Caroline Letkeman
104-9275 Mary Street
Chilliwack, B. C.
Canada V2P 4H5
carolinel@telus.net
February 8, 2002

. Ava Paquette
Moxon & Kobrin
3055 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 900
Los Angeles, California 90010
AMPaquette@aol.com

RE: http://www.entheta.ca/caroline/
Decoding Scientology Propaganda
Fair Use/Fair Game

Dear Ms. Paquette:

I have become aware of correspondence between yourself and Scott
Duncan, coordinator for a network that hosts
http://www.entheta.ca/caroline/, "Decoding Scientology Propaganda."

As I state on the site introduction:

This site is a critical summary of my exploration into Scientology's
doctrine, its origins, and the symbols Scientology uses to represent
their organization. It is published under Fair Use and in the public
interest.

Your e-mail of January 23 to Mr. Duncan and his response are webbed
here: http://www.entheta.ca/caroline/paquette-o-gram.opnx. You allege
in your letter that I am guilty of some 58 infringements of the
copyrights and trademarks of your Scientology corporate clients.

It is terribly dismissive of you, and bad faith, but not unexpected,
that you did not send a copy of your letter to me. You sought to have
my voice against Scientology's impious practices shuddered into
silence without even advising me of your attempt. You treat me this
way as directed because I'm "fair game."

Your letter is, of course, very similar to an e-mail letter dated
August 6 2001 that Helena Kobrin of your office sent me, making a
similar set of allegations of infringement. I responded to Ms.
Kobrin's charges by letter August 14, 2001, and have been awaiting Ms.
Kobrin's response ever since. Now you too act as if my letter, in
which I explained to Ms. Kobrin why her charges were without merit and
false, didn't exist.
So that all parties know what my earlier response to your office's
charges was, I am including it here in its entirety:

-----Original Message-----
From: Caroline Letkeman [mailto:carolinel@mediaone.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 4:54 PM
To: HKKOBRIN@aol.com
Subject: RE: Infringement
Dear Ms. Kobrin,


33 North Fort Harrison Avenue
Clearwater, FL 33755
Voice: (727) 467- 9335
Fax: (727) 467-9345
For comments or questions about this web site or the material
contained herein,
I welcome your e-mail.

--end text legalese.html---
To facilitate discussion, I will include here the US Code Section
cited above:
Sec. 107. - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use
of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or
phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for
purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching
(including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or
research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether
the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the
factors to be considered shall include -
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use
is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to
the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of
the copyrighted work.
You state in your January 23 letter that my unauthorized use of
copyrighted materials of your named "clients" (Hubbard Library, CSI,
RTC and BPI) violates United States and Canadian copyright law. This
is, as you know, a willful and professionally inexcusable lie. My
unauthorized use of the copyrighted materials I used not only does not
violate U.S. and Canadian copyright law, it is expressly permitted by
both countries' copyright law. As a copyright attorney you know this,
and as a Scientologist you know you lie because I'm fair game. As a
Scientologist attorney, of course, you are paid to lie.
To facilitate discussion, I will include here the relevant section
from the Canadian Copyright Act:
29.1 Fair dealing for the purpose of criticism or review does not
infringe copyright if the following are mentioned:
(a) the source; and
(b) if given in the source, the name of the
(i) author, in the case of a work,
(ii) performer, in the case of a performer's performance,
(iii) maker, in the case of a sound recording, or
(iv) broadcaster, in the case of a communication signal.
It is by both wog ® and your Scientology standards abundantly clear
that I am a critic involved in criticism. I am a widely known
reviewer of Scientology, having spent 24 years inside studying its
various components; I am a scholar, having, after leaving Scientology,
taken up scholarship, an impossible activity inside; I am an educator,
educating wogs® and Scientologists alike in decoding the Scientology
cult's propaganda, including, and particularly, decoding your cult's
symbols in your propaganda campaign. Some of Scientology's symbols
requiring decoding are, ineluctably, the registered trademarks you say
I've infringed. I have in all instances, as fair dealing necessitates,
mentioned on Decoding Scientology Propaganda the source and author of
the images or other copyrighted material used.


Scientology's agents on alt.religion.scientology, as I'm certain you
know, identify me as a "critic" and lump me in with other "critics" of
$cientology. Thus there is no justification for your not acknowledging
in your legal threat letter my being a very active, practically
prolific, internationally known, and award-winning critic. In fact it
was my award-winning criticism that brought David Miscavige and his
Scientology underlings to first fair game me. If you had acknowledged
my being a critic involved in criticism, of what is so extraordinarily
criticizable, you would naturally have had to acknowledge my fair use
right to display the copyrighted materials of your clients that I did
display for criticism. Criticizing your images, marks and symbols,
which is what on Decoding Scientology Propaganda I do criticize,
permits, indeed requires, my fair use display of your copyrighted
images, marks and symbols. You must pretend I'm not the critic I am
in order to ignore the critic's fair use right I so obviously possess,
in order to be able to use the law to harass and to fair game Mr.
Duncan and me.


Being in truth considered a critic by Miscavige and the other people
running Scientology, per Hubbard scriptures, I am also considered to
be and treated as a criminal, as a SP. Your bosses' clear intention
is to have me continue to be treated by Scientology and Scientologists
as a critic, and fair gamed, while you pretend I'm not a critic in
order to deny me the fair use right critics are granted by copyright
law. You lie about me to make me fair game so you can lie about me.


Due to your policy and practice of treating all critics of your
enterprise as criminals, that is to say, as your fair game targets to
be silenced, ruined utterly and destroyed, the number of critics
criticizing what in Scientology calls out for criticism is tragically
reduced. Thus those critics remaining and still willing to criticize
your cult have an even greater fair use need, purpose, and right than
do critics of an entity which does not fair game them.


The Berne Convention, which you cite to, states:
Article 10
(1) It shall be permissible to make quotations from a work which has
already been lawfully made available to the public, provided that
their making is compatible with fair practice, and their extent does
not exceed that justified by the purpose, including quotations from
newspaper articles and periodicals in the form of press summaries.
(2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the
Union, and for special agreements existing or to be concluded between
them, to permit the utilization, to the extent justified by the
purpose, of literary or artistic works by way of illustration in
publications, broadcasts or sound or visual recordings for teaching,
provided such utilization is compatible with fair practice.
(3) Where use is made of works in accordance with the preceding
paragraphs of this Article, mention shall be made of the source, and
of the name of the author, if it appears thereon.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/10.html


Thus, in addition to the U.S. and Canadian copyright laws, the Berne
Convention also expressly permits my use of the subject copyrighted
materials. Clearly my use of the Scientology copyrighted materials I
used is compatible with fair use, fair dealing and fair practice. The
extent of my use of your images, marks and symbols is in perfect
agreement with the purpose for their inclusion - discussion,
criticism, scholarship and education. As an aside, if your clients
practiced fair practice instead of fair game, there wouldn't be much
of anything about them to criticize.


As you know, since you use this law so extensively in your particular
part on the Scientology legal front in its war on us wogs ®, in accord
with the Berne Convention, both the U.S. and Canada have copyright
legislation to expressly permit, for purposes identical to the
purposes of the Decoding Scientology Propaganda site, the utilization
of copyrighted works like those of your clients by way of illustration
for teaching. As I stated above, I have in every instance provided
the source of the copyrighted work and, wherever available, its
author.


The threat in your letter to Mr. Duncan that he may be liable for 58
copyright infringements you tell him I'm guilty of, when it is obvious
to you, being a copyright attorney, that I have not infringed any
copyrights on my Decoding Scientology Propaganda site, and that my use
of your clients' subject copyrighted materials is expressly permitted,
indeed encouraged, by national and international copyright law, is
just further baseless, criminal fair game against me.


Your standard Scientology "copyright infringement" attack is but a
part of a concerted fair game campaign against me personally,
operated, as you are, by David Miscavige. As you know, the various
organization entities involved have refused, without a shred of
justification, to return the money each of them ripped off from me,
despite my having advised Miscavige personally. In fact, not one of
the various organization entities involved, including Miscavige
himself, except for a covert letter from IAS, even acknowledged my
demand.


As you're also aware I'm sure, this past year Miscavige ordered my
daughter turned against me and disconnected from me. She has been
brought to view me as one of your "suppressive persons," as someone to
be hated and, as is clear in your latest "suppression" promo,
shattered. It's obviously a term determined by Scientology, but the
use of the term is strangely fitting, since shattered families,
shattered minds and shattered hearts are the product of the
application of Scientology, certainly under the direction of David
Miscavige. If my own daughter, whom I love with all my heart, can be
brought to hate and fair game me, how much greater is your hatred and
how much deadlier your fair game, you who are paid to hate and fair
game me.


I noted a pronouncement by "CO OSA" Mike Rinder in an article entitled
"The IAS: The Nemesis of Suppression" in a recent Impact Magazine:
We won't stop until those SPs have been shattered ... Because we do
have the tech and the truth.
Rinder directs the shattering to "terminals," to living, breathing,
loving human beings, identified as "SPs." Rinder employs lawyers like
those in your office for this campaign to shatter those SPs like me.
Scientology, and all you Scientologists, as Rinder affirms, base your
shattering of wogs ® whom you deem to be "SPs" on your possession of
the tech and the truth.


You and Scientology's entire SP-shattering war machine will never
stop, because the determination you have-to never stop until the SPs
like me are shattered-is based on your possession of the tech and the
truth. Since as a Scientologist you cannot acknowledge that you do
not have the tech (to do what Hubbard/Scientology claim, of course)
nor the truth, you must participate in the shattering of SPs, as I
say, like me. The difference in the life of every Scientologist, and
the difference in the activities of every Scientology organization,
that possessing "the tech and the truth" makes, is that you get to
shatter SPs, in fact you get to conspire, organize and even get paid
to shatter SPs.


Everything that you, and Miscavige and the rest of the Scientology
operation, have done and everything that all of you have not done
signals that you are ratcheting up fair game. You personally are
working to take away my voice in the world against fair game, and you
threaten me just because I am fair game. I consider what you are
doing tortious and criminal, and I ask you to act immediately to
withdraw yourself from your cult's fair game campaign against me.


I believe it is your nasty habit, pursuant to the Scientology legal
doctrine of using to law to harass, to shudder people and ISPs into
silence with just the sort of baseless copyright infringement-joint
tortfeasor threat you make against Mr. Duncan. It is no wonder your
office and the Scientology cult you "represent" are known across the
web as Internet terrorists. Your reputation for making baseless, but
very real, threats to suppress and destroy wogs' ® fair use rights,
for which, with the requisite malevolent intention, the law can be
very easily used, supports my certainty that your threats against me
are baseless, and convinces me of the rightness of standing up to your
clients' suppression and their continuing effort to destroy me, and
destroy fair use for everyone.


You state that your "clients have obtained numerous permanent
injunctions concerning Internet infringements of copyrighted works
around the world." You are boasting about the results of
Scientology's campaign to destroy copyright rights. Your cult's
injunctions, judgments and other judicial rulings against free speech
advocates and activists, and scholars and critics like myself, are the
results of the fundamental Scientology legal doctrine of using the law
to harass, and employing lawyers like you who are willing to use it
for that illicit purpose. Scientology's legal triumphs are nothing
that decent Scientologists, if any exist, can ever be proud of.


The Virginia US District Court case, the result in which you are so
proud of, is famous, not for the judgment the Scientology organization
obtained against the free speech defendant, but for the US District
Court Judge's identification, and clearly her condemnation, of your
cult's purpose in bringing that copyright infringement action:
Although [Scientology] brought the complaint under traditional secular
concepts of copyright and trade secret law, it has become clear that a
much broader motivation prevailed--the stifling of criticism and
dissent of the religious practices of Scientology and the destruction
of its opponents.
You now pursue the same unlawful purpose for your copyright
infringement "case" against me-to stifle my criticism and dissent and
to destroy me.


You also boast of the Scientology cult's obtaining "assessed damages
in the amount of $75,000 against a Mr. Henson for copyright
infringement of a single work on the Internet." Again that is nothing
any decent Scientologist can ever be proud of. The $75,000 signifies
the reality of your cult's unlawful litigation purpose, that you
really will pay millions to destroy someone for "infringing" a single
work, that the threat of being destroyed by the Scientology "legal"
juggernaut is very real. It is widely known that lawyers for the
Scientology cult were able to get U.S. District Court Judge Whyte in
the Henson case to ignore the real and illegal purpose for bringing
the action, and to strip the defendant of his defenses and witnesses.


Perhaps Judge Whyte in fact did know what Judge Brinkema in the
Virginia case discovered, that Scientology was using copyright law and
his courtroom for the unlawful "stifling of criticism and dissent of
the religious practices of Scientology and the destruction of its
opponents." But whether Judge Whyte knew of Scientology's real and
illegal motivation or not does not make your cult's litigation
motivation any less illegal.


I believe that your clients' wins you boast of in the European cases
you referred to are also ill gotten. They are similarly successes for
Scientology and Scientologists no decent people will ever be proud of.
They are proof that your intention, your clients' intention, and the
intention Hubbard installed in the Scientology system, of stifling of
criticism and dissent destroying your opponents, is global in scope
and menace.


But even with your global army of lawyers and Scientologists all
on-purpose carrying out command intention to stifle criticism and
dissent and destroy your opponents, your "wins" are not even pyrrhic
victories, but complete lies. Your Dutch case, which must have cost
millions, to stifle and destroy writer Karin Spaink and her ISP,
XS4ALL, resulted in a dismissal of all charges, and complete judicial
support for Ms. Spaink's fair use right to display or publish
everything your cult and you lawyers tried to suppress.


Through their courageous and successful fair use defense against your
Scientology cult's attempts to destroy fair use rights, Ms. Spaink has
become a global fair use inspiration, and XS4ALL a freedom-fighting
legend among ISPs. I think that
http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/fishman/ot8a.html on Ms. Spaink's site
is an excellent example of the authority and extent of wogs' ® fair
use right. The Dutch court has clearly permitted Ms. Spaink to use
the totality of this document, the copyright of which is "owned" by
your cult clients, in her criticism of them.


Similarly your reliance on Rogers v. Koons, 751 F.Supp. 474, 478
(S.D.N.Y. 1990)
aff'd, 960 F.2d 301 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 934 (1992) to
support your threat to Mr. Duncan that the reproduction of a single
photograph in its entirety constitutes copyright infringement is
completely bogus. You know very well, and withhold as key facts of
the case, that defendant Koons produced an edition of three
sculptures, selling for over $100,000 each, from the single photograph
taken by plaintiff Rogers. And you know equally well that my Decoding
Scientology Propaganda site and all of my use of your clients' images,
marks and symbols are absolutely non-commercial. Rogers v. Koons, in
fact, only enhances my fair use right to do all the things you
improperly use that case to suppress and to threaten me for.


You complain that words and symbols I used on my Decoding Scientology
Propaganda site for purposes of discussion, criticism, scholarship and
education are identical to the form in which they are used as
Scientology trademarks and service marks. Naturally this must be the
case, indeed is necessitated by the fact that it is these very marks
which I discuss, criticize and explain on the site. Moreover, as you
certainly know, Scientology has a policy and practice of suppressing
criticism, scholarship and education about itself by, among other
techniques, attacking critics and educators for not using "source"
materials, or for "forging" or "altering" "source" materials, or
taking the part of Scientology being discussed or criticized "out of
context." Thus critics of Scientology, or people educating others
about Scientology, have an even greater need and fair use right to
display Scientology's words or symbols, as much as is practical, in an
identical form to how they are used by the cult, than the fair use
need of critics of wog ® groups which do not, as your cult does,
suppress criticism and attack critics.


You also complain that my use of these numerous marks is not
authorized by your
clients, and therefore may constitute copyright infringement. Of
course your clients don't authorize my use of their copyrighted
materials or their many marks. Your clients seek to use the law to
suppress and destroy discussion, criticism, scholarship and education.
My legal authorization comes from Canadian, U.S. and international
copyright law, which supports and encourages discussion, criticism,
scholarship and education, and my use of your clients' images or marks
does not in any way or instance constitute copyright infringement.


The following passage from the Chicago Manual of Style: The Essential
Guide for Writers, Editors, and Publishers, 14th edition, University
of Chicago Press, 1993, has been a helpful guide for my fair use
decisions:


The right of fair use is a valuable one to scholarship, and it should
not be allowed to decay through the failure of scholars to employ it
boldly. Furthermore, excessive caution can be dangerous if the
copyright owner proves uncooperative. Far from establishing good faith
and protecting the author from suit or unreasonable demands, a
permission request may have just the opposite effect. The act of
seeking permission establishes that the author feels permission is
needed, and the tacit admission may be damaging to the author's cause.


All of your Scientology clients are known world wide as utterly
uncooperative copyright holders; thus wogs ® such as Ms. Spaink or
myself involved in Scientology scholarship must employ our right of
fair use with utter boldness. I needed no authorization from your
clients to use any of their copyrighted materials in the manner, form
or context in which I used them, because of my fair use right, and
because it would be damaging to my cause, certainly with your clients
being who and what they are, to seek authorizations I didn't need.
Since it is your cult's clear and command intention to suppress and
destroy all fair use rights, and hence all criticism, scholarship and
education, for every wog ®, not to mention Scientologists, I also
exhort my fellow wog ® critics, scholars and educators, not just by
example but by active appeal, to likewise "employ our right of fair
use with utter boldness."


You say that my fair use display of the Scientology cult's images and
marks could result in a depreciation of the cult's, or some corporate
entity's, goodwill. This is a virtual impossibility. Whatever
"goodwill" Scientology, David Miscavige, Scientologists, and
Scientology agents like yourself, enjoy for your Scientology
operations and associations, is not goodwill at all, as the law
considers goodwill, but a cloak for bad acts and evil intentions. Any
criticism of Scientology, as it is now operates, necessarily
"depreciates" your cult's claimed goodwill, because its goodwill, and
the goodwill of all of you, is a lie, a part of the continuing fraud,
and because any criticism necessarily must see through your cloak to
your bad acts and real intentions.


Scientology and its founder are now known by me, and are known around
the world, to be, exactly what Judge Paul Breckenridge identified in
his judgment in your cult's first lawsuit against Gerry Armstrong, Los
Angeles Superior Court case no. C420153:
In addition to violating and abusing its own members civil-rights, the
organization over the years with its "Fair Game" doctrine has harassed
and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as
enemies. The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and
the bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH.
The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar
when it comes to his history, background, and achievements. The
writings and documents in evidence additionally reflect his egoism,
greed, avarice, lust for power, and vindictiveness and aggressiveness
against persons perceived by him to be disloyal or hostile.


I am of course aware that you, and the whole Scientology machine, will
treat me especially suppressively and subject me to your vilest level
of fair game because of my closeness and connection to Gerry
Armstrong. I am aware that Mr. Miscavige must have every
Scientologist, and certainly you lawyers, view each instance of Mr.
Armstrong's assistance to me in defense against your legal fair game,
as a violation of the "judgment" you've obtained against him in
California. Since I encourage, in fact induce him to help me, all of
you must view me as acting in concert with him and thus subject to the
same judgment.


I have seen that the "judgment" your office, under Mr. Miscavige's
direction of course, obtained against Mr. Armstrong, and continues to
try to enforce, enjoins and restrains Mr. Armstrong from directly or
indirectly discussing, or even mentioning, Scientology or
Scientologists or any of their lawyers, private investigators, etc. I
have also seen that your judgment enjoins and restrains "persons
acting in concert" with Mr. Armstrong from directly or indirectly
discussing, or even mentioning, Scientology or Scientologists or any
of their lawyers, private investigators, etc. I am just such a
person, acting in concert with Mr. Armstrong in every way I can to
facilitate and participate in the discussion of your cult, of its
lawyers, of Hubbard, of Miscavige, of Scientologists and your PIs.
You, on the other hand, are a personal "beneficiary" of this
"judgment" against Mr. Armstrong, a "beneficiary" of his enforced
silence, and you are one of the persons you do not permit him to
directly or indirectly discuss.


I have seen that your judgment against Mr. Armstrong enjoins and
restrains him, and persons acting in concert with him, from, directly
or indirectly,
[f]acilitating in any manner the creation, publication, broadcast,
writing, filming, audio recording, video recording, electronic
recording or reproduction of any kind of any book, article, film,
television program, radio program, treatment, declaration, screenplay
or other literary, artistic or documentary work of any kind which
discusses, refers to or mentions Scientology
or your cult, its cultists, or lawyers or agents like yourself.
Again, I advise you, and all of you, that I am acting in concert with
Mr. Armstrong in every way possible, and moreover that it is my
sincere intention to do what I can to facilitate and participate in a
discussion of all of you, and my Scientology experiences and Mr.
Armstrong's Scientology experiences, in as many of the media your cult
proscribes as will take our words.


It is my understanding that although your "judgment" restrains and
enjoins Mr. Armstrong from discussing his now 33 years of experiences
in relation to Scientology, your cult, Scientologists and their agents
of all kinds, you and the rest of the Scientologists, all the
organizations and all the agents insist that the judgment permits any
or all of you to say or publish whatever they want about Mr. Armstrong
or his experiences, no matter how untrue, perverse or defamatory. It
is also my understanding that you, Scientology, all Scientologists and
all agents of your cult insist that your judgment prohibits Mr.
Armstrong from responding in any way to whatever you or any of you say
or publish about him, again no matter how untrue, perverse or
defamatory. And it is my understanding that the Scientology cult and
its lawyers have in fact on multiple occasions prosecuted Mr.
Armstrong for responding to defend himself from your cult's untrue,
perverse and defamatory attacks on his reputation, character,
livelihood, person and associates.


Clearly then, since I am acting in concert with Mr. Armstrong in every
way possible, you and your Scientology bosses cannot but insist that I
am, as the judgment states, identically restrained and enjoined from
discussing our experiences in relation to Scientology, your cult,
Scientologists and their agents of all kinds. You also cannot but
insist that you, the cult, Scientologists and all the agents, like
yourself, can say or publish whatever you want about me, no matter how
untrue, perverse or defamatory, and that I am restrained and enjoined
from responding to defend myself. Such a "judgment" and concept, of
course, could not but encourage you, the cult, Scientologists and your
agents to say or publish all manner of black PR about me, as you all
have about Gerry Armstrong, just because you believe the judgment
permits no response. Although your California judgment against Mr.
Armstrong incites all of you to fair game me more than you would
without it, since it's a license to fair game me with impunity, I
still will violate it because acting in concert with Mr. Armstrong is
worth your increased deadly threat.


I have seen that your judgment against Mr. Armstrong enjoins and
restrains him, and persons acting in concert with him, from, directly
or indirectly, assisting any person who has a claim against any
Scientology entity, any Scientologist entity, or any entity agent, or
is even thinking about a claim against any of these entities. Clearly
I am such a person. I have a claim against the Scientology cult for
the more than $61,000 USD that various of its component organizations
ripped off from me, with false promises and mental degradation, over a
27 year period. I have a claim against your cult and your leaders for
their outrageous conduct, egregious lying and the criminal defrauding
of me of 24 years of my life. I have a claim against your cult for
your alienation of my daughter pursuant to your noxious disconnection
doctrine. I have a claim for the Scientology cult's delivery to me of
my auditing files and all other personal records of my involvement in
the cult. I will take this opportunity to renew these claims to you
as an agent of the Scientology cult and its components. The
Scientology cult, and certainly you as their agent, have thus far only
responded with the fair game Judge Breckenridge identified and
condemned eighteen years ago.


Clearly you and your cult will insist that Mr. Armstrong is restrained
and enjoined by your "judgment" from directly or indirectly assisting
me in my claims. Clearly too, because I am acting in concert in every
way with Mr. Armstrong, you and your cult must also insist that I am
restrained and enjoined from directly or indirectly assisting myself
in my own claims. You must insist that I am restrained and enjoined
from directly or indirectly assisting Mr. Armstrong, since he has his
own multitude of claims against your cult for twenty years of your
fair game and your ongoing criminal conspiracy to destroy his human
and civil rights. And you must insist that I am restrained and
enjoined from directly or indirectly assisting any other wog ® who has
been victimized, targeted or abused by your cult and thus has a claim
against any of you.


I have seen that your "judgment" against Mr. Armstrong enjoins and
restrains him, and persons acting in concert with him, from, directly
or indirectly, assisting any person defending herself from attacks
from any Scientology entity, any Scientologist entity, or any entity
agent, or even in any adverse legal relationship to these Scientology
entities. I am just such a person, a target of another of your cult's
notorious fair game campaigns. You, Ms. Paquette, are threatening me
and executing this legal attack upon me as part of this fair game
campaign, and I must defend myself against your attacks and your
cult's campaign. I am aware that your cult clients must insist that
by your California "judgment," Mr. Armstrong may not, directly or
indirectly, assist me in any way because I'm a defendant against your
fair game campaign directed at me, that I may not assist him, directly
or indirectly, because he's a defendant against your fair game
campaign directed at him, that neither of us may, directly or
indirectly, assist anyone else who might be trying to defend himself
or herself against any other of your fair game campaigns, and that I
may not, directly or indirectly, assist myself in my own defense
against your fair game campaign directed at me.


I have seen that your office and the Scientology cult have obtained
orders against Mr. Armstrong requiring his payment to your cult of
$50,000 USD per mention of his Scientology-related experiences or any
mention of you "beneficiaries" in his defense from your black
propaganda and fair game attacks. I have seen that your office and
Scientology have obtained orders in enforcement of your "judgment"
against Mr. Armstrong, which jail and fine him for mentions of you
"beneficiaries" in his defense from your black propaganda and fair
game attacks. I have also seen that your office and your cult have
obtained multiple warrants to have Mr. Armstrong hunted down and
arrested by law enforcement units for his mentioning of you
"beneficiaries" in his defense from your black propaganda and fair
game attacks.


I have seen that your office and your cult have obtained orders
against Mr. Armstrong requiring his payment to your cult of $50,000
USD per instance of assisting anyone, directly or indirectly, of
course, in the person's defense from your fair game attacks. I have
seen that your office and Scientology have obtained orders in
enforcement of your "judgment" against Mr. Armstrong, which jail and
fine him for any instance of assisting anyone, directly or indirectly,
in the person's defense from your fair game attacks. And I have seen
that your office and your cult have obtained multiple warrants to have
Mr. Armstrong hunted down and arrested by law enforcement units for
instances of assisting wogs ®, directly or indirectly, in their
defense from your fair game attacks.


Since I am acting in concert with Mr. Armstrong in every possible way,
but particularly in every wogs' ® defense from your fair game attacks,
you must insist that I am subject to the same $50,000 in "damages" per
mention or per act of assistance. You all must also insist that I am
subject to the same fines and imprisonment for any mention of
Scientology or any of you judgment "beneficiaries" or for assisting
any wog ® who is defending against your fair game attacks. And you
must insist that for any mention of Scientology or any of you judgment
"beneficiaries" or for assisting any wog ® who is defending against
your fair game attacks I be hunted down and arrested by law
enforcement.


I am certain, however, that in Canada, such prohibitive conditions,
stripping someone of the right to defend himself and others against
your dangerous and criminal fair game conspiracy, by stripping him of
his basic human and civil rights, would be ruled to be illegal, and
judicially impermissible. If your California "judgment" were not
clearly and beyond argument illegal here, you would, without a doubt,
have long since sued Mr. Armstrong into oblivion. But he has been
discussing your cult, your cult's founder, its leaders, David
Miscavige, cult lawyers, cult PIs and your cultists, all of the
"beneficiaries," plus discussing his experiences, plus assisting
victims and targets of your cult's fair game campaigns like myself,
here in Canada in exercise of his basic human and civil rights for
almost five years.


Certainly your Scientology cult has the necessary funds to buy the
necessary corrupt Canadian lawyers to prosecute in Canada, here in
Chilliwack, B.C., all the judgment enforcement actions you could
possibly manufacture against Mr. Armstrong. Therefore I conclude two
things: Scientology's legal/intel apparatus has not been able to buy
the necessary judges in Canada/B.C./Chilliwack; and that even the most
corrupt lawyers' loonies can buy here will not use the unbought
Canadian courts to enforce your "judgment" just because it is so
clearly illegal and unenforceable.


I am therefore completely confident that your cult and you cult
lawyers have no legal basis whatsoever in Canada to prevent Mr.
Armstrong from assisting me in my defense against your fair game
attacks and in your fair game "legal" activities. I am equally
confident that you have no legal basis to prevent him in Canada from
discussing, in any medium, any or all of you Scientology
"beneficiaries" and any or all of his experiences with or knowledge of
Scientology, Hubbard or any of you. I am also equally confident that
because your "injunction" is illegal and unenforceable as to Mr.
Armstrong in Canada, it is equally illegal and unenforceable as to
anyone such as myself acting in concert with him.


I am so completely confident that your "injunction," which on its face
prohibits me from acting in concert with Mr. Armstrong, is illegal
here in Canada, and that any efforts by your Scientology cult to
enforce such an illegal injunction against me here would be themselves
illegal, that I urge every wog ® who is a target of your cult and its
fair game machine to act in concert with Mr. Armstrong in every way in
our mutual defense, and for our mutual pressing of our claims against
the cult. We are a class, targets of Scientology's, and your illegal
policy and practice of using the law to harass. I urge all of us,
every wog ® who has ever been threatened or felt threatened by
Scientology's use of the law, or by its actions outside the law or
outside normal wog ® bounds of decency, to act in concert with Gerry
Armstrong.


That all your "legal" actions and "wins" in California in restraining,
enjoining and silencing Gerry Armstrong are illegal here in Canada,
which, as I point out, they obviously are, convinces me that the
"legal" actions you took and the success you boast of against Keith
Henson in California may very well be similarly illegal in other
jurisdictions. Indeed, your "legal" actions and your successes in
California against Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Henson and your other wog ®
adversaries may very well be illegal even in California.


Because, however, your cult and you cult lawyers are still able to use
the law in California to harass, and specifically to enforce your
otherwise illegal "injunction" against people such as myself who act
in concert with Mr. Armstrong, I will not enter California at this
time. I will not at this time risk being ruined at $50,000 USD per
mention of my cult experience, like the mentions I make on a.r.s. I
will not risk $50,000 per direct or indirect assist I might give to
any of Scientology's myriad victims or fair game targets. Nor will I
risk at this time being, as I would be in California, hunted down,
arrested, jailed and fined. Obviously there is a problem in a State,
or in the U.S. itself, where judges permit their courtrooms and their
powers to be used by the criminal Scientology cult, as in the
Armstrong and Henson cases, to harass.


I will therefore, as a citizen, not submit to the courts of California
but take this matter of this extraordinary threat in California, and
for that matter in the whole U.S.A., against me, against my most basic
and valuable human rights, and against the wogs ® with whom I act in
concert against the menace which is your client, to Canadian and
American legislative and diplomatic bodies, to the United Nations, to
world courts and to forums at the highest international level
accessible to me.


I believe that you and the cult leaders you represent will be forced
to acknowledge that the "injunction" which prohibits me, or anyone,
acting in concert with Mr. Armstrong from, directly or indirectly as
ever, discussing any of you, or your cult, or Hubbard, or anyone's
Scientology knowledge or years of experiences, or prohibits me from
assisting wogs ® anywhere against your cult and all of you, is
illegal. I believe you all look extremely and willfully petty and
foolish for not having already acknowledged the unenforceability and
illegality of your effort to restrain and enjoin wogs ® such as I
acting in concert with Mr. Armstrong.


When you acknowledge, of course, that anything wogs ® acting in
concert with Mr. Armstrong say or publish about you, your clients,
etc., and that anything wogs ® acting in concert with him do to assist
their fellow wogs ® against any or all of you, is not, and cannot be,
legally restrained and enjoined, you must perforce acknowledge that
Mr. Armstrong's identical actions cannot be legally restrained and
enjoined. He is restrained equally and enjoined equally with those
wogs ® who act in concert with him if the injunction is legal and
legally enforceable against them, which it is not, and he is equally
as completely unrestrained and unenjoined as those wogs ® who act in
concert with him if the injunction is legally unenforceable against
them, which it so clearly is.


I believe that Scientology, Scientologists and its lawyers like you
know you are using the law to prosecute and punish Mr. Armstrong for
saying and doing things all of you also know he cannot be legally
prosecuted and punished for saying or doing. And that is precisely
what you are doing with me. You pretend to ignore my statutory fair
use right in order to threaten and black PR me for acts you know are
not violations of your cult's copyrights. You pretend your illegal
California injunction is legal to shudder me and people like me into
not acting in concert with Gerry Armstrong in defense against your
fair game campaign.


You assert in your January 23 letter to Mr. Duncan that my
unauthorized use of your clients' trademarks on my Decoding
Scientology Propaganda website has caused Mr. Duncan's name to be
falsely associated with your client's registered marks and created a
likelihood of confusion as to the source or sponsorship of this my
site in violation of U.S. state and federal law, including the Lanham
Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a), various state and federal laws, in addition
to Canadian law. To facilitate discussion, I will include here the
section from the Lanham Act you refer to:


Sec. 1125. - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and
dilution forbidden
(a) Civil action
(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or
any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name,
symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false
designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or
false or misleading representation of fact, which -
(A) 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, or
(B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature,
characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or
another person's goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be
liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is
or is likely to be damaged by such act.
(2) As used in this subsection, the term ''any person'' includes any
State, instrumentality of a State or employee of a State or
instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Any
State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee, shall be
subject to the provisions of this chapter in the same manner and to
the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.
(3) In a civil action for trade dress infringement under this chapter
for trade dress not registered on the principal register, the person
who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the
matter sought to be protected is not functional.
I will also repeat, and include here, the Lanham Act section that is
actually relevant in this matter, and which, to concoct a "basis" your
fair game "legal" threats, you fail to acknowledge:
Sec. 1125.
(b) Remedies for dilution of famous marks
[ ] (4) The following shall not be actionable under this section:
[ ] (B) Noncommercial use of a mark.
(C) All forms of news reporting and news commentary.


As is made abundantly clear on the Decoding Propaganda site, as I
stated in my earlier letter to Ms. Kobrin, and as I state throughout
this letter to you, my use of your clients' marks is for noncommercial
criticism, noncommercial scholarship and noncommercial education.
There is nothing even faintly commercial about my site. You ignore
this obvious fact, which makes my use of your marks completely
inactionable, just so you can threaten "legal" action against Mr.
Duncan and me as part of your fair game campaign.


Your assertion that my fair use of your clients' trademarks on my
Decoding Scientology Propaganda website has caused Mr. Duncan's name
to be associated with your Scientology cult's marks and created a
likelihood of confusion as to the source or sponsorship of my site, is
obviously a barefaced lie. Even if you meant that my fair use of
your clients' trademarks on my Decoding Scientology Propaganda website
has caused the site name to be associated with your Scientology cult's
marks and created a likelihood of confusion as to the source or
sponsorship of my site, your assertion would still be a lie.


As I state in my letter of August 14, 2001 to Ms. Kobrin, which I have
included in its entirety above:
At the bottom of each page is a link to a legal statement and
disclaimer which clearly and prominently denies any affiliation with
your client. Your clients' marks are also noted as registered and
links are provided with these marks that also go to the legal and
disclaimer page.


I state very clearly on my legal and disclaimer page on the site,
which I sent to Ms. Kobrin with my August 14, 2001 letter, and which I
include in its entirety above:
The content of this site is critical to Scientology. It is neither
affiliated with nor sponsored by any Scientology organization.
Scientology's web sites: www.scientology.org or
bonafidescientology.org

Trademark Information


The names Scientology ® and Dianetics ® are owned by the Religious
Technology Center ® (RTC). Scientology's list of their trademarks and
service marks can be found here:
http://www.scientology.org/tmnotice.htm
[ ]
The Decoding Scientology Propaganda web site is a non-commercial web
site and consists almost entirely of critical commentary of
Scientology and its propaganda.

Disclaimer
[ ]
Neither this web page, nor this web site, nor any of the individuals
mentioned herein assisting to educate the public about the dangers of
Scientology and their false and misleading propaganda are members of
or representatives of the Scientology organization.


Quite clearly, your assertion that my fair use use of the Scientology
cult's marks created a likelihood of confusion as to the source or
sponsorship of my site, is a barefaced lie. Even beyond the clear and
prominent statements on the site, which I have requoted in the
preceding paragraph, however, Mr. Duncan has added your letter of
January 23 and his response very prominently to the site. See
http://www.entheta.ca/caroline/paquette-o-gram.opnx.


Your own words now on my Decoding Scientology Propaganda site make it
absolutely clear that none of your Scientology cult clients is the
source of my site, and none of your cult clients sponsors my site.
Your words show that you are unmistakably unconfused about who owns
and who sponsors my site, and your certainty concerning its actual
ownership and sponsorship will now be conveyed by your own words to
anyone who navigates to the site. If, despite what you've stated, you
are actually not unconfused about who owns and who sponsors my site,
please advise me and I will ask Mr. Duncan to make this clear as well
on the site.


Mr. Duncan's words added to the Decoding Scientology Propaganda site
in his response to your letter also make it even clearer that none of
your Scientology cult clients is the source of my site, and none of
your cult clients sponsors my site. Mr. Duncan states, prominently
and boldly on his new cover page for every reader:
Thank you for your interest in Caroline's works.
http://www.entheta.ca/caroline/
There is no doubt Mr. Duncan is completely unconfused about who owns
and who sponsors my site, and is doing nothing to generate such a
confusion.


But you and all of you are generating a "confusion" where no confusion
exists, just to be able to fair game us. I am aware that
Scientologists will state as truth pretty well whatever they're
ordered to state, that they can certainly confuse themselves on
command, and, of course, that your organization is, as Judge
Breckenridge states, schizophrenic, but I still don't believe there's
anyone you can produce who will sign an affidavit for you complaining
that after reading my site he or she thought it was owned and
sponsored by your Scientology corporate clients.


If you can produce a person, Scientologist or wog ®, who, after
reading my site, thinks it is owned and sponsored by your Scientology
corporate clients, I would like to have my psychiatrist examine him or
her. If you cannot produce such a person, who, after reading my site,
thinks it is owned and sponsored by your Scientology corporate
clients, you know you must immediately withdraw your threats and
propose an amends project.

Mr. Duncan repeats his statement as to my site's ownership and
sponsorship in his response to your letter: "the works of Caroline are
in tact." He also mentions his knowledge of your clients' illegal
motive for trying to shut down my site and his opposition to their,
and your, fair game campaign:
Knowing your litigious nature, it is unlikely this will satisfy you,
as your REAL motivation is to silence the information contained in the
document, and not protect copyrights at all! I REALLY disapprove of
your Machiavellian methods.
There is nothing whatsoever in anything I created for the Decoding
Scientology Propaganda site or what Mr. Duncan has added to the site
which would lead any somewhat sane person to the cognition that your
Scientology cult, whose motives and methods Mr. Duncan, thankfully,
criticizes and opposes, is its owner or sponsor.


Since Mr. Duncan supports me in my defense to your cult's attacks, he
is acting in concert with me. Since I support Mr. Duncan in his
defense to your cult's attacks, I am acting in concert with him. For
our mutual defense, and every wog's ® mutual defense, against
Scientology's attacks, of course, we act in concert with Gerry
Armstrong, and he acts in concert with us. Anyone reading anything
about your clients knows that no Scientology entity, or Scientologist,
or any lawyer or agent, would ever act in concert with Mr. Armstrong.


The obvious exception is in your cult's covert ops against him where
Scientologists or your agents pretend to act in concert with him in
order to get close to him to be able to perpetrate various crimes
against him; but as a rule, Scientologists who are not pretending to
be wogs ®, and any agent of the Scientology cult not a double agent,
will never act in concert with Mr. Armstrong. Therefore, as a good
faith gesture, I will ask Mr. Duncan to add to my Decoding Scientology
Propaganda site a banner or image I'll create stating clearly and
boldly that the site is acting in concert with Gerry Armstrong. I
think other site owners you've threatened, based on your same
mythological likelihood of confusion, might also want to display the
image to make it very clear that none of your cult clients and no one
connected to the Scientology cult operation owns or sponsors their
site. "This site is acting in concert with Gerry Armstrong."


As another good faith gesture, I will also ask Mr. Duncan to add this
letter to my site, because it is a good statement of my opposition to
the Scientology cult as it is now being operated. None of my writings
now on the Decoding Scientology Propaganda site provides such a clear
statement of my opposition, to your clients as parts of the cult, and
to their antisocial policies and practices, such as "black PR," "fair
game" and using the law to harass, as you're doing here. Therefore
this letter on the site will make it even more unbelievably clear that
the Scientology entities I criticize for these abhorrent actions are
not the site's owners or sponsors.


You say that your Scientology clients' trademarks are distinct, unique
and famous, and that, accordingly, my use of these marks for purposes
of discussion, scholarship and education dilutes and tarnishes the
distinctiveness of the marks. As you are well aware, my noncommercial
fair use of your Scientology clients' marks is specifically permitted
and encouraged by law, regardless of whether such noncommercial fair
use diluted and tarnished the marks' distinctiveness. My fair use of
your clients' marks did not, however, in any way dilute or tarnish
their distinctiveness. This is simply another baseless allegation by
you to give the illusion of validity to your "legal" fair game.


The distinctiveness, uniqueness, fame and tarnish of your cult
clients' marks, are, as you can imagine, worthwhile subjects for
discussion, scholarship and education. Your extremely bad faith
effort and your cult's effort to suppress and eliminate discussion,
scholarship and education concerning your cult's marks is itself
worthy of discussion, scholarship and education. In all of this, it
is in every way legally permissible, to display your marks, no matter
how wonderful, sacred or divine they are, how distinct, unique and
famous, or how demonic or infamous.


It is really the fact that in the wog world ® Scientology is more
infamous than famous that makes your clients' marks so worthy of
discussion, scholarship and education. It is also your clients'
infamy, not my fair use of their marks, nor my fair use decoding of
their propaganda, nor even my criticism of their infamy, which will
lose them customers, and income. If people who view the materials on
my site are led to themselves decode Scientology propaganda, to
cognite on your cult's infamy, to have nothing to do with Scientology,
to leave Scientology, or join the opposition to your infamy, that is
how it should be. That is proof that the site is educational.
Education about a fraudulent, dangerous cult such as Scientology
should properly result in people being able to decode the cult's
propaganda, in their cogniting on the cult's infamy, in some of them
having nothing to do with the cult, in some of them leaving the cult,
in some of them opposing the infamous cult's infamous policies and
practices, and, one would also postulate, in the cult's loss of
income.


The inclusion of your cult's images, marks and symbols in the
scholarship on my website assists education, even makes education
possible at all, since the subject being taught is decoding
Scientology propaganda. As even you will admit, I'm certain, your
Scientology cult clients makes extensive use of their marks in their
propaganda, and, I assure you, decoding their propaganda must
therefore make extensive use of these marks.


As you of all people are aware, decoding Scientology propaganda is
serious scholarship. No Scientologist, even yourself, is capable of
decoding Scientology propaganda, or even permitted to decode your
cult's propaganda. In fact, your job is to is to prevent its being
decoded, to hammer out of existence any attempt to decode your cult's
propaganda, and to close the door on criticism, scholarship and
education.


My job is to keep decoding Scientology propaganda, to keep studying
your cult's symbols and symbology, to keep displaying the results of
my scholarship, and to keep educating people about your infamy, about
your propaganda, and about your fair game war to destroy wogs ® like
me and to destroy our precious wog ® sacraments of fair use,
criticism, scholarship and education. I assure you that to keep
decoding Scientology propaganda, and to keep boldly employing my fair
use right, I must display, and will keep displaying, your marks,
images and symbols. If there is any scholarship on my Decoding
Scientology Propaganda site that is in error factually, please do
advise me, and I will be happy to make appropriate corrections. Your
cult's and your ferocious fair game efforts to close down my site and
destroy my scholarship based on your phony, manufactured charges of
copyright infringement, however, must cease immediately.


Being a "copyright attorney" for the Scientology cult, you are aware
of this statement by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in Feist
Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 US 340,
349(1991):
The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of
authors, but "[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."
To this end, copyright assures authors the right to their original
expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and
information conveyed by a work. This result is neither unfair nor
unfortunate. It is the means by which copyright advances the progress
of science and art.


You and Scientology, of course, try to get copyright law to do the
very opposite of what Justice O'Connor writes is its purpose. You use
copyright law to discourage others from building freely upon the ideas
and information conveyed in your "works." You use copyright law to
suppress out of existence any study which decodes your propaganda, and
to destroy criticism, scholarship and education. By destroying
criticism, scholarship and education, you and your cult seek to stop
the progress of science and art. That alone is enough reason for
someone such as myself, a wog ® who seeks to advance, rather than
stop, the progress of science and art, to do the study on Decoding
Scientology Propaganda I have done, and to oppose your cult's
suppressive policies and actions as I do.


Pursuant to Miscavige command intention, you have manufactured the
inanity, indeed impossibility, that I do not possess the fair use/fair
dealing right, I do possess, as a critic, as a leader in the field of
decoding Scientology propaganda, as an educator, as a mother, as your
cult's victim, or as its ongoing fair game target. You manufacture
this inanity in order to generate a "legal" conflict or controversy,
and the resultant "legal" channel, by which your cult can flourish and
prosper by ruining me utterly. You and your cult use your concocted
inanity to trample on my copyright rights, and copyright rights of
everyone; for the greatest copyright right of all is the right of fair
use.


If you acknowledge my indisputable fair use/fair dealing right, which
I clearly do possess, to display your images, marks and symbols for
the purpose of criticism, scholarship and education, your "conflict"
or "controversy" and your "legal" opportunity to fair game me
disappear. You have invented this "conflict" because I am fair game,
and copyright law, just as any part of the law, can be used very
easily, as your boss's command intention states, to harass.


Considering the misanthropic nature of Scientology, its founder and
its present boss of bosses, and your cult's goals of world conquest
and the crushing of wogs ® and our civilization's great treasures, I,
and all wogs ® everywhere have an inalienable right to expose by
copying, displaying, publishing and disseminating anything and
everything your cult clients say, display, publish or disseminate. It
is not necessary, however, to litigate, or even consider, your
Scientology cult's Marcabiavellian nature, nor Hubbard's or
Miscavige's nature, nor your clients' evil intentions toward wogs ®,
even fair game wogs ® like me. If Hubbard was not a complete fraud and
the author of fair game, if Scientology was not at war with wogs ®,
and even if I was not your clients' fair game target, my use of the
images, marks, symbols and any other copyrighted materials of your
Scientology corporation clients on my website is still fair use and
still completely permitted by all relevant copyright law.


The action I request of you is to immediately acknowledge to Mr.
Duncan and me my right pursuant to Canadian, U.S. and international
copyright and trademark laws to display the images, marks and symbols
of your clients which I have displayed, and as I have displayed them,
on my site Decoding Scientology Propaganda for the purposes of
discussion, scholarship and education. It might be good to make a
public acknowledgement to this effect, but if you don't, I will do so
when I get your ack in response to this letter.


I appreciate your courtesy and attention to this matter. For any
reason, please do not hesitate to contact me.


Very truly yours,






Caroline Letkeman






Copies to:




Scott Duncan Scott.Duncan@nx2000.net


Karen Spaink kspaink@xenu.org


XS4ALL admin@xs4all.nl


Keith Henson hkhenson@cogeco.ca


Arnie Lerma alerma@bellatlantic.net


Lisa McPherson Trust info@lisatrust.net


Gerry Armstrong gerryarmstrong@telus.net


alt.religion.scientology


Electronic Frontier Foundation


David Miscavige
info@scientology.net


bcc: Media list