I think so, Brain … but the requirements don’t have to make sense—they’re a government regulation.
I voted for Romney.
Video Credit: NASA
I think so, Brain … but why do people pay to ride up to the top of tall buildings and then pay to use those binoculars to look at stuff on the ground?
This paragraph is from The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s complaint in the Kimberlin v. Kimberlinunmasked copyright trolling lawsuit.And therein lies a fatal problem for TDPK’s lawsuit. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires that someone filing a pleading with a court provide
a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief[.]
Because TDPK never identifies which videos are his and which are JTMP’s he doesn’t show that he is entitled to relief. For all the court knows, all of the allegedly infringed videos belong to JTMP, and TDPK cannot sue on the organization’s behalf. JTMP would have to sue in its own right, and it would have to be represented by a lawyer instead of TDPK.
More fundamentally, TDPK never identifies which videos the allegedly infringing images were taken from. In effect, he’s saying, “Your Honor, they stole my stuff, but I can’t bother to tell you what they stole.”
If you thought the opposition to the motion for default was brutal, just wait till you see what can be put in a motion to dismiss.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
Last week, The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin filed a motion seeking default in the Kimberlin v. Kimberlinunmasked copyright trolling lawsuit against the two individuals he claims are Kimberlin Unmasked. They have filed their opposition to his motion.
UPDATE—I’m pleased to see that the evidence of the fraudulent green cards seems to be mostly derived from Hogewash! posts. This makes three cases where documentary evidence of forgery and/or perjury by TDPK have been placed in front of the court.
UPDATE 2—Aaron Walker comments here.