The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Mm11

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Regist10

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Tony Bennett on 02.01.10 20:07

Stevo to David Kirwan 27 September 2009:

From: TFM - Admin [mailto: admin@truthformadeleine.com ]
Sent: 27 September 2009 12:20
To: David Kirwan
Subject: GAGGEDBYMCCANNS.INFO

David,

Still developing this but the site is there: http://gaggedbymccanns.info/main/

When we’re happy with it, I’ll connect it to http://gaggedbymccanns.info/ via a splash screen.

Stevo

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

DAVID KIRWAN BACK TO STEVO, SAME DAY


Great work. How about a taster in terms of….

"The Madeleine Foundation has now been forced by the McCann campaign of suppression of the truth to engage a top UK Law Firm (don’t name us yet!) who are preparing an important Press Release".

"Separately…the MF and its supporters worldwide are dismayed at the McCanns world wide campaign which has now engaged a second high powered Firm of UK lawyers in the hunt to identify and shut down all criticism and dissent. Bindmans Solicitors of London have now joined forces with Carter-Ruck Solicitors in a campaign which threatens to undermine the basic principles of Freedom of Speech. Foundation supporters are troubled by the enormous potential cost of all these lawyers and question validity of this expenditure from Charitable Trust funds. Without exception people are calling into question the McCann motives in this witch hunt to witch lip service only appears to be paid for the search for their daughter".

"Also under header ‘Top cops join Maddy hunt’ put in reference to Oakley International [McCanns' private investigators] being under investigation for its financial dealings.

DSK
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15554
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 71
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Guest on 02.01.10 20:09

Were Kirwins actually suggesting someone do a hate site against the McCanns. I think a complaint to the Bar is in order.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty SRA not Bar Council

Post by Tony Bennett on 02.01.10 20:12

@rockyrobin wrote:Were Kirwins actually suggesting someone do a hate site against the McCanns. I think a complaint to the Bar is in order.
You complain about Barristers to the Bar Council.

You complain about Solicitors to the Solicitors Regulation Authority. David Kirwan is a Solicitor, not a Barrister.

I dont know if 'GAGGEDBYTHEMCCANNS' is still on the web.

If it is, it's not a hate site is it?
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15554
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 71
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Guest on 02.01.10 20:20

Thanks for that Mr Bennett, i know who to complain to now. Given the fact Stevo run the MF site, the 3A's site, Most of the outing sites, then i would suggest it would be a hate site.

And him suggesting he does it is as bad.
You have just dropped your own Solicitor in big doo doo, you do realise that don't you.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Stephanie on 02.01.10 20:23

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@rockyrobin wrote:Were Kirwins actually suggesting someone do a hate site against the McCanns. I think a complaint to the Bar is in order.
You complain about Barristers to the Bar Council.

You complain about Solicitors to the Solicitors Regulation Authority. David Kirwan is a Solicitor, not a Barrister.

I dont know if 'GAGGEDBYTHEMCCANNS' is still on the web.

If it is, it's not a hate site is it?

Solicitors or barristers, either writing an email that could be reproduced showing such foolhardy comments thus contained are in my opinion inconceivable.

Have you the actual E-mail Mr.B ? not just verbatim.
And if that E-mail was genuine dated around 27th September 2009,where is this "Important press release" they so speak of nearly three months on ?
Stephanie
Stephanie

Posts : 82
Join date : 2009-12-03

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by preciousramotswe on 02.01.10 20:40

If this is true, it's shocking.

Why on earth would a reputable company like Kirwan's be dealing with such utter schlock?

Are you sure this is true Tony, and not another one of Marsden's numerous and bizarre deceptions?
avatar
preciousramotswe

Posts : 269
Join date : 2009-12-02

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by preciousramotswe on 02.01.10 20:43

And that website is still there.

Why on earth would David Kirwan get involved in such a scheme with people he had never even met?

Tell us Tony, have you posted this up to try and scupper his political career?
avatar
preciousramotswe

Posts : 269
Join date : 2009-12-02

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Stephanie on 02.01.10 21:10

Mr. B I have no idea if you have taken that E-mail as a reliable source but I have just shown it to my O/H,

To say he has scoffed at it is an understatement, In every solicitors offices or barristers chambers is one concern ... TO WIN.

Winning= accolade or brownie points to put it in kindergarten format.

No Solicitors firm would even contemplate taking or even wanting to take on a case so fraught with pitfalls,unless that E-mail was written by a junior or a clerk it is completely unbelievable.

I am sorry but this isnt even my opinion it is just tantamount to fraud.

I suggest you go back to it's source and question it more detailed.
Stephanie
Stephanie

Posts : 82
Join date : 2009-12-03

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty The authenticiyy of those Stevo-Kirwan e-mails

Post by Tony Bennett on 02.01.10 21:42

@Stephanie wrote:Mr. B I have no idea if you have taken that E-mail as a reliable source but I have just shown it to my O/H,

To say he has scoffed at it is an understatement, In every solicitors offices or barristers chambers is one concern ... TO WIN.

Winning= accolade or brownie points to put it in kindergarten format.

No Solicitors firm would even contemplate taking or even wanting to take on a case so fraught with pitfalls,unless that E-mail was written by a junior or a clerk it is completely unbelievable.

I am sorry but this isnt even my opinion it is just tantamount to fraud.

I suggest you go back to it's source and question it more detailed.
You have questioned the authenticity of these e-mails to and from Stevo and David Kirwan.

So have others in another place.

Like all the e-mails I have posted here, I post them verbatim and unedited, unless I specifically say otherwise.

Under no circumstances do I 'doctor' emails or leave inconvenient bits out, unlike others who have inhabited this forum for a time.

Therefore if you or ANYONE sends me an e-mail to my private e-mail address, namely ajsbennett@btinternet.com, asking to see this original e-mail exchange, I will simply click on 'Forward' and will pass you a copy of that original e-mail.

Though I am not a 'tecchie', I am advised that by clicking on 'Properties' or something like that anyone can easily verify the authenticity or otherwise of any e-mail.

My offer is open from now onwards.

P.S. There are other e-mails between Stevo and Kirwans.
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15554
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 71
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by preciousramotswe on 02.01.10 21:46

It's OK Tony, you can cut out the mega-shouting, we can all read you know.

But my original questions still stand -

1) why on earth would Kirwan involve himslef with such nonsense (he even confuses the Bindman letter to people like Morais with the McCann case, when it had sod all to do with it, and makes it sound as if Bindman's had turned on the Foundation too - if they did you kept very quiet about it)

2) why are you posting this up now - are you trying to cause trouble for David Kirwan?
avatar
preciousramotswe

Posts : 269
Join date : 2009-12-02

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by vaguely on 02.01.10 21:48

sometimes less is more

just saying.

____________________
and on day six God created the non-carbon triple duplicate complaint form.
avatar
vaguely

Posts : 440
Join date : 2009-12-16

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Guest on 02.01.10 21:52

Tony, forwarding on an e-mail and then checking the header will only show your address as you forward it on.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Stephanie on 02.01.10 22:00

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Stephanie wrote:Mr. B I have no idea if you have taken that E-mail as a reliable source but I have just shown it to my O/H,

To say he has scoffed at it is an understatement, In every solicitors offices or barristers chambers is one concern ... TO WIN.

Winning= accolade or brownie points to put it in kindergarten format.

No Solicitors firm would even contemplate taking or even wanting to take on a case so fraught with pitfalls,unless that E-mail was written by a junior or a clerk it is completely unbelievable.

I am sorry but this isnt even my opinion it is just tantamount to fraud.

I suggest you go back to it's source and question it more detailed.
You have questioned the authenticity of these e-mails to and from Stevo and David Kirwan.

So have others in another place.

Like all the e-mails I have posted here, I post them verbatim and unedited, unless I specifically say otherwise.

Under no circumstances do I 'doctor' emails or leave inconvenient bits out, unlike others who have inhabited this forum for a time.

Therefore if you or ANYONE sends me an e-mail to my private e-mail address, namely ajsbennett@btinternet.com, asking to see this original e-mail exchange, I will simply click on 'Forward' and will pass you a copy of that original e-mail.

Though I am not a 'tecchie', I am advised that by clicking on 'Properties' or something like that anyone can easily verify the authenticity or otherwise of any e-mail.

My offer is open from now onwards.

P.S. There are other e-mails between Stevo and Kirwans.

Why so vexed? I was merely stating you question their authenticity, and as for yours and "Stevo's" E-mails received well not even you question his reliability now so why are you asking us to ?, and if said E-mails are in your possession why not post them on here (as you do with all your other E-mails) rather than shout about them ?
The E-mail is fake IMO doctored maybe to take yourself in but then again only Kirwans can answer that can't they !!


And I have no reason to shout or become obtrusive why have you ?
Stephanie
Stephanie

Posts : 82
Join date : 2009-12-03

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Two questions answered

Post by Tony Bennett on 02.01.10 22:03

badmanners wrote:It's OK Tony, you can cut out the mega-shouting, we can all read you know.

But my original questions still stand -

1) why on earth would Kirwan involve himself with such nonsense (he even confuses the Bindman letter to people like Morais with the McCann case, when it had sod all to do with it, and makes it sound as if Bindman's had turned on the Foundation too - if they did you kept very quiet about it)

That would appear to be question for David Kirwan, not me.

2) why are you posting this up now - are you trying to cause trouble for David Kirwan?

No. This communication was posted further to the enquiries by 'Nits', which I think were reasonable, about why Debbie Butler and I went to Kirwans for advice.

POSTSCRIPT: Bindmans did write to The Madeleine Foundation about the Mark Hollingsworth article which was also posted on the former Madeleine Foundation site. Some of the Mark Hollingsworth article is back up on our new website in the article by John Whitehouse www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15554
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 71
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by preciousramotswe on 02.01.10 22:11

And you still maintain that the Hollingsworth article D notice was something, indeed anything, to do with the McCann story in any REAL way?

Only you see, I happen to regard that whole idea as one of the most hilarious bits of tinfoil hattery ever.
And it made my eyes water to see David Kirwan taken in by the same tosh. big grin
avatar
preciousramotswe

Posts : 269
Join date : 2009-12-02

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Guest on 02.01.10 22:12

badmanners wrote:And you still maintain that the Hollingsworth article D notice was something, indeed anything, to do with the McCann story in any REAL way?

Only you see, I happen to regard that whole idea as one of the most hilarious bits of tinfoil hattery ever.
And it made my eyes water to see David Kirwan taken in by the same tosh. big grin

I know it is sooooo funny, if it was not so serious. Tony has grand ideas of himself being the champion of all causes, when in fact he is just a ((cough))
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Four e-mails to and from Stevo and David Kirwan 23 & 24 Sep 2009

Post by Tony Bennett on 02.01.10 22:53

@Stephanie wrote:Why so vexed?...as for Stevo...well not even you question his reliability now so why are you asking us to?, and if said E-mails are in your possession why not post them on here (as you do with all your other E-mails) rather than shout about them? The E-mail is fake IMO doctored maybe to take yourself in but then again only Kirwans can answer that can't they! And I have no reason to shout or become obtrusive why have you ?
The large letters were to make it absolutely clear to all and sundry that these two emails were genuine and that I do not under any circumstances 'doctor' e-mails. If I occasionally omit a part, I will say so and give a brief explanation as to why.

The authenticity had been disputed elsewhere. I don't mind fair criticism but I will not accept claims that I doctor e-mails.

In order to further rebut the charge that either I or Stevo doctored these e-mails, here is a further run of e-mails between Stevo and Kirwans dated 23 and 24 September. Bear in mind I was probably on Hadrians Wall or walking round Bambergh Castle at the time so had no idea what was going on until I returned from holiday.

These e-mails are copied and pasted without any alteration whatsoever:

++++++++++

Stevo to David Kirwan 23 Sep

From: TFM - Admin [mailto@truthformadeleine.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 1:49 PM
To: 'david@davidkirwan.co.uk'
Cc: 'DEBORAH BUTLER'
Subject: Getting the website up again

Dear David,

I understand you are now acting on behalf of Debbie Butler and Anthony Bennett.

If there is anything I can do to help please let me know. I have been totally committed to this case since it began and I have the most websites devoted to the case. In less than two years I have had over 10 million hits on the sites.

For now, I direct you to what we have to do with the website (MADELEINEFOUNDTION.ORG). We have been given a choice of 1) remove the material in their complaint or 2) file a counter-notification.

You can see Carter-Ruck’s letter of complaint to the hosting company attached to this message.

Some background on the 3 images in their complaint (they are also attached to the email).

1. (splash.jpg) This is a composite image that I created from scratch by combining an image of Madeleine's face with the bedroom from apartment 5A . The entire image cannot be copyright the McCanns because I created it.

2 & 3 are essentially the exact same image but they appear in two different places. The image is a photo of Tony's book "60-Reasons". On the front cover of his book he has a photo of Madeleine. (intropic1.jpg and booksemicircle.jpg)

The image they are complaining about derives from the same video clip and is contained on a poster which is available for free download without restriction from the official Find Madeleine website here: http://www.findmadeleine.com/support/downloads.html

I worked in computer software for 20 years and the way I am interpreting this is that they are giving a number of images of Madeleine away freely and so to exercise control over copyright of one of those free images seems like they would have very few grounds on which to do so.

If we do solution (1), I would just change the images and they would put the site back up and I guess we'd hear no more from Carter Ruck on the copyright issue. All they need for this is a one liner statement under penalty of perjury that we would remove the images.

I, John Doe, under penalty of perjury, will remove the offending content at [insert full resolving URL] promptly after the reactivation of my services.

/John Doe/

John Doe

(Please accept the above as an electronic signature.)

If we do solution (2), the counter notification, then I need the following statement from you so I can inform them that we wish to challenge their copyright claim. They would put the site back up and if they hear nothing more within 10 days that would be the end of it.

Here is what I need from you or Debbie (this is exactly what they wrote):

A. An electronic signature of the Infringer. (This can be a scanned copy of your physical signature, or as simple as typing your full name.)

B. Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.

C. A statement under penalty of perjury that the Infringer has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.

D. The Infringer's name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the Infringer consents to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the judicial district of Arizona, or if the Infringer's address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which Go Daddy may be found, and that the Infringer will accept service of process from the Complaining Party or an agent of such Party.

So something like:

I John Doe, under penalty of perjury;

1. Identify the following material as being disputed:

· The image of Madeleine McCann's face superimposed on the bedroom at Apartment 5A in the Ocean Club Resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on the URL: http://madeleinefoundation.org/

· An image on a drop down box controlled by cookies and which shows a semicircle of books on the URL: http://madeleinefoundation.org/main/

· A photograph of the Madeleine Foundation's book in a semicircle of books at this URL: http://madeleinefoundation.org/our-book/

2. I have a good faith belief that the material in question does not violate copyright laws and will consent to jurisdiction in any judicial district in which GoDaddy may be found and will accept service of process from the Complaining Party or an agent of such party.

I guess if you can type that and sign it and scan it in, I can email it back to them once I receive it from you.

I can do either solution and will leave it up to you. The main point is to get the website back up and running.

Best regards,

Stevo


++++++++++

DAVID KIRWAN TO STEVO 24 SEP

From: David Kirwan [mailto: dkirwan@kirwanssolicitors.co.uk ]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 2:23 PM
To: admin@truthformadeleine.com
Cc: Michael Sandys
Subject: RE: Getting the website up again

Michael Sandys my Partner is considering the options this evening. My inclination is option 2. I will leave the decision to him.

DSK


++++++++++

Stevo to David Kirwan later on 24 Sep

From: TFM - Admin [mailto@truthformadeleine.com]
Sent: 24 September 2009 19:56
To: David Kirwan
Cc: Michael Sandys
Subject: RE: Getting the website up again

Dear David & Michael:

To save you time…

During the Obama campaign last year, an artist (Shepard Fairey) took an Obama photograph and “created” a new image based on that image. AP claimed it owned the original copyright and threatened legal action. In a pre-emptive strike, Fairey took it to Federal Court in Manhattan and asked a judge to declare it “fair use”. I am unsure if there has been a ruling on the case as yet. It is a broadly similar type of argument to the one relating to the use of the montage on the Madeleine Foundation homepage.

[Obama images - unable to copy on to here - T.B.]

But I cannot see how the two photographs of Tony Bennett’s book can be a copyright violation because the photo was taken by Tony of his own book and the McCanns do not own those images at all.

However…there may be more mileage in simply changing the images and then claiming that they were changed due to hostility/bullying by Carter Ruck. This would then be even more newsworthy in my opinion.

Research links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/arts/design/10fair.html

http://obeygiant.com/headlines/the-ap-obama-referencing

Stevo


++++++++++

DAVID KIRWAN TO STEVO 24 SEP EVENING

From: "David Kirwan" <dkirwan@kirwanssolicitors.co.uk>
Add sender to ContactsTo: admin@truthformadeleine.com
Cc: "Michael Sandys" <msandys@kirwanssolicitors.co.uk>,
"DEBORAH BUTLER" <butler683@btinternet.com>,
ajsbennett@btinternet.com,
nick@masonmedia.co.uk

If technically Stevo can accomplish the option in the final paragraph of his message below then I am attracted to the idea of the resultant publicity which we may gain.

DSK


---ENDS---
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15554
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 71
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Guest on 02.01.10 23:01

This case sure has attracted some nutters never mind
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Stephanie on 02.01.10 23:09

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Stephanie wrote:Why so vexed?...as for Stevo...well not even you question his reliability now so why are you asking us to?, and if said E-mails are in your possession why not post them on here (as you do with all your other E-mails) rather than shout about them? The E-mail is fake IMO doctored maybe to take yourself in but then again only Kirwans can answer that can't they! And I have no reason to shout or become obtrusive why have you ?
The large letters were to make it absolutely clear to all and sundry that these two emails were genuine and that I do not under any circumstances 'doctor' e-mails. If I occasionally omit a part, I will say so and give a brief explanation as to why.

The authenticity had been disputed elsewhere. I don't mind fair criticism but I will not accept claims that I doctor e-mails.

In order to further rebut the charge that either I or Stevo doctored these e-mails, here is a further run of e-mails between Stevo and Kirwans dated 23 and 24 September. Bear in mind I was probably on Hadrians Wall or walking round Bambergh Castle at the time so had no idea what was going on until I returned from holiday.

These e-mails are copied and pasted without any alteration whatsoever:

++++++++++

Stevo to David Kirwan 23 Sep

From: TFM - Admin [mailto@truthformadeleine.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 1:49 PM
To: 'david@davidkirwan.co.uk'
Cc: 'DEBORAH BUTLER'
Subject: Getting the website up again

Dear David,

I understand you are now acting on behalf of Debbie Butler and Anthony Bennett.

If there is anything I can do to help please let me know. I have been totally committed to this case since it began and I have the most websites devoted to the case. In less than two years I have had over 10 million hits on the sites.

For now, I direct you to what we have to do with the website (MADELEINEFOUNDTION.ORG). We have been given a choice of 1) remove the material in their complaint or 2) file a counter-notification.

You can see Carter-Ruck’s letter of complaint to the hosting company attached to this message.

Some background on the 3 images in their complaint (they are also attached to the email).

1. (splash.jpg) This is a composite image that I created from scratch by combining an image of Madeleine's face with the bedroom from apartment 5A . The entire image cannot be copyright the McCanns because I created it.

2 & 3 are essentially the exact same image but they appear in two different places. The image is a photo of Tony's book "60-Reasons". On the front cover of his book he has a photo of Madeleine. (intropic1.jpg and booksemicircle.jpg)

The image they are complaining about derives from the same video clip and is contained on a poster which is available for free download without restriction from the official Find Madeleine website here: http://www.findmadeleine.com/support/downloads.html

I worked in computer software for 20 years and the way I am interpreting this is that they are giving a number of images of Madeleine away freely and so to exercise control over copyright of one of those free images seems like they would have very few grounds on which to do so.

If we do solution (1), I would just change the images and they would put the site back up and I guess we'd hear no more from Carter Ruck on the copyright issue. All they need for this is a one liner statement under penalty of perjury that we would remove the images.

I, John Doe, under penalty of perjury, will remove the offending content at [insert full resolving URL] promptly after the reactivation of my services.

/John Doe/

John Doe

(Please accept the above as an electronic signature.)

If we do solution (2), the counter notification, then I need the following statement from you so I can inform them that we wish to challenge their copyright claim. They would put the site back up and if they hear nothing more within 10 days that would be the end of it.

Here is what I need from you or Debbie (this is exactly what they wrote):

A. An electronic signature of the Infringer. (This can be a scanned copy of your physical signature, or as simple as typing your full name.)

B. Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.

C. A statement under penalty of perjury that the Infringer has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.

D. The Infringer's name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the Infringer consents to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the judicial district of Arizona, or if the Infringer's address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which Go Daddy may be found, and that the Infringer will accept service of process from the Complaining Party or an agent of such Party.

So something like:

I John Doe, under penalty of perjury;

1. Identify the following material as being disputed:

· The image of Madeleine McCann's face superimposed on the bedroom at Apartment 5A in the Ocean Club Resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on the URL: http://madeleinefoundation.org/

· An image on a drop down box controlled by cookies and which shows a semicircle of books on the URL: http://madeleinefoundation.org/main/

· A photograph of the Madeleine Foundation's book in a semicircle of books at this URL: http://madeleinefoundation.org/our-book/

2. I have a good faith belief that the material in question does not violate copyright laws and will consent to jurisdiction in any judicial district in which GoDaddy may be found and will accept service of process from the Complaining Party or an agent of such party.

I guess if you can type that and sign it and scan it in, I can email it back to them once I receive it from you.

I can do either solution and will leave it up to you. The main point is to get the website back up and running.

Best regards,

Stevo


++++++++++

DAVID KIRWAN TO STEVO 24 SEP

From: David Kirwan [mailto: dkirwan@kirwanssolicitors.co.uk ]
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 2:23 PM
To: admin@truthformadeleine.com
Cc: Michael Sandys
Subject: RE: Getting the website up again

Michael Sandys my Partner is considering the options this evening. My inclination is option 2. I will leave the decision to him.

DSK


++++++++++

Stevo to David Kirwan later on 24 Sep

From: TFM - Admin [mailto@truthformadeleine.com]
Sent: 24 September 2009 19:56
To: David Kirwan
Cc: Michael Sandys
Subject: RE: Getting the website up again

Dear David & Michael:

To save you time…

During the Obama campaign last year, an artist (Shepard Fairey) took an Obama photograph and “created” a new image based on that image. AP claimed it owned the original copyright and threatened legal action. In a pre-emptive strike, Fairey took it to Federal Court in Manhattan and asked a judge to declare it “fair use”. I am unsure if there has been a ruling on the case as yet. It is a broadly similar type of argument to the one relating to the use of the montage on the Madeleine Foundation homepage.

[Obama images - unable to copy on to here - T.B.]

But I cannot see how the two photographs of Tony Bennett’s book can be a copyright violation because the photo was taken by Tony of his own book and the McCanns do not own those images at all.

However…there may be more mileage in simply changing the images and then claiming that they were changed due to hostility/bullying by Carter Ruck. This would then be even more newsworthy in my opinion.

Research links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/arts/design/10fair.html

http://obeygiant.com/headlines/the-ap-obama-referencing

Stevo


++++++++++

DAVID KIRWAN TO STEVO 24 SEP EVENING

From: "David Kirwan"
Add sender to ContactsTo: admin@truthformadeleine.com
Cc: "Michael Sandys" ,
"DEBORAH BUTLER" ,
ajsbennett@btinternet.com,
nick@masonmedia.co.uk

If technically Stevo can accomplish the option in the final paragraph of his message below then I am attracted to the idea of the resultant publicity which we may gain.

DSK


---ENDS---

If you took time to read the responses you receive instead of getting worked up , NO ONE accused you of doctoring anything,

Who is blaming you for those false E-mails?, and if they are not fake then someone at "Kirwans" need to be held accountable for them.

And please don't keep posting pages of it over and over
again, it becomes quite undecipherable after seeing it so many times.
Stephanie
Stephanie

Posts : 82
Join date : 2009-12-03

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by preciousramotswe on 02.01.10 23:15

Raffle wrote:This case sure has attracted some nutters never mind

And people who think like this:

I am attracted to the idea of the resultant publicity which we may gain.

Who is the 'we' here - the Madeleine Foundation or Kirwan's?
avatar
preciousramotswe

Posts : 269
Join date : 2009-12-02

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Stephanie on 02.01.10 23:18

badmanners wrote:
Raffle wrote:This case sure has attracted some nutters never mind

And people who think like this:

I am attracted to the idea of the resultant publicity which we may gain.

Who is the 'we' here - the Madeleine Foundation or Kirwan's?
I believe it's called an EGO badmanners !
Stephanie
Stephanie

Posts : 82
Join date : 2009-12-03

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty The resultant publicity that Kirwans may get

Post by Tony Bennett on 02.01.10 23:24

badmanners wrote:
Raffle wrote:This case sure has attracted some nutters never mind

And people who think like this:

I am attracted to the idea of the resultant publicity which we may gain.

Who is the 'we' here - the Madeleine Foundation or Kirwan's?
Kirwans.
Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15554
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 71
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by preciousramotswe on 02.01.10 23:28

And there was me thinking that Kirwans may be more interested in getting some dirt on Esther McVey.

My bad.
avatar
preciousramotswe

Posts : 269
Join date : 2009-12-02

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Stephanie on 02.01.10 23:35

Mr B. to prove us all wrong and to stop speculation that you have been duped by this E-mail apparently by kirwans please post said E-mail with headers, you obviously have access to the said E-mail as you have copied it word for word.

No one here is accusing you of misinterpretation remember that!
Stephanie
Stephanie

Posts : 82
Join date : 2009-12-03

Back to top Go down

Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009 Empty Re: Stevo to David Kirwan and David Kirwan to Stevo 27 Sep 2009

Post by Guest on 02.01.10 23:58

Toony you have said you believe how to read the headers on the e-mails now post them please. Then i may not send these supposed e-mails to Kirwans and the Solicitors body to find out if they are true.
If they are not you will end up looking very stupid.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum