Rabid Ape banned [mod edit: also post your story!]

SocratesOne
SocratesOne's picture
Posts: 42
Joined: 2006-07-17
User is offlineOffline
Rabid Ape banned [mod edit: also post your story!]

[EDITED IN BY SAPIENT: IF YOU HAD A VIDEO REMOVED, PLEASE POST THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IT WAS. PLEASE CONSIDER MAKING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS PUBLIC IN THIS THREAD WITH A LINK TO YOUR YOUTUBE ACCOUNT. THIS INFORMATION MAY BECOME CRUCIAL TO THE MANY LAWYERS WHO WILL LIKELY END UP FIGHTING INDEPENDENT CASES AGAINST THE CREATION SCIENCE MINISTRY]

RabidApe's YouTube account has been suspended.

Along with this, several videos on YouTube have also been flagged as violations of copyright by Creation Science Evangelism, Famous Creationist Kent Hovind's organization.

Do a search for "Kent Hovind" on Youtube and you'll find that several videos have been flagged and taken down, including my "Kent Hovind get's pwended" video.

At least one of RabidApe's videos has been flagged as well, and it is fairly improbably coincidence that he should be banned the same day CSE's flagging campaign began, seeing as he is one of those YouTubers on CSE's hitlist.

Spread the word!

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful"
-- Seneca


lennyhipp
lennyhipp's picture
Posts: 12
Joined: 2007-02-18
User is offlineOffline
This is the court case i was talking about...

http://laughingsquid.com/michael-crook-retracts-false-dmca-claims/
and here is his follow up apology:http://laughingsquid.com/michael-crook-dmca-apology-video/
okay, it doesn't foreclose the full settlement, but it basically says he had to make a public apology, which he did in video form on YouTube and had to mention the case if he filed any more DMCA complaints in the next 5 years.
I didn't see any mention of a monetary settlement, and surely if there was one, they would have mentioned it, no? Seems to me like little more than a virtual wrist slapping!
Maybe Brian knows more since his owngoing lawsuit has the same lawyers involved?
Len


Dalbert342
Dalbert342's picture
Posts: 21
Joined: 2007-08-28
User is offlineOffline
You will have too ask Brian

You will have too ask Brian about that but I heard him clearly say that we 'would not' accept a appology for the false DMCA in his last video before RRS account was taken off YouTube...maybe I heard him wrong

HA!


Dalbert342
Dalbert342's picture
Posts: 21
Joined: 2007-08-28
User is offlineOffline
http://www.youtube.com/watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LN1rqQ0w-Y

 

Thats Brian's last video,listen what he said


lennyhipp
lennyhipp's picture
Posts: 12
Joined: 2007-02-18
User is offlineOffline
Attn Brian...

ATTN BRIAN:I had just sent you a message to your myspace account, but then saw your recent video about your over 700 unread mails and i figured if you wont get to those for a while, you may never see the one on myspace.
My friends of Extant Dodos had three videos removed:1) "Critical Anaylsis of Age of the Earth"2) "Critical Analysis of Dinosaurs and the Bible"3) "Kent Hovind, Truth in Arguments"
Ironically, their "Critical Analysis of Kent Hovind's Garden of Eden" video remains up on You Tube!
Anyway, as I said in that myspace mail:Extant Dodos have been actively spreading the word behind the scenes... as I've mentioned, their e-mails were mentioned on Pharyngula, The Skeptics Guide to the Galaxy, Panda's Thumb, and they also contacted the Pensacola News Tribune who made the jail cell audio tapes available to let them know CSE claimed copyright to them, and they may be getting the support of a certain BIG name in the world of science.

They are unable to log onto forum-based web pages from school computers, which is why I've been keeping your site updated with their moves.
Any way you can forward me a private e-mail so that they might contact you? They would love to discuss possibly getting on board with litigation.
Thanks,Lenlenny@itsjustnotpossible.com


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
This video is

This video is protected since it's parody and satire. We'll see if it's taken down. HOWEVER, I got a very interesting PM today:

"Well, you will no doubt be pleased to know that the Library of Congress has no copyrights filed since 1978 under the name of Kent Hovind, or CSE or Creation Science Evangelism. Them simply saying the are protected by copyright law does not make it so."

From a user named "Balthasar30". What do you make of it?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
BenfromCanada wrote:

BenfromCanada wrote:

This video is protected since it's parody and satire. We'll see if it's taken down. HOWEVER, I got a very interesting PM today:

"Well, you will no doubt be pleased to know that the Library of Congress has no copyrights filed since 1978 under the name of Kent Hovind, or CSE or Creation Science Evangelism. Them simply saying the are protected by copyright law does not make it so."

From a user named "Balthasar30". What do you make of it?

 

Ben you probably should upload a version without the background song as well.  

 

Keep speaking out people! 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:   Ben you

Sapient wrote:
 

Ben you probably should upload a version without the background song as well.

 

Keep speaking out people!

You can still hear Hovind at parts, especially at the end, and the song is awesome. Plus, when DK released the EP with that song, the tape said "Home taping is killing big time entertainment industry profits. Therefore side two of this tape has been left blank for your convenience." So, I'm fine on that front too.

 What is more important is that I checked out the claim in the PM, and you could really nail them for this. Since their work was public domain pre-2005, they would have to register a copyright to make it copyright material. Since they have not, EVERYTHING of theirs that they've taken videos down for is still public domain. Check the U.S. patent office for "Hovind" and then check it for "Creation Science Evangelism". Nothing in Kent Hovind's name, Eric Hovind's name, or in CSE's name. Thus, despite the copyright policy on their website, all the stuff they claimed was free to use is still free to use, legally.

Go get 'em, Sapient. 


FreshmanRob
Posts: 8
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
It wouldn't matter if they

It wouldn't matter if they had a copyright registered. They said in their pieces and on their website that they do not have copyrights and people are free to distribute them.  At this point, their material is in public domain. They can not EVER claim a copyright to these pieces becuase of this. Once material is public, it can not be made private.

And because Kent went on court record saying NONE of CSE's materials are copyrighted (because he was backed against a wall already, he was claiming CSE was not a business) ALL of CSE's material is considered public domain. CSE has no legs, let alone nubs to stand on. 

 

I would say that they shot themselves in the foot, but they lopped them off with an axe loooong ago. 


Dalbert342
Dalbert342's picture
Posts: 21
Joined: 2007-08-28
User is offlineOffline
Well,VirtualHolocaust has

Well,VirtualHolocaust has something similar too Operation Spread Eagle....he wants evidence that Hovind's lied about the copyright...now if the Library of Congress didnt have any record of Kent Hovind making copyright on his matterial...then,it was clearly without a doubt wrong of CSE to file DMCA against RabidApe and RRS

HA!


Dalbert342
Dalbert342's picture
Posts: 21
Joined: 2007-08-28
User is offlineOffline
Well,VirtualHolocaust has

[MOD EDIT - DOUBLE POST]


FreshmanRob
Posts: 8
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Well thats the thing, even

Well thats the thing, even if they didn't file with the LoC, the material could still be protected under copyright law. As soon as it's in media form, you own it regardless of your registration to the LoC.

 

As soon as you say "Hey, this ain't copyrighted" you lose it and can't get it back. Which is what Mr.Hovind did.


Dalbert342
Dalbert342's picture
Posts: 21
Joined: 2007-08-28
User is offlineOffline
Thats the law,Rob.....if I

Thats the law,Rob.....if I make a movie say and I say at the begining of it 'ya know,its not copyrighted...you can download and use it as you see fit' I cant bitch about it because I gave up all the rights too the work

And I am more pissed about what they did too Eddy Goombah and Chris Boe..they made a song/animation of their own and the CSE fucktards DMCAd it

HA!


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
FreshmanRob wrote: Once

FreshmanRob wrote:

Once material is public, it can not be made private.

Not 100% true, HOWEVER, to make it private, as they claimed they did, you MUST have a copyright registered. So, they're fucked.


Dalbert342
Dalbert342's picture
Posts: 21
Joined: 2007-08-28
User is offlineOffline
Well,I know I made it

Well,I know I made it simple...but yeah,what does Kent 'Fucktard' Hovind think Patent&Copyright office exsist for lol

 

WE WIN,HOVIND CRIMINALS LOSE

HA!


FreshmanRob
Posts: 8
Joined: 2007-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Sorry but it is true. Under

Sorry but it is true. Under copyright law, once a work is in public domain, you CAN NOT CLAIM IT AS YOUR OWN.

 

Period. 


Anthony Mallare
Anthony Mallare's picture
Posts: 5
Joined: 2007-10-19
User is offlineOffline
Freshmanrob - quite right on

Freshmanrob - quite right on that. Also, I think if you make a derivative work from public domain material, such as editing it or re-processing audio/video, then you would own the copyright on that 'new' work. Am wondering if Youtube would also be considered as accessories to the theft/false claims of ownership made by these god-botherers...

I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me.