Boston Battle of the Computer Nerds:
Jonathan Monsarrat v Brian Zaiger

Boston Battle of the Computer Nerds!
Jonathan Monsarrat v Brian Zaiger
Has Encyclopedia Dramatic met its match?
by Susan Basko, esq.

See PART 2 here.  Part 2 includes Jonathan Monsarrat's Answer to Zaiger's Counterclaims.

Update June 7, 2017: Judge Patti Saris denied Jonathan Monsarrat's Motion to Strike Zaiger's Answer and Counterclaims.  As you can see just below, she denied the Motion by "endorsement."  This means she wrote "Denied" in the margin of the motion and signed her name.  This was a foolish motion that should not have been filed, particularly considering the judge had already accepted the Answer.  You can read the motion itself at the date June 1 below.

What happens next?  Pretty soon, we should see Jonathan Monsarrat filing his Answer to Brian Zaiger's Counterclaims. Counterclaims are just like filing a lawsuit, but they are filed by a defendant as part of an Answer.  In filing his Answer to the Counterclaims, Jonathan Monsarrat will file Denials or state that he agrees with different statements or that he has no knowledge of certain statements.  He will also possibly list his defenses or affirmative defenses to the Counterclaims.  An affirmative defense is a defense that adds material or information that is not present on the face of the complaint.   When the Answer gets filed, I will start a new blog post, since this one is too long already.  The new one will link back to this one, to make it easier to follow the action.

Denied Motion by Sue Basko on Scribd

Update June 3, 2017:  Well, well, well.  The cads (and cadesses?) at Encyclopedia Dramatica (ED) have pretty much blown their chance at any Fair Use Copyright defense by revealing their bad faith and true intentions.  Use of Copyright materials without permission is limited to the few types of instances that are considered Fair Use under the law. These types of Fair Use include such things as singing a song in a bona fide church service or using something to illustrate a point in a classroom setting (but not removing the name of the creator or making copies of it.).  The types of Fair Use that might possibly be  considered Fair Use in ED using Jonathan Monsarrat's Copyright items would be to comment upon, criticize, or parody the copyrighted work.  Things such as defamation, false light, harassment, invasion of privacy, cyberstalking, and interference with a business are not Fair Use.  Encyclopedia Dramatica (ED) has posted a fundraising page to raise money for its legal defense. On that page, the true nature of the ED article about Jonathan Monsarrat is revealed, as is the intent to harm him.   Here are a few exact quotes from the page (the highlights are added to show the bad faith harmful intent):

"Seeing flashing dollar signs, his newest target has become Encyclopedia Dramatica, which featured an article detailing how much of a complete scumbag he (Monsarrat) is and that nothing is beneath him."

"As if he didn't already have enough money, he (Monsarrat) thought he could milk his schtick even more to silence the people who have not forgotten how his reputation was created and where his past came from."

"He fancies himself an "artist", but all he's made of himself is a con artist."

The people at Encyclopedia Dramatica also reveal their practice of using Google as a weapon to harm the reputations of people: 

"A quick Google search for "Jonathan Monsarrat" should tell you all you need to know about who he is."

Then the ED fundraiser goes on to bring up a long ago minor incident where Mr. Monsarrat was supposedly arrested for holding a party that got out of hand with some underage party goers drinking alcohol.  This is not news.  The ED write-up mentions that it happened back in 2010.  This ancient history minor incident does not excuse ED creating harassment and smears against this man now.

I wondered how long it would take the mean-spirited people at Encyclopedia Dramatica to wreck whatever legal defenses they had.  Not long, as it turns out.

Update June 1, 2017: Jonathan Monsarrat filed a Motion to Strike Zaiger's Answer and Counterclaims, complaining it was filed late.  But the judge already accepted the Answer.  This motion is annoying and insulting to the judge, as well as to the defendant.   Worse yet, the motion is convoluted and incomprehensible, and seems to be asking for some switcheroo on the date of the Answer.  This whole thing is senseless.  If a person does not want to litigate, don't file lawsuits against people.  If you file a lawsuit and the other side Answers, get ready to litigate.  You can read this ridiculous motion here:

The Zaiger response to this motion is succinct:

What is the upshot likely to be? Nothing. The Judge isn't going to strike the answer she just accepted.  The fact that such a motion was filed does alert her to the likelihood that there is going to be nonsense happening in this case.  That's never a good position to put yourself in.

Update May 30, 2017: Judge Patti Saris entered an electronic court order saying Brian Zaiger's Motion for Extension of Time to file an Answer is moot and the Answer is filed.  This also makes Jonathan Monsarrat's Objection to that motion moot. This means the Answer is filed and it is game on.  

The next phase in litigation is where either party might file motions to try to end the litigation in their favor.  The plaintiff, Jonathan Monsarrat, might file a Motion for Summary Judgement, stating that there is no material issue of fact and that he is entitled on the pleadings to win.  But this is not likely since Zaiger did file a solid Answer.  

The defendant, Brian Zaiger, might file a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim.  This is one of the defenses in his Answer.  However, the result of such a motion is that the court then gives the plaintiff several chances to amend the complaint to make it state a claim.  

One of Zaiger's other defenses is that the statute of limitations has run on the claim.  Zaiger could file a Motion to Dismiss on this basis.  However, that seems a very contentious topic, since the claim by Jonathan Monsarrat is that the Copyright registered materials were repeatedly placed back up on Encyclopedia Dramatica after being removed.  Each time the material was put up is a new act of infringement.  Further, most courts follow the "Discovery" rule, meaning the time clock on the statute of limitations only begins to run when the plaintiff discovers the infringement.  Since Monsarrat most likely thought he was done dealing with Encyclopedia Dramatica, and since the website is unpleasant, it is not likely he'd be returning to the site to see if by some chance they posted his things once again. So that sort of Motion is not likely to succeed.  Another one of Zaiger's affirmative defenses is laches, but laches does not trump statute of limitations.  There are other possible Motions to Dismiss that might be tried by Zaiger.  We'll have to wait and see what gets filed.

Please come back here to check for Updates.  

ORIGINAL POST: May 28, 2017: Jonathan Monsarrat, the epitome of Computer Nerds, has challenged Brian Zaiger, owner or not-owner of Encyclopedia Dramatica, the shit-posting website, to a Legal Duel at high noon.  Mr. Monsarrat, whose online resume establishes the facts that he is highly intelligent and highly educated, has filed a lawsuit against Mr. Zaiger and a host of Does and one mystery name (GotPer).  Mr. Monsarrat has dismissed the suit against Gotper and the Does, so he is going head to head against Mr. Zaiger in what looks like it is shaping into the Computer Clash of the Titans.

As a disclaimer, I must state a few things: 
1) I strongly dislike Encyclopedia Dramatica (ED); 
2) I did a legal review of the lawsuit for one of the ED Admins;
3) the Admin gave approval for me to write blog posts about the lawsuit.

Jonathan Monsarrat, who on his website calls himself "Johnny," got a whole lot of East Coast education -- MIT, Brown, Harvard, and MIT Sloan.  With all that fancy education, he has decided he wants to invent the next PokΓ©mon Go.  Johnny's thing, according to his website, is "Big Movement Gaming."  Apparently, this is where you go outside and actually do something, but you keep watching your phone screen the whole time.  Johnny Monsarrat got some dork press a while back when he allegedly got arrested for holding a wild party where a lot of gamers and college kids showed up (in Boston! Home of 35 colleges and universities!) and some of those under 21 drank alcohol. (Shocking! We've never heard of college kids drinking before.)  He appears to have mended his ways and he even poses on his website wearing an expensive-looking suit and overcoat.  He probably had to buy that for his various court appearances or maybe to meet with potential investors. Anyway, he got the expensive suit and now he's got the expensive lawsuit - like a matched set.

So why is this Johnny guy suing Brian Zaiger of Encyclopedia Dramatica?  Mr. Zaiger is (or is not) the owner of Encyclopedia Dramatica, a festering cesspool of defamation and cyberstalking inhabited by the internet's most notorious coterie of hackers, DDoSers, cyberstalkers, defamation artists, and, in legal terminology, all-around assholes.  Someone among this crew of scoundrels posted some of Johnny's copyright registered works of brilliance and had the audacity to make fun of it all.  Johnny then sued ED and the stuff was removed off the site, or maybe that happened in reverse order.  Then, more recently, the same stuff with the same "article" reappeared on ED.  So now/ the upshot/ thus/ as a result of/ because he can/ Johnny is suing Zaiger and asking for the statutory damages of $150,000 per infringing item, and he appears to be saying 5 items were infringed, which adds up to $750,000.

As far as we know, Mr. Zaiger is one of those university town people who make their living by masturbating into cups, wherein the semen is then used to impregnate the lonely wives of impotent male professors or to impregnate lonely female professors who have no inclination to date those of the male persuasion.  Or maybe that is not how Zaiger makes his money, but it seems likely from the bug-eyed appearance he has in every photo.  Anyway, Zaiger's Answer to the lawsuit includes the Affirmative Defense that Johnny Monsarrat is trying to ruin Zaiger's "business," which seems to refer to Encyclopedia Dramatica.  Encyclopedia Dramatica hardly seems lucrative, so this lends credence to the theory that Zaiger makes his money by delivering jizz to the lonely women of Cambridge.

You can read the lawsuit right here, and the Answer right below that.

Developments after the lawsuit was filed:

1. The court granted a subpoena to uncover the true identities of Gotper and the Does.
2. Mr. Monsarrat dismissed the lawsuit against Gotper and the Does.
3. Marc Randazza, a lawyer best known as representing gay porn Copyright trolls, entered an appearance for Brian Zaiger.
4. Randazza, for Zaiger, filed a Motion for a one month extension of time in which to file an Answer to the complaint.
5. A few days later, Marc Randazza, probably realizing he might not be granted that full month, surprised everyone and filed an Answer for Zaiger.  (faking them out, kind of like something one might expect to see in Big Movement Gaming.)
6. Monsarrat filed an objection to the Motion for the extension of time, but that is probably a moot point since Zaiger filed his Answer.  The Answer appears to be possibly filed a few days late, but it is highly unlikely any judge would not accept the Answer.
7. The Answer is kick-ass!  And you can read it below.  This Answer says, "Game On."

See our expert ANALYSIS and COMMENTARY below the ANSWER.


It appears that Mr. Monsarrat is attempting to use Copyright infringement claims to whack the shit out of Zaiger and his Troll Minions, as they so richly deserve.  This probably won't work, because they probably have a valid Fair Use defense as Commentary.  The analysis here at Subliminal Ridge is that Johnny M could more effectively hire a hitman to wait outside the Sperm Donor Clinic and run over Zaiger with a bicycle. Or maybe a fast-moving moped or Vespa scooter would do the trick.

If you'd like to follow the Game play by play, someone has been so kind as to open one of these Son Of Pacer pages where you can see the titles of what is filed without having to run up your Pacer bill:

SIDE NOTE:  Brian Zaiger filed a Corporate Disclosure Statement  in which he declares he is "a natural person."  That does not mean he is a hippie or vegan or that he does yoga.  It merely means he is not a corporation.  His declaration reminds me of Aretha Franklin singing this song:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated. Please do not post misinfo, threats, personal info, etc.