"Anim8rFSK" wrote in message
news:ANIM8Rfsk-CCA806.09534710032010@news.dc1.easynews.com...
> In article ,
> "Jim Beaver" wrote:
>
>> "TT" wrote in message
>> news:18Gln.13567$pL1.497@uutiset.elisa.fi...
>> > makento wrote:
>> >> here we have a flim ("hurt locker") that was written by someone who
>> >> actuallyl served in a bomb disposal unit. It is being criticized
>> >> mainly by those who were too chicken to join the army, and have no
>> >> idea of first hand experience in iraq
>> >
>> > All the vets say that it's completely unrealistic. Google it.
>>
>> Not all the vets. I'm a vet and I don't. The vet who claims they copied
>> his real-life experiences doesn't.
>>
>> Just because you've heard of something doesn't mean that's all there is
>> to
>> hear.
>>
>> Jim Beaver
>
> Just playing Devil's Advocate Jim, but does the guy suing say that it's
> accurate, or just claim they ripped off his story? The two aren't
> mutually exclusive.
True. I don't know. I've got doubts about the guy anyway. He claims he
invented the term "hurt locker," which I first heard in bootcamp in 1968,
when, I suspect, this fellow was either in diapers or still in heaven
waiting his turn.
I also think he doesn't have a case because the artistic expression of ideas
is deeply protected in the U.S., insofar as what constitutes ownership of an
artistic expression. I get no sense of a claim that this fellow's own
artistic effort was stolen or his personal life was depicted, but rather his
professional duties were depicted, and that elements of real-life experience
were transformed into dramatic material. That alone isn't enough, I think,
to provide grounds for such a suit. It isn't the idea that's protected,
it's the execution. I remember when Jack Henry Abbott, the convicted killer
who got released by the efforts of Norman Mailer and others due to his
literary prowess and then killed again, was the subject of a successful
play. Relatives of mine who were relatives also of Abbott's kept talking
about suing, because someone was making money off "their" story, despite the
fact that they weren't part of the story other than to be related to the guy
in the story. People often think, it seems, that if they have ANY
connection whatsoever to a dramatic work that they are somehow owed a
portion of the rewards for that work (emphasis on both meanings of "work.")
That opinion seems to rev up whenever the dramatic work makes money (or
seems like it "must have.")
Jim Beaver
|