Comment

Comment by 7R33SandR0P3S on June 9, 2009 at 4:54am

Pretty good presentation. But.....could be even better if it were brought up to date.

Comment by truth on June 9, 2009 at 3:27am

Cool, you added the link. F'n Ning pulled a blog I put up with the Guba embed code in it , with in hours of posting it..
No letter about DCMA as usual , nothing, just yanked it.

Comment by truth on June 3, 2009 at 10:46am

TLS could you add the above link to this blog? We are getting tons ofhits fromgoogle looking for a link !
Thanks !

Comment by truth on May 28, 2009 at 4:01pm

http://www.guba.com/watch/3000111574?duration_step=0&fields=23&...

Comment by Jeff on April 18, 2009 at 8:28pm

Thanks :)

Comment by TheLasersShadow on April 18, 2009 at 7:23pm

He was on Alex Jones show in person and you can do a quick search to find out his last name.

Alex and WAC Luke don't make anything on this video ... well AJ might sell it at his web store but thats his small cut because he's basically the star of the documentary.

Comment by Jeff on April 18, 2009 at 7:03pm

Didn't know the Luke in the letter wasn't the Luke in the video. How do you know that?

Comment by TheLasersShadow on April 18, 2009 at 6:55pm

The Luke in the letter Is not the Luke Rudowski of We Are Change in the documentary.

I wasn't really making a legal argument as much as i was saying I couldn't have known I couldn't use fair use. The reason I couldn't use their video was purely because that I would hurt "potential market for or value". I had thought they already sold all the rights and that DVD's where out. That letter he sent informed me that wasn't so.

All in all I think It's about IFC wanting to know accurately how many people download their video and to make it more attractive to investors. I don't have a problem with that I just hope it gets to a place where all can see it because as of right now you need a cable box on comcast or something to use their on demand feature.

Comment by Jeff on April 18, 2009 at 5:27pm

Personally, when a young man like Luke makes a personal plea for a video to be removed because it's posting may affect his ability to profit from it I would be inclined to side with him. He made the video with the intent to profit from it to be able to continue his efforts against the NWO and the lies associated with 9/11. something all of us here have a vested interest in. It seems to me that he's personally done a lot more to affect dissent against the NWO than anyone here has. Helping him with his endeavors by removing the video and adhering to his request should be paramount in our concerns, not attempting to use legal arguments to circumvent his desires. What's wrong with viewing the video for free on the web site Luke asked us all to view it on? If that gives him additional views to promote his video it seems to me that's the proper thing to do. If we're all supposedly in this fight together we have a responsibility to support each others efforts.

Comment by TheLasersShadow on April 18, 2009 at 4:58pm

I did some looking at "fair use" and WIKI had some interesting things in it.

"In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors." - WIKI

I didn't know this when i posted it the other day but now after looking into this all we need to know these two things. "the fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use" I couldn't have known the other day that they had not sold DVD rights but at the same time its not because it was not released but because "4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work". In the future I'm going to be more crucial of what I define as Fair Use. I guess i should have researched into Fair Use more than glancing over it.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page