That's exactly what I was thinking. But he is also claiming loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation, none of which has that trademark issue as an element. I think most of these are pretty half-assed claims and Damon will have a hard time proving them. Loss of reputation? What was his reputation before? Is he some kind of well known pillar of his community? For emotional distress he needs to show a physical injury that resulted from Moore's conduct. I don't think embarrassment and personal humiliation are even real claims recognized by the law. This whole thing stinks of the swiftys.
The merits of the suit aside, it does call into question Moore's regard for things like integrity and honesty. Of course, those are traits he has never ostensibly held in high regard.
I can't remember the specifics of that segment, but it clearly would have been edited to portray a certain point of view. Damon might disagree with that point of view, but if the film-maker's honesty is the issue then I think the question is a more subtle one. If it was edited to give the impression that Damon said something he didn't then that is dishonest. But is it dishonest to use Damon as an example in a story if he doesn't agree with the message of that story?
Having taught F/911 in the composition classroom, it cannot be disputed that, in terms of argumentation, Moore does engage in fallacious arguments. But since he is making a film-essay, he is not necessarily bound to be "fair and balanced", nor are we bound to believe him. I will say this, though: If you visit F/911 website, he thoroughly documents his claims, and more often that not, his claims can be corraborated.
That's exactly what I was thinking. But he is also claiming loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation, none of which has that trademark issue as an element. I think most of these are pretty half-assed claims and Damon will have a hard time proving them. Loss of reputation? What was his reputation before? Is he some kind of well known pillar of his community? For emotional distress he needs to show a physical injury that resulted from Moore's conduct. I don't think embarrassment and personal humiliation are even real claims recognized by the law. This whole thing stinks of the swiftys.
ReplyDeleteThe merits of the suit aside, it does call into question Moore's regard for things like integrity and honesty. Of course, those are traits he has never ostensibly held in high regard.
ReplyDeleteJoe
I can't remember the specifics of that segment, but it clearly would have been edited to portray a certain point of view. Damon might disagree with that point of view, but if the film-maker's honesty is the issue then I think the question is a more subtle one. If it was edited to give the impression that Damon said something he didn't then that is dishonest. But is it dishonest to use Damon as an example in a story if he doesn't agree with the message of that story?
ReplyDeleteI would say no.
ReplyDeleteHaving taught F/911 in the composition classroom, it cannot be disputed that, in terms of argumentation, Moore does engage in fallacious arguments. But since he is making a film-essay, he is not necessarily bound to be "fair and balanced", nor are we bound to believe him. I will say this, though: If you visit F/911 website, he thoroughly documents his claims, and more often that not, his claims can be corraborated.