On June 5th, 2009, Bruce Chapman and Hilary Adler Filed DMCA Complaints About Charly D. Miller’s Opinion Paper Regarding The Content of Chapman’s Two Websites

REMINDER; As in My Opinion Paper:

• Chapman’s Bogus and Sham Website – the one that falsely claims to offer the “truth” about prone restraint techniques – will herein be referred to as Chapman’s “BS Website”

• Chapman’s business website was developed for his Restraint Training company; a company that claims to train people to handle others with CARE, yet still instructs them to employ Forceful-Prone-Restraint. Because forceful-prone-restraint has caused the death of children and adults all over the world, the majority of world-wide restraint training experts (including myself) consider forceful-prone-restraint to be a LETHAL manner of restraint.
  Therefore, Chapman’s business website will herein be referred to as Chapman’s “Lethal Restraint Training Website,” or Chapman’s “LRT Website.”

If you’re already familiar with the DMCA, and how it is
frequently used by those who fear criticism to interfere with the
First Amendment Rights of those wishing to express an opinion,
Click Here to SKIP to Chapman/Adler DMCA Complaints Info

Click Here to SKIP to “TIP #1”

Click Here to SKIP to “TIP #2”

“DMCA” refers to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
[See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA.]

According to David S. Touretzky, of Carnegie Mellon University:

When the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was enacted in 1998, it amended US copyright law (Title 17, United States Code) in several areas. These include (1) prohibiting circumvention of copyright protection and management systems, (2) limiting liability of ISPs [Internet Service Providers, a.k.a. “Host Servers”] for their users' actions, and (3) establishing new rules for broadcasting music on Internet radio stations.

The DMCA was NOT intended to prevent individuals from writing Opinion Papers
about people or companies, and posting them on the Internet.

From http://tlp.law.pitt.edu/articles/McCall.pdf:
First of all, it is important to note that the DMCA only protects digital media. Digital media, as the name implies, is any media that is stored in digital form, e.g., music on a compact disc (CD), word processing documents on the hard drive of a computer, movies on a digital virtual disk (DVD), or books in electronic, or eBook, form.

Yet, people who FEAR CRITICISM often file DMCA complaints solely to interfere with the ability of others to exercise their First Amendment rights to voice their opinion of something on an Internet Website or Blog.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA [My Underline]:
The DMCA has been criticized for making it too easy for copyright owners to encourage website owners to take down allegedly infringing content and links which may in fact not be infringing. When website [Host Servers] receive a takedown notice it is in their interest not to challenge it, even if it is not clear if infringement is taking place, because if the potentially infringing content is taken down the website [Host Server] will not be held liable.

From David S. Touretzky, of Carnegie Mellon University:
Unfortunately, section 1201 of the DMCA contains some restrictions against "trafficking in circumvention devices" that are now being used to suppress lawful speech.

Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the blatant misuse of DMCA complaints by people who fear criticism will easily be prevented anytime in the near future.

From http://tlp.law.pitt.edu/articles/McCall.pdf:
Public awareness of the serious danger to citizens' First Amendment and privacy rights from the provisions of the DMCA is very low, largely because of the complexities of the issues involved.

Although the vast majority of Chapman/Adler’s DMCA complaints are entirely without merit,
I do NOT have the time or money to fight them.
That’s why I’ve edited and reposted My Opinion Paper (and created this Page),
being careful not to do any of the things Chapman and Adler whined about!

1. One of Chapman/Adler’s copyright infringement complaints was technically legitimate, in that I had posted a few PDFs containing PAGES captured from the two websites in question.

   However, if Chapman/Adler were confident that the material posted on Chapman’s BS Website and LRT Website represented the truth about the safety of their restraint techniques, why-oh-WHY would they complain about me posting PDFs containing pages from those websites?!

2. Chapman/Adler complained about the PDF file I posted containing material derived from an Internet search for the Domain Registration Information related to Chapman’s BS Website and LRT Website – a file that concretely demonstrated how Bruce Chapman sought to HIDE his relationship to the BS Website!
   I have no idea whether WHOIS Domain Name registration information is within the “Public Domain” – or not. I strongly suspect that it IS! But, I’m not willing to spend time or money to “defend” my posting of same.

   BOTTOM LINE; If Chapman/Adler were confident that Chapman had NOT attempted to HIDE his relationship to the BS Website, why-oh-WHY would they complain about me posting the Domain Registration Information for Chapman’s BS and LRT Websites?!
   [BTW: I’ll tell you how to find that information in an upcoming section.]

3. Chapman/Adler illegitimately alleged that the few QUOTES I cited (and appropriately referenced!) from Chapman’s BS Website and LRT Website constituted infringement of Chapman’s copyright.
   

   The United States Code §17-107 relating to fair use of copyrighted materials specifically stipulates that it is NOT an infringement of copyright when quotes from a copyrighted source are used for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research.

   Again, however, I’m not willing to spend time or money to defend my perfectly legitimate posting of appropriately referenced quotes. Especially since I can criticize both of Chapman’s websites without quoting them!

   BOTTOM LINE; If Chapman/Adler were confident that the statements I legitimately-quoted within my originally-posted Opinion Paper represented the truth about the safety of their restraint techniques, why-oh-WHY would they complain about me quoting them?!

4. Chapman/Adler also alleged that the HYPERLINKS I posted, directing readers to Chapman’s BS Website and LRT Website, constituted infringement of Chapman’s copyright.

   If Chapman’s BS and LRT Websites represented the truth about the safety of their restraint techniques, why-oh-WHY would Chapman/Adler NOT want me to provide links to them?

5. The MAJORITY of complaints lodged by Chapman/Adler were that I’d violated Chapman’s “TRADEMARK” copyright by using the actual TITLE of Chapman’s BS Website, and the actual TITLE of Chapman’s LRT Website, within my opinion paper!
   They also alleged that I’d violated Chapman’s “TRADEMARK” copyright by using the INITIALs of the actual TITLEs of his BS and LRT Websites!!!

   If Chapman/Adler were confident … yada-yada, woof-woof … Why-oh-WHY would they complain about me referencing Chapman’s BS Website and LRT Website by their actual TITLEs or INITIALs???!!!

BTW: THIS is why I re-named Chapman’s Websites.
I would have preferred using their real titles and initials!
But, thanx to Chapman/Adler’s Trademark complaints, his websites have become
Chapman’s Bogus and Sham Website (BS Website), and
Chapman’s Lethal Restraint Training Website (LRT Website).

SUMMARY OF THE CHAPMAN/ADLER DMCA COMPLAINTS:

1. Chapman/Adler don’t want me posting examples of the material contained on Chapman’s BS or LRT Websites.

2. Chapman/Adler don’t want me posting Domain Registration Information related to Chapman’s BS or LRT Websites.

3. Chapman/Adler don’t want me to quote any of the statements made by Chapman on his BS or LRT Websites.

4. Chapman/Adler don’t want me to provide links to Chapman’s BS or LRT Websites.

5. Chapman/Adler don’t want me to use the real TITLEs or INITIALs of Chapman’s BS or LRT Websites.

It is My Opinion that:

Bruce Chapman and Hilary Adler filed DMCA complaints against my Opinion Paper solely for the purpose of interfering with my First Amendment right to criticize Chapman’s BS Website and Restraint Training company.

Apparently, My Opinions carry so much WEIGHT in the world of restraint training,
that Chapman and Adler FEAR them.

TIP #1:

It’s quite easy for YOU to find the Domain Registration Information related to Chapman’s BS and LRT Websites. I just have to explain it to you in a rather ROUND-ABOUT way! LOL

1. Begin by going to NetworkSolutions.com
   
2. Scroll down toward the bottom of that page, looking for the word, “RESOURCES.”
   
3. Beneath RESOURCES, click on the “WHOIS Search” link.
   
4. In the “Enter a search term:” box, type in the
   Song Title from the first track on the Traveling Wilburys’ 1988 album.
   
5. Delete the SPACES between those three words,
   and add a “.com” after them (again, no SPACES).
   
6. Once you’ve done that, click on the “SEARCH” button.
   You’ll end up on a page that identifies Bruce Chapman of 184 McKinstry Road, Gardiner, NY 12525 as the REGISTRANT of that website DOMAIN NAME.
   (The website for Chapman’s Restraint Training company.)

7. After studying that information (perhaps even copying it to your computer), scroll back up the page, looking to the RIGHT of that Domain Name’s info.
   You’ll see a “SEARCH AGAIN” option, above another “Enter a search term:” box.
   
8. In that “Enter a search term” box, type the following letters: “thetruth” (no SPACES).
   
9. In that same search term box, at the end of the letters you just typed, type the following letters: “aboutpronerestraint” (no SPACES before or after).
   
10. In that same search term box, at the end of the letters you just typed, add “.com” (no SPACES).
    
11. Click on the “SEARCH” button.
    You’ll end up on a page that identifies Bruce Chapman as the REGISTRANT of that website DOMAIN NAME.
    But, there you’ll see a very different ADDRESS for Chapman.
    The Registrant address for Chapman’s BS Website is “c/o Network Solutions”!
    The Technical Contact for Chapman’s BS Website is zm33r76g6dk@networksolutionsprivateregistration.com

    This information demonstrates that Bruce Chapman purposefully made his BS Website’s Domain Name registration information PRIVATE!!!

But, WAIT!
How do I know – for a FACT – that the BS Website’s Bruce Chapman is the SAME Bruce Chapman of the Lethal Restraint Training Website?

Because the BS-Website-related DMCA complaint sent by Hilary Adler (of 184 McKinstry Road, Gardiner, NY 12525!) accused me of “the knowing and unlawful infringement of Bruce Chapman’s common law trademark and proprietary domain name “[BSWebsiteTitle]” and “[BSWebsiteTitle].com” respectively.”

THUS:

• Adler’s DMCA complaint clearly identified Bruce Chapman
  of the Restraint Training company
  as the BS Website’s Domain Name Registrant.

• And, the BS Website’s Domain Name registration information
  concretely demonstrates that Bruce Chapman sought to
  HIDE his relationship to the BS Website!

TIP #2:

Below are a FEW of the many phrases that you can GOOGLE in order to obtain information about DEATHS that have occurred at the hands of individuals who were trained by Chapman’s Restraint Training company.

• Chad Youth Enhancement Center restraint

• Kelly Young restraint death

• Omega Leach restraint death

Of course, once you know the Title of Chapman’s Restraint Training company, you can GOOGLE that TITLE, followed by “restraint training causes death” and the like!

Email Charly at: c-d-miller@neb.rr.com
(Those are hyphens/dashes between the “c” and “d” and “miller”)

myspace hit counter