Transformers: Dark of the Moon: Movie Review

Neoavatara ^ | June 29, 2011 | Neoavatara

[Neoavatara]

Transformers: Dark of the Moon, the third in the Transformers series, is in some ways the perfect summer movie. A movie where you can turn off your brain, ignore reality, and simply enjoy sugar sweet Hollywood mayhem.

The movie starts with a basic concept: that the space race in the Cold War was focused on reaching the moon first, not for its scientific achievement, but to obtain alien technology that both the Soviets and Americans secretly knew had crashed on the dark side of the moon millenia ago. Americans, led by Neil Armstrong, get there first...but keep the information hidden.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

For some trolls it takes a long time for them to be discovered and get zot. For many blogpimps it takes a long time for a zot to come as well. It doesn’t mean it won’t happen. And no, I do not want this poster zotted. I would rather that he stops blogpimping and posts his work here in full.

[Mad Dawgg]

Please point out any demand I have made.

oh my bad I must have you mixed up with some other Blog Pimp Police.

I never realized you didn't want the Blogs to not excerpt.

Glad to know you aren't like the rest of those Blog pimp Police Cretins.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

You know that quote from Jim Rob we showed you earlier? Well, on that same thread, a pimp defender (sausageseller) responded to Jim and Jim responded back. See what he said to the pimp defender here (posts number 805 and 806):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2636843/posts?q=1&;page=801

[Mad Dawgg]

"So what? This is an open forum. Anybody can reply to anything. Why are you so upset?"

I don't have trouble with replies I have trouble with non-sequitir. Her post makes it look like I am questioning Mr. Robinson. I was not I was questioning dumbergunner.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

By supporting blogpimp (which Jim Robinson does not like) perhaps you are questioning Jim’s stance? Hmm?

[Mad Dawgg]

"By supporting blogpimp (which Jim Robinson does not like) perhaps you are questioning Jim’s stance?"

I support people excerpting all threads on Free Republic (save those that originate on Free Republic) and I support Jim Robinson deleting those that do not please him in any way. After all it is his site.

What I don't support is copyrighted works being posted on Free Republic without the author's permission.

The reason I support all threads being excerpted is because it greatly reduces the chance of copyright law suits.

I believe Free Republic has had more than its share of such.

[FourPeas]

And I had my hopes up that you’d actually engage in reasonable discourse rather than stooping to insults.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

Yes, many sites have to be excerpted for copyright reasons. But there is no copyright issue when the poster is the author. When the poster is the author, they have no reason to excerpt, except to rack up hits.

[Mad Dawgg]

"But there is no copyright issue when the poster is the author."

Only because you cannot see beyond your bias.

Question is it possible for someone who writes a blog to plagiarize another author in his blog?

If so would this open up Free Republic to copyright suit if such were posted in full on Free Republic?

If such a thread were posted on Free Republic is it possible the Mods and/or the site owners may not know such a plagiarized work is being posted given the vastness of copyrighted works available on the Internet not to mention those that are in print form only and thus miss the chance to delete the thread?

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

I said, there is no copyright issue when the POSTER is the AUTHOR.

[Mad Dawgg]

"And I had my hopes up that you’d actually engage in reasonable discourse rather than stooping to insults."

Two problems, one you are posting on a Blog Pimp Police thread. The Blog Pimp Police routinely stoop to such and as the thread progresses I routinely shoot at all targets in like kind. (woe is to you to be in the line of fire)

Secondly: Come on You gotta admit that reply was intensely witty and I mean you did serve up a juicy fat pitch. I just couldn't resist knocking out of the park!

[Mad Dawgg]

"I said, there is no copyright issue when the POSTER is the AUTHOR."

OK I'll type slower so your finger can keep up.

Can one author plagiarize another Author and post such on his blog?

And then continue on down the list of questions again in my previous post?

Now what are your answers?

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

Can one author plagiarize another Author

Of course. But then they are not the author. Duh.

[Mad Dawgg]

"Of course. But then they are not the author. Duh."

Ahh but you forgot the rest of the questions.

Let us review. Question one: Can one author plagiarize another Author?

Your answer: Of course.

Question Two: If so would this open up Free Republic to copyright suit if such were posted in full on Free Republic?

Your answer?

[Eaker]

"You still don’t know the difference between a “blogger” and a “blog pimp”. Until you know the difference conversing with you is no different than showing a chicken a card trick."

Avoiding the issue above by hiding in a gay bar with your friends?

LOL! Happy packing 'lil feller!

[Eaker]

Gunner goes easy on the ‘lil feller.

It is clear from his neediness that his childhood was rough. A mother who didn’t love him enough and a father who loved him a little too often.

A lot of weak boys are find their way to the gay lifestyle from these circumstances.

Hell, he isn’t smart enough to know the difference between a “blogger” and a “blog pimp”.

Sadly neither do his bar buddies apparently.

[TheOldLady]

[shibumi]

"Ahh but you forgot the rest of the questions.

Let us review. Question one: Can one author plagiarize another Author?

Your answer: Of course.

Question Two: If so would this open up Free Republic to copyright suit if such were posted in full on Free Republic?

Your answer?

Hope you don't mind, but I think since this is kind of a group discussion, it's not inappropriate for me to interject.

The gist of your question seems obvious, but for the sake of clarity, I believe you're suggesting that FR could be in legal trouble if the insistence on full text posting resulted in plagiarized material be fully posted by an unscrupulous blogger, of which we know, there are many.

The answer is - no.

FreeRepublic falls under the "Safe Harbor" provision of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (PDF) which provides Web hosts with protection from liability from infringement perpetrated by their users if they meet certain criteria. One of those criteria is to “expeditiously” remove content that is found to be infringing once properly notified.

As long as JimRob and Co. comply in a timely manner with any infringement notices received under the provisions of DMCA, they are in no danger of being sued by someone whose work has been plagiarized and posted here by a smarmy, lowlife, content stealing, hit farming, excerpt abusing blog pimp.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

I would think that it would open their blog up to copyright suit. They were the ones that plagarized, not FR.

[Mad Dawgg]

"The answer is - no."

Really?

Now remember the question is does such open them up to a lawsuit. Not whether they are guilty of such.

And further understand even if such does not actually go to actual trial that still was not my question. My question is does such open them up to a lawsuit?

Even if such a suit does not make it to litigation (and do you really trust the legal system that is rife with liberal judges to deny cert in such a case?) Free Republic would still need lawyer to answer such a charge and if they didn't retain legal counsel and submit the required documents the opposing counsel would have field day.

All such things cost mucho dollars and if memory serves the FRepathons are not bringing in the same bucks as they used to which is understandable being our economy is in the toilet and folks have less money to give!