Filmscanners mailing list archive (email@example.com)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: OT: photographing on the street
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Lynn Allen wrote:
> With the "3 Stooges" decision, one can see that the law seems to favor
> whomever wants to be vindictive enough to pursue it.
The Stooges' rights are owned by Comedy III Productions, and they're very
protective of their property. In another recent case, they went after the
producers of the film "The Long Kiss Goodnight," because the film included
a brief scene in which a TV showing a Three Stooges episode was on in the
background. (The case was dismissed, and they lost on appeal.)
One of the judges on the Ninth Circuit (the federal court of appeals for
the area that includes California) characterizes his court as "the Court
of Appeals for the Hollywood Circuit"!
> One has to wonder how healthy a practice this is for the big
> picture(puns not intended, but useful parallels). :-)
I think it's way overdone -- and I'm a lawyer. Don't get me started on
patents and copyrights.
Terry Carroll | "Denied."
Santa Clara, CA | Baltimore Ravens v. Bouchat, no. 00-1494,
firstname.lastname@example.org | (U.S. Supreme Court, May 21, 2001)
Modell delendus est |