"The price of justice is eternal publicity." Arnold Bennett

Battle of Intel and Ken Hamidi over the Freedom of Speech on Internet

On November 24, 1998, Judge John R. Lewis of the Superior Court of Sacramento, California, granted Intel an unprecedented injunction to ban me from sending informational and educational e-mail messages to Intel employees.  Unjustly I was stripped of my Constitutional rights.  This is a prelude to a potential loss of every American's Freedom of Speech on Internet.

From Iran in 1978, I came to the United States for two clear objectives; Freedom and Prosperity.  I worked extremely hard and achieved the American Dream.  With my family (wife and two daughters) I was happily enjoying my modest success and I was proud of being privileged with my constitutionally guaranteed freedoms as an American citizen. 

I had a 4,200 square-foot home with a small lake and a magnificent waterfall on 3.8 fabulously-landscaped acres in Loomis, California.  I also had a 2,500 square-foot barn, 3 cars, a truck, and a tractor.

Mine and my family’s future was secured by a great pension plan I had over 5,000 in Intel stocks and stock options, and a large enough savings for my daughters’ college education.  Now I have lost them all.  I lost the material side of my American Dream only because I stood up and fought for rights that were taken away from me by Intel.  The only thing left for me was my freedom to fight the giant.

In response to Intel's wish, on November 24th, the Honorable Judge John R. Lewis of Superior Court of California (Sacramento County)  took my most precious American right.  With an unprecedented decision Judge Lewis deprived me of my guaranteed Constitutional right to Freedom of Speech.

I am a citizen of the most free and powerful country in the world, yet I was treated worse than a man in a communist country like China.  Lin Hai a Chinese Internet dissident was on trial in Shanghai in October of 1998.  Lin, a 30-year-old software entrepreneur, was accused of "inciting subversion" by exchanging 30,000 Chinese e-mail addresses to a "hostile foreign organization." Lin, who ran an Internet job-search and marketing business in Shanghai, gave the addresses to a Washington-based firm.  He was given a four-hour, closed-door trial on 12-4-98, which resulted in his conviction.  He remained in prison awaiting to be sentenced, and finally on 1-20-99 he was sentenced to two years in prison. 

This travesty of justice flew through the media.  Upset people around the world, including we Americans, were and still are outraged that Lin's human rights have been violated in China.  There now exists an international campaign to bring pressure upon the dictatorial Chinese Communist Regime to free Lin Hai from the yoke of oppression and treat him with human dignity, allowing him to enjoy his very basic Freedom of Speech.  People around the world feel so strongly about this that they are campaigning for the freedom of Lin Hai, though there is no constitutionally protected freedom in the Communist dictatorship of China.  

On the other hand, as an American citizen my Freedom of Speech is guaranteed in the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.  Yet, in what is considered the freest country in the world…at the simple whims and desires of a powerful, dictatorial corporation such as Intel…the court system of my government totally and unjustly stripped me of my Freedom of Speech.  Judge Lewis granted the giant Intel precisely what they asked to undermine the civil liberties of an individual citizen who mirrors the average American.

This decision was despite the many logical and technical explanations and citing of California's Civil Procedure 527.3.  Under this pertinent civil provision, the court is forbidden to issue an injunction in a case where there is a labor dispute and no one is involved in an unlawful breach of the peace. 

I explained to Judge Lewis that Intel was simply asking him to unjustly deprive me of my Freedom of Speech by presenting falsified and misleading claims.  As a judge who is bound to be independent, fair, just, and protective of the Constitution of the United States, Judge Lewis still yielded an individual’s rights to the oppressive desire of Intel, a large corporation. 

Intel has made two deliberately falsified and misleading claims.   They said I was trespassing "Chattel," which Intel explained as trespassing on a "proprietary computer system," and that I was creating a nuisance.  These claims and allegations are totally false and baseless.  Intel's proprietary computer system is their internal "Intranet", which I have never tried to access.  I sent one message to over 30,000 e-mail addresses from my private computer to my internet service provider's mail server, which is CLEARLY AND UN DISPUTABLY on a public domain - the Internet!  And if Intel would not choose to place their computer network on this CLEARLY AND UN DISPUTABLY public domain, then there would not be any mail boxes available for my messages to enter.  And that would be the end of this story. 

But like millions of other governmental, commercial, and private entities, Intel has freely chosen to open their network of computer system to this huge international and PUBLIC network of computers, called the Internet.  Therefore, Intel's right to the privileges provided by Internet is as equal as the right of any other NETIZEN (a citizen on the Internet) like you and me.

I have done nothing wrong nor illegal.  The problem is that Intel wants it both ways…public and private.  Intel can not handle the truth that I am legally communicating to Intel employees.  That is why the almighty Intel decided to attempt overpowering and intimidating me by hiring MOFO - Morrison and Foerster, the second largest law firm in the world today.  They are now filing a frivolous lawsuit.  Because MOFO managed to successfully manipulate the judicial system by buffaloing a non-computer-savvy judge to deprive me of my Constitutionally-protected Freedom of Speech, the true result was the setting of a dangerous precedent that deprives every American of his or her valuable Freedom of Speech on the developing frontier of the Internet. 

This is clearly and simply an attempt by Intel to monopolize mass communication power and the privilege of Internet.  Exploitative corporations like Intel are seriously worried about the opportunities and abilities that today's and tomorrow's technological advances of Internet can bring to a common person like myself.   Intel is fearful of the fact that via the public domain of Internet I can send an informative and educational message to all of its employees in a couple of hours from the privacy of my home.  A message such as mine could easily render Intel’s brainwashing and long-kept, isolated system of exploitation to be useless.

The availability of this technological marvel, the Internet, and the opportunities and power it brings to the immediate grasp of workers has left Intel with one of the following three options:

1.  If Intel cares about the free flow of truth and information, they could behave like a respectable and responsible employer that follows fair and reasonable guidelines, restrictions, and policies, allowing their employees open access to the Internet.

2.  If they want to retain their internal proprietary computer system (Intranet), Intel would be forced to isolate themselves from the opportunities and privileges of being on a public domain like Internet.  Of course this would be very painful for a dictatorial system like Intel.

3.  Or, Intel could stay on Internet and continue to crush any person sending information they do not like.  They can proceed with their attempts to overpower that person and abusively utilize the government to eliminate that person from Internet. 

Eventually, corporations like Intel would have the selective power of deciding who should and who should not communicate on Internet.  Because of the limited resources of an individual like myself, giant corporations can hire and unleash ferocious legal bulldogs like Morrison and Foerster, thereby manipulating the judicial system and depriving all of us of our Freedom of Speech on Internet.

As expected, Intel decided to apply the third option and that is the whole reason behind this absurd and frivolous lawsuit.  If Intel can win this case, then they will be successful at setting a precedent for all future similar disputes that will be ruled in favor of corporations like Intel. 

I am a person with a simple pioneer attitude, desire, drive, and determination at a new frontier which is called Internet.  I will fight as passionately as our early pioneers did to conquer this freedom for all my fellow Americans.

I have sacrificed tremendously as our forefathers did to secure, protect, and preserve our precious freedom.  I pledge to continue fighting to protect and preserve my Freedom of Speech and I hope our judicial system does not fail me…does not fail us all.  I will live and die free, but will never be a slave to Intel.  

This is a wake-up-call to all Americans.  This is the time we have to send a clear and resounding message to corporate giants like Intel and to our government that we will protect and preserve our freedoms and that no one can take them from us.  I am blessedly fortunate to be placed in a very unique situation and I am also blessed with the opportunity to be the messenger of this historic message which I will proudly carry forward!  

---

Background:

I have sent messages to certain destinations on Internet, the public domain.  If the mail box on the other end is not open, the message will not go through.  Judge Lewis chose to ignore or was incapable of understanding this very simple and clear fact, much to the benefit of Intel.  Judge Lewis said that my argument for my Freedom of Speech was not convincing and that I cannot trespass on Intel's property.  What does it to take to state the simple fact and educate a judge that I have not violated anybody's right, that Intel does not own the Internet, and that every American must be allowed to freely communicate his ideas and opinions through the medium of Internet. 

It is not that I am doing anything wrong. Intel simply does not like the content of my messages!  My policy has always been, "Don't criticize unless you have a solution."  And I have a solution for Intel that Judge Lewis could fairly decree.  Just make it a policy that no one should read Ken Hamidi's e-mails.   If that does not work, remove the Intel system from the Internet. 

But do not try to bully and overpower others.  Do not try to manipulate the government in order to shut up your opponents.  Clean up your act.   Treat your employees fairly and with respect for other's rights.  Then there will be no opponents from whom you fear the truth.

We all have TV sets in our homes.  Numerous television stations are broadcasting all sorts of programs that we might not want our children watching.   Do we sue the TV stations to stop them from broadcasting or do we just simply tell our children not to watch the questionable programming?  Obviously, we stop our children from watching those programs by blocking the undesirable programs.  If that does not work, we use technology to block our reception of those particular stations or programs we do not want.  If we don't have that capability, we have the choice of taking the TV set away.  But under no circumstance do we sue the TV stations or deprive them of their Freedom of Speech. 

Intel is the leader of computer technology in the world today.   Intel designs and dictates the architecture of computers that people use in the world.  Intel develops hardware and software that people use to protect and secure their computers and control the information that goes in and out.  Isn't it ironic and absurd that the leader of the computer industry cannot stop the messages that Ken Hamidi sends to its employees?  The truth of the matter is that Intel simply does not like the content of my messages and they cannot bare the painful truth. 

Annihilation of opponents is the chief behavior that Intel adopted under the rule of former Intel president, Andy Grove, the author of "Only the Paranoid Survive".  Present Intel president, Craig Barrett, is a strong proponent of this doctrine.  What these ill-minded leaders have to learn and will is that there is a limit to everything…that they are not creators.  They are simply mortal with temporary, Earthly power, which must not be abused!  I do not have a clear answer as to why Judge Lewis overlooked all the convincing facts and evidence provided to him.

But Judge Lewis' unconditional decision was so favorable to Intel that they are encouraged to boldly try to close this case immediately before the public finds out about it.  That can only happen at the price of denying me my right to a fair trial, another of the Bill of Rights guaranteed by our Constitution. 

I have received a notice of summary judgment motion hearing that Intel unilaterally had set for January 11, 1999.  It will be as easy for Intel’s attorneys as was the infamous unprecedented injunction they obtained through their sympathetic Judge Lewis.  According to my attorney friend, David Hurd,  this is absurd and ridiculous.  Dave adds that this case has just been filed.  There is no trial date set.  Nor has any discovery occurred.   What happened to my rights as a defendant?  Dave Hurd is the author of the "Survival Handbook for Employees"  Despite MOFO's attorney's, Dave is passionately and selflessly in pursuit of justice helping me to defend myself against Intel and MOFO (He can be reached at 916-502-0890 or 530-626-9518.).

This means that Intel wants to get a permanent ruling against me, win the case instantly, shut me up, and permanently deprive me of my right to Free Speech without giving me a chance to defend myself.  At least Lin Hai in China received a four-hour trial.  

My e-mail messages to Intel employees have always been what I believe to be educational, informational, and a true and accurate assessment of faults and shortcomings in Intel's Human Resources policies and practices.

If Intel can not stand the truth, isn't it best that Intel either simply ask their employees not to read Ken Hamidi's messages and or get off of the "Internet" and happily enjoy their own private and proprietary computer system, "Intranet"?  

I have worked very hard to gain my American citizenship and am proudly enjoying the freedoms that should come with it.  If by influence and desire of Intel our judicial system fails me and deprives me of my Freedom of   Speech, "I would rather die as a free man than being slave to Intel."