Internet et censure de la scientologie

La réponse d'anti-scientologie

A l'attention du service juridique de TiZoo sàrl

Monsieur,

Nous avons bien reçu votre lettre. Pour notre part sachez que nous souhaitons un procès pour décider de la légalité ou non de nos pages car elles sont légalement incontestables (voir PAGES INCONTESTABLES ci-dessous)

Pour celles contenant des images introduites par ignorance d'un copyright existant, elles sont bien entendu à supprimer. Elles seront republiées par la suite en conformité avec la loi.

Nous vous prions donc de signaler à l'avocate des scientologues notre décision car ces pages INCONTESTABLES ne concernent aucunement un copyright violé mais des commentaires de victimes sur les croyances et méthodes de la scientologie

Nous mettons ici au défit la scientologie de prouver le contraire à un juge quelconque.

S'il y a des citations de textes de Ron Hubbard elles sont faites en tant qu'extraits avec des commentaires de notre part - comme la loi suisse l'autorise - ce ne sont jamais l'intégralité des textes de Ron Hubbard.
La thérapie de la scientologie est dangereuse

Elle est fondée sur aucune recherche médicale et présente des risques élevés pour la santé mentale et physique

EXPERTISE DE LA SCIENTOLOGIE
par le Dr. méd. Hans Kind
Prof. Dr. méd. Ancien directeur de la Policlinique psychiatrique
de l'Hôpital universitaire de Zürich
mars 1989

LISTE DES PAGES INCONTESTABLES A REMETTRE SUR NOTRE SITE :

http://www.anti-scientologie.ch/nouveau_fichier110.htm

http://www.anti-scientologie.ch/secret-course.htm

http://www.anti-scientologie.ch/margery-wakefield.htm

Merci d'avance pour votre travail

Anti-scientologie, 11 octobre 2005
contact@anti-scientologie.ch

PS: Par gain de paix nous avons décidé d'enlever le transcript ci-dessous (OTIII) qui semble affoler la scientologie. Vous le retrouvez dans de nombreux sites sur le net et reproduit dans de très nombreux livres.

OT III Transcript



This transcript has been censored by the Scientology

You can find it here :

http://www.xenu.net/archive/OTIII-scholar/ot3-data-1.gif

http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/fishman/ot3.html

http://www.mystae.com/streams/gnosis/otiii.html

Censure de la scientologie aux USA

"Blackmail or sincere help ?

Forum internet, 20 juin 2003
[Texte intégral]

Once again, Jean-Luc Barbier, who has been a scientologist for almost ten years, could now be once again in position to complain for defamation by the scientology director of Lausanne (Switzerland). Indeed, the newspaper could pass on its pages the last effort of Suzanne Montangero (recently sentenced to 10 days suspended jail for similar defamation against another critic, François Lavergnat), which says:

"Blackmail or sincere help ?

The church of scientology launches heavy accusations against the founder of an association pretending to help scientology's victims. It accuses him of attempts to extort money from the church by publishing false informations, as shown by the menaces already proferred against the church.

Years along, J-L. Barbier harrassed the church , so as to obtain no less than a seven digits figure amount in exchange of his silence. He would then have ceased to profer his false informations and would have informed the public positively on scientology.

He complained before justice, that complaint having ended into the federal court without himself getting what he wanted.

Some years ago, J-L. Barbier , then in the Vaud's canton, had already created a group against scientology. This activity having been bankrupt, abandoned some unpaid debitors. Is is possible that he left the canton for that motive ?

The fact that M. Barbier is creating a similar group in the Jura, a canton where no group or scientology activity exists, is quite strange. And could demonstrate what are his motivations.

It is certain that the church of scientology will not let such actions without reactions. It'll continue to disclose the hate campaigns of J-L Barbier , who is trying to "sell" continuously his story. J-L. Barbier is the illustration of the fact that behind his "struggle against cults", many other interests are often acting, one of them being to get money."

****************************************************

Now the story:

JL Barbier left scientology since years; both himself and his wife complained, as he had been bankrupted by scientology when he refused to put his small company under WISE management and franchising. He has lost his ability to play professionnaly saxophon because he was desabilitated by a side-effect in the larynx.

Before the Federal Court was able to terminate the ruling, scientology, after years of Dead Agenting and other attacks against him, had paid a part of the sums** they should have refunded to both him and his wife. But Flag did not pay its part.

Therefore, Jean-Luc is now attacking under civil justice to get a rent or a payment for his disability, and for the various damages he got from the scientology handlings.

** The Court considered that he had gotten enough, ignoring part of the folder, and not having the whole story, as far as I know, so, it terminated the suit before a ruling.

The last efforts from scienos to defame him could very well send Montangero the scieno puppet into jail, unsuspended this time.

15 JOURS DE PRISON POUR LA PRÉSIDENTE DE LA SCIENTOLOGIE

Quotidien jurassien, 13 juin 2003 - Thierry Bédat

[Texte intégral]

Le président de l'Association des victimes de la dianétique a bel et bien été diffamé

L'ancienne présidente de l'Eglise de scientologie de Lausanne vient d'être condamnée pour avoir diffamé Jean-Luc Barbier, président de l'Association d'aide aux victimes de la dianétique et de la scientologie (AVDS), établi depuis quelques années en Ajoie.

Début 2000, la présentation de son association dans nos colonnes suscite une lettre ouverte de Suzanne Montangero, alors présidente de l'Eglise de scientologie de Lausanne, très partiellement publiée dans Le Quotidien Jurassien du 6 avril suivant.

«Excédée par les critiques de Jean-Luc Barbier, la présidente a voulu lui régler son compte en le discréditant sur le plan de son comportement privé, en le faisant passer pour un délinquant et un individu méprisable. Elle a agi dans le dessein exclusif de dire du mal de lui, en s'en prenant à sa personne», constate dans ses considérants le juge Jean-Pascal Rodieux, président du Tribunal de police de Lausanne.

Elle a délibérément choisi d'attaquer

Il a donc condamné la présidente à quinze jours d'emprisonnement avec sursis pendant deux ans; à verser 2'000.- à Jean-Luc Barbier pour tort moral; ainsi qu'à payer les frais de justice et ceux de défense du plaignant.

Le juge Rodieux pose un regard très sévère sur les méthodes de Suzanne Montangero, déjà condamnée en mars 2000 par le Tribunal cantonal vaudois pour avoir diffamé un adversaire de la scientologie dans une publication de l'église (voir article). «Alors que la présidente aurait pu en toute légalité défendre ses convictions et contester des erreurs éventuelles de la partie adverse, elle a délibérément choisi de s'en prendre à la personnalité et à la réputation de son contradicteur, de plus de manière basse et insistante», souligne le juge. Observant que l'article auquel elle prétendait répondre, ne renfermait aucune accusation venimeuse contre la de scientologie, il souligne qu'il pourrait se laisser aller à conclure que celle-ci refuse toute critique.

«En tant que présidente d'association, elle aurait dû donner l'exemple de la correction et de la prudence», termine le juge. Quant à la coupable, elle a déjà annoncé son intention de faire appel du jugement.

(Un appel rejeté - et une condamnation confirmée par la cours de cassation -ndlr)

LA MEILLEURE DÉFENSE ...
Les conseils aux officiers d'éthique

Jean-Luc Barbier a été un adepte de la scientologie pendant quinze ans. Il avait le grade d'officier d'éthique. Il a donc eu accès aux documents internes de l'église, dont un ouvrage de son créateur Ron Hubbard qui, «face aux dangers venant des gouvernements et des tribunaux», conseille: «Seule l'attaque est la solution aux menaces.» Il poursuit : «Fabriquez ou trouvez une menace suffisante contre eux pour les amener à négocier la paix. (...) C'est l'attaque imprévue sur l'arrière des premiers rangs de l'ennemi qui paie le plus.»

Informations dans les écoles

«La condamnation d'une membre du Conseil de l'Eglise de scientologie donne du crédit à notre association qui réunit une trentaine de membres et bénéficie de l'aide d'une soixantaine de donateurs», explique le président de l'Association des victimes de la dianétique et de la scientologie. Il va maintenant proposer au Département de l'éducation d'animer des conférences dans les écoles sur les degrés de manipulation au sein des groupes sectaires.

«Il faut bien faire attention, lorsqu'on veut savoir si l'on a affaire à une secte, de ne pas mettre automa- tiquement une étiquette sur ce qui est différent», avertit Jean-Luc Barbier.

Remarque d'anti-scientologie: Ce jugement est définitif, il a été confirmé en appel

retour haut de la page

LATEST UPDATE: Seems I'm "fair game" alright...

Apart from Ava's numerous email's and faxes (below) about their trademark claims re http://www.scientomogy.info (which I do not consider harassment), it seems the local chapter of the Co$ has decided to begin a non stop barrage of phone calls, emails, and visits to my home - at any hour day or night.

The phone calls are always from a prepaid cellular phone and they've used plenty of different numbers, normally at night from 8pm till midnight. The first few I was stupid enough to answer but now they just call and call and call. When I did speak to "a church member here in Auckland" he kept insisting over and over that we meet to talk about my "vendetta" with the church... I explained that my site is about Mr Cruise not the church and that was extremely clear - and all correspondence was to be through my lawyers and Ava - there was nothing else to say.

Then the visits to my home started. Now I have security cameras stationed at my front door and driveway entrance so I have never answered the door and therefore cannot be certain it is the church... but they have my home address and in 8 months of living here never had unsolicited callers - especially almost daily !

Though when I do meet these guys at least I'll know them from the footage! Interesting thing is ... Last census showed only approx. 200 Scientologists in the whole of NZ !! So, I wonder what's next ???


THE FAXES FROM THE SCIENTOLOGY LAWYERS CAN BE SEEN HERE :

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4

Also see here:

LATEST NEWS ! MSNBC: Scientologists not amused by Cruise spoof

LEGAL THREATS FOR SPOOF CRUISE/SCIENTOLOGY SITE

Legal Threats for Spoof Cruise/Scientology Site - imdb.com

Legal Threats for Spoof Cruise/Scientology Site - Hollywood.com

Church of Scientology Doesn't See Humor in Tom Cruise Website

Tom Cruise loves ScienTOMogy

MediaSyndicate --- Free Press Release, PR, IR, News Post & Media ...

http://www.theopenpress.com/index.php?a=press&id=4762

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Church_of_Scientology_does_not_see_humor_in_website_dedicated_to_Tom_Cruise
http://www.prnewsnow.com/PR News Releases/Legal And Law/Church of Scientology Does Not See Humor in a Website Dedicated to Tom Cruises Antics .

http://www.stopscientology.com/scientomogy.php

Comments ? Feedback ? Just wanna vent ?! Click here !

Unauthorized Use of Registered Trademark
8 messages (my details removed to prevent further harassment - note I am based in New Zealand)

AMPaquette@aol.com <AMPaquette@aol.com>

14 September 2005 06:24

To : XXXXXXXX

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX:

     Our office represents Religious Technology Center ("RTC"), the owner of the federally registered trademark and service mark "SCIENTOLOGY". The "SCIENTOLOGY" mark is registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office under registration numbers 1,755,441; 1,540,928; 1,342,353; 1,329,474; 1,318,717; 1,306,997; and 0898018. "SCIENTOLOGY" is also registered as a trade and service mark in numerous countries throughout the world, including New Zealand under registration numbers B 119,381; 153,974; 180,601; B 153,085; B 153,086; 180600. We also represent the Church of Scientology International ("CSI"), which is the licensee of the "Scientology" trademark.

     We have been advised that you have registered a domain name with Enom, Inc., a United States domain registrar and agreed, through Enom's Registration Agreement, Governing Law and Jurisdiction for Disputes, to submit to the jurisdiction of Bellevue, Washington, regarding the following domain name :

          "Scientomogy.info"

     You are hereby on notice that the registration and use of this domain name in this fashion has caused your name to be falsely associated with our client's registered mark, SCIENTOLOGY, as owner and creates a likelihood of confusion as to the source or sponsorship of this domain name in violation of United States state and federal law, including the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a).

     The fact that you have changed one letter (" m" instead of "l") does not protect you from trademark infringement. Huish Detergents, Inc. v. Orange Glo Intern, Inc., 2002 WL 32157171 (D.Utah 2002) (holding that minor differences in spelling and variations and arrangements of letters was insufficient to protect against trademark infringement); Salton, Inc. v. Cornwall Corporation, 477 F.Supp. 975 (D.C.N.J. 1979) (holding that, even though not completely identical, defendant's term was so like the plaintiff's in form, spelling, and sound as to constitute trademark infringement). The adoption of the term "Scientomogy" is so like the federally registered trademark "Scientology" in form, spelling and sound as to constitute infringement pursuant to the Lanham TradeMark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1114. AMF v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979); G.D. Searle & Company v. Chas. Pfizer & Company, 265 F.2d 385 (7th Cir. 1959).

     Likewise, our client's registered trademark is famous, distinctive and unique. Registering and using the Scientology mark in this manner dilutes and tarnishes the distinctiveness of the mark in violation of the federal trademark antidilution statute, 15 U.S.C. 1125(c) and California's antidilution statute, California Bus. & Prof. Code 14330. See, Archdiocese of St. Louis v. Internet Entertainment Group, Inc., 34 F. Supp.2d 1145 (E.D. Mo. 1999); Mattel, Inc. v. Internet dimensions, Inc., 55 U.S.P.Q.2d 1620 (S.D.N.Y. 2000); Deere & Co. v. MTD Products, Inc., 41 F.3d 39, 43 (2nd Cir. 1994); Century 21 Real Estate Corporation v. Sandlin, 846 F.2d 1175 (9th Cir. 1988); Grey v. Campbell Soup Company, 650 F.Supp.1166 (D.C. Cal. 1986).

     Your use of our client's mark in this manner also constitutes an unlawful false designation of origin and as such, violates 43(a) of the Lanham Trade-Mark Act. This prohibits any use of another's trademarks that is "likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person." America Online, Inc. v. IMS, 24 F.Supp.2d 548, 551 (E.D.Va. 1998).

     The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act ("ACPA") is also implicated by your registration and attempted sale of this domain name. Shields v. Zuccarini, 254 F.3d 476 (3rd Cit. 2001). Statutory damages can be awarded for violation of the Act in an amount not less than $1,000 and not more than $100,000 for each domain name. 15 U.S.C. Section 1117(d). The court in Shields imposed a $30,000 statutory damage award against a cybersquatter under the Act.

     Moreover, trademark rights subsist in New Zealand in our client's trademarks by virtue of the Paris Convention (to which New Zealand and the United States are signatories) which provides that United States citizens shall be given the same treatment in New Zealand with regard to trademark protection as that available to citizens of New Zealand.

     Accordingly, we ask that you cease and desist use of this domain name and transfer it to our client, CSI. We are willing to pay for your registration and transfer fees incurred in this matter.

     I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
Ava Paquette
Moxon & Kobrin
3055 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 900
Los Angeles, California 90010
Tel : (213) 487-4468
Fax : (213) 487-5385

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX <XXXXXXXX>

14 September 2005 07:16

To : AMPaquette@aol.com

Thank you for your email, and allowing me to respond.

I believe your copyright infringement claims hold no merit on a number of levels.

1. The site clearly states in it's header "This site is in no way affiliated with Scientology or Tom Cruise"

2. Even if you did see this as an infringement, Within the copyright laws there are certain "permitted acts" whereby infringements can justifiably be made despite the wishes of the author or creator. One of these is in the field of education. Suppose a great playwright were to write a play that resulted in the turning point in the history of the arts in that country, and that the playwright for some reason refused all and sundry to publish their work. Would the copyright laws act to ensure that the wishes of the playwright were respected so that their work could never be studied and appreciated? No it would not! This is not in the spirit of the copyright laws. Places of education would be free to study their work. Copyright laws are there to help make these works available to the public and for the benefit of the public, not to suppress them.

The same principle applies to trade secrets. There is no "fair use" of trade secrets. In fact, in 1984, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled against the Washington Post when the paper sought to obtain confidential materials from a court file. In Tavoulareas v. The Washington Post Co, the court ruled that :

"Public dissemination of confidential discovery materials not used at trial cannot be justified by a common law or constitutional right of access or by First Amendment right of free speech or free press."

3. The site is purely satirical and is for entertainment, and is consists of links to other sites - it contains no fact nor claims to do so and is completely non-commercial.

4. Regarding NZ trademarks; you have Scientology trademarked under the following categories;

Classification System \| Class (511)	Specification of Goods and Services
4\|16	printed matter and books

Classification System \| Class (511)	Specification of Goods and Services
4\|9	electronic devices in this class; educational films, tapes and cassettes

Classification System \| Class (511)	Specification of Goods and Services
4\|14	jewelry

Classification System \| Class (511)	Specification of Goods and Services
4\|25	articles of clothing including headgear for wear

Classification System \| Class (511)	Specification of Goods and Services
4\|41	educational, teaching, cultural and philosophical services in respect of religion; publication services

Classification System \| Class (511)	Specification of Goods and Services
4\|42	religious and ministerial services, including pastoral counselling

If this site was to furnish, sell, or promote any items within the categories above then under NZ law this is deemed "passing off" and is considered a violation. Obviously the site breaches none of these terms.

5. Finally, the site name is based on Dr A Nordenholz's book "Scientologie" which was published some 20 years before Mr Hubbard's book of the same name.

If you still believe you have a case then notify me via return email and I will in turn consult my lawyers.

Thanks for your time.

AMPaquette@aol.com <AMPaquette@aol.com>

14 September 2005 09:25

To : XXXXXXXX

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX :

Thank you for your fast response to my notice to you.

Regarding your views concerning copyright infringement and trade secrets I have noted them, but they are subjects that are not applicable here, as I am writing to you concerning your use of our client's trademark in your domain name.

In response to the points you raise concerning trademarks and in answer to your last question to me, I believe that the legal points I made in my notice to you apply here directly to your use of the domain name. These take into account the legal bases for our notice, including the jurisdiction which, pursuant to your Enom agreement, includes the United States and therefore, United States law.

I would hope that we can resolve this matter amicably.

Sincerely,
Ava Paquette

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX <XXXXXXXX>

14 September 2005 15:59

To : AMPaquette@aol.com

Please draft a formal letter detailing which provisions of the ICANN agreement I am in breach of and if legal consel are in agreement I will happily transfer the domain and delete all content at my cost.

From : AMPaquette@aol.com [mailto:AMPaquette@aol.com]
Sent : Wednesday, 14 September 2005 9:26 a.m.
To : XXXXXXX
Subject : Re : Unauthorized Use of Registered Trademark

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX:

Thank you for your fast response to my notice to you.

Regarding your views concerning copyright infringement and trade secrets I have noted them, but they are subjects that are not applicable here, as I am writing to you concerning your use of our client's trademark in your domain name.

In response to the points you raise concerning trademarks and in answer to your last question to me, I believe that the legal points I made in my notice to you apply here directly to your use of the domain name. These take into account the legal bases for our notice, including the jurisdiction which, pursuant to your Enom agreement, includes the United States and therefore, United States law.

I would hope that we can resolve this matter amicably.

Sincerely,
Ava Paquette

AMPaquette@aol.com <AMPaquette@aol.com>

15 September 2005 07:08

To : XXXXXXXX

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX :

Yes, if you would provide me with your fax number, I can send you a letter on my letterhead to present to your legal representatives.

Regards,

Ava Paquette

AMPaquette@aol.com <AMPaquette@aol.com>

15 September 2005 10:37

To : XXXXXXXX

Cc : AMPaquette@aol.com

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX :

     I have faxed to you my letter formally. Just to respond to your point about ICANN, Item 2 of its Dispute Resolution Policy states :

          "By applying to register a domain name, or by asking us to maintain or renew a domain name registration, you hereby represent and warrant to us that...(b) to your knowledge, the registration of the domain name will not infringer upon or otherwise violate the rights of any third party; (c) you are not registering the domain name for an unlawful purpose; and (d) you will not knowingly use the domain name in violation of any applicable laws or regulations."

     My letter points out those laws that we assert are being violated by the registration of the "scientomogy.info" domain name, which are expressly prohibited under this section of the ICANN Dispute Resolution Policy.

     We are not disputing that you have a right to your opinions, we are simply pointing out that you cannot use our client's trademark in this domain name to do so.

     I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,
Ava Paquette

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX <XXXXXXXX>

15 September 2005 13:55

To: AMPaquette@aol.com

I have not received this fax- to which number did you send it ?

From : AMPaquette@aol.com [mailto:AMPaquette@aol.com]
Sent : Thursday, 15 September 2005 10:37 a.m.
To : XXXXXXXX
Cc : AMPaquette@aol.com
Subject : Re: Unauthorized Use of Registered Trademark

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX:

     I have faxed to you my letter formally. Just to respond to your point about
ICANN, Item 2 of its Dispute Resolution Policy states:

          "By applying to register a domain name, or by asking us to maintain or renew a domain name registration, you hereby represent and warrant to us that... (b) to your knowledge, the registration of the domain name will not infringer upon or otherwise violate the rights of any third party; (c) you are not registering the domain name for an unlawful purpose; and (d) you will not knowingly use the domain name in violation of any applicable laws or regulations."

     My letter points out those laws that we assert are being violated by the registration of the "scientomogy.info" domain name, which are expressly prohibited under this section of the ICANN Dispute Resolution Policy.

     We are not disputing that you have a right to your opinions, we are simply pointing out that you cannot use our client's trademark in this domain name to do so.

     I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,
Ava Paquette

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX <XXXXXXXX>

15 September 2005 14:10

To : "AMPaquette@aol.com" <AMPaquette@aol.com>

My fax number is XXXXXXX

Comments ? Feedback ? Just wanna vent ?! Click here !

[Accueil][Objectifs][Nouveautés][Pétitions][Témoignages][Faire un don][Articles médias][Jura et les sectes][La manipulation]