From: hkhenson@cup.portal.com
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 20:30:23 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Federal Court Friday for Henson
Message-ID: <9604111032.1.29952@cup.portal.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


To: hkhenson
From: hkhenson
Subject: anouncement
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 10:31:13 PDT
Lines: 248

To those who have not been following the antics of the Scientologists 
in their epic battle with the Net, and various cryonicist, 
extropians, cypherpunks, pensfa, kabuki, and bay area folks: 

After a Temporary Restraining Order was issued against well known 
net.person Grady Ward by the Scientologists, I looked up one of the 
forbidden documents on the news spool, commented on the criminal 
aspects of the contents, and posted it to the net. 

A week later *I* was served with a 3 inch stack of legal papers.

There will be a hearing for me in Federal court, Friday, April 12,  
sometime between about 9:30 and 11:30.  It might be kind of fun, since 
I am starting by trying to get the judge to disqualify himself.

If you want to know *way* too much about this subject, the meat of the
court filings are at:

  http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/henson/home.html

And here is the my posting (sanitized), a threat letter, and my
response.  Sorry for the spam and the short notice. Wide distribution, 
especially to news media encouraged.  Keith Henson
**************
H. Keith Henson
San Jose, CA 95123
408-521-0614

Ronald M. Whyte, Federal Judge
Northern District of California
San Jose, CA

Open Letter to Judge Whyte

Dear Judge Whyte:

In the company of perhaps 100,000 other people (the readers of the 
Usenet newsgroups alt.religion.scientology, alt.activism, alt.2600, 
comp.org.eff.talk, and misc.legal), I read the TRO against Mr. Grady 
Ward and "all persons in active concert."  Was it your intent for this 
order to apply to random persons on the Internet such as myself?  If 
so, I believe the TRO is a violation of my First Amendment rights to 
discuss the criminal activities of the cult of Scientology. 

Upon reading the TRO you approved, I sorted the list of documents  
attached and ran a text search on the news spool on one of my accounts 
to see if any of these documents were there.  Some were-- though it is 
impossible to tell if they are the real thing or not.  I pulled out 
the first one which came up.  I had not been inclined to look at this 
material before (it's *boring*), but your TRO inspired me.  Assuming 
this is real, I can see why the "Church" of Scientology is trying to 
suppress this material.  If carried out, the instructions in this 
particular bulletin amount to *criminal* acts, to wit, the practice of 
medicine without a license.  I reproduce this widely available 
document in its entirety for your edification. 

>              HCO BULLETIN OF 14 NOVEMBER 1978

[snip all but name, I an under a TRO not to disclose the contents.]

Please note that point 4 states that this process of "blowing BTs" 
cures illness.  The phrases "cease to read" and "no longer read" refer 
to "auditing" with an E-meter.  The "Church" of Scientology is under 
Court orders stemming from FDA actions in the early 1970s against 
making such claims involving the use of E-meters.  This bulletin 
(assuming it is real) is written evidence of the level of contempt the 
"Church" of Scientology has for the Courts.  Scientology even has 
policies on using the court system to abuse critics and former 
members. 

Forbidding discussion of this particular document, including quoting
it entirely, is clearly against the public interest as well as a
violation of my First Amendment rights.  Unless, of course, copyright 
law can be used to prevent disclosure of instructions for criminal 
activity. 

With respect to "all persons in active concert,"  I have certainly 
been sympathetic to the ideals Mr. Ward espouses, and felt much of the 
rage he must have felt when (as he puts it) the "criminal cult of 
Scientology" sent Gene Ingram, a wanted felon, to obtain pictures of 
Mr. Ward's children from his mother by deceit.  For what reason did 
the "Church" of Scientology need pictures of Mr. Ward's children?  
Were they planning a kidnapping or was this just a tactic of 
intimidation?  This would certainly be an interesting question for you 
to skillfully ask of the members of the law firm which paid Mr. Ingram 
for this particular service.  They will be in your court Friday. 

I know that taking a stand against Scientology is likely to subject 
me and my family to the same abuse Mr. Ward has experienced.  But 
there comes a point where people of good will *must* stand up to 
criminals--even to those who are experts in using the courts to 
harass.  If you think I am being too harsh in this matter, I can 
supply you with nearly unlimited affidavits and court findings which 
show a consistent pattern of criminal behavior for this cult over 
decades of time.  Friday I will provide to you a letter from Mr. Arnie 
Lerma to Judge Brinkma about the stunts pulled on Mr. Lerma in a 
related case. 

Many of those who read these news groups are outside of the US, and 
thus not subject to your authority.  I, however, am local to San Jose 
and will be in your court Friday morning.  It is my position that the 
public interest in this matter should override *all commercial* 
copyright concerns.  The entire corpus of material the "Church" of 
Scientology is trying to keep from public view is so at odds with what 
cult victims are told when they are suckered into it as to constitute 
fraud--thinly disguised as "religion."  On the other hand, if you feel 
the TRO *does* preclude quoting examples of the copyrighted, trade 
secret, criminal instruction manuals of the "Church" of Scientology, 
please let me know. 

Sincerely,

H. Keith Henson
President/CEO 
Xanadu Operating Company

[CoS threat letter, and my response.  Posted on alt.religion.
scientology, comp.org.eff.talk and misc.legal]

Yo folks!  Another letter from Helena showed up in my mailbox.

[posted and mailed, cc to Judge Whyte]

>Dear Mr. Henson,
>
>     I represent Religious Technology Center ("RTC"), the owner
>of the confidential Advanced Technology of the religion of
>Scientology, and the holder of exclusive rights under the
>copyrights applicable to the Advanced Technology materials. 
>Among these copyrighted and confidential materials are the
>Advanced Technology materials of certain levels known as "NED for
>OTs Series."

Boilerplate.  Do you have a macro programmed with this introduction?

>     I have been informed that you have posted NOTs Series 34 to
>the Internet without the authorization of my client, who, of
>course, would not have given such authorization had it been
>requested.

That I did.  In particular the HCOB of Nov. 14, 1978.  I presume by 
your complaining that RTC acknowledges this material to be an official 
copyrighted, trade secret, instruction manual for criminal activities? 
No wonder you want to keep it from being discussed!   

>           I also see that you are claiming that you have talked
>to the court and that this justifies your posting.

You would have to be exceptionally dense to avoid noticing that the 
quoted document was right in the middle of a letter to Judge Whyte.

>     I am hereby placing you on notice that NOTs Series 34 is a
>copyrighted, unpublished work.

And I am hereby placing RTC on notice that the HCOB of Nov. 14, 1978 
contains claims and instructions which seem to me to be both criminal 
in nature and in violation of certain court orders against the 
"Church" of Scientology. 

>                                Not only is it subject to the TRO  
>issued by Judge Whyte against Grady Ward (and will be subject to
>the preliminary injunction once issued), it is also subject to a
>preliminary injunction issued by Judge Whyte in Religious
>Technology Center v. Netcom On-line Communications, Inc. against
>Dennis Erlich.  In both instances, the injunction is against Ward
>or Erlich and their "agents, servants, and employees, and all
>persons acting or purporting to act under his authority,
>direction or control, and all persons anyone acting in concert or
>in participation with any of them who receive notice of this
>Order."  These injunctions were issued on the basis that RTC was
>likely to succeed on the merits of its claims.

Well, lets see.  I am certainly not any kind of "agent, servant or 
employee" of either Dennis Erlich or Grady Ward, nor do I act under 
any kind of direction or control.  Now, you can go argue with Judge 
Whyte that all persons who happen to read a.r.s, agree with Grady or 
Dennis that CoS is a scam of a cult, and take independent action are 
"acting in concert or in participation."  Lots of luck. 
> 
>     You have also included in your notice a request for people 
>to send you the NOTs materials. 

I am not interested in just *any* old NOTs materials.  I asked for 
NOTs materials which amounts to instructions for criminal acts, such 
as those found in the HCOB of Nov. 14, 1978, or fraud.  I believe 
discussion of this subset(?) of these materials is in the public 
interest.  I am prepared to go to court to defend my right to quote 
from and discuss the criminal acts and policies of the "Church" of 
Scientology.  

>                                 Please be informed that the
>California Uniform Trade Secrets Act prohibits even the
>*acquisition* of materials containing trade secrets.  

I simply do not believe that anything which can be found by a few 
seconds of searching on any one of a hundred thousand computers all 
over the world can be considered a "trade secret."  What is a 
non-profit *Church* doing with trade secrets anyway?  Trade secrets 
are for *profit* making commercial companies.  Or perhaps fraudulent 
scams. 

>                                                      It is for
>this reason that Mr. Ward was enjoined under trade secret law. 
>Your solicitation of these materials is a violation of that law
>and an inducement to others to do so.

As I pointed out above, I asked for material which amount to criminal 
instruction manuals or material which shows evidence of fraud on the 
part of Scientology.  It will be very interesting to be enjoined in a 
First Amendment pursuit which is so clearly in the public interest.  
You really should try.  

You don't even have to hire a process server.  Give me a call, beeper 
# 408-521-0614, and I will come down to Mr. Hogan's office and pick up 
my papers. 

>     I am setting forth below the TRO issued by Judge Whyte and
>the notice which I posted after the TRO was issued.  I hereby
>demand that you cease and desist from any and all further
>posting, reproduction, display, distribution, solicitation or
>acquisition of NOTs Series 34 or any of the Advanced Technology
>works of the Scientology religion.  
>
>                              Sincerely,
>                              Helena K. Kobrin

Well, Helena, I am going to put it a little nicer than Grady would, 
but you can take your demand, fold it till it is all corners, and 
stick it where "the Sun don't shine."  And, just to show I mean it, I 
am *again* asking for NOTs or any other Scientology "AT" materials, 
acquired by legal, or *illegal* means which describe criminal acts, 
amount to criminal instruction manuals, or show the fraudulent bait 
and switch nature of Scientology.  It is my intent to comment on and 
post this material in the public interest.  I do not believe that 
either copyright law or trademark law will prevent the publication of 
information relating to unlawful acts.  If you think otherwise, I 
suggest you check with a couple of tobacco companies. 

>                            NOTICE TO READERS:
>
>     On March 6, 1996, Grady Ward posted a message to the
>Internet soliciting a NOTs pack.  In a later posting, Ward

[snip for bandwidth]

Keith Henson

SP 4, bucking for SP 6