Skip to main content

Nothing unexpected (All in a day's work)





The rationale I gave:



My video is FAIR USE, citing a brief excerpt from the public domain trailer (not even the film), with a self-evidently pro-public and counter-terrorist intention.

I have totally transformed the original content, which is totally unrelated to my video except as an item already in the public domain to be analyzed in the light of my commentary.

It is only a small part of the screen, dominated by my commentary.

Is one not allowed to criticize the flawed, outdated ideology of elites? How will society evolve?

Why should anyone be afraid of constructive criticism? That is always a fatal mistake.

If this is blocked, I'll take this case to not just the supreme court but also the judgment of the public* (military court), but since that Game Over aspect was a major part of modern history, especially my story, I will not remove it especially as this is plainly a case of fair use for the public's benefit rather than copyright infringement. How can citing a public domain trailer be equated with copyright infringement?


* Do not be under the impression that the public will not get to see this. The internet is not completely dead yet. If you try to block the easy way out that I offer (constructive criticism), I will simply host the film elsewhere. The public can still judge my position vs. yours. In any case, I will make my film available since this qualifies as fair use; trying to block it due to it citing a 1 minute trailer, is an illegal abuse of the spirit of open society & public domain critical discussion especially given the CT angle out here.


How much of the original content have you used?

I have only used excerpts from the trailer, and even that occupies only a fraction of the screen of my video.

Have you transformed the original content?

Entirely transformed it by adding commentary that provides most of the informational value.

Is your video a substitute for the original content?

It is completely different from the original content, in light of the commentary.


While I find a way to upload the whole 7 hour film for now, here is the blocked video, by the way:



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

#log54: The Saga of the Middlemen: The Secrets of Big IT in India

Context: contemporary fascism's expert big IT tactics are no secret .  What I had said a month ago proves true: Context: - Little did I know, when I wrote below tweet today morning, that I will chance upon the belly of the beast the same day... True reg linkedin. Coz "I follow Linkedsys on FB". I mean I don't, I have no clue what it is, but it is listed and I can't unfollow. It's a Systemism, pinching a line off my force with an argument "for the greater good". Partly; as it also means the cult sterilizes linkedin etc. https://t.co/bxCUUTfP8i pic.twitter.com/5d1GmEHRQI — Timetin (your drewwgie) (@anand_droog) September 5, 2022 Now this is incredible...   remember my old post about international barber shop chain geopolitics in Hyderabad -- about hair cut as a micro political activity  ...(you can find the relevant part if you search "Adnan"  here )... (as isaiahjanzen writes, "A haircut is a good metaphor for life. Remov...
Post a Comment
Read more

#58: Quantum Mysteries - II

You remember the video I made about the gravitron of the earth direction?  And how it can match even with the "systemic gravitron" ...? And .. you do recall all the assertions made (by the " established kairos elites ", the " only legit quantum 7 " etc.)...  about how "h is insignificant, i is unreal?" Update on all that! I was just solving a question today (for money....  :o ), that I stumbled across the exact meaning of "entanglement", about how i = Q, h = P (or i = P, h = Q) is possible (real, significant), i.e. a stable earthlings' gravitron that can help earthlings break on through to the other side, past the middlemen siege. (It exploits the strong Q/17 (as in Quora symbol, Q ) red CT and the "P" (Cain CT), so it involves Q and P). So here is the question: And here is the answer I wrote, about how the "classical (quantum) assumption" is wrong,  ... there's no strict requirement of "instruction sets...
Post a Comment
Read more

Log #57 ~ twin flames, the math

Now technically,  me and my li'l  kyootsiee are twin flames ...   i.e., the sharpest form of "soulmates",  twin flames make new fronts for more logical / truer soulmates (all can aspire to be twin flames, but the point is to get away with it) ( For example ) that means both we're relatively most synced with the timeline and our lives are "synced" :) A sync at every interaction it might appear, here's the 90 minutes to midnight at the 90th. The analogy of all drops from a single splash falling at the same time on a quasiplane of reality that uniquely connects two twin flames, more easily fits to explain it all. https://t.co/undaFxWETa pic.twitter.com/9oBZsv3YIT — Timetin (your drewwgie) (@anand_droog) May 2, 2022 Say... There was this pattern... I had noticed it long ago, but on 30th Sep it got very sharp, so I tweeted about it: We're such yin and yang of the new.. Like today, old/boomer/deep time 73 stand in her way.. Just as I push t...
Post a Comment
Read more