**Update - Apparently Moore is Against Copyright Laws**
Lawyers representing Slacker Uprising's international rights holder have sent letters to download sites telling them to remove access to the movie, file-sharing news site TorrentFreak reported.
The move - so far unsuccessful - appears to contradict Moore's earlier comments saying the film was "done entirely as a gift to my fans" and to inspire people "to get off the couch and give voting a chance". Moore implored viewers to "email it, burn it and share it with anyone and everyone."
Apparently, for all his claims that he is for all the little people of the world, Moore isn't so interested in offering his "free" film to foreigners.
Still, when asked for his reply to this story, Moore claimed that it was all "out of his hands." He claimed it was all the lawyers and not him. In the past he has also claimed that he was against copyright laws saying they are too "restrictive."
So, a mixed message from Michael Moore, for sure. On one hand he claims he's for open access to everyone else's efforts, yet on the other hand he limits that access to his own products.
So what does he really support? Most likely only what's good for Michael Moore.
**Update**
I suppose it's pretty easy to decry copyright laws when you are already rich beyond your dreams, but it looks like Michael Moore stands against current copyright laws. It seems he's an open access believer. In other words, he seems to believe that anyone who creates something -- like a movie or a book -- should have no right to bar others from unauthorized reproduction of that creation and to distribute it without benefit to the creator.
I say this because Michael Moore recently communicated with the sharing site TorrentFreak and revealed some of his thoughts on this issue.
“What do you think I’m up to? I know it may not be obvious to most, but I think you guys get it,” Moore wrote to us. “I only own the US and Canadian rights. So my hands are tied. But this is the 21st century. What are ‘geographical rights’ ?” Moore continued. “I’ll say it for the hundredth time: If I buy a book and read it, and then give you the book to read, I have broken no laws. Why is that not true for all media?”
“I wish someone would figure out what I am up to,” he concluded. We believe many people have by now. This isn’t the first time Moore has clashed with the ‘rights holders’ of one of his own films. Last year The Weinstein Co. went after websites that hosted “Sicko”, while Moore publicly said that it was ok for people to download his movie illegally. “I’m not a big believer in our copyright laws. I think they’re way too restrictive,” he said at the time.
TorrentFreak also notes that Moore said in interviews in 2004 that he felt that "information, art and ideas should be shared."
So, it looks like he wasn't being hypocritical as I earlier wondered. In fact, he opened the free download of his latest effort to sites he knew that would end up violating copyright laws on purpose. So, instead of lying about where the movie would be free, he is actually attempting to thwart copyright laws, even of his own product.
Like I said, it's all well and good when you already have your millions, but I wonder how those struggling artists who's work Moore is advocating should be free for everyone would respond to Moore's activism against the copyright laws that could make them rich and already DID make Moore rich?
(Photo credit: BBC.com)
