This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

    Originally posted by nojustice View Post
    I've got nothing to do with any of this, I've never downloaded or uploaded a script of any kind, but surely you'd need to be able to prove the educational validity of the practice.

    You'd need testimony from a screenwriting lecturer or someone who is employed in a higher educational setting to confirm the value of this approach. I don't think you'd be able to get that. They only use the classics for teaching, and only a handful of them. In fact, there would be a lot of testimony from lecturers who would say there's no educational benefit to be had at all from reading or studying unproduced scripts.

    Or you would have to have testimony from someone who is now a successful working writer, after having taken this educational approach. Is there one of those?

    While along side that you would have to deal with hundreds of testimonies from professional writers who say that none of them learned to write by this means, and wouldn't in any way recommend it.

    I don't think you have to be an IP attorney to speculate about the logistics.
    I don't know what film schools you've attended, but undergrad, grad and extension programs use current scripts regularly in a variety of film and television classes.

    I don't think it would be difficult to find someone to testify about the use of scripts in an educational setting. It might be more difficult, though, to find someone to testify about whether placing a script on the internet is automatically educational. Connected to schools and courses seems to be considerably different from floating freely on the internet for anyone and everyone to download.

    Comment


    • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

      Thanks for insulting my education.


      Originally posted by nojustice View Post
      In fact, there would be a lot of testimony from lecturers who would say there's no educational benefit to be had at all from reading or studying unproduced scripts.
      I was referring to the practice of studying unproduced scripts.

      I've never heard of it myself.

      But you make a good point about the lack of good reason for scripts floating freely on the internet.
      Last edited by nojustice; 03-23-2011, 04:36 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

        Originally posted by Ire View Post
        If you're an IP attorney, SBBN, then I'd defer to you. Trying to be diplomatic, but I get the feeling I'm better off attacking foilks. You've got issues with script sharing, fine. Mine is not a loser argument. It might not be Supreme Court ready but it's a valid point. But again if you're an IP attorney, I defer.
        This has nothing to do with how I feel about script sharing. I completely understand why someone would read scripts and want to trade. I don't have any problem with a person saying that he or she reads scripts to learn how to write. I'm not here to tell a person what he or she should or shouldn't do -- that's up to each person and I respect that.

        But that isn't what you were talking about and that's not what I responded to -- you are arguing a legal defense that simply isn't a legal defense in the way you've presented it.

        And, yeah, I actually am a practicing attorney. I didn't state that upfront because I was trying to show why your argument doesn't work from a commonsense standpoint and I didn't see a need to back it up by saying "I know what I'm talking about because..." but if that's what you need, no problem - there you go.

        Comment


        • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

          I'm curious as to how far all this legal stuff will go. Does Fox (in PJs case) really intend to take this to court? To what end? A token judgment of $1.00?

          They have already compelled sites to take down their scripts/property. Seems like there's nothing more to gain but bad press.

          Just wondering out loud...

          "Trust your stuff." -- Dave Righetti, Pitching Coach

          ( Formerly "stvnlra" )

          Comment


          • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

            An attorney! That's too cool!

            I think the amateur obsession defense has merit though. She was encouraged by the looks of it, and no offense, but she has been given very bad advice here, and the human wanting to succeed aspect can be the frame.

            Don't let it stress you though PJ. It's only money.
            Last edited by nojustice; 03-24-2011, 02:33 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

              I had a look a while ago about what we would have to do in Australia to be 100% covered by the 'education use only' provision.

              I know - it is different here but it's an interesting data point.

              There's an interesting approach to basically prevent yourself being sued. While everyone is covered (if they do it properly) we actually have an additional step that changes the presumption .. so that it puts the burden of proof onto them.

              Basically:
              1. You register as an education institution.
              This is as easy as getting a business number (an ABN) and filling out a form which gets published in the government gazette.
              2. You list the purpose of the education institution as being to educate via publicly available screenplays.
              3. You are then covered (*) as long as you mark the scripts as being 'for educational use only' .. and you make available no more than is needed for education purposes. (Even if that is the whole amount - clearly there is educational value in reading a screenplay to find the turning points instead of having them preselected for you )

              It sounds like a blank cheque - but in reality it isn't. That's because by registering as an educational library you 'covered' because it is deemed to be 'for educational use' unless there is a good reason otherwise - basically it reverses who has to prove what in the event of a lawsuit.

              But the protection is very strong when the availability of the script in your library doesn't damage the commercial value of the film. (I was proposing to cover this simply by only having screenplays available once the film had been released and had its run in the cinema... basically everything that is possible to be spoiled has been done by then)

              And there is a much easier way to them to stop you without suing ... basically they can just write a letter requesting that your presumption of 'education exemption' be revoked and it I'm sure it would happen .. it just takes a simple announcement in the government gazette ... and you are back to square one.

              But that's the beauty of it ... it provides a mechanism for the powers-to-be to shut you down without the pain of facing your home being taken away from you in a lawsuit.

              Mac
              (PS: Don't take my comments here as serious legal advice - I'm obviously oversimplifying the discussion quite a bit! )
              New blogposts:
              *Followup - Seeking Investors in all the wrong places
              *Preselling your film - Learning from the Experts
              *Getting your indie film onto iTunes
              *Case Study - Estimating Film profits

              Comment


              • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                I can't say much, but I can say this. This is not about money. You can take that to the bank.
                http://www.pjmcilvaine.com/

                Comment


                • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                  No, it can't be about money. Fox will spend more money on corp lawyers in order to bring the suit, than they can ever hope to win in court.

                  I'm not a lawyer, but I highly HIGHLY doubt, if this ever reaches court, that Fox will win a monetary judgment-- damages or punitive.

                  The sad part is, it will cost PJ's family a lot in money (in order to defend herself) and in emotional stress.

                  All they had to do was send a C&D order & she would have taken the scripts down, but they never sent one.(According to what I've read here.)

                  "Trust your stuff." -- Dave Righetti, Pitching Coach

                  ( Formerly "stvnlra" )

                  Comment


                  • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                    Originally posted by stvnlra View Post
                    I'm not a lawyer, but I highly HIGHLY doubt, if this ever reaches court, that Fox will win a monetary judgment-- damages or punitive.
                    Apart from who has the better "case" as a matter of what "should be" - i.e., what's the best for society - you might take a look at what the record industry/RIAA has done and the large awards it has won. (Not collected, perhaps, but won.) Huge awards against people of limited means.

                    Also, in some instances, a plaintiff need only prove infringement in order to be entitled to "statutory damages" - i.e., unlike in most other lawsuits, a copyright plaintiff sometimes does not have to prove actual harm in order to be to be awarded damages. Again, look at what RIAA has done. LINK.

                    Bottom line, the potential liability is real and substantial.

                    Comment


                    • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                      Originally posted by sbbn View Post
                      This has nothing to do with how I feel about script sharing. I completely understand why someone would read scripts and want to trade. I don't have any problem with a person saying that he or she reads scripts to learn how to write. I'm not here to tell a person what he or she should or shouldn't do -- that's up to each person and I respect that.

                      But that isn't what you were talking about and that's not what I responded to -- you are arguing a legal defense that simply isn't a legal defense in the way you've presented it.

                      And, yeah, I actually am a practicing attorney. I didn't state that upfront because I was trying to show why your argument doesn't work from a commonsense standpoint and I didn't see a need to back it up by saying "I know what I'm talking about because..." but if that's what you need, no problem - there you go.
                      SBBN, thank you for clarifying. Point taken.
                      #writinginaStarbucks #re-thinkingmyexistence #notanotherweaklogline #thinkingwhatwouldWilldo

                      Comment


                      • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                        Originally posted by Manchester View Post
                        Apart from who has the better "case" as a matter of what "should be" - i.e., what's the best for society - you might take a look at what the record industry/RIAA has done and the large awards it has won. (Not collected, perhaps, but won.) Huge awards against people of limited means.

                        Also, in some instances, a plaintiff need only prove infringement in order to be entitled to "statutory damages" - i.e., unlike in most other lawsuits, a copyright plaintiff sometimes does not have to prove actual harm in order to be to be awarded damages. Again, look at what RIAA has done. LINK.

                        Bottom line, the potential liability is real and substantial.
                        The Studios are playing hardball in response to what happened with Napster & the record companies (and the torrents & pirate DVDs) , but the circumstances in this case aren't the same. We'll see how this plays out...

                        The real danger, I think, is the cost of defending the suit. The sooner it is dropped the better. If I were PJ's lawyers I'd be working furiously to get it dropped.

                        "Trust your stuff." -- Dave Righetti, Pitching Coach

                        ( Formerly "stvnlra" )

                        Comment


                        • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                          I think all you need to do is print copies of what looks like years of nonsensical advice from posters like SC111 and Umo, who give a strong but false impression of understanding the law and how copyright and the film industry work, and the defense rests.

                          Comment


                          • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                            Originally posted by nojustice View Post
                            I think all you need to do is print copies of what looks like years of nonsensical advice from posters like SC111 and Umo, who give a strong but false impression of understanding the law and how copyright and the film industry work, and the defense rests.
                            You're a little ray of sunshine aren't you.
                            Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                            Comment


                            • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                              Originally posted by stvnlra View Post
                              The Studios are playing hardball in response to what happened with Napster & the record companies (and the torrents & pirate DVDs) , but the circumstances in this case aren't the same. We'll see how this plays out...

                              The real danger, I think, is the cost of defending the suit. The sooner it is dropped the better. If I were PJ's lawyers I'd be working furiously to get it dropped.
                              Intimidating your opponents by forcing them to pay huge legal fees to defend themselves is standard corporate practice.

                              It's a feature, not a bug.
                              If you really like it you can have the rights
                              It could make a million for you overnight

                              Comment


                              • Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

                                Originally posted by stvnlra View Post
                                The Studios are playing hardball in response to what happened with Napster & the record companies (and the torrents & pirate DVDs) , but the circumstances in this case aren't the same. We'll see how this plays out...

                                The real danger, I think, is the cost of defending the suit. The sooner it is dropped the better. If I were PJ's lawyers I'd be working furiously to get it dropped.
                                comparatively speaking it seems like they don't have much of a case when it comes to damages. in that RIAA case they said the defendant would not agree to a settlement b/c she never gained (or would ever gain) any monies from her infringement... but she could have. that's the thing - she had the finished product. in PJ's case - making scripts available for free and educational purposes is not selling a finished product and therefore have no real monetary value. the sly fox has no real damages.
                                you're right. they should be able to get it dropped.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X