Click Official ELI Links
Loading
Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.

Author Topic: Notice: This Forum is now READ-ONLY for Historical Record  (Read 2045 times)

Matthew Chan

  • ELI Founder, "Cult Leader", Grand Poobah, Big Cheese
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2499
  • 1st Amendment & Section 230 CDA Advocate
    • View Profile
    • Defiantly
Notice: This Forum is now READ-ONLY for Historical Record
« on: April 22, 2015, 04:52:42 AM »
On March 27, 2015, the Georgia Supreme Court handed a unanimous victory to me and ELI by reversing the overbroad Permanent (Lifetime) Protective Order by the Muscogee County Superior Court (March 6, 2013) that strangled me and consequently all ELI users for from posting or writing any comments or information about Linda Ellis, Linda's Lyrics, and the Dash Poem extortion scheme.

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/all-justices-concur-eli-wins-internet-free-speech-appeal-in-georgia-supreme-court/

On April 15, 2015, the remittitur was transmitted to the lower court making the Court decision and order reversal "official".

https://www.scribd.com/doc/261983625/Chan-v-Ellis-Remittitur

Much has been made about how "threatening", "dangerous", "controversial", "mean-spirited", "crude", and "distasteful" ELI posts were.  The truth of the matter is MOST forum posts did not fit into any of those categories.  There a FEW forum posts that fit those descriptions (I wrote some of them) and they ONLY occurred largely out of a sense of outrage or an angry response stemming from Linda's and her cohorts activities, not because we randomly selected her and started being "mean" to her for no reason.

It has always been our position that while some of the forum posts might have been "mean-spirited", "rude", "distasteful", and socially/politically incorrect, they were all constitutional and protected by the First Amendment.  They certainly were not "stalky".

And as much as Linda wanted to claim we were "stalking" or "harassing" her, we restricted our dialog here on ELI at "home base". There was no interest to directly engage or contact her. In the age of the Internet, emails, cell phones, and social media, it would have been an easy thing to do if any of us at ELI wished to do so. If anything, Linda and her cohorts tried to surreptitiously insert, involve, or interfere with how ELI users communicated with one another and the public at large.

Because of the legal shenanigans perpetrated by Linda and her unknowing lawyer, Elizabeth W. McBride, of taking forum posts entirely out of context and, in fact, altering, modifying, and skewing them in such a way, the ELI team is now on guard going forward. The flagrant disregard of context and basic facts necessitated Oscar Michelen issuing a formal written notice to Linda that she was engaging in potentially defamatory (or certain pseudo-defamatory) behavior.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/261983488/Oscar-Michelen-Matthew-Chan-Cease-Desist-Letter-to-Linda-Ellis

What we uncovered of her legal shenanigans since the March 27, 2015 is truly stunning and outrageous. So much so, I wrote a multi-part commentary series called "Cleaning Up the 'Chan v. Ellis' Mess". I am obviously biased but I am convinced it is worth your time to read if you want to see how skewed the legal system can get when people aren't watching closely.

http://defiantly.net/cleaning-up-the-chan-v-ellis-mess-part-1/
http://defiantly.net/cleaning-up-the-chan-v-ellis-mess-part-2/
http://defiantly.net/cleaning-up-the-chan-v-ellis-mess-part-3/
http://defiantly.net/cleaning-up-the-chan-v-ellis-mess-part-4/
http://defiantly.net/cleaning-up-the-chan-v-ellis-mess-part-5/
http://defiantly.net/cleaning-up-the-chan-v-ellis-mess-part-6/

The sad part is there is more to tell, but for now these 6-commentaries will have to do.

The posts on this forum will "forever" be READ-ONLY to preserve as much as we can prior to March 2013. There are a few posts that have been "hidden" for the purpose of "political-correctness".  I could have deleted them and no one would have been the wiser but I chose to be transparent about it.  I chose to only "hide" select forum posts because they are part of the historical record of ELI that we can access as necessary. But I won't let random people take certain paragraphs out of context.

Since this FORUM is now READ-ONLY, where do people go who want to read about and discuss Linda Ellis, Linda Lyrics, and the Dash Poem extortion scheme?  Honestly, in the last two years, there many more places to read and find more information. The shutting down of this forum two years ago created a burst of alternative websites to read.

Some websites were launched by ELI Supporters:

http://defiantly.net (ELI-alternative blog)
http://copyright-trolls.com
http://cabalaw.org
http://getpoeticjustice.com
http://www.aprilbrown.com/copyright-infringement-the-das/
https://www.facebook.com/getpoeticjustice

There are many more articles and blog posts to find if you do a Google/Bing search. Here is a link to many resources I compiled.

http://defiantly.net/the-linda-ellis-lindas-lyrics-dash-poem-copyright-infringement-letter-resource-page/

On ELI, the place to post comments about the Linda Lyrics and Dash Poem extortion scheme will be in the Legal Controversies Forum.

http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/forum/legal-controversies-forum/

I am not going to put much energy into promoting or moderating another forum about the Dash Poem extortion scheme. Anything I have to say will likely be posted on Defiantly.net.  Honestly, in the last two years during the shutdown, I have lost interest in having open discussions with the the Dash Poem extortion letter victims.  There are some notable exceptions (and they know who they are) but I have come to the realization there are some people I cannot help. As people know, I know how to fight and defend myself as the situation dictates. But not everyone has my values or sensibilities.  Hence, I prefer to focus on those who are empowered enough to do something to help themselves.

I have a lot to say about Linda, her lawyer, what went down behind-the-scenes, the strategies, and the overall legal battle of the last two years.  But little of that is about "dialog" as much as my wanting to "report", "teach", and "disseminate".

The "people in the know" already have their own individual website platforms to share their thoughts and perspectives. And there is a group of us who have taken our discussions underground out of the public eye.  The days of being open and naive are over. Strategy, calculation, and allying yourself with those that "can" is much more significant and rewarding than dealing with those that "can't" or "won't".
« Last Edit: June 15, 2016, 02:51:25 AM by Matthew Chan »
Read http://Defiantly.net. Under the 1st Amendment, I have the right to post facts & opinions using rhetorical hyperbole, colloquialisms, metaphors, parody, irony, snark, sarcasm, epithets, & profanity. Under Section 230 of CDA, I'm only responsible for posts I write, not what others write.

 

Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.
Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11