posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 08:37 PM
reply to post by Witness2008
Agreed. And to be honest, I think the Copyright Infringement aspect of this whole story is a little bizarre when you think about the actual problem
they're trying to address. According to the courts, the actor's work IS independently 'copyrightable'. I think Google is arguing that her claim
should be against the director (who used her recorded footage from another movie, hence breaking copyright), and I think they're right for saying
that. But I think this move is essentially trying to affect the director by stopping the distribution of his work.
I guess in that sense, it's like attacking ISP's for people illegally downloading movies. The ISP has nothing to do with the act, but targeting them
is a means to trying to stop people engaging in illegal activity.
But the ranting about this move being to placate angry Muslims, and the suppression of Free Speech is laughable.
Cheers,
Rewey