CTers Guilty of Copyright Infringement?

[NobbyNobbs]

I was wondering if copyrights are effective across various mediums. For example, can the author of this book (http://www.amazon.com/Loose-Change-Three-Women-Sixties/dp/0520209109/sr=1-1/qid=1169855115/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-5900938-5280132?ie=UTF8&s=books) sue Dylan Avery and his gang? Does anyone happen to know?

And even if the copyright to a book doesn't apply to a movie, what about this (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816566/)? Do you suppose the producers should be told? This movie was made in 1999, so any copyrights can't possibly have run out yet.

[pagan]

I was wondering if copyrights are effective across various mediums. For example, can the author of this book (http://www.amazon.com/Loose-Change-Three-Women-Sixties/dp/0520209109/sr=1-1/qid=1169855115/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-5900938-5280132?ie=UTF8&s=books) sue Dylan Avery and his gang? Does anyone happen to know?

And even if the copyright to a book doesn't apply to a movie, what about this (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816566/)? Do you suppose the producers should be told? This movie was made in 1999, so any copyrights can't possibly have run out yet.

Yep, anything goes for you. Your only mission is to stop the word spreading.

NO, shame:cool:

[Anti-sophist]

Yep, anything goes for you. Your only mission is to stop the word spreading.

:tr:



I was wondering if copyrights are effective across various mediums.

The answer is... not really. Copyrights don't apply to titles, they apply to "works". You can't copy a work without the permission of the copyright holder.

Now, for trademarks or other intellectual property, there's more stringent rules, but generally these things are only covered under copyrights.

[Arus808]

well its clear from the troof movement that they dont give a damn about laws (as witnessed by the posting of the Val phone call).

So copyright infringement is not surprising (since Dylan Avery comitted that in his first Loose Change video and LC 2nd ed).

[T.A.M.]

Yep, anything goes for you. Your only mission is to stop the word spreading.

NO, shame:cool:

Yep, anything goes for you...screw laws. Hurt and defame whom ever you like. Ruin lives, as long as what you think is the "truth" gets out there, it doesnt matter how you do it, what laws you break, or who you hurt.

TAM:mad:

[Quad4_72]

Yep, anything goes for you. Your only mission is to stop the word spreading.

NO, shame:cool:

It doesn't matter how many graves you piss on or how many innocent people you accuse of murder. For you its all about spreading the word.

I love how CFs accuse the government of murder and yet the government still defends their right to say what they want. If I was the big bad government, I would DEFINITELY have secret police just for these idiots. But oh well. I will still go wherever the government sends me and defend CFs like pagan.

[pagan]

It doesn't matter how many graves you piss on or how many innocent people you accuse of murder. For you its all about spreading the word.

I love how CFs accuse the government of murder and yet the government still defends their right to say what they want. If I was the big bad government, I would DEFINITELY have secret police just for these idiots. But oh well. I will still go wherever the government sends me and defend CFs like pagan.

Innocent people? The decider is innocent??? This man is guilty of murdering 100 000's people by now. Even if the stoopid bastid never had any involvment in 9-11.

The DECIDER is EVIL. He is bad and he is stupid.:p

[T.A.M.]

In that case, he joins a long list of POPULAR (Unlike him) world leaders guilty of the same...If you are going to call all those who bring their nation to war evil and stupid, than you are going to insult alot of famous leaders...

TAM

[Brainster]

I was wondering if copyrights are effective across various mediums. For example, can the author of this book (http://www.amazon.com/Loose-Change-Three-Women-Sixties/dp/0520209109/sr=1-1/qid=1169855115/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-5900938-5280132?ie=UTF8&s=books) sue Dylan Avery and his gang? Does anyone happen to know?

And even if the copyright to a book doesn't apply to a movie, what about this (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816566/)? Do you suppose the producers should be told? This movie was made in 1999, so any copyrights can't possibly have run out yet.

You can't copyright a title. You can sue for damages if you could prove that somebody was trying to mislead the public into thinking this was your product.

Sometimes creators get around this by trademarking their title or parts thereof.

[Quad4_72]

Innocent people? The decider is innocent??? This man is guilty of murdering 100 000's people by now. Even if the stoopid bastid never had any involvment in 9-11.

The DECIDER is EVIL. He is bad and he is stupid.:p

100,000s of thousands huh? You have a source for those figures? Thats what I thought.

[Horatius]

You can't copyright a title. You can sue for damages if you could prove that somebody was trying to mislead the public into thinking this was your product.

Sometimes creators get around this by trademarking their title or parts thereof.

Yes, they would have to go for them under trademarks laws. Unfortunately, Trademarks aren't automatic like copyrights, so unless they applied for the trademark, and have actively kept it alive, they can't do anything. Since I expect most people have never heard of those other works, they most likely aren't trademarked.

There are websites where you can search registered trademarks. For instance, if you want to find a Canadian trademark, this is the place to look:

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/app/cipo/trademarks/search/tmSearch.do?language=eng

/shameless plug for my employers :)

[LashL]

There was an organization for people with shopping addictions that had a site and forum called Loose Change long before the twoofers and the loose with the truth boyz came along. It was at www.loose-change.org but I see that it's "parked" now. I suspect that it has to do with Do-Over and company.

Can you imagine how awful it would be to have a genuine, caring community established with a view to helping people with a particular addiction, and then finding out that people trying to access the organization and its forums for help were accidentally finding WooWoo-ville when they try to get to your help forums?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Yep, anything goes for you. Your only mission is to stop the word spreading.

NO, shame:cool:
If we were trying to silence the movement, armed people would be showing up at CFist doors. They're not, ergo we aren't.

What we are interested in, however, is that laws aren't broken. Which, though the CFist movement claims so many other to be breaking are they, themselves, the ones guilty of breaking, bending, or ignoring left and right.

[The Doc]

Would cutting up Phillip Morelli's interview the way they did in 9/11 Mysteries constitute fair use and copyright infringement? I'm not a lawyer by any means but I was under the impression that removing certain sections of footage to change the context is a pretty serious offense?

You can see what they did to Phillip Morelli's interview here (coded to play at the exact spot).

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=-6243624912447824934#51m09s (http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=-6243624912447824934#51m09s)