TED Entertainment Inc. v. Alexandra Marwa Saber, Morgan Kamal Majed, and Kasey Caviness, California 2:25-cv-5564, 2:25-cv-5565,Missouri 4:25-cv-459 - Ethan Klein Suing three women and 10 redditors for Copyright Infringement.

Unknown God · 5 Cze 2026

Ed Craven powiedział(a):
and was the sort of shit the music and movie industry would claim throughout the 2000s and 2010s.

Way before, these faggots have been at it for much longer. The Simpson's episode "Homer vs. Lisa and the 8th Commandment" aired in 1991 and the entire plot is about how Homer's pirate cable hookup is "stealing", complete with shameless summoning of religion in a transparent attempt to manipulate Christian people for the financial benefit of Hollywood kikes. The only reason to be upset at this judgement is that it won't make any type of solid precedent further limiting copyright liability and it only serves for the faggot California court to protect an anti-America liberal commie e-prostitute because that's what California is all about, but if it actually put a dent on copyright law for real it would be a reason to celebrate and Ethan could go suck a lemon.

MrMM · 5 Cze 2026

AnOminous powiedział(a):
You sure about that? Federal courts often have Zoom and it looks like this one does.
Wyświetl załącznik 9099578

https://cacd-uscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1606398963?pwd=WWhvSlVWY2YxNEhFQkhnZTZoTWo3UT09

I don't know about this particular hearing, but it seems like all the judges in this district have Zoom links. Anyway, worth at least giving it a shot.

The judge's zoom room is live as of this moment for another matter. Ethan should be up shortly, for those curious.

If you watch, another reminder, *no recording*.

Edit: Potentially a false alarm, they took down the stream after the last matter and it is unclear if it will be started for H3's hearing

Gobermental Supervisor · 5 Cze 2026

Unknown God powiedział(a):
but if it actually put a dent on copyright law for real it would be a reason to celebrate and Ethan could go suck a lemon

I do not think anyone has been in favor of Ethan winning because Ethan is such a great guy. I could not care less if Ethan gets a win, I just want the Liberal Sandnigger Terrorist supporters be financially ruined and have their lives in shambles.

I am generally anti-copyright in its current iteration as a matter of principle, because it is a law created by big corpo for big corpo and generally disfavors the average citizen.
BUT
I do not think these Streamniggers sitting in front of the camera re-streaming content to make money is the type of "pirating" I want to champion.

I champion the students pirating their college textbooks because big corpo publishers and professors are milking the US education system and students for millions of dollars by forcing them to buy THEIR special textbook.

I champion the public viewing of privately bought movies 10 years after their cinematic release, without Hollywood being able to sue people into the ground because they showed Iron Man 1 to an audience of 47 people on a block party.

I support trademarks/copyrights expiring after 15 years instead of 50, no matter if the creator is still alive.

Unimaginative Username · 5 Cze 2026

AnOminous powiedział(a):
This was based on my apparently incorrect assumption of not having a mongoloid judge, and by that I mean a chink idiot from Los Angeles. Look at this faggot.
Wyświetl załącznik 9104551
Thanks Biden!

I'd been wondering if Denims might have gone the extra mile and sucked off the judge in exchange for a favorable ruling, but with gayface that severe, I'm starting to have doubts, although I suppose he could have just closed his eyes and pretended she was a teenage boy.

Hildy's interior cuckshed · 5 Cze 2026

Null powiedział(a):
I'm the nigger of the entire world

Nonsense, niggers usually have plenty of kids.

3-2-1836 · 5 Cze 2026

Nick G powiedział(a):
Courts decide issues based on the arguments the parties make, not the arguments they should have made. If you think about this decision in the context of the filings before the court, the decision makes sense.

Klein's complaint was a disaster. He sued Denims for copyright infringement knowing her defense would be fair use. The correct strategic choice would be to minimize any contribution by Denims, only briefly noting only that she made occasional comments that added nothing. Instead, Klein spent several pages complaining about the content of Denims' commentary. In one section, he makes the asinine argument that Denims' commentary should not be protected because it is misinformation. This is a David Stebbins argument with better grammar.

Similarly, the correct strategic choice would be to claim audience overlap, such that it was plausible that somebody watching Denims would have watched Ethan but for her reaction stream. Klein spent pages upon pages explaining that Denims' audience hated H3 and there was no overlap.

It is true that Klein averred that Denims held a "watch party" and her commentary was not transformative, but these are conclusory statements that judges give no weight to. The factual allegations from Ethan's own complaint about Denims' stream and her audience weigh against these conclusions. The Court cited to Ethan's complaint extensively in the decision, explaining as much.

This is the same issue that Akilah Hughes had when she sued Carl Benjamin (Sargon of Akaad). She made conclusory statements about Benjamin's video being non-transformative. She then spent the majority of the complaint explaining that Benjamin's video was spreading hate against her and that they had completely different audiences.

And this kids is why, if you aren't named Greer, plightsperging only sends your case into the ground.

That said I applaud you for such a concise takedown of his complaint as I only see seething from absolutely detestable people from the other side.

MrMM · 5 Cze 2026

Me rereading my old messages in this thread, sad at the news from the last 24-hours

:

MrMM powiedział(a):
There's a world where a judge could rule Kaceytron loses, because smoking and sitting silently isn't fair use, and a judge rules Denims wins, because she spent 5 hours and 6 minutes on the 1 hour and 42 minute content nuke "transforming" it to be compliant with fair use.

MrMM powiedział(a):
I still think the defendants are going to lose, but their individual cases are not identical, and some have better defenses than others (that I'm not going to elaborate here and give any free advice to motivated onlookers).

ETA: On a second review of the Denims complaint, 5 hours and 6 minutes is not accurate. That's just the timestamp of the video referenced. Subtract 1 hour and 15 minutes from that (~3 hours 50 minutes).

Denims always had the strongest fair use case, and I acknowledged it back in August of last year. I think I just assumed the obvious malicious intent stated by Denims would override the fair use defense.

gaba pentin3493 · 5 Cze 2026

I missed it, was anyone able to watch the hearing via Zoom?

Gobermental Supervisor · 5 Cze 2026

gaba pentin3493 powiedział(a):
I missed it, was anyone able to watch the hearing via Zoom?

The hearing was not streamed via Zoom, as it was held in person.

I would be very surprised if Rom managed to, in person, change the mind of the judge.
I expect the judge to do exactly what he wrote and not be swayed. (I would celebrate it, but I doubt it)

EDIT: No ruling today. Oral arguments were heard and taken under submission.

Two Frogs · 5 Cze 2026

Historical Strelkov powiedział(a):
You aren't adding to the work any more than niggers in the theater saying "OH LAWD DON'T GO IN THERE, DON'T GO IN THERE HE IN THERE GURL SHIIIET"

That nigger is adding entertainment value

TherapyMan · 5 Cze 2026

Nick G powiedział(a):
Courts decide issues based on the arguments the parties make, not the arguments they should have made. If you think about this decision in the context of the filings before the court, the decision makes sense.

Basically the correct take, and a cautionary tale of why you don't let your client write the lawsuit. Sometimes the client accidentally includes details that prove the opposing party's affirmative defense in an attempt to get an own in—which the court notes here. Whoops!

There's a universe where this case survives a 12(c) motion, but Ethan was too busy grandstanding and sucking his own dick.

Historical Strelkov · 5 Cze 2026

Two Frogs powiedział(a):
That nigger is adding entertainment value
Wyświetl załącznik 9106188

CONDUCTOR WE HAVE A PROBLEM

Terrifik · 5 Cze 2026

Sweet sweet victory

https://x.com/i/status/2063071232636092611

Turk roach from behind for the assist

https://x.com/Awk20000/status/2063036061308317781?s=20

Hasan calls out Ethan Klein and everyone else (Asmongold, xQc, etc) who championed against Denims in his lawsuit, hopes MoistCr1TiKaL and Philip DeFranco cover the situation

"This is Israeli mindset..not shocking to me his lawyer is a West Bank settler, not shocking that Ethan Klein loves Israel..u think u get to have a say in how ppl transform ur content, are u f'in stupid?"

"A lot of our opposition are unbelievably stupid or just horrible monsters, sometimes both..every single major content creator on this platform was championing this lawsuit..it would have gutted react content..they should be kissing Denims feet..screeching at Ethan..but no they were too h-ny to bully a bunch of pro Palestine women that they don't like..they didn't even think about the consequences"

"The work was transformative..Ethan was simply trying to sue ppl into submission bc he didn't like what they had to say, how's that for f'in free speech..at some point we finally got to say, this was a ridiculous process..Philip DeFranco MoistCr1TiKaL there's gonna be a point where ppl actually cover this stuff..I hope"

"U don't seem to understand a lot my friend..ya Asmongold famous at conducting research..what he means by that is groking it..was it (Frogan defaulting)..or are u just as stupid and don't know what happened..the answer will shock u..u were just wrong on that too..and all the other lawyers"

"I saw a clip of Asmongold crying and complaining that I was being as being soft as baby sh*t against this MorePegasus situation..what's really funny..Asmongold has actively demanded the federal government take care of me"

"This guy covers lawsuits all the time..unless it's one of his best friends and it's a R suit..he loves lawsuits..for him to turn around cry foul in this moment is very funny, he's celebrated Ethan's lawsuits..he's even actively told his audience that R-Tone was k*lling it, same xQc*ck"

oh no its pipkun · 5 Cze 2026

do you think kaceytron feels dumb for settling now that denims showed there was a potential path forward? i assume ethan's complaints agajbst those two were the same.

MrMM · 5 Cze 2026

oh no its pipkun powiedział(a):
do you think kaceytron feels dumb for settling now that denims showed there was a potential path forward? i assume ethan's complaints agajbst those two were the same.

Maybe? I mean she exited by just giving away what was left of her gofundme and was presumably pleased to put it behind her.

Her fair use argument was absolutely the worst, as she smoked her brains out and didnt do anything to plausibly transform the content.

And her case was in the Western District of Missouri, unlikely to get as cute and come up with a ruling like the Honorable Wesley Hsu in Los Angeles.

But she is dumb, so maybe she thinks she had a shot.

AirMail · 6 Cze 2026

Went pretty much how I thought it would. Ruling is reasonable, and despite what people are saying, set no interesting precedent at all.

For factual content, restreaming with the intent to disagree is fair use. In order to effectually disagree you really have to use the whole thing. And hate watching does not necessarily steal any views, because hate watching can be induced.

Ed Craven · 6 Cze 2026

AirMail powiedział(a):
In order to effectually disagree you really have to use the whole thing.

I’m not sure that’s true. While I’d agree that to effectively critique a work one would have to see all of it, but that doesn’t mean that if you’re to publish your critique you’d have to use all of it. I really think the judge has fallen short on ruling about why using the full work was proportionate.

AirMail · 6 Cze 2026

Ed Craven powiedział(a):
but that doesn’t mean that if you’re to publish your critique you’d have to use all of it.

If you don't react to 100% of it, then you leave yourself open to criticism of cherry picking, selective editing, and taking things out of context. To be truly effective as a rebuttal, you need to at least have the right to use 100% of the material.

Drama Trauma · 6 Cze 2026

Denims might have saved the Jomhas from a lawsuit from Ethan, lol. What a twist of turns.

Garm · 6 Cze 2026

lolwatagain powiedział(a):
One thing I'm not particularly fond of with the tentative is that it does not analyze how much of the "commentary" is incidental or relevant to the underlying work. Even in the tentative itself, I'm not certain how the fuck "(3) stating that disabled Americans lose disability benefits when they get married;(4) incarceration levels in the United States" relates in any way to "criticism of Piker’s apologia of China’s genocide of the Uyghurs." Disability benefits and incarceration levels in the US seems like a hell of a non-sequitur when it comes to commenting on the Turkroach deepthroating China for killing Uyghurs.

That's what I was wondering. This ruling seems to imply that you could go get a bipolar homeless man wearing a sandwich board that says "ask about my alien abduction", have him just ramble while a video plays and that is somehow appropriately transformative.

That "runtime" is more important "content."

#	Date	Description	Filing
44	9 Cze 2026	STATUS REPORT PURSUANT TO THE COURT'S MARCH 2, 2026 ORDER [DKT. NO. 29] filed by Plaintiff Ted Entertainment, Inc.. (Bar-Nissim, Rom) (Entered: 06/10/2026)	PDF
43	5 Cze 2026	COMPACT DISC Order for date of proceedings 06/05/2026 to 06/05/2026 filed by Plaintiff Ted Entertainment, Inc.. Court will contact Rom Bar-Nissim at Rom@HeahBarNissim.com with any questions regarding this order. Transcript portion requested: Pre-Trial Proceeding: Hearing for Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings on June 5, 2026. FEE PAID. (Bar-Nissim, Rom) (Entered: 06/06/2026)	PDF
42	4 Cze 2026	MINUTES OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AS TO COMPLAINT 35 Hearing held before Judge Wesley L. Hsu. The Court's Tentative Ruling was issued on June 4, 2026, and reviewed by counsel. The Court heard oral argument. The Court took the matter UNDER SUBMISSION and a ruling will be issued. Court Recorder: CourtSmart. (lom) (Entered: 06/05/2026)	PDF
41	2 Cze 2026	SCHEDULING NOTICE AND (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER CHANGING THE TIME OF THE MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings as to Complaint 35 scheduled for 6/05/2026 by Judge Wesley L. Hsu: The Court, on its own motion, changes the time to 2:15 PM. The hearing will proceed in-person at the First Street Courthouse, Courtroom 9B. IT IS SO ORDERED.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (cgm) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 06/03/2026)
—	2 Cze 2026

#	Date	Description	Filing
16	19 Maj 2026	DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Morgan Kamal Majed p/k/a Frogan. (iv) (Entered: 05/20/2026)	PDF
15	18 Maj 2026	REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against defendant Morgan Kamal Majed filed by Plaintiff Ted Entertainment Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Exhibit) (Bar-Nissim, Rom) (Entered: 05/19/2026)	1 2 3
14	4 Sie 2025	ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION RE: EXTEND ING THE DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT 13 by Judge John F. Walter. Frogan's deadline to respond to TEI's complaint extended to October 3, 2025. (iv) (Entered: 08/06/2025)	PDF
13	4 Sie 2025	STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to October 3, 2025 re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), 1 filed by Plaintiff Ted Entertainment Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Bar-Nissim, Rom) (Entered: 08/05/2025)	1 2
12	17 Lip 2025	PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Ted Entertainment Inc., upon Defendant Morgan Kamal Majed served on 7/14/2025, answer due 8/4/2025. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Jane Doe - Member of Household in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by substituted service at home address and by also mailing a copy (Bar-Nissim, Rom) (Entered: 07/18/2025)	PDF

#	Date	Description	Filing
27	7 Gru 2025	ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice as to Defendant Kacey Caviness p/k/a Kaceytron only. In the event that the settlement is not perfected, any party may move to reopen the case, provided that such motion is filed within 45 days of the date of this Order. In addition, the Court retains jurisdiction over enforcement of the settlement agreed to by the parties. Signed on 12/8/25 by District Judge Brian C Wimes. (TLD) (Entered: 12/08/2025)	PDF
26	1 Gru 2025	STIPULATION of dismissal without prejudice as to Defendant Kacey Caviness p/k/a Kaceytron by Ted Entertainment, Inc.. (Bar-Nissim, Rom) (Entered: 12/02/2025)	PDF
25	7 Paź 2025	DESIGNATION OF NEUTRAL by Kacey Caviness, Does 1-10. (Kassis, Benjamin) (Entered: 10/08/2025)	PDF
24	5 Paź 2025	PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed on 10/6/25 by District Judge Brian C Wimes. (TLD) (Entered: 10/06/2025)	PDF
23	1 Paź 2025	Joint MOTION for protective order for Approval of Proposed Protective Order filed by Benjamin Kassis on behalf of Kacey Caviness. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 10/16/2025 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Kassis, Benjamin) (Entered: 10/02/2025)	PDF

#	Date	Description	Filing
48	1 Cze 2026	USCA Case Number 26-3553 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for 46 Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit filed by Doe Defendants. (pjf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/2/2026) Modified on 6/3/2026 (pjf, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 06/03/2026)	PDF
47	31 Maj 2026	USCA Case Number 26-3513 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for 49 Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit filed by Doe Defendants. (pjf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/1/2026) Modified on 6/3/2026 (pjf, COURT STAFF). Modified on 6/4/2026 (pjf, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 06/02/2026)	PDF
49	28 Maj 2026	Petition For Writ Of Mandamus filed Directly with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (pjf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/29/2026) Modified on 6/4/2026 (cjl, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 06/04/2026)	PDF
46	28 Maj 2026	NOTICE OF APPEAL to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals filed by Doe Defendants. Appeal of Order, Terminate Motions 45 (Appeal fee of $605 receipt number ACANDC-22041800 paid.) (Vulic, Leah) (Filed on 5/29/2026) (Entered: 05/29/2026)	PDF
45	28 Kwi 2026	ORDER DENYING MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS. Signed by Judge Sallie Kim on 4/29/2026. (bxl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2026) (Entered: 04/29/2026)	1 2

#	Date	Description	Filing
9	21 Cze 2026	ADDED Counsel for Petitioner Jeffrey Michael Rosenfeld [Entered: 06/22/2026 02:10 PM]
8	21 Cze 2026	NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey Michael Rosenfeld for Petitioner Doe Defendants. [Entered: 06/22/2026 01:26 PM]
7	14 Cze 2026	DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to FRAP 26.1 and CR 26.1-1 filed by Real Party in Interest Ted Entertainment, Inc.. [Entered: 06/15/2026 03:03 PM]	PDF
6	3 Cze 2026	CORRESPONDENCE filed by Petitioner Doe Defendants. [Court entered filing to correct DE 5] [Entered: 06/04/2026 03:28 PM]	PDF
5	3 Cze 2026	DEFECTIVE---STATUS REPORT filed by Petitioner Doe Defendants. [Wrong filing type, corrected in DE 6] [Entered: 06/04/2026 03:09 PM] [Edited: 06/04/2026 03:29 PM]

TED Entertainment Inc. v. Alexandra Marwa Saber, Morgan Kamal Majed, and Kasey Caviness, California 2:25-cv-5564, 2:25-cv-5565,Missouri 4:25-cv-459 - Ethan Klein Suing three women and 10 redditors for Copyright Infringement.

Ted Entertainment, Inc. v. Alexandra Marwa Saber 2:25-cv-05564 — District Court, C.D. California

Parties (3)

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 45)

Ted Entertainment Inc. v. Morgan Kamal Majed 2:25-cv-05565 — District Court, C.D. California

Parties (3)

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 16)

Ted Entertainment, Inc. v. Caviness 4:25-cv-00459 — District Court, W.D. Missouri

Parties (3)

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 36)

In re. Subpoenas to Reddit, Inc. and Ddiscord, Inc. 3:25-mc-80296 — District Court, N.D. California

Parties (2)

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 60)

Doe Defendants v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco 26-3513 — Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Parties (3)

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 9)

Quoth the Raven? No, fuck Poe!

Live from the Goobybunker.

A Free, Sovereign, and Independent Republic.

Quoth the Raven? No, fuck Poe!

Live from the Goobybunker.

Załączniki

Card games Addict that like Kamen Rider.

Quoth the Raven? No, fuck Poe!

Sponsored by Chirprael