RE: [Videolib] More on Chan Films

Jed Horovitz (
Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:33:47 -0400

Jessica, you write that 'either you believe in free speech or you don't' (I
do). Equating free speech with free listening and thus free viewing (so do
I), you then state 'no one should be able to stop me from watching Chan
films' (again we agree), but you go on to exempt 'Fox because they own them'
(we part company). It is not NAATA's responsibility. They have every right
to lobby for the 'burning' of the movies. We have every right to lobby for
their preservation and showing. What is wrong is that this public
cultural/political censorship decision is being made by an amoral
corporation. The Charlie Chan films do not belong to Fox. Only the
copyright does. The films belong to our culture.

If Rupert was forced to 'publish or have his copyright perish' (as the
original law intended though I know not in those exact words or terms so
please don't jump on this) we would not have this problem of pc control of
culture but a free marketplace of ideas. With the public domain continually
receding so that the bulk of recorded media stays under wraps and with the
idea expression dichotomy rendered meaningless in our post Marshall Macluen
world we need to work for an aggressive first sale doctrine that allows us
to share and fair use that allows us to sample.

I don't see how you can take the position you have here on Chan at the same
time oppose my push back on copyright. In short, either you believe in
First Sale and Fair Use or you don't believe in Free Speech.


Videolib mailing list