• A win against the Baha'is and Youtube

    From NUR@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 18 21:51:01 2021
    https://youtu.be/EKGbJp9dve0

    15 July 2021
    To: Google LLC, D/B/A YouTube
    901 Cherry Ave.
    San Bruno, CA 94066
    USA
    Fax: +1 650-253-0001

    To whom it may concern:

    This is a follow up letter to one originally sent to you on 1 July 2021.
    On 1 July 2021, Youtube (Google LLC, D/B/A YouTube) removed a video from my channel and sanctioned me with a copyright strike based on a fraudulent claim made by a third party.

    As originally submitted and clearly indicated in the description box when first uploaded, the copyright of the video belongs to me (Wahid Azal) and not to X. Mr X has no evidence that the original video belongs to him; or that he has any legal copyright
    over it, and Youtube is acting outside of the scope of copyright laws (and its own policies) in accepting such claim prima facie without any credible evidence submitted by the other party to it.

    For the record, the content was made on my computer (Wednesday, April 28 2021) via Zoom and as such belongs to me and is my legal copyright under the laws of the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. As such no third party has legal standing
    to maintain a claim of copyright or intellectual property over said content that Youtube has presently sanctioned based on a fraudulent copyright claim made by a third party.
    Youtube (Google LLC, D/B/A YouTube) dismissed Mr X's initial privacy claim on June 14, 2021, where it stated in writing “... We have reviewed the complaint and have determined that the content is excepted from removal based on our privacy guidelines,
    which can be found at http://www.youtube.com/t/privacy_guidelines. The content does not violate our policies and will remain on the site...”.

    As such the copyright claim by the third party was unequivocally made in bad faith and so has no factual or legal basis.

    Given this, Youtube must reinstate the video and remove the copyright strike as the copyright of the video is mine and not Mr X's. If Mr Soltanzadeh or his representatives believe otherwise, they can go to either a British court or come to an Australian
    one and argue a case before a judge. As it stands, however, the legal copyright of the video belongs to me (Wahid Azal) since 1. it was made on my computer by me and 2. no pre-existing contract or agreement and/or document, and/or notary and/or
    instrument exists providing copyright (and/or any form of legal transference) to Mr Soltanzadeh or otherwise releasing it over to him; or any other such document or instrument to that effect.

    Again, very specific notice was placed in the description box that copyright belongs to me (Wahid Azal), and the previous claim by X (which Youtube dismissed twice) was a privacy concern and not a copyright one.
    This is to further notify you that, as originally indicated, I have initiated action in the Supreme Court of Queensland, Australia, against Mr. Amir X, and preliminary findings suggest that the case could be transferred from a civil to a criminal one.
    Youtube (Google LLC, D/B/A YouTube) has not resolved the problem in the specified seven (7) days originally allotted to it. It is now close to 14 days (13 as of this writing) and, after repeated emails to your legal department, Youtube has still not
    responded or explained its position and complete lack of legal due diligence in the matter. Failure to do so within the coming week will result in Youtube (Google LLC, D/B/A YouTube) being made a party and respondent (defendant) to this case currently in
    process in the Supreme Court of Queensland; and, if not promptly resolved in my favor, for reasons possibly involving illegal transference of copyright/intellectual property-ownership belonging solely to me over to third parties without due legal cause
    or justification (and without any consent), since the acceptance of any claim of copyright ownership of the video by Youtube (Google LLC, D/B/A YouTube), and over to Mr. X, is based on misrepresentations made by Mr. Amir Soltanzadeh which would
    constitute an unmitigable commission of fraud in all common law jurisdictions whether in the UK (where Mr. X resides), in Australia (where I reside) or the United States (where Youtube is located).

    I reserve my rights to the fullest extent of the law and expect a proper resolution of this issue by the end of this week.

    Regards,
    Wahid Azal

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)