In regards to the loose cannon, and any problems connected to Eric Whitfield, I believe i have a solution.
If Mr. Whitfield were to, rather than publishing the loose cannon and putting a price on it, thereby gaining profit from it, instead have the book printed on his own dime, and offering it for free to anyone who wishes to own a paper or hardback copy, cpuld this perhaps be am acceptable compromise?
And if it isnt, could one that is agreed on by everyone be sought after?
Eric isn't trying to gain profit from the loose cannon, he is simply trying to make it available to people in some form more tangible than a website or PDF, his attempts, as of now, have unfoirtunatly been ill conceived, particularly in the notions of how to fund his efforts.
As such he has tried to charge a price for the book, thereby upsetting those who wrote the book and do not feel it should be used for monetary vain.
He will accept responsability for this mistake on his part, and hopes that the people who collaborated into the books creation will allow him to produce them free of charge for those who may be interested in having it.
From: Russell Eric Whitfield
To: CreateSpace Validation Request Team
Subj: Statement of Ownership of Pseudonymous Works
Date: February 20, 2018
Dear CreateSpace Validation Request Team:
I own all the publishing rights to the content listed below. This is an exhaustive list of all works published in the “Loose Canon”. The pseudonym used for these works will be, “The Dark Noodle”. I have published these works under various pseudonyms over the years. The pseudonyms that I have used in the past include: (.....).
The Book of Chowmein's Condom Repair
The Hairbow Given to the Princess
Golf Used as a Radio Medium
The Good Cheer for More Beer
Monkey Vacuum Cleaner Sales
The Mayor of Pestoland Before
The Mayor of Pestoland After
Selling Shoes for a Good Cause
Wet Noodles Needed
The Book of Rod
Itchy Pirate's Recipe for Molasses
Before the Sun Shines
Washington Caterers I
Washington Caterers II
The Moronic Behavior of the Dark Noodle
Cardinal Fang's Restoration
I own all the publishing rights to the content of the Loose Canon. The pseudonym used for these works will be, “The Dark Noodle”.
My works have never been published on the following websites:
My works have never been seen by anybody. The confusion lies in the fact that the complainant thinks they own the rights to my work even though the complainant has never seen them. This shows malicious intent or rampant foolishness on the part of the complainant. It is completely impossible that the complainant has seen the content of the Loose Canon.
The work does in fact belong to me in accordance with the laws set forth under the Copyright Act of 1976. My work has even been registered with the US Copyright Law office through the Copyright Office Electronic Registration System and I have paid the required $730.00 fee to register my work.
In response to these claim(s) of copyright infringement against one of more of my documents that is published in the Loose Canon, I believe the claims of copyright infringement are inaccurate and should be rejected because:
The complainant has provided no copyright registration information or other tangible evidence that the material in question is in fact copyrighted by the claimant in compliance with the Copyright Act of 1976. I have in good faith belief that this work has not been registered by the complainant because it was registered by me. Complainant does not hold the copyright to the material in question, is not the designated representative of the copyright holder, has no knowledge of what is contained in the Loose Canon and therefore lacks standing to assert that my use of the material is a violation of any of the owner’s rights.
The complaint does not follow the prescribed form for notification of an alleged copyright violation as set forth in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 USC 512(c)(3). Specifically, the complainant has failed to:
· Provide a complaint in written form.
· Include a physical or electronic signature of the complainant.
· Identify the specific copyrighted work(s) claimed to be infringed upon.
· Provide sufficient information to identify the complainant, including full name, mailing address, telephone number, and email address.
· Include a written statement that the complainant has a good faith belief that use of the disputed material is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
· Include a written statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complainant is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
I declare, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good faith belief that the complaint of copyright violation is based upon mistaken information, misidentification of the material in question, and malicious intent. In short the complainant is a complete imbecile.
I ask that the CreateSpace Validation Request Team, upon receipt of this counter-notification, restore the material in dispute, unless the complainant files suit against me within ten days pursuant to 17 USC 512(g)(2)(B). It would be hilarious if they did. Their lawyer would smack the shit out of them.
My name, address, and telephone number are:
Russell Eric Whitfield
138 Daniel Drive
Hubert, NC 28539
I hereby consent to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which I reside.
I agree to accept service of process from the complainant. Please tell the complainant that not only are they a complete coward, they are also in fact the biggest idiot to ever live. All they had to do was call me, text me, email me, or come to my house. This is about the biggest waste of my life to fight with this idiotic complainant year after year even though there is no grounds whatsoever for them to file a DMCA takedown order.
Russell Eric Whitfield
Most Users Ever Online: 17
Currently Browsing this Page:
Guest Posters: 5311
Administrators: Spaghet: 5