If Brad married can't testify against his wife--

[Guest]

I answered the question, which is not a yes or no one. I understand and acknowledge that you are admitting you have trouble reading and understanding my posts. I post for those who can.

JW, don't pay any attention to the asswhipe that so rudely, and without provocation, just posted to you. Your answer to the question was well thought out, logical and interesting to read. Which is not the case for a lot of the killjoys (like this poster) who do nothing much more than criticize the intelligent posters on this forum. There are trolls and lunatic loons who would love all intelligent antis to be run off this board. Pay them (and this one above) no mind and keep posting! You, and your posts, are welcome here.

[Guest]

Does anyone remember the poster several years back- who said she'd done some truly heinous things, things that could send her to prison if they were discovered. That's what I'm wondering about regarding spouses not being able to testify against each other...

[Guest]

It is Boring in this thread Talk to me about what is set to come in May or something new than recyling non existent boring shiit.

[Guest]

Why, what's coming in May?

[Guest]

Does anyone remember the poster several years back- who said she'd done some truly heinous things, things that could send her to prison if they were discovered. That's what I'm wondering about regarding spouses not being able to testify against each other...

You're speaking about FireWoman. Frankly, she didn't sound all there, if you know what I mean. She claims that Angie had her raped. But she never went to the authorities to report the r**** which could be easily confirmed if she had been examined for the DNA evidence. And instead of giving the goods to sites such as Gawker or RadarOnline or TMZ which will post inside scoops when vetted out, she posts allusions after allusions here.

[Guest]

Does anyone remember the poster several years back- who said she'd done some truly heinous things, things that could send her to prison if they were discovered. That's what I'm wondering about regarding spouses not being able to testify against each other...

You're speaking about FireWoman. Frankly, she didn't sound all there, if you know what I mean. She claims that Angie had her raped. But she never went to the authorities to report the r**** which could be easily confirmed if she had been examined for the DNA evidence. And instead of giving the goods to sites such as Gawker or RadarOnline or TMZ which will post inside scoops when vetted out, she posts allusions after allusions here.

I believe that poster (Firewoman) is still around, she's one who replies to 13 and says she is stalking her here. She genuinely believes that 13 is Angie, that's for sure. I wouldn't put it past a psychopath to pay to have someone really hurt in that way. ABout her not reporting it, a significant number of rapes aren't because the victim can often be in shock for weeks. The first thing they want to do is get in the shower to scrub the attacker off them. After that kind of trauma/torture, you obviously wouldn't be thinking straight and we never know what we'd do in that situation until we had to deal with it *touches wood none of us will ever have to deal with that*.

[Guest]

Why, what's coming in May?

Uhhh. let's see, May, that's the month that Brad and Angie will once again RULE Cannes, as for the lawsuit, why the heck are you bringing up DEAD ISSUES....for attention I would suppose, as most ALL FF'ing PIGS seem to crave the attention that talking and obsessing about the most Famous Couple in the WORLD tends to bring...

[Guest]

Does anyone remember the poster several years back- who said she'd done some truly heinous things, things that could send her to prison if they were discovered. That's what I'm wondering about regarding spouses not being able to testify against each other...

You're speaking about FireWoman. Frankly, she didn't sound all there, if you know what I mean. She claims that Angie had her raped. But she never went to the authorities to report the r**** which could be easily confirmed if she had been examined for the DNA evidence. And instead of giving the goods to sites such as Gawker or RadarOnline or TMZ which will post inside scoops when vetted out, she posts allusions after allusions here.

I believe that poster (Firewoman) is still around, she's one who replies to 13 and says she is stalking her here. She genuinely believes that 13 is Angie, that's for sure. I wouldn't put it past a psychopath to pay to have someone really hurt in that way. ABout her not reporting it, a significant number of rapes aren't because the victim can often be in shock for weeks. The first thing they want to do is get in the shower to scrub the attacker off them. After that kind of trauma/torture, you obviously wouldn't be thinking straight and we never know what we'd do in that situation until we had to deal with it *touches wood none of us will ever have to deal with that*.

Granted the statistics do show that most r**** victims never report the crime. Having said that, this Firewoman have made many allusions of having evidence against Angie. She could turn this evidence over to authorities.

Believe me, I do want to believe this Firewoman and I do think Angie is capable of harming someone but I tend to think it would be more of harassment with either herself or siccing her minions on her victim. To physically harm someone? That's not only too much for me to believe but even clueless Angie would know that would risk everything that she has so carefully razzled dazzled with her media manipulation. Sure many high-profile figures have risked much more with their crimes - whether white-collar or outright violent ones, but it's still too out there.

And this Firewoman keeps threatening 13 (who she does think is Angie) of exposing her but nothing has ever come out of it. Frankly, I wish these people would walk the walk instead of talk the talk. There are too many who come on this board just to yank our chains.

[mm7]

JuJuBee says:

Wouldn't it be GK Films that will be the real loser in this plagiarism suit? Well the suit is for copyright infringement and for plagarism. JoLie is named individually as a defendant and also as one of the GKF producers. GKF's principals are not personally named. At present GKF's attorneys also represent JoLie. This could lead to a conflict if the fur flies later on in an effort to put the blame solely on JoLie for this happening.

There are two different claims: copyright infringement and plagarism. Copyright infringment is about compensating an author for someone taking his copyrighted material and using it without his permission. A plaintiff does not have to prove intent for copyright infringement, just that it happened. There is also something called contributory infringement - that is probably the main claim against GKF. They did not check out the source of the material thoroughly enough or at all before disseminating the material and benefitted thereby.

Plagarism is about redressing the damage done to the author because someone else claimed his work as their own and got a boost in their reputation for doing so. This is about JoLie, not GKF.

Money damages can be assessed for plagarism and/or copyright infringement even if the movie didn't make money.

[b]Why would anyone in the industry want to risk their reputation and money by getting involved with her after this?
Have to ask someone in HW about that. I think JoLie has more on the line personally since she claimed authorship and put out all those different stories about how easy it was for her to write the script. Of course, she is viewed as a liar already. Still, a blow to the ego and reputation if the case is settled or a judgment is entered against her. GKF may view this lawsuit simply as a cost of doing business and because none of their principals are personally named, it could seen in the industry as a lesson in the necessity of source checking properly no matter who is claiming authorship.

[Guest]

Why, what's coming in May?

Uhhh. let's see, May, that's the month that Brad and Angie will once again RULE Cannes, as for the lawsuit, why the heck are you bringing up DEAD ISSUES....for attention I would suppose, as most ALL FF'ing PIGS seem to crave the attention that talking and obsessing about the most Famous Couple in the WORLD tends to bring...

[Guest]

Why, what's coming in May?

Uhhh. let's see, May, that's the month that Brad and Angie will once again RULE Cannes, as for the lawsuit, why the heck are you bringing up DEAD ISSUES....for attention I would suppose, as most ALL FF'ing PIGS seem to crave the attention that talking and obsessing about the most Famous Couple in the WORLD tends to bring...

LOL, I guess the loon was wrong about that.

[Guest]

Jolie was way to occupied preparing for the challenging role of avoiding cowpies in a field.

[Guest]

Jolie was way to occupied preparing for the challenging role of avoiding cowpies in a field.

Only when she wasn't left hanging around.

[Guest]

Any legal eagles? This might be a stupid question and I hope that you can follow it ... If they got married and it developed that Ho did plagiarize and Pitt knew and did nothing to stop production of BloodNR@pe, would his assets be compromised in any monies awarded to the actual author, despite any prenups, if some of the money put up for production of that movie came from his assets in addition to what King and company put in? After all whozat the author, is said to have contacted the MIR foundation about his book and the movie idea long before Ho wrote her screenplay, and MIR is Pitt's baby.

He did not contact the MIR Foundation with details about his book. He sent a letter addressed to Jolie to MIR Foundation to see if she would like to collaborate on a bridge. I would imagine since Jolie has nothing to do with the admin of MIR.. it got tossed in the trash after it was skimmed by a flunkie or passed on and never opened.

They would have to prove in a separate lawsuit that Bead Pitt knew it was plagiarized and still helped produce it. They will have a hard enough time proving Jolie did unless they get the judge to give them access to the email and they magically find some kind of correspondence between Sarkic and Jolie that predates her writing her script. Without that magic bullet he is S.O.o.L.