Corrupt Federal Judge 2 of 3

Even so, the copyrights were all valid. Of Survivors 1 and 2
Judge Waters wrote (Exhibit B- 19), “The evidence before the court
indicates that Survivor 1 and Survivor 2 were publicly distributed in 1984, more
than one year before the date of the first publication. Thus, the copyright
protection on these works has been forfeited.”

The allusion to 1984 indicates an August 1984 ad in American
Survival Guide (Exhibit B-41) featuring Survivors 1 and 2, Poor Man’s James
Bond, Granddad’s Wonderful Book of Chemistry and others. The same ruling would
have invalidated the last two, but did not.

The books distributed in 1984, and before and after were duly
copyrighted earlier editions. In the 1987 edition of Survivor 1, the first page
(not the title page) says “Copyright 1976 by Kurt Saxon.” In the 1988
edition of Survivor 2, the first page (not the title page) says “Copyright
1977 by Kurt Saxon.”

The books in the ad were 11 1/2 x 14, on newsprint and,
except for a 1930 home workshop manual added as filler, were identical to the
original 24 issues copyrighted separately and bound in their original tabloid
format.

The Survivors 1 and 2 of 1987 and 1988 are 81/2 x 11, on
glazed paper, each with 1 1/2 times more material. They were registered as
compilations. The “Date-of first publication of this particular work”
(Copyright registration form TX) was 1987 for Vol. 1 and 1988 for Vol. 2.
Neither “particular work” existed in 1984.

PMJB 2 was first published in 1986. The copyright
registration said it was first published in 1988. The copyright notice for the
first printing of PMJB 2 was typed on the title page by Plaintiff. When Harper
reset the title page for the second printing he mistakenly wrote
“1988” instead of “1986.” When Plaintiff filled out the
copyright form he was copying from the second printing and repeated Harper’s
error. It was a simple clerical error, not meant to deceive so could not have
invalidated the copyright. Moreover, the first printing reflected the original
copyright date of “The Poor Man’s Armorer” copyrighted by Kurt Saxon
and distributed in 1977. (Exhibit B-42) This is not shown on the title page of
the second printing but the Poor Man’s Armorer’s copyright date is on page 6 of
PMJB 2.

Judge Waters ruled the copyright to PMJB 2 forfeited.
Regardless, a judge’s ignorance of the validity of a document does not
invalidate the document.

Discrediting the above three copyrights was important to
Judge Waters. Otherwise he might have had to acknowledge that Harper had
transferred 9,282 stolen books to Blann with a retail value of $157,794, losing
the case for the defense.

Had Judge Waters been impartial and wanted to see if
Plaintiff’s material was protected, he had but to ask. But throughout the trial
he did not once address himself to Plaintiff. Had he done so, the proof would
have been presented immediately, as it was in the courtroom throughout the
trial.

But none of this mattered to Judge Waters. He knew Plaintiff
had authored The Poor Man’s James Bond and was a Survivalist and was therefore
beyond the Pale.

During the trial, Judge Waters leafed through the PMJB and
commented, “I’m very disturbed by this material, especially the part about
poisoning winos.” Did he feel threatened? No matter. The subject matter of
Plaintiff’s works was not supposed to have any bearing on the outcome of the
trial.

When Blann ran out of the PMJBs he had illegally kept after
the property was signed over to him, plus something like 3,414 New Improved
PMJBs illegally transferred to him by Harper, he had Harper print 5,370 more.
(Exhibit C-25). Harper called Plaintiff and told him he was printing a run of
PMJB 1 for Blann. He asked Plaintiff if he would like a run of New Improved
PMJBs since all but the first 20 odd pages were the same and costs could be cut
for both parties by running both editions at the same time.

Plaintiff told Harper he didn’t want him to print PMJB 1 and
sent a letter of protest. (Exhibit C-17). They were printed anyway. (Exhibit
C-25).

Blann purposely removed the copyright notice from that
printing, jeopardizing its copyright. Blann wanted others to believe the
copyright no longer belonged to Plaintiff. (Exhibit B-30).

Although Judge Waters quoted the law: “A licensee’s
publication without copyright does not invalidate the copyright unless
publication occurred by or under the authority of the copyright holder,” he
still ruled the copyright invalid.

Judge Waters knew Plaintiff had protested the printing and
had no control over it, and in point of fact, Plaintiff didn’t even know the
copyright notice had been left out until much later. Even so, Judge Waters
ruled, “Saxon has failed to establish the applicability of any of the S 405
exceptions. Therefore, the copyright protection on PMJB 1 has been
forfeited.”

This ruling is not only completely wrong, but if allowed to
stand, it threatens every copyright in existence.

An important point in the trial was Judge Waters’ refusal to
see the marketability of the books Harper and Blann stole from Plaintiff.
Defense maintained only the 1,000 authorized books had been marketed. Plaintiff
sought to prove the 1,000 would not fill even the orders from the initial
135,000 catlogs Blann ordered from Harper.

Blann had been printing and sending out many hundreds of
thousands of catlogs. He had been buying name lists representing many thousands
of weapons buffs who were the best market for Plaintiff’s books and sending them
catlogs. Blann was also selling thousands of Plaintiff’s books at gun shows,
from his own tables and also to other gun show dealers in such books. He also
had display ads in just about every national gun magazine.

He was also selling thousands of Plaintiff’s books to
Plaintiff’s former dealers, who were also selling them through catlogs and
display ads in national magazines.

A definite factor in the sale of the books was that
Plaintiff’s books had been virtually off the market for two years. Now with PMJB
1 in a new format and enlarged and with the brand new PMJB 2 and 3 plus
Chemistry and the new Survivors 1 and 2, Blann had new books for the same
market. Even those who had bought Plaintiff’s original works wanted the new
editions.

Blann had no problem selling a paltry 17,164, or an average
of 2,860 of each title in the next few months.

But Harper wasn’t doing that well, in giving Plaintiff so
much credit, on behalf of Blann, Harper was deeply in debt to DP&L. What
with Blann clearly cornering the market in books stolen from Plaintiff,
Plaintiff was unable to make large enough payments to satisfy Harper. On August
3, 1988. Harper wrote Plaintiff a four page letter explaining how much he had
gone into debt printing the 30,000 books and how much Plaintiff still owed.

The letter listed five books prepared for printing at $4,000
each (PMJB 2 had been prepared previously), or $20,000. Next was a cost of
$5,000 for paper for each of the six books, or $30,000. Then was the cost of
$8,000 for the printing of each book, or $48,000, for a total of $98,000. Harper
had borrowed from his wife and son and was deeply in debt to DP&L and feared
an accounting.

The letter listed a payment of $7,500 from Blann for the
1,000 authorized books. It followed with “Total paid, $33,500” and
“Balance, $68,396.”

Soon after writing that letter, harper regretted it. Had
Plaintiff come up with the balance and demanded delivery, an accounting would
have had to be made of the books illegally transferred to Blann. The remainder
of the books could not have been reprinted as cheaply as had been done in
increments of 5,000. Too much juggling of figures would have tripped him up with
DP&L.

“Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice
to deceive.”

Moreover, Harper couldn’t apply the moneys paid by Blann for
the books to Plaintiff’s account because Blann wasn’t supposed to have them.

So in subsequent letters, Harper denied having printed 5,000
of each of the six books. Too late!

When confronted with the letter of 8-3-’88 at the Deposition,
(Exhibit C-3), Harper babbled. “But these figures don’t have anything to do
with anything. They don’t have anything to do with books that were printed. They
don’t have anything to do with what Kurt paid. They don’t have anything to do
with anything. This is what it would have cost had I printed five thousand
copies of each of those books. And that was never done.”

Of that most incriminating letter, Judge Waters wrote,
“On August 3, 1988, Harper sent Saxon the figures on Granddad’s, Survivor
1, Survivor 2, PMJB, PMJB 2 and PMJB 3. These figures indicated Saxon owed a
total of $98,000 for printing 5,000 copies of each of the six books.

“Harper testified that these figures represented the
amount Saxon would have owed DP&L had 5,000 copies of each book been
printed. Harper stated he had written this letter in anger. Italics Plaintiff’s.

This was the end of Judge Waters’ comment on the letter.
Note: he didn’t comment on the inclusion, “Total paid by Kurt-
$33,500” and “Balance $68,396.” Judge Waters makes the letter
unimportant by saying, “Harper stated he had written this letter in
anger.”

So Judge Waters discounted the letter’s contents because
Harper was angry! According to Harper and Judge Waters the letter was simply a
cost estimate. Then why the anger? Harper was angry because Plaintiff had only
paid $33,500 of the $98,000 he owed. But if the letter was only an estimate,
Plaintiff would not have owed $98,000; would not have already paid $33,500. If
the letter was only an estimate and Harper was angry, Harper would have simply
refused to print the books and the matter would have ended then and there.

Judge Waters willfully, wrongfully and with extreme
prejudice, discounted the most important document. That document proved Harper
was a liar. It proved he had indeed printed 30,000 books for Plaintiff, had
delivered only 11,836 and could not account for the remaining 17,164, unless he
admitted selling them secretly to Blann.