The odds are in favor of Hunter Biden in imminent lawsuit against computer repairman

[meaner gene]

Unless I’m mistaken copywrites have to be applied for. You can’t just claim something is copywriter after the fact,

Do you have to pay to own a copyright?

Copyright exists automatically once you create a work and is free. Copyright is one of the most powerful rights you can own as a creator.

If you do not want to pay the fee to register a book copyright, and do not need the legal peace of mind that comes with officially registering a copyright, then you can copyright your book for free by simply writing it yourself.

 

[Rigby5]

First all contracts have to be legal. And because much of the intellectual property on the computer doesn't belong to the owner of the computer, they can't by contract transfer ownership of property that isn't theirs.

The contract would be a swiss cheese of exclusions in order to include intellectual property in the abandoned property clause.

Not intellectual property or copyright laws are at all involved.
No one is trying to publish anything claimed to be an original play or work of art.
Copyright law does not at all protect something from being examined by police and used as evidence.
There could be naked pictures you could not publish, but you can still let police use them.

 

[Rigby5]

Do you have to pay to own a copyright?

Copyright exists automatically once you create a work and is free. Copyright is one of the most powerful rights you can own as a creator.

If you do not want to pay the fee to register a book copyright, and do not need the legal peace of mind that comes with officially registering a copyright, then you can copyright your book for free by simply writing it yourself.

You automatically own copyrights, but if you want to register them, then you have to pay.
And registered copyrights are much easier to protect.
But this case has NOTHING to do with copyright law.
No one is trying to publish something for sale, like a book, short story, play, song, etc.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Right-wingers argue that the computer repairman acquired the laptop as abandoned property, but according to this legal analyst, only the hardware and not the data belongs to the repairman in this case. The repairman cannot use Hunter Biden's copyrighted images, emails, etc. The only permissible action the repairman could have taken with the data is to recover it:

Guest view: Hunter Biden’s laptop and data: A legal and data privacy analysis

By David L. Hecht, Esq. A newly released document suggests that on April 12, 2019 Hunter Biden signed an $85 services “quote” from the Mac Shop in Wilmington covering labor

delawarebusinessnow.com

It's a bunch of bunk.

That journalist claims Delaware Code, Title 25, § 4001, defines "abandoned property," and the laptop did not meet that definition. However, the contract terms specifically state that the laptop can be treated as abandoned property, and Crackhead agreed in writing.

The lawyers are simply attempting to intimidate. They have no case. Mac dude does not seem easily intimidated. We need more like him.

Hunter's lawyers claim violations of different laws - page 14 (of the PDF, 2nd document) here...

Letters from attorneys for Hunter Biden to the Delaware attorney general, the Justice Department’s National Security Division and the IRS

February 1, 2023

www.documentcloud.org

Claims are for unauthorized access, which is obviously false.

Another claim is related to stolen property, which is also BS.

The final claim is about making public "restricted information." Again, Mac Dude's access to the information was not restricted; it was granted by Hunter. It is also about using the info in a malicious manner (threaten, intimidate, or facilitate the commission of a crime of violence against that covered person), but Mac Dude was just getting the truth out.

 

[meaner gene]

The FBI would be able to determine fake info added within days. They have had it for two years, and no charges against the shop owner.
Why is that, Simp?

No charges against anyone.

Which means the FBI has either not looked, or cleared Hunter of any crimes involving the laptop.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Everyone who's picture appears in a newspaper or magazine, has signed a release for that photo to be printed/broadcast.

You're full of shit.
I've been in several newspaper photos, never signed a release. Not once.

My first newspaper photo was in 1960.



Best damn Easter Egg hunt it was, too!

 

[meaner gene]

You can not successfully just add emails to a single laptop.
There are many multiple copies on other computers.
There would be copies on every server in the server chain, tap backups, copies on the receiving computer, etc.

Which is the very antithesis of the Hillary email argument.

As you said, she could delete 30,000 emails from her laptop, but there would be copies on other computers and servers.

So why the bitching about deleting only one of several copies?

 

[Rigby5]

To everyone, read the law

Contrary to popular belief which states that “an email is not copyright protected once it is sent”, surprisingly, emails are protected by intellectual property laws, by default; it's protected by copyright laws once penned down or created by the sender. Dec 12, 2019

Copyright law does NOT at all prevent anything from being viewed by police or be used as evidence.
The ONLY time copyright law applies to email is if you email someone a copy of a work of art you did, be in an image, song, short story, book, play, etc.
That is not the case here.
There is nothing in any of these emails of files that is worthy of copyrighting, and no one is violating copyright law by trying to publish any work of art as their own.
As long as they attribute Hunter Biden as the creator, there is nothing remotely illegal about republishing them.

 

[meaner gene]

Not really.
Applying for the copyright just makes it MUCH easier to win your case.
But if you can prove somehow that someone stole your work in progress, you can still win even though you never applied.
You would need witnesses not only of prior content, but of the person claiming rights to it having had access.
If it was just coincidence someone came up with a similar idea, that is not a copyright violation.

You refer to a "registered" copyright.

Which is like registering a will with the county. Wills are still legal without being registered. That's just an additional legal protection.

 

[progressive hunter]

If the laptop contained evidence of a crime, and the FBI was investigating Hunter, they are required by law to send Hunter a "target" letter. Which they didn't do.

So either they found no crimes on the laptop.

Or they didn't look at the laptop.

unless its true the FBI is compromised and protecting democrats,,

 

[progressive hunter]

WHAT crimes? Name them, describe them.... tell us please, what rightwingers are being told, are crimes by your right wing news media....???

if youre going to stick your nose in a discussion the least you could do is get caught up with whats already been said instead of asking me to repeat myself,,

 

[Rigby5]

Evidence of crimes are presented to law enforcement, not the courts.

Giuiliani as an officer of the court would not be who to give it to.

Essentially the courts actually are the only representatives of law.
Police actually have no legal authority at all.
But I agree normally one gives evidence and reports crimes to police.
However in this case, it takes a lawyer to figure out if a law was violated or not.

 

[progressive hunter]

The only evidence they have has no chain of custody.

how do you know??

 

[meaner gene]

It's a bunch of bunk.

That journalist claims Delaware Code, Title 25, § 4001, defines "abandoned property," and the laptop did not meet that definition. However, the contract terms specifically state that the laptop can be treated as abandoned property, and Crackhead agreed in writing.

First the owner can't identify who "signed" the agreement.
Second, the owner failed to notify Hunter Biden as required under Maryland abandoned property law, which requires the shop to send written notification (not email) to the owner, three times within 90 days.

 

[progressive hunter]

Nope. A laptop to the Trump supporter where it was accessed multiple times and files added. Then copies to the Trump campaign hitmen. A laptop supposedly was given to the FBI.

got proof of that??

 

[Rigby5]

WHAT crimes? Name them, describe them.... tell us please, what rightwingers are being told, are crimes by your right wing news media....???

There are many.
But one example is that Hunter is arranging meetings with those paying him, to talk directly with Joe Biden.
That is a clear case of selling influence, and illegal.

 

[Nostra]

First all contracts have to be legal. And because much of the intellectual property on the computer doesn't belong to the owner of the computer, they can't by contract transfer ownership of property that isn't theirs.

The contract would be a swiss cheese of exclusions in order to include intellectual property in the abandoned property clause.

So all you have is your Crackhead Cultist opinion.

 

[Rigby5]

Art isn't the only thing protected.
Dumbass

It does have to be a work of art in order to be protected under copyright law.
A journalist writing a dry and factual article, is still a work of art, because the journalist is still deciding how to phrase it.

 

[Nostra]

No charges against anyone.

Which means the FBI has either not looked, or cleared Hunter of any crimes involving the laptop.

Or the massively corrupt FBI is covering for Crackhead Biden.

 

[Rigby5]

Of the laptop, but not personal papers and documents of Hunters. The shop owner can not just give out Hunters social security number, or business deals arrangements, or medical records, or naked pictures and other personal information. He can remove Hunter's personal property information and then sell the laptop to recover any money loss for the transaction....from all I've read on it.

The shop owner is under no obligation to erase anything.
He can sell, give, or let the police have it as is.
If it had naked images and they started appearing on the internet, I think Hunter could then sue to get them removed.
But its not the fault of the repairman if the police leak files.