Oh No! Did Bill Admit To Illegal Activity?

So today we found out that Bill Schmalfeldt started using an automatic tweet deleter that deletes all tweets older than 7 days.  That started on May 27th 29.  Interesting post can be found on Hogewash on May 27.

Beginning in late April, Bill Schmalfeldt began publishing a series of defamatory books and ebooks which used copyrighted works that I own. I advised the publishers of the infringement, and the books and ebooks were withdrawn from their catalogs. On 15 May, Schmalfeldt published the following on his Patriot-Ombudsman blog:

Here is my official DMCA Takedown Counterclaim.  Hoge … [has] until June 4 AT THE LATEST to file suit against me in US District Court for the District of Maryland.

This morning, I filed in the Southern Division of the U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland a lawsuit against William M. Schmalfedlt. The suit alleges 124 counts of copyright infringement since August, 2013.

– WJJ Hoge on his blog on May 27th, the day WM Schmalfeldt started auto-deleting tweets

I don’t believe that the suit hit PACER until June 5th, but it is clear it was filed earlier.  So why would Schmalfeldt decided to start auto-deleting tweets on the 27th29th?  Could it be that he got wind of a lawsuit that was filed against him on that daytwo days earlier, which heavily revolved around tweets?

Even if he set up the auto delete program, there is a strong argument that he shouldn’t have been deleting anything that may be used in a pending court case considering the DMCA Counterclaim he filed against Hoge didn’t expire until June 4th.  Purposefully deleting things surrounding that DMCA Counterclaim would be, in fact, deleting potential evidence if Hoge decided to pursue it.  And he did.

But even better, after being officially notified of the suit, the fact that he is continually deleting these tweets after getting the suit, and all while threatening to expand his counterclaim based on things posted after he filed his counterclaims, goes to show that Bill isn’t as smart as he thinks.  He willfully deleted evidence in a pending trial, evidence he himself was expounding on.  It is reasonable to assume Hoge would use his continuing tweets against him, but he gleefully continued deleting.

Wow.  The Hubris.


I was wrong. The proper date was May 29. So two days after Hoge announced his lawsuit. I’ll be updating above and just have to say this looks worse and worse.

Update II
From looking at comments on the above mentioned Hogewash post, Bill posted to a now memory holed blog on or before the 28th admitting to seeing Hoge’s post about the lawsuit. And yet, on the 29th he starts the deleting. Interesting. Maybe he’ll blame me for that too.


16 thoughts on “Oh No! Did Bill Admit To Illegal Activity?

  1. Michael, something to keep in mind with all this talk about “deleting” tweets… when you delete one of your tweets it is, indeed, deleted from the publicly available timeline of your current twitter @name (or @names). But ALL tweets, even tweets of old accounts (active, discarded or suspended), are still discoverable from twitter.com even if they had been, at some point, deleted. From what I understand they can be recovered if lawfully requested. They are all archived. That said,I could be wrong about this but I believe it is true.

    • I think you’re wrong. Twitter claims to remove them from everywhere within a reasonable time frame unless already notified of Legal Action. At least, that’s what twitter tells folks who desperately want to recover their own tweets.

      • Even if they are recoverable from Twitter, that doesn’t remove the responsibility of Schmalfeldt to not delete items while he had a legal action pending. So even if no one can provide a tweet from him acknowledging the May 27th post, he shouldn’t have started deleting until well after the 4th, with his proven knowledge of how long service can take.

  2. Actually, as soon as Hoge filed a DMCA notice, there existed the potential of litigation. Bill and Hoge both were then legally obligated under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to preserve any and all evidence remotely related to the claims. In the case of Bill, due in part to his counterclaim, that ncluding all his tweets and blog posts. Bill should not have deleted a single tweet or blog.

    • And I would be willing to bet that for the last couple of years every one of Bill’s tweets, websites and blog posts have been captured in all of their HTML glory, probably at 2 second intervals.

    • In the case of Bill, due in part to his counterclaim, that ncluding all his tweets and blog posts.

      And now for the ACME Law view of the evidential value of Blob’s communications:

      Blob, you’ve been OBSESSIVELY TRYING YOUR WHOLE F*$%NG CASE ON TWITTER and now you claim that your tweets are not relevant to your case after having deleted virtually ALL of them.

      The Judge was so ready to make that mean old HOOOOGE!!! pay and you had to go do something idiotic like spoliating evidence! I think you just might make her cry, Blob.

      Michael, I’m wondering if you’d like to consider a gentlemanly side bet.

    • Y’know, I don’t really want to place a bet, but I’d really love some venison. If I pry some 20 year old scotch out of my best-beloved’s mitts, do you think we could arrange an exchange?

Comments are closed.