»Oh the irony...Matrix fans are a bunch of Blue Pill takers.«

Because most people in the field are white. We make wrong presumptions all the time. I might presume that my Darjeeling tea was made by an Indian (someone born in India) when in fact it may have been made by a Nepali immigrant. Oh no! I have an unwarranted prejudice for Indian people! - Give me a break!

I might presume that the white wine I drink comes from white grapes. Actually the colour comes from the skins so I might turn out to be drinking wine made from the juice of black grapes. While I'm sure this will be turned against me, I think this is the main point....

Sophia Stewart is a perfectly normal name for a white woman. Some people heard the name and imagined a white woman. What an error to make!

Perhaps it was bad to presume she was female too? I didn't make any presumptions about race myself, but I DID presume she was female. For all I could have known she could have been transgender or a haemaphrodite. Was I making a serious error of presumption?


This whole discussion is nonsense. There are certain FACTS involved here which are clearly available to us now.

1) The Wachowski Brothers directed the movie
2) Their special effects team used revolutionary techniques to produce effects.
3) The Wachowki Brothers got fantastic performances from Hugo Weaving and Laurence Fishburne, not to mention a damn good performance from Keanu Reeves (who many consider to be a poor actor)

Whatever Sophia Stewart did, the Wachowski Brothers STILL did acheived great things in making The Matrix. This I think is where Matrix fans are really hurt. We are told that we should hate what the Wachowski Brothers have given us for the sole reason that they didn't WRITE it.

My answer that is HOW DARE YOU? How dare you tell us what films we SHOULD and SHOULDN'T like.

A forgery of Rembrandt may cause terrible legal upsets, but it still looks like a Rembrandt and can still be appreciated for its beauty. You are telling us that we would have to say that a forgery was not only not painted by the artist we thought it was, but that it is not beautiful either!

The Matrix movies are brilliant, no matter who wrote them.

fatpie. Not only most people in the FIELD are white, but most people in the US (and in the world) in general. That's why i posted the census for "greayrevealed" to look at. Now if we move to the selected field of writers, perhaps , blacks are NOT EVEN 12% but a lot less. So...i think these 2 comments cover his question.

I again agree with all the rest you just posted.

And all this is said in the case thay really didi steal it.

This has nothing to do with ends and means but rather a simple matter of givng credit where credit is due. Equitable relief (the court telling someone to do or not do something) is generally only granted where damages (the court telling someone to pay a certain amount to the plaintiff) are inadequate. That does not seem to be the case here. If successful, Sophia Stewart will get a boat load of money and perhaps royalties on future profits. It is highly unlikely that she will have any say over the use or destruction of the movie.

As far as IP is concerned, it is rare that somone would sell their copyright. More likely they would licence specific aspects of it for specific purposes. The WGA standard agreement is an example of that. The scenario of Harry Potter being printed on toilet paper and the publishers getting away with it is simply absurd.

Education is rather meaningless when it comes to creative endeavors. Most art critics are well educated idiots who have no talent themselves, so the spend their time judging other people's talent. Whether the Dubya Brothers or Sophia Stewart are either high school educated or PhDs is irrelevant and immaterial. Look at Quinten Tarantino: he is a guy that went to films rather than film school.

In short there are many grey areas that will have to be explored in the upcoming trial.

My opinon is that there will be some sort of settlement, both sides will claim some sort of victory, and Sophia Stewart will still protest that she could have proved her claim if she had enough money and if the white media establishment was not against her.

Imhotep397 wrote:

<Whatever is shown in Sophia Stewart's case, it still remains true that The Matrix movies were directed by the Wachowski Brothers. The Oscars were not for the script, they were mostly for special effects for which Stewart could not take no credit even if she wins her case.> So again, here's another person that doesn't care where it came from as long as the Wachowskis get credit for it. So I guess for him "The ends DO justify the means." If Stewart's case is proven right, without the original manuscript there would have been no film, no effects, absolutely nothing and the Wachowskis would still be considered mediocre filmmakers/ comic book creators with high school diplomas. Sophia Stewart, on the other hand, went to one of the best film schools in the country on the graduate level and USC doesn't let everyone in, ask Steven Spielberg. Sophia Stewart claims to have written the movie treatment concurrently with the book and based on her background I have no reason to believe that that didn't happen. Apparently the number of characters, the mannerisms of the characters, the dialogue and the plot structure even the literal descriptions of the visual effects are virtually identical with only names being changed. Why should the Wachowskis get ANY credit if they are thieves? To be honest I don't even believe I'm discussing this. <If Harry Potter turned out not to be written by J.K Rowling, the actual author could not request that the movies based on those Harry Potter books be destroyed - what they COULD ask for though would be royalties.> "could not ask?" This is totally this person's opinion that he attempted to slide in as fact. I'm going to have to educate you on the business of the entertainment industry. Here's what factually can happen: J.K. Rowling writes the book, but in order to have it published she must sell "It", the intellectual property, to a publishing company. (which is owned by Warner Bros.) Once she sells the Intellectual Property she has no control over what happens to it after that unless it is specifically stated in the contract of sale. If Warner Bros. wants to print the book on toilet paper rolls, unless the contract of sale says they can't she can do absolutely nothing about it. She could politely request that they didn't do that and they could tell her to go to Hell, because they own the book. She can't say who, how, or when the screenplay is written, she also can't say who will, produce, direct, or act in the eventual film unless it's in the the contract of sale, which, publishing companies almost never would agree to. The point is; there is NO GREY AREA in intellectual property ownership and it's a two way street. You either own the IP or you don't and if you don't it's completely worthless to you violate those laws you have ZERO LEVERAGE. Ownership of intellectual property is foundation of global business. If what she is saying is correct Sophia Stewart could request that Warner Brothers recall/refund every copy of the Matrix request and request that they send apology letters to every responding customer and destroy all the original film prints. It would be totally up to Judge at that point. If that were to happen the only recourse Warner Brothers would have to recuperate their money would be to sue Joel Silver and the Wachowskis because the contracts that they signed with Warner Brothers had to have stated that they were the owners of the copyright, falsely. The money Warner Brothers spent to produce and distribute the film would have absolutley no bearing on the judgement of the court case.

This has nothing to do with ends and means but rather a simple matter of givng credit where credit is due. Equitable relief (the court telling someone to do or not do something) is generally only granted where damages (the court telling someone to pay a certain amount to the plaintiff) are inadequate. That does not seem to be the case here. If successful, Sophia Stewart will get a boat load of money and perhaps royalties on future profits. It is highly unlikely that she will have any say over the use or destruction of the movie.

As far as IP is concerned, it is rare that somone would sell their copyright. More likely they would licence specific aspects of it for specific purposes. The WGA standard agreement is an example of that. The scenario of Harry Potter being printed on toilet paper and the publishers getting away with it is simply absurd.

Education is rather meaningless when it comes to creative endeavors. Most art critics are well educated idiots who have no talent themselves, so the spend their time judging other people's talent. Whether the Dubya Brothers or Sophia Stewart are either high school educated or PhDs is irrelevant and immaterial. Look at Quinten Tarantino: he is a guy that went to films rather than film school.

In short there are many grey areas that will have to be explored in the upcoming trial.

My opinon is that there will be some sort of settlement, both sides will claim some sort of victory, and Sophia Stewart will still protest that she could have proved her claim if she had enough money and if the white media establishment was not against her.

Imhotep397 wrote:

<Whatever is shown in Sophia Stewart's case, it still remains true that The Matrix movies were directed by the Wachowski Brothers. The Oscars were not for the script, they were mostly for special effects for which Stewart could not take no credit even if she wins her case.> So again, here's another person that doesn't care where it came from as long as the Wachowskis get credit for it. So I guess for him "The ends DO justify the means." If Stewart's case is proven right, without the original manuscript there would have been no film, no effects, absolutely nothing and the Wachowskis would still be considered mediocre filmmakers/ comic book creators with high school diplomas. Sophia Stewart, on the other hand, went to one of the best film schools in the country on the graduate level and USC doesn't let everyone in, ask Steven Spielberg. Sophia Stewart claims to have written the movie treatment concurrently with the book and based on her background I have no reason to believe that that didn't happen. Apparently the number of characters, the mannerisms of the characters, the dialogue and the plot structure even the literal descriptions of the visual effects are virtually identical with only names being changed. Why should the Wachowskis get ANY credit if they are thieves? To be honest I don't even believe I'm discussing this. <If Harry Potter turned out not to be written by J.K Rowling, the actual author could not request that the movies based on those Harry Potter books be destroyed - what they COULD ask for though would be royalties.> "could not ask?" This is totally this person's opinion that he attempted to slide in as fact. I'm going to have to educate you on the business of the entertainment industry. Here's what factually can happen: J.K. Rowling writes the book, but in order to have it published she must sell "It", the intellectual property, to a publishing company. (which is owned by Warner Bros.) Once she sells the Intellectual Property she has no control over what happens to it after that unless it is specifically stated in the contract of sale. If Warner Bros. wants to print the book on toilet paper rolls, unless the contract of sale says they can't she can do absolutely nothing about it. She could politely request that they didn't do that and they could tell her to go to Hell, because they own the book. She can't say who, how, or when the screenplay is written, she also can't say who will, produce, direct, or act in the eventual film unless it's in the the contract of sale, which, publishing companies almost never would agree to. The point is; there is NO GREY AREA in intellectual property ownership and it's a two way street. You either own the IP or you don't and if you don't it's completely worthless to you violate those laws you have ZERO LEVERAGE. Ownership of intellectual property is foundation of global business. If what she is saying is correct Sophia Stewart could request that Warner Brothers recall/refund every copy of the Matrix request and request that they send apology letters to every responding customer and destroy all the original film prints. It would be totally up to Judge at that point. If that were to happen the only recourse Warner Brothers would have to recuperate their money would be to sue Joel Silver and the Wachowskis because the contracts that they signed with Warner Brothers had to have stated that they were the owners of the copyright, falsely. The money Warner Brothers spent to produce and distribute the film would have absolutley no bearing on the judgement of the court case.

[quote="Fatpie42"]So if I have a t-shirt with the Nike logo printed on it (ie. not made by Nike), Nike are allowed to ask me to "destroy" my t-shirt?

That's BS!

[quote]

Actually, they can and they have. Pirated merchandise is routinely destroyed.

I dont believe this topic can ever be resolved, even with a court decision, there will still be stubborn parties on both sides that wont give in.

In my opinion, im not choosing sides...but it seems like whenever something is highly successful, theres always some theft or hidden motive around it....this problem is likely to never be resolved, so im not picking a side.

And to respond to something Allone posted earlier, even the movie Kung Pow had The One in it.

greyrevealed wrote:

Quote: Quote: I also learned that she was black, a lot later. I had formed my (preliminary) opinion on the case assuming she was white. I think others did too. ...therion ... why would you, or anyone else here make that assumption? ... greyrevealed Demographics perhaps? Gives you the best odds in the absense of anyother information. If we were talking about basketball players instead of screenwriters, what do you thing the reasonable assumption about race would be? ...66scorpio ... if this is what the typical train of thought is here on this forum, then maybe i should leave it be. in answer to your revealing question... it would depend on what level the play. almost anyone knows that there are more whites playing basketball across the nation in the schoolyards, elementary, high school and at the college level, then any other ethnic types. it is only at the professional level in this country that blacks are featured in greater number percentages... and that represents a tiny percentage of what is commonly referred to as a basketball player. i still don't understand how in 2005, one automatically assumes that a screenwriter is white. educate me.

If I have to clarify this then I wonder what type of people I am dealing with here. Perhaps I should have specified that I was referring to multi-million dollar professional basketball players. To me, they are more analogous to the multimillion dollar screenwriters that work in Hollywood.

We could play all sorts of word games about the definition of assume and presume et al. My point is that there are certain statistical realities that people will base their perceptions on. Despite Tiger Woods, Vijay Singh and that Korean teenage girl whose name evades me, if someone mentions "golf pro" then you immediately think of a white male because it is the logical image to consider when you take into account the demographics of the top 100 players.

It really didn't matter if Sophia Stewart is black or white until SHE made an issue out of it.

Imhotep397 wrote:

<I am not supporting the Wachowskis over Stewart. I am merely claiming to like the movies, and what's so wrong with that?> There's nothing wrong with that as long as you would feel the same way if it were you that got ripped, or if it was someone else that claimed they got ripped off, like say George Lucas. If you were saying something like "Well, until my (or George's) case is proven in court, I'll just enjoy the movies."

As you read this, someone somewhere is ripping me off. I am not involved in movie industry (yet), but have clear title to a science fiction board game. There is a UK producer making accessories to this and selling them at a profit. There may be a US producer doing this as well ( I am Canadian).

There seems to be two basic reasons why I cannot rectify the situation while Sophia Stewart gets a great deal of wordage here.

First is that the money involved for me is probably in the 5-figure range, or perhaps low 6-figures. Stewart's suit is 9-figures. So there is 1,000 times the money on the line and therefore 1000 times more of a windfall for lawyers to advance the case.

Secondly is that as a thirty-something white male - healthy, straight and without some obscure religious affiliation - I cannot garner the support that is given to a black female who "fights da man!"

What I have never done is to suggest to any of my fans that they stop playing the game, enjoying the game, or refuse to purchase any accessories even if they are not authorized by me. I got into the business because I enjoyed it and I liked to see other people enjoy what I had done.

I can perfectly understand that Sophia Stewart may feel aggrieved in that she thinks that someone is taking credit for her work. What I find less appealing is the resort to racial/gender conspiracy theroies. To be sure "just because y0u are paranoid doesn't mean they AREN'T out to get you". However, the whole thing smells of a money grab.

The blanc de noir phenomenon is an excellent illustration. "Blanc de noir" seems to be a much more refined way of referring to an ethnic traitor rather than calling someone an "Oreo" or a "Banana".

Fatpie42 wrote:

I might presume that the white wine I drink comes from white grapes. Actually the colour comes from the skins so I might turn out to be drinking wine made from the juice of black grapes. While I'm sure this will be turned against me, I think this is the main point....

The Therion wrote:

fatpie. Not only most people in the FIELD are white, but most people in the US (and in the world) in general. That's why i posted the census for "greayrevealed" to look at.

Whites are NOT the dominate population in the world. Out of 5 billion people on the planet 2 billion are asian and they aren't classified as white or caucasian.

66Scorpio wrote:

As you read this, someone somewhere is ripping me off. I am not involved in movie industry (yet), but have clear title to a science fiction board game. There is a UK producer making accessories to this and selling them at a profit. There may be a US producer doing this as well ( I am Canadian). There seems to be two basic reasons why I cannot rectify the situation while Sophia Stewart gets a great deal of wordage here. First is that the money involved for me is probably in the 5-figure range, or perhaps low 6-figures. Stewart's suit is 9-figures. So there is 1,000 times the money on the line and therefore 1000 times more of a windfall for lawyers to advance the case.

Stewart has brought the case on so she has to fund the fight for it. Which is why she's asking for money from supporters. And while some things are on contingency of her winning other things require cash upfront so she could very possible not be able to continue the case if she doesn't raise enough money. Also except for fan sites this case is NOT a big deal in the rest of the world. MOST people haven't even heard of the case unless they were told by a fan or run across it online.

Quote:

Secondly is that as a thirty-something white male - healthy, straight and without some obscure religious affiliation - I cannot garner the support that is given to a black female who "fights da man!"

In this case you are "da man". You can't be a part of the majority and enjoy the advantages that comes with it then be upset because you can't claim any of the FEW advantages the minority may get. Trust me you don't have to deal with the HALF the bullshit a BLACK FEMALE has to put up with in a white and male dominated society. And while no one on this board has said it I have read a few places where people have said they REFUSE to believe a black woman could write something as deep as that story.

Quote:

What I have never done is to suggest to any of my fans that they stop playing the game, enjoying the game, or refuse to purchase any accessories even if they are not authorized by me. I got into the business because I enjoyed it and I liked to see other people enjoy what I had done.

neither has she... cut and paste anything where she said that.

Quote:

I can perfectly understand that Sophia Stewart may feel aggrieved in that she thinks that someone is taking credit for her work. What I find less appealing is the resort to racial/gender conspiracy theroies. To be sure "just because y0u are paranoid doesn't mean they AREN'T out to get you". However, the whole thing smells of a money grab.

and what do you call your case?[/quote]

alex_the_droog wrote:

66Scorpio wrote: What I have never done is to suggest to any of my fans that they stop playing the game, enjoying the game, or refuse to purchase any accessories even if they are not authorized by me. I got into the business because I enjoyed it and I liked to see other people enjoy what I had done. neither has she... cut and paste anything where she said that.

Alex, it was Imhotep397's main argument against me! I was saying that it is insulting to say that I shouldn't be allowed to enjoy the matrix movies simply because they weren't written by the directors:

Imhotep397 wrote:

<I am not supporting the Wachowskis over Stewart. I am merely claiming to like the movies, and what's so wrong with that?> There's nothing wrong with that as long as you would feel the same way if it were you that got ripped, or if it was someone else that claimed they got ripped off, like say George Lucas. If you were saying something like "Well, until my (or George's) case is proven in court, I'll just enjoy the movies."

That was all that was left of Imhotep's argument after I had accepted that:

(a) Sophia Stewart MIGHT have written the matrix, but we have as yet to see enough evidence of this and are unlikely to until after the trial

(b) Sophia Stewart could have directed the movie if she was a graduate of a film school, but she didn't direct the movies so she can only claim credit for writing something upon which the movies are based. (If she DID write it obviously she is entitled to certain rights - the most obvious being royalties worth millions of dollars)

(c) Sophia Stewart may have written the film treatment, but since I have never heard this claim before and since she was meant to be giving the Wachowskis comic book ideas, not film treatments, this seems to be even more reason to take a sceptical view of the claims until after the trial when we have all the facts.


Here are some facts:

The Wachowski Brothers are legally to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

The movies were directed and overseen by the Wachowski Brothers.

The Matrix does not have a substantial resemblance to any of the Terminator movies.

The Matrix Trilogy rocked my world.

"And while no one on this board has said it I have read a few places where people have said they REFUSE to believe a black woman could write something as deep as that story. "

There are some racist idiots out there. What are you gonna do?

I say we round up all the inbreeding scallies with their intolerant ways and send them to the gulag! *kidding*

Quote:

Whites are NOT the dominate population in the world. Out of 5 billion people on the planet 2 billion are asian and they aren't classified as white or caucasian.

Υou're missing the point. But even so, the population is not 5 billion, its 6.5. And by white we were intending "not black" because you said that black women are not treated right.

But even so, we're talking US. And in Us the numbers i posted are correct. So...i DID educate you, and you can now stop arguing about why we assumed she was white in the beggining.

Thanks.

The Therion wrote:

Υou're missing And by white we were intending "not black" because you said that black women are not treated right.

WTF? by white you meant not black? you said: Not only most people in the FIELD are white, but most people in the US (and in the world) in general.
how is anyone supposed to conclude that you meant not black from that statement or that you weren't comparing the general population?

Quote:

and you can now stop arguing about why we assumed she was white in the beggining. Thanks.

i wasn't arguing that....i was correcting your world population statement.[/quote]

Quote:

WTF? by white you meant not black? you said: Not only most people in the FIELD are white, but most people in the US (and in the world) in general. how is anyone supposed to conclude that you meant not black from that statement or that you weren't comparing the general population

Because we were talking of whether we had reason to believe she was NOT black.So only that race (african) was of interest. And compared to the Africans, the non-Africans are a LOT more. But EVEN if we exclude asians, the africans are still less than the rest. But anyway, maybe i dodnt put it very well, maybe you didnt get it right away.No biggie.

Quote:

i wasn't arguing that....i was correcting your world population statement.

You were arguing that before. And only on the last post you just corrected the population statement. (by the way, why ? if you got the point, that was unnecessary...anyway). I'm glad we got it out of the way.

So was what I said ok?

If Sophia Stewart wrote the Matrix how did The W bros. get their hands on the script? I mean she didn't make a big deal about this when the original Matrix hit theatres or did she? I don't know much about this woman I don't really care but it seems someone tries to blame another successful person for stealing their ideas. Whether she's black or not doesn't matter it just takes a deep and rooted person to write a script like the Matrix. If the W bros did steal her idea she should have got the ball rolling before they did. You snooze you lose.

The Therion wrote:

Because we were talking of whether we had reason to believe she was NOT black.So only that race (african) was of interest. And compared to the Africans, the non-Africans are a LOT more. But EVEN if we exclude asians, the africans are still less than the rest. But anyway, maybe i dodnt put it very well, maybe you didnt get it right away.No biggie.

you're right you didn't put it very well and you're still wrong.
in terms of world population africans rank third after asians and indians so again...what the fuck are you talking about?

Quote:

You were arguing that before. And only on the last post you just corrected the population statement. (by the way, why ? if you got the point, that was unnecessary...anyway). I'm glad we got it out of the way.

the only comment I made concerning race was in response to 66scorpio's comment:

66scorpio wrote:

Secondly is that as a thirty-something white male - healthy, straight and without some obscure religious affiliation - I cannot garner the support that is given to a black female who "fights da man!"

reread the posts and see where you got confused.

Jermaine101 wrote:

If the W bros did steal her idea she should have got the ball rolling before they did. You snooze you lose.

thats why we have laws AGAINST thievery.

Quote:

you're right you didn't put it very well and you're still wrong. in terms of world population africans rank third after asians and indians so again...what the fuck are you talking about?

First off, i'm trying to be polite here, but it seems it will not work with you. Anyway, the point is YOU didnt get the idea. Perhaps YOU need to read some posts,and ask yourself if all this talk about how many the Africans are has any value. Especially since i showed you why we thought she was white. Let me say it again so it gets through your skull : Africans in the USA are 12% Get it? Now talk about world african popylation all you want.


PS: and by the way, i dont think I'm wrong even about world population. Your problem is that you're talking about specific races,while i'm talking "african"/"non-african". Which was the point of the post upon which all this started. Now find something intresting to present here. This is not significant.Bye.

The Therion wrote:

First off, i'm trying to be polite here, but it seems it will not work with you. Anyway, the point is YOU didnt get the idea. Perhaps YOU need to read some posts,and ask yourself if all this talk about how many the Africans are has any value. Especially since i showed you why we thought she was white. Let me say it again so it gets through your skull : Africans in the USA are 12% Get it? Now talk about world african popylation all you want.

its understood what the US population is but then YOU said in the world which is what I addressed.

Quote:

PS: and by the way, i dont think I'm wrong even about world population. Your problem is that you're talking about specific races,while i'm talking "african"/"non-african". Which was the point of the post upon which all this started. Now find something intresting to present here. This is not significant.Bye.

Not only most people in the FIELD are white, but most people in the US (and in the world) in general.

That statement indicates to ANYONE else but you that you mean that most people in the world are white. thats how it reads there is NO indication that you meant "non-black".
if you can't or refuse to see that then thats YOUR problem.

and you're right this is beneath me.

Quote:

PS: and by the way, i dont think I'm wrong even about world population. Your problem is that you're talking about specific races,while i'm talking "african"/"non-african". Which was the point of the post upon which all this started. Now find something intresting to present here. This is not significant.Bye.

Not only most people in the FIELD are white, but most people in the US (and in the world) in general.

That statement indicates to ANYONE else but you that you mean that most people in the world are white. thats how it reads there is NO indication that you meant "non-black".
if you can't or refuse to see that then thats YOUR problem.

and you're right this is beneath me.[/quote]

Point is, a lot of people are white. I bet 90% of the people on these forums are white. Ergo, people thought she was white.

with all due respect...
this discussion of how race enters into our understanding, and thus our inferences about this case is not beneath any of us. we all should look at how our racial bias effects the way we view what should be an unrelated circumstance.

many on this board claim that this is not an issue of race and then are the first to make assumptions based solely on race. when we look at the movie industry it may be easy to apply racial dynamics to movies actually made in this country, but the scriptwriting thing is different. if anyone here believes that this is a practice either limited to, or completely dominated by whites, than they are mistaken.
if the race of a person enters our thoughts as an assumption when adressing an arbitrary script than the opportunity for objectivity is limited.

to then believe that this is a problem only for the person making the assumption, is not entirely accurate. a great degree of racial discrimination occurs when, based on a project, the receiver falsely assumes that the producer belongs to a specific ethnic group and then is disappointed.

it is not for me to say whether or not some of the people on this board won't be able to see beyond their particular racial bias, but i will say that the opportunity exists here, even in the course of frivilous conversation to grow past these limitations.

this is neither beneath, or above us, but is rather... where we live.

... i have mentioned on this board before, that the wachowski bros. had openly solicited for ideas from within the comic industry. they obviously drew from many sources in the execution of "the matrix". the problem here lies in what they pitched with... which would translate to what the "source" material was. they own no copyrights to any original script... and neither does cameron for the terminator.

joel silver is supposed to have brought the bros. to warner... what did they bring with them when they had not written a script? larry w. has testified in a related case, that he had handwritten notes "longhand" on tissue paper... i'm sure that it would take more than that to get silver to "sign on". at some point some of this stuff is too obvious.

from inside the industry, the sentiment is that this sort of thing is common place. the only difference here, is that ms. stewart brought her case to the feds first for investigation before bringing a suit before the court. this is precedent setting. this is the reason why the discussion is so widespread on this case.

there are many similiar circumstances in the courts... ask eddie murphy (life, coming to america, harlem nights, to name a few).

Quote:

its understood what the US population is but then YOU said in the world which is what I addressed.

Which was irreelevant nonetheless.

Quote:

That statement indicates to ANYONE else but you that you mean that most people in the world are white. thats how it reads there is NO indication that you meant "non-black". if you can't or refuse to see that then thats YOUR problem.

That's just your mistaken view of how the subject was aproached here. You see, when people say "black" they only mean ONE race : the African. Thats why i used the word "white" and didnt say Caucasian, or asian, or whatever. But i guess asians are "yellow" to you. So by white i thought it was clear we were talking "non-african", as Africans are supposed to be the majorly opressed race in the developing/developed countries of the world.Can we drop the demographics now? (by the way, do you have any links that sho the race % around the world ? )
================================