Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 22 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Profile Photo Inactive
    @KTCat

    That was hilarious!

    • #1
  2. Profile Photo Member
    @Valiuth

    But the real kick is when Disney make Jaws 2. That’s the one where the shark joins the high school swim team…”Show me the rule that says a shark can’t be on the swim team!”

    • #2
  3. Profile Photo Inactive
    @JanMichaelRives

    No, this definitely qualifies as a ‘transformative’ work, so it would still be permissible under fair use doctrine.

    Man, aren’t I just the life of the party?

    • #3
  4. Profile Photo Member
    @Sandy

    Your post deserves to be sent around the world and I’m about to do my share.

    • #4
  5. Profile Photo Inactive
    @rayconandlindacon
    Valiuth: But the real kick is when Disney make Jaws 2. That’s the one where the shark joins the high school swim team…”Show me the rule that says a shark can’t be on the swim team!” · 13 minutes ago

    No… Jaws 2 will be when the shark joins the law school glee club.

    Who says sharks can’t swim among lawyers?

    • #5
  6. Profile Photo Member
    @JamesDelingpole

    @notjmr That’s really interesting. As you can see I’m really very ignorant of the details of this SOPA issue: it’s one for geeks and lawyers and I’m neither.

    But I came across this film via one of my libertarian Twitter friends who was using it as part of his argument of THINGS THAT WOULD BE BANNED IF SOPA WERE ENFORCED.

    Thank you for enlightening me.

    • #6
  7. Profile Photo Inactive
    @JanMichaelRives

    Actually, my legal training is limited to listening to Law Talk at 3/4 speed in order to understand what Richard Epstein is saying. In other words, take my comment with a grain of salt.

    • #7
  8. Profile Photo Thatcher
    @Percival
    raycon

    Valiuth: But the real kick is when Disney make Jaws 2. That’s the one where the shark joins the high school swim team…”Show me the rule that says a shark can’t be on the swim team!” · 13 minutes ago

    No… Jaws 2 will be when the shark joins the law school glee club.

    Who says sharks can’t swim among lawyers? · 22 minutes ago

    Gee raycon, have some mercy will you? They are dumb animals — it’s not proper to subject them to danger like that.

    The sharks, I mean.

    • #8
  9. Profile Photo Inactive
    @AmishDude

    I think this classic recut trailer for The Shining is still better. It’s inspiring.

    • #9
  10. Profile Photo Inactive
    @outstripp

    In the sequel, the shark will reveal what really happened at Chappaquiddick, exonerating Kennedy completely.

    • #10
  11. Profile Photo Inactive
    @TheKingPrawn
    AmishDude: I think this classic recut trailer for The Shining is still better. It’s inspiring. · 5 minutes ago

    Beat me to it.

    • #11
  12. Profile Photo Member
    @PaulARahe
    The King Prawn

    AmishDude: I think this classic recut trailer for The Shining is still better. It’s inspiring. · 5 minutes ago

    Beat me to it. · 8 minutes ago

    What a hoot! Both trailers!

    • #12
  13. Profile Photo Member
    @DuaneOyen
    Not JMR: Actually, my legal training is limited to listening to Law Talk at 3/4 speed in order to understand what Richard Epstein is saying. In other words, take my comment with a grain of salt. · 3 hours ago

    The actual Supreme Court case is based on fair use as parody- Campbell v. Acuff.

    • #13
  14. Profile Photo Member
    @genferei

    It’s kind of annoying that many of the commentators who have a go at the anti-SOPAtistas haven’t actually read the bill (which is, admittedly, drafted to avoid easy comprehension).

    Here’s how it might work. Some foreigner – let’s call him James – has a website – let’s call it jamesdelingpole.com. On this website he has some ads, sells some books. He puts up a link to some emails liberated from a warmist institution.

    An academic takes exception to her compromising emails being made available so she sends a notice to Google and Amazon (and whoever) saying that James is promoting the infringement of her IP rights, viz the copyright in her emails. Google etc. send the notice on to James.

    James now has a choice. If he does nothing, Google must stop providing advertising (and the related payments) to his site, and Amazon (and other payment providers) must prevent transactions with US customers from taking place. If he chooses to dispute the notice, he must consent to the jurisdiction of US courts.

    The academic may also ask a US court for a temporary injunction effectively removing jamesdelingpole.com from the internet unless he removes the link.

    • #14
  15. Profile Photo Inactive
    @CalvinDodge

    My attitude to SOPA/PIPA mirrors my attitude toward the Federal “drug war”. If enforcement of a law requires outrageous actions, then it’s time to end the law.

    • #15
  16. Profile Photo Inactive
    @Douglas
    James Delingpole: @notjmr That’s really interesting. As you can see I’m really very ignorant of the details of this SOPA issue: it’s one for geeks and lawyers and I’m neither.

    But I came across this film via one of my libertarian Twitter friends who was using it as part of his argument of THINGS THAT WOULD BE BANNED IF SOPA WERE ENFORCED.

    Thank you for enlightening me. · 4 hours ago

    Then your friend, like so many others, was being hysterical.

    Even if SOPA passed… flawed as it was… it was not the “End of the Internet”.

    • #16
  17. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DocJay
    Not JMR: Actually, my legal training is limited to listening to Law Talk at 3/4 speed in order to understand what Richard Epstein is saying. In other words, take my comment with a grain of salt. · 4 hours ago

    Play it backwards for the hidden message. Play it on 78 and see God.

    • #17
  18. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DocJay

    My goodness James, this made my day.

    • #18
  19. Profile Photo Inactive
    @Roberto
    genferei: It’s kind of annoying that many of the commentators who have a go at the anti-SOPAtistas haven’t actually read the bill (which is, admittedly, drafted to avoid easy comprehension).· 2 hours ago

    You appear rather sanguine on how this method could be used to suppress speech via prior restraint:

    “The Act would allow courts to order any Internet service to stop recognizing [a] site even on a temporary restraining order… issued the same day the complaint is filed,”

    No adversary proceeding is required at all apparently if a response is not prompt enough and even then no appeal is possible, the defendant must file a separate lawsuit after the fact. A site can be taken offline for months or years depending on how long it took to resolve matters. It has already happened.

    Let us not forget for a moment that as mentioned in the letter above blocking entire domains could:

    “suppress vast amounts of protected speech containing no infringing content whatsoever”

    How anyone can believe this does not violate due process is impossible to comprehend.

    • #19
  20. Profile Photo Member
    @JamesDelingpole
    Here’s how it might work. Some foreigner – let’s call him James – has a website – let’s call it jamesdelingpole.com. On this website he has some ads, sells some books. He puts up a link to some emails liberated from a warmist institution.

    An academic takes exception to her compromising emails being made available so she sends a notice to Google and Amazon (and whoever) saying that James is promoting the infringement of her IP rights, viz the copyright in her emails. Google etc. send the notice on to James.

    James now has a choice. If he does nothing, Google must stop providing advertising (and the related payments) to his site, and Amazon (and other payment providers) must prevent transactions with US customers from taking place. If he chooses to dispute the notice, he must consent to the jurisdiction of US courts.

    The academic may also ask a US court for a temporary injunction effectively removing jamesdelingpole.com from the internet unless he removes the link. · 3 hours ago

    Eeek! For some reason your random example scares me.

    • #20
  21. Profile Photo Inactive
    @KarlUB

    Actually, I am pretty sure this resembles Jaws as it would be produced if the current iteration of Steven Spielberg were in charge.

    • #21
  22. Profile Photo Inactive
    @TheKingPrawn
    genferei: It’s kind of annoying that many of the commentators who have a go at the anti-SOPAtistas haven’t actually read the bill (which is, admittedly, drafted to avoid easy comprehension).

    What do you think of the alternate bill Rep. Issa is working on?

    • #22
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.