Battlefield of Love is in Breach of Copyright, according to the "General Counsel" of Money Week

Below is a message I have dated 26/10 from Helen Hensperger, with the a very grand title viz "General Counsel". 

Dear Ms Khaw,

I act for MoneyWeek Limited, publisher of the MoneyWeek magazine and owner of copyright in the MoneyWeek magazine content.

It has come to our attention that you have posted MoneyWeek content on your blog. The content includes an extract from an article with Robin Angus and an image of Merryn Somerset Webb. This reproduction has occurred without our consent and is an infringement of our copyright.

Please confirm by return that you have removed the infringing content from your blog.

Yours sincerely,

Helen Hunsperger

General Counsel

MoneyWeek Limited

Listen, Ms Hunsperger, I don't think your boss Bill Bonner who writes from The Daily Reckoning will like the action you have taken.  Having read Finacial Reckoning Day, I have a feeling that he is a man of impeccably libertarian credentials and will understand that I am making a very important point with the purpose of alerting the powers that be that Western civilisation can only be saved if the matriarchy is destroyed.  (This is because all matriarchies descend into barbarism and then become third world countries to be exploited by others.  Feminism is pernicious because it lowers the quality of men while raising the expectations of the female to unrealistic levels.)

Also, I would wish to invoke the defence of public interest.

Public interest

Public interest does not appear in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. However, the courts have said that, just as they will not stop publication of confidential information which is in the public interest, they would not prohibit the infringement of another’s copyright where the public interest in publication outweighed the private right of property. The defence is based on the idea that the public’s need to know should sometimes override the copyright owner’s right to restrict or prevent publication (and takes into account the right to freedom of expression explained above).

Permitted Acts under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
Permitted acts include use of a work for:

  • Research or private study.
  • Criticism, review or reporting of current events provided it is fair dealing.
  • Incidental inclusion.
  • Things done for the purposes of instruction or examination.
  • Anthologies for educational use.
  • Copying by libraries and archives.
  • Anything done for the purposes of parliamentary or judicial proceedings.
  • Copying of material open to public inspection or on an official register.
Fair dealing

The fair use of another’s work for the purpose of criticism or review, or the reporting of current events, does not amount to an infringement of copyright. The originator of the work must be acknowledged in a criticism or review and in the print media’s news reporting, but not in the broadcast media.

Bill Bonner will also be speaking at The World Money Show on Friday 12 November from 9:25 am to 10 am.

A matriarchy is a society which is indulgent and tolerant of feminine vices.  The worst of feminine vices is promiscuity because it creates widespread illegitimacy and destroys the quality of future generations.

46% of babies born the UK are born out of wedlock.

70% of the UK prison population were singly-parented.

The failure of education in the West is largely due to the fact that the teaching profession is female-dominated.  Women, being infamous for their prevarication, masochism, mendacity, hypocrisy and cowardice, have seen to it that the failure of British state education is denied and constantly devise new ways of disguising the failure that is British education.

Being women, they are tolerant of the widespread illegitimacy and the consequences of unsocialised children badly parented by promiscuous and inadequate single mothers who enter state schools and spoil it for other children.

To criticise single motherhood in this day and age is to be guilty of heresy or blasphemy.  That is presumably why Ms Hensperger - who is part of the matriarchy she instinctively defends - wishes to suppress my views.

I do hope that she has gone all the way up to the top with regard to obtaining the approval of Bill Bonner with regard to the victimisation of such a longstanding reader of Money Week as yours truly.  He, being a member of the stronger sex, ought to have no problem with dealing with cold hard facts without instinctively wishing to suppress them by threatening legal action.  I am pretty certain that he would agree with my conclusions after careful consideration. 

My reference to Money Week could only have the effect of increasing its readership (and this can only be regarded as a Good Thing by the owner of this publication) by drawing the attention of others to this explosive debate.

Extremist Liberalism has now created the matriarchy - an ideological disease the equivalent of a society suffering from terminal cancer or senile dementia.


MarkyMark said…
That was a beautiful, just beautiful!

On a more serious note, your law sounds much like the 'fair use' doctrine in US copyright law. That is to say that one can quote a copyrighted work for the purposes of instruction, criticism, commentary, etc. This stupid bitch is just pissed off because you told the TRUTH, and defenders of the matriarchy cannot tolerate that.

Popular posts from this blog

Divorced women who literally turn their sons into women

The easy and cheap availability of British women

Religion and Recreational Sex: sharia-compliant threesomes and mini-orgies?