i agree. any objective person with no agenda would have to admit this film helps in so many ways. its a positive FILM, as you say, not a documentary and shouldnt be reviewed as such.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

>>which does NOT promote the theories she claims

I guess all the people who watched the film in Oakland and came to the mic to ask what the deal was with the planes that hit the WTC were delusional.

There's no accounting for stupidity. It was perfectly clear to everyone who watched the Washington premier.

It's fine if people want to use it for non-commercial purposes but using it in an ad isn't cool.

I haven't seen the movie and have no opinion on it.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

The problem is that the logo was being used--without permission--to promote a commercial event.

I'll let others explain the details.

______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

I don't see that I missed it at all, Jenny. I simply clarified that the phrase itself is not proprietary, but that the promoters can substitute a different graphic as there seems to be a problem -- any problem -- using YT's. If I had seen a promo with that poster/artwork, I would have had no idea that it belonged to a particular group with reason to exercise control over it. Most 9/11 resource materials have been freely disseminated and reproduced historically, and this one looks so similar to others.

To be honest, I'm not up for another tempest in a teapot over something so easily rectified, so no one should feel compelled to air it all out on my account. The rest is topical, given blogging and comments on the film over past days.

Best.

Posted his comment while I was typing mine--lol!

Got any more questions, direct them at him.
______________________________________
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/

Copyright protection goes into effect the moment a work of art is created, Cosmos's logo is just such a thing. He does not need to register it with the USPTO as a 'trademark', he has the right to exercise restrictions on its use. It seems clear that he is limiting its use for NON-commercial purposes. To state he doesn't have a right to speak up is wrong and unjustified.

---

source: http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#what
What is copyright?
Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works.

What does copyright protect?
Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section "What Works Are Protected."

How is a copyright different from a patent or a trademark?
Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. Ideas and discoveries are not protected by the copyright law, although the way in which they are expressed may be. A trademark protects words, phrases, symbols, or designs identifying the source of the goods or services of one party and distinguishing them from those of others.

When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

Do I have to register with your office to be protected?
No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration.”
--
Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month

(thanks, Reprehensor!)

There's really no need to make a big deal about it, unless you insist.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

as a matter of fact it will tend to survive long enough to actually make a difference.

According to my friends in Vancouver, their group has made a profit on every event they've put on, and judging by their conference this past June, they do a very good job.

Might I also add that YT has every right to control how an image closely associated with truthaction.org is used, whether for commercial purposes or not, as it indirectly implies endorsement.

It's common courtesy to simply ask before using, yes? We need to emphasize civility at all times*, both within the movement and with the general public.

(*while allowing for a certain level of tactical civil disobedience, of course)

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

If you vote me down again, it's, uh, like saying 9/11 was NOT an inside job!

Any takers? (We gotta inject some humor into this guys . . . C'mon. Peace?)

You people seriously need to get your act together.

----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent, Principle Investigator, Forensic 9/11ologist

To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men. — Abraham Lincoln

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. — Robert Heinlein

Meanwhile, the Dems expose themselves for what they really are when the R's turned around surprisingly today to say "yes" to impeachment, for the sole purpose of mocking and exposing the Ds, knowing the powerless, spineless and terrified Ds wouldn't dare allow an impeachment debate to happen -

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071106/ap_on_go_co/cheney_impeachment

It was the "Democrats" who blocked the debate.

They are the ultimately protectors of the empire.

Peter Camejo discusses the role of the Democrats in his Avocado Declaration -

Every major gain in our history, even pre-Civil War struggles --such as the battles for the Bill of Rights, to end slavery, and to establish free public education-- as well as those after the Civil War have been the product of direct action by movements independent of the two major parties and in opposition to them.

Since the Civil War, without exception, the Democratic Party has opposed all mass struggles for democracy and social justice. These include the struggle for ballot reform, for the right of African Americans to vote and against American apartheid ("Jim Crow"), for the right to form unions, for the right of women to vote, against the war in Vietnam, the struggle to make lynching illegal, the fight against the death penalty, the struggle for universal health care, the fight for gay and lesbian rights, and endless others. Many of these struggles were initiated by or helped by the existence of small third parties.

When social justice, peace or civil rights movements become massive in scale, and threaten to become uncontrollable and begin to win over large numbers of people, the Democratic Party begins to shift and presents itself as a supposed ally. Its goal is always to co-opt the movement, demobilize its forces and block its development into an alternative, independent political force.

The Republican Party has historically acted as the open advocate for a platform which benefits the rule of wealth and corporate domination. They argue ideologically for policies benefiting the corporate rulers. The Republicans seek to convince the middle classes and labor to support the rule of the wealthy with the argument that "What's good for General Motors is good for the country," that what benefits corporations is also going to benefit regular people.

The Democratic Party is different. They act as a "broker" negotiating and selling influence among broad layers of the people to support the objectives of corporate rule. The Democratic Party's core group of elected officials is rooted in careerists seeking self-promotion by offering to the corporate rulers their ability to control and deliver mass support. And to the people they offer some concessions, modifications on the platform of the Republican Party. One important value of the Democratic Party to the corporate world is that it makes the Republican Party possible through the maintenance of the stability that is essential for "business as usual." It does this by preventing a genuine mass opposition from developing. Together the two parties offer one of the best frameworks possible with which to rule a people that otherwise would begin to move society towards the rule of the people (i.e. democracy).
http://www.cagreens.org/longbeach/avocado.htm

And the 'thought crime bill' sponsored by California's Jane Harman (whom we saw confronted re 9/11 by Lynn Pentz on video posted to this website)--officially known as the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, or HR 1955--was passed with the overwhelming support of the House in late October. Only six members--3 Dems (Kucinich being one of them) and 3 Repugs--voted against it.

Conyers was listed as 'not voting' on that bill (abstention? not present? wish I could say).

I am glad you made your posting Victronix.

This is precisely the point I wanted to make and was hoping someone will raise the issue and point out THE OBVIOUS.

The left-right paradigm is a FARCE now. We are being played to look like FOOLS in this dog and pony show.

With Miss Nancy "Impeachment is OFF the TABLE" Pelosi and one side and the Bush Cabal on the other, ALL of us have our work cut out.

This is NOT the time to SLOW DOWN or BE COMPLACENT.

The current 110th Congress is FAILING in its duty.

We CANNOT FAIL IN OURS.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

God Cop - Bad Cop
--
Truth Revolution: The Eleventh of Every Month

We are being played and I am sure you feel the same way I do.

WE DON'T LIKE BEING LIED TO AND MANIPULATED! ENOUGH!

O How I Pray that People Will Take BACK the Congress.

Pls WAKE UP AMERICA.

You are being led to certain destruction unless there is a MAJOR COURSE CORRECTION.

More updates:

Debate on Cheney Impeachment Averted
http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/ap/news/nation/washington/congress/20...

Vice President Dick Cheney speaks at the World Affairs Council luncheon Friday Nov. 2, 2007 in Dallas. The World Affairs Council is non-profit, nonpartisan organization established to educate citizens on issues of international affairs and foreign policy. (AP Photo/Tim Sharp)

JIM ABRAMS

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON - House Democrats on Tuesday narrowly managed to avert a bruising debate on a proposal to impeach Dick Cheney after Republicans, in a surprise maneuver, voted in favor of taking up the measure.

Republicans, changing course midway through a vote, tried to force Democrats into a debate on the resolution sponsored by longshot presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich.

The anti-war Ohio Democrat, in his resolution, accused Cheney of purposely leading the country into war against Iraq and manipulating intelligence about Iraq's ties with al-Qaida.

The GOP tactics reversed what had been expected to be an overwhelming vote to table, or kill, the resolution.

Midway through the vote, with instructions from the GOP leadership, Republicans one by one changed their votes from yes , to kill the resolution , to no, trying to force the chamber into a debate and an up-or-down vote on the proposal.

At one point there were 290 votes to table. After the turnaround, the final vote was 251-162 against tabling, with 165 Republicans voting against it.

"We're going to help them out, to explain themselves," said Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas. "We're going to give them their day in court."

Democrats countered by offering a motion to refer the proposal to the House Judiciary Committee for further study, effectively preventing a debate on the House floor. That motion passed by a largely party-line vote of 218-194.

The White House, in a statement, said Democrats were shirking responsibilities on issues such as childrens' health insurance "and yet they find time to waste an afternoon on an impeachment vote against the vice president. ... This is why Americans shake their head in wonder about the priorities of this Congress."

Kucinich has long pushed for a vote to impeach Cheney, but has failed to win the backing of the Democratic leadership. After Kucinich introduced the resolution, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., immediately moved to table it.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said "impeachment is off the table" and Congress is focused on responsibly getting U.S. troops out of Iraq, covering 10 million uninsured children and meeting national priorities long neglected by the Bush administration, said her spokesman Nadeam Elshami.

The resolution said that Cheney, "in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of vice president," had "purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests."

The 11-page resolution also charged that Cheney purposely deceived the nation about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida and has "openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States."

House approval of an article of impeachment sends the issue to the Senate, which has the constitutional authority to try and, with a two-thirds vote, remove a person from office.

,,,
The bill is H. Res 799.

On the Net:

Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it