Posted on 08/14/2006 9:03:38 AM PDT by Colofornian
Ever heard of The Mountain Meadows Massacre, the Danites,
Destroying Angels, Avenging Angels, The "Death Society" - also known as "Daughters of Gideon," or, in Brigham Young's reign, as "Sons of Thunder," "Sons of Dan," How about blood atonement?
First off, the copyright belongs to the performers or their producer. Doesn't matter if they admit everybody free of charge, it's their performance, or if it's performed in a public space.
Only real problem in renting government property is they can cancel your lease under eminent domain INSTANTLY no matter what your lease says. On the other hand, you can probably get relief in court concerning lost business and so forth (as just compensation).
I'd never lease anything from the government ~ all their property is managed by idiots.
Even the news media don't film this sort of thing without permission ~
Your latter 3 sentences above are true. But I never claimed this person was LDS.
We all know of folks who are members of certain religious sects...2 generations later a grandchild might be doing something that if they were a member of their grandfather's sect, they would be excommunicated.
That does not negate the fact that such a person is still the "progeny" of the grandfather. Likewise, a number of sects have fractured from the "mother ship" so to speak. While the "mother ship" has disowned them, it doesn't mean that they are not spiritual progeny.
If you read UNDER THE BANNER OF HEAVEN, you'll note that John D. Lee was treated almost like a "stepson" by Brigham Young. When the heat got so bad on Lee, Young finally directed him to a distant outpost which is now "Lee's Ferry"--a point every rafter down the Colorado recognizes. Young's hopes was that Lee's out of the way residency would keep him safe.
Lee was a polygamist...most of his wives divorced him vs. accompanying him to such a remote outpost. But the LDS church sent a new operator (also a polygamist) to Lee's Ferry to assist one of Lee's wives. That person was was Warren Johnson, father of polygamist sect leader Leroy Johnson.
So even here, the actions of the "mother ship"--sending some of its polygamists to Lee's Ferry...became the fertile seed of Short Creek and the offshoots that arose there and elsewhere.
Your local Kinko's will not reproduce copyrighted materials without permission either, and in some cases, e.g. picture of a stuntman, they'd probably turn you in to the Stunt Man's Association for the reward.
I think rather "how much" is filmed, and for what purpose.
"30 sec shot on a TV News show" (particularly when the report is not "the show" but is ABOUT "the play")isn't "recording the entire feature play for selling later" ...
Yes, usually the case...but I can just imagine "Sixty Minutes" doing some undercover probe...and in order to be "Cache County correct," they ask the local sherriff for permission to film.
That'll be the day.
So's your house.
Words to live by. ;-)
Again, technically correct but missing the basic news thrust of what happened over the weekend.
I mean, "Yup, shure...we see deputies arresting folks @ Kinko's for this violation every weekend!"
"Mormons should be allowed their privacy, including the courtesy of not being filmed when you are trying to pray."
They weren't praying. They were conducting a play.
Interestingly enough the Mormons can separately go after the guy for civil damages while the government lays to with criminal charges.
Most houses are hardly considered "public property." So even a rented home is still private property.
On the other hand, if films of your walk were used commercially you might change your mind.
For example, that crazy killer abortionst in Wichita might use a film of your walk to prove to an insurance company that his opponents were not so dangerous that he shouldn't be able to buy liability insurance for his business.
Without a "release" he couldn't do that and you could sue his little crotch panties off.
Okay, how much "undercover" film footage have you seen emerge on some investigative news program that involves shooting of film either disallowed by the proprieters (or would be if they knew it was being shot)? (And I'm not talking about anything that would be deemed as legally obscene or exploitive)
How many arrests has that resulted in?
If somebody videotapes something and profits from it in some unlawful way, we have civil courts for that. We don't tie up our police forces and sherriff's departments who launch anti-videocam campaigns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.