|
|
 | | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
| (...) Since common courtesy is in the eye of the beholder, and since a title can certainly be spoofed without seeking the indulgence of the title's holder, then Bradbury is left with nothing but sour grapes. Sorry, Ray, but that's how it goes in the (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
| (...) Technically Tito wasn't the first paying passenger either, but I think he was the first to fund his own way. (...) True, but Tito got a week's vacation in a space Hilton. Today's flight was the equivalent of a couple of minute ride in the (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
| (...) No, it's based on common courtesy, or the lack thereof on the part of Moore. Farenheit 911 is so obviously a takeoff on Farenheit 451 that it's not really questionable that Moore intended to rip off the name recognition Bradbury has earned for (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
| (...) I read an article (might have been by Roger Ebert) that suggested that this time, Moore used real facts. I wonder if he caught too much heat over Bowling for Columbine for which he seems to have made a bunch of stuff up. Chris (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
| (...) Well, news programs constantly use punch/pun titles, and no one complains about it (except when the torrent of stupid puns overwhelms the discourse (such as when Trent Lott pined for the days of segregation: "Lott of Trouble," "Lott of (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
