# Typing your name in all caps = copyright, and other BS **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 11, 2002, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212 "2002-11-11T01:35:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Cessandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cessandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cessandra)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/1 "2002-11-11T01:35:10Z")
One of the lists I belong to exists to give support and advice to parents in legal trouble. Someone posted a bunch of “advice” that sounds pretty crackpot to me: > [@](#): > > when you are served with any legal or court papers- notice that the name is in all caps. reason being- when in a legal process- your an entity and not a person when it is all in caps. hence, you get a copyright on your name as in all caps. this keeps anyone from using your name on legal papers without paying you a copyright infringement. if you are ever taken to court- you can refuse to do business with the judge until they pay you for your time per u.c.c. rules > [@](#): > > never forget that courts are commercial…so look up the u.c.c. laws in your state. > [@](#): > > if ever facing criminal charges- when you appear in front of the judge, DO NOT PLEAD anything…state you do not understand the NATURE of the charge…also you do not understand how the state was personally affected by the situation you were charged with. as long as you do not plead, they cannot lawfully go forward. if the judge tells you that you need to hire a private atty. as he cannot give legal advice- you simply ask- IS THIS A SECRET COURT WHERE ONLY YOU AND BAR CERTIFIED ATTORNEYS KNOW WHATS GOING ON? AM I NOT PERMITTED TO REPRESENT MYSELF? [qupte] if they try to go ahead and plead for you and then find you guilty- they will say- is there any reason i cannot sentence you today? your answer is yes- your honor i still do not understand the nature of the charge. all you say is court record…all the judge says is court record. if he throws you in jail and you appeal- its an automatic reversal…hence you are free. [/quote] In subsequent emails he claims that criminal courts are commercial businesses (because the constitution only allows for maritime and commonlaw courts); that driver’s licenses are unconstitutional (because the constitution guarantees the freedom to travel between states); and that social security numbers are optional, and that you can opt out even after you have one by reapplying for one and checking “other” instead of “federal citizen” on the application. He justifies this by saying that we are not citizens of the US, just of our states. Further, he claims that doing so prevents CPS from having any jurisdiction over your family. To me, this guy sounds like a complete and total loony-bin. So what’s the Straight Dope? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Torque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/2 "2002-11-11T01:40:33Z")
Complete and total loony-bin. That’s the Straight Dope. ---
**Author:** ![Cessandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cessandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cessandra)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/3 "2002-11-11T01:44:54Z")
Thank you, Max, but i was hoping for some info I could use to discredit him, as many of the other list members are not only taking him at face value, but THANKING HIM for his advice. I worry that some of them may use his advice in court. ---
**Author:** ![chula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a4c791/32.png) [@chula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chula)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/4 "2002-11-11T02:02:10Z")
I’ll start here. > [@](#): > > when you are served with any legal or court papers- notice that the name is in all caps. reason being- when in a legal process- your an entity and not a person when it is all in caps. hence, you get a copyright on your name as in all caps. this keeps anyone from using your name on legal papers without paying you a copyright infringement. if you are ever taken to court- you can refuse to do business with the judge until they pay you for your time per u.c.c. rules No one owns a copyright on court documents. They are publicly available. > [@](#): > > never forget that courts are commercial…so look up the u.c.c. laws in your state. What does this mean? ---
**Author:** ![Cessandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cessandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cessandra)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/5 "2002-11-11T02:07:40Z")
chula, I think he is saying that your NAME is copyrighted, and so the court must pay to use your name on their documents. As for the second thing, his comment was: > [@](#): > > there are only 2 kinds of courts in the constitution- maritime courts > aka military courts, and common law. common law. since the courts > do not practice common law, they do fall undere commercial courts as > they do charge fees, impose fines, court costs etc. > this brings them under the u.c.c. which has guidlines for all biz > transactions. So, as far as I can tell, he is saying that courts are for-profit businesses and therefore their use of your name falls under copyright laws. For one thing, I wasn’t aware that only for-profit businesses were subject to copyright laws. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/6 "2002-11-11T02:10:21Z")
Well, you could point out that not a single other person in the world believes any of the things he says. That might start them thinking. Or you could just say all this to a lawyer and tape record the hysterical laughter that results. ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/7 "2002-11-11T02:18:21Z")
> [@](#): > > if ever facing criminal charges- when you appear in front of the judge, DO NOT PLEAD anything…state you do not understand the NATURE of the charge…also you do not understand how the state was personally affected by the situation you were charged with. as long as you do not plead, they cannot lawfully go forward. The judge will enter a “Not Guilty” plea on your behalf and the case will go forward. ---
**Author:** ![Cessandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cessandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cessandra)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/8 "2002-11-11T02:46:20Z")
Thank you, guys. I am starting to see where I can begin to tear his statements apart. Frankly, the things he said were so ludicrous I wasn’t sure what to say. It’s almost like trying to argue with someone who thinks the sky is blue because that’s what color the government’s secret balloons painted it. ---
**Author:** ![Cessandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cessandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cessandra)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/9 "2002-11-11T03:43:36Z")
I typed up a response to this guy, and I am posting it here in hopes that the Teeming Millions would point out any factual errors or logical fallacies on my parts. It would do me no good to point out his inaccuracies if my arguments are incorrect as well. > [@](#): > > Please don’t take the following as an attack, but I feel that you are > spreading some fairly dangerous misinformation. > > \> when you are served with any legal or court papers- notice that the name is > \> in all caps. reason being- when in a legal process- your an entity and not a > \> person when it is all in caps. hence, you get a copyright on your name as in > \> all caps. this keeps anyone from using your name on legal papers without > \> paying you a copyright infringement. > > First of all, a name cannot by copyrighted. If it were protected at > all, that would be a trademark, not a copyright. Secondly, a trademark > is not created simply by putting a name in all capital letters. > Trademark is a specific process, which includes the transaction of > money. Thirdly, even if your name was trademarked, this would not > prevent others from using your name in reference to you. It would only > protect you from others _calling themselves_ by your name. Therefore, > there is simply no basis for the claim that you have any right to > prevent anyone from using your name IN REFERENCE TO YOU – whether they > be a private person, a commercial business, or a governmental entity. > > if you are ever taken to court- you can > \> refuse to do business with the judge until they pay you for your time per > \> u.c.c. rules. > > This is not true. First of all, even if the first part of your > paragraph was true (that you could somehow trademark your name and > prevent court officials from referring to you on court documents), this > would have nothing to do with paying you for your TIME. It might allow > you to charge the judge for the use of your name on each document, but > as I have mentioned, that is a moot point because the very premise is > flawed. > > if they do not agree to this - which they wont anyway- then > \> you can file a u.c.c. claim against them with the secretary of state and name > \> them as a debtor to you and the amount…now you get a judgement against > \> them and take their chit and make them as miserable as they try to make > \> you… > Understand that getting a judgment would involve getting a judge to rule > in your favor. Because the very conditions on which this argument is > based are completely flawed and false, no judge in the country would > rule for you. Ever. However, just for arguments sake, supposing that > you could protect your name in this way and that this somehow meant that > the court must pay you for your time, if you did have a reason to bring > suit against the state, you still have to get the state to agree to be > sued. You cannot sue the state without their consent. > > \> works like a charm. and if you are familiar with the whole law as opposed to > \> the statutes- and there is a big difference- you can get out of any legal > \> proceeding…so i may show my ass in court with dss ---- watch my > \> magic…what will end up happening is that they will continue it to bow > \> out gracefully. when you check on the status of the case later on- there is > \> no such case. > > Are you actually suggesting that DSS will drop the case simply because > you showed up in court? That is the most ludicrous thing I have ever > heard in my life. I’m sorry, I could not think of a kind way to say > that. > > there is more to this though- you have to hear it all to > \> understand it fully. > \> never forget that courts are commercial…so look up the u.c.c. laws in > \> your state. > > In another email you state that courts are commercial (I assume you mean > that they are commercial businesses?) because “there are only 2 kinds of > courts in the constitution- maritime courts aka military courts, and > common law. common law. since the courts do not practice common > law…” > > May I quote from the Constitution where it discusses criminal > proceedings? > > Amendment VI > > In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a > speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district > wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have > been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and > cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against > him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, > and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. > > If criminal courts are not part of the Constitution, then why should it > mention criminal proceedings? > > \> there is much more to tell but it is long. i should record this and send out > \> the cd’s to each person on the list… > \> if ever facing criminal charges- when you appear in front of the judge, DO > \> NOT PLEAD anything…state you do not understand the NATURE of the > \> charge… > > The first time you do this, the judge will explain the charges to you. > If you insist that you do not understand repeatedly, the court will > simply put in a plea for you. If you continue to insist, the court may > find you contempt. If you are found in contempt, you will have to pay a > fine or face jail time. And at that point, you have seriously > jeopardized your chances of getting your children back, all for a > ridiculous stunt that will hardly even stall the court. Another thing > to consider is the chance that the court may question your state of mind > – and rightly so. What sane person would attempt such a thing? > > also you do not understand how the state was personally affected > \> by the situation you were charged with. > > That is simply not going to change a thing. If you are charged with a > criminal offense, the legislature has already decided that your actions > affect the state enough to outlaw them. If you want to challenge the > law, go ahead, but do not expect that you will simply be released for > bringing up the question. > > as long as you do not plead, they > \> cannot lawfully go forward. > > This is not true, as addressed above. A plea will be entered for you. > > if the judge tells you that you need to hire a > \> private atty. as he cannot give legal advice- you simply ask- IS THIS A > \> SECRET COURT WHERE ONLY YOU AND BAR CERTIFIED ATTORNEYS KNOW WHATS GOING ON? > \> AM I NOT PERMITTED TO REPRESENT MYSELF? > > That is a good way to end up in jail for contempt of court, and will > gain you nothing. Judges cannot give you advice as they are meant to be > impartial. You are certainly allowed to represent yourself, but then > you lose the benefit of professional legal advice. Your choice. > > he has to say no-----now you still > \> do not understand the NATURE of the business of the court- the charge. still > \> do not plead anything…if you do you give them jurisdiction over you, when > \> this is done you will lose. > > The courts already have jurisdiction over you by virtue of your being a > resident of their district. Refusing to plead does not change that in > the least. > > if they try to go ahead and plead for you and > \> then find you guilty- they will say- is there any reason i cannot sentence > \> you today? your answer is yes- your honor i still do not understand the > \> nature of the charge. > > Again, a good way to end up in contempt of court, and will gain you > nothing. > > all you say is court record…all the judge says is > \> court record. if he throws you in jail and you appeal- its an automatic > \> reversal…hence you are free. > > This is simply false. I doubt any court will even agree to hear an > appeal on those grounds. > > \> when i said jurisdiction of the court over you- remember - according to the > \> constitution, there are only common law courts and maritime courts…hard > \> to explain it in type…will have to do a cd. > \> fascinating stuff. nothing like fighting dirty with the crooks themselves. > \> its going to be a wonderful day- enjoy! > \> char > \> > > I am sorry, but I find absolutely nothing in this email that has any > basis in fact. Please do not take this person’s advice. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/10 "2002-11-11T04:27:19Z")
**Cessandra** , sounds to me like you’ve run into a person who believes in the “sovereign citizen” or “common law courts” movement. Adherents of this group believe that the highest legal authority is at the county level, and deny the validity of state and federal laws. They also believe that at common law, there are only two ways to create binding obligations: by physically injuring someone, or by contract. As an extension of those beliefs, they deny the validity of statute law as a way to impose liablity, either criminal or civil. They also argue that documents with your name in all caps are not legally binding, since they don’t give your “true, Christian, name”. They also argue that all licences are simply contracts with the state, which can be repudiated, hence the repeated references to the uniform commercial code. Notable sovereign citizen groups have included the Freemen of Montana and the Republic of Texas separatist movements. Tim McVeigh’s accomplice, Terry Nichols, also seems to have belonged to the movement, according to this [link](http://www.adl.org/learn/ext%5Fus/scm.asp). It’s all nonsense, of course, and won’t have any effect in courts. However, I’m very doubtful that you’d have any success arguing with this fellow about it. ---
**Author:** ![Cessandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cessandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cessandra)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/11 "2002-11-11T04:35:25Z")
Oh my gosh. How funny. After my husband read the email, he said that this guy “sounds like a nut case. I bet he even thinks Texas can legally secede from the Union anytime we want.” Wait until I tell him that he’s probably right!! And don’t worry. I am not the least bit concerned about convincing him that he is wrong. Someone on this board once said, “You cannot reason a man out of a position that he did not use reason to reach.” I don’t know if he was quoting someone else, but it’s a smart sentiment regardless. I am just concerned about those who would blindly believe him if no one pointed out how absolutely stupid he sounds. And there are a lot of people like that out there. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/12 "2002-11-11T16:16:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Northern Piper \* > \*\ ***Cessandra** , sounds to me like you’ve run into a person who believes in the “sovereign citizen” or “common law courts” movement. Adherents of this group believe that the highest legal authority is at the county level, and deny the validity of state and federal laws. They also believe that at common law, there are only two ways to create binding obligations: by physically injuring someone, or by contract. > \*\* Right you are. For many, many more arguments of this sort, see: [http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/taxprot2.htm](http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/taxprot2.htm) [http://www.quatloos.com/Otto\_Skinner.htm](http://www.quatloos.com/Otto_Skinner.htm) The reason these sort of activists are wrong is not, per se, because of the theories and policies they espouse – it’s a free country, and you can have your (wrongheaded) personal interpretation of the Constitution, or Magna Carta, or whatever. And hey, dubious interpretations of the Constitution have been advanced not just by activists, but by legislators and courts (see, e.g., the expansion of the Commerce Clause as justification for federal legislative authority over . . . everything), so just for the sake of argument, let’s assume something kind of fishy did happen in the process of trying to ratify the 16th Amendment. No, these guys are wrong, and affirmatively bad actors, because they lead people to believe that theories that no court will embrace will, as a factual matter, actually win you acquittal/dismissal of charges/freedom from tax liability/etc. When, as a factual matter, they will invariably lead you to jail or the like. That’s just dishonest or grossly uninformed (and unsophisticated people sometimes do buy into the notion that by spouting the tax protestor or common-law-court theories they’ve been sold, they will, in fact, send the judge reeling, helpless before the undeniable force of the secret arguments they’ve discovered). When, in reality, a government corrupt enough to conceal all these “true” doctrines is certainly corrupt enough to jail/tax/fine you despite the fact that you discover and blurt out these defenses. Rather than argue about the correctness of their arcane legal theories, when dealing with people like this I’ve found it more useful to stress cynical realism: "Granted that you are completely correct in your legal theories, can you envision any set of circumstances in which a judge of a federal court, sitting at the head of a massive federal apparatus, and dependent for his livelihood and prestige upon that apparatus, is going to (rule the income tax unconstitutional/grant you a trillion dollar judgment against the UN/etc.)? The response is usually something along the lines of “They should, if they’re not corrupt.” Which is far from “They will, in fact.” Then I wish them luck in their crusade and assure them that the minute they win a case based on their theories, I will most assuredly cite it as precedent in my own tax-nullification action. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/13 "2002-11-11T18:47:52Z")
**Cessandra** , I know it sounds funny, but I would advocate caution. Some of these folks are harmless, but others can cause a lot of trouble by filing vexatious bogus documents with the courts and the IRS, naming persons with whom they’ve had disagreements. Even though the documents are bogus, they can cause the victims a lot of trouble. For example, one tactic is to file a document with the IRS alleging that the filer has paid a large sum of money to the victim as income. Since the victim naturally didn’t report this non-existent income, the IRS has to look into it and audit the victim. Even if the matter is cleared up, it’s quite a hassle. Another favourite tactic is to try to petition the victim into involuntary bankruptcy, or to file liens alleging the victim owes them thousands of dollars. Again, it will take a lot of time and effort for the victim to clear it up, and it could have significant effects on the victim’s credit ratings. There was a case recently in Milwaukee where a sovereign citizen was convicted of criminal charges for using these tactics against county officials who had the uneviable task of instituting tax foreclosure proceedings against the sovereign citizen in question. See this article in the [Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel](http://www.jsonline.com/news/State/nov02/93415.asp) > [@](#): > > Among the documents Magritz filed were liens for $15 million against about 36 county officials, including the seven officially identified as victims. > > He also tried to file 36 involuntary federal bankruptcy petitions against county officials. > > A federal bankruptcy judge quashed that effort, but not before the liens led to problems for county officials. Some found that their credit cards had been canceled, others found that their credit ratings had been impaired and, in one case, a house sale was held up. I would be careful. ---
**Author:** ![Cessandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cessandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cessandra)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2002, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/typing-your-name-in-all-caps-copyright-and-other-bs/136212/14 "2002-11-12T16:50:55Z")
Ew…