the Truth About Ray Ornhay's Rabid BlogCFC

It is worth nothing that I also took some of Ray's code - with his permission, I asked to use his RSS code in my blog and he said sure. Of course, my blog is also open source and free.

*cough* http://rayhornsucks.onesite.com/

Sounds like you want to be sued for Libel because your comments are just plain wrong and defamatory in nature.

Thanks! I added your link to my main entry to help with search engine rankings! =) (Links in comments in my blog software are not followed by most search engines)

Ray - are you denying that Rabid BlogCFC is a moodified version of Ray Camden's BlogCFC? Are you also denying that you WERE distributing "your" version as encrypted source code? And are you denying that you wanted people to pay you for the unencrypted source code?

Those are the three "claims" that I've made in this entry.

While I understand why you posted this, I think the CF community, as a whole, will be better served if we just ignore the smug, unhappy little man.

So whats the deal with this then?

http://rayhorn.contentopia.net/blog/FA792971-1026-0A9B-297AEA0C2C5096E3

Curiouser and curiouser

The guys gone nuts. Looks like he's been de-listed from mxna. What a fruit.

Who truly gives a shit? Horn is an asshole for violating the spirit, if not the letter, of the usage license for BlogCFC, but anyone that continues to piss and moan about it is a bigger asshole.

To bemoan and lament the unethical acts of the average loser like Ray Horn is useless and extraordinarily naive, and to CONTINUE to do so ad nauseum is unforgivable.

Let Horn continue on his pathetic way and the rest of you get back to work.

Let it go.

It is truly sad that none of you even knows the facts of this matter and it is alarming that all of you have rushed to judgement in this matter completely devoid of the real facts.

Fact #1: BlogCFC 4.0.2 was and is Public Domain because it was published by Camden as Public Domain devoid of any kind of Licensing Protection - this is an undisputed fact.

Fact #2: The ONLY requirement as stated by Camden was that HE be given credit in the comments whenever HIS Open Source code was being used and this was done.

Fact #3: Camden published NO RESTRICTIONS as to how his Open Source code could be used.

Fact #4: Had Camden published any restrictions as to how his Open Source code could be used every single restriction would have been observed.

Fact #5: Just because someone "thinks" they are publishing Open Source and that certain unspecfied restrictions may apply that doesn't mean everybody on the planet knows what those unspecified restrictions are or should be - some of us read what people write and we tend to abide by what we have read.

Fact #6: Camden knew his code was being published without any kind of Licensing and still he claimed his code was stolen however his code was not "stolen" by me because he was given credit in the comments whenever his code was redistibuted and every single time his code was mentioned HE was given credit - credit was given where credit was due.

Fact #7:Those who publish unsubstantiated comments only open themselves up to being sued for libel or slander - bear this in mind, even someone like me has legal rights even when the crowd at-large would rather not grant those rights to someone like me. We all have legal rights and Camden's were observed every single time I mentioned his name in public and yet everyone has rushed to make me into the villian stripping me of whatever rights you all would want observed if our roles were reversed. This is how crowd-mentality leads crowds to perform lynchings and this is a sad state of affairs that none of you should feel proud about. Shame on the lot of you, shame on you very much.

None of those things are relevant to the fact that you made some minor changes to someone elses software and expect people tp pay you for it.

You could've done the same thing with my blog software, only my license specifically states that you can do whatever you want.

And just because Ray distributes his code without a license doesn't mean that it's "public domain". But you can get your lawyers to fight that fight for you with your $1.5 million payment from the European content publisher, I'm sure.

This post is now the top Google result for the phrase "Ray Horn" - I've been curious as to how long that would take.

I get really good search rankings with my blog - especially on things that are commented on from time to time.... google the following:

Debra Lefave
Star Wars Episode VII: Fall of the Empire
Peak City Grill

Those, along with this one, are all in the first 3 results, and they all get regular comments (the nerdfest flaming each other on the star wars entry is funny!)

I just added a bunch of links to other blog entries about this topic to the main text.

Note to anyone who might still be getting subscription updates on this topic.

Please stop threatening me regarding the topic of this entry. It is not slanderous. It can't be, because it's not spoken. It's also not libelous, because it's not false.

I'm curious as to know what you think about the original topic is libelous.

Here's what I said:

"You see, Mr. Horn took Ray Camden's BlogCFC product, made a few changes to it, and is distributing the code under the name "Rabid BlogCFC" as encrypted source code. If you want the unencrypted source, he wants you to pay for it - even though the vast majority of the work was done by the original author."

Those statements were undisputed FACTS when they were written, and the only reason they're not anymore is because "Rabid BlogCFC" is no longer available. Where's the libel? If you can point out legitimately where my statements are false, I'd be happy to remove those false statements from my blog entry.

I saw that you have a page that discusses patent-related resources at http://www.rickroot.com/blog/1/2006/01/Ray-Horns-Rabid-BlogCFC-is-Stolen-Software.cfm. I wanted to suggest adding www.freepatentsonline.com to the page. This web site has free PDF downloading (instead of having to page through TIFFs like at the US PTO). It is by far the best free patent searching site.

My name is 'Ray Horn' but I am not any known relation or have any knowledge about the person by the same name who you defame in your blog and elsewhere, which is publicly accessible and mass distributed.. However, I work in the same field and by confusion you have defamed my name and reputation. I demand all such references by removed immediately or face legal action.

Ray, your approach needs a lot of work. Rick has no legal reason to remove this post, since it is completely factual. If your name was George Bush, would you email everyone in the world who has posted negative things about the president?

I'm sorry your name happens to be the same as the target of this blog entry, but that doesn't change what that person did and why it is important for that information to stay in existence. Rick already has links to the person in question, which clearly identifies who they are.

Rick, what's even better is that when you attempt to go to Ray Horns blog from your entry, I get a warning saying that I'm coming from a slanderous web site. The person who posted the above comment does seem to be the "original" Ray Horn. It's interesting (but probably not surprising) that not only is he trying to get you to remove the post, but he's doing it by impersonating someone else.

Having had personal correspondences with the 'real' Ray Horn, the tone and overall feeling of the comment 3 up from here, leaves no doubt in my mind they are the same Ray Horn.

Nothing is defamation when it is true. Since the character of the "other Raay Horn" was ruined by himself, please take up all issues of defamation up with him.

Wait, you CAN do that, right?

Rick, what's the deal with the name change? Did his threats get to you or are you just sick of listening to him whine?

We've determined that the latter Ray Horn is actually someone else. For some reason, he's unable to email me, though since i use google for hosting, I can't imagine why. He contacted me through a third party.. still threatening, which annoys me to no end.

So yeah, I'm tired of it all.

No offense Rick, but until/unless I see both of them in the same room, with ID, there's no way I am buying they are not the same person.

The attitude in the comments, and hollow threats are just too similar.