Le mercredi 31 juillet 2013 à 22:43:05 UTC-8, KalElFan a écrit :

On rec.arts.movies.current-films, "Russell Watson" wrote in
message news:kt9nog$a44$1...@dont-email.me...

We briefly segued into this turf while discussing a potential
Wonder Woman for a JLA flick.

Indeed, and I've added the groups from that discussion and
extended your thread title with "and Other Political and 'Porn'
Ironies".

The irony, to me, is how these parodies so easily, and rightly,
escape harrassment from the major studios AND clearly make
money, while some fan who makes no money from a creative
mash-up on YouTube that arguably just as easily qualifies for
the commentary, parody or other exemptions doesn't.

Fans can get targeted with automated-like false accusations
of copyright infringment. And/or get told by a site that there's
been a complaint and they have to dispute it else it'll get taken
down, or ads used to pay the claimed owners or the like.

Meanwhile, the major studios and their lobbies are no doubt
trying to figure out how they can "safely" buy yet another 20
or whatever more number of years of copyright from the U.S.
Congress, who've already given them 95-125 years.

Elsewhere, 9th Circuit judges named Otis (more irony!) rule
against the original creators of Superman for supposed binding
agreements BEFORE the last 20 years was bought or anyone
knew it would be! There are arguably issues surrounding the
latter ruling, e.g. the inequity of Warner Bros. potentially losing
ALL rights to making new Superman had the ruling gone the
other way as multiple lower court judges had said it should.
Still, the original creators get screwed to save the behemoth
studio's a$$.

Wherever the shoes fit when it comes to these various
issues, "corrupt whores" comes to mind and the hypocrisy
boggles it. So Go Porn, but also Go Away with harassment,
and the whoring, when it comes to massively corrupt copyright
law and other hypocrisies. The focus of such laws should be
to ensure creator rights in particular to payment, but beyond
that mandatory competition after a much shorter time. With
patents including prescription drugs, and with the telephone
companies and so on "Monopoly Bad" was something the
public got long ago. Copyright has remained under people's
radar but hopefully it'll bubble up before the next heist(s).

This is a pretty interesting article about what happens
when a guy who makes superhero porn parodies is an
actual comics geek in real life. Scroll through the pics
and look at the costumes (all from his Batman knock-off)

I'll also give the direct link below, the picture of "Catwoman"
at the top having a slideshow button to the right with three
more pictures it looks like. The fourth and last has a cast
shot with the 60's series Riddler, Catwoman, Joker, Robin,
Batgirl and Batman -- the parody versions at least and it
is quite amazing how close to the mark they all look there
with their costumes on. The first picture at these links
(your tinyurl and the direct one to the foxnews article) is,
again, of Catwoman with the mask. When I first saw it I
couldn't believe how easily she could be mistaken for Julie
Newmar. :-)

http://tinyurl.com/ou35tpk

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/07/30/super-hero-parodies-do-for-porn-industry-what-super-hero-blockbusters-do-for/

And here was another Associated Press article in the last
few days titled "Can superhero parodies rescue the porn
business?"

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Can-superhero-parodies-rescue-the-porn-business-4690543.php

Finally, since I happened to run across the latest TMZ link on
one of those sites, and then saw the two prior ones regarding
Anthony Weiner's "sexting" partner, I'll post those links here
too. One of the titles (the second link) shows her getting into
a porn mogul's car with the headline "My First Steps Into the
Porn Biz". The links are in reverse chronological order.

http://www.tmz.com/2013/07/31/anthony-weiner-sydney-leathers-sugar-daddies-website/

http://www.tmz.com/2013/07/30/anthony-weiner-sydney-leathers-sexting-meeting-vivid-video/?adid=hero4

http://www.tmz.com/2013/07/29/anthony-weiner-sexting-parter-drop-out-mayor-campaign/

The gossip sites have never been ones I check out, but I
have to admit TMZ can be great at exposing hypocrisy
no matter where it comes from. :-) There are other reasons
not to vote for Anthony Weiner, but consenting adults sexting
over the Internet IS NOT one of them. One of the pundits on
CNN had some poll where 25%-30% or some such of 18-25
or 18-34 (not sure which) said they sexted. That could even
have been for the survey overall (I think she said it was by
Harris), and the younger demo even higher. Here's a cite
for a different study:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexting#Sexting_and_Relationships

That URL cites a study where 54% of couples said they had
sexted, so the other one may have been of singles it's not
clear.

If the question had been "Should sexting by consenting adults
be illegal?" -- that wording -- I imagine the same percentage
as want to ban porn would have said Yes. That might also be
the same number who think that homesexuality, prostitution,
marijuana, and gambling should also be banned. Not all the
same respondents mind you, but if these banning-happy folks
on any given indignation of theirs want to vote for the Pure
candidate in their eyes (ha!), then feel free.

Angelina Jolie has been identified by Canadians worker as..

https://charbonneau-gomery-corruption-canada.blogspot.com/2022/09/the-truth-about-angelina-jolie.html

Comments on Google Groups

https://groups.google.com/g/uk.politics.misc/c/E6FNPWjNZTI/m/H30BSeCjAQAJ

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.checkmate/c/BPxykPdEE24/m/ZIKqEfkZBAAJ

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)