From KKD–filing of a new lawsuit against the IARDC

Dear Readers;

Well, the time has finally come to file a copyright lawsuit against the miscreants.  You will note that the civil rights complaint was only filed against certain miscreants–not all of them.  This is carving out what is most likely to succeed against your opponent in litigation.  Contrary to popular belief, you don’t sue everyone and you decide whether you are going after a company or agency or just the employees for their wrongful acts.  Likewise, the copyright suit was only filed against certain miscreants, but that does not mean that certain others are off the hook.  If you copied large portions of my blog containing my creative works, those of KKD and Gloria and others, don’t think you are off the hook for copyright infringement, you are not.  It is very easy to add defendants once the lawsuit is filed.  For example, I note that portions that were copied contained Lisa Belanger’s poem regarding her father, and also certain other’s works, including cover art work by John Howard Wyman which has been copyrighted.

While we haven’t added these plaintiffs yet, I simply cannot imagine the IARDC’s excuse for investigating me (but never asking Gloria, Kathie, Scott and Yolanda about the truth of what I am publishing first), and then engaging in blatant and notorious copyright infringement against innocent members of the public–Gloria, Lisa, Janet and others.

Nimmer on Copyrights (sorry, I can share that text, get it at your local law library) makes it clear in his section on “evidence as fair use” that there is no “evidence” exception to fair use.  Fair use is for your own personal research, education, some religious exceptions (you can sing a hymn in church as part of a religious service but not pass out copyrighted lyrics)–and even then, fair use is only a few sentences, maybe a paragraph or two which you immediately comment upon.  Take what you need to make your point, but never take more than you need, that is infringement.  Also, if you are in litigation, yes, you will have to buy or license the following from the party producing it:  copyright photographs, including the model’s rights therein, any copying from books, appraisal report are often copyrighted and you have to buy them separately, if you want data from a copyrighted program such as Peachtree, QuickBooks and the like be prepared to show you already own a license or you will just be using it in a “viewer program”.  Many larger companies have their data in proprietary data bases and software, meaning you will NEVER get the data because you will NEVER be able to use it.  That party will contact the vendor and tell him not to grant a license and the vendor is likely to cut off the party from getting raw data on that basis.  I have done it in litigation.  It works.  A proprietary financial/sales system can stop a 3rd party from getting raw data. It won’t stop them from asking your client to run a few reports, but it will stop that nonsense.

I get the question all the time, what if I am writing a book that is a parody of another book or it contains quotes from a copyrighted book? Simple, go to the publisher and ask for their licensing department.  Pay the small fee ($50 to $100) for the quote and do it the right way.

Read Ken’s comments below.

It is entirely fair and fitting that the wholesale copying of creative works–many of which are not even mine, must be redressed (reported) to a federal court judge.

All proceeds from this lawsuit will go for probate victims.

I am also looking for a tax lawyer that is experienced in NFP’s.

thanks.  We will fight this and win.  We will clean up the benches in our courtrooms.  The days of the “Code of Silence” the IARDC wants is over.  Ken and I and others known and unknown are making sure of that.

Join us on Mar 10 and 11th as I intent to organize a protest outside the offices of the IARDC.

The weather will be better.  We can take pictures and hopefully the news will show up.

I think we should do it during the lunch hour, maybe more people will see what they do is wrong, namely:

1) no reporting on ethics by the IARDC attorneys and managers EVER.  Directly contrary to the 2009 Illinois Ethics Act-my question is why?  We call, they say they are a “private business” when in fact they are an administrative agency of the SCOI!

2) no publishing salaries of the IARDC attorneys and staff.  Why?  They do not answer my Freedom of Information Requests for salary information.  Why?  99% of Illinois agency salaries are reported–even the tens of thousands of teachers in Illinois do them.  Why does not the IARDC do them?

3) Other state agencies publish “accountability and transparency” statements.  The IARDC does not.  It has secrets.  Lots of them.  About $21 million according to the 2012 Annual Report.  Look at it, you can easily google it and I have published it here.  Apparently taking some $300 plus per licensed lawyer since 1978 has resulted in a “slush fund” for the managers. Why do they have that?  Should they not be required to do Ethics Reporting before they hale in any atty for disciplinary proceedings?  Should they not be required to publish a list of all the companies they invest in so the atty can see if in fact a company listed (a bank or insurance company) had been sued by the atty in question?  I for one would like to know.

There are public records indicating judges in my case, Ken’s case and Mr. Amu’s case have interesting and highly unusual financial activities.  I would like to know why.

Connors said “no discovery” to Gloria’s attorney, Jay Dolgin when he asked.  Why is that? The IARDC follows the same pattern. Gloria had the right to ask about Carolyn’s finances, her husband’s finances, Kristen’s finances. She was shut up and shut up right away.

The IARDC says when I bring these things up, I “must not relitigate”.  But this blog IS the other side of the story.  It consists of attorney questions and opinions and those of Gloria, Bev and Ken Cooper, Sylvia Rudek, and other managers of Probate Sharks, NASGA and other respected probate blogs.

Why does the IARDC say that probate blogs are ipso facto (automatically and per se) not experts?  What is up with that?  They have not come up with a larger expert than NASGA that gets 140,000 views per year, or Probate Sharks that gets 70,000.

They have not answered the complaints of Sykes, Bedin, Gore, Wyman and others seriously damaged by lack of jurisdiction, millions of dollars missing from accountings (Sykes and Gore and Tyler),  attorneys such as Miriam Solotovich continues to go into the private judge’s areas with Judge Stuart (Feb 20, 2014 at about 10:50 am– a day that will live in infamy) and no lawyer says anything, no one protests.  During my trial, the excuse was “oh, they have arbitrations back there”–but arbitrations require 2 attys not one, or two parties and an attorney not one.  Their excuses are lame and idiotic.  Plus, how about this, to avoid the appearance of an impropriety, don’t hold arbitrations there.  Do it in the dozen+ jury rooms and conference rooms that are always unused.

I am not litigious, I do NOT want to sue people for copyright infringement, esp. when it is pretty much a lay down type of suit and there is personal liability for every infringer and there is not corporate limitation on liability.  There is also no insurance policy that covers it because it is an intentional wrongdoing.  You know when you slap someone else’s creative writings onto a copier you are infringing. You know when you print out creative writings from the internet that you are infringing–esp. when you send it on or show it to others.  You also know that when you use a program like Nextpoint, even a kid knows that uTorrent, Gnutella and LimeWire are completely illegal and will get you into a ton of trouble with DMCA notices filling your parent’s mail box threatening them with huge fines and penalties for copyright infringement (most kids know enough to proxy via a foreign country, and if you don’t know how to do it, ask a kid, but my advice is buy your stuff off of ebay used and don’t infringe, how about that).

Nextpoint is nothing but evil, IMHO, they run a “barely legal” business and there is no legit excuse for their software or business.  They are clearly living on the edge waiting for the first fallout of how they or their employees knew of infringement and did not shut it down immediately.  That poor sales rep from Nextpoint being misled by the IARDC.  Nextpoint will learn next time to get an IP expert and not be led into perdition by two faced infringers.

Kids, again, don’t do this at home.  Eventually, by infringing you will tick off some person or company that sues first and asks questions later.  The ND Ill federal court system is not kind or accommodating to infringers. They consider it theft just as much as you pick a pocket, forge a check or drive off with someone else’s car.


From: kenneth ditkowsky
Sent: Feb 28, 2014 9:36 PM
To: Tim NASGA , NASGA , probate sharks , Eric Holder , matt senator kirk , Jo Anne M Denison , Chicago Tribune , SUNTIMES , “” , j ditkowsky , Harry Heckert , Lawrence Hyman , Necla Lane , Ginny Johnson Justice4 Everyone Blog Fan
Subject: Re: Activity in Case 1:14-cv-01470 Denison et al v. Larkin et al complaint

 As Mr. Larkin continues to ignore the law, he was sued for violation of the copyright law.  I think you will find this lawsuit interesting.   Few public officials have had the temerity to protect the promulgators of elder cleansing so openly.   Few public officials have assaulted the First Amendment so vigorously in direct defiance of the Rule of Law as set forth by the Supreme Court of the United States.
In the case of Ms. Denison’s Blog the obscenity of Mr. Larkin’s action is illustrated by the outrageous disregard of copyright protections.   The immunities provided to citizens be damned in Mr. Larkin’s view.   He makes it very clear the First Amendment, Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution, 735 ILCS 110/5, 320 ILCS 20/4, 18 UsCA 4 et al mean nothing to him!   Lawyers who respect the law in Larkin’s view are unethical; however, those who prey on the elderly are to be protected, ergo Mary Sykes has for almost five years been held hostage until the involuntary assisted suicide can be accomplished and Alice Gore lies in cold grave without teeth because the avarice of a GAL who needed the gold filling from Alice’s mouth. 
The record will show that Larkin and the ARDC were totally uninterested in the villains who hold Mary in captivity and who when death took Alice Gore closed the books on her; however, Denison is being prosecuted for he crime of publishing a poem written by the daughter of one of the victims of elder cleansing as a tribute to her father.   
Get a copy of Ms. Denison’s complaint that we filed today.   It is case number 14 CV 1470.  the poem is an exhibit.    
After you read the complaint – join with us in calling for an HONEST intelligent complete and comprehensive investigation of the entire Elder Cleansing industry.   Getting old should not be a crime in 21st Century America. 
Ken Ditkowsky



1 thought on “From KKD–filing of a new lawsuit against the IARDC

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s