Continued: MAN THE HARPOONS!!! xenutv1 MEGATHREAD

Wise Anon is wise.

You win caek.

Originally Posted by uhnonamus

This may sound out of left field, but I wonder if the problem could be the V mask in the background. I'm sure Warner Brothers must own the rights to that image. Only thing I can think of that might explain the copyright issue.

You can't copyright the image of an object. You can copyright a logo, and you can copyright a product so that nobody else can produce it. But it's not a logo, its an object in the background, and it's not being produced or sold.

Otherwise, a manufacturer of a popular brand of running shoes or cars or something could shut down practically any video or photo. Ebay merchants wouldn't be able to show photos of their used merchandise. Etc.

Awesome, op, you are full of win and epicness.

You just made my day!!!! w00t!!! Anyways, THANK YOU!

Originally Posted by Edges

You can't copyright the image of an object. You can copyright a logo, and you can copyright a product so that nobody else can produce it. But it's not a logo, its an object in the background, and it's not being produced or sold.

Otherwise, a manufacturer of a popular brand of running shoes or cars or something could shut down practically any video or photo. Ebay merchants wouldn't be able to show photos of their used merchandise. Etc.

afaik you're right, you can't copyright an image of an object. with logos associated with products there's trademark, which is a little different. obviously if warner or whoever is selling masks, they should reasonably expect them to be worn in public, and there's no case at all here, imho. there was a barbi doll internet site a decade or so ago that got sued and folded for using barbi in ways the company didn't like. i guess the idea of trademark is for companies to be able to control how their product name and logo are presented publicly, so it's a little bit different. you can't trademark common words, so CoS claiming "freedom" is nonsense, plus you have to have a word associated with an image that is distinct in some way. not a specialist, but this is how i understood it. funny thing, scilons fliered mailboxes in vilnius, lithuania on their book drive. the leaflet says L Ron Hubbard is copyrighted and trademarked by RTC (see image, fine print at bottom). I guess this means RTC will be suing the Library of Congress for listing the name L Ron Hubbard in their collection now.

posting in epic thread.

VictoireFlamel. Is there an update on this story? Thanks.

Their complaint form:

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Try to be nice; it might help.

Here is the Official Statement I just received from The Church of Scientology:



/////

Originally Posted by TacticalAnalyst

VictoireFlamel. Is there an update on this story? Thanks.

I think our press hero is still sleeping. Give it some time.

Originally Posted by J. Swift

Here is the Official Statement I just received from The Church of Scientology:



/////

BAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

News reached Dagbladet (One big Norwegian paper) and they published an article 14 minutes ago.

YouTube slettet scientologikritisk video - Nyheter - Dagbladet.no


In short, they are saying YT removed the video, quoting the usual YT representative's policy thing and Andreas Hedal-Lund tells of the possibility that cult members are mass flagging a automated system.

They are self-hosting the interview too.

Viva Zapata!

Originally Posted by VictoireFlamel

There are some interesting new developments in this case, but I will not post until Mark Bunker either updates his blog, or gives me permission to post it. I will try and work with WBM to get this video on INTERNATIONAL media. Scientology will not win.

Disclaimer: Don't read anymore into this than what is stated. It's vague for a reason.

Vict,

I appreciate your work on this but teaser posts have a tendency to go over like a ton of bricks. Hint of news with a request not to read into it...is kinda self defeating.

Originally Posted by Edges

You can't copyright the image of an object. You can copyright a logo, and you can copyright a product so that nobody else can produce it. But it's not a logo, its an object in the background, and it's not being produced or sold.

Otherwise, a manufacturer of a popular brand of running shoes or cars or something could shut down practically any video or photo. Ebay merchants wouldn't be able to show photos of their used merchandise. Etc.

not to mention guy fawkes is a historical character long before V the comic, or V the movie

REMEMBER REMEMBER THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBER

Originally Posted by J. Swift

Here is the Official Statement I just received from The Church of Scientology:



/////

At first... I was like "hmmm..."

But then I lol'd