I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Yoko Ono, record companies drop suits against "Expelled"

Great news! Both the federal-court and state-court copyright infringement lawsuits against Premise Media, the producer of the movie "Expelled," have been dropped.

There once was a lady named Yoko,
who had a mind that was quite loco.
When she tried to sue,
she later did rue,
'cause the lawyers she faced were pro bono.

Labels:

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

How much was she paid in the out of court settlement?

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 8:08:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

>>>>>> How much was she paid in the out of court settlement? <<<<<<

Ben Stein is a he, not a she. I don't know how much.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:18:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

The plaintiffs had to make a deposit, which has probably been forfeited.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Michael said...

I remember how hot this topic was especially in atheists' blogs who were trying to make a case for Yoko Ono and the record companies.

Yoko Ono decided there wasn't enough profit in pursuing such a lawsuit and felt her liberal crowd who were outraged that part of the song was in the movie, was happy with her effort.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 11:03:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Michael said...
>>>>>> I remember how hot this topic was especially in atheists' blogs who were trying to make a case for Yoko Ono and the record companies. <<<<<<

IMO it is very wrong to assume that licensing or permitting use of a copyrighted work implies endorsement of the borrowing work, and a ruling against "Expelled" would have shown approval of that bad assumption. Such an assumption tends to discourage copyright holders from allowing their works to be borrowed by a controversial work.

I suspect that the reason why the plaintiffs gave up now is that the release of the DVD of the movie is scheduled for October 21 and the plaintiffs realized that they had no hope of blocking it. The DVD's are going to be distributed all over the world and -- unlike the theatre copies -- cannot be recalled. Yoko Ono et al. realized that they were faced with a fait accompli.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 12:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Hector said...

> Ben Stein is a he, not a she. <

Yoko Ono is a she, not a he. I guess you don't know how much she was paid to drop her suit.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 1:55:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

>>>>>> I guess you don't know how much she was paid to drop her suit. <<<<<<

Yoko Ono is rich -- she could not be paid enough to do something that she does not want to do.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 3:27:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

>>>>>> I guess you don't know how much she was paid to drop her suit. <<<<<<

Yoko Ono is rich -- she could not be paid enough to do something that she does not want to do.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 3:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Hector said...

> Yoko Ono is rich -- she could not be paid enough to do something that she does not want to do. <

She might want it as a matter of principle. It was the "Expelled" people who wronged her. She did not wrong them.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:31:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

>>>>>> She might want it as a matter of principle. <<<<<<

Why should they give her anything, bozo? They are in the driver's seat. And she caused them a hell of a lot of trouble.

>>>>>> It was the "Expelled" people who wronged her. <<<<<<<

Wrong, doofus. It was fair use.

>>>>>> She did not wrong them. <<<<<<

Wrong again. She disrupted and delayed the movie's theatre runs.

Thursday, October 09, 2008 2:04:00 AM  
Anonymous Voice in the Urbanness said...

> Why should they give her anything, bozo? <

Because she is in the driver's seat. And they caused her a hell of a lot of trouble.

> Wrong, doofus. It was fair use. <

No, dunghill. That is what the case was to decide.

I wonder how much they paid. It looks like the film was falling on its face anyway so nobody really cares.

Thursday, October 09, 2008 7:24:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home