21 Replies to “Whois stephenharpersaid.ca”

  3. HOw about doing it while working on the government payroll.
    Or are there so many government employees doing LIberal party work now that it is accepted as okay?

  4. I’m not a lawyer but according to Osborne v. Canada, I would think that it would be alright as long as he is not doing it on ‘government time’. There are how many 1000’s of civil servants? Of course there are going to be Liberal party members. Osborne appears to give them the right to use their voice in the political world too.

  5. He’s a private individual working for the Librano PARTY, not the government. From his title, he was probably told to arrange for a website, ans used his name as the contact – no big deal – I’n the contact for our company’s website for the same reason.
    Of course, it is just normal (for Libranos) behavior to create a website targeted at smearing the leader of the Opposition Party…

  6. And was it normal for the Liberals to threaten to sue the Conservatives for a similar site “Paul Martin Said”.

  9. Hmmm. Check this out.
    The Province. Vancouver, B.C.: Dec 24, 2003. pg. A.43
    Prime Minister Paul Martin is threatening to sue the operators of a critical website for copyright infringement unless it closes or makes big changes by 5 p.m. today.
    The site, http://www.paulmartintime.ca — billed as a “source for critical news, analysis and parody of our recently unelected prime minister” — was launched as Martin was sworn in earlier this month.
    The site is strikingly similar to Martin’s official site, with the same red-and-grey colour scheme and identical navigation buttons.
    The difference is tone: While the official site’s headline is “Paul Martin meets with new cabinet for first time,” the imposter site reads “Martin continues the Liberal assault on affordable housing.”
    The site’s founders, Rob Maguire, Dave Ron and Dru Oja Jay of Halifax, say Liberal Party webmaster Tim Tierney contacted them Dec. 17 and asked them to delete the site or face legal action.
    Maguire said the group made major changes and informed Tierney.
    Despite this, the group received a letter last Friday from Andrew Davis of Shore Davis Barristers in Ottawa stating, “My client is insisting that you immediately cease your unlawful use of its art work, graphics and style sheet.”
    But Maguire, a graduate student at Dalhousie University, said: “I’m confident they’re coming after us on content. In threatening this suit, they’ve made this a cause celebre.”
    His web hits have skyrocketed. The site is parodying the suit with a banner of Martin saying: “Hey kids! I’m suing PaulMartinTime.ca on Christmas Day!”
    ________FROM PAULMARTINTIME.CA:________
    http://paulmartintime.ca/lawsuit/000061.html
    The Liberal Party is Going to Sue Us
    I woke up on Wednesday morning to a phone call from a friendly guy named Tim, who informed me that I had one hour to take down the website, PaulMartinTime.ca, or he would set the lawyers loose on our asses (that’s not a quote, but it’s an accurate summary).
    In between his friendly but businesslike remarks, he dropped a few remarks intended to make me nervous. He said, for example, that he “had a little trouble getting through privacy.ca, but they’re no longer supporting your cause.” If we had in fact been using privacy.ca, that would be pure power-play. It would mean that he had intimidated (legally or otherwise) a company whose function it is to protect the identity of people who use it into breaking its sole mandate. As it turns out, we don’t use privacy.ca; the address of Rob Maguire, the person who registered paulmartintime.ca, is publically available, for all with an internet connection to see.
    I immediately called Dave and Rob, the people I collaborate on the site with, to determine a plan of action. Dave came over, and we called Rob to discuss the situation. We thought it was strange that some guy had called us up out of the blue, not giving his full name and claiming to work for the Liberal party, telling us to shut down our site in one hour.
    Not the most legal way to do things.
    First, we set out to figure out who this guy was. We assumed he was with a law firm working for the Liberals. Not having his last name made this effort completely fruitless. Then we get an email from him, to “confirm” that he has our addresses. This was followed by a bizarre message, also from him, that simply read: “Tim Tierney would like to recall the message, ‘Address confirmation.'” It turns out that the friendly intimidator (Tim Tierney), is the Liberal Party webmaster.
    I have to admit that I was shocked that the guy who makes and maintains web sites all day, every day for the Liberal party would have such a natural grasp of intimidation tactics. I should mention that this guy was out of the textbook of legal intimidation: friendly, casual, yet vaguely paternalistic tone; subtle name-drops indicating the power of the Liberal party to crush us and not think twice; multiple references to the fact that he knows where we live; emphasis that he believes in free speech. I’m a web developer myself, and I can’t pull that kind of thing off. If that’s their webmaster, what kind of shop are they running, anyway?
    Dave and I go over the site, and make a few changes to the design to make it less of an overt copy of Paul Martin’s official site. We call up Tim to clarify things. We don’t actually get him on the phone until we block callerid from identifying our number. It’s the same story: “I see you’ve made some changes to the site, but I don’t think that it’s enough.” He had passed our names on to the pack of wolv… lawyers, who he refused to name. “They’ll get in touch with you,” he says.
    And then he–completely gratuitously, but sounding like it’s a totally natural thing to say–casually mentions that the lawyers will be getting in touch with CIRA (the body that oversees who has .ca domain names). Given the context, the obvious implication is that the Liberal party has the power to take our domain name from us unilaterally, and are willing to do it. Who knows if they actually are, but they’re comfortable using the threat, anyway. He also emphasizes that he believes in free speech, and thinks the text of the site is just fine. He takes back the request to take the whole site down, saying that he just wants us not to use the Liberal party’s intellectual property.
    Before hanging up, he makes a point of repeating that he has all of our names (which we have made no effort at all to hide) and addresses.
    The next day, we get the following note:
    Sent: 19 Dec 03, 5:52 AM
    Subject: Copyright Infringement
    Dear Messrs. Macguire, Ron and Jay:
    I act on behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) with respect to your website, http://www.paulmartintime.ca and your collective and individual infringement of my client’s copyright in relation to the form and content of its website, http://www.paulmartintimes.ca.
    As you are no doubt aware, not only have you utilized LPC’s art and graphics but, as well, you have, without alteration, made use of its style sheet. Furthermore, the name of your website is, notwithstanding the minor variance, a clear usage of title without alteration. Even your logo is an exact copy of that found at http://www.paulmartintimes.ca.
    Although my client does not, for a moment, question your Constitutionally guaranteed right to express your opinions, you have failed to take account of the fact that the laws of this country also require that this right be excercised within a lawful framework and it is not prepared to countenance your continued blatant infringement of its copyright. You cannot resort to the entitlement to free speech in a manner whereby my client’s proprietary interests are infringed upon.
    My client is insisting that you immediately cease your unlawful use of its art work, graphics and style sheet by way of deleting your website in its entirety or, in the alternative, making amendments sufficient to address the improper usages referred to.
    Again, you are certainly free to voice the opinions of your choice, but only within a lawful framework.
    I am assuming that the required action on your part will be completed within five (5) days of this email, that is, by no later than 5 p.m. on Wednesday, December 24th, 2003, failing which those steps needed to obtain injunctive and any other required relief will be sought without further notice to you. Furthermore, should such litigation be necessary, we will also be seeking recovery from each of you of all costs incurred in pursuing this matter.
    I trust that you will each govern yourselves accordingly and that this email will mark the end of the matter. If it does not, you should not be under any doubt as to my client’s intention to proceed in the manner referred to.
    Andrew P. Davis
    c/o Shore Davis
    Barristers-at-Law
    800-200 Elgin Street
    Ottawa, ON.
    K2P 1L5
    Tel:(613)233-7747 (Ext. 227)
    Fax:(613)233-2374
    As you can imagine, we were thrilled that Paul Martin’s lawyers support our right to free speech.

  12. Sorry. Only had the page down to the Whois printout. Then I saw the *Whois Tim Tierney* after posting. Dumb me. Ok, that’s enough laughing. 73s TonyGuitar

  14. Oddly enough, I’m with Todd on this one. Unless Canada has something similar to our Hatch Act (and it appears Canada has no such thing) a bureaucrat can do what he likes.
    Folks, the outrage over mandarins being in hock to the Grits is getting old. Down here, the civil service is just about the only growing constituency the Democrats have. Trust me, coming from a country that hasn’t had it at the federal level for almost a century, patronage is highly underrated.

  15. I think that the post at Conservative Life that I’ve linked to acknowledges much of what has been written here in the comments.
    Sometimes, its just useful to learn more about who the players are – especially in a country where media has a tendency to interview or source people without disclosing their partisan connections.

  16. Thanks Kate. You are correct. I’m not suggesting that something IS wrong with what was presented simply that something MIGHT be wrong with it. Our vigilence is what will keep (or at least should) these people in line.

  17. Kate & Everyone:
    Gee, this looks so familiar…
    As the owner of JoePeschisolido.com, I have seen the email from the Liberal webmaster, (though I don’t recall his name now).
    Back in 2001 when JoeP. jumped from the Canadian Alliance to the Librano$, Alice Thomson and I were the webmasters for JoeP. As soon as he jumped, we re-worked the website and had our own version up within 24 hours.
    Some background: Alice had told JoeP to register the .com version of his name in addition to the .ca version that he was using for his official site. He was too cheap to spend the $20 or so to hang on to it – now WE own it! 😉
    Anyway, it is still up. JoeP is long gone from federal politics.
    We got the threatening email, but they never followed up with a lawyers letter or anything else.
    I think what they are hoping for is that you will quietly take down the site and just go away. We didn’t – we got national news coverage and our hits went wild!
    If they truly had a leg to stand on, you’d be in court right quick without any webmaster threats.
    One of the strongest things you can do in your own defense is to use satire and make fun of your target – that is fair use of copyrighted material. Just think what Saturday Night Live and Air Farce get away with.
    Keep fighting!

  19. I used to own JeanChretienSucks.com but for some reason PaulMartinSucks was taken right away. Besides, I found it impossible 3 years ago to get anyone to go there. I guess things would be different now.

  20. Todd, since you’re not a lawyer, perhaps you should stop offering comments on legal matters?

  21. I am not a lawyer, but in Todd’s case this is free advice: Comment on anything, Todd.
    If a suit arises, the law firm of Beagle, Shyster, and Beagle will defend you pro bono (not that Bono).
    If they are too busy, the firm of Shyster, Flywheel, and Shyster, will defend for a fat retainer upfront.
    In both cases, the “affront” man is Groucho Marx.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation