Removal of College Fraternity Secrets Threads, page 1

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 10:54 AM

link

I apologise for having to remove the College Fraternity Secrets topic, but I have been contacted by representatives of fraternities recently asking that information relating to their secret initiation ceremonies and rituals be removed.

They have legal cause to raise this concern, and as such I must comply.

Please be careful what you post in future. Despite AboveTopSecret.com's purpose of open alternative discussion, we must still comply with the law.

Mirthful Me

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:04 AM

link

I'll just have to see how this plays out, the beer drinking frat boys are worried about the world knowing that they dress up funny, and paddle each other (a little light S&M between consenting adults is O.K. by me), but the Freemasons, bent on world domination, have never lifted a legal finger to subvert anything that has been portrayed (factual or not) on ATS. The silence is deafening, Guess I'll have to stick to charities and community service... darn, the whole world domination thing was kind of appealing to me.

NumberI

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:17 AM

link

If anything I think the Sigma Chi challenge thread should be removed b4 the college fraternity secrets thread was. That thread specifically has info about their secrets. The college fraternity secrets thread if i recall correctly never stated any secrets of various fraternities in the thread. correct me if i am wrong.

darkspace

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:19 AM

link

well the catched thread is still on google for those who want to see it

SkipShipman

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:22 AM

link

People ought to know where they really stand, and realize what rights are applicable to such situations.

You would not hesitate to report wrongdoing because you were worried about copyrights. There is an extent of fair use, while tending to be an individual case by case basis that is operating here. Most people prefer to avoid confrontation, but just how wrong is all this "secret society," information? Is there a public interest, maybe even a matter of public safety issue to point out?

If you find people who sit in a coffin and swear allegiance to canned deviled ham, wouldn't you be right to want to question that, determine the facts, and put a stop to it, even if "harmless fun?" We need less nonsense in this world and more intelligent understanding.

Hey if that is what you do in a fraternity, then wake up already, there is a larger world than that, and more responsibility than appeasing your so called "friends."

www.chillingeffects.org...

[edit on 11-7-2004 by SkipShipman]

hallucinated

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:24 AM

link

Lol, what the hell is with college fraternities. These people need to get lives.

darkspace

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 11:26 AM

link

Originally posted by hallucinated
Lol, what the hell is with college fraternities. These people need to get lives.

some fraternaties is probably a gateway to other "organisations"
mayby that's why.

slickwilly95991

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:02 PM

link

I doubt anyone with authority contacted ATS on a Sunday to complain. Considering the thread pretty much had all pro-fraternity content. I fail to see the problem with this.

I think it's clear that ATS is playing on the conspiracy theory with this blatant censorship. I think their view is that the thread didn't have enough anti-fraternity talk and that is the reason to get rid of it.

23rd_Degree

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:05 PM

link

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
the beer drinking frat boys are worried about the world knowing that they dress up funny, and paddle each other

Hold on now. Us frat boys drink beer, that is true. But are you suggesting that Masons are not drinkers? I've heard quite the opposite. But I guess it would be silly of me to make such a generalization about a group as large as the Masons, no?

Dress up funny? I don't think a Mason is in any position to talk about funny outfits. Honestly, do you consider a suit a funny outfit? Maybe we have different ideas on that.

And really, the whole paddling thing is bunk. I've never heard of anyone in a fraternity actually being hit with a paddle, and I've talked to a lot of different fraternity groups about hazing. I'm sure it's happened before, but I can assure you it ain't the norm. Animal House is a great movie though.

I almost always agree with damn near everything you post, but I have to take issue with you here.

slickwilly95991

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:27 PM

link

Originally posted by SimonGray
I apologise for having to remove the College Fraternity Secrets topic, but I have been contacted by representatives of fraternities recently asking that information relating to their secret initiation ceremonies and rituals be removed.

They have legal cause to raise this concern, and as such I must comply.

Please be careful what you post in future. Despite AboveTopSecret.com's purpose of open alternative discussion, we must still comply with the law.

I question this even more because this website is based in the UK and all the college fraternities are in the US. They have absolutely no claim. Fraternity rituals are not copywritten, to do so would cause the secret nature to be bunk. Every copyright and patent must be presented in writing to the library of congress. And as we all know the Library of Congress story is a myth. There are no rituals on file at the LOC.

I would like to see some of the paperwork on this.

Mirthful Me

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:33 PM

link

Originally posted by 23rd_Degree
Hold on now. Us frat boys drink beer, that is true. But are you suggesting that Masons are not drinkers? I've heard quite the opposite. But I guess it would be silly of me to make such a generalization about a group as large as the Masons, no?

Dress up funny? I don't think a Mason is in any position to talk about funny outfits. Honestly, do you consider a suit a funny outfit? Maybe we have different ideas on that.

And really, the whole paddling thing is bunk. I've never heard of anyone in a fraternity actually being hit with a paddle, and I've talked to a lot of different fraternity groups about hazing. I'm sure it's happened before, but I can assure you it ain't the norm. Animal House is a great movie though.

I almost always agree with damn near everything you post, but I have to take issue with you here.

No need for the "Third Degree" treatment (get the bright light out of my sensitive simian eyes), I think your sensitivities are shining through the mists of my posts obscurities. No doubt the Masons drink, and there is nothing thirstier than a Shriner after a parade on a hot July day. As to beer, I prefer Bordeaux or a Single Malt (18 year plus, unless it's a special occasion and then it better be vintage), but that's just old age creeping in. As to the funny dress, why I'll put my Fez and tuxedo, or my Kilt (the thought of old men in skirts huffing, puffing and squeezing to get nine notes with no flats or sharps...) or my Turban, Robes, Saif (that would be an Arabian Sword) while conducting initiations, against the regalia of any fraternity... after all... we did it first.

In all seriousness, my post reflects the absurdity of removing any content that is sensitive (certainly content that violates the "Terms of Use" does not apply here) simply because some one, or some organization feels that they have been wrongfully exposed. The most likely explanation is that this is a "nuisance value" decision based on the potential cost of addressing any legal filing. Unless ATS decides to become a for profit organization (goodbye membership), with a "war chest" to combat any and all legal petitions, such tactics will from time to time succeed. Innocence and youth is lost as well...

Masonic Light

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:37 PM

link

Originally posted by SkipShipman
If you sit in a coffin and swear allegiance to canned deviled ham, wouldn't you be right to want to question that, determine the facts, and put a stop to it, even if "harmless fun?"

Why? What makes you think it's any of your (or my or anybody else's) business? You want to "put a stop to it"? What gives you the right?

If some idiot wants to worship a canned ham, he can do so. That's what freedom is all about.

Fiat Lvx.

Mirthful Me

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:49 PM

link

Originally posted by SkipShipman
If you sit in a coffin and swear allegiance to canned deviled ham, wouldn't you be right to want to question that, determine the facts, and put a stop to it, even if "harmless fun?" We need less nonsense in this world and more intelligent understanding.

What if the ham was "smoked" or "sugar cured", would it be O.K. then? Spam is out of the question, right. I mean anyone who would defend Spam to the death, is just a little too far out there for my taste. Personally if I was going to put my hand over my heart, and part with my immortal soul over a piece of animal flesh, I think I would have to go with some 28 day dry aged Kobe Beef... but that's me. In addition, we don't sit in the coffin, we lay down in it, just wanted to clear that up. "Beef, it's not just for initiations".

23rd_Degree

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:53 PM

link

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
In all seriousness, my post reflects the absurdity of removing any content that is sensitive (certainly content that violates the "Terms of Use" does not apply here) simply because some one, or some organization feels that they have been wrongfully exposed.

And I agree with your sentiment that it's stupid to try to censor content that one doesn't agree with. I think you could've made your point, however, without taking cheap (and factually inaccurate) shots at fraternity members. If you want to attack the national organizations, I'll back you up all the way. But it's important to make a distinction between the national organization and the individual chapters. The national HQ wants chapters to pay dues and show good rush numbers, and that's about it. They're just a business. It's the chapters that really embody the fraternity. That's why I get sensitive.

[edit on 11-7-2004 by 23rd_Degree]

Hawk

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 12:57 PM

link

How could anyone have legal claim on a ritual?

SimonGray

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 01:08 PM

link

Originally posted by Hawk
How could anyone have legal claim on a ritual?

Trade secret

en.wikipedia.org...

senrak

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 01:15 PM

link

Trade secret

en.wikipedia.org...

SimonGray,

You beat me to the punch. There are several Masonic (and other fraternal society) ritual books protected under "Trade Secrets" even though there's no "Copyright" noted in the book itself.

CommonSense

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 01:19 PM
link

I don't think the trade secret argument would hold up in court. Trade secrets are those items and practices used by one company against its competition to gain an advantage. Frraternities are just that, fraternal organizations. They are also non-profit organizations. If the wish to claim that they are harmed by the leaking of "trade secrets", they may be dooming their non-profit status. Additionally, if they chise to pursue the matter through the courts, they would have to demonstrate that the secret information revealed caused the organization economic harm. the only thing I can say about that is that it would certainly be some entertaining reading, but quite frankly, far more fictional than the Titor thread.

IMHO, ATS got snowed on this one. I think ATS needs another level of member, General Counsel, for just such items. This is not a criticism, but rather, a recognition of the gowth of ATS and some of the new challenges that will be faced in the future.

Remember too that a trade secret must be something unique and of value. this could be a recipe or a manufacturing process, things of that nature. Being of value, they must be superior to that of the competition. Being unique, they must be different than that of the competition. Typcally these things are covered and protected by patents and copyrights. The fact that neither is available for the argument here is a good sign that there is no problem with trade secrets. Using a little common sense, how many different ways can you party, how many different ways can you get drunk, how many different ways can you trick girls. Aside from the final item, I see no value in the concept of trade secrets for fraternities. A final point, membership in a fraternity is by invitation and acceptance. As such, the recruitment of members is not the same as selling a procuct. The outing of "trade secrets" therefore would not limit the number of people admitted to the fraternity since the demand usually exceeds the supply.

[edit on 7/11/2004 by CommonSense]

Mirthful Me

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 01:28 PM
link

Originally posted by SimonGray

Trade secret

en.wikipedia.org...

ATS isn't in economic, or any other competition (membership, etc.) with the fraternities that were posted in the offending thread. Nor was there any compromise of any aforementioned fraternities in relation to each other... third party (ATS) malfeasance ruled out. In addition fraternities do not take "reasonable care" in regards to their ritual (neither do the Freemasons for that matter, just look at the web). Some relevant excerpts.

Time limitations, and the lack of patent option.

Trade secret protection can, in principle, extend indefinitely and in this respect offers an advantage over patent protection (which lasts only for a specifically delimited period -- currently twenty years in the U.S.). (One company that has no patent for its formula and has been very effective in protecting it for many more years than a patent would have is Coca Cola.) However, the "down side" of such protection is that it is comparatively easy to lose (for example, to reverse engineering, which a patent will withstand but a trade secret will not) and comes equipped with no minimum guaranteed period of years.

Reasonable care and how many copies of ritual are out there.

The "quality of confidence" highlights the fact that trade secrets are a legal concept. With sufficient effort or through illegal acts (such as break and enter), competitors can usually obtain trade secrets. However, so long as the owner of the trade secret demonstrates that reasonable efforts have been made to keep the information confidential, the information remains a trade secret and is legally protected as such. Conversely, trade secret owners who do not demonstrate reasonable effort at protecting confidential information, risk losing the trade secret, even if the information is obtained by competitors illegally. It is for this reason that trade secret owners shred documents and do not simply recycle them. Presumably an industrious competitor could piece together the shredded documents again. Legally the trade secret remains a trade secret because shredding the document is considered to have kept the quality of confidence of the information.

Another note on reasonable care, it wasn't that long ago when a Mason died, the Lodge (or Grand Lodge) would pay a visit to his home and collect any Masonic books and ritual (I have an antique copy of "Morals and Dogma" that states on the inside cover that it must be returned to the Southern Jurisdiction upon death of the owner). Unless all organizations are prepared to go to lengths like this, reasonable care is out the window.

Darktalon

posted on Jul, 11 2004 @ 02:15 PM
link

Wow, did someone roll over. Unless ATS advertised that thread for profit, or to get people to join the ATS Fraternaty, ATS can't be held respondsable.

Do fratenaty members sign NDA's? If not, the Fraternatiy didn't use just cause to hide their secrets.

Second, there have been a multiple number of shows on the History, Discovery and Learning channels about Fraternaties, which again shows a lack of prudance in keep their secrets.

Third, members of those fraternaties have spilt the beans, so to speak, about their rituals, again showing the orginisations lack of rules to keep the secret.

It isn't our job, or ATS' job to keep their secrets for them.

Deny ingorance, unless we get threatened.

In which case you just better shut ATS down, cause their are a lot of talk of Trade Secrets on this board.

Lastly, how has there been books published on fraternatiy, "secret societs" rituals, if this was a just law suit? There wouldn't have been, cause they would have been, or could have been sued by those orginisations, but they weren't because it doesn't fall under this law and Trade Secrets.