YASNY Posted June 3, 2006 Share Posted June 3, 2006 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 07:16 AM) And of course the only thing you look at is Moore's politics. We have a system in this country that when you are wronged you can legally seek remedies. People buy and sell other people's intellectual property all the time. That is the law in America and I respect that. Even scumbags are protected. If George Gittoes wanted complete control over his documentary, he should have paid for it himself and owned the whole thing. But he didn't and the company that took the risk on a documentary about soldiers singing songs, allowed it to be used. And they proably even made a few dollars more than from the hippies that went to art houses to watch it the first time. Damon could have refused to appear, but signed a release and it gave ABC the rights to the interview. Lesson to all, don't appear on TV and you won't have that problem. We'll see how his case pans out. That's why we have a legal system. That's all I wanted to comment on, in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted June 3, 2006 Share Posted June 3, 2006 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 02:35 AM) Tex, that link had nothing to do with the title. It had to do with Moore taking pieces from the others guys work and basiclly putting them in his piece without asking, or paying. As for the name, it is well known that Bradbury didn't like it, but since it can be considered a parody, it is fair game. "There are about 17 scenes from my documentary in his film. I wouldn't go so far as to say he lifted (them). Michael got access to my stuff ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted June 3, 2006 Share Posted June 3, 2006 Moore usually has a wide, overarching good point (i.e. the lack of military children of Congressmen -- seems real easy to vote for a war when it isn't going to impact your life or the increasing costs of health care, poverty, etc.) He's a) just an entertainer and B) plays too fast and loose with his facts, for humor's sake. Yeah he may be a total douchebag as YAS said, but he does occassionally do something good like when he took on Fred Phelps with the Sodomobile & protested his protests or when he sandbagged Humana into helping a guy with their medical coverage get a new pancreas otherwise the guy would have died (Humana said they'd cover the guy's disease and then cut off the funds when it got costly) I'm not going to defend Moore on everything because he sometimes is wrong and plays fast/loose with his facts, but he's not a total douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 01:17 PM) I think it pretty much depends on the original release you sign, and all the fine print contained therein. If you have read any of the boilerplate language on those you know you pretty much agree to give up control of the use of your likeness in a variety of media uses beyond the original broadcast. This includes use as marketing materials for the broadcaster or its parent company or its affiliates, and it also usually includes general nondescriptive derivative uses that are consistent with the manner in which thir archive material is normally used. There is big money in archival and B-roll newsreel footage leasing. And it is getting bigger and bigger with all the Internet demand for broadcast content and also the increasing ease with which regular folks can get into the documentary business with minimal hardware and software expenditures. Most likely, Michael Moore's lawyers will produce evidence of the lease agreement with NBC and will refer Sgt. Damon to the release he signed with NBC. As far as using newsreel material in a way that the subject deems unflattering or otherwise objectionable, if it was that easy to sue over it then Michael Moore, Jon Stewart, and Stephen Colbert would be in the poor house. They are not. They and the companies they work for are meticulous in the way they secure usage rights to avoid such complications. According to NBC News, Moore didn't get clearance to use that film. http://enterprise.southofboston.com/articl...news/news02.txt "As all news organizations do, NBC News does license footage that has already aired on NBC programs," wrote NBC News spokesman Barbara Levin. "As a general rule, most news organizations, including NBC News, do not obtain releases from people who appear on our news programs. "When we do license footage — as in this instance — NBC includes a provision that it is the responsibility of the licensee, not NBC, to obtain all required consents and releases necessary to use the footage," she wrote. Based on that policy, it would have been up to Moore to get any needed clearance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 QUOTE "As all news organizations do, NBC News does license footage that has already aired on NBC programs," wrote NBC News spokesman Barbara Levin. "As a general rule, most news organizations, including NBC News, do not obtain releases from people who appear on our news programs. "When we do license footage — as in this instance — NBC includes a provision that it is the responsibility of the licensee, not NBC, to obtain all required consents and releases necessary to use the footage," she wrote. looks like he might have a case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 09:51 PM) Moore did quite well. http://www.slate.com/id/2117923/ Whole story here, where gross gate of over $200 million turned into only a $78 million profit. With that kind of creative accounting maybe Enron should have hired a few Hollywood accountants. I can see that though. Can you imagine the cost of feeding Michael Moore during the shooting? They were lucky to make as much as they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 5, 2006 -> 05:50 PM) I can see that though. Can you imagine the cost of feeding Michael Moore during the shooting? They were lucky to make as much as they did. Griffin v. Moore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted June 6, 2006 Share Posted June 6, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 5, 2006 -> 07:53 PM) Griffin v. Moore. LMFAO!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts