<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Case Studies in Fair Use Abuse</title>
	<atom:link href="http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/</link>
	<description>NewTeeVee</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:57:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Scientology, A YouTube Sponsor &#171; NewTeeVee</title>
		<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-237075</link>
		<dc:creator>Scientology, A YouTube Sponsor &#171; NewTeeVee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 23:57:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-237075</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] is only the latest front in this battle, with skirmishes stretching back at least a year, including the notable case of stressed BBC reporter vs. Scientology camera crews and of course the [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is only the latest front in this battle, with skirmishes stretching back at least a year, including the notable case of stressed BBC reporter vs. Scientology camera crews and of course the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stewart and Colbert Take the Stand Against YouTube</title>
		<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-78192</link>
		<dc:creator>Stewart and Colbert Take the Stand Against YouTube</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-78192</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] Beck: Mr. Colbert, did you not encourage viewers to re-use material from your [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Beck: Mr. Colbert, did you not encourage viewers to re-use material from your [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary McConnell</title>
		<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3277</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary McConnell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 03:08:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3277</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;TrueFilms, it was interesting to see where things stand during this evolution of Fair Use of media and and film maker rights. Nice blog&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Despite the impression NewTeeVee gave, The Bridge movie is alive and well on the internet and on this very page that you refer to in your article.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If it&#039;s maker Brett Hanover could speak his mind without reprecussions from The Church of Scientology, I suspect he&#039;d thank you for taking the time to see his attempst to give the viewer a small but significant piece of what scientology does not want the public to see.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;You mention Fair Use within a documentary format. It&#039;s interesting how Scientology was not able to prevent filmaker Karl-Rainer Blumenthal from creating  and distributing his &#039;Friend of Mankind &#039; documentary abouty L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology using a compilation of historical media critical of L. Ron Hubbard.  It was the lack of copyright ownership to the content that prevented them from doing so.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&#039;Friend Of Mankind &#039; is an excellent documentary for the uninformed and informed alike.  Both it , The Bridge movie and many others can be found over at Mark Bunker&#039;s XenuTv
http://www.xenutv.com/friendofmankind.htm
http://www.xenutv.com/bridge/index.html&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It is also not controllable by scientology because they never anticipated how media would evolvenor did they see that the internet was going to be it&#039;s biggest battle. So far, the internet is winning and for  the average me, that is a good thing.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TrueFilms, it was interesting to see where things stand during this evolution of Fair Use of media and and film maker rights. Nice blog</p>
<p>Despite the impression NewTeeVee gave, The Bridge movie is alive and well on the internet and on this very page that you refer to in your article.</p>
<p>If it&#8217;s maker Brett Hanover could speak his mind without reprecussions from The Church of Scientology, I suspect he&#8217;d thank you for taking the time to see his attempst to give the viewer a small but significant piece of what scientology does not want the public to see.</p>
<p>You mention Fair Use within a documentary format. It&#8217;s interesting how Scientology was not able to prevent filmaker Karl-Rainer Blumenthal from creating  and distributing his &#8216;Friend of Mankind &#8216; documentary abouty L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology using a compilation of historical media critical of L. Ron Hubbard.  It was the lack of copyright ownership to the content that prevented them from doing so.</p>
<p>&#8216;Friend Of Mankind &#8216; is an excellent documentary for the uninformed and informed alike.  Both it , The Bridge movie and many others can be found over at Mark Bunker&#8217;s XenuTv<br />
<a href="http://www.xenutv.com/friendofmankind.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.xenutv.com/friendofmankind.htm</a><br />
<a href="http://www.xenutv.com/bridge/index.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.xenutv.com/bridge/index.html</a></p>
<p>It is also not controllable by scientology because they never anticipated how media would evolvenor did they see that the internet was going to be it&#8217;s biggest battle. So far, the internet is winning and for  the average me, that is a good thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: truefilm &#187; Two steps forward, one back for fair use</title>
		<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3278</link>
		<dc:creator>truefilm &#187; Two steps forward, one back for fair use</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:06:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3278</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] holder will agree to accept CSM&#8217;s guidelines or follow Viacom&#8217;s lead. Jackson West, in an article for NewTeeVee, describes the problems Brett Hanover encountered with his film The Bridge, “the first feature [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] holder will agree to accept CSM&#8217;s guidelines or follow Viacom&#8217;s lead. Jackson West, in an article for NewTeeVee, describes the problems Brett Hanover encountered with his film The Bridge, “the first feature [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary McConnell</title>
		<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3276</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary McConnell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2007 05:08:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3276</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for this very informative and helpful article. The &#039;Claim your Content&quot; issue has many unanswered questions but you zero&#039;d in on the fundamental threat.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;You also provided an excellent  worst-case scenerio with The Church of Scientology vs  teen filmmaker Brett Hanover and his movie,  The Bridge.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Scientology is the internet&#039;s biggest bully . Brett is not the first, nor the last to have been scared by the church attornies or gagged into submission because of a copyright issue.  However, Brett is probably the youngest and most talented to date.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Many were horrified to see how quickly the church pounced and how easily Brett gave in . Victims like Brett are cornered into silence.......never able to explain what it was that the church held over their head that forced the agreement to be *silent. That&#039;s part of their plan to silence  critics and Brett was no exception to the rule.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;There&#039;s an excellent web page that documents this stuff:
&#039;Scientology Gag Agreements - A Conspiracy for Silence&#039;
http://www.lermanet.com/scientologyscandals/silence.htm&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For some victims, it&#039;s extorted silence but presumably Brett , being a young man, probably envisioned a life of perpetual fear and poverty, so no one I know blames him for the decision to forsake any association with his own movie.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Thankfully there are places on the net, like newteevee, where one can see the movie The Church of Scientology does not want anyone to see. :) Brett is a bright and talented young man and the critics of Scientology appreciate all that he did to get The Bridge done and out to the public. He certainly gets extra kudos for taking on the project in the first place!&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Thanks for bringing attention to the real threat that wealth and power can have over free speech on the internet. Viacom&#039;s fake take down notice is just the tip of the iceberg.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for this very informative and helpful article. The &#8216;Claim your Content&#8221; issue has many unanswered questions but you zero&#8217;d in on the fundamental threat.</p>
<p>You also provided an excellent  worst-case scenerio with The Church of Scientology vs  teen filmmaker Brett Hanover and his movie,  The Bridge.</p>
<p>Scientology is the internet&#8217;s biggest bully . Brett is not the first, nor the last to have been scared by the church attornies or gagged into submission because of a copyright issue.  However, Brett is probably the youngest and most talented to date.</p>
<p>Many were horrified to see how quickly the church pounced and how easily Brett gave in . Victims like Brett are cornered into silence&#8230;&#8230;.never able to explain what it was that the church held over their head that forced the agreement to be *silent. That&#8217;s part of their plan to silence  critics and Brett was no exception to the rule.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s an excellent web page that documents this stuff:<br />
&#8216;Scientology Gag Agreements &#8211; A Conspiracy for Silence&#8217;<br />
<a href="http://www.lermanet.com/scientologyscandals/silence.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.lermanet.com/scientologyscandals/silence.htm</a></p>
<p>For some victims, it&#8217;s extorted silence but presumably Brett , being a young man, probably envisioned a life of perpetual fear and poverty, so no one I know blames him for the decision to forsake any association with his own movie.</p>
<p>Thankfully there are places on the net, like newteevee, where one can see the movie The Church of Scientology does not want anyone to see. :) Brett is a bright and talented young man and the critics of Scientology appreciate all that he did to get The Bridge done and out to the public. He certainly gets extra kudos for taking on the project in the first place!</p>
<p>Thanks for bringing attention to the real threat that wealth and power can have over free speech on the internet. Viacom&#8217;s fake take down notice is just the tip of the iceberg.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jackson West</title>
		<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3275</link>
		<dc:creator>Jackson West</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 17:24:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3275</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks, Martin, for clearing that up.  Will make the correction.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Martin, for clearing that up.  Will make the correction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MartinWelbourne</title>
		<link>http://newteevee.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3274</link>
		<dc:creator>MartinWelbourne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 17:00:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/case-studies-in-fair-use-abuse/#comment-3274</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Good article. One minor trivia correction though and that wikipedia entry needs to be corrected. The Bridge movie was not shot in Norway. It &lt;em&gt;premiered&lt;/em&gt; in Norway (at a 10 year celebration of XENU.NET hosted by Andreas Heldal-Lund). It was actually filmed in the USA. You can contact associate producer (and scientology critic) Tom Padgett for verification of the exact shooting locations (I believe it was entirely in Brett Hanover&#039;s home city of Memphis and the film credits only mention localities: The Madison Hotel, Temple Israel, First Congregational Church, The Memphis Digital Arts Co-operative).&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article. One minor trivia correction though and that wikipedia entry needs to be corrected. The Bridge movie was not shot in Norway. It <em>premiered</em> in Norway (at a 10 year celebration of XENU.NET hosted by Andreas Heldal-Lund). It was actually filmed in the USA. You can contact associate producer (and scientology critic) Tom Padgett for verification of the exact shooting locations (I believe it was entirely in Brett Hanover&#8217;s home city of Memphis and the film credits only mention localities: The Madison Hotel, Temple Israel, First Congregational Church, The Memphis Digital Arts Co-operative).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
