dennis roadman
nuclear war in my bag
.
Last edited:
Because she is trying to sell and market her book. She might've legitimately recognized some themes she included in her "manuscript". But guess what, you know how many times these themes have popped up in science fiction works? Over and over and over.
Check out this book by Daniel F. Galouye Simulacron-3,
Simulacron 3 is the story of a virtual city (total environment simulator) for marketing research, developed by a scientist to reduce the need for opinion polls. The computer-generated city simulation is so well-programmed, that, although the inhabitants have their own consciousness, they are unaware, except for one, that they are only electronic impulses in computer.The simulator’s lead scientist, Hannon Fuller, dies mysteriously, and a co-worker, Morton Lynch, vanishes. The protagonist, Douglas Hall, is with Lynch when he vanishes, and Hall subsequently struggles to suppress his inchoate madness. As time and events unwind, he progressively grasps that his own world is probably not “real” and might be only a computer-generated simulation.
Sound familiar? This shyt was written in the fukking 60s!
She lost her court case and provided no evidence proving anything. Why didn't she sue the terminator when it came out in 1984? She waited all the way until The Matrix to sue? LOL. Many writers have been fukked over, but she has NO EVIDENCE to support her claims.
I'm not a law student dog and we're not talking about Marvin Gaye here. Marvin Gaye's family had proof and evidence of copyright infringement.Marvin Gaye's family didnt immediately sue for blurred lines either... they waited like a rattlesnake and when it made it's money they sued everyone involved knowing full and well what they did. Alot of copyright holders are like that, Only striking when the goose is fat... that's a certified way to guarantee you see your money.
And please answer this if this woman is lying about writing the matrix why hasnt there been a countersuit AT ALL... you dont find it fishy a corporation, DONT countersue for libel and slander this has been going on for years, irreguardless...
or I'm a huge sci-fi head who has researched this topic thoroughly since it pops up on this subforum at least once or twice a year. Oh and the fact that I hate black people.Although I do believe it was bs.....
.......it doesn't surprise me who is going all out to prove she didn't win or write what was claimed.
She won breh....
Stewart filed her case in 1999, after viewing the Matrix, which she felt had been based on her manuscript, ‘The Third Eye,’ copyrighted in 1981. In the mid-eighties Stewart had submitted her manuscript to an ad placed by the Wachowski Brothers, requesting new sci-fi works..
According to court documentation, a FBI investigation discovered that more than thirty minutes had been edited from the original film, in an attempt to avoid penalties for copyright infringement. The investigation also stated that ‘credible witnesses employed at Warner Brothers came forward, claiming that the executives and lawyers had full knowledge that the work in question did not belong to the Wachowski Brothers.’ These witnesses claimed to have seen Stewart’s original work and that it had been ‘often used during preparation of the motion pictures.’ The defendants tried, on several occasions, to have Stewart’s case dismissed, without success.
Stewart has confronted skepticism on all sides, much of which comes from Matrix fans, who are strangely loyal to the Wachowski Brothers. One on-line forum, entitled Matrix Explained has an entire section devoted to Stewart. Some who have researched her history and writings are open to her story.
Others are suspicious and mocking. ‘It doesn’t bother me,’ said Stewart in a phone interview last week, ‘I always knew what was true.’
Some fans, are unaware of the case or they question its legitimacy, due to the fact that it has received little to no media coverage. Though the case was not made public until October of 2003, Stewart has her own explanation, as quoted ataghettotymz.com:
‘The reason you have not seen any of this in the media is because Warner Brothers parent company is AOL-Time Warner…. this GIANT owns 95 percent of the media… let me give you a clue as to what they own in the media business… New York Times papers/magazines, LA Times papers/magazines, People Magazine, CNN news, Extra, Celebrity Justice, Entertainment Tonight, HBO, New Line Cinema, DreamWorks, Newsweek, Village Roadshow and many, many more! They are not going to report on themselves. They have been suppressing my case for years.’
Every dog has its day... Written: 23 November 2015
Black Author wins Copyright Case for Matrix movie - NonStop Ghana News
bububut its a conspiracy!!!!!Warner definitely does not own the New York times I used to work there, it is publicly traded and the majority shares are owned by the Sulzberger Family.
Oh I am sure you researched it very thoroughly once you heard a black woman might have wrote what she claimed.or I'm a huge sci-fi head who has researched this topic thoroughly since it pops up on this subforum at least once or twice a year. Oh and the fact that I hate black people.
It's remarkable how you're able to really get into my head and understand my thought processesOh I am sure you researched it very thoroughly once you heard a black woman might have wrote what she claimed.
Cuz that could never be....
It's remarkable how you're able to really get into my head and understand my thought processes
perfect choice of gif, a corrupt newsman who doesn't write anything yet profits from others' words