ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Submitted 9 days ago...
Still awaiting assignment to someone.
October 14, 2012 06:56 pm
==============================
This has been waiting now for 27 days. ??
dA_AGREEMENT.pdf
November 01, 2012 02:51 pm
==============================
Does ANYONE here think "clicking here" can possibly agree to 3,049 words or about 7 pages of legal gibberish?
November 01, 2012 02:54 pm
==============================
What part of the legal gibberish permits the display of NSFW art via GOOG searches.
November 01, 2012 02:54 pm
==============================
dA is simply conspiring with GOOG to fool dA artist into believing viewers of art disclosed as NSFW at dA must log-in to increase dA ad revenue. dA is also refusing to place these labeled NSFW images in an excluded directory to emphasize the scienter required for exemplary damages while demonstrating familiarity with the robots exclusion protocol with the dA file contents below.
User-agent: *
Disallow: /users/login
Disallow: /users/wrong-password
Disallow: /users/lost-password/
Disallow: /checkout/
Disallow: /join/step2.php
Begin correcting this issue or prepare to begin litigation against somebody and NOT ME. I can help with a defense but there remains only damage mitigation.
No judge will begin to allow the verbose "click to agree" to do anything but INCREASE damages allowed. It is called "scienter".
There is no usage of any type authentication. GOSH. How wide open for a lawsuit can dA be? The dA_AGREEMENT is almost suicidal.
November 02, 2012 05:56 pm
I love this website and can help correct the MASSIVE legal liabilities of this website from AR.
I will not do this REWORK for free but can do this for less than you can find elsewhere.
This journal entry is NOT legal advice or legal opinion and does not establish any attorney-client relationship.
Still awaiting assignment to someone.
October 14, 2012 06:56 pm
==============================
This has been waiting now for 27 days. ??
dA_AGREEMENT.pdf
November 01, 2012 02:51 pm
==============================
Does ANYONE here think "clicking here" can possibly agree to 3,049 words or about 7 pages of legal gibberish?
November 01, 2012 02:54 pm
==============================
What part of the legal gibberish permits the display of NSFW art via GOOG searches.
November 01, 2012 02:54 pm
==============================
dA is simply conspiring with GOOG to fool dA artist into believing viewers of art disclosed as NSFW at dA must log-in to increase dA ad revenue. dA is also refusing to place these labeled NSFW images in an excluded directory to emphasize the scienter required for exemplary damages while demonstrating familiarity with the robots exclusion protocol with the dA file contents below.
User-agent: *
Disallow: /users/login
Disallow: /users/wrong-password
Disallow: /users/lost-password/
Disallow: /checkout/
Disallow: /join/step2.php
Begin correcting this issue or prepare to begin litigation against somebody and NOT ME. I can help with a defense but there remains only damage mitigation.
No judge will begin to allow the verbose "click to agree" to do anything but INCREASE damages allowed. It is called "scienter".
There is no usage of any type authentication. GOSH. How wide open for a lawsuit can dA be? The dA_AGREEMENT is almost suicidal.
November 02, 2012 05:56 pm
I love this website and can help correct the MASSIVE legal liabilities of this website from AR.
I will not do this REWORK for free but can do this for less than you can find elsewhere.
This journal entry is NOT legal advice or legal opinion and does not establish any attorney-client relationship.
![[Open] Adoptable AI DigiXero's - Gusnimon #042](https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/2a76319e-ab63-4dc2-85ee-5f5a455a721b/dgqdutl-64971679-eed0-45bc-8d10-5a573d1afa61.jpg/v1/fill/w_350,h_350,q_70,strp/_open__adoptable_ai_digixero_s___gusnimon__042_by_xeroaiart_dgqdutl-350t.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.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.PgB53KTP-pi_HPZfz4rbgSSKoOC8vmXmhxqeOCQI_qM)
5017937849CJNJr1986 12-26-2014_Notice.html
This notice will be electronically communicated by wires to (25) addresses BCC including:
Ms. Bettina E. Brownstein Esq, Ms. Susan Talcott Camp Esq, Ms. Courtney M. Dankworth Esq,
Ms. Holly Elizabeth Dickson Esq, Mr. Colin Jorgensen Esq,Ms. Mary Elizabeth McAlister Esq,
Mr. Allan Edward Parker, Jr. Esq, Ms. Shannon R. Selden Esq,Ms. Anita Staver Esq,
Mr. Claude Gabriel Szyfer Esq, Ms. Stephanie Toti Esq, Time, The New Republic, Grace Church,
The two primary cultural arguments of ALL time are the human rituals of reproduction and the human rituals concerning individual speech.
The earlier human species[1] developed rituals to counter cer
C'mon guys. PLEASE WAKE UP!
Please try to wake up and consider the following.
MSFT is advised YET AGAIN that there remains no 47 USC §230 third-party rational for returning nudes in the following searches removing the q_ and replace with q= if an adult and wishing to see nudity.
1. http_www.bing.com/images/search?q_...Apurestorm.com |http://www.bing.com/images/search?q_curtis+neeley+site%3Apurestorm.com
2. http_www.bing.com/images/search?q_...ative-nude.net | http://www.bing.com/images/search?q_curtis+neeley+site:creative-nude.net
3. http_www.bing.com/images/search?q_...dels-forum.com | http://www.bing.com/images/search?q_curtis+neeley+site:models-forum.com
4. http
Rebuke _nailed_ to a door.
Google Inc and Microsoft Personnel through the respective counselors,
United States and FCC, through respective counselors,
The Copy[rite] Act of 1790 was ruled not to protect human rights in 1843. The Copy[rite] Act has NEVER protected civil rights for humans in the United States. The Copy[rite] Act of 1976 was considered an entirely new Copy[rite] regime by most and attempted to make the US ritual or HOAX more closely emulate the fundamental human rights the rest of the developing nations on Earth were accepting. 1976 was when 47 USC §107 was passed though immediately unconstitutional due to vagueness. The entire HOAX called copy[ri
FCC begins regulating internet wires!!!
ENDING A TWENTY-YEAR MISTAKE!
Curtis J Neeley Jr., MFA is involved in litigation against the FCC in the United States. This litigation will change the way indecent photography is handled on internet wire communications FOREVER!
This US lawsuit will impact internationally! (US, UK, China, India, Iran, Europe, etc.)
This is WAY newsworthy but won't be mentioned by news or other media in desperate hope of keeping today's status quo of porn and other indecent image and indecent text flowing to anonymous public viewers.
THAT WAS A TWENTY-YEAR MISTAKE!
In the near future, NO INDECENCY will be allowed to be shown on wire or radio communication
© 2012 - 2024 CurtisNeeley
Comments26
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
BTW, I love and will help dA but the damages are sought from GOOG and NOT dA. 11,600,000,000 is <20% profits of GOOG while facing me in Federal Court but continuing the undesired trafficing in my indecent art from the past to minors and expanding this offensive action by scanning and putting nude images by me from book from a library in New York online.....