Robin16’s Techdirt Profile


About Robin16

Robin16’s Comments comment rss

  • Jun 18th, 2010 @ 9:03pm

    (untitled comment)

    An advertisement on the webpage read, “Millat Facebook helps you connect and share with more than 1.57 billion Muslims and sweet people from other religions.” The Public interest litigation forum’s Judicial Activism Panel (JAP) has developed the website and launched it as a platform for users who were unhappy about not being able to use Facebook since the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) banned it under court orders. In a ceremony held at the LHCBA the chairman of JAP, Advocate Muhammad Azhar Siddique displayed the webpage ( for the first time.

    He urged internet users to sign up with the new website and connect with people who wanted harmony and were tolerant of religious sensibilities. The move is meant to convey to disgruntled users of the blocked site that the bar is not against the use of modern technology, but only insists on respect for a user’s religious beliefs. Azhar expressed his disappointment that no political party had stepped forward in condemning the sacrilegious contest. He requested government officials to take up the issue at the International Court of Justice and stop similar future initiatives.

    He stated that the JAP had every intention to take up the matter with the United Nations very soon.

    Lahore—The Lahore High Court (LHC) Tuesday adjourned the hearing of the petitions against Facebook till July 9.

    The Deputy Attorney General Naveed Inayet Malik submitted that a case had been registered against owners of the facebook on charges of blasphemy at Police Station Civil Lines, Lahore and it had been sealed.

    The court was also informed that the federal government had written a letter to its permanent representative in the United Nation (UN) asking to present resolutions in the UN regarding the matter.

    Director Telecommunication (DT), Communication Ministry, Ali Muhammad submitted that a policy had been prepared to control blasphemous material on the internet.

    However, the petitioner-counsel Muhammad Azhar Siddique informed the court that blasphemous content was still present on Facebook.

    The court then directed the communication ministry to take notice of the situation and control the availability of such content.

    Ali Muhammad submitted that a complaint cell would be set up in this regard who would take action on any complaint within 24 hours.—APP
    Be sure to link to

    OK so that one worked for a while and apparently now doesn't work, but this one does

    This seems to be the website of the founder of HiCircle

  • Jun 17th, 2010 @ 10:25am

    (untitled comment)

    My husband served on the jury of a high profile gang murder case in Los Angeles. He disclosed immediately that he knew one of the witnesses who had worked for a sub-contractor on one of his job sites. Nothing happened and my husband was elected as the jury foreman. No case there. This juror might be facing criminal charges herself for contacting the defendant.

    West Virginia Juror Instructions:

    Talking With Parties or Lawyers: Jurors should not talk with any of the parties, witnesses or lawyers during the trial. It may give the appearance that something unfair is happening.


    From a West Virginia County

    Jurors get instructions.

    In almost all Virginia jury trials, however, the jury goes home at the end of each day and is simply told not to discuss the case with anyone nor to watch, read, or listen to news reports about the case. It is essential that you follow these instructions.

    During the trial my husband served on he didn't even tell me what the case was about! Why? Because of JURY INSTRUCTIONS not to discuss the case with anyone let alone sending the defendant ANY sort of message! It was during the holidays and took a one week break for Christmas, His mood was SOMBER. It wasn't til I heard the verdict announced on the news and my husband came home that he told me that was the trial he was serving on.

    Contacting the DEFENDANT in ANY way is a NO NO no matter how you look at it, MySpace or not! I can't believe anyone commenting here would say "poor juror". No, STUPID juror for going against jury instructions jeopardizing the case and costing the tax-payers money for a new trial!

    Here read the document. They weren't friends on MySpace UNTIL she sent him a message!

    Hey, I dont know you very well But I think you could use some advice! I havent been in your shoes for a long time but I can tell ya that God has a plan for you and your life. You might not understand why you are hurting right now but when you look back on it, it will make perfect sence. I know it is hard but just remember that God is perfect and has the most perfect plan for your life. Talk soon!5

    The jury CONVICTED him and then the guy gets a new trial because she's such a DUFUS she's sending him advice?!!!

    Ye Gads!

    5Juror Hyre told investigators that she wrote the message because she heard Appellant was going through a divorce and wanted to provide him with some advice. However, according to Appellant, he had been divorced for more than two years.

    Ye GADS!

    For his part, Appellant avers that he did not then recognize Juror Hyre to be the same “Amber” who wrote to him on MySpace. Apparently, “Amber” from MySpace did not include her last name and, according to Appellant, Juror Hyre looked very different from her photograph posted on the website. As indicated above, Appellant alerted the trial court to Juror Hyre’s MySpace message just following the verdict, having first learned that Juror Hyre and “Amber” were the same person only a short time earlier.6

    Ye GADS!

    “Mrs. Hyre was questioned about her friendship with Mr. Dellinger and she stated that she knew him and had spoke to him only to say ‘hi’ in passing and that they used to live in the same apartment complex together.” It is undisputed that, during voir dire, Juror Hyre never indicated to the trial court that she knew Appellant; had ever spoken to him “in passing”; or that they used to live in the same apartment complex.7

    YE GADS!!!! Sorry guys, but she didn't fess up to ever "knowing" him in any way during jury selection either. A NO NO!

    Does anyone here still feel sorry for this DUFUS who didn't do a single thing right as a juror?

    Sure hope not.

  • May 28th, 2010 @ 11:47am

    (untitled comment)

    Falling off my chair, "I wonder if they paid the licensing fee"? (For Einstein's name) Good one!

  • May 28th, 2010 @ 11:24am

    (untitled comment)

    More: the law firm Arent-Fox are the attorneys for this case against GM

    They were also the attorney for this case which took a website down

    Int eresting: (Richmond was bought by Corbis=Greenlight now)

    Commercial usage
    "Albert Einstein" is a registered trademark of The Roger Richman Agency, Inc. [6] (, that controls the (commercial) usage of the name. Advertisements and merchandise including the name, likeness and image of Albert Einstein must be licensed by this agency. In this specific case the agency acts as a representative of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which Einstein himself had supported actively, and this institution will benefit from all license fees. Furthermore, the agency may entirely prevent usage of Albert Einstein in a way that does not conform to the public image of the trademark. The agency's website dedicated to Albert Einstein [7] ( states that "When written in copy on all materialy, the name 'Albert Einstein™' must always bear a ™ symbol." (see [8] (

    Though the general purpose of Roger Richman Agency — at least in the case of Einstein — is not a purely commercial one, there is some controversy about the licensing of popular names. The agency "owns" numerous other well-recognized names, such as "Sigmund Freud" and "Steve McQueen", and apparently uses the associated rights not exclusively for the protection of the dignity of these symbols. Indeed, the agency's official website advertises its service claiming that "celebrated personalities deliver instant recognition, recall and credibility to your advertising campaign and/or promotional program." On the other hand, various licensed advertisements feature rather a caricature of the scientist. These could be considered as a misuse of Einstein's popularity, since they lead to a further distortion of Einstein's public image instead of displaying him as "one of the most renowned scientists and humanitarians of all time" as advertised on the agency's webpages.
    Hebrew University has lawyered up to protect their trademark because it brings $$$$$$ to the university. Say all you want that they have only altruistic motives and I will say BUNK! Because his image has been used in comedic ways many times.

    I just wonder why Leo Burnett which has been around for years wasn't aware of the pitfalls of using his image.

  • May 28th, 2010 @ 10:39am

    (untitled comment)

    Here is a really good article, comprehensive, because this is by far not the first time Hebrew University and Bill Gate's company who represents the trademark here has done this

  • May 27th, 2010 @ 7:12pm

    (untitled comment)

    Protectionist AND profit. They are claiming that the use by GM has harmed their trademark (which earns them big bucks) and they did not give their permission for it to be used in this manner. They specifically stated in the lawsuit that the way it was used makes it look like Hebrew University endorsed GM with that image which they say they protect and it was used improperly in distorting it. Citing unfair business practices under the Lanham Act

    Big bucks page

    Forbes 2008 listed Einstein as one of the top earning dead celebrities celeb.html

  • May 27th, 2010 @ 6:42pm

    (untitled comment)

    Institute for Advanced Study, Einstein Drive, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 USA (609) 734-8000

    The Corbis (previously Roger Richman Agency) represents Hebrew University in the United States for granting licensing for the use of Einstein's image in print, television and film. Anyone seeking permission to use images of Einstein, other than for scholarly publication, should be referred to this agency. Corbis/Roger Richman website
    Roger Richman Agency 9777 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700
    Beverly Hills, CA 90212
    phone: (310) 276-7000 - fax: (310) 276-8023

    Corbis is owned by Bill Gates. In 2008 they restructured to name their Rights Services Division Greenlightrights. Greenlight is named in the lawsuit as who the picture was purchased from.

    GreenLight LLC and its affiliates exclusively represent publicity, trademark, and related rights of Albert Einstein on behalf of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. "Albert Einstein" and "Einstein" are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

    Does that help you understand. Hebrew University owns the trademarks for Albert Einstein

  • May 27th, 2010 @ 3:52pm

    (untitled comment)

    OK here goes, here's the link to the court docs rporation/

    You have to read them to know the nature of the suit. Just keep clicking on them individualy to enlarge. Read that HU is saying that it makes it look like Einstein is endorsing the Terrain by GM and that it brings loss to Hebrew University. How could a dead man endorse GM and the fact is that other companies have used his image in their advertising. It's called "celebrity image rights" In this case, a dead "celebrity"

    Then read this. See who owns Corvis? Bill Gates. When I called Corvis they are the ones who referred me over to Greenlight. Greenlight is named in the suit but Corvis is in there. oldpage

    Mike Masnick, I apologize. The person I spoke to at the foundation was the one who told me the photos cannot be used for commercial use. Now I am realizing he means the photos they give out for a nominal fee which are not to be used commercially.

  • May 27th, 2010 @ 2:19pm

    (untitled comment)

    Sorry, you have it all wrong. Einstein's estate overseen by Hebrew University prohibits the use of his image for commercial use.

    See the link to Corvis? I called them after speaking to Mr. Anderson at that link, this is who holds the photos

    But the estate which is controlled by Hebrew University PROHIBITS photos of him that greenlight holds for commercial use.

    GM used Leo Burnett advertising agency. GM stated that Leo Burnett worked with a well known stock photo holder.

    If the photo used by GM was NOT part of those held by Hebrew University then the suit goes PLUNK. There are photos out there which are not part of the estate.

    If it was a greenlight photo used, then the suit goes forward because again, commercial use of those photos is forbidden

    ESVA provides photos of Einstein and other images for non-commercial use only. Follow this link for more information about our use policies.