Create your own social network with a free forum.
zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Welcome to Loose Change Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:


Pages: (2) [1] 2  ( Go to first unread post )

 Jref's New Strategy Against Loose Change, Contacting Anti-Piracy Groups
stopsnitchin
  Posted: Nov 12 2007, 04:55 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,501
Member No.: 447
Joined: 21-October 06



Top
IVXX
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 05:07 PM


MDCCLXXVI


Group: Admin
Posts: 5,109
Member No.: 378
Joined: 20-October 06



QUOTE (BenBurch @ JREF)

You know, I bet if we got on the phone this week, by Friday we could have at least a half-dozen media outlets suing Dylan over his piracy of their copyright works. He goes WAY beyond the legal definition of fair use.


QUOTE (SDC @ JREF)

I can only assume that DA not only never consulted a specialist in copyright and intellectual property, he never considered it seriously.


:lol:

Think they'll admit they're wrong?? I guess BenBurch likes making an ass of himself.
Top
buddy
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 05:12 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,884
Member No.: 2,673
Joined: 28-February 07



well, the assumption is that all the videos are being used without permission and not as fair use. Good luck with that.

yeah that's good. go after copyright infringement, not the issues.
Top
IVXX
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 05:18 PM


MDCCLXXVI


Group: Admin
Posts: 5,109
Member No.: 378
Joined: 20-October 06



QUOTE (buddy @ Nov 12 2007, 05:12 PM)
yeah that's good. go after copyright infringement, not the issues.

They'd be better off sticking to the issues. Not that they have much there either.
Top
seeker135
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 05:31 PM


Death to Tyrants


Group: Members
Posts: 3,157
Member No.: 3,469
Joined: 28-March 07



QUOTE (IVXX @ Nov 12 2007, 05:18 PM)
QUOTE (buddy @ Nov 12 2007, 05:12 PM)
yeah that's good. go after copyright infringement, not the issues.

They'd be better off sticking to the issues. Not that they have much there either.

Does anyone else see the traitorous undertone to these efforts? :angry:
Top
Tim Riches
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 05:33 PM


Canadian Action Party Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,275
Member No.: 472
Joined: 22-October 06



Absolutely.
Top
Sureshot
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 05:44 PM


"Real world hijack? Cool!" -Shelley Watson, NEADS


Group: Admin
Posts: 2,265
Member No.: 430
Joined: 21-October 06



They wouldn't have a case considering the footage presented is historical record of an event. Its not like Dylan could have gotten that footage anywhere else.

QUOTE
Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered “fair,” such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair
Top
Revolutionary91
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:02 PM


Great Scott!


Group: Admin
Posts: 2,993
Member No.: 135
Joined: 18-October 06



It's their plan B.

You really think they'd have a chance in just taking the film head on and addressing the facts? HA! The day that happens is the day I'll grow a third eye.
Top
Headhunter
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:05 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,868
Member No.: 2,758
Joined: 3-March 07



Why don't they debate the content, instead of working to try to stop people from accessing the information..? Interesting tact..
Top
IVXX
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:22 PM


MDCCLXXVI


Group: Admin
Posts: 5,109
Member No.: 378
Joined: 20-October 06



QUOTE (Headhunter @ Nov 12 2007, 06:05 PM)
Why don't they debate the content.

Cause they can't.
Top
Arbor
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:23 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 680
Member No.: 6,799
Joined: 2-September 07



Does the "fair use" doctrine include for-profit documentaries?

Perhaps LTW should become a 501c3.
Top
ihatecreditors
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:31 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,191
Member No.: 3,981
Joined: 17-April 07



that is dispicable.

These people don't have an ounce of understanding of freedom of speech. Freedom of belief and freedom of expression. If it were their way they would get rid of freedom of speech, outlaw speech. Then these same people would control us.
You know I may not agree with everything people say. But I'm smart enough to ask questions to be sure.

I am not a dumb person, I can honestly say this about myself. I know what my questions are and my concerns. I know my rights and how the government is taking them away.
These people don't understand the effects 9/11 and bush had on our freedoms.

I just really want these people to get a better hobby. I don't hate on you believers so don't hate on me. Pompous assholes
Top
mynameis
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:35 PM


If you're a troll, you get dead air from me.


Group: Members
Posts: 4,823
Member No.: 856
Joined: 4-November 06



Well what else can you expect, when you let the dogs crap all inside your bed, speaking about the forums here?
Top
Quezinox
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:47 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Admin
Posts: 210
Member No.: 58
Joined: 18-October 06



QUOTE (stopsnitchin @ Nov 12 2007, 09:55 PM)
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=98600

<_<

too bad the footage was bought and not all taken in "fair use" so they can do what they want the reason the film cost so much to make in part is because the cost of using footage.
Top
thehighwaymanq
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:49 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,673
Member No.: 1,048
Joined: 26-November 06



QUOTE (Quezinox @ Nov 12 2007, 07:47 PM)
QUOTE (stopsnitchin @ Nov 12 2007, 09:55 PM)
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=98600

<_<

too bad the footage was bought and not all taken in "fair use" so they can do what they want the reason the film cost so much to make in part is because the cost of using footage.

Yo Mikey, do you know if LTW Radio is new tonight or a repeated ep?
Top
Quezinox
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:52 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Admin
Posts: 210
Member No.: 58
Joined: 18-October 06



QUOTE (thehighwaymanq @ Nov 12 2007, 11:49 PM)
QUOTE (Quezinox @ Nov 12 2007, 07:47 PM)
QUOTE (stopsnitchin @ Nov 12 2007, 09:55 PM)
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=98600

<_<

too bad the footage was bought and not all taken in "fair use" so they can do what they want the reason the film cost so much to make in part is because the cost of using footage.

Yo Mikey, do you know if LTW Radio is new tonight or a repeated ep?

not sure as i have not has contact with either dylan or jason today, home all alone haha

oh and at least Gravy got it right over there

QUOTE
Why are people assuming that LTW didn't purchase the rights for the footage they are using? After the Naudet debacle (not a lawsuit, btw), they assured their fans that the Final Cut would not have those copyright issues, that it would be "100% legal." Since they were trying get the movie released in theaters with major investors like Mark Cuban on board, I don't expect they would have treated this issue cavalierly.


someone thinking before jumping to conclusions
Top
IVXX
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 06:58 PM


MDCCLXXVI


Group: Admin
Posts: 5,109
Member No.: 378
Joined: 20-October 06



QUOTE (Quezinox @ Nov 12 2007, 06:52 PM)
oh and at least Gravy got it right over there

QUOTE
Why are people assuming that LTW didn't purchase the rights for the footage they are using? After the Naudet debacle (not a lawsuit, btw), they assured their fans that the Final Cut would not have those copyright issues, that it would be "100% legal." Since they were trying get the movie released in theaters with major investors like Mark Cuban on board, I don't expect they would have treated this issue cavalierly.


someone thinking before jumping to conclusions

WOW!! I'm impressed.
Top
Headhunter
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 07:02 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,868
Member No.: 2,758
Joined: 3-March 07



So gravy isn't a total fool then.

Hey remember Mel Gibson in the film "Conspiracy Theory"..?

"Oh no, not the gravy, not the gravy!"
Top
Matthew Brown
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 07:03 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 743
Member No.: 1,267
Joined: 23-December 06



Dang, Gravy... we knew you had it in you.
Top
TomBombadillo
Posted: Nov 12 2007, 07:28 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Gone
Posts: 487
Member No.: 115
Joined: 18-October 06



QUOTE (IVXX @ Nov 12 2007, 06:22 PM)
QUOTE (Headhunter @ Nov 12 2007, 06:05 PM)
Why don't they debate the content.

Cause they can't.

What was new in the film that hasn't already been addressed?
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
« Next Oldest | The Lounge | Next Newest »
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you

Topic OptionsPages: (2) [1] 2 



Hosted for free by zIFBoards* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.0321 seconds · Archive