Slashdot Mirror
Former Congressman Learns About Streisand Effect
corbettw writes "Ted Alvin Klaudt, a former South Dakota lawmaker convicted of raping his two foster daughters, has sent news organizations what he claims is a copyright notice that seeks to prevent the use of his name without his consent." The story says Klaudt maintains "no one can use his name without his consent, and anyone who does would owe him $500,000."
I wonder how many times he used the foster girls without their permission.
Where did this poor fool get his law training? Despair can make a fool out of a man but then again raping one's daughters sort of establishes that he is warped to begin with. It seems to me that we have special places to put people who rape their daughters.
I've never heard of Ted Alvin Klaudt before, but it sounds like Ted Alvin Klaudt is a grade A jerk. Who does Ted Alvin Klaudt think Ted Alvin Klaudt is to try to claim copyright on Ted Alvin Klaudt's name? I can't wait to see Ted Alvin Klaudt get slapped down for trying to copyright Ted Alvin Klaudt. ...Ted Alvin Klaudt.
One more time and he would have appeared in your room.
Well, he might have a defense given three of the four factors:
Was the nature of the use commercial, or for non-profit, educational use?
Did he use the entire work, or just portions of it? (I'm guessing just portions.)
Did his use of the work affect its marketability?
Wow. Even I found that tasteless.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
That'll be $1 million, please.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
who knew?
All of us that already tried to do something that stupid.
Write boring code, not shiny code!
You cannot copyright a legal name. I.e., if a word or phrase is your official identifier it cannot be copyrighted. There is no precedent being set here; this man is simply stupid.
Whoever decided to make Klaudt a lawmaker is armed with weapons-grade stupidity and should be prosecuted as a terrorist.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
He isn't a "Congressman". He is a former member of the South Dakota House of Representatives, which would make him a former state legislator.
The New York Times has a little bit more info on the story. Apparently he sent this notice from prison, where he's serving a 54-year sentence (44 for rape, 10 for witness tampering).
Ted Alvin Klaudt! Ted Alvin Klaudt!
Hm. So that's what it feels like to spend a million dollars.
Less satisfying than I had imagined.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Sorry Slashdot, but I agree completely with Ted Alvin Klaudt. If I were Ted Alvin Klaudt and had been convicted, as Ted Alvin Klaudt was, of raping my foster daughters, I too would have scrambled for ways to prevent the media from commenting on my transgressions, just like Ted Alvin Klaudt is doing. Some may say employing copyright law in the manner of Ted Alvin Klaudt constitutes blatant abuse of the legal system, but I, as Ted Alvin Klaudt, feel otherwise. Ted Alvin Klaudt hasn't done anything wrong (with respect to the copyright thing, not the rape thing), and I wish him (Ted Alvin Klaudt) the best of luck.
Godspeed, Ted Alvin Klaudt. Godspeed.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
http://sor.sd.gov/results.asp?nav=7
You have to do a search for him after agreeing to some terms.
I wonder if he plans to sue the state over this?
Whilst this mans acts are undoubtably horrifying, the pride with which people from the US regard further crimes taking place in gaol disgusts me.
A prisoner once jailed is under the protection of the state and should not be subject to violence.
The obvious enjoyment of this is sickening.
Are you seriously trying to peddle the thought that rape is "just something that happens to you. don't worry about it, you'll get over it"? Ugh. Sure, you can talk people into a PTSD, or whatever, but the problem with rape really isn't that it's happened; the trouble is with trying to cope with the fact that you (as a woman) apparently do not have full autonomy over your body, over the fact that sensations were produced in it against your will by your assailant, etc., and then trying to talk yourself into the fact that that doesn't mean that you wanted it (as you'll be told by those self-righteous conservative christians that call themselves human). The effects that has on a person, especially a (pre-)teen, who is still forming his/her personality, are enormous. How is that not a permanent effect of your "temporarily nullifying someone's right to autonomy"?
Larry Craig is a jerk, not a predator.
So what? That's like excusing someone who kills a guy in a bar fight because he's not a serial killer who keeps his victim's head in the fridge. The difference is only a matter of degrees. Both are wrong.
Craig and Klaudt were "moral values" Republicans who sponsored numerous bills attempting to outlaw acts or discriminate against people that were guilty of things they themselves did. Both ran on campaigns that portrayed themselves as highly moral people on issues of sexual behavior (which inherently imply or explicitly state themselves to be superior to their opponents on these issues) all while engaging in pure hypocrisy. Klaudt backed numerous tough anti-pedophile laws in South Dakota and fought to keep children from getting contraception at schools in a bid to keep children from having sex. Craig has voted consistently against gay rights over the past decade. Both are utter hypocrites.
Just because people might be more sympathetic to gay sex in a bathroom, compared to child molestation, doesn't mitigate the fact that they themselves harped on the immorality of such actions, that they profited from votes gained from "taking the high road," and that they did so while engaging in the very acts they vilified.
(Side note: Craig was rumored as far back as 1982 as having been involved with male, teenage pages, so he might actually be a predator, but that's irrelevant to my point.)
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").