I’ve never argued that JT was a real time traveler. I think you came here to these forums just to annoy me, show me where I ever argued that he was other than a fraud. For the record I am not writing a JT book, never have, never will, I was simply arguing the rights of someone who would do such a thing, the creator of this thread, I don’t agree with his idea of writing such a thing, as you can see I said I would never buy it. Someone’s interpretation of Titor’s predictions for example, someone could legally write a book about this. As long as copyrighted material was not in the book, this would be easy to accomplish, but apparently your mind is too limited to even comprehend such a posibility.
Yes being a public figure can easily relate to copyrights, it is harder to claim rights to yourself as you become a public figure, the various internet blogs alone are proof of this. Before you argue your case concerning defamation, are you sure you understand what the word means?
Quote from qflux...
Here's an idea for you - why don't you acuse him of murder and see if JT comes forward to file a libel or slander suit? If he does, then I will agree he is a public figure.
Umm.. It was your idea, I’ll let you go ahead with that allegation. This statement of yours is more proof you have no idea what a public figure is.
Even if someone were to acuse him of that, they would most likely get away with it, only because Titor is a public figure.
An example of this from the expert law library:
Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1964 Case, New York Times v Sullivan, where a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation, the public figure must prove an additional element: That the statement was made with "actual malice". In translation, that means that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth. For example, Ariel Sharon sued Time Magazine over allegations of his conduct relating to the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Although the jury concluded that the Time story included false allegations, they found that Time had not acted with "actual malice" and did not award any damages.
Quote from qflux...
You are dead wrong about this. The person, group or time traveler who wrote the posts still has copyright ownership to them. Posting them on the Internet is like writing a book and giving it away for free. Just becuase you got a free book does not mean you can put a new cover on it and sell it yourself. I have maintained for a while that the only way to get JT to come out and play is to find out who is claiming copyright.
They could have ownership of them, if they could prove they were the author, to prove they were the author, they would have to have pre-dated writings that match, or would have to have confirmation from the webmaster on the IP address, etc.. Posting in an open online forum isn’t exactly the most secure place to keep your records.
Quote from qflux...
Raz - You can talk about the JT posts all you want but you cannot reprint them and sell them without the permission from the author or copyright holder. No one loses rights, they just have a harder time proving their case with different standards.
You seem to think I was planning to do this. Never have never will, try talking to the creator of this thread, ArcaneEdge.
Another idiotic quote from qflux
Titor a public figure? Really - can you please show me a picture of him or tell me where he lives? Under that definition doesn't that make you a public figure too?
These questions obviously show you have no idea what a public figure is.
From the expert law library:
The concept of the "public figure" is broader than celebrities and politicians. A person can become an "involuntary public figure" as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention. For example, people accused of high profile crimes may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even after their innocence is established, on the basis that the notoriety associated with the case and the accusations against them turned them into involuntary public figures.
qflux, Your total of 4 posts at this forum are replies to me, you obviously have some fixation on my posts alone, did Darby send you here? I assume you will be too lazy to actually read the quotes I just posted from the expert law library, but they prove you wrong in many cases.
----- Razimus