Good Morning, Hypocritical Lying DUMBFUCK!

So I got a comment earlier today:

Whose copyright did I steal? Yours? Can I see the certificate? Mr. Dog ever hear of “Fair Use”? Ye GODS, he’s an angry little nebbish, ain’t he just?

Now, this comment came from a server in San Francisco, and we all know very well that our DUMBFUCK is no coward to hide behind TOR like a weeping monkey vulva full of sand.  On the other hand, that writing style SURE IS FAMILIAR, AIN’T IT??  Making demands?  Check!  Mentioning Fair Use?  Double Check!  Still sounds like a lithping eight year old girl with a new thethauruth? Oh, yes indeed it does.  Plus, it misspelled deepbraianradio in the email address.

So on balance, I’m gonna say…yep!  DUMBFUCK.

We all know that DUMBFUCK is ESPECIALLY FUCKING DUMB when it comes to copyright and Fair Use.  What it thinks is Fair Use get many of its books taken down from online booksellers with astonishing regularity.  And what it thinks is not Fair Use still sits right here on this blog, despite its great many attempts to get material taken down.

Thanks, Daisy!

But I thought this an appropriate moment to provide an example of a transformative Fair Use on a copyrighted image.  I even put a little bar over the eyes so you can’t identify the person in the picture, because I’m appropriate like that.

In the interest of protecting the more sensitive souls who visit from getting a fresh case of butthurt, I’m putting it below the jump.  So don’t blame me if you lack the impulse control not to click and see and set your ass aflame.



Author: Paul Krendler

The Thinking Man's Zombie

27 thoughts on “Good Morning, Hypocritical Lying DUMBFUCK!”

      1. By cropping out the thumb in the corner, you raised the artistic value considerably.

      2. Is that a juice box or a can of paint thinner on the night stand?

        Asking for a friend...

  1. He has claimed "Fair Use" allows him to use my pictures? Let's look at the Fair Use exemptions allowed under law:

    1. Classroom Use - No.
    2. Research - No.
    3. Scholarship - No.
    4. Nonprofit Educational Institution - No.
    5. News Reporting - No.
    6. Transformative - No.
    7. Restricted Access - No.
    8. Parody - No.

    9. Criticism - See below.
    10. Comment - See Below.

    For either of these last two uses to be allowed, Bill would have had to have made comments about the photos. He did not. He simply included them in his blog post and emails to show that he knew who I was. He never mentioned the photos in his text. He didn't caption them or indicate their source. He simply stole them and included them in email, Twitter comments, and web pages he published. I can find no exemption of Harassment or Intimidation as Fair Use.

    Fair Use is an affirmative defense - it requires a finding of fact by a judge or jury at trial. It cannot simply be claimed in a motion or other filing. He will have to justify using my pictures to a third party, and I don't think they will look kindly on his usage, especially the one of me and my wife he published on Twitter along with the threat to ruin her business.

    1. Speaking of "a finding of fact by a judge or jury at trial," I could have sworn that we were promised that another lulzsuit was coming. Was it interrupted by Johnnie Walker Red and fear pee, or is something more ... sinister afoot?

      1. Hey, in this day and age of internet shopping it could take MONTHS before he can replace his printer.

        1. My personal theory is that Mommy Cindy told him no and not even William is stupid enough to try filing IFP after the ruin that David Edgren almost visited upon him last time.

          But maybe someday he'll save up enough empty Johnnie Walker bottles to do something for himself.

    2. How exactly does he think anything he does could ruin a business?

      He certainly has an unjustly inflated opinion of his own power and ability. As near as I can tell, he seems to envision himself as something like a 1970s-era "60 Minutes," striking fear into the heart of anyone into whose office lobby he intrudes.

      The closest he could come to ruining a business would be to show up and soil himself on-site. The hazmat cleanup could shutter the location for weeks.

      1. "How exactly does he think anything he does could ruin a business?"

        By working for it.

      2. Well, that does make sense. happy its wife died themerrywidower worked for the federal government, and look at the shape it's in -- if it weren't for the trillions it takes from citizens, it would have went under long ago.

        Now, the malingering, such as spending entire shifts at xmfan most days; or the obvious incompetence when the repeatedly cuckolded and admittedly demented Bill Schmalfeldt took a few minutes off from online forums to actually do something included in the freakshow's job description, including typos in short titles; are the sole cause of the mess. However, it seems very clear to me that there was less than no value added for all of the money that stint continues to cost taxpayers.

      3. Oops - NOT the sole cause. hahaha As if something so insignificant could have any real impact, or such a total FAILure could, even if it tried.

  2. You promised me a bar, and I had hoped it was more of a dive bar, tavern or Local Meeting House of Alcoholics Unanimous!

  3. I'm pretty sure that when you register a copyright for yourself on work you didn't write and you don't have the actual copyright holder's permission for, you've stolen someone's copyright. DUMBFUCK.

  4. So.. This comment you received...

    Was in in _reply_ to someone who has a no-contact order against him?

    Wouldn't that be a violation of a court order?

    .... Has he yet walked back the faildox of LT?
    If he hasn't that would mean he intentionally sent the person he accuses of being Krendler a message, which would be...

    Lessee, a violation of a court order, wouldn't it?

    2 for 1!


Comments are closed.