Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:39:56 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:
>
>> In article <1579398.gtx43UFvFB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Why did Erik harass an artist just so that he harasses or sues me?
>>> And yes, he had to persistently ask him time after time (nagging the
>>> guy) to actually bother to send me a message (he told me), asking for
>>> removal of an image I DID ATTRIBUTE TO HIM (with a _hyperlink_ to his
>>> Web site).
>>
>> On the fact of it, that is a rather ridiculous claim. If the artist
>> didn't mind your unauthorized use, he would have simply told Erik that
>> it was OK, and that would have ended the matter.
>>
>> You are simply trying to rationalize your misuse of the artists work.
>
> It's not even true. I had 3 messages with the guy, and HE asked ME for
> information. I did not "harass" him.
Did *he* initiate the exchange? Or did you the first step?
> So Roy is likely lying there.
Knowing your past behaviour, I'd say you are lying
> I mean come one. "Yeah, umm.. some guy told me you were copying my work,
> and since he's harrased me so much, i guess i have to ask you to stop".
>
> Come on, does that even sound plausable?
Yes. You don't make much sense here, but yes, it sounds more plausible than
your usual bullshit
--
Who the fuck is General Failure, and why is he reading my harddisk?
|
|
