Comments on: About the “Expelled” Animation http://www.ooblick.com/weblog/2008/04/16/about-the-expelled-animation/ All the etcetera that's fit to read. Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:31:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Pauli Ojala http://www.ooblick.com/weblog/2008/04/16/about-the-expelled-animation/comment-page-1/#comment-133439 Pauli Ojala Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:36:00 +0000 http://www.ooblick.com/weblog/2008/04/16/about-the-expelled-animation/#comment-133439 <p>I wish an analogous documentary film was made concerning the DINOGLYFS or dinolits: http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/dinosaur.htm It seems that the ancient man not only saw but also documented the last megafauna (gigafauna, I should say).</p> <p>Unfortunately, these are not animated.</p> <p>pauli.ojala@gmail.com Biochemist, drop-out (Master of Sciing) http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Expelled-ID.htm</p> I wish an analogous documentary film was made concerning the DINOGLYFS or dinolits:
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/dinosaur.htm
It seems that the ancient man not only saw but also documented the last megafauna (gigafauna, I should say).

Unfortunately, these are not animated.

pauli.ojala@gmail.com
Biochemist, drop-out (Master of Sciing)
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Expelled-ID.htm

]]> By: Olorin http://www.ooblick.com/weblog/2008/04/16/about-the-expelled-animation/comment-page-1/#comment-132358 Olorin Sun, 20 Apr 2008 03:04:03 +0000 http://www.ooblick.com/weblog/2008/04/16/about-the-expelled-animation/#comment-132358 <p>The Expelled video infringes if the XVIVO video was copied, and if it has a similar expression.</p> <p>If Expelled had access to the XVIVO video, and if the two are similar, than Expelled must prove that it did <em>not</em> copy the original.</p> <p>Although both ar based upon factual cellular processes and components, there are many ways to select which one to include and exclude, and many ways to portray the ones that are included. If Expelled chose essentially the same items and showed them in a similar way, then there is infringement.</p> <p>The XVIVO video required 14 months to produce. The Expelled video was apparently done in a couple of weeks. This can be evidence of copying and similarity.</p> The Expelled video infringes if the XVIVO video was copied, and if it has a similar expression.

If Expelled had access to the XVIVO video, and if the two are similar, than Expelled must prove that it did not copy the original.

Although both ar based upon factual cellular processes and components, there are many ways to select which one to include and exclude, and many ways to portray the ones that are included. If Expelled chose essentially the same items and showed them in a similar way, then there is infringement.

The XVIVO video required 14 months to produce. The Expelled video was apparently done in a couple of weeks. This can be evidence of copying and similarity.

]]>