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.