Showing posts with label Berne Convention. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Berne Convention. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Reports Indicate Singer Prince Left No Will


Prince
 
Legendary singer/musician/songwriter Prince died on April 21, 2016. He was cremated this past weekend and a private ceremony was held at his Paisley Park recording studio and home in Minnesota to remember his storied life. Reports indicate Prince left no will. His estate is worth approximately $100,000,000. Paisley Park and its contents is worth an estimated $10,000,000.

As Prince was a songwriter, he left behind a fortune in music. Prince's sister, Tyka Nelson, who is also a singer, is his heir. Tyka is also a mother. My advice to Tyka is this, get a good lawyer and call all the shots yourself (be careful, Warner Bros and Sony Music, are known in legal circles for bribing lawyers and judges). Set up a trust regarding Prince's estate. Prince, like me, had legal fights with the record label Warner Bros, which is a greedy, evil, unscrupulous company. The only worse one in the entertainment industry is Sony Music.  Prince stated Warner Bros made him feel like a "slave" (he wrote it on his face) and it's the exact same way they have made me feel. 


Inside Prince's gorgeous Paisley Park studios
 
Do not sell off Prince's music catalog. He fought to keep as much ownership of it as possible. He wouldn't want certain music industry people owning it. There are some greedy psychopaths in the entertainment industry circling, as they know he has died and will seek to prey upon you and your family to rip his catalog from your hands. Do not let them do that. I know how evil they can be. Therefore, be careful and protect yourself.

Prince would not want other musicians, especially those he did not approve of, traipsing through his record studios and making music there. It would have devastated him in life. Do not let this happen to him in death. However, I don't think he would mind the public visiting it to take a look at where he made his hits. I think he would like that.


Prince's sister, singer Tyka
 
Prince was also very particular about who he licensed his music to for other works. He was not into music with violent themes and other negative messages. Do not authorize such singers or rappers to sample his work. He wasn't even a fan of the sampling to begin with, as he was a real songwriter/musician who could compose music from scratch, which is sadly no longer the norm in music. Don't allow movie producers to place his music in films of a twisted or negative nature.  

Prince left behind unreleased music. Make sure to properly secure the copyrights in America. The rest of the world immediately recognizes a copyright the moment it is authored in accordance with United Nations laws, via the Berne Convention (time stamps help to secure authorship dates, regarding who did what first in the vent a dispute arises). However, in America the law requires you pay the Copyright Office a fee, in violation of international law, to protect your copyrights on U.S. shores which grants you the right to sue in federal court, in the event they are infringed. If you choose to release Prince's unreleased songs, do it through your own record company.

RELATED ARTICLE
 

Friday, October 23, 2015

Jay Z's 'Big Pimpin' Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Dismissed On Corrupt Technicality


Jay-Z

The copyright infringement lawsuit against rapper Jay Z over his foul, explicit song "Big Pimpin" has been thrown out of court by a U.S. federal judge (*feigns surprise*). The lawsuit contends frequently sued copyright infringers, rapper Jay Z and producer Timbaland, used a sample of the preexisting song "Khosara Khosara" without the permission of the copyright holder. The lawsuit was brought by Osama Fahmy, the current owner of the song, written by his uncle, the late Baligh Hamdi.

U.S. federal judge Christina Snyder basically ruled Egyptian law does not apply in America and Jay Z and Timbaland are allowed to steal his music. Technically, the judge is correct in stating Egyptian law does not apply in America. However, the United Nations' Berne Convention does, as America is signatory to it and it covers the breadth of copyright law.

At the end of the day, if the copyright owner does not want you using their work, you have no business doing so. If defeats the purpose of ownership and intellectual property laws that any idiot can steal something and use it against the wishes of the copyright owner. It constitutes fraud, financial fraud, conversion, grand theft larceny and copyright infringement.

If foreign recording artists began stealing Jay Z and Timbalands songs, using them abroad and making money off them while stating American law does not apply in their nations, the two men would be livid (and knowing Jay Z and his legal track record he would willfully commit acts of assault, attempted murder or murder). However, they expect to do this to others and get away with it, as the U.S. federal court system is unequivocally the most corrupt in the world. 99.9% of copyright cases are questionably thrown out by a federal judge before it gets the chance to reach an American jury to decide the merits of the case. That is disgraceful. Hollywood is an industry of thieves. 

RELATED ARTICLES












Monday, November 18, 2013

HBO’s New Pornographic Gay Show ‘Looking’ Is Depraved, Debauched And Unoriginal


HBO's "Looking" didn't look for originality or adherence to the Copyright Act or Berne Convention 

HBO’s new gay show "Looking" is depraved, debauched and very unoriginal. So unoriginal it breaches three preexisting copyrights I own that they've changed from wholesome and heterosexual to gay porn (Christians take note, because that's Hollywood). Time Warner owns HBO as well as Warner Bros.

Warner Bros has been home to chronic copyright stealing pop tart Madonna for nearly thirty years, before she signed with Live Nation in an unsuccessful pairing. However, Time Warner still plays host to the singer and her ex-husband Guy Ritchie at Warner Bros Pictures, in a series of crooked business deals. HBO’s parent company, Warner Bros (Time Warner) is a company I sued in the past for criminal copyright infringement and sent the matter to the FBI, as required by the U.S. Congress under federal jurisdiction rules.
The FBI interviewed me twice about the matter, in addition to other commissioned criminal misconduct by Madonna, Warner Bros and their affiliates, regarding crimes which includes, but is not limited to hacking to copy and steal preexisting copyrights, phone hacking (News Corp scandal I broke first) and wiretapping that transpired in the case.

Madonna's private eye Anthony Pellicano was subsequently arrested 4-months after I was interviewed by the FBI twice. He was also  convicted and sentenced to 15-years in prison for his crimes. Madonna has since switched to new private investigators to continue her criminal behavior (see: Gavin DeBecker among others).


You're right it's not TV...it's gay porn!

Based on pre-release items of HBO's "Looking" that I’ve seen online, there is very provable, clear cut criminal copyright infringement of what was heterosexual, Christian copyrights I own and registered years ago, well before this show was even announced. However, Time Warner/Warner Bros has turned preexisting heterosexual Christian copyrights they stole into debauched gay porn for broadcast on HBO. Please boycott the show.

"Looking" follows the lives of gay males in San Francisco and is packed with inappropriate, explicit and graphic scenes of gay sex. Some of the actors in the film were heterosexual prior to filming, but due to paychecks and career promises in Hollywood, took questionable x-rated roles in the show to their detriment.

According to IMDB, for the first few months of 2013, "Looking" was being made by another network in Britain, under a different name. Something went bad with the deal and the British network backed out of the infringing project, which as stated above, was once was a preexisting copyrights about straight people, whose stolen storyline has now been turned gay, much like some of the previously straight actors in the show.


Time Warner owns Warner Bros (home to Madonna and ex-husband Guy Ritchie) as well as HBO

Some of the actors in "Looking" were not known to be gay prior to this show. However, hefty paychecks and promises of fame changed that (see: Hollywood illuminati). What I don’t understand is why none of the actors in the film took their parents into consideration when filming what is basically gay porn.

Once their parents catch an eyeful of their children engaging in gay porn on screen, they are going to be shocked, shaken, heartbroken and devastated. They are going to literally cry tears. That’s a horrible thing for a parent to go through in watching something like that. I’m already being informed that some of the parents of actors connected to the show are very upset at pre-release materials.

No parent wants that for their child. Furthermore, the shock of seeing one’s son performing gay porn on TV is not good for any parent’s heart (physically or emotionally). The actors in the show owe their parents and fans (many former fans after they grasp what’s in that show) an apology for springing that debauched mess on them. It was not cute, cutting edge or funny. It was disrespectful and thoughtless. Neither will be it be funny when said actors see the effect the show will have on their careers, especially in America.


Time Warner's Illuminati eye logo

It is also going to create feelings of embarrassment and humiliation for parents of actors connected to the show once people find out or even see what their kids are doing on camera. And for what? Phony, trumped up promises of fame and fortune in Hollywood that will not materialize once audiences grasp the graphic nature of the show.

Additionally, when the general public finds out the full truth behind what went into "Looking" people are going to be appalled and never see Hollywood the same way again. The back story on "Looking" and the hateful, vengeful, malicious motivation behind it is the height of depravity. More on that in a later column (it is also going to be added to the film "Justice And Truth").


Madonna

Previously, the industry pushed the sexually charged HBO show "Queer As Folks" which was overwhelmingly unpopular with audiences in America, but due to the gay factor in Hollywood, the show was given far more chances than other programs, but produced very little results.

It doesn’t matter who one sleeps with in Hollywood or what promises are issued if one compromises one’s self in going against moral codes, if audiences don’t like what they are being sold, they’re not going to buy it. You could have all the promotion, marketing and money in the world behind it, if audiences don’t like it or the image that has been created, having that big machine behind you won’t matter.


RELATED ARTICLES








Friday, May 3, 2013

Justin Bieber And Usher Sued For Copyright Infringement Over Stealing Song 'Somebody to Love'


Justin Bieber or Usher

R&B singer Usher and his protégé Justin Bieber have been sued for $10,000,000 over copyright infringement, concerning the song "Somebody To Love." Sony Music artist Usher is being labeled the culprit behind the alleged song theft, as singer/songwriter, Devin Copeland, also known as De Rico and his writing partner, Mareio Overton, released the song "Somebody to Love" in 2008 on the album "My Story." Two years later, Justin Bieber released the song "Somebody To Love" on his 2010 CD "My World 2.0."

Yahoo News reported this week regarding the case, "According to the complaint, the pair later spoke to Usher's mother/sometimes manager, Jonetta Patton, who said that Usher had listened to the album and expressed interest in bringing Copeland on tour with him."


Justin Bieber

The Judiciary Report has not heard the 2008 song in question to make any statements regarding similarities between the two tracks. However, the site did state over year ago that Usher and Scooter Braun have been using criminally stolen copyrighted music for Bieber's career and it's only a matter of time before it all comes to ahead.

Usher has been repeatedly sued in credible court cases for stealing people's copyrighted works for his career. Copyright infringement is a federal crime under U.S. law and a violation of U.N. law as well (The Berne Treaty).

STORY SOURCE

Billboard Magazine Outs Singer Beyonce For Repeatedly Stealing Copyrighted Music, Images And Videos


Beyonce stealing from European pop singer Kerli brought on the latest scandal about her unlawful stealing of other artists' protected works

Thieving Sony Music singer, Beyonce, has been slammed and exposed by the music industry's top magazine, Billboard, for stealing other artists copyrighted music, videos and images, in a subtle op-ed piece. Beyonce is known and mocked all over the internet for being a thief, who insists on stealing from others in failed attempts at unlawfully making herself look like an artist who does it all.

Copyright infringement is a crime under U.S. and U.N. laws. Stop for a moment and think about that. When you steal copyrighted works, you are a criminal under domestic and international law (not to mention a fraud and a phony). When you steal someone's copyrights, it is the equivalent of stealing a mansion or luxury car, due to the value of intellectual property.

Shamefully, this happens often in the music industry, especially regarding certain mainstream artists in Hollywood cults such as Kabbalah, who call themselves the Illuminati. Leaked documents have shown, when they see or hear something they like, they simply take it, in criminal violation of the law, as copyright infringement is a federal crime. To applaud Beyonce or any other artist engaging in this felony, is the equivalent of praising a bank robber, burglar or ponzi schemer like Bernard Madoff.


Beyonce's husband Jay-Z has been sued by many people in unrelated cases for theft of copyright, trademark and money 

The FBI, under Robert S. Mueller, has failed in their congressional mandate in this regard, operating under the corrupt premise stars are allowed to break the law, which is disgraceful and an embarrassment. These thefts are damaging America's bottom line, as these stolen copyrights are executed incorrectly and devalued in the process, bringing in lower revenues and tax dollars.

Having been a victim of copyright infringement at Beyonce and Jay-Z's hands (see items listed below), the Judiciary Report has covered Beyonce's many thefts in past articles, which were subsequently read by millions online. A noticeable and significant sales decline began for both aforementioned artists shortly after, as no one in good conscience could support such thievery, dishonesty and fraud.

This week it is Billboard's turn, as the industry's most prominent publication details some of Beyonce's most brazen and disgraceful thefts, completely calling her artistry or lack thereof into question (see article below).

STORY SOURCE

Op-Ed: When Beyonce's Inspiration Turns Into Imitation

May 01, 2013 11:48 AM EDT - They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but what if the person imitating is a polarizing icon that should be doing otherwise -- someone like Beyoncé? On Monday (April 29), pop singer Kerli posted a side-by-side photo on her Facebook page of her and Beyoncé donning the same Amato Haute Couture dress. The photo of Beyoncé comes from the pages of her 2013 "Mrs. Carter Show" tour book.

Except, it's not just the Furne One designed dress -- which also Nicki Minaj wore in her "Va Va Voom" video -- that's similar in the photo. Both singers can be seen painted in white, from head to toe, and stylistically posed as sculptures. No one owns a look, image, dance move (after all, how many artists have pulled out signature Michael Jackson moves?), or in this case, an experimental costume. They're not copyrighted property, but filed as intellectual property.

Any artist, including Beyoncé, can wear whatever another artist wore, but that multiplicity gets suspicious and easily pegged as stealing. And understandably so, when it's not only the look of the artist that is being traced, but his or her entire idea.

Beyoncé first caught flak for working up a dance similar to Josephine's Baker's iconic banana dance in her "Deja Vu" video, then was seen sporting a skirt with dangling bananas when performing the "B'Day" track. But let's be honest: that wasn't that serious, at least not at that point in her 20-year plus career. She later borrowed from Bob Fosse's routine, "Mexican Breakfast," in the video for her girls anthem, "Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It)." There are also references to "Rich Man's Frug" scene (of Bob Fosse's "Sweet Charity") in Bey's "Get Me Bodied" video.

There's a difference between inspiration and imitation. "Countdown" is a good example of Beyoncé doing both in one piece of work. She references Audrey Hepburn's "Funny Face" dancing and both Hepburn and Peggy Moffitt's late 50's/early 60's fashion, then elaborates with color schemes and pairs the choreography perfectly with the pace of the soundscapes. She also samples Boyz II Men's countdown from their song, "Uhh Ahh."

As the video continues, we see Bey' using the same choreography, cinematography and costumes that Belgian choreographer and dancer, Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker, used in "Rosas Danst Rosas." It's one thing to be inspired by someone else's work and revamp with one's personal style, but it's another to duplicate exact movements, which is ultimately violating the artist's intellectual property. Context matters.

Before the debut of "Countdown," Beyonce was criticized for nearly replicating Italian singer Lorella Cuccarini's live performance with her performance of "Run the World (Girls)" at the 2011 Billboard Music Awards. She later stated that she had hired the same choreographers that had worked on Cucarini's performance, but it's still puzzling as to why she didn't work with them to create a groundbreaking concept of her own.

The choreography, seen in the performance and the song's accompanying music video, comes from Mozambigue dance troupe Tofo Tofo. Instead of thanking them for the inspiration after the fact, as she's done with Cuccarini and Keersmaeker, Beyoncé brought them to the U.S. and hired them to dance alongside her in the "Run the World (Girls)" video.

The 2011 song, off her fourth studio album "4" swipes the beat from Major Lazer's 2009 "Pon De Floor." According to Diplo, one half of Major Lazer, the making of "Run the World (Girls)" started out as a "joke" (whatever that means).

Beyoncé's "1 + 1" video features scenes similar to the unfinished French film, "Le'Enfer," while her "Love On Top" video has dancing scenes much the same as those in New Edition's "If It Isn't Love" video...


ADDITIONAL BEYONCE THEFTS AS LISTED BY THE JUDICIARY REPORT: 


Beyonce 2011 (left) and Lorella Cuccarini 2010 (right)

Thieving Sony singer, Beyonce, has been stealing from other artists again, in a nasty habit that has made her the recipient of a number of copyright infringement lawsuits. Her career has solely been based on copyright theft, which is a federal and international crime.


This time Beyonce stole in great detail, the preexisting video performance of European pop artist, Lorella Cuccarini, for her appearance on the Billboard Music Awards show last week. She's being slammed all over the internet for it.


Beyonce performed the infringing song "Run The World Girls" which has flopped on the charts and paired it with a scene by scene rip-off of Cuccarini's performance from last year that was televised in Europe.


Internet users are slamming Beyonce for this unoriginality. This week Beyonce also premiered a new song entitled "1+1" which is already being panned by people online. Ironically, Beyonce's "1+1" is a dead rip off of the 1960's song "Wonderful World" by my dad's favorite singer, Sam Cooke, who he plays often on his radio show. 


Sam Cooke

My dad played "Wonderful World" so many times in the house and car, while I was growing up, when I heard the Beyonce song, I instantly recognized the infringement. A few of the copyright infringing lyrics are:

Sam: but I do know one and one is two
Beyonce: but I know one plus one equals two
Sam: don't know much about algebra
Beyonce: I don't know much about algebra
Sam: don't know much about the French I took
Beyonce: I don't know much about fighting
Sam: what a wonderful world this could be
Beyonce: when the world's at war
  

En Vogue

Beyonce's "1+1" is also a rip off in certain parts, of the 1991 En Vogue hit "Don't Go." It's clear she slapped the two songs together ("Wonderful World" and "Don't Go"). There are melodic infringements and lyrical ones as well:

En Vogue: don't go
Beyonce: don't let me go
En Vogue: let's make sweet love
Beyonce: make love to me
En Vogue: I won't put up any fight
Beyonce: I will fight for you
En Vogue: lay me down
Beyonce: I'm laying right next to you
En Vogue: Our love's been growing freely
Beyonce: our love will heal us all
En Vogue: it's out of my hands
Beyonce: when I ball up my fist
En Vogue: body next to mine
Beyonce: laying next to you


BEYONCE'S OBSESSION WITH RIPPING OFF VANESSA WILLIAMS' MUSIC CAREER:

Vanessa in 1991 Beyonce in 2008

Vanessa Williams took the photo posted above on the left in 1991 for her "Running Back To You" single. In 2008, Beyonce ripped it off. Note the similarities:

1. Vanessa Williams is wearing a black leotard covered by a black jacket. Beyonce is wearing a black leotard.

2. Vanessa Williams is wearing black paten leather ankle high boots and Beyonce is also wearing black paten leather ankle high boots .

3. Vanessa Williams has the front of her hair upswept with blonde highlights at the top while the back is flowing over her shoulders. Beyonce has the front of her hair upswept with blonde highlights at the top while the back is flowing over her shoulders.

4. Another sick note to add, Vanessa Williams has a daughter named Sasha. Beyonce adopted an alter ego named Sasha Fierce (more like Sasha Stupid ripping everybody off).

PREVIOUS PHOTO AND VIDEO THEFTS OF WILLIAMS' WORK BY BEYONCE:
Vanessa Williams 1988: Beyonce 2009:

(Above) same see through jacket, plunging neckline dress, dangling earrings, hair teased upwards and the same pose.

Same blue hued video tint, same hairstyle and highlights, but the part is on a different side and both wearing coats with black:
Vanessa Williams "Darlin I" 1988: Beyonce "Halo" video 2009:
Pictured below, is Vanessa Williams in another scene from the 1988 "Darlin I" video, wearing that same black coat, makeup and hairstyle Beyonce is now wearing 20 years later in the rip off video (photo above right):
 

Vanessa Williams "Just For Tonight" 1991 (left) Beyonce 2008 (right)


Vanessa Williams "Comfort Zone" 1991 (left) Beyonce 2008 (right). Beyonce posing topless with a cross on her arm (bracelet) is sacrilegious and disrespectful to God. 


Vanessa Williams 1988 (left) Beyonce 2008 (right) wearing the same style corset top, tutu, leggings and black boots as Vanessa Williams did in her "Right Stuff" debut video 20 years ago.


Vanessa Williams' "Darlin I" video 1988 (left) and Beyonce's "Get Me Bodied" video 2007 (right). Both scenes contain the singer getting out of the same old style black car with a chauffeur in uniform holding an umbrella for them in the rain, however, Beyonce stole it from the Vanessa Williams music video.

 
George Michael's "Too Funky" music video 1990's (left) Beyonce 2008 (right)
 
OTHER BEYONCE THEFTS:

For details on the thefts listed below see the Judiciary Report article Butt Shaking Beyonce Strikes Again
 
Sued for stealing the song "Survivor"

Sued for stealing the song "Baby Boy"

Sued for stealing the song "Independent Women"

Sued for stealing the song "Kissing You"

Took credit for writing "Crazy In Love" when she didn't

Took credit for writing "Irreplaceable" when she didn't

Sued for not paying Wilhelmina

Sued for not paying Greg Walker/Icon Entertainment

Sued for stealing $32,000,000 from the family of her former dead co-manager who got them their record deal

Will be sued shortly for stealing the songs “Worldwide Woman,” “Amor Gitmo” and “Welcome To Hollywood” and the videos “Beautiful Liar,” “Suga Mama,” “Greenlight,” “Flaws and All” and “Still In Love.”

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Viacom Loses $1 Billion Case Against YouTube


Viacom has lost its copyright infringement case against video site YouTube. The judge stated the massive website did not violate Viacom's copyrights. Though, the Judiciary Report is no fan of Hollywood (i.e. Sony, Warner Bros., Universal ect), as they are horrible, unconscionable thieves themselves, with all due respect, the judge's decision is very flawed and illegal, as it strikes down the Copyright Act, Digital Millennium Act and the Berne Convention, with no legislative authority to do so.

The U.S. Copyright Act has a "Fair Use" clause that permits people to use the copyrights of others under certain circumstances, but there are limits. For example, one can use published photos or excerpts of articles to discuss a news event, as that is permitted. However, one cannot take another's whole copyrighted works and exploit them for financial gain without permission. That is completely illegal under U.S. and international law.

The Judiciary Report loves YouTube, as it is a great, entertaining website, when it is in compliance with the law, streaming videos that are furnished with the consent of the copyright holder.

However, the fact remains, on any given day, one can find illegally uploaded songs, movies and television shows, in their entirety on YouTube, posted without the consent of the copyright holder, eliminating the need to buy them at official outlets. That has got to stop. It defeats the purpose of having a Copyright or Copyright Office.

If it continues, all the labels and studios will simply close and there will be no entertainment, as they are not going to do this for free, having no revenue to pay staff and underwrite the necessary production and marketing costs. That judge's decision needs to be tossed like Britney Spears' bad weave.

STORY SOURCE:

Google's YouTube Didn't Infringe Viacom Copyrights, Judge Says

YouTube wins in Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit

Friday, April 16, 2010

"The Lion King" Is A Complete Rip-Off

1990's "The Lion King" (left) and 1960's "Kimba the White Lion" (right)

According to two websites, Disney's hit film "The Lion King" is a major rip-off of a preexisting 1960's Japanese cartoon entitled "Kimba the White Lion."

The similarities include, but are not limited to:

  • Both films are about lions

  • In the 1990's "The Lion King" a lead character is named "Simba" while in the 1960's "Kimba the White Lion" a lead character is named "Kimba" - only one letter is different in the name

  • In the 1990's "The Lion King" the lions were originally white albinos, but changed at the last minute, most likely a vain attempt at hiding the infringements.

  • Both films have, "A wise monkey character, hyenas as comic-relief villains, a dead father who appears to his son in the clouds, and an older relative (an aunt in "Kimba" and an uncle in "Lion King") who serves as the main antagonist."

  • "The cartoons were so similar that when Matthew Broderick was hired to be the voice of Simba he had assumed he was playing Kimba in a theatrical interpretation of 'Kimba the White Lion'."

Disney is currently immersed in scandals, suicides and financial stress, contradicting its claim of being, "The happiest place on Earth." The company has morality issues, which have landed it in court many times for stealing preexisting copyrighted works and using them for films such as "Nemo" "Pirates of the Caribbean" and "Princess Diaries 2" to name a few. Other problems include criminal negligence at Disney Theme parks that resulted in the deaths of a number of visitors.

Hollywood is a town built on criminal copyright infringement, which is expressly forbidden by U.S. law and international legal treaties that America is subject to, as apart of the Berne Convention.

However, it does not stop Hollywood from ripping off copyrights, then buying off some U.S. judges with stocks, favors and funds, to get away with this abhorrent criminal misconduct, frowned upon in the world.

The FBI has deliberately failed in this area for years, in violation of their Congressional mandate, seeing copyright infringement by Hollywood as a corrupt way to put money in the Treasury, ill-gotten funds into stars' pockets and underserved awards on their shelves. What a disgraceful, dishonest farce.

However, it enters even more terrible territory, when religious copyrighted works are pilfered, profaned and secularized by Hollywood, in bids at criminally gaining undue revenue, in deeds that misuse profits meant to go towards producing cures to cancer and AIDS. The government has placed stars too stupid to write their own work, ahead of dying disease sufferers.

Such conduct produces God's disfavor, not His blessing. It's no mystery why Hollywood has been plagued with an unprecedented, unexplained string of woes, troubles and tragedies.

The FBI still believes thievery, such as Hollywood's chronic copyright infringement of numerous writers' works, the Madoff and Stanford cases and many others like it the Federal Bureau of Investigation have looked the other way to for years, is the way to build an economy.

The FBI clearly has not learned from the 2008 financial crisis that was a wake-up call, which means it is destined to happen again and to greater degrees, for harboring such thievery and fraud, deteriorating the progress of hardworking Americans in the corporate sector actually doing work.

What's the sense of having hardworking Americans productively contributing to the economy each day, while allowing one segment of the corporate sector to run loose with thievery and financial fraud, eating away at the nation's collective progress, via the deterioration of valuable assets - not to mention, destroying the nation's name in the business world.

Disney's The Lion King is a total ripoff of "Kimba the White Lion", a Japanese cartoon.

The plot also closely follows Shakespeare's "Hamlet"

"Kimba the White Lion" was a Japanese manga (comic book) from the 1950s that became a cartoon show (anime) in the 1960s. In addition to having a similarly-named protagonist ("Kimba" as opposed to "Simba") the "Kimba" cartoon and "The Lion King" feature extremely similar characters: a wise monkey character, hyenas as comic-relief villains, a dead father who appears to his son in the clouds, and an older relative (an aunt in "Kimba" and an uncle in "Lion King") who serves as the main antagonist.

Early screenshots from preproduction work on "The Lion King" show that Simba was intended to be an albino, just like Kimba. The cartoons were so similar that when Matthew Broderick was hired to be the voice of Simba he had assumed he was playing Kimba in a theatrical interpretation of "Kimba the White Lion".

Ironically, Osamu Tezuka,the creator of "Kimba" and the popular series "Astroboy", drew from Walt Disney's early work as inspiration for his own artistic style, and he even received permission from Walt Disney to make a manga adaptation of Disney's "Bambi".

The Lion King also shares some plot details with Hamlet. Both Simba and Hamlet are on a quest to avenge their fathers and take back their kingdoms. Both had their uncle kill their father and assume power. Both were visited by the ghosts of their fathers to inspire them to take revenge. Thankfully, the similarities don't extend to the end of the story, otherwise the Lion King would (spoiler alert!) end with Simba, Nala, Simba's mom, and Timon and Pumba all dying.

Comment on #2280 (2) - Apr 12, 2010 05:00 PM

http://www.omg-facts.com/view/Facts/2280

Monday, February 22, 2010

Madonna Stole Anne Sexton Poem

Mad-onna

Another nice reader has sent the site information regarding Madonna stealing others copyrighted works and trying to pass it off as her own, in violation of the Copyright Act and Berne Convention.

Chronic copyright infringer Madonna, stole a poem by Anne Sexton, changing a few lines, then sending it to a boyfriend, who auctioned it off for profit recently. I don’t know why anyone would want to own any drivel by that madwoman.

Anne Sexton

However, her conduct in the Sexton theft, illustrates a well-established pattern of copyright theft Madonna has utilized in her own career, from her very first infringing song that hit the charts.

She searches for preexisting copyrights, when one strikes her fancy, she steals it, changes a line or two, then releases it as her own like a sociopath, committing criminal copyright infringement for financial enrichment, which is also constitutes fraud, money laundering and conversion.

Side Bar: why do some people say "borrowed" when attempting to minimize what is "stealing" and criminal theft of property. You borrow a cup of sugar. When you take a copyright(s), you've committed a domestic and international crime classified as stealing.

RELATED ARTICLES

Madonna Is Jealous Of Lady Gaga

Marc Jacobs Slams Madonna

Lady GaGa Bruised, Burned And Busted

Madonna Ripped Off Boy George

Madonna 'borrowed Sexton love poem'

Thursday, August 6 2009, 1:24am EDT - A love poem that Madonna wrote to her former bodyguard is similar to one that Anne Sexton penned, it has been reported.

House Gottahaveit.com are reportedly auctioning off raunchy video and audio tapes that the 'Erotica' singer sent to her ex-minder James Albright, along with love letters she would fax him using the alias Lola Montez.

One of the poems up for sale closely resembles Sexton's Love Song from the Pulitzer Prize-winning author's Live Or Die collection, the New York Post reports.

A fax dated December 24, 1993 reads: "I was the girl of the love letter/the girl full of talk of dreams and destination... the one with her eyes half under the covers/with her large gun-metal blue eyes/with the thick vein in the crook of her neck."

In comparison, Sexton wrote: "I was the girl of the chain letter/the girl full of talk of coffins and keyholes...the one with her eyes half under her coat/with her large gun-metal blue eyes/with the thin vein at the bend of her neck."...

http://www.digitalspy.com

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Google Loses Copyright Case In Paris

Google HQ

Search giant Google has lost a landmark copyright case in Paris, France, regarding its digital library of books that saw the company scan millions of literary works, without permission from copyright holding authors.

Internationally, one does not need to file a copyright to protect one's works, as in America with the Library of Congress (The Copyright Office). The world works under the premise that the Berne Convention applies to all and a free copyright is established the second one puts pen to paper or fingers to keyboard. One only needs to verify the date of authorship in the event a legal dispute arises.

However, the U.S. Courts requires one to register copyrights at a not-so-cheap-fee, because in the event your work is stolen and due to the treachery and greed of Hollywood, it probably will be, it is the only way you can attempt to recover damages in the American legal system.

Google needs to work out a proper compensation package to the authors whose books were scanned without permission. Then, seek full clearance before continuing with this practice.

RELATED ARTICLES

World Governments Accuse Google Of Copyright Infringement

Paris Court Convicts Google in Copyright Case

PARIS—A French court found Google Inc. guilty of copyright infringement for scanning books and publishing extracts online without a French publisher's consent, a ruling that could hinder the U.S search company's ongoing drive to create a giant global online library.

In a Friday ruling that Google said it would appeal, the court ordered the U.S. company to pay €300,000 ($501,000) to French publisher La Martinière and to remove online extracts of the publisher's books.

The ruling, which is the first of its kind in France and applies only to this country, could set a legal precedent for any future copyright infringement cases by French publishers, said Valerie Barthez, head of the legal department at the French publishers' association Société des Gens de Lettres de France, which was one of the plaintiffs in the case...

Earlier this week French President Nicolas Sarkozy said France would spend €2 billion to digitalize books and other cultural publications itself. "We can't let this heritage go astray," Mr. Sarkozy told reporters. "It's a question of national identity." ...

http://online.wsj.com