[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Ram Samudrala, Ph.D. on July 22, 1998 at 17:53:02:

In Reply to: PUBLIC NOTICE TO COPYRIGHT VIOLATORS posted by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. on July 22, 1998 at 15:51:12:

: Dear Mr. Samudrala:

That's "Dr." to you.

: We do have a controversy over facts here, sir,
: because we have a hard-copy file on your specific
: violation, dating at least from the Fall
: of 1997. That hard-copy file is presently
: in safe storage, for security reasons,
: so I cannot conveniently refer to it,
: at this particular moment.

Until you can prove this with more than just
your words, you've shown nothing. Anyone
can create a hardcopy containing an infringing

: I did personally,
: at that time, exchange email with you, on
: more than one occasion, and I did receive
: email from you in reply. My email address
: at that time was
: (no longer active).

I exchange e-mail with dozens of people each day.
I do not recall exchanging e-mail with you about
this topic. For the record, the claims you
made in

There you wrote: "You received lawful notice from us last Fall"...
I repeat, I did not receive any "lawful notice" from you.
The first notice I received about The Federal Zone was
on July 7, 1998.

You also wrote: "which we documented on your computers at
Stanford University."

Since the link you're accusing me is on a page
in the domain, where the computers are
located in Maryland, this has nothing to with
Stanford University. So you're engaging in
blatant falsehoods at this point.

Given my own expertise in copyright law, no
jury would listen to your claims. It would
be interesting to see what you can convince
them. Until then, this is going to get us


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]