posted 04-01-2001 01:07 PM            

A link was posted on one of the threads:
http://briefcase.yahoo.com/quetee2

When I went to this link, I discovered that every one of the Top 250 scripts is on the site, availabe for downloading. Also, since the authors names are not on the scripts, as per the contest rules, there is no copyright protection for any of them.

As I understood the rules of this contest, we were supposed to submit our scripts without our names attached in order to be judged impartially. Since they were only to be read within the contest community,
it is possible that there is an exemption to the copyrules of displaying the name and date.

On the other hand, when these scripts are posted on a site outside the contest, available to people who are not contestants and have not registered with PGL...

Well, I guess I wanted to know if this is allowable within the rules, for contestants to post our scripts on outside web sites.

Thank you.

posted 04-02-2001 10:05 AM            

Here's my concern. When I entered this contest, I was frankly worried about my script being posted on the PGL website where any reviewer could download it. When I saw ads in "Entertainment Weekly" asking people who had not written scripts to log on and sign up as reviewers, I was also concerned. I decided, however, that because PGL had a registration procedure, at least we would have a record of who downloaded it and when.

Now, however, I find that my script, along with 300 or so others, is on another website. The person running this website has posted the link. There is no way to control or document who downloads these scripts.

Do you see why this bothers me? As part of the rules of the contest, my name does not appear anywhere on the script. This means that people who go to this other website have no way of learning who wrote it. And since my name is not on it, my copyright may be at jeopardy, if I allow a third party to "publish" my work without my name on it.

The recent Napster case has similar facts. The Napster website was posting links to copyrighted music. The ruling, in part, said that Napster could not post copyrighted material if the owners of the copyright asked them to take it off the site. I have made that request on the message board, and the operator of the site has refused to remove my script from his site.

That's where the situation is now. I need to know if this situation was covered in the rules under which I submitted my entry, and if anyone has your blessing to download the 250 finalists and post them on a site outside of PGL.

Thank you.

posted 04-02-2001 10:10 AM            

At the other website, Yahoo has the ability to restrict access to certain materials. On this site, access to the Project GreenLight scripts is listed as "Everyone."

According to the log, the folders with the TOP 250 scripts were created on December 19, 2000 and January 2, 2001. At that time, were reviewers still limited to 3 declines in a month? How did this member of PGL get around the restriction of only being allowed 3 declines, to download all 250 semifinalists?

posted 04-02-2001 01:12 PM            

I thought you said you were an attorney?

The rules state in 4. Ownership & Restrictions except for uses of submissions on use of material that as long as the screenplays are not sold to a 3rd party or changed - our rights are not infringed upon.

Isn't your script only 74 pages?

posted 04-02-2001 10:36 PM            

bill more than half those people sent me their script and nobody has complained about their script in that folder.

were you asleep when the profess was talking about copyrights.

bill,
how in the hell are you going to lose your copyright if you have one. can you please explain that one too me.

am i missing something.

and another thing smart ass,
i was able to download some many scripts because i read so many freakin scripts.

quote:

---

Originally posted by billhays:
One more point.

At the other website, Yahoo has the ability to restrict access to certain materials. On this site, access to the Project GreenLight scripts is listed as "Everyone."

According to the log, the folders with the TOP 250 scripts were created on December 19, 2000 and January 2, 2001. At that time, were reviewers still limited to 3 declines in a month? How did this member of PGL get around the restriction of only being allowed 3 declines, to download all 250 semifinalists?

If they had to break the PGL rules to download all 250, isn't that an indication that we have to be worried about what they will do with our scripts in the future?

---

posted 04-02-2001 10:48 PM            

and two......... i told you i would take it out it is at the other forum so stop being an ass.

quote:

---

Originally posted by billhays:

When I went to this link, I discovered that every one of the Top 250 scripts is on the site, availabe for downloading

As I understood the rules of this contest, we were supposed to submit our scripts without our names attached in order to be judged impartially. Since they were only to be read within the contest community,
it is possible that there is an exemption to the copyrules of displaying the name and date.

On the other hand, when these scripts are posted on a site outside the contest, available to people who are not contestants and have not registered with PGL...

Well, I guess I wanted to know if this is allowable within the rules, for contestants to post our scripts on outside web sites.

Thank you.

Bill Hays[/b]

---

posted 04-03-2001 10:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetee:
bill

***more than half those people sent me their script and

***nobody has complained about their script in that folder.

were you asleep when the profess was talking about copyrights.

bill,
how in the hell are you going to lose your copyright if you have one. can you please explain that one too me.

---

Some good questions.

The United States constitution gives the federal government authority to grant patents and copyrights. A copyright means that you can write something, like a book or in this case a screenplay, and you can legally protect your rights in the creative aspects of that work.

This is a tenuous right of protection. If you are not diligent in protecting your patent or your screenplay, and someone uses it with your knowledge and without acknowledging your legal right of ownership, you CAN lose your patent or copyright. We say that the work has passed into the public domain. Some books are in the public domain because their original copyright has expired due to the passage of time.

A recent case on point involved a website called Napster. A rock band (Mettalica) hired lawyers to prevent Napster from using their material in the course of commerce without acknowledging their copyright by paying royalties. Would this usage have led to Metallica losing the copyright in their songs? Well, presumably, the copyright notice was attached to the downloaded copies, but it is a debatable issue.

Now, how does the Napster ruling apply to the PGL situation? I draw an analogy to property law (copyright is called Intellectual Property law.) If a deed grants a piece of property to "my son for thirty years, and then to my daughter", we say the daughter has a future property interest. She knows she will get the property in thirty years. This isn't a physical right, something you can hold in your hand, but the law does recognize future property interests as basis for actions.

Right now, PGL holds the copyrights, which means they can post the entries under "Copyrighted by PGL" and not have to give the name of the author, which would defeat the rule about authors being anonymous. (Remind me next year to choose another name, which doesn't identify me as the person known to some of the contestants who might judge my script.)

Because they hold the present interest in the copyrights, and the authors of the scripts hold future interests due to accrue 90 days after the end of the contest, everyone has some legal rights.

Bottom line. If PGL is aware of copyrighted scripts being posted on a website outside of the contest, they have a legal obligation to defend all of the copyrights, for the benefit of those holding a future interest in getting their rights back. They have a duty not to allow these scripts to fall in the public domain. Since the movie business does a brisk business in spec scripts, they may also have a duty to prevent people from "borrowing" ideas and using them, or at least from making these ideas available to the public in a way that does not proclaim that copyright is protected.

You said nobody has complained about their script being in that folder. That may be because they don't know their scripts are on a website outside of PGL. Some contestants may know, but I think we can argue that some contestants do not participate in these message boards and are not aware that their scripts have been posted outside the PGL website. To them, because they do not know, there is a legal obligation to step into their shoes and protect their rights.

In some cases, all you have to do is post a message that says, "This property is protected by copyright and you cannot use it without my name and copyright notice attached." Since you have removed my script, or at least said you did and I have no way to prove that you haven't except to check the website and see if it is there - but, since you have removed my script, the protection of my copyright has been public and continuous.

But what about the other people who don't know their scripts have been posted?

If PGL becomes aware that the entries are being posted on the Web outside the PGL site, then I think their minimum duty would be to contact every entrant whose scripts have been posted, notify them of what is being done and what PGL's policy is, and give them the opportunity to either send an e-mail to quetee or to PGL and ask that their script be removed.

In this case, if PGL has knowledge of what is going on, it would seem that they have at least a duty to notify the contestants so they can ask for the scripts to be removed.

I think this was the gist of the ruling in the Napster case. If Napster couldn't produce a certified letter from the holder of the copyright saying it was okay to put the song on their site, then they had to remove it.

Thank you for reminding me about my class in copyrights at law school. Some of this is a new area, Intellectual Property, and many of the rules are being written about web postings. But I think, if you know that a script has been posted outside the web site, you have a duty to ask the entrant if they want PGL to take legal steps to have it removed.

posted 04-03-2001 02:25 PM            

BILL, BELIEVE ME A ROSE BY AN OTHER NAME WOULD SMELL AS SWEET.

IN REGARDS TO YOUR ASSERTION TO QUETEE THAT SHE HAS INFRINGED UPON YOUR COPYRIGHT LAWS IS BOGUS. THE RULES SPECIFICALY STATE THAT AS LONG AS SHE DOES NOT SALE IT TO A 3RD PARTY AND SHE IS NOT SELLING IT;

and you entered PGL to have your script read by reviewers and contestants and YOU AGREED TO THAT WHEN YOU CLICKED I AGREE. (that's why I do not believe you are an attorney - you have no idea what you agreed to at PGL and you keep threatening people and lying - no wait...what am I saying...he's an attorney, of course he lies)

IF YOU CONTACT THE COPYRIGHT OFFICE YOU CAN EXTEND YOUR COPYRIGHT ON 'RILEY WIN'S AS LONG AS YOU WANT TO KEEP MAKING THE PAYMENTS AND THEY WILL TELL YOU HOW TO DO THAT.

BUT FOR YOU TO STATE YOU ARE AN ATTORNEY AND THREATEN ANOTHER CONTESTANT AT PGL IS ABUSIVE AND VIOLATES THE RULES OF CONDUCT WHICH PGL CAN ELIMINATE YOU FROM THE CONTEST.

IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?

DO YOU INTEND TO CONTINUE TO MIS-USE AND ABUSE YOUR LEGAL AUTHORITY AT PGL CONTESTANTS?

YOU HAVE NO RIGHT AS A CONTESTANT NOR A RIGHT AS A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE AND I SUGGEST THAT IF YOU ARE AN ATTORNEY THAT YOU START CONDUCTING YOURSELF AS SUCH AND STOP ABUSING THE SYSTEM.

posted 04-03-2001 08:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pickel87:
...IN REGARDS TO YOUR ASSERTION TO QUETEE THAT SHE HAS INFRINGED UPON YOUR COPYRIGHT LAWS IS BOGUS. THE RULES SPECIFICALY STATE THAT AS LONG AS SHE DOES NOT SALE IT TO A 3RD PARTY AND SHE IS NOT SELLING IT;

and you entered PGL to

*** (a) have your script read by reviewers
(b) and contestants

and YOU AGREED TO THAT WHEN YOU CLICKED I AGREE. (that's why I do not believe you are an attorney - you have no idea what you agreed to at PGL and you keep threatening people and lying - no wait...

***what am I saying...he's an attorney, of course he lies)

***BUT FOR YOU TO... THREATEN ANOTHER CONTESTANT AT PGL IS ABUSIVE AND VIOLATES THE RULES OF CONDUCT WHICH PGL CAN ELIMINATE YOU FROM THE CONTEST...

---

Of course, I take offense at the statement by Pickel87 that if I am an attorney, then I might be lying because all attorneys lie.

This is the type of constant abuse that appears in Pickel87's messages. And that is one reason, but not the only reason, why I feel it is important to make it clear that my script is my own property and that no other contestant has any right in it. I may have assigned the ownership of the copyright as part of my submission, but it was on the condition that it would be returned to me 90 days after the end of the contest. Therefore, I have a legal interest in keeping that copyright intact, even if PGL temporarily owns it.

As you stated, the agreement allows contestants and reviewers to read it. In order for them to read it, they must be registered as contestants or reviewers at the PGL website. When you post my script on your website, the people who can read it are not limited to contestants and reviewers who have registered with PGL. On the home page, it says that "everybody" is allowed access, and it is not even necessary for them to sign in.

No, she has not sold it to a third party. I agree with that. And, for that matter, my personal interest has been resolved since she has voluntarily removed my script from her website. However, the opinions you've posted here are incorrect. You're not an attorney and you don't seem to understand anything about the rules of copyright law regarding a copyrighted script entering the public domain.

On the website, the scripts are posted without names attached. She could have contacted each contestant individually and asked if they would give her a name and address for interested parties to contact. I see nothing like that on the website. The scripts are there without identifying the authors, and if you know anything about the workings of Hollywood, it is simply not the kind of situation where you want to see your script, the script you are hoping to sell.

Put this another way. Suppose Matt and Ben were trying to sell a movie based on their script "Good Will Hunting." They run across a website where the latest version of their script is posted, but without any names identifying them as the authors. How do you think they would react? IF that had happened BEFORE it was sold?

I see nothing wrong with notifying the author of each script that you have posted on your website outside the PGL site, and asking them if they want their scripts to be posted or not. And if so, if a contact e-mail address or name should be attached to the script to preserve the copyright, and to help them sell it. Right now, sure, some production people may be reading scripts on your site, but if the names of the authors aren't attached, it sure isn't going to help us sell anything.

posted 04-03-2001 08:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pickel87:
...you entered PGL to have your script read by reviewers and contestants and YOU AGREED TO THAT WHEN YOU CLICKED I AGREE. (
...

---

Right.

posted 04-04-2001 10:21 AM            

Contents Copyright (copyrightsymbol) 2001 by Playboy. All Rights Reserved. ... No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form by any electronic, mechanical, photocopying or recording means or otherwise without prior written permission of the publisher."

posted 04-04-2001 06:03 PM            

Bill if a pc looks up your logline right now and they wanna buy your script, how will they do this...... they will do one or two things.

a- they will post a message looking for you or

b- they will contact pgl for the contact info.

posted 04-04-2001 07:04 PM            

so quetee,
keep in mind this is the guy who tried to get into the TOP 10 PARTY IN LA and was turned away so he went home and logged on.

Hmmm - don't believe this guy - I don't.

posted 04-05-2001 08:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by billhays:
(Remind me next year to choose another name, which doesn't identify me as the person known to some of the contestants who might judge my script.)

Bill

---

I am so confused.

Which one of is your personal secretary who is supposed to remind you of this?

I would certainly hate to be remiss in my duties.

BTW - what was the pay scale again?

posted 04-06-2001 10:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetee:
Bill,
i would hope that anyone production company interested in any of these scripts have enough sense to contact PGL for the contact info...

---

You know, I would, too.

Are you familiar with columnist Art Buchwald's lawsuit over "Coming to America"?

It seems that Buchwald had written a script about an African rules who was deopsed by a revolution while visiting the United States. The script was read by Eddie Murphy as a possible vehicle, and he was told to wait.

A few months later, Buchwald read that Murphy was starting production on "Coming to America" about an African Prince who come to America to find a bride.

Buchwald thought "Coming to America" infringed on his script ideas and sued. He won because he had a contract, the studio had given him coverage on his script, and not because of any violation of copyright.

posted 04-06-2001 10:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pickel87:
Oh quetee,
billhays is trying to place blame on you because he is feeling angry. You don't have to be an attorney or rocket scientist to know the copyright laws and/or the rules of PGL before you CLICK I AGREE! Bill did that and has proported several times that he is an attorney yet; he is not listed as an attorney in California. ..

---

The scope of your knowledge continues to impress me.

First, the rules say that we're not supposed to have our names appear on the script. If my name was actually bill hays and the handle billhays appeared, that would violate the rules, wouldn't it?

posted 04-06-2001 02:45 PM            

You can ask, as a matter of courtesy, to have quetee remove your script from her Yahoo briefcase. But it really is just a bit silly to imply either directly or indirectly that she had any malevolent pupose in gathering those scripts together.

Quetee really did do it as a good deed for the entire PGL community. PGL hadn't yet made unlimited declines (not having to fill out the review form) available to us and quetee actually deserves a medal for having such a brilliant idea.

She was not trying to steal anything from anyone. She was trying to help people.

And it is true that she posted and posted here on the message boards for people to send their scripts to her, and so, most that are there are only there because the author sent them to her briefcase.

I understand that you feel your work has been treated in a disrespectful manner but jumping into the trenches to duke it out with Pickel and Quetee is not making headway here or in the public arena that you fear so much re: the copyright issue.

So see that your script is withdrawn from public view and then just drop it.

The PGL community and Tech Support and all of the powers that be already know that quetee has been and continues to be, a valuable contributing member here.

You are not going to convince anyone that anything unethical or illegal is going on here.

Please, just get your script back and do save yourself some headaches by letting the matter drop.

You can obviously write an articulate sentence. So please use that precious skill for something that can bring you satisfaction instead of all this frustration.

Take care.

PEACE,
uhuru1701

posted 04-06-2001 03:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by billhays:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by quetee:
[b]Bill,
i would hope that anyone production company interested in any of these scripts have enough sense to contact PGL for the contact info...

---

You know, I would, too.

Are you familiar with columnist Art Buchwald's lawsuit over "Coming to America"?

It seems that Buchwald had written a script about an African rules who was deopsed by a revolution while visiting the United States. The script was read by Eddie Murphy as a possible vehicle, and he was told to wait.

A few months later, Buchwald read that Murphy was starting production on "Coming to America" about an African Prince who come to America to find a bride.

Buchwald thought "Coming to America" infringed on his script ideas and sued. He won because he had a contract, the studio had given him coverage on his script, and not because of any violation of copyright.

If Buchwald gets HIS ideas stolen, what protection do you think WE have from people who visit your website without even signing in?[/B][/QUOTE]

THE ONLY PROTECTION WE NEED IS FROM YOU BILLHAYS
you are the only one crying FOUL! FOUL!
I'M A LAWYER!

posted 04-10-2001 10:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by uhuru1701:
Bill,

***You can ask, as a matter of courtesy, to have quetee remove your script from her Yahoo briefcase. But it really is just a bit silly to imply either directly or indirectly that she had any malevolent pupose in gathering those scripts together.

Quetee really did do it as a good deed for the entire PGL community. PGL hadn't yet made unlimited declines (not having to fill out the review form) available to us and quetee actually deserves a medal for having such a brilliant idea.

She was not trying to steal anything from anyone. She was trying to help people.

...So see that your script is withdrawn from public view and then just drop it.

The PGL community and Tech Support and all of the powers that be already know that quetee has been and continues to be, a valuable contributing member here.

You are not going to convince anyone that anything unethical or illegal is going on here.

Please, just get your script back and do save yourself some headaches by letting the matter drop.

PEACE,
uhuru1701

[This message has been edited by uhuru1701 (edited 04-06-2001).]

---

Sorry. I know you don't understand what copyright means and why it is important.

Have you read the ruling in the recent Napster case? When an Internet site decided to allow others to download music without paying a royalty? Do you understand why Metallica sued over it? Do you understand why a Federal judge said that Napster couldn't post a copyrighted song on its site unless they had a signed letter from the holder of the copyright giving them permission?

do you understand this is an evolving area of intellectual property law, as to what it takes to preserve a copyright when your work is posted on the Internet without your name attached?

Yes, I took steps to have my script removed. I posted, in a public place, my intention to keep my own copyright alive by not ignoring it when someone posts my script on a website without my name attached.

I would never say that Napster had a malevolent purpose by sharing music on their website. They thought they were doing people a favor by putting out tracks for new groups that couldn't get recording contracts. But seriously, and I know you don't understand why this is important, you don't do it by posting the work on a website without the names attached. If people asked her to post their scripts on the site, then put the names and a way for interested producers to contact them directly, and just give notice to the world that you have not abandoned your copyright and you do not want the world to take your work for free.

posted 04-10-2001 10:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by uhuru1701:
Bill,

...Quetee really did do it as a good deed for the entire PGL community. PGL hadn't yet made unlimited declines (not having to fill out the review form) available to us and quetee actually deserves a medal for having such a brilliant idea.

---

I don't consider it a good deed.

When you go onto the PGL site and register, even as a Reviewer, you sign an agreement to abide by the contest rules. One of these is recognizing that PGL temporarily owns the copyright and that the copyright notice is posted in the name of PGL on the website.

Quetee does not have this protection on her briefcase. The site gives the impression, to anyone who visits it, that the authors of these scripts have abandoned their copyright, in that they have not attached their names.

It would be reasonable to assume that such scripts are in the public domain, and that is how you lose a copyright.

posted 04-10-2001 11:26 AM            

quote:

---

By the way, if you read back over Quetee's posts, you will see that she threatened to file a complaint against me with the State Bar of California because I lied about demonic spirits not existing. Do you understand why I do not want this particular person to post MY script on her personal web site? It was her threat to take our disagreement outside the PGL community, and I met her malicious threat with hard facts, not by threatening her back.[/B]

---

posted 04-10-2001 11:31 AM            

so shut the hell up about it already. The reason you are not going to receive benefits like the rest of the pgl community is because you bill are an ass.

If UHuru wants somebody to read her script, she will get atleast 5 people who will help her out. If pickel needs a read, she will get it too. But you, you can ask for feedback till the cows come home but you will never get anyone because you act like an elite ass.

I suggest you pull your head from you ass and get a freakin clue. Its obvious you dont have one.

and by the way,
i use to have more scripts in that briefcase. when people heard i cleared some out to make room for others they were disappointed because they knew that alot of folks were reading from there...... so no matter what the hell you do or say..... there is no violation none.......... AND YOU KNOW THIS......... so keep your silly jargon to yourself..... i dont care if you are a lawyer..... all that means is that you read a couple of books that the average joe can pick up at the library. If i were you, i would not discount UH's abilities.......

quote:

---

Originally posted by billhays:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by uhuru1701:
[b]Bill,

...Quetee really did do it as a good deed for the entire PGL community. PGL hadn't yet made unlimited declines (not having to fill out the review form) available to us and quetee actually deserves a medal for having such a brilliant idea.

---

I don't consider it a good deed.

When you go onto the PGL site and register, even as a Reviewer, you sign an agreement to abide by the contest rules. One of these is recognizing that PGL temporarily owns the copyright and that the copyright notice is posted in the name of PGL on the website.

Quetee does not have this protection on her briefcase. The site gives the impression, to anyone who visits it, that the authors of these scripts have abandoned their copyright, in that they have not attached their names.

It would be reasonable to assume that such scripts are in the public domain, and that is how you lose a copyright.

So, it just isn't such a great idea.[/B][/QUOTE]

posted 04-10-2001 02:52 PM            

There is NO liability quetee - I read the rules and clauses and bill hays is once again showing his inability as a self proclaimed attorney - just as he attempts to thwart Pete's script he is attempting to malign you and it simply will not work.

I suggest that we all file complaints to PGL about Bill Hays because HE has VIOLATED the rules of conduct at PGL.
In addition, we can all file a complaint against him with the State Bar as well. I'm sure they will be very interested in him. I hope he isn't billing clients while he's been posting away here......cuz that would be illegal too.

posted 04-11-2001 11:14 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetee:
I just looked at that entire thread..... and I DIDNT ONCE SAY ANYTHING ABOUT FREAKING DEMONS....... you better retract you statement and stop trying to slander me.............

---

Okay, sure, I'll retract that statement.

Let's go to the thread "Schmooze with Pete Jones". There is a message from Pickel87.

The message is timestamped 04-06-2001 and 06:18PM. Since the messages are in chronological order, you can find it near the bottom of page 6 by following the other timestamps.

Pickel87 says "You lie Bill when you say there are no demons."

You can go back over the thread and find that Pickel87 and quetee were posting many messages on the topic of my status and a lawyer and whether they were going to file a complaint with the State Bar against me. For some reason, they think this is allowable. But since it attacks my reputation, and my membership in the Bar, and since I just find the idea of someone filing false complaints with the State Bar to be repulsive... well, let me explain.

Have you ever heard of "Patient Zero"? When doctors were trying to discover what the HIV-(virus) was, they traced the onset of the disease back in time. The evidence pointed to an outbreak that was spread by one infected individual, whom they caled "Patient Zero."

It turned out that Patient Zero was a gay man, and a flight attendant on an airline that allowed him to visit many European cities. He visited gay bars and picked up partners, and hired prostitutes. The doctors managed to identify and interview him before he died. Turns out he didn't know what disease he had, but he knew he was going to die from it, and that he had given it to some of his partners. He said that since he was going to die, he wanted to take as many with him as he could, and he was infecting his partners on purpose.

I am always wary of the "Patient Zero" syndrome. People who want to inflict their suffering on others. They are aware of what they're doing, and they think that since they have to suffer, it is only fair for other people to suffer, too.

This is why I took these repeated, offensive threats to report me to the State Bar seriously. Because any person who accuses me of lying because I deny that demons exist, as Pickel87 did in his post on 04-06-2001, is possibly suffering from what I call a "Patient Zero" complex.

posted 04-11-2001 11:18 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetee:
... If UHuru wants somebody to read her script, she will get atleast 5 people who will help her out. If pickel needs a read, she will get it too....

---

Thanks for the info.

There were a lot of posts on the message boards, offering to trade a review of someone else's script for a review of theirs.

So, the underground has progressed to the point where, if Uhuru needs a read, she will get five people "in the loop" to review her script. This does not bode well for the impartiality of judging in next year's contest.

posted 04-11-2001 11:22 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pickel87:
It's cuz HE'S THE DEMON POSSESSED.

***In addition, we can all file a complaint against him with the State Bar as well. ***

I'm sure they will be very interested in him. I hope he isn't billing clients while he's been posting away here......cuz that would be illegal too.

BABABOOM!

---

To save me the trouble of going back through the posts, it was Pickel87 who posted the specific threat about making a complaint about me to the State Bar, not Quetee, that I was talking about earlier. Thank you for making me go back and find it.

I am still looking for the post of Bible verses supporting Demonic possession. Let's table this while I look.

posted 04-11-2001 11:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetee:
I just looked at that entire thread..... and I DIDNT ONCE SAY ANYTHING ABOUT FREAKING DEMONS....... you better retract you statement and stop trying to slander me.............

---

Okay, you're right.

The post appears under the thread "My review of Stolen Summer" originated by 1smartlady under the "Schmooze with Pete" thread, under "Winning Script- Stolen Summer."

The post appears on page 2. The timestamp is 5:10 pm at 03-19-2001 and it was posted by Pickel87.

As long as I'm here, let me make it clear why I objected to Pete's script. Today, Jews and Christians are trying to bury centuries of hard feelings by engaging in an "interfaith dialogue." This means they get together, either at a church or a synagogue, and under controlled conditions, they try to find some way to get along and be friends.

These conferences have certain rules. One of the most important ones is that the Christians not use their new friendship to try to convert Jewish children with promises of Christmas presents, or the threat of not going to heaven if they don't accept Christ as their Savior. The idea is that both sides don't want to repeat the mistakes of the past, and in the past, Jews felt that their religious heritage was at risk because many of their children are not "religious" Jews or marry outside the faith or do not agree before interfaith marriages to raise their children as Jews, in the Jewish faith. They feel that evangelicals Christians, more than Catholics, but both groups, have targeted the Jews for conversion in the past, and focus on their children, both very young and while they're in college.

So, the basis for interfaith dialogue is the promise to abide by the condition that there not be any attempt to convert Jewish children, and certainly no threat that Jews can't go to heaven or have eternal life if they don't convert to Jesus.

I think this explains why you have never seen a movie based on the ideas in Pete's script. Because, at least to me, they seem to violate the understanding that led to the interfaith dialogue. And it will give jewish conservatives ammuntion to turn down such dialogue in the future, saying that the Catholics have always had the agenda to go after jewish children, and they saw the interfaith dialogue as the first step, to get the Jewish children familiar with Christians, before they go into all-out conversion mode.

All of this has been spelled out in the threads I mentioned. I just want to make my position clear before this goes any farther. I don't like to be misquoted, either, and since I apparently confused quetee and pickle87 on the demon issue, I just wanted to make it clear what I was saying and not get my positions confused with theirs.

posted 04-11-2001 11:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pickel87:
(that's why I do not believe you are an attorney - you have no idea what you agreed to at PGL and you keep threatening people and lying - no wait...what am I saying...he's an attorney, of course he lies)

...BUT FOR YOU TO STATE YOU ARE AN ATTORNEY AND THREATEN ANOTHER CONTESTANT AT PGL IS ABUSIVE AND VIOLATES THE RULES OF CONDUCT WHICH PGL CAN ELIMINATE YOU FROM THE CONTEST.
...

---

posted 04-11-2001 11:50 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by billhays:
P.S. Alan Dershowitz, a law professor from Harvard, has written a book about the problems that Jews face, in his opinion. I'm going to Amazon to find a link, if i can.

---

The name of the book is "The Vanishing American Jew: In Search of Jewish Identity for the Next Century."

Look up Alan M. Dershowitz at either www.amazon.com or www.bn.com.

Under editorial reviews at amazon:

"The well-known counselor (best known for his work on the Von Bulow and O.J. Simpson cases) ... His premise: Assimilation and other factors will soon end American Jewish culture as we know it unless Jews rise up to establish a "new Jewish state of mind."

Under customer's reviews,

"The author, accurate in his identification of the problems of Jewish assimilation, none the less cannot come to an answer that will in fact keep the Jews from vanishing. Secular Judaism, cultural Judaism, and any other form that does not require adherance to halacha and Torah values, cannot survive. The book sounded like a justification of the fact that Dershowitz, coming from an Orthodox background, had a son that married out of faith... Though I share his pain and his concern for future generations, his solutions, other than Jewish education, are not sufficient..."

posted 04-11-2001 04:35 PM            

Having some difficulty remembering which triade you are on bill?

I'll help you out this ONE time bill.

You came here to post to the techs because you threatened Quetee regarding copyright issues with your script 'RILEY WIN'S. You wanted to stop anyone from reading it. (not that I blame you because I think if the State Bar read 4 stages no waiting and Matt played the smart one in GoodWill Hunting so he can play the dumb one in this....they might, well never mind.)

The issue about demons in existance is a discussion you raised and I responded with Biblical scripture and you never read it nor responded to it. BTW you posted those rants in Pete's thread. I merely responded to you with TRUTH.

In order to be a good attorney you need to keep them facts straight bill.

posted 04-11-2001 06:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by billhays:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by billhays:
[b]P.S. Alan Dershowitz, a law professor from Harvard, has written a book about the problems that Jews face, in his opinion. I'm going to Amazon to find a link, if i can.

---

The name of the book is "The Vanishing American Jew: In Search of Jewish Identity for the Next Century."

Look up Alan M. Dershowitz at either www.amazon.com or www.bn.com.

Under editorial reviews at amazon:

"The well-known counselor (best known for his work on the Von Bulow and O.J. Simpson cases) ... His premise: Assimilation and other factors will soon end American Jewish culture as we know it unless Jews rise up to establish a "new Jewish state of mind."

Under customer's reviews,

"The author, accurate in his identification of the problems of Jewish assimilation, none the less cannot come to an answer that will in fact keep the Jews from vanishing. Secular Judaism, cultural Judaism, and any other form that does not require adherance to halacha and Torah values, cannot survive. The book sounded like a justification of the fact that Dershowitz, coming from an Orthodox background, had a son that married out of faith... Though I share his pain and his concern for future generations, his solutions, other than Jewish education, are not sufficient..."

So, this is an issue that is of great concern to at least one influential Jewish voice of this generation, Alan Dershowitz. And the idea of a young irish-catholic boy declaring a holy quest to convert "a Jewish person" is... I don't have to connect all the dots, do I? Get Dershowitz's book and read HIS concerns. It would be much better to see the problem from HIS perspective, instead of mine.[/B][/QUOTE]

What the hell does this have to do with tech support?

posted 04-11-2001 08:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pickel87:
...I'll help you out this ONE time bill.
You came here to post to the techs because you threatened Quetee regarding copyright issues with your script 'RILEY WIN'S.

***You wanted to stop anyone from reading it... ***

---

Actually, no.

When TechSupport contacted me by e-mail on this issue, they offered me the option of removing my script from the PGL site. I decided not to do that because I want to be part of the contest and the ongoing Community here.

You seem not to understand what "copyright" means. In America, artists (such as writers) have a legal right to benefit from their work. This is a purely financial benefit that means we can get paid for what we create and people cannot steal it. The recent Napster case is on point. The band Metallica didn't object to people hearing their music. They objected to millions (okay, thousands) of webbies downloading their music without paying them royalties. The law in this case said that Metallica had the right to control who sold (or gave away) their music over the internet, when it interfered with their legal right to obtain royalties under the theory of copyright. The judge made a ruling that was very much in Napster's favor. Instead of closing down the site, the judge said that Napster had to remove any song from their site if the owner of the copyright sent them a letter asking them to. Now, it seems that Napster's search engine is still allowing some prohibited songs to be accessed, and the judge may close them down for violating his previous order - but not for copyright infringement per se. So, this is an evolving area of the law. It is interesting because all the kinks aren't worked out yet, and we have to use a vague law about copyright from 1776 to control distribution rights over the Internet.

In my job, some of the things I recommend are to prevent problems from occurring in the future. A judge might not order quetee to remove everyone's script from her Yahoo website, just because PGL wanted her to. But he might issue the order, too, because PGL holds the legal copyrights on the material.

So, when you write a script, the term "copyright" refers to the whole legal area of what you own and what people can steal from you without penalty. Screenwriters often worry that if they submit their scripts to a studio, the studio will take their best ideas and pay someone else to write a better script around it. That means, basically, that your original script is now dead. You can't sell it and you can't sue because they've only sold the ideas, not your work.

Of course, maybe everyone in the movie industry is honest. That seems to be quetee's rationale. She posts all of the Top 30 scripts without people's names, and she thinks anyone who likes one of them will contact her and then go to Project Greenlight to locate the name of the writer. That might happen. I hope it would. but it doesn't solve the issue of protecting "copyright," which is the real issue. If PGL owns our copyrights, then PGL has an affirmative duty to protect them, whether there is any provable financial loss or not. And the duty is really simple. You tell them not to post the material without the names and copyright info attached, on the title page, saying the author has protected his rights and intends to continue protecting them. And the problem here is that the scripts are in Adobe and quetee would have to recreate the Adobe file if she wanted to add a first page with the author's name and copyright info. She didn't do that on any of the scripts I checked.

posted 04-11-2001 08:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pickel87:

*** The issue about demons in existance is a discussion you raised and I responded with Biblical scripture and you never read it nor responded to it...

*** I merely responded to you with TRUTH. ***

.

---

No, you did not respond with TRUTH.

You responded by quoting from the Bible.

The NT describes encounters with invisible, demonic spirits in possession of people, the same type of invisible entities that were depicted in "The Exorcist."

These invisible spirits do not exist, so the stories in the Bible are not TRUTH.

See the difference?

posted 04-11-2001 08:41 PM            

Synopsis
Noting "that since 1988 the intermarriage rate has been over 50 percent, and adding to that figure the low birth rates of non-Orthodox Jews, Mr. Dershowitz...(argues) that 'if trends continue apace, American Jewry -- indeed, Diaspora Jewry -- may virtually vanish by the third quarter of the 21st century." (N Y Times Book Review)

Publisher
In this urgent book, Alan M. Dershowitz shows shy American Jews are in danger of disappearing - and what must be done now to create a renewed sense of Jewish identify for the next century... More than 50 percent of Jews will marry non-Jews, and their children will most often be raised as non-Jews. When means, in the view of Dershowitz, that American Jews will vanish as a distinct cultural group sometime in the next century..."

This is WHY Dershowitz and other Jews resist the idea of conversion efforts directed at their children. For example, if you make a movie with a cute 7 year-old Irish Catholic boy as the star, and you advertise it as a friendship between an irish-catholic boy and his Jewish friend as they try to figure out a way to get him into heaven after he dies. So, the movie is targeted at Jewish children, and at Irish-Catholic children. And when you get into the theatre, you discover the hero, the protagonist, embarks on a holy quest to convert one Jewish person to Catholicism. And states so in a voice-over, which to the sophisticated audiences in Hollywood, means that the young tyke is actually speaking the words written for him by a 31 year-old Irish Catholic adult. He isn't exploring what heaven means. He is exploring how a 31 year-old Irish Catholic man sees the Jews, as his friends, and as people who will not get to heaven unless they are brought to Jesus.