Uri Geller making Youtube pull down James Randi's criticism?

Moochie said:
Yeah, the EFF has had some success in that area.

http://blip.tv/file/169553

M.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I was thinking. That situation has a lot in common with this one. How great would it be to see a video like that of Uri Geller?

Somehow, I've actually managed to lose more respect for that man. In my book, there is almost nothing worse than trampling the free speech to protect your own ego.
 
delphi_ote said:
Exactly what I was thinking. That situation has a lot in common with this one. How great would it be to see a video like that of Uri Geller?

Somehow, I've actually managed to lose more respect for that man. In my book, there is almost nothing worse than trampling the free speech to protect your own ego.
Click to expand...

Geller and Popoff really deserve another takedown, IMO.

M.
 
e-sabbath said:
In cases such as this where 'we' are third parties to the case, it really is not as effective as being a first party. Standing issues. If you would like Mr. Gellar hoist by his own legal petard, it is best to be a first party.
Click to expand...

That's why I was hoping the JREF could put the videos (back) on YouTube. It would seem to be more effective for it to be the JREF vs. Explorologist LTD. It could even be the case that whoever did post them in the first place doesn't care, doesn't check that e-mail/YouTube account anymore, or any number of things.

delphi_ote said:
We're dealing with YouTube and the DMCA here, so this might be useful.
Click to expand...

Am I on ignore? I posted that a little ways back... :p (Kidding, I think my ramblings were a little wordy and unnecessarily complicated.. I was getting excited finding stuff..)
 
If the JREF uploads the file, but is not the copyright owner, it is still not the strongest link. Which is why I suggested creating something, using fair use clips, but enough production and intro to make it a creative work, worthy of independent copyright.

The one with the highlighting of the spoon may or may not qualify, I can not judge, it seems a bit of an edge case.
 
Kilgore Trout said:
Am I on ignore? I posted that a little ways back... :p (Kidding, I think my ramblings were a little wordy and unnecessarily complicated.. I was getting excited finding stuff..)
Click to expand...
Yes. I have you on ignore, so I can't read anything you post. Not even that. :D
 
zombiebex said:
Richard: I was thinking of doing the same thing, but the video you made is a bit confusing. Maybe a voice over explaining how the trick is done?
Click to expand...

I was thinking of that, but the video I put up is in reply to this video and linked from the page. Anyone seeing it and them my video will have no doubt of what it's showing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MWrVJqQDSY

I wonder what Geller thinks when he sees these videos, clearly showing what he is doing? Does his mind reject it? Is he so lost in the the 'Uri Geller' character after all these years that he can no longer tell performance from reality? Or, is he just sticking to the same line of deny, deny, deny? Whatever is going on in his head, the evidence is there for all to see.
 
Are there any pro-Geller videos, not posted by him, that remain? If not, then they should be taken down for violations as well.

There's always Google Video, DailyMotion, and if all else fails... Pornotube.
 
LOL.This video was posted in Conjurer's Corner a while back!
These are the people we should be exposing!! :D
 
I think Moochie and Kilgore Trout have hit on the more logical answer. IMHO it's too coincidental that there's a big lawsuit pending just when a lot of material that's possibly been infringing on copyrights is being taken down.

While I have no doubt that Geller or his representation have been trying to get Uri-exposing vids removed through any method they can, it's a lot more likely that someone at YouTube, in the face of the Viacom suit, is going back and finally looking at the huge pile of copyright infringement protests they've received over the years, and taking down doubtful material. They've probably been consigning complaint notices to "file 13" for years, and now want to show that they're making an effort.

There was much hue and cry about "victory for the good side" on the CT boards last week that a lot of YouTube and MySpace videos were being removed, apparently for the same reasons. YouTube doesn't have the resources to check every item, so in a broad-brush defence, they want to be able to say in court, "Well, any time a possible copyright infringement is raised, we remove the offending item until the poster can prove he/she has rights to the material or that it's in the public domain."

It's sort of like proofing 70 year olds at Shea Stadium. No one really thinks the guy with the walker looks to be under-aged, but if you can defend yourself by saying "we proof 100% of our customers", no one can accuse you of lax standards.

I'd love this to be proof of over-reaching by Uri and his evil minions, but I think it's more likely to be YouTube catching up on reams of old complaints.
 
Richard said:
I was thinking of that, but the video I put up is in reply to this video and linked from the page. Anyone seeing it and them my video will have no doubt of what it's showing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MWrVJqQDSY

I wonder what Geller thinks when he sees these videos, clearly showing what he is doing? Does his mind reject it? Is he so lost in the the 'Uri Geller' character after all these years that he can no longer tell performance from reality? Or, is he just sticking to the same line of deny, deny, deny? Whatever is going on in his head, the evidence is there for all to see.
Click to expand...

Waitasecond... people needed a reply to that video? For the first 12 seconds I was watching the yellow part of the key and didn't realize that I should have been watching the shiny end. That was a demonstration of unbridled mental power at its finest? Oh boy.

BTW -- Those are great videos posted on the other thread. :D
 
Foolmewunz said:
I think Moochie and Kilgore Trout have hit on the more logical answer. IMHO it's too coincidental that there's a big lawsuit pending just when a lot of material that's possibly been infringing on copyrights is being taken down.

While I have no doubt that Geller or his representation have been trying to get Uri-exposing vids removed through any method they can, it's a lot more likely that someone at YouTube, in the face of the Viacom suit, is going back and finally looking at the huge pile of copyright infringement protests they've received over the years, and taking down doubtful material. They've probably been consigning complaint notices to "file 13" for years, and now want to show that they're making an effort.

There was much hue and cry about "victory for the good side" on the CT boards last week that a lot of YouTube and MySpace videos were being removed, apparently for the same reasons. YouTube doesn't have the resources to check every item, so in a broad-brush defence, they want to be able to say in court, "Well, any time a possible copyright infringement is raised, we remove the offending item until the poster can prove he/she has rights to the material or that it's in the public domain."

It's sort of like proofing 70 year olds at Shea Stadium. No one really thinks the guy with the walker looks to be under-aged, but if you can defend yourself by saying "we proof 100% of our customers", no one can accuse you of lax standards.

I'd love this to be proof of over-reaching by Uri and his evil minions, but I think it's more likely to be YouTube catching up on reams of old complaints.
Click to expand...

It could have been a complaint filed years ago, but no matter how you look at it, it's Uri trying to squash criticism. Even if it took a year to come to fruition.

And since someone here re-uploaded it again, and it was almost immediately pulled, that really makes me think they're still active.
 
Foolmewunz said:
I'd love this to be proof of over-reaching by Uri and his evil minions, but I think it's more likely to be YouTube catching up on reams of old complaints.
Click to expand...

Not running across any evidence of this. Youtube have always taken down in responce to a DMCA fileing. It's just that more are being filed at the moment.
 
Here is the company's listing at Companies House.

Exploroligist Ltd

For a modest sum you should be able to get more complete information, including a list of shareholders (or members, in the jargon, which is the important test of interest)
 
Geckko said:
Here is the company's listing at Companies House.

Exploroligist Ltd

For a modest sum you should be able to get more complete information, including a list of shareholders (or members, in the jargon, which is the important test of interest)
Click to expand...

Some of us are way ahead of you. :)

There are only two people: Uri Geller and Shipi Strang. Virtually no assets in the company.
 
CFLarsen said:
Some of us are way ahead of you. :)

There are only two people: Uri Geller and Shipi Strang. Virtually no assets in the company.
Click to expand...

Are the corporate statements vailable, on-line or otherwise?

If so, do they list the value of the videos in question as assets?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom