Googlebot Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Googlebot agrees with Az. Even as much as we...severely dislike Michael Moore, there are other people involved who have rights over this movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Moore sold the rights of this film to the distributors. Therefore, any viewing of it is in the hands of the distributors. Furthermore, the copy you are getting is most likely bootlegged, and bootlegging is illegal, so by downloading it, you are saying that the bootlegger was okay (or in essence, receiving stolen property). Another example is like this: I own a painting. I loan the painting to a friend. I say that you can have the painting, so you break into the friend's house and steal it from there. Have you committed a crime? Yes, because you stole from the second party without permission. Moore doesn't own this film entirely himself anymore than I own a story that I have published in a newspaper. They buy it from me and maintain publication rights from there on out. Moore is just being a troublemaker by saying its okay to download it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 I again disagree with all of you. [quote]Whenever you get in debates you sound angry, so sorry if this makes you even angrier, but I don't think it's your place to decide whether or not you are sinning.[/quote] i simply said i disagree, how is that angry? only if you're reading angriness into it. and i don't think it's your place to decide whether or not i am sinning. pAx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I don't understand the concept of "not having the place to say if someone is sinning." If something is objectively sinful, and someone is doing so, knowing they are doing so, even after being told its sinful...then frankly, it is wholly acceptable to say, "You are sinning." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 Dojo, I agree with you there. but this is not something that is objectively sinful, Moore has the Artistic ownership of the piece, if he says people can and should fileshare it, then it's okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeenaBobba Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 The thing that made me change my mind is when people said that others were involved. That's very true. Sure, they might agree with Moore on this, but I don't know that, so I should just play it safe and not download it. There's a chance that they don't agree with Moore, too, and I'd want to respect that. God bless, Jen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Al, If I publish a song, who do you have to contact to get permission for distribution? The author alone? Or the publishing company? Both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I never said it's my place to decide, I'm saying that in the end, only God knows for sure. And Dojo, I think that saying something is sinful or saying you think someone is sinning is a lot different from saying "you are sinning" or "i am not sinning". You know what I mean? Like it is ok to tell a person they are sinning I guess, just not condemn them. And Al, like Grant and I have both said, Michael Moore doesn't own this movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 Dojo, IMO, the author alone. pAx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I would like to add: If Moore says you should sneak into the theater without paying, is that acceptable? Why or why not? If Moore doesn't care about you having to pay to view it, disenfranchising the distributors, and its not stealing, then isn't it also not stealing to see it in the theater? Also, you didn't address the bootlegging issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeenaBobba Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Hi Al, I agree that he has artistic ownership in the sense that he made this film. But he doesn't entirely have financial ownership over it, and that's what I think would make it wrong to download this movie. Like everyone has said, it also belongs to others at this point, and downloading it would be taking money out of their pockets -- and they've never given us permission to do so. If Moore owned all the rights to this movie, and if his cast and crew knew about this beforehand and agreed to it, I'd tell you to download to your heart's content; but that doesn't seem to be the case at the moment. That being said, it seems it shouldn't be downloaded. God bless, Jen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 [quote]Dojo, I agree with you there. but this is not something that is objectively sinful, Moore has the Artistic ownership of the piece, if he says people can and should fileshare it, then it's okay. [/quote] Artistic ownership isnt really ownership at all... he gets credit for making the film but when he signs the contract of sale, he lost any rights to saying people could download it. You are currently breaking federal laws -nevermind Church laws- by downloading a film based on a statement made by a man who has no legal right to allow it to be downloaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 (edited) I'm looking at my Plumb CD. It is not copyrighted by the musician, but by Curb Records, who "manufactured and distributed" it. The law would say that I must have their permission for unlicenced listening, not Plumb. Plumb sold their songs to Curb. Michael Moore sold the viewing rights to the distributors. The ONLY way this is legal is if Michael Moore distributed a copy of the movie on the Internet HIMSELF. The distributors have theater rights, but not Internet rites. However, if you are viewing a bootleg copy, it is wholly illegal. And this assumes that he actually had full ownership of it (that is, it was not partially owned by investors). Without this knowledge, its basically like seeing a movie sitting outside on the pavement and someone says, "Here take it," when it might belong to someone else who accidentally left it there. Edited June 30, 2004 by DojoGrant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crusader1234 Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 [quote]The ONLY way this is legal is if Michael Moore distributed a copy of the movie on the Internet HIMSELF. The distributors have theater rights, but not Internet rites. However, if you are viewing a bootleg copy, it is wholly illegal. [/quote] That is possible, however I dont know of any self respecting international distribution company that would buy a movie and leave loopholes in the contract so that the creator could give it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 crusader, True. The law is so tedious that everything is covered these days. They probably have sole distribution rights until its completely out of theaters and a contract is signed for home video rights, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now