Bruce Pettycrew

[From bpetty@primenet.com 2 May 98. This deals with BP actually writing to one of the scientology 'spam web pages']

The following threatening letter was sent to me and ( I presume ) my ISP, after I actually took the person's web site at face value and sent the REQUESTED personal communication. Of course, I did not use the on-site channel to the CoS recruitment office, but derived the host's e-mail address from the URL and sent the Xenu leaflet. We then exchanged several e-mails, ending in the message quoted below. Now my e-mails are rejected. Oh, well.

The attempt to portray the Xenu story as copyrighted is crap, it has already been admitted by the Co$ that the story itself is public domain, only the OTIII methods are (they claim) copyrighted.

- Start of empty threat -
From: ACTINUP2 ACTINUP2@aol.com
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 00:24:15 EDT
To: bpetty@primenet.com
Subject: copy of letter sent to globalcenter.net
X-UIDL: 669ca005ad10c2142940cf1bfd9f2af0

Enclosed find info on court rulings regarding the unauthorized distribution of Church of Scientology materials, which are being sent by and distributed from bpetty@primenet.com(aka globalcenter). -From actinup2@aol.com

In late 1994 and early 1995 a California man named Dennis Erlich posted to the Internet copyrighted sacred writings of the Scientology religion. This was done through the bulletin board service of Tom Klemesrud (operating as Clearwood Data Services) which distributed the postings through his Internet access provider, Netcom. A number of these writings were also confidential and unpublished.

Although Erlich, an ex-Scientologist, was subject to confidentiality agreements regarding these materials and was asked directly several times to stop the infringements, he continued. Religious Technology Center (RTC) then notified Netcom and Klemesrud of Erlich's illegal activities and asked that they get Erlich to stop the infringements or do so themselves, but they refused.

RTC subsequently filed suit on February 8, 1995.

In September 1995, Judge Ronald Whyte ruled that Erlich had infringed Scientology copyrights and that his postings were not "fair use."

On November 21, 1995 Judge Whyte issued a landmark ruling stating that Netcom and Klemesrud could be liable for contributory infringement for messages posted on the Internet by their customers. The court also noted in its decision that Netcom admitted that "it did not even look at the postings once given notice" and "had it looked at the copyright notice and statements regarding authorship, it would have triggered an investigation into whether there was infringement."

Commenting on the decision, Shari Steele, counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told the Wall Street Journal that it is "perfectly reasonable" to hold system operators liable if they know about copyright infringement on their systems.

Bill Burrington, Assistant General Counsel and Director of Public Policy for America Online, said that "the ruling was not as drastic as it could have been for this evolving online Internet medium. The industry collectively needs to take a closer look at it and decide what to do."

The case is likely go to trial in 1996 but no date has been set.

On August 15, Larry Wollersheim, Robert Penny and their hate group FACTNet, Inc. posted a message to the Internet stating that Arnie Lerma, the defendant in RTC v. Lerma, had posted the Fishman declaration and attachments as a director of FACTNet.

FACTNet also downloaded the same infringing materials to an Internet site.

Religious Technology Center filed suit against Wollersheim, Penny and FACTNet on August 21, 1995, asking the court for injunctive relief and damages for copyright infringement and trade secrets misappropriation.

An immediate temporary restraining order was granted as well as an order for impoundment and seizure of the FACTNet computers and software.

When FACTNet's computers were searched, over 5,000 infringements were found. Entire multi-volume series of books, equivalent to an encyclopedia, had been scanned into the defendants' computers and onto CD-ROMs which the defendants had sold to others, all without authorization.

Bridge Publications, the American publishing house of Mr. Hubbard's works, thereafter joined RTC as a plaintiff in the suit and the additional infringements were added to the complaint.

US District Court Judge John L. Kane ordered the return of FACTNet's seized equipment but also ordered that FACTNet not distribute the Scientology copyrighted material. RTC explained to the court that the unpublished Scientology scriptures could not be returned to FACTNet as delivering these materials to apostates would violate RTC's rights and subject the responsible parties to expulsion from the Church.

The Judge then appointed Professor Gary Nutt as a special master to take charge of the return of the defendants' computers and to ensure the confidential, unpublished materials on FACTNet's hard drives before returning the computer media to FACTNet. The seized materials were otherwise ordered into the custody of the Court in response to RTC's concerns, and remain in that custody.

This case is likely to go to trial in 1996 but no date has been set.

- end of empty threat -