+ Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 8 9 10 11 12
Results 111 to 120 of 120

Thread: Bryan Reo's latest bogus DMCA cumplaint against WhiteNationalist.org

  1. #111
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Granby, State of Missery, ZOG
    Posts
    4,948

    Default Pastor Lindstedt's Reply Brief to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals -- 8 Feb16

    Pastor Lindstedt's Reply Brief to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals -- 8 Feb16


    http://christian-identity.net/forum/...4085#post14085

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Filing bogus DMCA cumplaints & Taking Down Web Pages
    Posts
    198

    Default

    Ol' Niggerlips Bryan Reo here & queer:

    I want you to shut down Pope Marty's Aryan Nations Cult for Not Endorsing The Donald




    http://christian-identity.net/forum/...4251#post14251



    Docket, p9 10 March 2016

    .

    Docket as of 10 March 2016 Bryan Reo Motion Doc #58 + Exhibits (pdf):
    http://pastorlindstedt.org/lindstedt...pt-10Mar16.pdf

    Idiot Motion by Bryan Reo bitching about Pastor Lindstedt "not endorsing" Donald Trump Doc #58(pdf):
    http://pastorlindstedt.org/lindstedt...16/58-main.pdf

    Exhibit #1 -- The Movement Turd #309 -- The Aryan Nations doesn't Endorse Donald Trump (pdf):
    http://pastorlindstedt.org/lindstedt...Mar16/58-1.pdf


    ___666___666___666___

    Anti-Racist Activist Destroying Internet Free Speech Through Bogus Litigation


  3. #113
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    13

    Default The 8th Circus Kort of Appeals Refuses to Protect Church Property Attacked Under Color of the DMCA

    The 8th Circus Kort of Appeals Refuses to Protect Church Property Attacked Under Color of the DMCA


    http://christian-identity.net/forum/...4632#post14632
    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...4632#post14632


    Unpublished Opinion 25 May 2016 (pdf):
    http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/16/05/153756U.pdf



    Whatever ZOG [d]rules

  4. #114
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Granby, State of Missery, ZOG
    Posts
    4,948

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    13

    Default Petition for Rehearing Denied 8 July 16

    Whatever ZOG [d]rules

  6. #116
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,977

    Default Mandate of the US 8th Circus Kort of Appeals Dismissing & Closing Case

    Mandate of the US 8th Circus Kort of Appeals Dismissing & Closing Case


    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...4913#post14913
    http://christian-identity.netforum/s...4913#post14913


    Mandate of the US 8th Circus Kort of Appeals Dismissing & Closing Case on 20 July 2016 (pdf):

    http://pastorlindstedt.org/lindstedt...e_20July16.pdf



    ____________________________
    I am The Librarian
    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/
    http://www.pastorlindstedt.org/forum/

  7. #117
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,977

  8. #118
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Granby, State of Missery, ZOG
    Posts
    4,948

    Default The Church of Jesus Christ Christian / Aryan Nations of Missouri vs Bryan Reo Supreme Kort Brief

    The Church of Jesus Christ Christian / Aryan Nations of Missouri vs Bryan Reo Supreme Kort Brief


    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...5315#post15315
    http://christian-identity.net/forum/...5315#post15315




    Petition to Proceed In Forma Pauperis: (pdf)
    http://bryanreo-lawsuits.xyz/Reo2014...tion%20IFP.pdf

    In Forma Pauperis Affidavit: (pdf)
    http://bryanreo-lawsuits.xyz/Reo2014...0Affidavit.pdf

    2016-2018 Biennial Report for The Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Arya Nations of Missouri: (pdf)
    http://bryanreo-lawsuits.xyz/Reo2014...l%20Report.pdf

    Three Pages In Forma Pauperis Filings


    .

    =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

    .



    Main Body of Petition (pdf):
    http://bryanreo-lawsuits.xyz/Reo2014...of%20Brief.pdf




  9. #119
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Sans Fagscrisco
    Posts
    1

    Default The Northern California Federal Kort Protects Google Attacked Under Color of Canuckistani [F]Law

    The Northern California Federal Kort Protects Google Attacked Under Color of Canuckistani [F]Law


    http://christian-identity.net/forum/...2022#post17202
    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...202#post172022


    Unpublished Opinion 25 May 2016 (pdf):
    http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/16/05/153756U.pdf



    http://www.eff.org

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Zimbabwe
    Posts
    321

    Default Critical Free Speech Protections Are Under Attack in Texas

    Critical Free Speech Protections Are Under Attack in Texas

    BY JOE MULLIN
    MARCH 14, 2019



    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/0...r-attack-texas
    http://christian-identity.net/forum/...9456#post19456
    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...9456#post19456


    A bill introduced in Texas threatens the free speech rights of 28 million residents by making it easier to bring frivolous lawsuits against speakers and to harass or intimidate them into silence.

    EFF has long been concerned about these types of lawsuits, called Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, or SLAPPs, as they use legal claims as a pretext to punish individuals exercising their First Amendment rights. That’s why EFF supports efforts to limit or prevent SLAPPs.

    28 states have so-called “anti-SLAPP” laws, which provide invaluable protections to speakers exercising their First Amendment rights, both online and off. While the laws vary, they typically allow the target of the SLAPP suit to quickly get a court to decide whether the case can go forward, and often require the party bringing the claims to demonstrate they have legitimate legal claims. Anti-SLAPP laws also often allow a victorious target of a SLAPP suit to recover attorneys’ fees from the party who brought the meritless claims.

    Without anti-SLAPP laws, plaintiffs could bring a meritless claim against speakers that they have no intention of winning—just to stop the speech or inflict financial stress by forcing those targeted by the suits to pay for attorneys to defend against meritless claims.

    Texas has one of the premier anti-SLAPP laws in the country: the Texas Citizens Participation Act, or TCPA. The law currently applies to a broad range of protected First Amendment activity, including discussing matters of public importance or speaking at a government proceeding. A bill introduced earlier this month, H.B. 2730, would gut these and other important protections.

    The attempt to substantially weaken and narrow the TCPA is particularly concerning because, since its passage in 2011, the law has disposed of numerous lawsuits filed against Texans who were exercising their free speech rights.

    Some examples of the TCPA’s success at stopping meritless lawsuits include:

    .
    A Dallas area couple who were sued by a pet-sitting company when they left a negative Yelp review

    Individuals who complained about using a “fascia blaster” treatment on Facebook, which prompted the company selling the product to sue

    Anonymous speakers who posted comments on a nonprofit’s website avoided being unmasked by a group of lawyers seeking to find out their identities

    An online critic of a multi-level marketing company was sued after publishing blog posts that were critical of the company
    .

    If H.B. 2730 passes, the protections enjoyed by the speakers described above and others will be severely threatened. The bill eviscerates several key protections of the TCPA.

    First, the bill narrows the scope of activity protected by the law in a way that will allow those bringing lawsuits against speakers to make an end-run around the TCPA’s protections. In short, H.B. 2730 will allow plaintiffs to argue that the because they are alleging the speech was defamatory, the TCPA simply does not apply.

    The bill also removes key definitions that explain what type of activity is protected by the TCPA, creating uncertainty for speakers as to whether the law would protect them, which will chill speech.

    Additionally, the bill exempts lawsuits that are based on alleged breach of non-disparagement clauses. These types of contracts are notoriously speech restrictive and have been used by websites and other online services to limit users or customers’ ability to criticize products or services. Worse, these terms are often buried deep in form contracts.

    H.B. 2730 would also exempt the TCPA from applying to a procedure under Texas law that allows parties to attempt to unmask anonymous online speakers without first filing a lawsuit. EFF has been particularly concerned about the use of this pre-litigation discovery process to target anonymous speakers because it can be abused to harass speakers rather than vindicate legitimate legal claims.

    We filed a brief last year in support of anonymous speakers who posted on the employer review site Glassdoor after a business attempted to use Texas’ pre-lawsuit discovery process to learn their identities. Although the Texas Supreme Court declined to rule that the TCPA applied to the pre-suit discovery process, its ruling had the practical effect of protecting anonymous speakers.

    If H.B. 2730 passes, litigants will likely increase their use of Texas’ pre-lawsuit discovery process to attempt to unmask anonymous speakers. That result may well succeed in scaring off online critics, and chilling speech.

    The TCPA needs to be defended. It’s a law that’s protected the free speech of more than 28 million Texans, and is a national model for other states.

    If you live in Texas, tell your representatives to oppose H.B. 2730. The Texas Protect Free Speech Coalition is organizing opposition to the bill, and the group’s website has sample letters and information to help you make your voice heard.

    Regardless of where you live, join us in advocating for new federal anti-SLAPP protections that will protect those sued in federal court. EFF has supported such measures in the past and will be pushing for them again this year. Last year, we also launched an anti-SLAPP coalition of non-profit groups, to make sure that dissenting voices aren’t drowned out when they’re hit with a SLAPP. Rolling back laws that protect speakers from harassment isn’t the way to go—in Texas, or anywhere else.

    .

    Numero Uno of Meercats


+ Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 8 9 10 11 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts