One of These Things is Not Like The Others

comparisonTwo of the items shown above are from genuine U. S. District Court documents and are in the public domain. One is from a computer file used to create a document filed with a court, but it is not the court document itself. It is not in the public domain.

Can you tell which is which?

Hint: Look for the Clerk’s acceptance stamps and the PACER legends across the the top of the real court documents.

UPDATE—Here’s the significance of the above lesson. If a copyrighted work is included in a court paper, the court document may be reproduced with the copyrighted material included. However, the copyrighted material is not in the public domain, so it can only reproduced without infringement in the context of the public record. (Aside: The entire first issue of Action Comics was reproduced in a court filing. Guess what kind of lawsuit one would face if one published that material outside of the context of the related court filing without getting the permission of the copyright holder. You don’t tug on Superman’s cape.)

The Cabin Boy™ has included material from Hogewash! in his latest book that does not appear to be from what he filed with the court but from copies of the computer file(s) used create what he filed. If that be the case, he has again infringed multiple copyrights.

28 thoughts on “One of These Things is Not Like The Others


  1. I can’t get a larger version of the image than what is displayed in the body of the article; can’t read it.


  2. Is it from Bill schmalfeldt’s book? And how would he have access to a draft document, and why wouldn’t he rely on pacer for a true copy? ‘Cos he could lift one for free?


  3. John studies the rhetorical object thrown through his intellectual living room window. Hoge gazes amusingly at the fragrant vagrant who is screaming die bitch die! John sighs – pulls the pin – and lobs the rhetorical grenade back at the Wednesday School Graduate


  4. I don’t have any interest in discussing the legal analysis. I am interested in how he got copies of the unfiled documents. The only persons who would rightly have those would be parties to the case. I see nothing inherently wrong in the exchange of those documents, but I can’t help but wonder why they are being provided and for what purpose. It almost seems to evidence a concerted effort on the part of those involved, a conspiracy of sorts. If there were wrongdoing in the exchange of said information (and I doubt there is) then it could feasibly be a criminal conspiracy. Of interest is the claim by a certain dread pro se that he is the victim of a conspiracy by multiple individuals to harass him. If this were the case, why would that same individual then provide documents to an adjudicated harasser?


      • Ok, I get it now. The pictures were purely for the purpose of illustration. BS was posting his own court filings, which included as exhibits Hogewash Material and possibly Krendler’s material. The copies he provided of the court filings, were not the actual court filings, but instead were the prefiled copies, which you contend are not public records and therefore not entitled to copyright protection. I get it now, mea culpa.


  5. To the twitter feeds Bill has risen He is now master of all he surveys – hundreds of tweets physical threats oh my, war has been declared, he shall smite anyone who stands in the path of total destruction of Hoge and Paul! prepare for the Amazon Federal Police force!


  6. There are a lot of ways to screw things up. He and Brett Kimberlin are dedicated to experimenting with ALL of them.

    So, the new book is damaged goods? Great.

Leave a Reply