ftmag
Skip to content

Yoko Ono’s copyright suit against creationist film fails

A JUNK-science “documentary” which screams out for “intelligent design” to be given – at the very least – a status equal to that of evolutionary science has pissed off a great number of people since its release in the US earlier this year.

Yoko Ono: pissed off over an alleged copyright infringement in the 'documentary' Expelled

Yoko Ono: pissed off over an alleged copyright infringement in the 'documentary' Expelled

Most lately, the movie – a kind of porno for gibbering fundie retards - has pissed off Yoko Ono, wife of the late John Lennon, who yesterday lost a copyright law suit against the film’s producers for including Lennon’s song Imagine in their movie, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.

A federal court in Manhattan denied Ono’s request for an injunction against the film that would have forced it out of theatres nationwide.

Expelled, starring Ben Stein, faced being pulled out of theatres if Ono had won her case.

One of the films producers, John Sullivan, noted:

We had many individuals and groups who had planned to see this film, but decided not to because of the cloud of doubt this lawsuit bought to the film.

Shortly after the film was released, Ono filed a suit against the film’s producers, Premise Media, seeking damages for the alleged copyright infringement. However Judge Stein denied the injunction.

Earlier, the film pissed off Prof Richard Dawkins, who agreed to be interviewed for a film called Crossroads. He then found himself in a movie with a completely different name – Expelled – which is pure propaganda for ID, creationism’s kissin’ cousin.

And it certainly pissed off Prof P Z Myers, who was also conned into appearing in the film. Myers, of the Pharygula blog, was subsequently threatened with arrest if he didn’t remove his arse pronto from a screening of the film back in March.

Myers revealed:

I went to attend a screening of the creationist propaganda movie, Expelled, a few minutes ago. Well, I tried … but I was expelled! It was kind of weird — I was standing in line, hadn’t even gotten to the point where I had to sign in and show ID, and a policeman pulled me out of line and told me I could not go in. I asked why, of course, and he said that a producer of the film had specifically instructed him that I was not to be allowed to attend. The officer also told me that if I tried to go in, I would be arrested. I assured him that I wasn’t going to cause any trouble.

I went back to my family and talked with them for a while, and then the officer came back with a theater manager, and I was told that not only wasn’t I allowed in, but I had to leave the premises immediately. Like right that instant.

The irony was that Myers was accompanied by a guest who WAS allowed into the theatre.

That guest was Richard Dawkins!

The film has courted controversy ever since its release.

Writing in the New York Times, Cornelia Dean said:

The growing furore over the movie, visible in blogs, on websites and in conversations among scientists, is the latest episode in the long-running conflict between science and advocates of intelligent design, who assert that the theory of evolution has obvious scientific flaws and that students should learn that intelligent design, a creationist idea, is an alternative approach.

There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth. And while individual scientists may embrace religious faith, the scientific enterprise looks to nature to answer questions about nature. As scientists at Iowa State University put it last year, supernatural explanations are “not within the scope or abilities of science.”

And describing the film for New Scientist, Amanda Gefter wrote:

Expelled is pure propaganda, its style reminiscent of a sub-standard Michael Moore flick complete with voice-over narration and lots of aimless wandering around. Its selling point is that academic freedom in the US is threatened by a vast conspiracy of atheist scientists, hypnotised by what Stein labels in the film the “Darwinian gospel”. Supporters of ID are fired from their institutions or denied tenure, the film argues, while journalists who report on ID are silenced or shunned. This is an old trick. By claiming their views are suppressed, proponents of ID hope to be protected from criticism. When someone argues that ID is bogus, all they need do is yell: “See? Suppression!”

Stein’s response?:

Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place. Science leads you to killing people.

No doubt Expelled will be surfacing in the UK sometime soon, and we expect creationism’s ga-ga brigade to greet its arrival with much rejoicing and ecstasy.

The rest of us, if we have any sense, will give it a very wide berth indeed – unless we feel compelled to sit through it purely for its comic content.

Send this article to:  reddit button       Digg!       stumble      delicious link              Searchles icon     Email this article

6 Comments

  1. Emil wrote:

    Isn’t it kind of ironic that an pro-ID movie would choose a so pro-atheistic song? Didn’t they reflect over the song lyrics: “no hell below us, above us only sky”, “and no religion too”?

    I haven’t seen the movie, but it seems an odd choice to me.

    Tuesday, July 29, 2008 at 4:28 pm | Permalink
  2. I’ll be one of the gaga parade welcoming it’s arrival. In fact, I’m going to the USA in a week, I might get a copy and start infecting the blogosphere right away.

    Thanks for the Ono info, I was wondering how that case would end up.

    Tuesday, July 29, 2008 at 8:21 pm | Permalink
  3. Michael Cohen wrote:

    im going to see the film for the fun of it–i want to take some friends who have sore backsides from sitting on the fence over the Rationalist-religious debate - they need to see what atheists are up against in the USA

    Tuesday, July 29, 2008 at 10:18 pm | Permalink
  4. Roger wrote:

    Does anyone know if Yoko is going to Sue for breach of copyright ? If I’m reading this right, she’s failed to get an injunction to stop the film being shown - but is she getting royalties ? And how much of a say does she have over the song’s use ? My knowledge of US copyright law isn’t good, so I’d appreciate someone filling me in!

    Rog

    Wednesday, July 30, 2008 at 12:48 pm | Permalink
  5. Roger wrote:

    Mant to add: I agree totally with emil. Using an atheist song for a film promoting religious dogma is totally out of place. It’s a bit like using “O Come all ye faithful” in a porn movie !!

    Rog

    Wednesday, July 30, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
  6. Barry Duke wrote:

    As I understand it, the song pops up to provide an example of how evil science and media folks are waging war on religion. I know the film has extensive footage of Nazi atrocities, which it blames on evolutionists, but do not know whether Imagine was played over any of the footage.
    As for the law suit itself, the best background I could find to the case appeared here on Dawkins’ website.

    Wednesday, July 30, 2008 at 8:54 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

Comments are semi-moderated, so you may have to wait before your comment is approved. Opinions expressed in the comments section are not necessarily the opinions of The Freethinker. If anyone has a complaint that a comment is defamatory, contact us and it will be removed.
Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *
*
*
Design and hosting by mckeegan's websites
14 queries. 4.147 seconds.-->