Re: Kelman v Kramer ruling 12.29.09
Posted by Deborah on 1/06/10
Speculation, assumption, and innuendo..
I would like to hear what Dr. Saxon has to say about it.
If I contract with you for a specific job, paper, etc.., I would take issue if you
were to affiliate my name, as in co-author, to another paper even if it were a
purported "lay translation"; in other words, if the paper were to be translated, even
if to another language, I would want to have final authorization for use of my name
upon it even if it meant hiring a credible language specialist. A "good name" for
business is a highly valuable commodity.
On 1/06/10, Deborah wrote:
> On 1/06/10, johncodie wrote:
>> On 1/06/10, Deborah wrote:
>>> so, you would have no problem with your name being used prominently to market
>>> a product for the purpose of generating a profit even if you were unaware of
>>> it and thus without having authorized its use, especially if the product was
>>> of little merit and may very well cause harm by it promoting false and/or
>>> seriously flawed information?
>> I believe it has been proven, at least confirmed that Ms Kramer had a prior
>> legal disagreement with Kelman and made the decision to make that known in
>> public as to cause some type damage to Mr. Kelman. Either it to make up for the
>> losses she incurred as a result, or for the emotional benefits of retribution.
>> The facts of the case have been sketchy but the time involved in the history
>> appears to be from eight to ten years.
>> Why would I have a problem with my name being used, it is not trade marked and
>> most reputable establishment has one designated for either of the
>> sexes. "John". Mr Saxon was a member of an association and had entered into
>> some agreements of peer review. Mrs Obama just got her picture on the side of
>> busses for not wearing furs. The White House might not be happy about it, but
>> she is a public figure, and has previously expressed her opinion.
>> Mr Saxon is a public figure and was involved in writting a paper for a group.
>> He had knowledge, and associations. Did he or has he written a paper that
>> totaly disagrees with what was published. Where is his paper? He stated that
>> the laymans terms paper was published with his name on it. That may be true,
>> that might be false. Was Mr Saxon ever involed in the Globaltox firm? It is a
>> matter of record they were employed on a common paper.
>> With ever emerging tort reform, I would not place much of any faith in a laymens
>> term position paper. Much of all LCD televisions made today are made in china,
>> and are disposable with no repair parts made. Love those extended warranties
>> for labor and repair without repair parts made. This has come to the bare
>> minimum insurance companies pays, and health care reform that has not been
>> defined as to the metrics of equality of care.
>> Sure Kramer had a beef with Kelman in extrapolating animal data to say her
>> daughters near death due to mycotoxins in their home was'nt supported by the
>> medical community. But that does not provide the data to the contray. The
>> accusation of misconduct of Mr. Kelman by Ms Kramer as to perjury has not been
>> substantiated by the judicial system. I don't see any court entertaining any
>> malfesence correction that has gone this long.
>> One of our Supreme Court Justices approached the Legislature with the following
>> quote "Justice Delayed, Justice Denied". One of our most notable civil right
>> judges begin 18 months in Kentucky prison for lying to the FBI concerning one
>> lie. It was a lie about a conversation and association.
>> I see from Ms Kramers recent posting some decline. It shows the lack of rest
>> and continue persuit of trival matters. More dribble or grammer correction. If
>> the justice department can't get the Emit Teel murder back into trail what would
>> warrant misuse of a prior contributor on a laymens paper on effects of
Posts on this thread, including this one