley+site%3Aen.artring.net&go=&qs=n&sk=&sc=4-33&form=QBIR]MSFT[/url][/b] to return ONLY non-nude images.
This wire communication is searchable by wire and NOT private.
[b] http://open.salon.com/blog/curtisneeley/2012/01/03/copyrites_v_copy_wrongs[/b]