Copyright Worries Threaten The Best Thing To Come Out Of The New Star Wars Movies
from the MST3K2.0? dept
If you haven’t seen Red Letter Media’s excellent reviews of the Star Wars films, The Phantom Menace and The Attack of the Clones, then you might want to carve out three hours out of your day and watch them (the reviews are 70-minutes and 90-minutes long, respectively) — they’re incredible. (Warning: he does use some NSFW language occasionally.)
So, it’s very sad to hear that Mike Stoklasa, the writer & director of the Red Letter Media reviews, is considering not producing any more reviews, out of fear of being slapped with a copyright lawsuit. Stoklasa says:
“The thing is, I’m no lawyer. But I had someone actually talk to a copyright lawyer, and they didn’t know what to make of the reviews. It’s a new thing, You can get away with using a clip from a movie for the purpose of review or commentary, but can you dissect an entire film like that? There’s commentary and it’s part satire [because of the character, Mr. Plinkett] and part review and part educational as well because there’s elements of filmmaking insights.”
Stoklasa’s reviews are innovative and entertaining and take movie reviewing to a whole new level by remixing movie clips into the review itself. In doing so, they are emerging as a whole new art form. While more traditional movie reviews and satire can use clips of movies as a result of fair use, Stoklasa could be treading on new ground with his works. That said, this could be an interesting case if he were to get sued, because he would likely win, which would then redraw the boundaries for fair use, which would be a great thing. So, Mike Stoklasa, please don’t let the threat of copyright lawsuits stop you from continuing to produce your excellent reviews — to do so would be a travesty.
Filed Under: copyright, movies, reviews
Companies: red letter media
Comments on “Copyright Worries Threaten The Best Thing To Come Out Of The New Star Wars Movies”
See: MST3K
Though maybe they simply got the “rights” on the cheap simply because they were crap films. I know with Rifftrax they don’t sell movies alongside their riffs, except for short films which are public domain (a lot of old informational videos and the like) and 1 or 2 DVD’s.
Please please please please PLEASE don’t let him stop doing these reviews.
That said, this could be an interesting case if he were to get sued, because he would likely win, which would then redraw the boundaries for fair use, which would be a great thing. So, Mike Stoklasa, please don’t let the threat of copyright lawsuits stop you from continuing to produce your excellent reviews — to do so would be a travesty.
Well, in NJ we just passed a law that says pedestrians have the right of way in the crosswalk, but I wouldn’t recommend someone walk out in from of cars so they could win in court. You might win but it will still hurt.
there is a point where a review is no longer review. I think it was about 65 minutes earlier in the 70 minute review.
Re: Re:
Coming from renowned know-absolutely-nothing-about-copyright-law TAM.
Fun.
Re: Re:
So if a review goes longer than five minutes it’s not a review? Why not two minutes? Why not fifteen? Does this translate to written reviews?
You’re not making sense.
Re: Re:
So if a review goes longer than five minutes it’s not a review? Why not two minutes? Why not fifteen? Does this translate to written reviews?
You’re not making sense.
Re: Re:
[Oops, sorry about the double post. Browser problem.]
Re: Re:
When you have previosly viewed something
and you view it again
for a period in excess of five minutes
is it not a review?
If not a review, then what is it?
Do enlighten us great sage
Re: Re:
This was way more than a review. You would know that if you watched any of it.
“Nothing in the Phantom Menace makes any sense at all.”
If it takes 70 minutes to prove that statement then let them take the full 70 minutes.
Re: Re: Re:
hint -> re – view
that is: to view again
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don’t get it.
Really
“this could be an interesting case if he were to get sued, because he would likely win”, only if he had the money to fight. They always win because no one can afford to fight for that long.
Re: Really
He could always contact the EFF and have them forward him to a good copyright lawyer will to do this pro bono.
Dude I’m gonna be soo pissed if he stops making his reviews. and stfu TAM no one likes you.
Sadly, it’s his cash on the line, and with figures like in the millions on the line, even a 99% chance of winning is a poor gamble. This is especially true because after legal bills, even if he wins he loses.
If he quits, add it to the list of things you put in the letters you write your politicians. You guys do write letters, right?
Re: Re:
Yes, actually, I (and some others from where I would hope) do.
Not that they pay too much attention to me or all the support I cite. Every once in a rare while I will get an actual response and not just some simple auto response looking email saying “I will vote for the people” which looks like they never even read my email.
The studios don’t need to sue him. They need to hire him for quality control. He’s not doing anything wrong – and he’s doing everything right. Lucas needs this guy on his shoulder telling him when he’s doing something crappy. The only problem here is the guy didn’t get to the movie until AFTER it was released. The guy’s only telling them how to make good movies.
That was so awesome, thanks for letting me know it exists.
I can’t stop watching (unlike the movies where I could).
Many thanks for letting me know this was out there.
While some of the attempts at humor are a bit annoying, these are valuable commentary and critique. Even though there are a great number of clips, this is definitely fair use. It’s not a mere recital of the film despite the fact that you do get a fairly detailed summary of the plot, there are still large chunks missing, out of order, chopped up, and without dialogue. These are in no way a substitute for the films, and serve a much different purpose. It’s an explanation why these films are so unsatisfying that’s primarily aimed at people who are already familiar with the movie.
Copyright & lawyers
Why don’t you lend him your lawyers to defend his right to free speech – er, aimed at Mike.
Stupid videos! I nearly wet myself because of how ridiculously funny they are. This may be the best thing I’ve ever seen on the internet.
How is what he is doing any different from what Universities do in their film classes?
Re: Re:
Universities only show the film to 30 students at a time and charge them $300 a credit (plus books) to view the movie.
Re: Re: Re:
Good think this guy isn’t charging us all that money then.
What’s wrong with your faaaaaace?!?!?!?
Red Letter Legal Defense Fund
The Red Letter reviews are among my favorite things on the intertubes. I think Mike Stoklasa could get a good Legal Defense Fund going if he merely asked. To watch his reviews is to love them, and that love means people would come to his defense. I’d contribute, if it came to that.
I also expect he could easily get a very good pro bono legal team, because such a case would set such an important precedent and garner so much publicity. So fight, Mike, FIGHT!!
thanks for the link
“The second biggest problem with the Phantom Menace is the whole story and the way it was told”. OMG, this guy is brilliant! Looks like I know how I’m going to spend the rest of my morning…
video dissertations
If he were writing long form reviews of the movies, he could simply paste into his narration descriptions of the crap, er, action on the screen, but it would have the immediate visceral effect of seeing just how bad these movies are. This is the future of reviewing.
god these were hilarious, i had to watch all of em
Association with disturbia.
I don’t think it’s so much the idea of copyright issues… Well, actually it has a lot to do with that. But I think it also has something to do with the guy inserting an obsessive serial killer subplot into his reviews. As much as I love the entertainment that comes out of it (and they do make the reviews a lot, lot more interesting to watch), I don’t think George Lucas wants something as wildly popular as these videos associating his franchise with the idea of a fictional serial killer/hostage holder reviewing and picking the films apart.
In the end I love the reviews, and it’s obvious it’s sour grapes on Lucas’ side of things for making a few films that are so flawed. If you note, the reviewer has very little negetive things to say about the original films (even though they also have faults) and Lucas can’t milk the old ones anymore because they are not the focus of the series majority revenue.
So in the end it’s all about the reviews ripping the films apart and Lucas throwing all his toys out of the pram and being an idiot about things because of it.
While his reviews would currently win a copyright lawsuit, once the ACTA Treaty is ratified, he would not. Wikipedia has more info on ACTA which is a clever way for intellectual property owners to get around existing fair-use court decisions by means of policy laundering.