SCHULZ'S ATTORNEYS CHARGED ME W/COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. SEEK HELP.
(newsgroup: alt.politics.homosexuality)
========
Subject: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel Krahlin)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:11:59 GMT
I have recently gotten embroiled with a charge of copyright or
trademark infringement by Charles Schulz's attorneys, over a
gay-rights parody I did of the Peanuts comic strip. View the image in
question yourself, at:
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
and make your own educated decision. The site includes the original
letter e-mailed to me by Schulz's legal counsel, as well as references
citing copyright laws regarding "fair use" by artists who parody the
work of another. Basically, in the United States, it is perfectly
legal to mimic another work of art in the form of a parody...without
getting permission from the artist being parodied, to either display
or sell the parody.
If you feel that *my rights are being infringed (and *not those of
Charles Schulz), and would like to help in some way, then read on:
-------------------------------------------
HOW YOU CAN HELP:
WRITE LETTERS TO THE EDITORS OR NEWSCASTERS
E-mail, snail-mail, fax or hand deliver, a letter to newspapers,
television and radio stations, web magazines, and other media centers.
(Don't forget our counterculture and gay media!) Tell them about
Charles Schultz's attorneys accusing me of copyright infringement for
my gay-rights parody of Pee Nuts. Include my web site URL:
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
SEND ME EVIDENCE IN MY DEFENSE
Send me photocopies or scanned images of other parodies of comic
strips, such as from Mad Magazine and underground comics. (Parodies
should be of comics by authors still living.) Please include the name
of the publication, copyright information, and other relevant
information. (Any other ideas you may have to assist my defense, by
all means tell me!) E-mail scanned images to:
ezekielk@members.gayweb.com
Snail-mail photocopies to:
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
584 Castro St., Suite 436
San Francisco, CA 94114
HELP ME FIND LEGAL COUNSEL
I am dirt poor, living on a disability stipend as I have for many
years. Would very much appreciate finding pro-bono legal counsel by
attorneys well-versed in copyright and trademark law.
-------------------------------------------
PLEASE NOTE: I cannot afford to reimburse anyone for any expenses
accrued in mailing me your contributions of support. But I will give
each person who assists in my defense, complete credit for so
doing...except for those who prefer to remain anonymous.
---
Charles Schulz's lawyers are after my ass
for my gay-rights parody of Peanuts!
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
---
My website kicks (but never licks) butt!
http://members.xoom.com/ezekielk/
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: italiangm@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:59:12 GMT
In article <35f7877e.9146295@nntp.sj.bigger.net>,
ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com wrote:
[...]
> I am dirt poor, living on a disability stipend as I have for many
> years. Would very much appreciate finding pro-bono legal counsel by
> attorneys well-versed in copyright and trademark law.
Huh?
Not 30 days ago you claimed your 'disability' was an act you used just to
'push buttons' right here on UseNet!
You've got more than copyright problems. Your *credibility* ledger is showing
red ink.
--
Steve Giammarco
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: "Lu Lu Pironi"
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 09:31:01 -0700
We need to give Ken Starr your number, Zeke!!
italiangm@hotmail.com wrote in message <6t8eug$iif$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <35f7877e.9146295@nntp.sj.bigger.net>,
> ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>[...]
>> I am dirt poor, living on a disability stipend as I have for many
>> years. Would very much appreciate finding pro-bono legal counsel by
>> attorneys well-versed in copyright and trademark law.
>
>Huh?
>
>Not 30 days ago you claimed your 'disability' was an act you used just to
>'push buttons' right here on UseNet!
>
>You've got more than copyright problems. Your *credibility* ledger is
showing
>red ink.
>
>--
>Steve Giammarco
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: look@my.sig4address (Magenta)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 17:15:17 GMT
In [[6t8eug$iif$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>> italiangm@hotmail.com doth
speak:
>In article <35f7877e.9146295@nntp.sj.bigger.net>,
> ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>[...]
>> I am dirt poor, living on a disability stipend as I have for many
>> years. Would very much appreciate finding pro-bono legal counsel by
>> attorneys well-versed in copyright and trademark law.
>
>Huh?
>
>Not 30 days ago you claimed your 'disability' was an act you used just to
>'push buttons' right here on UseNet!
>
>You've got more than copyright problems. Your *credibility* ledger is showing
>red ink.
Like he ever had any credibility...
--
+----- Peace & Love, ----+------- Magenta77 (at) AOL (dot) com ------+
| /| /| _ _ _ _-|-_ |"There are more things in heaven and earth,|
| / |/ |(_|(_|(/_| )|(_| |...Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." |
|_________ _/ __________|_________________--[Hamlet Act I: Scene V]_|
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: sheroux@europa.nospam.com (RavensHeart)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 13:42:29 GMT
On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:11:59 GMT, ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel
Krahlin) wrote:
>I have recently gotten embroiled with a charge of copyright or
>trademark infringement by Charles Schulz's attorneys, over a
>gay-rights parody I did of the Peanuts comic strip.
>If you feel that *my rights are being infringed (and *not those of
>Charles Schulz), and would like to help in some way, then read on:
>
>-------------------------------------------
>
>HOW YOU CAN HELP:
>
> (Any other ideas you may have to assist my defense, by
>all means tell me!)
You could always plead insanity.
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: "L. Michael Roberts"
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 18:37:43 GMT
RavensHeart wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:11:59 GMT, ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel
> Krahlin) wrote:
>
> >I have recently gotten embroiled with a charge of copyright or
> >trademark infringement by Charles Schulz's attorneys, over a
> >gay-rights parody I did of the Peanuts comic strip.
>
> >If you feel that *my rights are being infringed (and *not those of
> >Charles Schulz), and would like to help in some way, then read on:
> >
> >-------------------------------------------
> >
> >HOW YOU CAN HELP:
> >
> > (Any other ideas you may have to assist my defense, by
> >all means tell me!)
>
> You could always plead insanity.
Based on his posts here... there would be no contest!
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Burlington, Ont, Canada To reply, remove 'SpamSux' from my E-ddress
"Life is a sexualy transmitted, terminal, condition"
+==================================================================+
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: wstewart@hi.net (Ward Stewart)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 19:49:14 GMT
On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 13:42:29 GMT, sheroux@europa.nospam.com
(RavensHeart) wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:11:59 GMT, ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel
>Krahlin) wrote:
>
>>I have recently gotten embroiled with a charge of copyright or
>>trademark infringement by Charles Schulz's attorneys, over a
>>gay-rights parody I did of the Peanuts comic strip.
>
>>If you feel that *my rights are being infringed (and *not those of
>>Charles Schulz), and would like to help in some way, then read on:
>>
>>-------------------------------------------
>>
>>HOW YOU CAN HELP:
>>
>> (Any other ideas you may have to assist my defense, by
>>all means tell me!)
>
>You could always plead insanity.
Besides which he is not "embroiled" in anything -- He drew a dim
little parody of Peanuts and identified the author as being Charles
SCHITZ. Puerile and vacuous. Irrelevant and stupid.
He then recieved a form letter from Schultz' law firm -- he is about
as "emboiled" as is a library patron with a card announcing that a
book is overdue.
ward
***********************************************************
"I am constantly mystified by this notion of "disagreeing"
with homosexuality -- not unlike disagreeing with Tuesday --
like it or not, every seven days, there it is -- TUESDAY.
uncle ward
***********************************************************
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: putpeel@putpeel.com (Tim And Barb)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 22:22:00 GMT
Mr. Schulz is a client of mine and I can Assure you he is a bastard when it
comes to this kind of issue. He has simply CRUSHED individuals in similar
instances. This is a guy with so much clout in the courts that when an
employee of his SHOT to DEATH her husband, in Schulz's private studio, she was
acquitted. He personally testified to her distress, and the torment by the
dead guy. There were 4 witnesses, and when the police arrived she literally
had the gun in her hand.
If what you received was a warning I suggest the following:
1. If you want to make a free speech issue of it, find a civil liberties
lawyer with nothing to do. Expect to lose.
2. Consider yourself warned, flattered by the attention, and drop it.
My suggestion would be the latter.
In article <35fd1e45.5713422@news.hi.net>, wstewart@hi.net (Ward Stewart)
wrote:
|On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 13:42:29 GMT, sheroux@europa.nospam.com
|(RavensHeart) wrote:
|
|>On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:11:59 GMT, ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel
|>Krahlin) wrote:
|>
|>>I have recently gotten embroiled with a charge of copyright or
|>>trademark infringement by Charles Schulz's attorneys, over a
|>>gay-rights parody I did of the Peanuts comic strip.
|>
|>>If you feel that *my rights are being infringed (and *not those of
|>>Charles Schulz), and would like to help in some way, then read on:
|>>
|>>-------------------------------------------
|>>
|>>HOW YOU CAN HELP:
|>>
|>> (Any other ideas you may have to assist my defense, by
|>>all means tell me!)
|>
|>You could always plead insanity.
|
|Besides which he is not "embroiled" in anything -- He drew a dim
|little parody of Peanuts and identified the author as being Charles
|SCHITZ. Puerile and vacuous. Irrelevant and stupid.
|
|He then recieved a form letter from Schultz' law firm -- he is about
|as "emboiled" as is a library patron with a card announcing that a
|book is overdue.
|
|ward
|
|
|***********************************************************
|"I am constantly mystified by this notion of "disagreeing"
|with homosexuality -- not unlike disagreeing with Tuesday --
|like it or not, every seven days, there it is -- TUESDAY.
| uncle ward
|***********************************************************
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel Krahlin)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 08:48:01 GMT
On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 22:22:00 GMT, putpeel@putpeel.com (Tim And Barb)
wrote:
>If what you received was a warning I suggest the following:
>1. If you want to make a free speech issue of it, find a civil liberties
>lawyer with nothing to do. Expect to lose.
I do expect to lose the court case. But what I hope to gain is the
issue of invisibility of gay characters in mainstream comic strips. I
now quote from my essay, "My Pee Nut Agenda":
---begin quote
Mainstream comics inevitably play an important role in educating young
people about the real world...often portraying a minority in some
situation that enlightens the readers as to this character's humanity
and normalcy. Both daily and Sunday comics cover, on a regular basis,
issues regarding the rights of women, children, people of color, the
elderly, the physically and/or mentally challenged, the poor, and
various alternative lifestyles. But the coverage of gay people is
glaringly absent.
"This is wrong, and we must not continue to allow this-and-that excuse
of our mainstream comic strip authors, to persist in keeping a blind
eye to the gay issue. To imply that this would be "dirty" or "obscene"
to children, is a slap in our face. We are neither immoral nor
inappropriate with or without children in our presence. Even here in
our lovely gay mecca of San Francisco...there is not one single gay
comic in either of our two major newspapers.
"Newspapers of Amerika: where is your honor, your dignity, your sense
of Amerikan values of decency and fair play? Are you really so afraid
of Christian fanatics as to toe their party line, at the cost of gay
people's annihilation? Until you do the right thing, the heartfelt and
respectful thing...which is including a gay-relevant comic strip...our
blood, gay blood, will continue to be spilled across your pages,
across your headlines, across every newspaper in this troubled,
homophobic nation.
"For as we raise our children, so bends the tree. And if gays remain
invisible to them in our daily comic strips, as well as in other media
so influential to young minds...then we cannot expect anything better
than future generations fearing and villifying gays.
---end quote
>2. Consider yourself warned, flattered by the attention, and drop it.
>
>My suggestion would be the latter.
Your insight and concerned are well appreciated. I do not feel,
however, it is my role to cower before what is clearly monstrous and
wrong. I am aware of the dangers I have put myself into...and am
willing to stand in court for my right to free speech and parody as a
gay activist.
I think you will find my Pee Nuts site quite intriguing, and I invite
you to drop on over!
P.S.: In what way is Mr. Schulz a client of yours (may I ask)?
---
Charles Schulz's lawyers are after my ass
for my gay-rights parody of Peanuts!
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
---
My website kicks (but never licks) butt!
http://members.xoom.com/ezekielk/
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: look@my.sig4address (Magenta)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 17:19:26 GMT
In [[35f8e34f.16999500@nntp.sj.bigger.net>> ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com
(Ezekiel Krahlin) doth speak:
>On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 22:22:00 GMT, putpeel@putpeel.com (Tim And Barb)
>wrote:
>
>>If what you received was a warning I suggest the following:
>
>>1. If you want to make a free speech issue of it, find a civil liberties
>>lawyer with nothing to do. Expect to lose.
>
>I do expect to lose the court case. But what I hope to gain is the
>issue of invisibility of gay characters in mainstream comic strips.
I guess you never read "For better or Worse", "Dunesberry", "Bloom
County", or "Life in Hell", or watched "The Simpsons".
Everything is invisible to someone who is blind.
--
+----- Peace & Love, ----+------- Magenta77 (at) AOL (dot) com ------+
| /| /| _ _ _ _-|-_ |"There are more things in heaven and earth,|
| / |/ |(_|(_|(/_| )|(_| |...Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." |
|_________ _/ __________|_________________--[Hamlet Act I: Scene V]_|
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel Krahlin)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 22:06:19 GMT
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998 17:19:26 GMT, look@my.sig4address (Magenta) wrote:
>I guess you never read "For better or Worse", "Dunesberry", "Bloom
>County", or "Life in Hell", or watched "The Simpsons".
Of course I have. For Better or for Worse gets censored in the
majority of newspaper, when it has a gay character. Doonesbury...well,
that was quite a few years ago. Bloom County and Life in Hell...no, I
don't know about them. The Simpsons, however, has done some good
things...but we are speaking here of the Sunday and daily comics in
our newspapers.
I don't consider it more than tossing us a crumb, when we have a gay
character appear in our daily comics once every four or six
years...and is censored in over half the papers, anyway. My cause is
quite justified...gay visibility on a daily basis in *one of our
popular comic strips.
>Everything is invisible to someone who is blind.
Why is it what whatever you offer up as pearls of wisdom, turn out to
resemble rabbit dung-pods? I guess it's because you have "the touch".
---
Charles Schulz's lawyers are after my ass
for my gay-rights parody of Peanuts!
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
---
My website kicks (but never licks) butt!
http://members.xoom.com/ezekielk/
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: look@my.sig4address (Magenta)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 22:50:27 GMT
In [[35faef02.7350264@nntp.sj.bigger.net>> ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com
(Ezekiel Krahlin) doth speak:
>On Sat, 12 Sep 1998 17:19:26 GMT, look@my.sig4address (Magenta) wrote:
>
>>I guess you never read "For better or Worse", "Dunesberry", "Bloom
>>County", or "Life in Hell", or watched "The Simpsons".
>
>Of course I have. For Better or for Worse gets censored in the
>majority of newspaper, when it has a gay character. Doonesbury...well,
>that was quite a few years ago. Bloom County and Life in Hell...no, I
>don't know about them. The Simpsons, however, has done some good
>things...but we are speaking here of the Sunday and daily comics in
>our newspapers.
>
>I don't consider it more than tossing us a crumb, when we have a gay
>character appear in our daily comics once every four or six
>years...and is censored in over half the papers, anyway. My cause is
>quite justified...gay visibility on a daily basis in *one of our
>popular comic strips.
Then try "Life in Hell", from Matt Groening, the same guy who does
"The Simpsons". It is syndicated in many newspapers, usually as a
Sunday only. Two of the main characters are a gay couple named Akbar
and Jeff, who wear fezzes with tassels. If you don't have the strip in
your paper, I am sure you have seen them before.
.=~\ /~=.
,'|-~'--__. .__--'~-|`.
/ | '' \ / '' | \
+ C | | ) +
| --' '-- |
| l----` '----| |
| | | |
/`----'\ /`----'\
/ \ / \
'T~T'/\\ //\ /\\ //\'T~T'
| \// \Y/ \ / \Y/ \\/ |
UJJ--------' '--------UJJ
| | | |
`---^---' `---^---'
| | | | | | | |
`===`=== ==='==='
.=~\ .=~\
+--__--__-'|-~'--__. +--__--__-'|-~'--__.
| '' \ | '' \
C | C |
| --' | --'
| l----` | l----`
_ ._____| |_____. _ _ ._____| |_____. _
C_'-| `----' |-'_3 C_'-| `----' |-'_3
C .-|___ ___|-. 3 C .-|___ ___|-. 3
~ |/\ //\ //\| ~ ~ |\\ //\ //\| ~
| \\/ \\/ \| | \\/ \\/ \|
.__L___________L_. /~\ .__L___________L_. /~\
/~\_| |_| | /~\_| |_| |
| |-| |-| | | |-| |-| |
| | '~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' `-' | | '~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' `-'
'~' '~'
Even without "Life in Hell" your cause is NOT justified, as has been
explained to you repeatedly. THe simple fact that the Peanuts does not
address gay issues does NOT mean it is anti-gay. As John pointed out,
you never mention all of the Gypsies who died in the Holocaust, does
that mean you are anti-Gypsy?
PLUS, you took copyrighted characters, used them to slander their
creator, and then demanded money if someone used your derivative
creation. That is NOT "fair use".
--
+----- Peace & Love, ----+------- Magenta77 (at) AOL (dot) com ------+
| /| /| _ _ _ _-|-_ |"There are more things in heaven and earth,|
| / |/ |(_|(_|(/_| )|(_| |...Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." |
|_________ _/ __________|_________________--[Hamlet Act I: Scene V]_|
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel Krahlin)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 20:57:42 GMT
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998 22:50:27 GMT, look@my.sig4address (Magenta) wrote:
>Then try "Life in Hell", from Matt Groening, the same guy who does
>"The Simpsons". It is syndicated in many newspapers, usually as a
>Sunday only. Two of the main characters are a gay couple named Akbar
>and Jeff, who wear fezzes with tassels. If you don't have the strip in
>your paper, I am sure you have seen them before.
They are not in the Sunday comics, or in the daily...and I certainly
would like to see that. Plus: I have never seem them discuss the gay
issue. What's their problem, afraid to come out of the closet all the
way? What have they got to lose?
---
Charles Schulz's lawyers are after my ass
for my gay-rights parody of Peanuts!
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
---
My website kicks (but never licks) butt!
http://members.xoom.com/ezekielk/
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: jmnorthw@gte.uce_is_icky.net (J. Northwood)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 23:49:05 GMT
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998 22:06:19 GMT, ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel
Krahlin) wrote:
>Of course I have. For Better or for Worse gets censored in the
>majority of newspaper, when it has a gay character.
Ballocks.
>Doonesbury...well, that was quite a few years ago.
The last "Mark and Chase" strip was less than a week ago.
>Bloom County and Life in Hell...no, I don't know about them.
Or care to learn, obviously.
>The Simpsons, however, has done some good
>things...but we are speaking here of the Sunday and daily comics in
>our newspapers.
Yes -- like Doonesbury, For Better or Worse and so forth.
>I don't consider it more than tossing us a crumb, when we have a gay
>character appear in our daily comics once every four or six
>years...
Or almost weekly, as in the case of Doonesbury.
>and is censored in over half the papers, anyway.
Wow. Over half.
Maybe in the midwest.
Maybe.
>My cause is
>quite justified...gay visibility on a daily basis in *one of our
>popular comic strips.
Fine.
Then write one, syndicate it and demand that it be carried.
If you can't, or won't, then shut up.
>Why is it what whatever you offer up as pearls of wisdom, turn out to
>resemble rabbit dung-pods? I guess it's because you have "the touch".
Pot. Kettle. Herr Krahlin.
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel Krahlin)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 20:57:43 GMT
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998 23:49:05 GMT, jmnorthw@gte.uce_is_icky.net (J.
Northwood) wrote:
>Then write one, syndicate it and demand that it be carried.
There are already plenty of gay comic authors that could easily be
syndicated by any mainstream newspaper. I am pushing for them to do
that.
>If you can't, or won't, then shut up.
Oh, I see: I must abide by your rules, or just drop out, eh? What a
logical belief system! What I am doing, is pressuring society to
syndicate one of our present cartoonists, into mainstream daily and
Sunday comics. This is essentially accomplishing the same thing, as
trying to syndicate my own...plus, is more likely to happen long
before I could ever have my own regular comic strip.
>Pot. Kettle. Herr Krahlin.
The only people who care what you say, are twisted in their own souls.
Enjoy your fan club while it lasts.
---
Charles Schulz's lawyers are after my ass
for my gay-rights parody of Peanuts!
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
---
My website kicks (but never licks) butt!
http://members.xoom.com/ezekielk/
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: jmnorthw@gte.uce_is_icky.net (J. Northwood)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 22:25:51 GMT
On Sun, 13 Sep 1998 20:57:43 GMT, ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel
Krahlin) wrote:
>On Sat, 12 Sep 1998 23:49:05 GMT, jmnorthw@gte.uce_is_icky.net (J.
>Northwood) wrote:
>>Then write one, syndicate it and demand that it be carried.
>There are already plenty of gay comic authors that could easily be
>syndicated by any mainstream newspaper. I am pushing for them to do
>that.
Ah. So by demonizing artists (those who create comics are called
artists, little one), you seek understanding of the need to reach out
to homosexuals in the comics?
>>If you can't, or won't, then shut up.
>Oh, I see: I must abide by your rules, or just drop out, eh?
No. I'd just like to see you -- just _once_ -- put your money where
your mouth is.
>What a logical belief system!
I think so.
>What I am doing, is pressuring society to
>syndicate one of our present cartoonists, into mainstream daily and
>Sunday comics. This is essentially accomplishing the same thing, as
>trying to syndicate my own...plus, is more likely to happen long
>before I could ever have my own regular comic strip.
IOW, you don't even want to try.
>>Pot. Kettle. Herr Krahlin.
>The only people who care what you say, are twisted in their own souls.
>Enjoy your fan club while it lasts.
Frankly, you pathetic wretch, I don't care one way or another about
"fan clubs". You and your little Cherry pal are more than welcome to
go your merry way, but don't expect to spit your venom without it
being detoxified.
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: desalvo@monitor.net (John De Salvio)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 08:02:28 -0700
In article <6t9jdq$m7i$2@news.ncal.verio.com>, putpeel@putpeel.com (Tim
And Barb) wrote:
> Mr. Schulz is a client of mine and I can Assure you he is a bastard when it
> comes to this kind of issue. He has simply CRUSHED individuals in similar
> instances. This is a guy with so much clout in the courts that when an
> employee of his SHOT to DEATH her husband, in Schulz's private studio,
she was
> acquitted. He personally testified to her distress, and the torment by the
> dead guy. There were 4 witnesses, and when the police arrived she literally
> had the gun in her hand.
A client, eh? In what capacity?
If I get the transcripts of the court case, what do you think I will find?
Do you REALLY think Schulz got the woman acquitted solely by his "clout"?
My "clout" is that I can get the transcripts immediately.
Now, what were you saying?
--
John
NOTE: "From" address is deliberately wrong.
My correct e-mail address is:
desalvio["AT" SYMBOL]monitor.net
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: "James Doemer"
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 22:21:39 -0400
Well I doubt that the transcripts are going to reflect that the woman
was aquitted by Mr. Shultz's clout, but it would be interesting to see
that case, if it's not too much trouble to get the transcripts.
John De Salvio wrote in message ...
>In article <6t9jdq$m7i$2@news.ncal.verio.com>, putpeel@putpeel.com (Tim
>And Barb) wrote:
>
>> Mr. Schulz is a client of mine and I can Assure you he is a bastard when
it
>> comes to this kind of issue. He has simply CRUSHED individuals in
similar
>> instances. This is a guy with so much clout in the courts that when an
>> employee of his SHOT to DEATH her husband, in Schulz's private studio,
>she was
>> acquitted. He personally testified to her distress, and the torment by
the
>> dead guy. There were 4 witnesses, and when the police arrived she
literally
>> had the gun in her hand.
>
>A client, eh? In what capacity?
>
>If I get the transcripts of the court case, what do you think I will find?
>Do you REALLY think Schulz got the woman acquitted solely by his "clout"?
>
>My "clout" is that I can get the transcripts immediately.
>
>Now, what were you saying?
>
>--
>John
>
>NOTE: "From" address is deliberately wrong.
>My correct e-mail address is:
>
>desalvio["AT" SYMBOL]monitor.net
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: jayteefl@aol.com (JayTeeFL)
Date: 12 Sep 1998 10:03:52 GMT
In article <35fd1e45.5713422@news.hi.net>, wstewart@hi.net (Ward Stewart)
writes:
>He then recieved a form letter from Schultz' law firm -- he is about
>as "emboiled" as is a library patron with a card announcing that a
>book is overdue.
furthermore, he IS guilty of copywright infringement.
prince jace <----- an artist...who has signed an agreement with his employer
that THEY own the rights to work i create for them using their tools. do i
*like* selling away my rights like that? no...not at all. but i knew going in
exactly what that piece of paper meant when i signed it.
http://members.aol.com/jayteefl/
"we're one, but we're not the same...we get to carry each other..."
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: "DRS"
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 23:33:24 +1000
JayTeeFL wrote in message
<1998091210035200.GAA00936@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
:In article <35fd1e45.5713422@news.hi.net>, wstewart@hi.net (Ward Stewart)
:writes:
:
:>He then recieved a form letter from Schultz' law firm -- he is about
:>as "emboiled" as is a library patron with a card announcing that a
:>book is overdue.
:
:furthermore, he IS guilty of copywright infringement.
Actually, I think the fruitcake has a case.
--
Beware of the Spam-Dog
========
Subject: Re: Schulz's Attorneys charged me w/copyright infringement. Seek help.
From: ezekieljk@my-dejanews.com (Ezekiel Krahlin)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 15:44:11 GMT
On 12 Sep 1998 10:03:52 GMT, jayteefl@aol.com (JayTeeFL) wrote:
>furthermore, he IS guilty of copywright infringement.
No matter how heavily protected is an artist's copyright or
trademark...he does *not have any legal assertion over censoring a
parody of *any work that he has originated. (That is, under the
artistic "fair use" laws here in the United States.)
---
Charles Schulz's lawyers are after my ass
for my gay-rights parody of Peanuts!
http://www.2xtreme.net/jwd/k6/copyrite.htm
---
My website kicks (but never licks) butt!
http://members.xoom.com/ezekielk/
end of document (and this thread) [Return to Pee Nuts page]