tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post1826114449632032467..comments2024-03-23T22:54:58.661-04:00Comments on FBC Jax Watchdogs: Proof that Tim Rogers is Just Plain Off His Rocker FBC Jax Watchdoghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10740366031265491559noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-11998480213858096352014-06-05T20:14:20.395-04:002014-06-05T20:14:20.395-04:00Third comment (awaiting moderation):
I don't ...Third comment (awaiting moderation):<br /><br />I don't know if you care or not, but before you make assumptions, I'm not Calvanist.Josh Autryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15595201265910355676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-7191286927319257882014-06-05T20:01:15.760-04:002014-06-05T20:01:15.760-04:00Rest of comment:
Finally, Ergun has repeatedly sh...Rest of comment:<br /><br />Finally, Ergun has repeatedly shown and expressed through his counsel that he does not care about protecting his so-called “copyright” for the purpose of generating revenue. For example, the way copyright actions typically go is that a person or business sues to protect their ability to generate profit because, if someone makes the work freely available, it makes it harder to sell. So, if I post an entire season of 24 on YouTube, it would be harder for Fox to sell DVDs to people what they can see online. From the beginning, Ergun has not sought to sell the lectures in question; rather, he sought to remove the lectures from public view because they expose clear false statements. This would be like George Allen suing the person who posted the “macaca” video online without his permission. Not only does such litigation seek to stifle criticism, it seeks to remove works from public view, which is precisely the opposite of the purpose of the Copyright Act.<br /><br />Second comment (awaiting moderation):<br />The link I posted apparently doesn’t work. This should: http://ia700607.us.archive.org/17/items/gov.uscourts.vawd.92537/gov.uscourts.vawd.92537.68.0.pdfJosh Autryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15595201265910355676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-813105892015761112014-06-05T20:00:23.521-04:002014-06-05T20:00:23.521-04:00My comment on Roger's blog (awaiting moderatio...My comment on Roger's blog (awaiting moderation):<br /><br />Most of your criticisms of me and my brother are fully addressed in my brief filed with the motion for attorney fees, which involves an in-depth look at Ergun’s true motives (suppressing criticism and removing misstatements from the internet), Ergun’s unreasonable legal posturing, and the reasonableness of my time in the case. It is available here. Reading this would likely correct your incorrect views about my brother.<br />I write here to address them head-on. First, Jonathan is not suing Ergun Caner. I have filed this motion asking the Court to reimburse my current firm and former law firm for the time that the firms have allowed me, an associate, to work on his case. Almost all of the fees will go to the firm I used to work for to reimburse the firm for allowing me to work on the case instead of requiring me to work on other cases with clients who pay. I am gracious that both firms permitted me to work on the case, and I do believe that they should be rewarded for doing so.<br />Jonathan will not see a dime of an attorney fee award. Under the Copyright Act, generally speaking, the losing party has to pay the winner’s attorney fees. Although Jonathan had no choice, Ergun chose to file a frivolous lawsuit knowing this risk and continued to assert his nonsense legal positions for almost a year now knowing that he will pay attorney fees when he loses.<br />Second, my representation is still pro bono because I never charged my brother for my services, nor would I have if my brother lost. My filing of a fee petition against Dr. Caner does not affect this at all. If the court reduces my fees or awards no fees at all, my brother will not receive a bill for even a fraction of an hour. This is a common practice of many Christian legal organizations, including the Alliance Defending Freedom, of which I am a member and have worked with on numerous cases to protect the rights of Christians. If you think this is unethical, then you have a fundamental disagreement with every Christian legal organization that I know.<br />As far as the amount of time I put in the case, it was necessary due to the multitude of issues presented. Ergun initially filed in Texas (a state without jurisdiction) and refused to transfer to Virginia until after I had to get admitted in Texas by motion, file a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, and a motion to transfer—all of which had to be researched before written. All of this time was wasted due to Ergun’s unreasonableness.<br />I also had to address more issues than fair use (what the judge ruled on). For example, I addressed whether Ergun has any rights to videos produced by the military and released under the Freedom of Information Act, whether Ergun waived his rights to the videos, whether Ergun can seek attorney fees at all when he didn’t apply for a copyright until after the videos were removed from the internet, and whether Ergun can seek any relief without proving that Jonathan would ever repost the videos. Because Jonathan could not afford to hire a copyright attorney, he was stuck with me (a civil rights attorney). As a civil rights attorney, I had to research every single one of these issues for the first time.<br />Josh Autryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15595201265910355676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-40736116770402880352014-06-03T18:29:17.296-04:002014-06-03T18:29:17.296-04:00That is only 120 hours of work at 250.00 per hour,...That is only 120 hours of work at 250.00 per hour, which is reasonable attorney compensation in much of the U.S. Now some was legal assistant time at approximately 1/3 of that rate, but it is still not a lot, given the research time and writing time, responding to phone calls and demands from the other side, etc. I usually figure 2-3 hours prep for a one hour hearing, and that is after the research and writing, interviewing of the client, etc., has been done. Truly not an unreasonable amount. And I am sure that had Caner won, his attorney would have been asking for something in the same range.An Attorneynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-11248394848473301552014-06-03T17:32:01.062-04:002014-06-03T17:32:01.062-04:00Thx attorney - how do you suppose $ 30,000.00 of a...Thx attorney - how do you suppose $ 30,000.00 of attorney fees accumulated? I am trying to imagine what what the body of work was that caused that amount. Treble charges? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-1929067558032950842014-06-03T16:46:48.468-04:002014-06-03T16:46:48.468-04:00...and the SBC wonder why they are declining in me......and the SBC wonder why they are declining in membership?<br /><br />They should start their services with the words, "Step right up folks! Popcorn, get your popcorn, cotton candy..."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-36506896530637883772014-06-03T16:46:21.719-04:002014-06-03T16:46:21.719-04:00...and the SBC wonder why they are declining in me......and the SBC wonder why they are declining in membership?<br /><br />They should start their services with the words, "Step right up folks! Popcorn, get your popcorn, cotton candy..."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-7458997022340892212014-06-03T12:41:24.032-04:002014-06-03T12:41:24.032-04:00From Pastor Timmy's blog post questioning whet...From Pastor Timmy's blog post questioning whether Dennis Kim should be the choice for SBC President:<br /><br />"Dr. Kim is a Korean and certainly has maintained a great church there in the Maryland area. Thus, this is not about Dr. Kim as a person."<br /><br />What the heck does the fact that Kim is "a Korean" as Pastor Timmy puts it, have to do with anything? When Fred Luter was nominated did he say, "Luter is a black and certainly has maintained a great church there in the New Orleans area"? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-51973688436807378352014-06-03T11:52:56.796-04:002014-06-03T11:52:56.796-04:001. The relationship between attorney and client, ...1. The relationship between attorney and client, that the attorney is not charging the client, hence acting pro bono publico -- for the benefit of the public -- is not an issue in the recovery of fees. Most civil rights litigation is undertaken with no expectation that the client will be able to pay, but with the hope of recovering attorney fees and, on occasion damages.<br /><br />2. The award of attorney fees is generally at the discretion of the trial judge.<br /><br />3. It is rare that a federal judge is accused of bias and it is generally not a good idea to base an argument that a federal judge was biased. It will guarantee that the judge recuses himself if a suit involving Rev. Tim lands in his court, since judges make extensive efforts to avoid even the possible appearance of bias.<br /><br />4. Finally, if Caner's attorney believes the judge was biased, an appeal can be made. But I suspect that won't happen, because were such an appeal made and lost, the court would likely award the attorney fees and Caner would become a debtor in extremis.An Attorneynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-44795783030548294432014-06-03T11:13:03.881-04:002014-06-03T11:13:03.881-04:00I don't think that anyone who has read anythin...I don't think that anyone who has read anything that TR has written expects a good explanation to make any difference to Tim. But I suspect it was fun and I appreciated it.Bennett Willishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01200940136846753450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-51865459181657994492014-06-03T10:26:18.445-04:002014-06-03T10:26:18.445-04:00Thanks for this. When i was reading what Tim wrot...Thanks for this. When i was reading what Tim wrote I truly thought that either he or I was in the Twighlight ZoneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-36423851724793391722014-06-03T09:46:54.982-04:002014-06-03T09:46:54.982-04:00I suppose that there might be an issue with justif...I suppose that there might be an issue with justification of the fees. On the one hand, it is open and shut. Many in here say Caner never stood a chance. I know of a similar case with about as many court appearances and body of work that was less than $10,000. I do not pretend to know what all was involved, experts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8384632623933772727.post-41987887604429494632014-06-03T09:25:23.256-04:002014-06-03T09:25:23.256-04:00I've read through Pastor Timmy's blog post...I've read through Pastor Timmy's blog post and comments, and I THINK I MIGHT have ascertained what he is TRYING to say (and believe me, it is an arduous task) - that Autry is now seeking affirmative relief for attorney fees against Caner and therefore he has effectively "sued" Caner. I'll go ahead and give Pastor Timmy that. Yes indeed, Autry chose to seek affirmative relief against Caner, albeit TO OBTAIN RELIEF AGAINST CANER'S FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT. So yes, I'll agree that in substance Autry is "suing" Caner, even though in legal form it is part of the lawsuit that Caner filed. The big difference is that Autry's "suit" has MERIT. <br /><br />But that's all really secondary. What's more fun than a barrel o' monkeys is reading through Rogers' bizarre argument that Autry is sinning by "suing" Caner, whereas Caner was, in effect, doing the Lord's work by suing Autry. You'll just have to go read it for yourself. But watch an episode of Beavis n' Butthead first to get your brain warmed up, though. <br /><br />Finally, I'd note that Pastor Timmy is apparently also a lawyer, and a very knowledgeable one at that. Because he knows all about copyright law and civil procedure and "constitional" law as he spelled it. He explains us, in no uncertain terms, that the judges in these two Caner suits were just flat out wrong - they don't know the law like Pastor Timmy does, apparently, and/or they're corrupt because they don't like Liberty University, so to get back at the school that fired Caner from his position as seminary dean, they rule against Caner.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com