Join 3,496 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


An Inconvenient Truth
January 9, 2007 3:06 PM   Subscribe

An Inconvenient Truth (full movie, while it lasts)
posted by empath (75 comments total) 8 users marked this as a favorite

 
Is it me, or should this be deleted in 3 . . . 2 . . .
posted by MarvinTheCat at 3:07 PM on January 9, 2007


that picture looks pretty damn good for flash. looks like the site is going down, though. Is peekvid a legit outlet or a youtube clone?
posted by mwhybark at 3:11 PM on January 9, 2007


it's actually just wrapping a video hosted at dailymotion. I looked for the original daily motion clips, but could not find them.
posted by empath at 3:14 PM on January 9, 2007


I looked for the original daily motion clips, but could not find them.

Here's a dubbed version. :)
posted by soundofsuburbia at 3:23 PM on January 9, 2007


Direct link to Flash video:

Part 1
Part 2
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 3:29 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


If you want to wait a little while, you can get an honest-to-God, legit DVD for free here.
posted by champthom at 3:34 PM on January 9, 2007 [2 favorites]


That was good timing.
posted by PreteFunkEra at 3:35 PM on January 9, 2007


Re-Elect Gore!
posted by PreteFunkEra at 3:39 PM on January 9, 2007


peekvid is obviously a pirate site. I mean they basically have every show on there, and there is no way it could all be licensed. I'm not exactly sure what their plan is.

I downloaded a torrent file a couple weeks ago, but I haven't gotten around to actually watching the film.

This is a link to ISO Hunt It's your friend.
posted by delmoi at 3:39 PM on January 9, 2007


You know, call me old fashioned, but if we don't own it, and the owners haven't authorized it to be copied this way, maybe we should give the owners of the film some respect and not encourage those who post such material.

Of course, if Gore happens to be listening, why hasn't this been freely available in high definition over the web? I mean, if this is all about changing the world and moving a message along, wouldn't that be a good idea?

I'm guessing the response would be that the money gained from DVD sales could be used to further the cause...
posted by Muddler at 3:39 PM on January 9, 2007


While it lasts? Do you mean the movie or the Earth?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 3:41 PM on January 9, 2007


These people will buy a DVD copy of An Inconvenient Truth and send it to you for free
posted by PreteFunkEra at 3:58 PM on January 9, 2007


Theft.
posted by parki at 4:09 PM on January 9, 2007


Yup I would recommend going to ISOHUNT as well , plus if you use torrent you also help others get the movie !! Without moving your ass from the chair ! Double win !
posted by elpapacito at 4:12 PM on January 9, 2007


Sir No Sir and Why We Fight on Google Video.
posted by homunculus at 4:14 PM on January 9, 2007 [2 favorites]


Civil_Disobedient: Do you mind explaining how you managed to strip out the .flv link?
posted by Espy Gillespie at 4:15 PM on January 9, 2007


I didn't post the material. I posted a link to the material. More over, watching a flash movie hosted on dailymotion doesn't give you a copy of the movie to keep.
posted by empath at 4:20 PM on January 9, 2007


The site linked to Peekvid.com is pretty good for watching tv shows and movies. The wife has been using it for a month now and I've only just started catching on.
posted by furtive at 4:21 PM on January 9, 2007


Why not just link to the pirate bay?
posted by jeffburdges at 4:21 PM on January 9, 2007


>More over, watching a flash movie hosted on dailymotion doesn't give you a copy of the movie to keep.

So? Permission to watch has not been granted by the copyright holders. Its not like its less illegal and less unethical. What if you could see movies at the theater for free by sneaking in, but you're forced to sit in the worst seat in the house. Does that suddenly make it right?
posted by damn dirty ape at 4:32 PM on January 9, 2007


So i'm supposed to double check to make sure everything I see online is authorized by the copyright holder?

I should really be more careful watching videos on youtube, then.

As far as I'm concerned, the responsibility is on dailymotion to ensure that the material they offer for download is authorized. It's not my job to figure it out.
posted by empath at 4:40 PM on January 9, 2007


Do you mind explaining how you managed to strip out the .flv link?

I just looked at the code in the page. They already did the hard work, I just had to translate the encoded POST entities (%2F == "/" for example).
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:41 PM on January 9, 2007


Theft.

Oh come on. It's a political video meant to be disseminated, not a presidential election.
posted by Peter H at 4:42 PM on January 9, 2007 [3 favorites]


In my opinion, you should double check before posting to the blue.
posted by parki at 4:42 PM on January 9, 2007


And those chocolate bars I stole? They were MEANT to be eaten. And I'll shaddup now, I promise.
posted by parki at 4:43 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


It's not my job to figure it out.

A Convenient Truth.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 4:45 PM on January 9, 2007 [2 favorites]


It happens to be convenient, and also to be the law.
posted by empath at 4:47 PM on January 9, 2007


I find it funny that "Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese" is balking about copyright infringement.
posted by Peter H at 4:50 PM on January 9, 2007


For future reference, you can use UnPlug to get embedded media from dailymotion, youtube and the like.
posted by bob sarabia at 4:54 PM on January 9, 2007


Theft.

Florida 2000? Right on.

I just hope Gore gets his Oscar, no other US President has ever won one.
posted by matteo at 5:08 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


Think of all the coal that has to be burned to produce the electric power you use in watching that film! Mother Gaia weeps...
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 5:11 PM on January 9, 2007


I just hope Gore gets his Oscar, no other US President has ever won one.

And no President will have won one, even if he does win. :)
posted by The Deej at 5:12 PM on January 9, 2007


Whoa, hold on. Peekvid has links to such still-in-the-theaters films as "Blood Diamond." How can this possibly still be up and running?
posted by mapalm at 5:23 PM on January 9, 2007


But... but... having to go through authorized channels would be... [wait for it] ...Inconvenient!

And Deej, you must understand that after Bush leaves office in 2009, he will decide not to stand in the way of a lawsuit overturning the 2000 election results, therefore making everything that happened since '01 Gore's fault.
posted by wendell at 5:31 PM on January 9, 2007 [2 favorites]


Y'all should shut up and watch the movie.
posted by recurve at 5:41 PM on January 9, 2007


"Permission to watch has not been granted by the copyright holders."

copyright isn't required to watch. Copyright is required to publicly display. Buying a ticket to a movie is buying a right to enter the screening room not to see the film. There isn't anything illegal about giving people directions to an unauthorized screening, and there is nothing illegal about attending. Only the host violates copyright law.
posted by subtle_squid at 5:42 PM on January 9, 2007 [3 favorites]


Thats why if you sneak in to a movie you can be charged with trespass but the film's distributer can't sue you.
posted by subtle_squid at 5:44 PM on January 9, 2007


Look, DVDs are made of plastic, plastic is made of oil, oil damages the environment. Pirating the movie via the interwebs is clearly the most environmentally-friendly option! And before you ask, yes, all the electricity I use is from renewable sources (well, kind of).
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:44 PM on January 9, 2007


easy as torrent (s)pie
posted by mishaco at 5:47 PM on January 9, 2007


LOL Best Of Teh Web
posted by davejay at 5:53 PM on January 9, 2007


Y'all should shut up and watch the movie.

No, I really rather think that the appropriate reaction and response here is to fill up the room with even more hot air.
posted by loquacious at 6:01 PM on January 9, 2007


"This screening copy is the property of Paramount Pictures. All Rights Reserved."

That doesn't mean what it used to mean, evidently.
posted by darkstar at 6:07 PM on January 9, 2007


empath: just watched the whole movie,which I had been intending to see for some time. thanks very much.
posted by twsf at 6:13 PM on January 9, 2007


I guess Matt and Jess are glued to the Keynote.
posted by MarvinTheCat at 6:35 PM on January 9, 2007


I thought there was some discussion from Matt that linking to protected material wasn't a big concern. But hosting it was. I predict: no deletion. And ya know what... if I am wrong, you can't say "I told you so" here because no new comments can be posted then, so nyah.
posted by The Deej at 6:43 PM on January 9, 2007


If you watch a pirated movie that you otherwise wouldn't have paid to seen, who gets hurt exactly?

Seriously--what are the material consequences?
posted by mecran01 at 6:46 PM on January 9, 2007


And Deej, you must understand that after Bush leaves office in 2009, he will decide not to stand in the way of a lawsuit overturning the 2000 election results, therefore making everything that happened since '01 Gore's fault.
posted by wendell


Damn!!!! That Bush is brilliant!!! Brilliant!!!
posted by The Deej at 6:49 PM on January 9, 2007


I thought there was some discussion from Matt that linking to protected material wasn't a big concern.

On the contrary, I believe Matt has been pretty vocal about not linking to pirated material, but he is thankfully rather pragmatic in his enforcement. Gore has been pretty adamant about the dissemination of this material, going so far as to hold training conferences to help others teach the message and spread the word.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 7:19 PM on January 9, 2007


I just finishing watching it for the first time. everything blustery pundits have told me about this movie is wrong. thanks for the link!
posted by mcsweetie at 7:20 PM on January 9, 2007


Man, MetaFilter is clearly the last outpost for people who don't think filesharing is a victimless crime. It don't think it's just the Gore factor, "we like his politics so we shouldn't steal from him" - the hordes call for blood any time something possibly copyrighted gets linked up. I imagine it's the same impulse that produces "double" comments in triplicate...in the first four posts, like most people are just clicking refresh to hunt for re-posts. Y'all keep flagging and shaming; maybe *you'll* be the next lucky censor to get the keys from Matt. As for me, I line up with John Barolow:
[...]If you wanna share something - share it. If you wanna use something - use it. Try to do so ethically in the sense of don't take things without attribution.[...] Pay no attention to these people when it comes to being creative. Go ahead and do the stuff that Larry showed in the beginning of his talks and do lot of it. And every time they put a lock on - break it. And every time they pass a new law - break that.[...]
posted by Banky_Edwards at 7:26 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


I meant to rent this movie a while ago, but never got around to it. Thanks to this post, I got to see it. Cheers, empath.
posted by vorfeed at 7:44 PM on January 9, 2007


I love it when people who don't know the law argue copyright law...but I'm going to stay out of it...

There are plenty of resources on the web that will point you to statutes and cases on this sort of activity. Guess which side they come out on...
posted by Muddler at 7:57 PM on January 9, 2007


That's the MeFi I've come to love - a whole buncha comments about the messenger, not the message.

Y'all have heard about MetaTalk, haven't you?
posted by wilful at 8:03 PM on January 9, 2007


There seems to be a culture here that MetaTalk is only when you really are serious. Comments in the blue that should be in MeTa, therefore, are just the bleatings of the under-endowed.

As for this post: I just bought the DVD, haven't watched it yet. I don't mind paying for it at all. I figure it makes it easier for others to end up seeing it for free that wouldn't or can't pay for it.
posted by Goofyy at 9:03 PM on January 9, 2007


Thanks C_D. And thanks bob sarabia, unplug is excellent.
posted by Espy Gillespie at 10:32 PM on January 9, 2007


So global warming makes the earth egg-shaped, and everything look squished?
posted by The Deej at 11:05 PM on January 9, 2007


The first man who, having enclosed a piece of land, bethought himself of saying `this is mine' and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civic society. From how many crimes,wars and murders ... might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes or filling in the ditch, and crying to his fellows: `beware of listening to this impostor!'? You are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.
Jean-Jaques Rousseau
posted by sluglicker at 11:43 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


I liked the graphic of balancing bars of gold against the whole planet!
posted by The Deej at 12:07 AM on January 10, 2007


Gore is very serious, and very devoted to this (his/our) cause. His slideshow is well supported with facts, his manner excellent, his proposals viable. He is also in a unique position to present to people that can make a difference, people high up in business and politics. And he is not peddling fear: at the end, what his message say, is that changing the way we think about the planet and acting according to this new way can be very sound economic policy. In short, there's money to be made in saving the planet.

If you are going to watch this, look also for the update to "an inconvenient truth". And stop bickering about copyright and such.
posted by acrobat at 2:47 AM on January 10, 2007


champthom writes "If you want to wait a little while, you can get an honest-to-God, legit DVD for free here."

Unfortunately, it looks like it'll be quite a while - their site states that they have $64,320 worth of requested DVD's in the queue and $478.21 currently available to them.
posted by concrete at 3:27 AM on January 10, 2007


Well put acrobat.

I am definitely right-leaning, politically, but more than that, I am truth-leaning. (Not just truthiness.)

The fear among the the right-wing is that global warming will be used as a way to sacrifice our sovereignity, or as a tool to redistribute wealth. The right-wingers who say that Gore's approach is fear-mongering, are also engaging in their own brand of fear mongering: "Oh no! We will lose our independence! Oh no! We can't legislate business any more, because we will all lose our freedoms! Oh no! Capitalism and market forces should be left to decide what to do!"

I agree with acrobat: This presentation is in no way a hand-wringing, fear-mongering piece of propoganda. Although I am sure there are areas that may have legitimate disagreements, the basic facts cannot be ignored. I especially liked when he said that so many people, upon hearing the facts, go from denial to despair, but he wants us instead to stop, not get in despair, and use history's example of what we are able to accomplish as a springboard for solving this problem as well.
posted by The Deej at 5:31 AM on January 10, 2007


Unfortunately, this post could have been about the message except for two very good reasons:

1) It was thrown up as a "get it while it lasts" post that couched the discussion in terms that made it sound like "this is a blatant illegal copy you can watch over the internet, watch it now before it is taken down." It's hard to discuss the merits of global warming with such a thin post.

2) The movie has been out for a very long time, global warming can and has been a post topic on MeFi, and overall there is nothing much to discuss here regarding the movie that is new - except for its current distribution model.

So, thumbs up MeFi folks - you want to talk about something new and interesting, and you did...the distribution model of a social change movie.

Wait for a much better post to debate the merits of global warming theories. Instead, I like talking about whether this should be a free download.

I, for one, have this in the Netflix que - a quite easy alternative to asking the copyright question.
posted by Muddler at 7:54 AM on January 10, 2007


Thanks, I haven't had the chance to go see this but it's been sort of on my list for a while - thought I'd just take a look at the beginning, but really got sucked in. I can see a few moments people unsympathetic or skeptical might find a little tear-jerky (the bits about his son & his sister, for instance), but overall it seemed pretty even-handed, and if you're inclined to think the scientists know what they're talking about to begin with, those stories actually seem quite moving & relevant.
posted by mdn at 8:32 AM on January 10, 2007


For those wondering about the back end, if you click through the video submission process, basically you are restricted to posting youtube or dailymotion URL, plus show and episode information. So basically this just aggregates user-submitted links and metadata and repackages the video stream.

The domain appears to be registered in Denmark by somebody who doesn't want it to be trivial to figure out who they actually are, so the site might actually not be that easy to get rid of. I imagine Google and Dailymotion (which is, I guess, French) might as much of an issue with it as the copyright holders. I imagine the videos themselves are going to be as unreliable as YouTube et al tend to be in any event, both in quality and consistent availability.

This also seems like it would be a great one-stop shop for anyone charged with the task of tracking down their employers' property on these two popular video sharing services. Ultimately I wonder if these sorts of "making it easy" aggregation sites are going to wind up as a real problem for sites like YouTube by making the extent of copyright violation going on on those sites so manifestly obvious.

I missed this movie in the theaters but ended up screening a legal DVD copy with a bunch of Quakers (whole other story). Given that little flash of "for your consideration" prior to the opening, I assume this was ripped off a copy distributed for Oscar consideration?
posted by nanojath at 9:10 AM on January 10, 2007


An Inconvenient Copyright Law
posted by Kickstart70 at 10:53 AM on January 10, 2007


Muddler: Thanks, but Metafilter Is Not About Discussion.

Before the movie first came out I posted a FPP on the blue full of link-y goodness and a good discussion on global warming was had then. And several have been had since. And I assume more will be had in the future. But that was not he point of this post. I was merely trying to point people in the direction of the full version of the movie online. Any discussion was beside the point.
posted by empath at 11:56 AM on January 10, 2007


A rebuttal to Gore's movie.
posted by The Deej at 3:43 PM on January 10, 2007


A rebuttal to Gore's movie by former professional petroleum lobbyist Tom Harris executive director of the petroleum-funded Canadian nonprofit NRSP.

Within the comprehensive reference links of those two articles there is plenty of debunking of Harris' op-ed for hire for anyone who cares to actually take the trouble of tracking down their sources. The article is a veritable who's who list of paid professional climate debunkers - Harris prefers to call them "scientists," of course, in fact reviewing some of his articles reveals it as a charming habit, "scientists" proclaim this and "scientists" say that, presumably to give chuckleheads like you, The Deej, the idea that what he is writing represents the opinions of, well, scientists. Rather than the opinions which the companies which hire him would like for you to hold.
posted by nanojath at 6:03 PM on January 10, 2007


...presumably to give chuckleheads like you, The Deej, the idea that what he is writing represents the opinions of, well, scientists. Rather than the opinions which the companies which hire him would like for you to hold.

nanojath
HUH?!?!?!?!! "Chucklehead???"

#1- Uncalled for and childish.
#2- Did you actually read my comments in this thread? I suggest you do, then come back.
#3- Linking to an article does not mean "I agree with this article."

Put down the chucklehead gun, and step away.
posted by The Deej at 6:52 PM on January 10, 2007


If you watch this movie for free, Paramount will clearly go broke. And then who will unchange the climate?

TriStar?
Castle Rock?

Pheh.

Pheh.
posted by poweredbybeard at 8:13 PM on January 10, 2007


Hard to believe this is still here, ain't it?
posted by soyjoy at 10:04 PM on January 10, 2007


Oh, man, here we go again. Number one, hmm, I'll give you childish but I'm reserving judgment on uncalled-for... Number two, no, and okay, hold on a minute.

...

And three, this is true. Nevertheless if on disagrees with the content of what one links to, one should give that context.

Nevertheless this does not rise to the level of chucklehead. Withdrawn. (And, ahem, I apologize).
posted by nanojath at 10:39 PM on January 10, 2007


Yer a big man nanojath. Withdrawing a "chucklehead" takes more guts than accepting a "triple-dog-dare."

You are correct that in most cases providing context for a link you disagree with is good form. (Maybe in all cases, even.) I saw this thread as an ongoing conversation, and since I made my views pretty clearly known just a few comments earlier, it was more along the lines of, "Yeah, that's true guys, but did you see this?"

So anyway, I kick the chucklehead gun aside, and resist all temptation to call "nyah-na-na-nyah-nyah" on you. And MeFi is a better place.
posted by The Deej at 5:19 AM on January 11, 2007


"Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore."
posted by homunculus at 1:14 PM on January 11, 2007


What a chucklehead!


(I kid!!!!!)
posted by The Deej at 2:15 PM on January 11, 2007


« Older Nerdcore Rising!...  |  Memoirs of Phillipe de Commyne... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments