Comments on: City Can’t Use Copyright To Censor Critical Videos–Inglewood v. Teixeira https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2015/08/city-cant-use-copyright-to-censor-critical-videos-inglewood-v-teixeira.htm Thu, 27 Aug 2015 20:16:10 +0000 hourly 1 By: curtisneeley https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2015/08/city-cant-use-copyright-to-censor-critical-videos-inglewood-v-teixeira.htm#comment-1364 Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:31:00 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=14752#comment-1364 Yes, people are attempting to use Title 17 to protect against “fixations” of their speaking or writings being used without authorization to violate their fundamental human right to protect the dignity of the self. America has never yet recognized this fundamental human right first recognized in England in 1734. (Engraver’s Act) This was the first and is still the only fundamental human right to survive death by being transferred to another for protection (the spouse) in 1766. (Hogarth’s Act)

Please note the “Doe” v. Google case should not have been reversed en
banc and was not decided honorably. Affirming would not allow council to assert American copyrite claims
for their individual “performances” unless intercepted and altered.

“Doe” will not seek SCOTUS certiorari to further protect reputation. This mistake, made in the Ninth Circuit en
banc, will be mentioned in the coming petition for certiorari for the AR Act 301 appeal of 12-week limit for privately controlling gestation to protect personal honor.

]]>