Paul S Nassif review: Financial abuse (documented with evidence). Rhinoplasty Specialist 4

I am the author of the complaint with user name Rhinospecialista with the complaint titled: Financial abuse (documented with evidence). Rhinoplasty Specialist

...Please note that my concern with this company has been positively resolved. They explained to me everything in detail and I am very pleased with our communication. I am trying to delete this complaint but unfortunately I cannot do so as since I registered with an aol accout, the site is not allowing me to login back with my account.

...as far as for the above comment with username: Messageboardowner, I do not know who this poster is. Perhaps someone crazy coming out of the woods with stupid philosophies. It can also be MissJ who goes around plasticsurgery forum messageboards soliciting money from us active messageboards patients. Friends on Plasticsurgery forums told me that MissJ is Miss Alexander J . He wears ladies clothes- 'transvestite'. You could see him/her on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DW7mydMTSg I told him/her from the first instance that I am not interested in her/his deals and she/he kept on following my complaints. I am scared of her/him and he/she is the last person I would imagine myself chatting with..

I'm doing a study of your case that is relevant to internet legal issues.

Here I'm going to attempt to explain WHY your CONDUCT might preclude you from any defense for it.

Let me just say that BEFORE you 'did things your own way', you COULD HAVE had a defense. But refused access to that possibility. Harvard's Berkman center for internet law is cream of the crop defense attorneys if one really wanted to 'fight' a 'gag contract'. So, congratulations for refusing introduction to the best and the brightest in any possible help about 'gag contracts'. It's your own doing that you are now left with the prosecuting attorney and totally defenseless.

I shall explain why you are now "defenseless". It has very little to do with the prosecuting attorney "gagging your freedom of expression". It has more to do with YOUR OWN conduct:

1: A 'gag contract' is a transfer of copyright. One would have to demonstrate a desire to RECLAIM the copyright in any attempt to contend the initial transfer of copyright was an 'illegitimate' one. A desire to reclaim copyright would be evidenced if you used one screen name for all complaints. Although the prosecuting attorney could still 'go after you' telling you that you 'broke the contract', that would not preclude the possibility of a good defense attorney finding some grounds for copyright to be transferred back to you.

2: The salient issue is that you actually DO NOT want to reclaim any copyright to your content. That is evidenced by use of multiple screen names in many web venues where in each venue many different screen names are used. Doing so as to try to pretend and present as MANY people, all gravitating to commentary about Nassif and all with negative quips about him or who provide links to complaints about him, mention how they saw posts about him being removed etc.

Although the ACT of willfully giving the appearance that you were "many people" with this same complaint or; who provided links to this complaint, supported 'others' with this same complaint, 'had not had surgery with Nassif but would not do so due to the 'other patients' with complaints about him', 'witnessed posts from "other people" being removed on the net' etc. when ALL the commentary could be attributed to YOU (the man from Malta), in itself is HIGHLY MISREPRESENTATIONAL and is in the venue of "astroturfing"--an FTC violation in some cases--that act itself clearly demonstrates you DID NOT want to claim any copyright to your content.

3: Multiple screen name use with the INTENT to appear as MANY 'different people' resolves to the act of wanting to DISCLAIM copyright. You have no legitimate grounds to claim copyright or 'reclaim' copyright subsequent to a copyright transfer unless you show good intent to reclaim it. Trying to pretend that you were NOT the patient from MALTA responsible for most if not all of the anonymous commentary having to do with this complaint demonstrates bad intent. The act of trying to HIDE that all this commentary was coming from YOU demonstrates that you are not fighting to reclaim any copyright.

4: What you did was DUMP your misrepresentational crap on any webmaster that housed it and was not vigilant enough initially to cross reference that all this commentary from multiple screen names was coming from an IP in MALTA. So, now the webmasters, IF they want ANY RELIEF from your constant INVASIONS of their TOS policies to use one screen name or not sign on again if you are BANNED for using multiple screen names, very likely could turn to that prosecuting attorney if they seek relief from your invasions. That's right, with your constant invasions and blatant disregard for TOS policies of webmasters housing commentary, (you are on record for announcing that if a mod banned you, you would sign up with another name!), the ONLY WAY a webmaster actually VIOLATED by your actions could hope to seek relief from them would be to share information with the prosecuting attorney who's name; Domingo Rivera, you have announced to all of them in your complaints that he was giving your 'threats'. Not because he's 'forcing' them to but rather, that would be the ONLY OPTION for a webmaster wanting to seek relief from your constant invasions.

Now you know and I know how many webmasters there are out there (message boards) who have removed your posts, banned some of your multiple IDs because you VIOLATED their terms of service in 'cloning' this complaint through a multitude of screen names. We both know that some of them are pretty pissed with your conduct and we both know that you are on record for WANTONLY defying the policy of one web master and threatening her that you would sign up with more screen names if the one she let you presently use were banned for violations. Webmasters, board owners, mods etc SEEKING RELIEF from your constant INVASIONS aimed at VIOLATING their TOS policies might elect to assist, (voluntarily so) your prosecuting attorney if they are having a problem trying to get rid of an INVADER from MALTA constantly signing up again to VIOLATE their TOS policies! So, I suggest you factor that into your 'no one can get me in my country so I'll just keep on astroturfing my complaint' plan of yours. It's highly unlikely that the multi-Id user INVADER from MALTA on a variety of message boards having a problem with him isn't the same person Rivera is pursuing. Violated parties (message board owners) very well could seek relief from you by turning to Rivera if you persisted in your complaint campaigns on their websites after they, themselves have told you to stop with the board abuse.

Be reprised that some webmasters (such as myself) are very sympathetic to complaints about doctors and are happy to accommodate commentary from 'botched' patients and are highly critical of 'gag contracts'. However, those doing so, must be able to stand by what they say and demonstrate as the SOLE possessor of all their content (which is done by sticking to one screen name). Since you DON'T demonstrate as wanting to be known as the sole possessor of all your content and instead construct multiple false or anon identities to appear as 'many different' people, (which is a violation of most boards housing your content), you LOSE your 'status' as a 'botched patient' to be sympathized with due to constant violations of the TOS policies. The 'sympathy' or in some cases the collective criticism of the 'offending doctor' goes to the patients sticking to the same screen name and complaining WITHIN the TOS policies given to complain. That should help explain why, in the eyes of some board owners, you are now persona non grata. Your OWN actions and nothing to do with any 'loyalty' to the doctor or 'threats' from his lawyer. All posts removed and screen names banned of yours were due to YOUR OWN actions. Nassif and his lawyer played no role.

5: Your assessments of the 'facts and circumstances' regarding your experience with Nassif are misrepresentational, willfully so as to lead the reader to the conclusion that he "financially abused" you or "trapped" you. I won't pick apart all the holes in the story here. I'm sure the prosecuting attorney has the facts and circumstances straight as to demonstrate your presentation is meant to lead the reader to false conclusions. However, I will tell you that your content in addition to the act of how you convey it (via multiple identities) is within the territory of defamation or lets say OUTSIDE 'free speech' that can often be protected against a claim of defamation. However, I'm not here to 'defend' Nassif. But rather I'm here to keep our patient message and complaint boards open to legitimate complaints from those wishing to assert their copyright whether or not they have a 'gag contract'. It's my believe that a patient's claim to copyright is higher than that of doctor it's transferred to and copyright can be reclaimed. However no 'defense' of copyright or 'free speech' can be made in the circumstances you have created for YOURSELF here. You've demonstrated as YOUR OWN enemy to any rights you could have had or reclaimed.

6: So now you have gone WAY BEYOND any legitimate claim for 'free speech' or any legitimate claim to reclaim your copyright which could be used in any defense in not 'honoring' this particular contract and have ventured into the territory of what we might call 'cyber crime'.

7: It gets WORSE from there. Anytime you are actually INFORMED that you are engaging in a type of cyber crime and to stop doing it, (for your own good) whether it be from the lawyer or someone else wishing NOT to be VIOLATED in this way, you commit MORE of it. Your campaigns of multiple complaints with multiple IDs INCREASE. In them, you present as a "victim" of someone wishing to "gag" you.

8: Constant attempts to try to present as the "victim" of someone wishing to "gag" you, will NO LONGER be tolerated when the FACTS are that YOU have victimized others and willfully demonstrate that you will do so repeatedly by placing defamatory commentary when ever you are called to task for acting outside the rules or law.

All that said, it's YOUR OWN actions; malicious actions to willfully misrepresent that now leave you with NO DEFENSE. I don't think you are going to cease and desist. You are going to PERSIST. But I will tell you now that if I see any more defamatory crap about me in these multiple complaint venues you use with multi-IDs, I might elect to offer my research services of your various web activities and my expert opinion as someone very conversant in the dynamics of PS message boards to your prosecuting attorney.

I think the report should stay as evidence that you have willfully engaged in wanton misrepresentation all over the internet. This is a report for which you have used several multiple IDs on many message boards to call attention to. Recently, webmasters from different message boards where you have used several multiple IDs to give the appearance 'many people' had this same complaint have all discovered that it is the SAME person, you from MALTA.

Post the doctor's lawyers name again as I'm sure there are going to be several PS message boards who have been violated by your many false accounts who might be needing that lawyer to pursue you for multiple violations on their boards.

I am the author of this report. Due to particular circumstances I would like to ask the moderator to remove this report or ask you to ignore this report. Unfortunately, I cant edit the post. However, my sole message for you is that: the Dr. is not a 'thief' if you can see what I mean, but I (myself) do not want to do 'business' with him. If I were to return back, I (myself) will not go for him. Having said that, I m not asking you to avoid his services (that s not my job-you decide), but I (myself) ll not.