The Unfunny Truth About Scientology 2

I am reposting this according to the ''Fair Use'' clause of U.S. copyright law.

Section 107 of the Copyright law states:
"the fair use of a copyrighted work. . . for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include — "


1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
a. Is it the use for commercial purposes?
b. Does it fall within the purpose of the Fair Use exception? ((1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching)
c. Is the use transformative or merely derivative?
2. the nature of the copyrighted work
a. Informational work (factual articles) is more likely to be ruled fair use than works of fiction/literature/music
b. Was the work being copied previously published? If it was unpublished then Courts are more likely to find a fair use violation. They assume that the author did not want the work published.
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: In general, the smaller the portion of the work copied, the more likely the use is fair use. In certain instances, you can copy entire works without violating copyright—videotaping movies for time-shifting purposes is allowed when doing it for your personal viewing. On the other hand, the use of 400 words from President Ford's 200,000 word memoir were viewed as copyright infringing because those words represented the "heart of the book"
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. (Probably the most important factor). If the copied work reduces demand for the original work because people view it as a substitute for the original work then this factor will weigh as copyright infringing. But a stinging criticism that makes the author of the original work look like a fool, and thus reduces the demand for the original work in the marketplace would fall within Fair Use.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• unfunny
• truth
• Scientology
• $cientology
• $cilon
• cult
• mysterious
• death
• brainwash
• Anonymous

[xlioilx]

Who is this song by?

[EricZombie]

i wish i could tell you. i remember i downloaded it from a myspace band a long time ago, but i failed to mark the folder or file.

-_-

[Joflyer0211]

go fuck yourself with a rusty knife

[RhetoricPerson]

this video itself is rhetorical propaganda, so congratulations.

[gorgasha]

how about Cockinology or hoe-ology, it's a made up religion that means nothing, people who take it seriously must really like Tom Cruise .............. just pick a word and put ology on the end, that's what they did, maybe they figure if they defend it to the death it will somehow mean something.... Damn I miss George Carlin

[Wpganon]

One of the many videos that provoked me to join in on Chanology when it began one year later. It's a good thing the Church of Scientology no longer has the power to attack critics individually like they did Anthony Walter. The online harpooning of Anonymous is great for that.

[MARYBLEUZ]

great info...........thanks!

[lucidatheist]

Thanks.