Moore’s new movie getting some downloaders in hot water
Everyone hang on to your seats… I’m about to defend Michael Moore. ;)
Cinema Blend has a hot button article up on their site accusing Moore of a few things. The most important allegation of theirs is that Moore was trying to get the people outside the US and Canada who downloaded “Slacker Uprising” through his site in legal trouble. To be completely fair to Cinema Blend and to ensure that I don’t quote anything out of context, I’m going to republish their article in its entirety.
Any Michael Moore fans living outside the U.S. or Canada were frustrated when they went through official routes to download Slacker Uprising, Moore’s latest film that he made intentionally available for free download online. But it didn’t take long for the movie to show up in less legal venues, like Bit Torrent, and that was when the lawyers less thrilled with Moore’s copyright plan got involved.
Moore talked to Torrent Freak and admitted that he pretty much planned for the movie to be available all over the Internet, for viewers all over the world, even though the movie’s copyright holder has sent lawyers marching all over to cease and desist downloading. “I only own the US and Canadian rights. So my hands are tied. But this is the 21st century. What are ‘geographical rights’?”
He repeatedly told Torrent Freak that he wishes someone would figure out what he’s up to, though it seems pretty clear they get it-- Moore did what he could to get the movie out there, and is now forced to stand back as the viewers in Brazil, Denmark or wherever get slammed with copyright infringement. I guess it was done with good intention, and I doubt any of the downloaders will actually be prosecuted, but couldn’t he have done a better job of sorting out this legal mess before making the movie available for download? It seems he knew this would happen, but will let a few viewers get in legal trouble for the sake of having his movie more widely seen. His movie that is about American politics. Yeah, something about this isn’t as “heal the world” as Moore wants it to seem.
First of all, the idea that Moore would want to get people who wanted to see one of his movies in trouble with the law deliberately seems more than a bit far-fetched to me. Moore’s all about getting people to see him, hear him, watch him, believe in him. Why would he intentionally alienate a single one of his fans, even if they aren’t US citizens? It just doesn’t make sense.
Secondly, Moore doesn’t own the international distribution copyrights for “Slacker Uprising”. Brave New Films does. They get to decide who outside the US and Canada get to download Moore’s movie, not Moore himself. And if they don’t want the movie floating around internationally, they legally must make a showing that they intend to protect their copyright or they could be accused of abandoning it. By suing people and companies who are downloading or distributing “Slacker Uprising” in other countries they are simply protecting what is legally theirs and making a proper legally showing. Michael Moore isn’t part of this equation since the copyright isn’t his. He simply cannot be blamed for this one.
Thirdly, and perhaps more importantly, Moore told everyone in his letter of September 22nd, 2008 that this movie was only available for download in the US and Canada. He said it plainly, albeit perhaps not overly clearly, that this download was only available to US and Canadian citizens: “That’s why I’m giving you my blanket permission to not only download it, but also to email it, burn it, and share it with anyone and everyone (in the U.S. and Canada only).”. HE TOLD EVERYONE. He gave proper notice to those outside the US that this download was not for them. He did his legal duty and I cannot find fault with him on this front.
Now, I will agree with Cinema Blend on one point. Moore really should have made sure that either this movie was available throughout the world or he should have worked out a deal with his distributors to make it so before the lawsuits came flooding down on his fans. However, to lay the blame for this problem at Moore’s feet is wrong. He doesn’t own the international copyrights and he did give notice that the download was only available to the US and Canada.
There are plenty of reasons to dislike Moore. I personally see no need to invent ones that have no real merit, and this one doesn’t.
Comments
gitarcarver… I totally get and agree with pretty much everything you’re saying. Don’t get me wrong - I’m not saying Moore didn’t make a major gaff on this one. I’m just saying that I didn’t agree with Cinema Blend’s take on things as Moore is legally right and legally not at fault for this mess.
NOW… if you want to get hypothetical for a minute… ;)
Suppose you were a famous movie maker who made what from all accounts is a REALLY bad movie. And you knew that when you released it you were only going to get more bad reviews like you did at its premiere, if you got any real reviews at all that is. So what could you do to drum up awareness and press coverage for your doomed project? Could you, hypothetically of course, do just enough to legal cover yourself and then let the copyright infrigement lawsuits and cease-and-desists fly? You could, and it would get you press, and you could still maintain - and legally keep - your innocence in the matter. Is it moral or ethical? Of course not. But it *IS* legal, and that’s really all that counts.
Right? Right. ;)
But it *IS* legal, and that’s really all that counts.
Is it?
This is the “Napster” defense. It didn’t work for them and it shouldn’t work for him.
Basically the premise that “we told you to not distribute the movie outside of the US and Canada, but if you decided to do so,..... oh well” doesn’t work.
You seem to believe that Moore knew that the movie was going to be downloaded and put on the web. In fact, he says that is what he wants:
You can broadcast it on TV, on cable access, on regular channels or on the web.
He wants the movie distributed. Even though he claims to have “clean hands,” in essence he is encouraging people to distribute the film.
Don’t believe me?
Here’s a question for you....
How many times in his letter on the Michael Moore site (and I feel filthy just going there to read the thing) does he say “his film” or “my film?” How many times does he say that someone else owns the rights to the film outside of the Canada and the US?
He does a “Napster.” He deliberately leaves out the fact that there is someone else that owns the right to international distribution while leaving the impression that he is the owner of the film and therefore controls the rights.
It is clear that Moore knew the film would be distributed in the manner it was. His comments in the TorrentFreak article says so.
I would love to see Brave New Films step up to the plate and sue him for the enabling of illegal distribution. They won’t but that is what he is guilty of.
The violator of the copyright is, in part, Moore himself.
After going to brave new films web site, I have come to the conclusion that, Robert Greenwald will never sue Moore, largely because like Moore, Greenwald is of the same ilk; a Democratic Socialist. Brave new films, is a web distribution site for the purpose bring a specific agenda to the masses. Greenwald will never sue Moore because there is no reason to. It is as if the site is dedicated to the liberal mindset.
Evan
RSS (Subscribe)
He doesn’t own the international copyrights and he did give notice that the download was only available to the US and Canada.
That’s a generous reading of his letter. When Moore states in the same letter You can broadcast it on TV, on cable access, on regular channels or on the web, he has to know that the “web” is world wide, he has to know that the film is going out all over the world.
In his discussion with TorrentFreak, Moore uses the analogy of buying a book and then giving it to a friend claiming he has broken no laws. He then claims that laws within countries or laws that cross borders do not have revelance to him. “I only own the US and Canadian rights. So my hands are tied. But this is the 21st century. What are ‘geographical rights’?”
Moore gets to play the “innocent” and at the same time say “look at those mean corperations who only want to make money off a file that *I* generously made available to people for free!”
Moore knew what he was doing and what he was saying.
His statements and actions prove further that he has no concern for people or corporations outside of himself.