Subject:
|
Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 24 Jun 2004 19:55:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
780 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
(snip)... because there’s no need to repeat it, especially if it goes
unanswered by Dave!(1)
But, tangentially related, here’s a story
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=493&ncid=762&e=1&u=/ap/20040624/apenmo/filmfahrenheit911
in which some conservative group apparently wants to block Mr. Moore from
advertising his movie at certain time periods because to do so violates
campaign finance laws.
Talk about reaching!
|
I think they have a case.
|
True, they very well might, as the law is written. But it’s beside the point.
‘d have more respect for them if they came out against the law instead of using
it against their opponents. Just as I said I’d have more respect for Clinton if
he had said “yes, I did X and the law about X is bad” rather than “I didn’t
inhale”.
My main point is that the law, as written, is broken. In fact the entire idea of
regulating political speech is a broken idea.
| |
How would a commercial promoting a movie that
criticizes a political candidate differ in kind from a commercial criticizing
a political candidate paid for by a political opponent? And besides, the
group is only protesting any advertising after July 31st. Further, isn’t
the DNC buying millions of dollars worth of this movie to use/give
away/whatever as a tool to reelect Kerry? Talking about reaching:
|
Possibly true but beside the point.
| |
“I have not publicly endorsed John Kerry. I am an independent, I am not a
member of the Democratic Party.” Okaaay, whatever, MM. The guy is so
disingenuous it is beyond belief.
|
Possibly true, but beside the point.
| |
Seems to me that this is another example of how Democrats love to regulate,
but don’t feel those very rules they create don’t apply to them.
|
c/Democrats/Democrats AND Republicans/ * *
and you’ll get my agreement. Else, no.
Not JUST the Democrats, John. Your party too, John. More so than the Dems, even,
in some areas.
| |
Look at the
completely foundationless appeal of MM to the MPAA on his film’s “R” rating.
The case is so clear cut, but somehow MM should be exempt. Contemptible.
Typical.
|
Possibly true, but beside the point.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
| (...) I think they have a case. How would a commercial promoting a movie that criticizes a political candidate differ in kind from a commercial criticizing a political candidate paid for by a political opponent? And besides, the group is only (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
106 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
