All Lickspittle Broadcast System programs end with an announcement such as this one—
ANNOUNCER: Johnny Atsign is a work of fiction. If anyone thinks it’s about him, he should read Proverbs 28:1. This is LBS, the Lickspittle Broadcasting System.
This post, Funny You Should Ask, from eight years ago today is an example of the truth contained in that proverb.
* * * * *
The last three intriguing episodes of Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign have dealt with several potentially interrelated episodes of harassment wherein either The Grouch or The Bomber had contacted a third party in order to harass someone who was or wound up as one of Johnny’s clients. None of the episodes provide any information about the contents of the harassing messages. Yet, today, Hogewash! received this comment to yesterday’s episode.Why would “Keep Wondering” ask such a question unless he knew that the contents of one or more of the messages directed the recipient(s) attention to “public information”?
Pretend for a moment that the fictional Johnny Atsign episodes are, like Blognet, based on true incidents but with the some of the names changed to protect the innocent. That knowledge of the contents of at least one of the messages would limit the range of possible identities of “Keep Wondering” to one of the senders or one of the recipients. Since the recipients know why they turned the messages over to law enforcement agencies, they probably have a good idea of why the messages might be illegal. That leaves a very small population of suspects.
Still, the question deserves an answer. There are several—depending on who received which message.
Under Maryland law, it is a crime to harass a government employee at work.
Under federal law, it is a serious felony to harass a federal employee or a contractor assisting a federal employee at work.
Under Maryland law, it is a crime to make a false report to a public official which causes an investigation to occur.
Under federal law, it is a crime to make a false statement to a federal official.
Someone is playing Go Fish when the real game is Fizzbin.
* * * * *
And it turns out he wasn’t playing with a full deck.
It seems that Neal Rauhauser has been trolling for a pro bono lawyer for a friend.
IANAL, but the ones I’ve talked to say that anyone with a righteous libel claim against a defendant with deep pockets should have no trouble finding a lawyer willing to represent him on a fee-contingent basis. Pro bono representation is generally provided to defendants rather than plaintiffs. Of course, those observations come from many of the same lawyers who told me that the reason they suspect that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin is pro se is that he can’t find a lawyer willing to risk his law license by signing court papers making the unfounded allegations Kimberlin is bringing.
* * * * *
Certain peoples’ prurient interest in children as sexual objects keeps coming up as well.
As the TKPOTD for eight years ago today showed, clarity of thought has never been one of Team Kimberlin’s strong suits.
* * * * *
The Dreadful Pro-Se Schmalfeldt is lying.
There is no question that TDPS has posted pictures that meet the definition of pornography under the Miller v. California (413 U.S. 15) standard.
He posted a picture of two men engaging in anal sex with my face photoshopped onto the body of the the one being penetrated. The picture was originally posted at http://radiowms.com/2013/07/19/the-fat-man-episode-004-murdery-me [dead link]. The page disappeared when the copyright holder of the video from which my face had been lifted asked that the picture be removed.
Schmalfeldt posted another picture into which my face had been photoshopped. It showed my face surrounded by naked men with erect penises. Again, the link is dead—this time because the web host took the site down for violation of its policy against porn. The original URL was http://www.patriot-ombudsman.com/oh-cutie-pie-eh-nsfw-you-are-warned. This is the picture which may use a photo of me taken while I was underage.
Even if I could, I wouldn’t post either of those pictures here, but I can’t. Judge Stansfield placed them under seal during the peace order extension hearing last year. However, the pictures are part of the record of the hearing as is Schmalfeldt’s admission of having made and posted them. That record can be used as evidence in any further proceeding.
The Cabin Boy™ is correct in saying that I want no part of anything that is about to happen about, to, or because of him. If he thinks things through with the least bit of clarity, he should realize that he doesn’t want me involved either.
* * * * *
It turned out that Schmalfeldt’s second photoshopped image did us a picture take when I was 17.
It also turned out that Schmalfeldt lost all of the LOLsuits he filed against me.
Brett Kimberlin’s campaign of pro se lawfare was not the only way Team Kimberlin went after their perceived enemies. Many of us were subjected to various forms of online harassment, and one of the principal agents of that harassment was Bill Schmalfeldt. I was the first person to bring some consequences his way when I sought a peace order against him. After it was granted, he tried to get it modified. Nine years ago today, I reported on what happened at the hearing on his motion to modify. In Summary …
* * * * *
… what Judge Stansfield told Bill Schmalfeldt in court yesterday was this:
1. The Misuse of Electronic Communication statute has no bearing on the Hoge v. Schmalfeldt peace order because none of the court’s findings were based on it. The court found Schmalfeldt to have violated the Harassment statute.
2. @mentions per se are not at issue in the case. While the direct contact involved in the finding of harassment came via @mentions, the order prohibits all further contact, attempts to contact, or harassment.
3. There is no “journalism” exception to Maryland’s Harassment law.
4. U.S. v. Cassidy deals with publications about someone. Hoge v. Schmalfeldt deals with communication directed to someone.
5. All the questions above were settled at trial and will not be retried unless the Court of Appeals remands the case for retrial.
Now, what new circumstance require that the order be modified?
* * * * *
Of course, the new circumstances resulting from Schmalfeldt’s misbehavior under the terms of the peace order did not lead to it being modified.
However, they were the bases for extension of the order a few months later.
I was the first of several people who were able to hold Bill Schmalfeldt accountable for his online harassment. However, he didn’t obey the first peace order issued against him, continuing to contact me through (at)mentions on Twitter. For brief period during the first peace order, he managed to tweet about me rather than to me. Nine years ago today, I optimistically thought Perhaps He’s Learning.
Lawfare hasn’t been the only thing I’ve had to put up with from Team Kimberlin. They also tired to intimidate me with various forms of cyberthuggery. This post about Anonymity and Cowardice ran nine years ago today.
* * * * *
The use of the term “anonymous coward” to describe someone who posts a comment without using his real name or a known nom de cyber goes back to the early days of Usenet. If Samuel Clemens were to comment here as Mark Twain, he would not be considered an anonymous coward. (Note: Someone using a known nom de cyber (i.e., @BreitbartUnmask) may be a coward but doesn’t really meet the definition of anonymous coward.)
OTOH, these “commenters” are clearly anonymous cowards:The abusive, often obscene, content of the comments submitted under these names compounds the cowardice of the sender(s). He (they) doesn’t (don’t) have the courage to speak openly.
I’ve received around a hundred such “comments” over the past few months. I’ve posted a few of them. Most have been so juvenile that my reaction has been to shake my head and file them away. Some, however, have contained seriously perverted messages that raise concerns about the stability of the sender. They have caused my family to take some additional measures to assure our safety.
There are some really sick weirdo trolls on the Internet.
* * * * *
Bullies always seem surprised when a victim punches back, and I’ve rarely settled for only twice as hard.
One of the best techniques to use against Team Kimberlin in court has been to let them make my case for me. Doing so resulted in what Bill Schmalfeldt called My “Dirty” Win in the hearing to extend the peace order against him. I wrote about it eight years ago today.
* * * * *
I’m told that Bill Schmalfeldt has been whining about my “dirty victory” in court yesterday.
It’s true that my lawyer had a secret strategy that she used against him, and it worked: She let him talk.
Schmalfeldt repeated arguments that previously had been shot down. He asked irrelevant questions. He ranted. He yelled. He pounded the table. He convinced the judge that he intended to continue to disobey the peace order. In short, he made my case for me.
Bill Schmalfeldt can think that was a dirty trick if he wishes. I call it good lawyering.
Now, if Schmalfeldt will simply obey the peace order, I will have no reason to take any particular notice of him. We’ll see how that goes.
* * * * *
My podcasting partner Stacy McCain once wrote that the easiest way to discredit Bill Schmalfeldt is to quote Bill Schmalfeldt. Sometimes, it’s even easier to simply let him keep talking.
I was the first person to be able to hold Bill Schmalfeldt accountable for his cyberharassment undertaken on behalf of Team Kimberlin by securing a peace order against him. Of course, he continued his thuggery, so eight years ago today, there was a hearing that resulted n the peace order being extended for six months. I wrote about the hearing in a post titled What I Saw in Court Today.
* * * * *
I was called to the stand by my lawyer Zoa Barnes, and we presented evidence of Bill Schmalfedlt’s violations of the existing peace order. The peace order requires that Schmalfeldt not contact, attempt to contact, or harass me. We presented evidence of over 470 times that he contacted me after the order was issued. We presented evidence of at least one attempt to contact me through third parties. We presented evidence of harassment in the form of three pornographic images Schmalfeldt created using my likeness. Even dealing with lots of objections, that only took about 20 minutes.
I spent the next hour on the stand being cross examined by Schmalfeldt. Most of that hour was taken up by his ranting rather than actually asking me questions. He tried to get the court to consider many of the legal theories he had offered before. The result is best summed up with the word res judicata. At one point Schmalfeldt asked me what I thought would happen if the the peace order were extended. I replied that I expected that he would continue to violate it until it was enforced.
When Schmalfeldt tried to bring up the Attorney General’s opinion letter, Judge Stansfield quoted a Court of Appeals decision back to him that said that the Attorney General’s opinion is just one lawyer’s opinion.
After my grilling on the stand, we rested my case, and the court took a brief recess. When we were called back, Schmalfeldt tried to make his case. He was sworn and offered some testimony.
During her closing argument, Zoa Barnes made the point that if the order were extended and Schmalfeldt were to violate it, we would be back with a motion for contempt seeking jail time.
Judge Stansfield granted the six-month extension of the peace order. In doing so, he found that the 470 tweets that I had received between noon on 16 October and last night were contact that I should not have received under the existing peace order. He also found that the pornographic images were harassment sufficient to permit the order to be extended.
That’s what happened today.
Oh, one more thing …
Brett Kimberlin drove Bill Schmalfeldt to the courthouse today. What appeared to be the same silver Toyota Highlander photographed at BlogBash was parked at the courthouse.
* * * * *
BTW, one of the pictures of me he used to create those pornographic images was taken when I was 17.
After I filed one of several complaints about unwanted contacts from Bill Schmalfeldt while he was subject to a Peace Order, a District Court Commissioner charged Schmalfeldt with misuse of electronic communication or interactive computer service. The State’s Attorney eventually declined to prosecute the case, but while it was pending Schmalfeldt kept insisting that (a) mentioning someone on Twitter was not a form of contact. Eight years ago today, I put up this post discussing The Elements of one of the acts prohibited by Maryland Criminal Law § 3-805,
* * * * *
In order to establish that a law has been violated, one must show that all of the elements of the crime have been committed. What are the elements of the Maryland crime of misuse of electronic communication or interactive computer service?
One of the acts prohibited by Maryland Criminal Law § 3-805 is (1) the use of any means of data transmission (2) via a computer or other electronic means (3) to send that data to a person (4) who receives that data (5) for the purpose of engaging in course of conduct (6) that alarms or seriously annoys another (7) with the intention to harass, alarm, or annoy the other person (8) after being told to stop and (9) without a legal purpose.
1. Does Twitter transmit data? Yes.
2. Does the transmission go via a computer or other electronic means? Yes.
3. Is the data sent to a particular person? If @useraccount is used, Yes.
4. Does the user receive the data? Yes. It arrives in his Interactions and/or Mentions pages.
5. Does a course of conduct exist? If no more than an isolated tweet is involved, probably no. If a sustained flow of tweets is involved, yes.
6. Does the data contain anything alarming or seriously annoying? If it’s petty name calling, probably no. If it’s threats to file criminal charges, probably yes.
7. Does the course of conduct demonstrate an intention to harass, alarm, or annoy? If it contains threats to file criminal charges, probably yes.
8. Was the data sent after being told to stop? A warning from the bench by a District Court judge is notice to stop. A peace order is notice to stop.
9. Was the data sent without a legal purpose? Communication or harassment in violation of a peace order is illegal.
The examination of the elements of this crime with respect to the behavior of certain persons using Twitter is left to the Gentle Reader as an exercise.
Speaking of “The Elements” …
* * * * *
It has been suggested that the elemental particle of Team Kimberlin is the moron.
In the autumn of 2015, Bill Schmalfeldt published a book titled Confessions of an Internet Troll. It was a Frankenstein creation stitched together with material stolen mostly from the anonymous blogger Paul Krindler. One of the characters in the book was Bill Parvocampus. Six years ago today, I published a post In Re Bill Parvocampus.
* * * * *
There’s a rumor afoot on the Interwebz that I created or have some other connection to a character called “Bill Parvocampus.” I have no recollection of that character prior to its appearance in the past few days, but, just in case I’m mistaken, I hereby place any rights I may have to that character or stories, articles, or posts containing that character into the Public Domain. Who knows? Someone might actually do something creative with the character.
Note that this does not apply to the Willy Parvocampus character who has appeared in Blogsmoke; Blognet; or Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign episodes.
UPDATE—This release of rights include the trademark and/or service mark rights to the character name.
* * * * *
The book was clearly an attempt to provoke Paul Krendler into a copyright action which would require him to reveal his identity in order to enforce. It was also a marvelous example of Team Kimberlin’s inattention to detail.
You see, Schmalfeldt also ripped off some material from this blog.
Gentle Reader, I’ll bet you can guess which blogger filed the copyright complaints which doomed Schmalfeldt’s plan.
Team Kimberlin fails at almost every thing they try because the often act with out thinking things through. The I’m Not Making This Up, You Know post from three years ago today presents a classic example.
* * * * *
In a staggering bit of cluelessness, Breitbart UnmaskedBunny Billy Boy Brett Unread is writing about attempted serial bombings.As far as we know, none of the devices have used Mark Time timers or Tovex or have been contained in a gym bag. Still, …
I’m so old I can remember when there was a reasonable chance of Twitter acting responsibly to deal with harassment. The TKPOTD for eight years ago today dealt with one of the enforcement actions they took against Bill Schmalfeldt.
* * * * *
I wish to express my thanks to Twitter for suspending the sockpuppet/impersonation @wjjjhoge account.
* * * * *
Fair enforcement of understandable rules by Twitter didn’t last long. In April, 2015, I became one of the first conservatives to be permanently banned from Twitter. They didn’t have all the bugs worked out on banning conservatives in my case, so they wound up reinstating the @wjjhoge account when the false charges filed against me by Brett Kimberlin were dropped.
The main reason Team Kimberlin has lost every single LOLsuit they filed since 2012 is that both the facts and the law have been against them, but a close runner up was their mind-boggling incompetence as pro se litigants. This post from eight years ago today poked fun at #BillSchmalfeldt, Legal Genius.
* * * * *
From tweets in my Twitter timeline and emails, I’m given to understand that Bill Schmalfeldt has received service on the Motion to Dismiss Petitioner’s Motion for Stay Pending Appeal filed by my lawyer. I’m told that he doesn’t like it. Now, that’s a shock—Schmalfeldt doesn’t like my lawyer’s defense of my position.
The mailman just delivered a copy for me a few minutes ago. It seems that Md Rule 8-425 states that the party filing for injunctive relief shall do so in the Circuit Court first before going to an appellate court. Since that isn’t the course the Sore Loserman has taken, Ms. Barnes has asked that his motion be dismissed.
Schmalfeldt filed his appeal with the wrong court. Now, it appears he’s filed a motion in the wrong court.
Copyright trolling and bogus DMCA claims were two of the means that Team Kimberlin used to try to harass people. Their efforts invariably backfired. The TKPOTD for eight years ago today dealt with one of their early failures.
* * * * *
Some of the best comments that I’ve had about Sore Loserman Bill Schmalfeldt’s recent fascination with DMCA takedown notices have come via email from lawyers. Alas, they’re off the record, so I can’t share them, but they’ve given me some interesting ideas.
Let’s review the story thus far.
The photographer who took the headshot photo that I use on the Internet retained the copyright on the image. I use it under license. When he discovered that it was being used as the basis of a pornographic image on one of Schmalfeldt’s websites, he sent a DMCA takedown notice. Schmalfeldt responded by replacing that picture with another pornographic image with my face photoshopped into it. He also posted nine copies of the DMCAed image on Twitter. In addition to those postings, Schmalfeldt retaliated by sending a bogus DMCA notice about material covered by the Fair Use doctrine to the host for this blog.
The copyright holder of the image of my face in the new pornographic picture asked Schmalfeldt to take that image down and he complied on one of his sites, but not on Twitter or any of the hate sites run by Acme for Team Kimberlin.
When I pointed out the hypocrisy of his position vis-á-vis parody images, the remaining porn came down, including stuff on sites such as Breitbart Unmasked and hogewash dot net. However, the Cabin Boy issued a threat of a second DMCA takedown notice to Hogewash! concerning a parody image created by one of my readers.
When I refused to be bullied over a Fair Use parody, Schmalfeldt issued the second takedown notice. And he posted another image of me that he describes as “obscene.” He’s right about that.
Schmalfeldt makes all sorts of claims about copyright law. I don’t think I’ve seen one that’s correct.
He claims that Fair Use audio clips are limited to 30 second. Of course, there’s no such limit in the Copyright Act, and the case law specifically allows for a whole work to be reproduced in some instances of Fair Use.
He has his “check list” about what qualifies for Fair Use. It’s different from the one in 17 USC §107, the one Congress enacted into law and that the courts really use.
He thinks he can drag people into court in Maryland. That’ll work for me. But Lee Stranahan, for example, lives in Texas, and DMCA cases are tried in the federal court district where the defendant resides. 28 USC §1338 gives U. S. District Courts jurisdiction on copyright matters. 17 USC §512(g)(3)(D) specifies that the appropriate District Court is the one with jurisdiction over the alleged infringer’s address in the case of a DMCA dispute. Relying of books about copyright law published before the DMCA took effect may not be a wise strategy.
Getting legal advice from Acme may be even worse.
* * * * *
BTW, a third image of my face that Schmalfeldt photoshopped into a pornographic image was lifted from the Vanderbilt University annual for my sophomore year. It turns out that the headshot he lifted had been taken during the first semester of my freshman year in the fall of 1965. I turned 18 on 31 December, 1965, so I was 17 when the photo was taken. I was underage, and he photoshopped that headshot into a pornographic image.
Bill Schmalfeldt claims he has never produced child pornography.
Seven years ago, Karoli Kuns had a long piece up at Crooks and Liars that spun a false tale about how I was using Maryland’s peace order statue to harass and oppress Bill Schmalfeldt. Of course, her story was utter nonsense, an inversion of what Brett Kimberlin had done to Aaron Walker and would later try to do to me. I responded to her and to Matt Osborne (who made the mistake of trying to pile on too) with a post titled On Justice.
* * * * *
Every one of us has said it beginning from the time we were small children. Human beings seem to be wired with a predisposition to fairness. Indeed, evolutionary psychologists like Jonathan Haidt believe that the moral sense of fairness is a universal human trait. Outrage is a normal, heathy response to unfair treatment. We want the world to be set to rights. We want justice in what seems to be an unjust world.
As a Christian, I believe that the source of justice is God. It says in Genesis that we were created in His image, so it makes sense to me that more we allow ourselves to be led by the Holy Spirit to be what God intends for us to be, the more we would desire justice. Sometimes Christians are called to deal with the grander problems of the world—think of William Wilberforce, Desmond Tutu, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and Martin Luther King, Jr.—but, most of the the time, most of us deal with the seemingly smaller injustices of the world. Sometimes a Christian is called to stand up to a bully.
Bill Schmalfeldt is a such a bully. For years, he has harassed others on the Internet, and no one was able to bring him to justice. That task seems to have fallen to me.
Schmalfeldt’s surprised reaction has been to whine, “No fair! You hit me back.” However, even that’s not strictly true. I haven’t taken personal revenge on him. I’ve reported him to the proper authorities and left any action taken to them.
The real question I face is not what Jesus thinks of my allegedly sadistic treatment of Bill Schmalfeldt. That question is based in the false premise that I am the sadist in the interactions between us. No, the real question is what Jesus would think of my failure to stand up a thug like Schmalffeldt who is bullying others.
Has my response to Schmalfeldt been perfect? Probably not. But my conscience is clear. It would not be if I had failed to step in between him and some of his victims.
The members of Team Kimberlin clearly wish they could have been influential denizens of the Interwebz, but they’ve failed. There so unimportant that they’ve even had to forge harassing emails and comments to their websites to draw attention themselves. This Bonus Prevarication Du Jour is from seven years ago today.
* * * * *
Ace investigative journalist Bill Schmalfeldt (Stop laughing; I’m not to the punchline yet.) says he’s receiving emails from someone calling himself “Nomen Nescio.” He asked me about that name during our mediation session in January, and I told him that it was Latin for “Name not known” and that the term was used on legal documents before “John Doe” was common.
It turns out that it’s also used as a blind return address by some anonymous remailers. Over the past month, I’ve received several emails routed through dizum.com, and the all were supposedly sent by “Nomen Nescio” whose email account is “firstname.lastname@example.org.” It took all of 15 seconds to pull down the headers from the first such email and about a minute on Google to find the dizum.com website.It’s hosted on a server in Holland. Note the Dutch flag on the dizum.com browser tab.
I’ve never used such a service. While I have had occasion to encrypt the contents of an email (usually because of sensitive client data), I’ve never had to mask my email address.
My best guess is that the “Nomen Nescio” who sent the email shown above is the same person who has tried to post obscene comments here at Hogewash! under various obviously fake names. But that’s just a guess.
UPDATE—I never suggested that the Cabin Boy™ has sent any of the “Nomen Nescio” emails to himself. I would have thought that they came from another source. OTOH, one wonders if these don’t constitute a tacit admission …
Identity theft has been one of the forms of harassment used by Team Kimberlin. The TKPOTD from six years ago today dealt with one attempt to impersonate Mrs. Hoge.
* * * * *
Mrs. Hoge received a couple of interesting emails today. Someone is trying to use her identity to sign up for a Disqus account in order to post comments at Breitbart Unmasked.Mrs. Hoge also received this email related to Bill Schmalfeldt’s new SRN.Of course, she hasn’t tried to comment at BU, and she has no interest in SRN. (She prefers to listen to WYPR out of Baltimore for NPR talk and jazz and WETA-FM from Washington for classical music.)
I can understand why a member of Team Kimberlin would rather have someone else’s identity instead of his own. OTOH, I am not amused by someone trying to steal my wife’s identity.
* * * * *
I was not amused. Mrs. Hoge was not amused. However, the statute of limitations has run, so this is one less anvil that might drop. There are others still pending.
It’s been two years since there has been any new material posted at Breitbart UnmaskedBunny Billy Boy Unread.One former editor, Bunny Boy (aka Matt Osborne), now styles himself Gender Heretic on the Twitterz and has floated farther from Reality. The other former editor seems to be slipping into permanent forced retirement.
Meanwhile, Hogewash! keeps chugging along having not suffered any of the direst of dire direness predicted by BU, and Ali Alexander, the subject of the the last hit piece on BU, seems to be having a more significant impact public’s understand of election fraud issues than any of Team Kimberlin’s efforts.
One of the enduring characteristics of Team Kimberlin’s presence on the Internet is their utter disregard for the property rights of copyright holders. The Prevarication Du Jour from seven years ago today dealt with one of Bill Schmalfeldt’s many stumbles over copyright law.
* * * * *
Which copyright violations? Well, I can’t be sure because there were so many.
For example, the Cabin Boy has received multiple DMCA takedown notices over his use of an image of my face. BTW, the notices haven’t come from me. I’m not the copyright holder. He published that image again during the last few days on one of his Twitter accounts.
As I pointed out yesterday, Schmalfeldt has published images of complete posts from Hogewash! on Twitter. Brief quotations from a post are certainly covered by Fair Use, and that would include a 100% quotation of a very shot post, but otherwise a complete ripoff of an entire post without permission is a copyright violation.
It’s possible that none of these violations resulted in his suspensions, but there were plenty of others that could have.
It’s not Ali Akbar who’s lying.
Oh, if you go looking for the @Tidingsofdoom account on Twitter, you’ll find that the Cabin Boy has abandoned it and that it has been picked up by Not Bill Schmalfeldt.
* * * * *
They’re slow learners. In 2020, Schmalfeldt still was having trouble with copyrights.
Hogewash! hasn’t been the only blog that has engaged in pointage, laughery, and mockification inspired by members of Team Kimberlin. Five years ago today, I posted this link to The Further Adventures of …
In the early days of Team Kimberlin’s attempts at online harassment, their tactics often involved Cybersquatting and Cyberstalking. This post from seven years ago described part of what they were up to.
* * * * *
Cybersquatting, according to the United States federal law known as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), includes using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else. The sharp-eyed Gentle Reader will notice the ™ symbol next to the Hogewash! logo in the site banner. The Fine Print for this site provides this notice:
Hogewash! and hogewash.com are trademarks owned by W. J. J. Hoge.
The hogwash dot net website is an example of a cybersquatting. It isn’t a parody so much as an attempt to use the goodwill of the Hogewash! trademark to provide a benefit for someone not entitled to use the mark.
OK, so why haven’t I taken action against that site?
The principal reason is that the person creating the site is actually giving my lawyer information that is helpful to me in a legal matter. Another reason is that I believe the material on that site is so outlandish and offensive as to do more damage to the site’s operator than to me.
In any case, I reserve the right to file a complaint either via ICANN or the courts if I choose.
Let’s move on to cyberstalking. Cyberstalking is the use of the Internet or other electronic means to stalk or harass someone. Stalking is a crime in Maryland. Some people think that the Maryland law requires the act of following someone around and that a homebound invalid really couldn’t be a stalker.
In Hackley v. State, 866 A.2d 906 (2005), the Court of Appeals (Maryland’s highest court) ruled
… that the General Assembly did not intend the stalking statute’s requirement of a “malicious course of conduct that includes approaching or pursuing another person” to be limited to conduct that is done in the victim’s actual physical presence and with the victim’s concurrent awareness.
Md. Criminal Law § 3-802 defines stalking as
[A] malicious course of conduct that includes approaching or pursuing another where the person intends to place or knows or reasonably should have known the conduct would place another in reasonable fear:
(1) (i) of serious bodily injury;
(ii) of an assault in any degree;
(iii) of rape or sexual offense as defined by §§ 3-303 through 3-308 of this title or attempted rape or sexual offense in any degree;
(iv) of false imprisonment; or
(v) of death; or
—and this bit is often overlooked—
(2) that a third person likely will suffer any of the acts listed in item (1) of this subsection.
Yep. In Maryland, it is possible to stalk someone by stalking someone else, a provision intended to allow a parent or spouse to seek protection because someone is stalking a family member (for example.)
The Court interpreted “includes” to mean “this is an example that doesn’t rule out others.” It upheld Hackley’s conviction which was based on his delivering messages to where his victim might find them. The Legislature has since revised the statute without correcting the Court’s interpretation.
Given that precedent, it’s possible that a Maryland court could find a person who delivered threats of the sort listed in § 3-802 via the Internet to be guilty of stalking.
UPDATE—I see that Team Kimberlin has already been in touch with their legal advisor at Acme.
They are entitled to their opinion, but I’ll stick with the fact that the U. S. Patent & Trademark Office says that federal registration of a trademark is not required. As the Harvard Law webpage cited in the attempted comment notes:
Assuming that a trademark qualifies for protection, rights to a trademark can be acquired in one of two ways: (1) by being the first to use the mark in commerce; or (2) by being the first to register the mark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”).
[My emphasis.] While registration does offer some legal advantages by providing a presumption that the mark is valid, prior use in the marketplace will usually defeat a registration. The Hogewash! trademark has been in continuous use by this website since 24 July, 2011.
UPDATE 2—At 11:57 am ET (15:57 GMT on the time stamp), Bill Schmalfeldt sent the following tweet:
I just reread my post, and I can’t find where I say I am suing anyone. In fact, I explain why I’m not suing anyone. Other than by accident or mistake, does Bill Schmalfeldt ever tell the truth?
* * * * *
My podcasting partner Stacy McCain has referred to Bill Schmalfeldt as a deranged cyberstalker. Ken White (aka Popehat) has called Schmalfeldt a demented freak. Rather that choose, I believe this is a case where I can embrace the power of AND.
Also, not only were Team Kimberlin inept at these and other forms of cyberbullying, they failed when they tried construct cases to frame Aaron Walker or me with cyberstalking charges.
This TKPOTD from seven years ago today shows that Bill Schmalfeldt knew exactly who he was involved with when he joined Team Kimberlin.
* * * * *
From Twitter, 16 June, 2012:
Sat Jun 16 22:27:31 +0000 2012, liberalgrouch, 214122056504184832, @Prepostericity If your point is that Kimberlin is a scumbag, I’m way ahead of you on that. Said so in my blog weeks ago. I could do
Sat Jun 16 22:28:26 +0000 2012, liberalgrouch, 214122288910577664, @Prepostericity without the condescending bullshit from a fellow blogger, if you don’t mind. I am trying to find the truth and tell it as
Sat Jun 16 22:28:59 +0000 2012, liberalgrouch, 214122427435847682, @Prepostericity I see it. Do YOUR homework and read up on who you’re talking to before you make such assholish statements in the future.
Sat Jun 16 22:29:46 +0000 2012, liberalgrouch, 214122624475869184, @Prepostericity I know Kimberlin was a bomber. I also know Breitbart followers and their reputations. So spare me the eye rolling disbelief
Sat Jun 16 22:30:21 +0000 2012, liberalgrouch, 214122770508955648, @Prepostericity when someone who has been doing this since you were in diapers tends to side with liberals over proven right wing liars. OK?
You may choose to look the other way but you can never again say you did not know.
* * * * *
The “news” Bill Schmalfeldt “reported” when associated with such Team Kimberlin outlets as Breitbart UnmaskedBunny Bill Boy Unread was the sort of lies that would even embarrass … oh, never mind.
The never-ending parade of silly mistakes made by The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se Kimberlin and The Dreadful Pro-Se Schmalfeldt in their various LOLsuits have yielded a gold mine of pointage, laughery, and mockification. Here are some bits from the TKPOTD, a Legal LULZ Du Jour, and a Bonus Legal LULZ Du Jour from four years ago today.
* * * * *
I’ve been rereading some of The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s recent filings in the five active lawsuits in which he is a party. (BTW, four are LOLsuits he’s filed against me.) His writing is becoming … how to put this? … wilder and more full of stupid errors and omissions. I just finished reviewing something from one of the state cases, and its fatal error is both obvious and quite stunning. I won’t write about that mistake here because it’s the judge’s job to educate the midget on this one.
* * * * *
The Cabin Boy™ has a DOOM CLOCK running over at his Derp Brain Radio website (No, I won’t link to it.) that shows 32 days remaining for the return of waiver of service forms he says he’s sent to the defendants in LOLsuit VI: The Undiscovered Krendler.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(3) says—
A defendant who, before being served with process, timely returns a waiver need not serve an answer to the complaint until 60 days after the request was sent[.]
Even if the waiver request forms had been sent the day the LOLsuit was filed, there would still be 54 days remaining for the defendants to respond. But I suppose following the Rules is hypertechnical. And math is hard.
UPDATE—Or perhaps it means that the Cabin Boy™ is exercising his option to allow at least 30 days but less than 60 days for the return of the waiver forms. Whatever. Setting the minimum time for return of the waiver forms won’t change when any answers or dispositive motions are due.
UPDATE 2—The Cabin Boy™ has a post up “correcting” this one. I checked his “correction” with a lawyer, and I’ll wait for Schmalfeldt to find out the hard way how wrong he is.
Oh, and I see from his post that he’s still too afraid to include me in his LOLsuit.
* * * * *
The Cabin Boy™ has yet another post up over at his Derp Brain Radio website (No, I won’t link to it.) in which he demonstrates his poor reading comprehension and his poor knowledge of the legal resources I have at hand. Given his track record, it’s possible that he has come up with a novel way to screw up service of process. We shall see.
As I noted earlier today, The Dreadful Pro-Se Schmalfeldt’s fear of having to face me in court will keep me out of LOLsuit VI: The Undiscovered Krendler, at least for the nonce, and I expect that the amended complaint [redacted]. All this means is that he’s surrendered his chance to control the actual venue after [redacted]. Meanwhile, I get to sit on the sidelines and point and laugh.
* * * * *
Tomorrow is Christmas Day, and this feature will take the day off.
So head out to the store to finish your shopping (or pickup more popcorn), enjoy the holiday, and …
It’s been a year since anything new has been posted at Breitbart UnmaskedBunny Billy Boy Unread.You know, I kinda miss reading some of their outrageous forecasts of doom for me and other bloggers who had the temerity to write about The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se/Publisher Kimberlin. Perhaps the Gentle Reader will remember the pointage, laughery, and mockification that resulted from such silly posts as this—Meanwhile, this blog continues, and the former editor of BU is having a second winter vacation up north.