IMPORTANT NOTICE 1-28-2008

 

An important problem concerning our MANSON film materials.

As many of you know, the matter of people selling our exclusive MANSON materials without our authorization has always been a major obstacle in getting high quality DVDs into the marketplace, and our ability to produce more exclusive film projects. While we are aware that widespread piracy is at least, in part, due to the public's miss-interpretation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and a younger generation's lack of understanding of just how a civilized society is supposed to function, the problem only seems to grow bigger and bigger. Most folks understand that we simply cannot afford to make more films if, for instance, the entire MANSON film is posted on YouTube for free by parasites on the internet. Now, a major internet retailer, with a name that sounds like a famous jungle river refuses to even allow a "customer review" comment to be posted on their applicable "product info" page in connection with their vendor's "counterfeit" MANSON DVD offerings, so unsuspecting buyers are paying $30 and up for very low quality counterfeit DVDs. We are only talking about posting a "comment" that alerts buyers to the fact that those DVDs are counterfeit. That same retailer allows postings that make positive comments about those counterfeit DVDs, so why not a "factual" comment, so its loyal customers can make an informed decision. This situation really becomes hurtful to the consumer when you consider that for $40 in February, they can obtain an authentic personally signed quality DVD that will likely become even more valuable over time.

Then, there is the Getty Images situation where screen shots (images) from the 1973 "MANSON" motion picture were being offered for a price to news organizations, and various other media types for use in their projects, without our permission. But here is where it gets interesting. Seems there has been a race between three companies to buy-up smaller stock footage / image companies in order to build image licensing empires. In America, this is not only allowed, but encouraged. The problem is, over the years, the smaller companies apparently pirated many still images directly from existing motion pictures and they are now contaminating these vast image libraries. If, for instance, a single image was taken from a 1930's Paramount Pictures movie where a New York street scene is depicted, the screen image taken is likely not even authentic, but that of a movie "set". So now, parts of otherwise authentic documentary films and news programs, made by once reputable companies, are somewhat tainted. One particular image from the 1973 "MANSON" that was being made available by Getty Images is a close-up screen shot of one of the MANSON girls eyes with an "X" carved in her forehead, but the caption states that it "shows the 'X' cut into the forehead of convicted murderer Charles Manson, early 1970s." Now the Getty folks want to sell their entire image business for over a billion dollars. Such a deal, but what about all the folks that bought stolen and fake images and what programs have they been incorporated into? Wasn't it the Getty Museum people that just dug their way out of a big scandal involving stolen artifacts?

This of course now raises the issue of just how does anyone make an informed decision, if most all public information is incomplete or contaminated. For example, just before President Kennedy was murdered, he was given a tour of a place now commonly known as Area 51, where those in charge became very upset with his threatening reaction to a certain exhibit. He proclaimed that the whole world should not be deprived of the knowledge of a specific secret. To put this in a relevant context, it should be noted that no person has ever lived to publicly bare witness regarding such a secret place. If Kennedy was silenced because he posed a security risk, we will never know, but if, as any good military man will tell you, a nation's greatest weapon is its best kept secret, historians may have something new to consider.

Now consider the idea of a pivotal, but hidden "fact" for each and every controversial case of interest in history. Because the 60's generation was deprived of very important facts, like the fact that President Johnson (LBJ) was lying to escalate the Vietnam War, "they" are now motivated to discover the truth about important events in order to rewrite history correctly. Because they were brought up in a time of much deception, we can see that there's a lot of history to be re-examined. And it will begin this year, with a complete review of the 1960's. The media, now controlled by the kids of the 60's, is going to flood your television screens with stuff you never knew about America's "first" really "aware" generation. We hope to be doing our part by preparing our exclusive films for an audience that now gets high on reality. Unfortunately, other filmmakers will likely have to rely upon stock footage and images from questionable sources, in order to inspire their viewers.

So why are we complaining of being robbed of the benefits of our creative work?  Simple, we are caught at a crossroads and are having a hard time deciding on whether to complete the 5 hour MANSON mini-series or just move on to other projects. Under the present circumstances, we must think very seriously about the consequences of releasing to the public such an important project. We sincerely want to make available this "last word" on the Charles Manson Family, but if the corporate piranhas do not change their evil ways, it won't make much sense for us to work for nothing. But please don't feel sorry for us, as we are also well aware that MANSON material is pirated because it has actual value based upon a very real public demand. That is the very nature of American business. So if there is anything you can do to help reverse this otherwise negative situation in a positive way, please do.

Thanks for listening.

 

| BACK |

© 2008 TOBANN INTERNATIONAL PICTURES