The rights of all are being challenged by someone that has publicly stated that he fights FOR these very rights.
We acted in good faith. Several people were attacked during this conflict. Redoubt News will always stand behind our journalists and affiliates in this battle. We will never sit back and allow their integrity to be put into question over unfounded accusations.
****** Editors Comment ********* As many are aware, It Matters How You Stand & Doug Knowles were impacted by this as well. Doug Knowles had his Personal Account deactivated by these False copyright infringement claims. thanks to Shari Dovale and Redoubt News for taking the effort and spending the Money to fight this Fraud. Watch for our next article that will exp0lain how Facebook Tracks us and what you can do about it.
Redoubt News investigative reporter, Wendy Kay, attended and Live streamed the FIJA event on Feb. 9th. During the evening, a member of the audience told John Lamb about Randy Weaver living nearby, and offered to make a connection with him for an interview. Lamb did not initiate that contact.
Lamb went to Wendy and told her about it, and invited her to be a part of the event.
On Saturday, Feb. 10th, many folks met with Randy over brunch at a public restaurant. They got to know him and explained about live streaming. Weaver was excited to share his story.
Permission is not required in a public venue, however, Wendy had already been given permission to record this interview. But, Wendy is a diligent person and wanted to be extra sure that everything was acceptable to all parties. While she was on the phone with me, she again asked Lamb if everything was okay for her to live stream this interview to Redoubt News. He said yes, reiterating it more than once.
“Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under [17 U.S.C. § 512] that material or activity is infringing … shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer…who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing….”
Well, it subjects John to penalties, should he not be able to prove that he owns Redoubt’s video, or, that conditions of use were imposed upon Redoubt’s video. This may cost Lamb a few buck more than his filing fees.
Two days after Lamb filed that above with the Court, the Judge ruled, in his Order Denying Temporary Restraining Order” (pgs 8-9).
The Judge cites Montana Code Annotated, 27-19-315.
The 71-year-old rancher has become the focus of a legal effort by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Spokane, which is asking a federal judge to sanction Riley for “trespass, encroachment, damages” and make him pay the legal costs incurred by forcing Riley to abide by the rules on ground purchased by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers some 53 years ago.
“The government just has too many employees and too much money,” said Riley’s nephew, Chad Lindgren, who works Riley’s River Ranch. “They are not going to back down. They are not going to give in unless we make them give in.”
And, he noted, the yearslong dispute is being funded by taxpayers: “We are basically paying those people to be a pain in our ass.”
To set this record straight, Wendy Kay did ask John if she could video it for Redoubt News (see below). John said okay, so it was not just an observation, it was consent. John imposed no conditions on the videoing for Redoubt, which made the Redoubt video the property of Redoubt News, a patriotic and very well presented news source.
News is not news if it can’t be gotten out. There is always an endeavor to get news out to as wide an audience as possible, So, GMN (Guerilla Media Network) agreed to live stream the video, which seems to be the source of the problem.
So, let’s look at the video that was, by consent, the property of Redoubt. John’s tactic was to claim a copyright violation; however, it is absent any proof. So, if we boil that down, John is claiming that he has rights over the property of another person. Normally, that would be theft, and perhaps fraud.
In a unanimous ruling by The Supreme Court this week, it was determined that challenges to the “Waters of the United States” or WOTUS Rule must be filed in federal district courts. This is significant in that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) attempted to limit their victims chance for appeal or redress.
It was reported that the Obama administration asked the Supreme Court not to take the case, and argued that the Sixth Circuit should be allowed to consider it.
The written opinion, delivered by Justice Sotomayor, states that challenges must be filed in federal district courts.