»SOPHIA STEWART VICTORIOUS?«

allone wrote:

you have proven that confusticate is a word, however you have not proven that confusticated is a word. confusticated was not found by the exact same reference that you used to prove that confusticate is in fact a real word.

Oh what the hell, I have time for one more.

Let's do this logically:

---------------------

1. I have not only proven that "confusticate" is a word, I have proven that it is a VERB. Recheck the reference for clarification of that point:
   
   
   dictionary.reference.com...
   
   
   Note where it says "Part of Speech: verb."
   
   
2. Unless you claim that "confusticate" is the ONLY verb in the entire English language that cannot be conjugated, then you agree that there are various forms of the verb, although not all of them may be published.
   
   
3. Linguistics teaches us to group verbs into certain categories by pattern recognition. Verbs with the suffix "-ate" are derived from Latin verbs with the suffix "-are" and follow a specific pattern for conjugation.
   
   
4. The past-perfect form of Latin-derived "-ate" verbs (without exception) is "-ated".
   

Hooray, Steve went home!

I could have sworn this forum was about Sophia Stewart. Does anyone have a comment about Sophia Stewart? Maybe you all can argue about how to spell her name. Or maybe how it's pronounced. So-fi-a Stew-art

If you really want to know, I don't care about Sophia Stewart or her script. I was pissed at transio for implying I didn't know what I was talking about.
Here's an idea: Why not list all the reasons why this woman is an absolute lunatic:
1) No sane person with a serious plagiarism case would try to rally Internet users around her. Her counsel would have advised against it.
2) Granted that the Wachowski Brothers may have been influenced by reading the script she allegedly sent them, IT IS ENTIRELY IMPOSSIBLE THAT THE SCRIPT COULD HAVE FOUND ITS WAY TO HOLLYWOOD and spawned the Terminator saga. The Wachowski Brothers were nobodies when T1 was being written.
3) Look at her web page "The Mother of the Matrix". It is full of unsubstantiated claims, which could be considered libelous, and you bet WB is watching that page.

Oh, but I could go on and on....

i reckon i just need to be more edumacated

blind_monk wrote:

I could have sworn this forum was about Sophia Stewart. Does anyone have a comment about Sophia Stewart? Maybe you all can argue about how to spell her name. Or maybe how it's pronounced. So-fi-a Stew-art

Since you brought it up, I thought you might find it interesting that her name is an anagram for:

1. Water a sophist
   
2. A rat sophist, we
   
3. A sore twat / hips
   
4. Throw it á passé
   
5. O! His spare twat
   
6. POW! Stare at this!
   

footloosifer wrote:

1) No sane person with a serious plagiarism case would try to rally Internet users around her. Her counsel would have advised against it.

It seems that most of websites are created by other people not her. And since there is no pertinent info on it and the case hasn't really made news other than websites like these there seems to be no real problem there.

Quote:

2) Granted that the Wachowski Brothers may have been influenced by reading the script she allegedly sent them, IT IS ENTIRELY IMPOSSIBLE THAT THE SCRIPT COULD HAVE FOUND ITS WAY TO HOLLYWOOD and spawned the Terminator saga. The Wachowski Brothers were nobodies when T1 was being written.

But it is entirely possible just not probable. Who said the wachowskis were the ONLY people she sent the script to?

Quote:

3) Look at her web page "The Mother of the Matrix". It is full of unsubstantiated claims, which could be considered libelous, and you bet WB is watching that page.

Thats not her website.

Quote:

It seems that most of websites are created by other people not her. And since there is no pertinent info on it and the case hasn't really made news other than websites like these there seems to be no real problem there.

The reason why the case hasn't "made news" is most likely that it is all trumped up. Even tacit approval, such as authorizing them to use her picture, would be a huge mistake that no lawyer would allow their client to make. She would want to distance herself from all of that. What would be the desired outcome? A vendetta?

Quote:

But it is entirely possible just not probable. Who said the wachowskis were the ONLY people she sent the script to?

No! The law does not deal in the realm of infinitesimal probability. That is, the burden of proof is always on the plaintiff or accuser to prove his or her case. Just because there is a very, very slight chance that her apparently awful script became a hot commodity in Hollywood after she sent it unsolicited to some studio (I guess that's what you're implying), leading to a massive coverup, there's still no case until evidence is presented proving that the script was actually followed in the production of the film.
That protection (burden of proof) is all that stands between us and our witchburning days, which I am sad to say the Bush administration seems to want to revive.

Quote:

3) Look at her web page "The Mother of the Matrix". It is full of unsubstantiated claims, which could be considered libelous, and you bet WB is watching that page.

When I post that Sophia Stewart is an "absolute lunatic", that is called an insult. If I started a website called Sophia-Stewart-the-Insane-Bitch.com, filled with accusations that she was involved in stealing a book I had written, and had covered it up, that is totally illegal. No matter who is the owner of the site.

However, I stand corrected, alex_the_droog, that is apparently not "her" webiste.

footloosifer wrote:

No! The law does not deal in the realm of infinitesimal probability. That is, the burden of proof is always on the plaintiff or accuser to prove his or her case. Just because there is a very, very slight chance that her apparently awful script became a hot commodity in Hollywood after she sent it unsolicited to some studio....

You're making a lot of assumptions in your post. Just because she's accusing more than one person of stealing her script doesn't mean her accusation involves sharing of information between them. It's probable that she sent her script to the W's AND many others. I don't see where any accusation states that the W's shared the script with the creators of T1.

footloosifer wrote:

When I post that Sophia Stewart is an "absolute lunatic", that is called an insult. If I started a website called Sophia-Stewart-the-Insane-Bitch.com, filled with accusations that she was involved in stealing a book I had written, and had covered it up, that is totally illegal.

Incorrect. Stating that Sophia Stewart an "absolute lunatic" (in the manner that you have) in a public Internet forum is libel, as it is damaging to her reputation. The reason it is libel is because you back up the statement with an argument (albeit a baseless one) that attempts to impress on others that she actually IS insane, rather than using the statement as an off-handed insult (e.g. "that crazy bitch"). However, there is no way of prosecuting you due to the anonymous nature of Internet boards.

footloosifer wrote:

The reason why the case hasn't "made news" is most likely that it is all trumped up. Even tacit approval, such as authorizing them to use her picture, would be a huge mistake that no lawyer would allow their client to make. She would want to distance herself from all of that. What would be the desired outcome? A vendetta?

I agree that talking about the case while its pending isn't the smartest thing but its not like its on CNN or she's doing Larry King and Nightline. Also the case hasn't made the news big time because its not bigtime news its just a run of the mill plagarism case.

Quote:

No! The law does not deal in the realm of infinitesimal probability. That is, the burden of proof is always on the plaintiff or accuser to prove his or her case. Just because there is a very, very slight chance that her apparently awful script became a hot commodity in Hollywood after she sent it unsolicited to some studio (I guess that's what you're implying), leading to a massive coverup, there's still no case until evidence is presented proving that the script was actually followed in the production of the film. That protection (burden of proof) is all that stands between us and our witchburning days, which I am sad to say the Bush administration seems to want to revive.

True that the burden of proof is on her but so far she's won the right to pursue her claim against the WB in trial and we haven't heard any further info on the Terminator connection so it MIGHT have been dismissed for all we know.
And the script couldn't be that awful IF the WB used any part of it.

Quote:

When I post that Sophia Stewart is an "absolute lunatic", that is called an insult. If I started a website called Sophia-Stewart-the-Insane-Bitch.com, filled with accusations that she was involved in stealing a book I had written, and had covered it up, that is totally illegal. No matter who is the owner of the site.

Accusations of theivery is not illegal if there's some truth to it. Also I'm sure that Warner Brothers would have shut any website that was falsely claiming anything about them down in a heartbeat IF it weren't true.

Quote:

Incorrect. Stating that Sophia Stewart an "absolute lunatic" (in the manner that you have) in a public Internet forum is libel, as it is damaging to her reputation. The reason it is libel is because you back up the statement with an argument (albeit a baseless one) that attempts to impress on others that she actually IS insane, rather than using the statement as an off-handed insult (e.g. "that crazy bitch"). However, there is no way of prosecuting you due to the anonymous nature of Internet boards.

You seem to be equating my statements with Da Ghetto Tymz. Excuse me while I go vomit...bleeeeaargh!
By what definition does calling someone a name and attempting to justify that name become libel? As I understand it, libel is the propagation of false claims, e.g. defamation. I can call President Bush a "moron because he's stupid", "a psychopath because he kills without remorse", and whatever else I want to on the forums, and he can't stop me even though he's the most powerful law enforcement official in the country. Don't you think if what you say is true, i.e. that insulting someone is libel or defamation, all the right-wing websites that constantly claim things like, "John Kerry shot himself in the leg to get out of Vietnam," would have been shut down? But they haven't! Why? First Amendment, remember?
As for Sophia Stewart, the case against me would have to prove that she is not actually "insane" - mind you, not the legal definition of insanity, but a societally accepted one. A rather tall order.
On the other hand, the "Mother of the Matrix" site is one big defamatory statement against certain elements in the movie industry. That is, Da Ghetto Tymz seems to be claiming that the Wachowskis, Silver, WB et al, actually conspired against her and others, taking actions which put her career in danger.
What is more, she has apparently accused them of racketeering, a crime. All this leads me to conclude (as a lay observer) that she is guilty of libel or defamation of character, while I am guilty of venting my spleen.

footloosifer wrote:

First Amendment, remember?

First Amendment doesn't allow libel. It allows freedom of expression. One could not legally say, for instance, "Footlucifer's mother sells her cunt for $2 a pop to sustain her crack addiction." It is defamatory. In the same way, accusing Stewart of being insane is defamatory.

footloosifer wrote:

As for Sophia Stewart, the case against me would have to prove that she is not actually "insane" - mind you, not the legal definition of insanity, but a societally accepted one.

What mickeymouse law book are you reading? Or are you just making this shit up as you go?

That's the title.
How did you know about Mom's business venture?
Are you a customer?

Have any of you read her "The Third Eye"? It sucks. It could never get published. Her work is derivative at best and the court case will bearthe truth out.

Have any of you read Phillip Dick? or Heinlein? Bester? Haldeman?

Matrix was fairly derivative too, but it was done in a very entertaining way.

If you look at all the news on Sophia Stewart, you'll see that the positive info is all generated from sources out of the mainstream - nothing with any reputation is supporting her argument.

I've read over what she's wrote and it seems to be pretty convincing. It did seem that there were some websites that proposed to be her work, but further research proved them to be hoaxes to confuse the reader. The amount of bashing she receives on this board is weird . I would think that a community that proclaims to understand and expound upon Matrix philosiphy would be more open minded. I've got links to NPR coverage on my blog. I'll also include them here.

blackgeek.blogspot.com...

NPR Story
npr.org...
Similarities I see:
The "One".
Main character dressed in all black.
Revolution against great power with almost total control.
Prophetic fullfilment.

You guys might want to re-analyze the material in an unbiased manner there are coincidences .

Jet Li has a movie called The One. Maybe she should sue him too.

Oh, characters dressed in black, that's a new one.

People fighting against a great power, wow, that's also a new one.

Oh my god, you have got to be kidding me, prophetic fullfilment. There is so much new, never before heard of stuff in the third eye I can't believe it. She's an absolute genius.

yipman wrote:

Jet Li has a movie called The One. Maybe she should sue him too. Oh, characters dressed in black, that's a new one. People fighting against a great power, wow, that's also a new one. Oh my god, you have got to be kidding me, prophetic fullfilment. There is so much new, never before heard of stuff in the third eye I can't believe it. She's an absolute genius.

haha! Give 'em hell, yipman!

Hey guys, its been some time since i've been here. Any REAL news?

Anyway, i read the last 2-3 pages.

transio you are a litle off topic i'd say.

Also the defamation,libel,1st amendment thing....its a little complicated. One can express his opinion on another. If he wants also he can make it as a criticism, or comedy,in which cases it is allowed.

Anyway, we're off topic.

Any release of her "3rd eye" yet?

QuantumSam+yipman : well said

QuantumSam : have you read the 3rd eye ? Or just the 2 pages that are released?

Yip, FOCUS ,Stewart didn't submit any material to Jet Li at his request( Atlthough "The One" was a really bad Matrix ripoff" )

"The One" was a Hong Kong styled Matrix with less plot(can he be sued for that?)

The request for submission is the link and basis for the lawsuit. What story today hasn't been done before. If they had never had an opportunity to read her material she would have no grounds to sue.

Scenario:

I let you read and keep my class paper for fall semester for class X. Spring semester you take class X. Professor of class X notices similarities finds out through the grapevine we are friends guess who's getting a plagirism rap.

darkwoulfe : if i show you a script, and then, later on you make one that is similar, that only SUGGESTS that you took ideas and put them in your own. Perhaps you didnt. It doesnt PROVE it that way. Perhaps you took my script and forgot it in a drawrer.Noone can tell.
================================

Now, i was reading some of the MAtrix symbolisms etc and i walked on the following (we have mentioned the author, but i didnt know all the following was so) :

"The music to the freeway chase is called "Mona Lisa Overdrive"
Mona Lisa Overdrive is a book written by William Gibson. Gibson has written another book, Neuromancer. One of the first Cyberpunk novels, featuring

* "Zion"
* "The Matrix"
* "The Oracle"
* "the construct"
* "Smith"
* EMP weapons
* Only 1 survivor of an attack, sabotaged by an EMP
* a factory of babies, grown in tubes
* "Reinhold Scientific A.G." (connection to Neo's boss, Mr. Rhineheart?)
* A villian with a French accent
* connection between brains and computers via electrodes
* an enemy who was "an unthinkably powerful artificial intelligence"
* Words like "The sky was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel."
Just think of the green and blue hue in the Matrix / in Zion
* Sunglasses
* Trenchcoats
* Black clothes
* and more..."

And the "more" is matrix-explained.com....

I havent seen Gibson or any of his people, suing or anything.But according to Sophia's supporters, if Sophia had become famous from making the Matrix trilogy, then Gibson could just come out and sue easily. And he would be far more credible, as the above similarities are more in number and in association.

Thats also very suspicious but most of it could be dismissed as genre specific similarities and it would have to be proven that the material was viewed by the Matrix creators. That's where I think this differs. Not saying they paid her material any information at all but, the request for submission opens them up for litigation.

Gotta cover your ass in these things.

The Therion wrote:

"The music to the freeway chase is called "Mona Lisa Overdrive" Mona Lisa Overdrive is a book written by William Gibson. Gibson has written another book, Neuromancer. One of the first Cyberpunk novels...

I've read Neuromancer and I can tell you that if Sophia wrote the Matrix films, Gibson should sue her. Those films have so many similarities to Gibson's work that the idea that some third party is responsible for them is laughable, especially a hack like Stewart.

*[quote="darkwoulfe"]Thats also very suspicious but most of it could be dismissed as genre specific similarities and it would have to be proven that the material was viewed by the Matrix creators*

The Wachowskis have said that they are Gibson fans. And Gibson himself has said that he liked the first Matrix movie and he thought it was more like Philip K Dicks work than any of his own. This is what Gibson had to say about the Matrix.

*I was, as you can probably imagine, prepared not to like THE MATRIX. A friend finally dragged me to see it in Santa Monica, when I was taping NO MAPS FOR THESE TERRITORIES. I liked it a lot. I even went back to see it a second time in theatrical release, which is unusual for me. I thought it was more like Dicks work than mine, though more coherent, saner, than I generally take Dick to have been.

Whatever of my work may be there, it seems to me to have gotten there by exactly the kind of creative cultural osmosis I've always depended on myself. If there's NEUROMANCER in THE MATRIX, there's THE STARS MY DESTINATION and DHALGREN in NEUROMANCER, and much else besides, down to and including actual bits of embarrassingly undigested gristle.

And while I was drawing directly from those originals, and many others, the makers of THE MATRIX were drawing through a pre-existing cyberpunk esthetic, which constituted as much of a found object, for them, as science fiction did for me. From where they were, they had the added luxury of choosing bits from, say, Billy Idols Neuromancer as well.

When I began to write NEUROMANCER, there was no cyberpunk. THE MATRIX is arguably the ultimate cyberpunk artifact. Or will be, if the sequels don't blow. I hope they don't, and somehow have a hunch they won't, but I'm glad I'm not the one who has to worry about it.

The other thing I'm glad of is that a film of NEUROMANCER, whatever else I might want it to be, definitely doesnt, now, have to be THE MATRIX, or even anything very much like it*
[William Gibson]

Found it here

Nice info yipman

Thoth wrote:

It looks like it. You will have to log into the site. slccglobelink.com... Scroll down on the page below: slccglobelink.com... Good for her.