Editing DreamworksReply

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
::: ''update: The letter below was sent in January 2013. 6 months later, a trailer for the film in question was released with the Noisebridge™ logo briefly visible at [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZT1wb8_tcYU#t=0m43s 0:43].''
Dear Ashley and Todd,
Dear Ashley and Todd,


Line 7: Line 5:
and Daniel Domscheit-Berg. It must be very exciting to work on such a large
and Daniel Domscheit-Berg. It must be very exciting to work on such a large
project, especially when you need, as your letter says, clearance on our logo
project, especially when you need, as your letter says, clearance on our logo
"tomorrow" (15th January). How annoying it must be to constantly ask for
"tomorrow" (15th January). How many people you must have to constantly ask for
such permissions, just for a little bit of set dressing!
such permission, just for a little bit of set dressing!


It is probably long past the point when you needed it, but
It is probably long past the point where you were going to use it anyway, but
here is our decision:
here is our reply:


From your description, it should be clear to anyone watching your
From your description, it should be clear to anyone watching your
Line 17: Line 15:
you ''are'' Noisebridge or that Noisebridge supports your film*.  
you ''are'' Noisebridge or that Noisebridge supports your film*.  


Given this, Noisebridge as a community believes you have the free speech right to use such imagery without having to ask permission -- especially those who you might
Given this, Noisebridge as a community believes you you have the free speech right to use such imagery without having to ask permission -- especially those who you might
be implicitly criticising or commenting upon. Such a right is encoded in the
be implicitly criticising or commenting upon. Such a right is encoded in the
existing nature of trademark and copyright with the idea of fair use.  
existing nature of trademark and copyright with the idea of fair use.  
Line 31: Line 29:


Such a position is lunacy and a genuine threat to free speech and the first
Such a position is lunacy and a genuine threat to free speech and the first
amendment. You should exercise all of your fair use rights freely and without
amendment. You should use exercise all of your fair use rights freely, without
fear.  
fear.  


So we say tell your friends at DreamWorks to publish (or print, or produce) and
So we say tell your friends at DreamWorks to publish (or print, or produce) and
be damned. Tell them we fully support them in their brave stand. You can say
be damned. Tell them we fully support them in their brave stand. You can say
with confidence that the only conditions under which Noisebridge would sue them and their
with confidence that the only conditions in which Noisebridge would sue them and their
partners to the maximum damages entitled to us by law would be if it turned out
partners to the maximum damages entitled to us by law would be if it turned out
that hackers like us were completely hypocritical nihilists out only for our
that hackers like us were completely hypocritical nihilists, out only for our
own egotistical ends.  
own egotistical ends.  


Given that you were so nice as to ask us, we can't imagine you think that of us.
Given that you were so nice as to ask us, we can't
imagine you think that of us.


Lots of love,
Lots of love,
Line 47: Line 46:
Noisebridge
Noisebridge


* - which frankly sounds a bit sleazy. Are the screenwriters really inserting a fake subplot about a non-existent American spy in Iran who is exposed in the State department cables? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible to you, given the great, real stories in the WikiLeaks affair you could have written about?
* - which frankly sounds a bit sleezy. Are you really inserting a fake subplot about a non-existent American spy in Iran who is exposed in the State department cables? Doesn't that seem a little irresponsible to you, given the great, real stories in the WikiLeaks affair you could have written about?




Please note that all contributions to Noisebridge are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (see Noisebridge:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)