[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

Come on, good luck to OMF or whoever for trying to make a buck and if it forced the copywright issue all well and good.

No good claiming it went against Isaac's instructions - we are all guilty of that here quoting small sections of text and inserting pictures.

Isaac - "They are available as high resolution scans that I am giving away free, PROVIDED THEY ARE NOT MODIFIED IN ANY WAY AND ARE KEPT TOGETHER ALONG WITH THIS WRITTEN MATERIAL."

This reads as if it is just in correspondence to C2C - not specifically as a warning to all and sundry. How can you provide individual high res scans for download and then expect individuals to keep them together with the written material.

I don't think any merchandise has exactly broken this "request" anyway.

As to any copywright infringement the only way this would arise is if it was some form of VMC, otherwise who is going to put their hand up and how many fingers would it have !

Who knows, maybe everyone is being played by a higher power, maybe wearing the T-shirt or drinking from that mug causes the lanuague to have some effect and when the drones turn on everyone .......

He, he, if I was Chad/Isaac I would wait a couple of months so that more people started selling drone related items. Then I'd sue their butts to oblivion.

There's no shame in admitting the hoax. He managed to make a fool out of a lot of people, and he will get some cash from the ones that thought they were smarter than him. He can even write a book of how he had us all discussing for months while he sat there in front of his monitor -beer in hand-, laughing his ass off.

-Hell, I'd buy it.

Originally posted by yuefo

So what? You can't be sued by an anonymous party. Is Isaac going to come forward and admit the hoax?

Who knows? Isaac could come forward at any time as he/she committed no crime.

There is also something called public domain, which I think applies here. Isaac described the origin of the materials as the government project he was working on, which gave everyone the green light to use them how they saw fit,

The Government is an entity like any other and can hold copyright.

Are you suggesting no one should copy anything off the web via a personal sense of ethics, or do you actually think there's a legal implication with the selling of Isaac images? I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.

You can copy anything you want as long as you don't realize a financial gain from its use. You can use an image for an Avatar or as Wallpaper for instance. If you print it and hang it on a wall you are entering a gray zone as you are avoiding paying the artist for a print (this one is never pursued but that does not change the ethics involved). You would loose in court but the chances of that happening are slim. If you reproduce the image and sell it you are infringing. You can however include part of a work or reproduce a small element of a work in your own work. You can also do a Tribute to a work that resembles it but is not a copy of it.

This is often a gray area in the law. Putting an image on a T-Shirt is not in that gray area. If your doing these things it is up to you to find out how the law pertains to your commercial enterprise and it is nobody else's responsibility to inform you of your legal obligations. Hiring an attorney is always wise.

A person may try to profit off this stuff and get away with it with no problems but if the author comes forward with the original file(s) it would be hard to defend. The attorneys fee's alone would likely exceed any monies made.

I'm not an attorney but I am an artist who routinely sells work. I also do desktop publishing for my business, including helping customers create ads for the publications. I have never had a problem but I'm a believer in not taking risks where my livelihood is involved. In addition to that I have had a work stolen and used on a book cover. I'll never see a dime for that and the Graphic took me nearly a week to produce. 30 hours of my time stolen. That 30 hours includes the 30 plus years of experience and schooling involved. It is no different than if I were to steal 30 hours worth of someones wages. Stealing is stealing no matter how a person justifies it in their minds.

Originally posted by pjslug
If it is in fact an alien language, Isaac can no more copyright it than you could copyright Cuneiform.

In this case though it appears to be presented as a diagram or set of plans.

I'm obviously playing the devils advocate here but with reason. If this is a Hoax why extend it and make it worse by profiting from a hoax. A person can't criticize a hoaxer if they participate in the hoax.

Originally posted by chunder

No good claiming it went against Isaac's instructions - we are all guilty of that here quoting small sections of text and inserting pictures.....

......."They are available as high resolution scans that I am giving away free, PROVIDED THEY ARE NOT MODIFIED IN ANY WAY AND ARE KEPT TOGETHER ALONG WITH THIS WRITTEN MATERIAL."

Posting on a discussion board is not copyright infringement.

I don't see any mention of relinquishing copyright or permission to profit from the documents use.

Who knows? Nothing may ever come of it. Then again? This is not something I would do. The funny part is if this is a hoax and I believe it is, the issue of copyright becomes more of a problem than if it is real. I'm not sure I'd want to be the one to convince a judge that I believed it was real just because it was posted on the Internet

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I'm obviously playing the devils advocate here but with reason.

If this is a Hoax why extend it and make it worse by profiting from a hoax.

A person can't criticize a hoaxer if they participate in the hoax.

I'm not sure where you are coming from with the devils advocate comment but taking your statement at face value I disagree.

How does it make it worse - it's all a bit of fun really.

We are all participating in the hoax - ATS participates in it - are you saying someone like Saladfingers can't criticise the hoaxer ?

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Posting on a discussion board is not copyright infringement.

I don't see any mention of relinquishing copyright or permission to profit from the documents use.

Who knows? Nothing may ever come of it. Then again? This is not something I would do. The funny part is if this is a hoax and I believe it is, the issue of copyright becomes more of a problem than if it is real. I'm not sure I'd want to be the one to convince a judge that I believed it was real just because it was posted on the Internet

Just what is the copywright issue here ?

It's either a complete non-issue or will prove the thing a hoax or real if someone comes forward.

Originally posted by Farnswoth
He, he, if I was Chad/Isaac I would wait a couple of months so that more people started selling drone related items. Then I'd sue their butts to oblivion.

Really? How's he going to do that. He said, in writing, that he secreted the materials from a government program he was working on. I'll take a false claim like that to court and win hands down.

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by yuefo

So what? You can't be sued by an anonymous party. Is Isaac going to come forward and admit the hoax?

Who knows? Isaac could come forward at any time as he/she committed no crime.

See comment above.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
The Government is an entity like any other and can hold copyright.

Of course, but you're not paying attention to the details of my previous posts. One would be taking a calculated risk that doesn't take much calculation. Do you think the materials originate from a secret goverment program? Then you'd better not sell anything. Otherwise, sell away. Issac has already disclaimed his rights.

Nothing you have said persuades me that there's even a remote risk of being sued in my opinion. You've described how you were ripped off. That's a shame. Now I understand where you're coming from. I administer an artist awards program, and my firm produced 5 artist catalogs showcasing the award winners, so I know where you're coming from, and I also know a couple things about copyrights.

Honestly, you're being a little too sensitive to poor Isaac's rights. How about he reimburse everyone who's made a fool of themselves believing in his lies? Did you lie and say someone else created your artwork? No? Well then there's the difference.

[edit on 8/6/2007 by yuefo]

Originally posted by chunder

How does it make it worse - it's all a bit of fun really.

We are all participating in the hoax - ATS participates in it - are you saying someone like Saladfingers can't criticize the hoaxer ?

Not at all. As you said this is a "bit of fun" but with a serious side. By "devils advocate", I meant in the sense of I don't really have a horse in this race as I'm not the author. Criticize the Hoaxer by all means.

Originally posted by chunder

Just what is the copywright issue here ?

It's either a complete non-issue or will prove the thing a hoax or real if someone comes forward.

I will always have an issue with Copyright Infringement because of one of the ways I earn a living.

Printing the diagram on T-Shirts without the authors permission or even knowing if it is in public domain is Copyright Infringement. If I wanted to do that, I would contact someone who claims to be in contact with Isaac and have them forward a message and a reply. Easy enough to do and the right thing to do. Who knows? Isaac might say go ahead and do it. Of course if Isaac is telling the truth the diagram and the text documents are stolen in the first place.

Originally posted by yuefo

Honestly, you're being a little too sensitive to poor Isaac's rights. How about he reimburse everyone who's made a fool of themselves believing in his lies? Did you lie and say someone else created your artwork? No? Well then there's the difference.

[edit on 8/6/2007 by yuefo]

I could care less about Isaacs' rights. I'm just sharing what I have learned. Anyone is free to do whatever. If someone wants me to say it is alright to profit off others work without their permission I can not do that. I'm just another Bozo on the Bus who likes a good mystery or conspiracy.

I figure printing Isaacs stuff to sell for profit is not wise in my opinion. My opinion may not match someone else's opinion. My opinion is based on personal experience, reading on the topic and asking other artists who have experience in these things.

What you have here is:

1- Isaac is telling the truth and the documents are stolen and belong to the US Government or a Contractor for the US Government.

2- Isaac is lying and the documents belong to Isaac or a person or entity that was commissioned to produce the documents.

3- These documents do not belong to me or anyone other than the two possibilities mentioned above.

4- Anyone other than the producer of the documents would risk violating both civil and criminal law by knowingly profiting from someone else's work.

I am not trying to talk anyone into anything or out of anything. I do not have a horse in this race.

I suggest people who are interested do a search for articles relating to this topic. There is plenty of information out there. It is a complex topic that changes with every court decision.

Originally posted by yuefo
Honestly, you're being a little too sensitive to poor Isaac's rights. How about he reimburse everyone who's made a fool of themselves believing in his lies? Did you lie and say someone else created your artwork? No? Well then there's the difference.

[edit on 8/6/2007 by yuefo]

You state that with such conviction, as if you've proven Isaac's story is a lie. No one has proven any such thing. We have all lent opinions to both sides of the argument and it seems his story contains both truth and fiction, or at least misleads.

Originally posted by pjslug

You state that with such conviction, as if you've proven Isaac's story is a lie.

No one has proven any such thing. We have all lent opinions to both sides of the argument and it seems his story contains both truth and fiction, or at least misleads.

But neither way does it matter as far as who owns the rights to the pictures.

If he lied, and made the pictures himself, then he ought to claim them. And if they are stolen from some research, then what right has he to say how and where they are used?

Come out, come out, wherever you are!

Isaac, Isaac, oxen free!

I was browsing unknowncountry.com and they have a member who posted the following regarding the Drones: Posted on Thursday, July 26, 2007 - 5:36 pm: Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post
Do I Share IsaacCARET Schematic, or Not ? HELP !

Friends,

I have a bit of a dilemma on my hands here, one concerning a MAJOR SUBJECT :

You know the ' Isaac ' CARET Documents showing the Dragonfly/ Drone UFO Schematic ? The major Language Analysis Primer ?

isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...

isaaccaret.fortunecity.com...

Well, I have somehow managed TO FIGURE OUT ABOUT 90 % OF IT, in outline form, anyway.

And NOW I am really conflicted about whether or not to POST here my findings.....

This all started out with my writing a commentary on my impressions of the Isaac information, intending to share that with everyone here.
But NOW, things have taken a rather sudden and I think more serious turn, when some major information seemed to fall into place unexpectedly.

For starters, know that Isaac HAS ALREADY SUPPLIED sufficient information that would allow one TO PIECE TOGETHER THE CORRECT MEANING OF THE SCHEMATIC, in outline form, as I say.

The two key pieces of information that he supplied, which make possible the CERTAIN understanding of the larger picture, are

1 ) the fact that the Dragonfly device utilizes a Cloaking Device;

2 ) the fact of the presence of a Gravity Generator

And I assure you, I CAN POINT OUT ON THE SCHEMATIC the identity of the Cloak/ Projector and the identity of the Gravity Generator. And I AM CERTAIN OF THIS ! !

BUT, it does NOT stop there ! Because, you see, once you begin to see where one or two components fit in, you very quickly are able to deduce the functions of the other Schematic Symbols !

AND I AM ABOUT 90 % OF THE WAY !

So, I NOW have gotten myself into a really MAJOR MAJOR PROBLEM because, I NOW have to make A QUITE SERIOUS DECISION- DO I POST, or do I NOT post ?

I MEAN this- this is FOR REAL !

At this very moment, I have just copied the above Isaac document onto a floppy to take to the printers to make some hard copies which will expedite the making of some notations and sharing in person. But I have neither scanner nor graphics utility. Not even a printer !

And, personally, I am NOT liking the direction this stuff seems to be headed.

And all this comes up at a time when I do not have a lot of time to spare, as I am getting ready to go on a trip up North, into Ojibway Country.

Besides, I have a LOT of doubts and questions, mainly about whether and when and how to present this information, which I feel is solid : it almost feels like a TEST of some kind, it is all so far out ! I am worried that the Government may just be using us on a kind of fishing expedition, collecting information on UFO Technology from as many and varied sources as possible. And in the process ferreting out any ' traitors ' inclined to public disclosure.

Can anybody here SEE just HOW DEEP this is all getting ?

It just this moment occurred to me that maybe I ought to present A LIST NAMING THE SUBSYSTEMS I have definitely identified, but WITHHOLDING identifying their precise location on the schematic. Besides, it's a lot more FUN to try this FOR YOURSELF ! I REALLY THINK WE CAN DO THIS ! ! ( Isaac made the two I named pretty obvious, really. )

What do you all think ?
Is that a safe and balanced approach ?

If you so think, I will present the list anytime.
( We need to come up with our own in- house terminology allowing us to communicate our schematic references- but JUST DO YOUR BEST ! )

Kevin Puppos in Toledo

(Message edited by kevin_puppos on July 26, 2007)

There is more...

Posted on Friday, July 27, 2007 - 8:10 pm: Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post
Thanks Everyone,

For encouraging me to go ahead and post my ideas about the Schematic. I think it's unanimous !

Here is a list of proposed Subsystems for the IsaacCARET Dragonfly/ Drone Schematic, as I promised :

( I would offer the idea that you all take this list and try to match it up with the Schematic Symbols for yourselves ( the ' round things ', not the Script Glyphs ), see what kind of progress the discussion allows us, given that both Isaac and I have dropped a few hints along the way. This all can be a lot more FUN if I withhold my own views on the matching for a little while ! Besides keeping open the discussion options. )

Propulsion, a 3- Space Rigidity Attenuator/ Lock/ Navigator

Gravity Generator

Cloak/ Projector/ Camera that includes a Tri- Axial Emitter arrangement, a Polarizing Differentiator EMR Generator and a Coherent Near Field Re- Circulator ( which is like a highly tunable/ modulatable LASER ) which itself is connected to a smaller Semi- Autonomous Controller

Control, non- Autonomous ( includes a more distributed secondary system )

Control, Semi- Autonomous

Sub- Space Link ( Direct Communications Link to the Gray's Side of the Great Divide )

Autonomous Control ( includes a more distributed secondary system ) including showing what is possibly a Navigator Subsystem Planetary linked to Propulsion

Human Contact/ Presence Detection Subroutine Controller, responds to human contact with device, includes both Conditional and Un- Conditional Subroutines

Systems Integration : " the Core "

Those are all of the Subsystems I could identify and name to date. ( Excepting for one possible connection which I discuss below. )

You should, with a little thought and trial and error fit, be able to match an above name to a major component or components of the Schematic. I GUARANTEE IT ! ( OH ! It is, as far as I have experienced so far, NOT been necessary to ' know ' the meanings of the Symbolic Script to decypher this outline, but it stands to reason the Script will eventually HAVE TO BE understood to some level in order to go much further. For now, the only ' language ' you really need to be able to ' think ' in is basic Systems Theory, and I can coach you through that. I do NOT know the meaning of the Script, but it MAY BE decypherable : by the way, if you have noticed a generally circular orientation to each of the Script characters, YOU WOULD BE CORRECT ! )

Page 119 has sufficient resolution for this discussion at the scale of Subsystem.

Think in Systems Terms, meaning in terms of necessary Feedbacks ( among other properties, like relative Information Stream Density ), how one system needs to have give and take with the other systems, with some to a greater degree and with some to a lesser degree, some to the external environment ( which includes TWO Universes ! ), but most limited to the internal architecture. The entire thing is based on Phase Relationships, thus the circles everywhere !

Thus, fundamentally, the Schematic represents a Flow Chart, or Flow Diagram, showing Device Geometry at the scale of Subsystem AT LEAST, but I think much finer detail is derivable from the ' Bar Codes ' and the Script.

Excluding the Controllers and the Core, there are only 4 major Subsystems. Other items are secondary.

I believe the Projector is able to not only display Images analogous to LIGHT but ALSO able to project MENTAL IMAGES, which I think are used by the Grays or Living Alien Entities to convey Mental Inclinations or Spiritual Attitudes, if you prefer, into our Dimension, onto the humans. For example, I believe I see 2 ' taps ' running from the Sub- Space Com Link which intercept the ' Data ' Stream joining the Core to the CNFR-C LASER stage of the Projector. It is accomplished by ' piggy- backing ' Psychic Attitudes onto the Tri- Axial Projector Data Stream. The Aliens ARE ABLE TO AFFECT OUR MINDS !

...

I already posted how Isaac gave what I think are KEYS to unlocking the rest of the Schematic : he described the action and general architecture of the Gravity Generator, and he described in less detail about the Projector ( Cloak ).

I have already written a much more detailed discussion about the mechanism, but I think it is not appropriate to go into such detail yet. I will share that later. ( For a bit of a teaser, as I was writing in greater detail, the name ' Icke ' popped into mind ! You can read between the lines for yourself..... )

Kevin Puppos, Toledo, Ohio


I'm sorry for copying and pasting all of this. I know how annoying it can be. Ive noticed that there is a way to link but for some reason, whatever I copied would simply redirect me to their "topics" section in the forum and not the specific thread. Anyhoo, I felt that this might be worth contributing to this forum.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Anyone other than the producer of the documents would risk violating both civil and criminal law by knowingly profiting from someone else's work.

But you're conveniently ignoring what I've said repeatedly--by saying, in writing, that the materials aren't his but rather pilfered, he has reliquinshed rights to the property. I said it before and I'll say it again, you can take a document like that, his own document, into any court and walk out victorious. You can't lie about ownership, in writing, and turn around and sue someone. The judge isn't going to say, "Oh, you should have known it was a hoax and he was really the owner." He's also not going to say, "Well someone is the owner so you're guilty," which is basically what you're saying, because the person offended must file the charge. I'm not repeating this point again. Either you get it or you don't.

One other point--if a third party comes out of the woodwork and says it's his property and sues, the only person he can sue is--guess who--Isaac.

Originally posted by yuefo

But you're conveniently ignoring what I've said repeatedly--by saying, in writing, that the materials aren't his but rather pilfered, he has reliquinshed rights to the property.

So you are saying that because something is stolen the copyright held by the author no longer applies? The entity the documents were stolen from would no longer have any rights simply because it was stolen? We will have to agree to disagree I guess If his story is true the stolen document still belongs to someone. If someone steals my car and someone else who knows it is stolen then sells it they are not complicit in the crime? Property is property and the crime would be the same by both people.

I think we have carried this to its conclusion, agreement or no. I'd rather move on to finding more evidence. I'll admit I'm running out of search idea's. What is this odd stuff just posted above you??????????

Link to what sequel is posting about.
Second line for appearance sake.

Sorry won't work for me either. Search for the title on the search page and it comes up.

[edit on 8/6/2007 by Blaine91555]

Originally posted by Sequel
I already posted how Isaac gave what I think are KEYS to unlocking the rest of the Schematic : he described the action and general architecture of the Gravity Generator, and he described in less detail about the Projector ( Cloak ).

Cool. I wish you would show us how your descriptions match up to the individual schematics. I certainly don't know how to do it, and honestly I don't think anyone here has the patience for this subject anymore with regards to playing "games." It would be better if you just came out and show us how it works. Thanks. Kudos if you really did it.