Our Response To The Latest Ridiculous Legal Threat Against Us: Milorad Trkulja Can Go Pound Sand
from the damn-it-feels-good-to-be-a... dept
As we've noted, we regularly get legal threats, some of which are more serious than others. Sometimes we ignore them entirely, and sometimes we feel the need to respond. Depending on the situation, sometimes we respond privately. Sometimes we respond publicly. The more ridiculous the threat, the more likely we are to respond publicly -- and I think the latest holds up as one of the most ridiculous legal threats we've seen. It comes from Milorad Trkulja, who is also known as Michael Trkulja, and who lives in Australia. Trkulja made some news a few years back when he (somewhat surprisingly) successfully sued both Yahoo and Google for hundreds of thousands of dollars, because when people did image searches on a variety of phrases related to things like "Australian criminal underworld mafia" sometimes a picture of Trkulja would show up. Apparently, Trkulja was actually shot in the back a decade ago by an unknown gunman. And somehow, for whatever reasons, certain websites included pictures of him along with enough keywords that the search algorithms at both Google and Yahoo would return his photo in such searches. We wrote about his victory over Google back in November of 2012, pointing out how ridiculous it was that an Australian court said you could sue search engines because image search happens to pop up your image along with actual gangsters.Anyway, after we wrote about the case, as happens on Techdirt, people commented on the story, including one anonymous comment from someone who, in a totally offhand way, claimed that "Trkulja's a gangster, too." The actual content of the comment, as you can see was actually to clarify some of the misconceptions -- including who "Tony Mokbel" is (a well-known Australian gangster) and responding to the author of the post, Tim Geigner's (admittedly weak) sarcastic joke that Australians fight with machetes, rather than guns.
Now, it appears that Trkulja just found out about this comment (more on how in a moment) and has sent off a fairly massive 54-page document to both myself and to Google with a series of increasingly hilarious demands -- including that we respond by 4pm today (he does not designate in what time zone -- not that it matters). The letter is, well, you kinda have to read it. It is full of misspellings, along with typographical and grammatical errors of all kinds. For someone who claims to have consulted a lawyer before sending the letter, you'd think he'd consult someone who could proofread his letter as well. No such luck, apparently.
It starts out by claiming that it's "Not for publication" but that's totally meaningless. You send it to us, we can absolutely publish it. Free speech means something here in the US.
Oh yes, speaking of Duffy, it felt... odd... to receive a legal threat from Australia so soon after discussing the Duffy decision -- especially given that Duffy had not only just yelled at us online, but had also been going off on some bizarre rants and outright threats against some individuals who expressed an opinion suggesting that the ruling in favor of Duffy was troubling.
So, it didn't come as a huge surprise that Trkulja then admits he only found out about our post and the comments... thanks to Duffy, who is apparently a "family friend" of his.
From there, he notes:
I complains is an article authored by you and posted to the "Techdirt" website situate at https://www.techdirt.com ("the website")....Well, I'm really not quite sure what to do with that information, because almost everything in it is wrong, but we'll get there. From there, he mentions that he spoke to an Australian defamation lawyer, and suddenly shifts oddly from the first person to the third person -- possibly copying what someone told him, though it's not at all clear from the text of the letter. The key point: he claims that comment is defamatory and that Techdirt is liable for it. This is wrong on a variety of levels -- but we'll get there as well.
Then, we get to the "demands." It starts with a demand for Google. They are apparently supposed to delist Techdirt entirely because of a single comment that Trkulja falsely believes is defamatory. Also, it could be read as to be asking Google to block me personally from Google's website. Or something. Also, he wants Google to block some other websites. No reason or explanation is given.
Then there are a ton of screenshots that I assume are "exhibits" of some sort. They include my Twitter page for no clear reason. And also the Techdirt profile of the author of the original article, Tim Geigner, and, for reasons unknown, Tim's Amazon author page. He also refers to Tim as "Darknight aka Timothy Geigner" while I think most of our regulars recognize that Tim is better known as "Dark Helmet" in our comments....
Okay, so that's the situation. Now, the response: we're not going to do any of the demanded things. For a whole variety of reasons. Let's go through just a few, because this post is getting too long already and if I had to respond to all of the ways this letter is wrong, none of you would still be reading.
- First up, not that it really matters, but the statute of limitations is one year in Australia, as it mostly is in the US as well. Under some circumstances, it can apparently be extended to three years, but (oops) that comment was published on November 13, 2012. The statute of limitations is up. Sorry.
- The comment isn't defamatory. The reference claiming you're a "gangster" is totally innocuous. It's a trivial throw away comment on a blog post that no one would notice. Trivial comments are not defamation in Australia (or the US for that matter).
- The other lines that you seem to complain about are opinions not statements of fact. The reference to the "gun" was a response to Geigner's joke in the post about machetes, not to anything involving you. Opinions are not defamation. Things unrelated to you are not defamation of you.
- Also, we're a US company with no presence in Australia, so your threats are pretty pointless.
- Even if you could convince an Australian court with some sort of wacky legal argument, we're totally protected from such judgment thanks to the SPEECH Act.
- Free speech, dude.
- We have no "subscriber" named Anonymous Coward. That's the designation given to anyone who comments without logging in.
- We didn't publish the comment. An anonymous user did. We're not liable for it. If you have any legitimate complaint at all (and you don't), it's with an anonymous user who posted a trivial comment three years ago, rather than us or Google.
- Even if none of the above is true: what the fuck? NO ONE is finding a comment buried deep below a blog post about your legal victory and suddenly saying "oh, well that proves that Trkulja was a gangster."
- Wait, what's so terrible about being called a "gangster" anyway? To many people it's a compliment or something to brag about.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: australia, comments, defamation, intermediary liability, janice duffy, liability, michael trkulja, milorad trkulja, secondary liability, section 230, speech act
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Or it's a typo because he uses the numpad while otherwise typing a letter instead of the number keys like a normal person. I think my interpretation is funnier.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
..|.. O.O ..|..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The proper response would be to ship this guy a case of that Dark Helmet beer that Mr. Geigner wrote about some time ago. With a message that this is more than he deserves.
(I looked for a link to that story but it appears to have wrapped out.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
To the Gangster Trkulja
In order to stop being referred to as a gangster, it would help stop threatening people. Although as a Techdirt reader, I want you to keep it up, because I truly enjoy reading the articles and reading your sloppy and meaningless legal threats, it makes my day pass more enjoyably and give me a good laugh.
Thanks,
Another Anonymous Commenting Person
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is the subscriber Anonymous Coward, and I officiously take back my statement that Trkulja is a gangster. He is actually a petty and sensitive fraudster that likes to perform show tunes with various domesticated amphibians. That and dull sex acts.
It is these amphibians that are the actual gangsters who have, through the psychic medium of Dr Duffy, forced me to submit these facts to the world wide internets against my will. Google was witness to this and will back up my statements with a self driving car.
Please obliviate techdirt.com of any guilty associations with my infernal commentry and I will send you a 1/2 penny to cover your legal fees, you gansta you.
Sincerely and in perpetuity,
AC
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There! How does it feel to get a taste of your own medicine, eh Masnick?
You say you're not the publisher for Techdirt comments? Well then... good luck suing yourself for this post!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I hope the Goddess Streisand is pleased.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm a Nigerian Prince who has a large inheritance coming my way . If by chance you can forward ten thousand dollars via western union to this web site I can immediately send you a check for one million dollars .
Please do not hesitate as I'm sure you would like the cash and if some one else sends the ten thousand dollars before you , they will get the one million dollars .So don't delay send today
Thank you
Nigerian Prince
[ link to this | view in thread ]
All the incoherent ranting, poor punctuation, bad cut & pastes and terrible spelling look awfully familiar to me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You wish.
It means that this article follows right after the one titled "Judge In FBI Case Was Forced To Redact His Mocking Of FBI's Ridiculous Arguments" which happens to be about the court case of Nicholas Merril who fought 11 years in the U.S. legal system in order to be allowed to publish a "NS letter" sent to him.
"Free speech means something here in the US." is a Humpty Dumpty claim:
Now let Humpty Dumpty speak with the voice of the acting Attorney General and you get the drift.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That'll learn him
Obligatory oz link to harden up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh6pZQX22CQ
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's called due diligence. Good way to avoid Streisanding yourself
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A Hunting We Will Go
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawsuit vs Speech
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This Milorad Trkulja is totally a c**t!
Trying to get Techdirt plucked
but Milorad Trkulja is totally f***ed.
Well, just sharing my opinion here. A guy who makes these kinds of threats isn't a gangster anyways. He's just a pathetic moron. If he gets shot in the back again, no one would cry about it, I think.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
perhaps we can have Trkulja's law
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reasonable Response
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You wish.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Milorad Trkulja is a gangster
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Page 9 of the attached document.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
we can register it to a hundred of porn sites and it will not be useful EVER
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"family friend"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:Page 9
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Milorad Trkulja's payday
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trkulja; Shut the f**k up ya f**king wanka, it's f**king c**ts like you that make me f**king ASHAMED to be born Australian with family going back to the First f**king Fleet.
It's f**king bad enough we're getting shat on by ex-govo wanks like Hellstra, trying to live in the modern digital age (15 years let alone 30 years is too f**king old for a phone exchange for internet users, especially rural ones!), but f**king c**t wanks like you are f**king giving the c**twaffles in Canberra the fuel to f**k over our rights and freedoms both online and on the street.
F**k's sake mate, every f**king time you pull c**p like this by trying to f**king hide your f**king past you just KEEP BRINGING THAT F**KING PAST BACK INTO THE F**KING SPOTLIGHT, ya f**king wank.
And to the c**t Duffy, the same goes to you, ya f**king c**t.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh no, it's too late!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You know mike
[ link to this | view in thread ]
By all means, read the 54-page document
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trkulja was my bagman
[ link to this | view in thread ]
better luck next time the criminals can take the other criminals off the streets and I can sit back and laugh
bet Google would prefer the next shot did the job to save them some grief and money
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Surprised you missed Trkulja's latest little earner from Google
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VSC/2015/635.html?stem=0&synonyms=0& query=Trkulja
Surely this deserves a review
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Looks like Milorad Trkulja is already going after Google
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VSC/2015/635.html?stem=0&synonyms= 0&query=Trkulja
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Milord Trkulja s a dishonest gangster
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VSCA/2014/76.html?stem=0&synonyms=0 &query=trkulja
So Trkulja is a dishonest gangster, go figure
[ link to this | view in thread ]
And now on: Natures great mysteries!
Look how they fall down and are now trying to take the food from the other animals who witnessed it.
It is a wonder we keep seeing these Idiotas, because as you see, they now dig holes so deep that they can't get up again and they will eventually die of starvation.
One has to wonder how Wankers evolved into this, but one thing is for sure: being an idiot is in the Wankers nature."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Trkulja; Shut the beep up ya beeeeeep, it's beeeeeeep like you that make me beep ASHAMED to be born Australian with family going back to the First beep Fleet.
It's beeep bad enough we're getting beep on by ex-govo beep like Hellstra, trying to live in the modern digital age (15 years let alone 30 years is too beep old for a phone exchange for internet users, especially rural ones!), but beeeeeeeeeep like you are beep giving the beep in Canberra the fuel to beep over our rights and freedoms both online and on the street.
beep sake mate, every beeep time you pull beep like this by trying to beep hide your beep past you just KEEP BRINGING THAT beep PAST BACK INTO THE beep SPOTLIGHT, ya beeeeeeep.
And to the beep Duffy, the same goes to you, ya beeeeeep.
Now say the above with a broad and course accent with the appropriate buzzer sounds added.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Techdirt is lining Trkulja's pockets
Anonymous Coward, Dec 1st, 2015 @ 1:24pm
Hey Mike, ever considered going through life not being a total douche?
RE: "We're not liable for it. If you have any legitimate complaint at all (and you don't), it's with an anonymous user who posted a trivial comment three years ago, rather than us or Google."
Under Australian law Google is liable.
RE: "Even if none of the above is true: what the fuck? NO ONE is finding a comment buried deep below a blog post about your legal victory and suddenly saying "oh, well that proves that Trkulja was a gangster."
Well if the comment on the 2012 post wasn't actionable this post and the comments most certainly are. Of course, it won't cost Techdirt anything. Trkulja will just sue Google. That is a real responsible way to put a case for free speech-not!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Free speech?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
LMAOROTF
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Techdirt is lining Trkulja's pockets
JAAO
[ link to this | view in thread ]
2 - Mike tweeted about a threat, I jokingly replied but managed to foresee this coming from Oz. Imagine my shock she wasn't the source but somehow still involved.
3 - Anyone else shocked to see Duffys name attached? IIRC there was talk about her working with someone offering reputation management services one might think that she is using her "win" to drum up more people to hop on the bandwagon and publicize any "results" as evidence she is vindicated once again and you can be to for a fee.
We are going to end up seeing more and more of this type of stupid. RTBF is gaining traction because people only want the world to have a carefully curated view of them, altering reality to make that happen. With everyone "googlestalking" everyone else for jobs, relationships, etc. there is this cottage industry in trying to get things removed about past "indiscretions" ignoring that it would be far more useful to do good moving forward and not keep highlighting that past issue over & over & over. In obsessing over that, they do new things that get reported on and focus more views on the past they fighter harder to hide, drawing more attention to the past, so they fight harder to hide, drawing more attention...
I'm not proud of everything in my past, but I don't spend my time trying to make reality blackhole it. I do however judge people who find a bad event on my timeline to obsess over it while ignoring everything else. Judge me on my worst day, you're not worth my time... and it is your loss to pass me over, because I am so much more. Shame these people seem to let 1 event define them & refuse to move on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Techdirt is lining Trkulja's pockets
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The lack of a "presence" in Australia isn't exactly a defense. As your website is made available to Australian people, there is always a chance that a court will still find that you can fall under their laws in certain circumstances. This argument could be strengthened if it could be shown that your gear shop sold t-shirts or access to Australians (ie, you did business with Australians in Australia).
Also, the argument about who published the comment would be on your side if you are in the US (because of Safe Harbour) but may not hold legal water outside of the US.
I don't think this guy has a legal chance in hell, but then again, how many people have won against Google?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I admit it all
I also like to con lawyers out of money by not paying them legal fees which I get from the search engines and pocket myself.
I will sue anyone who has money so don't say anything nasty about me unless you are poor. I might even sue you anyway and take your house or car or your first born daughter if she is pretty and can earn a few dollars for me (he he he).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Aussie Fighting
... But that's because we have decent gun laws, no Second Amendment and no NRA to bribe our government.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
$$$$s
the cap on damages here is 250K plus interest so ballpark $330.00 this year so keep going because I am sure that you can maybe even double those damages by tomorrow
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nope, speech act doesn't apply
besides, they paid him once if the media is correct
I'm no lawyer but I think that is why Google didn't file a notice of acting in his latest court case but unless they file he is entitled to a summary judgment and if they don't pay and the media get a hold of it Google will look very bad especially since they don't pay their fair share of tax here
safe to say you lot have fixed the problems of time limitation and one little comment in the above because this is now on the front page of a search for his name
well done
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lets all jump on this bandwagon
However, Milorad Trkulja. Just because I Milorad Trkulja is just a weird name and should be at the top of ANY google search result.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Judgement
> laws in certain circumstances
That's why Masnick cited the SPEECH Act. Our Congress passed a law protecting us from judgements in foreign courts for speech that would be protected by the 1st Amendment if "spoken" here in the US.
So yes, an Australian court might find in favor of this Trkulja idiot and award him damages, but that judgement would have no legal effect in the US and he would never be able to collect it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Judgement
I don't think it would happen, but smugly standing behind US laws isn't the safest bet. Being right and being able to prove it would be better. Since the Australian courts have already sided with this guy once against one of the biggest companies in the world, he may in fact have enough of a case to work it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Whatever he/she said
Whatever raises good points. It is never a good strategy for a pawn to put the King in danger because that has a way of coming back to bite.
The blog post and comment that is the subject of this article may not succeed in a defamation court but this one certainly will. Since it is on page 1 of Google and read by Australians Trkulja arguably has a good case and is probably printing it all out as each comment is posted with one hand and using a calculator to add up damages with the other.
Australia has a cap on defamation damages but the legal costs from Trkulja’s recent win and that of the other recent Australian case must be into 7 figures.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VSC/2015/635.html?stem=0&synonym s=0&query=Trkulja
Then of course there is the ‘saving face’ and ‘plugging the leak’ issue for Google in not only Australia but in the rest of the common law countries.
Techdirt may think in can afford not to care because of the communications decency and the libel tourism acts but a recent US decision in a case against that infamous website RipoffReport.com found against the website due to the way that it solicits content.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2428558/vision-security-v-xcentric-ventures.pdf
Th e castle is no longer so secure.
It is not smart to be a pawn that opens the castle gates to an enemy for its own amusement and compromises the King’s position.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So, does this mean that... Duffy is a gangster too?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Really? How so? Is he using special packets or an .au domain?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Nope, speech act doesn't apply
If they didn't want the matter to be front and center all over again, then they shouldn't have sent laughable legal threats/demands to a site known for making legal threats against them public. Five minutes of research could have saved them from shooting their own foot, but as it stands they get to enjoy the crowd, and they have no-one to blame but themself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Techdirt is lining Trkulja's pockets
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: You wish.
At some point of time, the Bill of Rights was actually intended to limit the powers of the government.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
nah.. thongs.. thongs are the tool of chose of any Bogan worth their vegemite!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Surprised you missed Trkulja's latest little earner from Google
Thanks for putting this on my radar. Another idiot I have to keep tabs on... oh dear
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay you got me!
are they like kangaroos that dwell in burrows?
I'm so confuzzled!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Whatever he/she said
What, pray tell, in the blog post is defamatory?
Thanks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay you got me!
though I'm sorta wanting a pair now
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Whatever he/she said
As far as I can tell, nothing at all..
Though the Victorian Supreme Court in regards to Defamation cases could read (and normally do) totally different.
Though as your learned counsel would no doubt explain to you (waves at Marc) this whole post is actually nice, succinct and could probably do with more snark. :)
Not unlike the defense pleading in this recent Queensland (another state of Australia) case of defamation where the plaintiff lost.. [ here's the article] [here's the hilarious defense pleading(pdf).. I lost it at "BS reality" in headings]
Though this from the judgement shows that the Streisand Effect is also alive and well in Oz too ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I wonder what Ms Duffy's response to this factoid is.
Note: it could be totally Bullshit and/or quite innocent. But hey if it looks like a duck etc.. etc.. (it's probably made of wood)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
DOA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Techdirt is lining Trkulja's pockets
JAAO
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Maybe he should of seen a real one first. I don't know maybe one who is actually a QC, a member of the Victorian Bar, a Senior Fellow of the Melbourne Law School. Who is also the esteemed author of three editions of The Law of Defamation and the Internet (2001, 2005 and 2010) and of Collins on Defamation (2014) which are tomes used by all Australian solicitors, law schools, and barristers.
Maybe the same one who just recently (27th November 2015) wrote this article about 'Paddling in the backwater: Australian courts and online defamation '
Personally I love this line:
Maybe Mr Trkulja should take that advise and not be thought of absolutely as a complete and blithering moronic egotist who has a few kangaroos loose in his top paddock by all and sundry WORLDWIDE now.
Oh and Milorad, or Michael, or as I now will call you "Wanna be yobbo"... I'm Aussie.. bring it on ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And it's easier than throwin a full (or half empty) stubby at em.. I mean the stubby might break and spill me grog!
Though the old Barbie tongs from K-Tel might work.. not sure on their balance, though the snag stabber on the side of em might scare the buggers off!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
:)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You're out on a day pass?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
After reading and reading and reading...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: You wish.
It becomes hard to figure out just which David is replying to which one if every posting gets a new gravatar.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Some say..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I complains!
Re: Comment 35. It was flagged by the community, not by Mike or his team, because it adds nothing to the discussion. Insult Mike all you want but don't complain when people downmod the comment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Some say..Goat sex
Mr Trump you must be clear
Are you saying Milorad Trkulja like goat sex as in baking cupcakes or goat sex as is copulating with goats?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WTF indeed.
David Bowie wrote as Tin Machine something something about shit... oh yeah, I can't read shit anymore, and well, I couldn't. I couldn't get through #4 because this thug can't FUCKING SPELL let alone check his grammar.
I also think that if Anonymous Coward is going to ruin it for everyone else, you should ban this member, give the aforementioned member the door prize and hand Him (the Royal sense) over to the Gangster because the thug is really s̶e̶r̶i̶a̶l̶, I mean really serious and knows the law really really awesomely - I got all tingly like just reading his first veiled threats....
I wouldn't want to be in TechDirt's shoes right now, 'cuz that's like one of the more serious takedowns threats I've seen posted here.
So, what is TechDirt going to do about this Gangster and his threats? Do you think he means to cause physical harm? :D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Techdirt is lining Trkulja's pockets
[citation needed]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"Anonymous Coward"
Who is this Anonymous Coward?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh god not THIS guy!!
He then tried to sue us for calling him a free ranged chicken.
I told him to pound sand and have never heard from him again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Oh god not THIS guy!!
Yes, he tried the same thing with me - trying to sue because of something I said that wasn't even directed at him.
So since Techdirt will protect me let me say what I really think!
Milorad Trkulja is lower than a snakes asshole and makes up defamation cases, doesn't pay his lawyers, and then tries to deny that he is a criminal. Well extortion is criminal and that is what he does - extorts money out of unsuspecting and innocent people.
I bet his pal Duffy is not much better and is trying to extort Google.
The both should be locked up for their crimes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Milorad Trkulja / Michael Trkulja doesn't know his own name and has a small, deformed penis.
Oh and he looks like one too.
I tried. Sorry.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Judgement
Again, I will point out that even if he prevails in Australia and obtains a judgement, that's only half the battle. A foreign judgement must be submitted to a US court for enforcement and collection. In this case, if he submits his foreign judgement, the US court will rule it's unenforceable per the SPEECH Act and he will be left with no way to legally collect his money from the US resident/citizen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
> thus it is available to Australian people.
Putting a website up on the internet does not make me subject to the laws of every nation from which it can be viewed.
If it did, I could be prosecuted by Germany for putting a swastika on a web page; I could be prosecuted by Saudi Arabia for blasphemy if I say Islam isn't the one true religion; I could be prosecuted by the UK for "being racially offensive" for cracking an off-color joke.
I don't lose the my right to free speech in *this* country merely because I conduct my speech on the internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Judgement
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Okay you got me!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Judgement
Trkulja is in the Aussie vernacular.. 'pissing up a rope'
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "family friend"
Internet users, be sure to ACT and you'll be fine:
A - Avail yourself of information on internet use, etc., from reputable websites like Techdirt
C - Conduct yourself in a manner that reflects the way you wish to be perceived online
T - Turn off the internet and find something else to do if you find you simply can't resist lashing out at people you find annoying.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "family friend"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "family friend"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: "family friend"
Nor have I resorted to petty name-calling because I can't make a cogent argument.
I'll leave all that to you, dear.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Is that you Swan? :D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Technically, I should say something like "Over near Civic", but only those who've been to/lived around Canberra would really know what I mean without cracking open Google Maps or Wikipedia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: "family friend"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yes I am fat and ugly
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "family friend"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Yes I am fat and ugly
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Yes I am fat and ugly
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Whatever he/she said
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Duffy, is that you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DUFFY DID ATTEMPT TO EXTORT GOOGLE WITH HER BUSINESS PARTNER MICHAEL ROBERTS
Here is a link to when her business partner DBA Page1me, Badforpeople, Ripoff Report Victims, Rexxfield , Authorized Statement
Attempted to get Google to pay them for an SQL hack.
https://www.slideshare.net/darrenmeade1/google-tip-off-offer-deadline
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/201 2/01/20/google-cide-online-reputation-managers-can-wipe-from-web.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]