Nov. 10, 2010
From: Joseph Hartvigsen
To: davis ron
Sent: Wed, November 10, 2010 9:47:53 PM
Subject: Re: Hartvigsen and Ruyter--Do you deny that I have always had an absolute right to demand that you present proof to support your public claims that my Watermotor turbines are illegal?
And that you had a legal obligation to provide that proof?
Ron,
I think there is a disconnect on the standard of proof. I've repeatedly outlined the facts that any "original expression fixed in a tangible medium" is copyright without filing. I've given you the U.S. Government documents stating as such (circ01.pdf from copyrights.gov) The spoons exist, therefor there is a copyright. The identity of their creator was known and obvious to everyone except you, as being the historical source of the spoons and later his heir and her assignee (Peter). Do you have a legal right to demand dated drawings and invoices for the original spoons I've created? It is possible that such documentation never existed if someone designed from their head and built with their own hands. Anyway, I think the answer is no, you don't have that right. It should be obvious as there has never been any other primary source for these items. The same logic applies to the spoons from Sweden.
And, as I keep saying since talking to Brian it is all moot given the legal interpretation given to functional items that the copyright only protects the appearance and brand sort of issues and not the function. Further, we never were going after you. You were going after us and we were defending our position for having asked in the first place. That has always been clearly articulated in public postings in response to your badgering. You have also had a long standing invitation to go view the original documents. There is no legal responsibility to deliver any such proof to your doorstep.
So, when do you want to see this proof you are so insistent on seeing? As we keep saying, if you want to see the proof go visit Peter but there is no obligation for us to go to Bolivia to show you and there is no way you get your own copies of private documents.
When do you want to go? The evidence provided yesterday should be sufficient to give you expectation of seeing what you seek when you arrive in Sweden.
Joe
From: davis ron
To: Joseph Hartvigsen
Sent: Wed, November 10, 2010 4:24:18 PM
Subject: Re: Hartvigsen and Ruyter--..I have always had an absolute right to demand that you present proof..
Joe
This is a central point:
Do you deny that I have always had an absolute right to demand that you present proof to support your public claims that my Watermotor turbines are illegal?
And that you had a legal obligation to provide that proof?
Joseph Hartvigsen, ceramatec, brian kunzler lawyer, extortion, fraud, Internet fraud, sweden, IP rights, turgo design, watermotor, wim klunne, corruption, IP law, Swedish police, bolivia
Here hartvigsen clearly states his opinion that we do not have the right to challenge his five years of public claims made on the Internet that my turbines are "illegal", which he has used to destroy our rural microhydro aid project.
ReplyDeleteThis is completely contrary to the law and common sense. He said that he would be able to prove his claims that our turbines were "illegal" to a lawyer, then turned up empty handed.
Hartvigsen told me the turgo design he encouraged me to use in our Watermotors was an "orphan" design, that is unclaimed, and one reason why I used it--because the Watermotor design was meant be in public domain, owned by the entire world.
ReplyDeleteI was using this turgo design because, according to Hartvigsen, anyone could use it. I had no problem with him or anyone else producing turgos. I guessed that his claims that his sleight variation on the Swedish turgo design we used was superior, made to the group on Dec. 12, 05,was probably based on wishful thinking, as he later admitted--they had not actually been tested; but mainly he was motivated by a desire to stake a public claim on the design for himself--a move to take over the turgo design.