What happens when an organization that is best known for inveighing against the unauthorized copying of movies gets caught doing exactly that? The Motion Picture Association of America was caught with its pants down, admitting to making unauthorized copies of the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated in advance of this week's Sundance Film Festival.
This Film Is Not Yet Rated looks at the motion picture ratings system created and run by the MPAA. Director Kirby Dick submitted the film for rating in November. After receiving the movie, the MPAA subsequently made copies without Dick's permission. Dick had specifically requested in an e-mail that the MPAA not make copies of the movie. The MPAA responded by saying that "the confidentiality of your film is our first priority."
Dick later learned that the MPAA made copies of the film to distribute them to its employees, despite the MPAA's stance on unauthorized copying. Ah, there's nothing like the smell of hypocrisy in the morning-apparently the prohibition against copying films without the copyright owner's consent doesn't apply to the MPAA.
:laugh:
And their excuse? Oh, like they wouldn't invade people's privacy if it served their own purpose. Sony already got caught installing root kits on people's computers in a suruptisious manner, and then Bwahahahahaha These are hardly the one's to lecture anyone on right vs. wrong, or to give excuses of "but he invaded the privacy of our staffers" ROFL
I know, Dick should file a lawsuite against the MPAA, and make sure they're nailed to the same legal cross the RIAA has tried to nail deceased 80 year old grandmothers who didn't even know how to use a computer, and everyone else when it had suited their purposes. It'd be fitting, for them to be at the same level of litigation they spew out upon world + dog, when they're caught copying a movie themself in this manner
After all, fair would be both fair and just :up:
Given that the MPAA's intent isn't financial gain and that the whole situation may rise above the level of trading barbs through the media into legal action, making a copy may be justified.
Oh, is that the sound of fair use I hear? Course, in due consideration of this little provision in the 13th Amendment called "equal protection under the law", it should either apply to everyone, or no one at all
The law is supposed to be impartial, and no respecter of persons, etc, etc... Oh yes, the deliscous irony indeed
And who better to know this, then one of the largest filers of law suites themselves, come to see their own actions return to them full circle...
