Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
grub
()
Date: November 15, 2006 07:38AM
Zeropaid is a popular P2P news site.
You should be able to see the story submission here:
[www.zeropaid.com]
If you vote for it it will come out of the queue faster. :)
You should be able to see the story submission here:
[www.zeropaid.com]
If you vote for it it will come out of the queue faster. :)
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
grub
()
Date: November 15, 2006 07:58AM
The 450 MB video with subs is on MiniNova and already has several hits.
[www.mininova.org]
If you're seeding this, please keep it running. :)
[www.mininova.org]
If you're seeding this, please keep it running. :)
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
ajinajan
()
Date: November 15, 2006 11:08AM
Here is another article:
Google seals YouTube marriage
Ken Lewis
Wednesday, 15 November 2006
[m-net.net.nz]
It's hard to tell whether this is new information or just a rewritten version of the Reuters report...
They do say "unnamed plaintiff", so it looks again like Ken Lewis is simply assuming here that it's France 3, when it really might be Landmark Education and Art Schreiber...
Google seals YouTube marriage
Ken Lewis
Wednesday, 15 November 2006
[m-net.net.nz]
Quote
Meanwhile, a French filmmaker is suing Google for hosting a controversial documentary about alleged cult the Landmark Forum on Google Video and YouTube. The unnamed plaintiff seeks $193,000 in damages, but the lawsuit poses a much larger threat for Google in the form of precedent.
It's hard to tell whether this is new information or just a rewritten version of the Reuters report...
They do say "unnamed plaintiff", so it looks again like Ken Lewis is simply assuming here that it's France 3, when it really might be Landmark Education and Art Schreiber...
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
ajinajan
()
Date: November 15, 2006 04:30PM
Quote
Zeropaid is a popular P2P news site.
You should be able to see the story submission here:
[www.zeropaid.com]
If you vote for it it will come out of the queue faster.
Looks like the submission is now its own permalink story:
[www.zeropaid.com].
You can still vote on it though.
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
ajinajan
()
Date: November 17, 2006 12:20PM
Landmark Education vs. a link on Apologetics Index
[www.religionnewsblog.com]
Thanks to the response they observed from EFF, looks like they will not be complying with Art Schreiber's requests:
[www.religionnewsblog.com]
Quote
Apologetics Index, the parent site of Religion News Blog, is an annotated directory of research resources on religions, religious sects, cults, Large Group Awareness Training programs, world views and related issues.
In its entry on entry on Landmark Education, Apologetics Index includes a link to the video. When the video was removed from Google and YouTube, we updated the link to point to an Australian website at which the video is still available.
The other day we received a letter from a lawyer in Amsterdam on behalf of his client, Landmark Education. Landmark Education requests that we immediately remove the link to the video in question because, they allege the documentary violates Landmark copyright by ‘reproducing large portions of its copyrighted work, the Landmark Forum Manual.’ The letter suggests that our link to the video encourages third parties to violate Landmark Education’s copyright.
Thanks to the response they observed from EFF, looks like they will not be complying with Art Schreiber's requests:
Quote
Since we are not convinced that Landmark’s claims regarding copyright violations are correct, we have not removed the link to the video from Apologetics Index.
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
ajinajan
()
Date: November 17, 2006 12:35PM
Interesting blog post:
[thezeroboss.com]
[thezeroboss.com]
Quote
I haven’t watched the vid to the end yet. I’m dying to dig into it later tonight; the little I saw looks meaty. The French have the same concerns about Landmark that I do: that it’s a pack of know-nothings who declare themselves a “self-help group” in order to bypass the regulation demanded of psychologists. I wouldn’t call them a “cult” (hate that word), and wouldn’t accuse them as being as corrupt as Scientology. But the scam is the same. Take innocent people’s money in order to train them to walk, talk and act like the rest of the robots you churn out - then declare them “happy” and “well-adjusted” and “clear”.
It’s amazing how much money you can make off of other people’s suffering, isn’t it? And all it requires is a gaping hole in your brain where your ethics ought to be.
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
ajinajan
()
Date: November 17, 2006 12:50PM
More on Landmark's attempt to intimidate Apologetics Index:
Looks like Landmark has NOT learned much since their interactions began with EFF.
Apologetics Index goes on to say :
[www.apologeticsindex.org]
Quote
Recently we posted a link to a French TV documentary about Landmark Education. We were subsequently contacted by an attorney for Landmark Education, requesting that the link be removed since, the letter claims, the documentary includes copyrighted material from the "Landmark Forum Manual."
Looks like Landmark has NOT learned much since their interactions began with EFF.
Apologetics Index goes on to say :
Quote
We are currently in the process of obtaining legal advice regarding the legality of our direct link to the video in question. While we do not encourage nor condone copyright violations, we await the outcome of the EFF communications with Landmark Education before we decide whether or not to remove our link.
[www.apologeticsindex.org]
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
The Anticult
()
Date: November 17, 2006 02:10PM
Its interesting that Landmark is filing more ugly frivolous anti-Free-Speech harrassment and threats, but this time using a local lawyer in Amsterdam.
So it is possible that Landmark hired a lawyer in France to sue Google as well. We need someone from France to go look it up!
:-)
Its the same lies the Landmarkian worker-bees keep saying in the Wikipedia article on the video. They keep removing the links, and giving the same false argument, that merely pointing a link to a webpage that contains the video is copyright infringement! Sheer utter nonsense, as then the Google search engine would be sued on the same principle.
Anyone who wants to post a link pointing to a webpage with links to the video, could just post this link below to the google index of several sites containing the video.[/color:1964b782c2]
(Make sure you right click and copy the ENTIRE link, so the link is not broken). Its just a Google search for the four words Inside Landmark Forum video.[/color:1964b782c2]
[www.google.com]
The Mininova torrent has had 500 downloads in 2 days.
[www.mininova.org]
So its very clear that the Pirate Bay download counter is not accurate, its probably at least 10x what it says, and in the thousands of views.
Landmark has lost.
Their frivolous and abusive harrassment of these sites, only gives the video more publicity, and will cost them their few corporate clients.
Landmark Diseducation has to be one of the ugliest and repressive organizations out there, they are fascistic.
So it is possible that Landmark hired a lawyer in France to sue Google as well. We need someone from France to go look it up!
:-)
Its the same lies the Landmarkian worker-bees keep saying in the Wikipedia article on the video. They keep removing the links, and giving the same false argument, that merely pointing a link to a webpage that contains the video is copyright infringement! Sheer utter nonsense, as then the Google search engine would be sued on the same principle.
Anyone who wants to post a link pointing to a webpage with links to the video, could just post this link below to the google index of several sites containing the video.[/color:1964b782c2]
(Make sure you right click and copy the ENTIRE link, so the link is not broken). Its just a Google search for the four words Inside Landmark Forum video.[/color:1964b782c2]
[www.google.com]
The Mininova torrent has had 500 downloads in 2 days.
[www.mininova.org]
So its very clear that the Pirate Bay download counter is not accurate, its probably at least 10x what it says, and in the thousands of views.
Landmark has lost.
Their frivolous and abusive harrassment of these sites, only gives the video more publicity, and will cost them their few corporate clients.
Landmark Diseducation has to be one of the ugliest and repressive organizations out there, they are fascistic.
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
The Anticult
()
Date: November 17, 2006 03:39PM
There are some interesting points in this article about Landmark.
She also mentions the rambling, irrelevant letters by Art Schreiber, and the package of legal threats he sends out to anyone who talks about Landmark in the media.
Also she mentioned that the Landmark license will revert back to Werner Erhard in 2009, even though anyone with a brain know that Werner has always controlled Landmark from afar.
She also mentions how the CEO of Landmark Harry Rosenberg outlined his strategy for libel-chill and suppression of free expression in the media, called ALTERING THE PUBLIC CONVERSATION.
Well guess what Jack and Harry Rosenberg? Your tactics to try and suppress free speech, and suppress free expression on the internet have BACKFIRED.
Notice how Landmark has stayed silent now for a few weeks? They realized what they were doing was having the opposite effect, so they backed down.
Hopefully the EFF will not capitulate in any way to Landmarks threats.
[www.metroactive.com]
She also mentions the rambling, irrelevant letters by Art Schreiber, and the package of legal threats he sends out to anyone who talks about Landmark in the media.
Also she mentioned that the Landmark license will revert back to Werner Erhard in 2009, even though anyone with a brain know that Werner has always controlled Landmark from afar.
She also mentions how the CEO of Landmark Harry Rosenberg outlined his strategy for libel-chill and suppression of free expression in the media, called ALTERING THE PUBLIC CONVERSATION.
Well guess what Jack and Harry Rosenberg? Your tactics to try and suppress free speech, and suppress free expression on the internet have BACKFIRED.
Notice how Landmark has stayed silent now for a few weeks? They realized what they were doing was having the opposite effect, so they backed down.
Hopefully the EFF will not capitulate in any way to Landmarks threats.
[www.metroactive.com]
[/size:85f747bb70]Quote
Once word about my story got around, popping up in an online Landmark newsgroup, it somehow made its way into the office of Art Schreiber, general counsel of Landmark Education Corporation.
Schreiber responded swiftly with a 10-page letter advising me of his "serious concern" that I might defame Landmark. What followed were six pages explaining why Landmark is not a cult, a page of why Landmark cannot be said to brainwash its enrollees, a page and a half of why I must not defame Werner Erhard or est, and a tedious summary explaining that should I "leave Landmark and its programs depicted in a false light ... Landmark is fully prepared to take the appropriate legal action."
He included 23 letters of recommendation from happy Forum grads; a letter like mine addressed to Self Magazine, whom Landmark sued in 1994 for calling The Forum a cult; a newspaper article describing a lawsuit by Erhard's daughter against a San Jose Mercury News reporter; and statements from Margaret Singer, author of Cults in Our Midst, and Cynthia Kisser, former director of the Cult Awareness Network, that Landmark is not a cult. Landmark has sued them both.
...
Landmark advocates self-expression. Surely, I thought as I hung up the phone, I'm not being discouraged from expressing myself.
CEO Harry Rosenberg recently noted that "in the United States, we have altered the public conversation about our work and our enterprise. For example, it is no longer possible for informed people or publications in the United States to pin pejorative labels on us." [/color:85f747bb70]
"Altering the public conversation."[/color:85f747bb70] The phrase sends a chill up the spine of anyone who thought it was OK to speak freely in this country without fear of being sued into silence.
...
Landmark says that Erhard has nothing to do with The Forum. But the license Landmark obtained from Erhard enabling them to produce The Forum is in fact owned by Erhard, and is scheduled to revert to him in 2009.
Landmark and litigation re: France 3 video - false claims
Posted by:
kath
()
Date: November 17, 2006 10:02PM
[m-net.net.nz]
"Meanwhile, a French filmmaker is suing Google for hosting a controversial documentary about alleged cult the Landmark Forum on Google Video and YouTube. The unnamed plaintiff seeks $193,000 in damages, but the lawsuit poses a much larger threat for Google in the form of precedent."
It's not france 3 doing the sueing though is it? Is this true?
:?
"Meanwhile, a French filmmaker is suing Google for hosting a controversial documentary about alleged cult the Landmark Forum on Google Video and YouTube. The unnamed plaintiff seeks $193,000 in damages, but the lawsuit poses a much larger threat for Google in the form of precedent."
It's not france 3 doing the sueing though is it? Is this true?
:?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.