Okay, this is weird...
Apr. 16th, 2008 02:42 pmRemember that movie, Expelled? Started as "Crossroads" claiming to be a documentary about the intersection of religion and science, turned out to be an anti-evolution movie equating biologists and Nazis, yeah you remember the basics.
Well 1) it turns out the makers of Expelled copied the best part, a computer animation of various proteins working in a cell, from a video called "The Inner Life Of The Cell" made for Harvard by a small company called XVIVO (The video is great, by the way; I can see why they wanted to use it. I'm less clear on why they wanted to plagarize it. ) XVIVO has naturally taken action to protect their copyright.
2) Apparently the makers of Expelled stole other parts of the movie from PBS.
3) And now it turns out that the makers of Expelled are suing XVIVO. I'm a little opaque on for what. As near as I can figure out, it's for sullying Expelled's good name by complaining that it plagarizes their work.
I think someone over at PBS should look into this. If the makers of Expelled really did steal from PBS, PBS should sue the snot out of them.
Well 1) it turns out the makers of Expelled copied the best part, a computer animation of various proteins working in a cell, from a video called "The Inner Life Of The Cell" made for Harvard by a small company called XVIVO (The video is great, by the way; I can see why they wanted to use it. I'm less clear on why they wanted to plagarize it. ) XVIVO has naturally taken action to protect their copyright.
2) Apparently the makers of Expelled stole other parts of the movie from PBS.
3) And now it turns out that the makers of Expelled are suing XVIVO. I'm a little opaque on for what. As near as I can figure out, it's for sullying Expelled's good name by complaining that it plagarizes their work.
I think someone over at PBS should look into this. If the makers of Expelled really did steal from PBS, PBS should sue the snot out of them.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 07:36 pm (UTC)Okay, so let me get this straight:
They're suing someone they plagiarized for slandering them with accusations of plagiarism.
I mean, if it were a counter-suit, with XVIVO bringing the original suit, I could maybe understand, but even then:
Is this not the very definition of "coming to court with unclean hands"?
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:34 pm (UTC)Fortunately, this lot is only armed with lawyers, not, say, the US military.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:58 pm (UTC)Which also explains a lot about the Bush Administration.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 09:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:39 pm (UTC)I was not familiar with this usage until you brought it up, but other than that, I would have thought so.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-19 07:11 am (UTC)Without having seen the complaint, I can't give an opinion whether it is potentially applicable in this case.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:20 pm (UTC)What do you expect? These are conservative Republicans here. If they do it, it's not illegal, and if there's conflict, it is the other guy's fault. And they're being persecuted just because they're Christians.
If they run over a pedestrian, their first instinct is to file suit against the pedestrian for damage to their car, alleging that the pedestrian willfully jumped in front of the car for the purpose of filing a fraudulent injury claim and intentionally inducing guilt on the driver. No shame whatsoever.
These are the same people who obtained interviews with professors by falsely claiming to be doing a different kind of movie than they actually had in mind, then purposely edited the interviews to make the professors look foolish, and finally tried to ban them from showings of the movie and then lied about that. A little plagiarism is nothing to them.
In fact, you can next expect them to accuse XVIVO of trying to "hide" their work from the public, and to rhetorically ask if XVIVO is afraid to have an honest debate about the issues. Finally, they'll try to promote their "film" by claiming that the vast leftist conspiracy, that has controlled everything in America for decades now, is trying to censor them.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:51 pm (UTC)"Yes, evil cheats. Evil lies. Evil does whatever it must to get ahead. That's why we call it 'evil'."
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:37 pm (UTC)I have occasionally wondered if Christianity is like someone who was abused as a child. They went through some bad times they didn't deserve and now whenever anyone disagrees with them, they have flashbacks. I wouldn't have thought an institution could have that response, but I'm beginning to wonder.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:29 pm (UTC)XVIVO is going to court to
(wait for it)
WIN BEN STEIN'S MONEY!
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:46 pm (UTC):D
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 09:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:12 pm (UTC)Let's hope they do.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:48 pm (UTC)Eep.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-16 09:01 pm (UTC)My guess is the lawsuit against XVIVO is a message that "Expelled" has so much rightwing money behind it that they can make it to expensive for XVIVO to pursue its lawsuit.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 02:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 08:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 07:16 pm (UTC)