Sony probably has some of the best tech geeks and lawyers money can buy advising them to do this. Something those hackers have got has them scared silly.
Sony Entertainment =/= Hollywood. Not every company would respond the same way.
djones520 wrote: Sony probably has some of the best tech geeks and lawyers money can buy advising them to do this. Something those hackers have got has them scared silly.
Agreed. This isn't some random event by silly little hackers nor is it someone kowtowing to terrorists. There is probably a fair amount we don't know at the moment.
Jihadin wrote: Seems the FBI 110% sure North Korea was involved....maybe just a smidgen...
The Engrish in the message the hackers left was a pretty big clue in addition to the subject matter of the film...
Personally I hate seeing people cower to threats, especially from that shambles of a nation, but I think Sony is probably scared of any potential lawsuits more than anything else.
Sony Entertainment =/= Hollywood. Not every company would respond the same way.
Most major theater chains had already made the decision to pull the movie before Sony did. I might at least understand postponing or only doing midnight screenings so as not to endanger little children, (however remote that danger might be) but the level of cowardice on display here kind of turns my stomach.
Sony Entertainment =/= Hollywood. Not every company would respond the same way.
Most major theater chains had already made the decision to pull the movie before Sony did. I might at least understand postponing or only doing midnight screenings so as not to endanger little children, (however remote that danger might be) but the level of cowardice on display here kind of turns my stomach.
Guess Sony best not make any other movie that might offend someone.
Mitt Romney's got a good idea though. He suggested on Twitter that Sony release the film for free online, while requesting a $5 donation towards a charity.
Here is an interesting article on Wired that I came across this morning. It says that they evidence that North Korea (or another nation-state) is behind the hack is circumstantial at best and all around pretty flimsy. It also discusses the idea that the hacks weren't motivated by The Interview, considering all early communication coming from the GOP to Sony Pictures made no real mention of the film. There is a chance that the film is a red herring, because the hackers didn't address it until after the media began suggesting that the film might be the reason behind the attack.
Also, the hack has pretty much devastated Sony Pictures infrastructure to an unprecedented degree.
jhe90 wrote: NK are pretty nutty though, dangerous too, backward but none the less dangerous.
Some people are too damn crazy to tell if there threats or going to do it.
Though we had none of this stuff due to team america, some fat leader is a touch sensitive?
How are they dangerous? What even remote threat does NK pose to anyone in the west?!
The correct response to this should be to openly mock the ridiculous NK regime and its claims to have any significance in modern matters and if they were indeed responsible for the hack, to completely cut their access to the international internet infrastructures.
And "devastating cyber attack"?! Really? All that the hackers did was the business equivalent of "the fappening", was that also considered a "devastating cyber attack"?
jhe90 wrote: NK are pretty nutty though, dangerous too, backward but none the less dangerous.
Some people are too damn crazy to tell if there threats or going to do it.
Though we had none of this stuff due to team america, some fat leader is a touch sensitive?
How are they dangerous? What even remote threat does NK pose to anyone in the west?!
The correct response to this should be to openly mock the ridiculous NK regime and its claims to have any significance in modern matters and if they were indeed responsible for the hack, to completely cut their access to the international internet infrastructures.
And "devastating cyber attack"?! Really? All that the hackers did was the business equivalent of "the fappening", was that also considered a "devastating cyber attack"?
Information is power and money is power. Both of those can be very damaging, and at this point the hacker known as Kim 4Jong Un has both of those when it comes to Sony.
NK is powerless against "the west" as far as conventional threats are concerned. But NK, and any cyber criminal that is sophisticated enough, can be a big threat against companies and other organizations when it comes to hacks like this.
I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
jhe90 wrote: NK are pretty nutty though, dangerous too, backward but none the less dangerous.
Some people are too damn crazy to tell if there threats or going to do it.
Though we had none of this stuff due to team america, some fat leader is a touch sensitive?
How are they dangerous? What even remote threat does NK pose to anyone in the west?!
The correct response to this should be to openly mock the ridiculous NK regime and its claims to have any significance in modern matters and if they were indeed responsible for the hack, to completely cut their access to the international internet infrastructures.
And "devastating cyber attack"?! Really? All that the hackers did was the business equivalent of "the fappening", was that also considered a "devastating cyber attack"?
so a phycopathic leader with nukes, 1 million man army and thousands of guns zeroed and calculated to fire on SK. the capital is range of the heavier units.
missiles which can reach pearl harbour and parts of Alaska.
who gets all in a twist over one film, there was not this much trouble over Team America,
Ouze wrote: I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
I don't really blame Sony... they're a business.
So, we the feth is our government? Hello... John Kerry! Hello President Obama!
Ouze wrote: I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
I don't really blame Sony... they're a business.
So, we the feth is our government? Hello... John Kerry! Hello President Obama!
Stand up for American values!
What's Obama going to do, realistically? Nuke NK for threatening the release of a mediocre movie? Post Marines at 1,500 theaters across the country? Counter-hack NK? What could they have that we would want to hack? Tell NK that they are being jerks? Tell China that NK are being jerks?
Ouze wrote: I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
I don't really blame Sony... they're a business.
So, we the feth is our government? Hello... John Kerry! Hello President Obama!
Stand up for American values!
What's Obama going to do, realistically? Nuke NK for threatening the release of a mediocre movie? Post Marines at 1,500 theaters across the country? Counter-hack NK? What could they have that we would want to hack? Tell NK that they are being jerks? Tell China that NK are being jerks?
How about reaffirm our country's 1st Amendment rights?
Oh... wait... you forget that this is the same administration who blamed the events in Benghazi on that youtube director and went out of their way to tell the world that "we shouldn't slander Islam".
How about they go out of their way to defend America for a change?
How about reaffirm our country's 1st Amendment rights?
Oh... wait... you forget that this is the same administration who blamed the events in Benghazi on that youtube director and went out of their way to tell the world that "we shouldn't slander Islam".
How about they go out of their way to defend America for a change?
How about reaffirm our country's 1st Amendment rights?
Oh... wait... you forget that this is the same administration who blamed the events in Benghazi on that youtube director and went out of their way to tell the world that "we shouldn't slander Islam".
How about they go out of their way to defend America for a change?
I ask again: What should he do, realistically?
Have a speech at the WH denouncing this cyberattack and reaffirm that Americans are free to do these things.
Or better yet, invite a showing of The Interview at the WhiteHouse!
Have a speech at the WH denouncing this cyberattack and reaffirm that Americans are free to do these things.
Or better yet, invite a showing of The Interview at the WhiteHouse!
Oh, well if all you're asking for is symbolic gestures, then yeah.... he probably should do something like that.
*sigh*
It's about being a fething leader.
President Obama needs to call this cyber-attack on Sony studios what it is: A state-sponsored terrorist attack by North Korea upon the United States.
President Obama needs to reaffirm to Sony's Executive and America that we won't be intimidated and to demonstrate some fething spine.
Because Sony’s decision not to release The Interview are both valid and understandable... sure... but they are also unfortunately very cowardly actions.
So when Obama (and rest of the political class) see American livelihoods threatened as the result of an act of war conducted by a foreign power, we must present a strong face against such incursion. For instance, the US will no longer abide diplomatic courtisies (sp?), no more nuke negotiation and renew pressures to enact new sanctions.
I think we're getting bitch slapped here... and the bitch slapping won't cease until we get some spine back into the White House.
I agree that there needs to be a state-level response to state-sponsored cyber attacks into what is a (partially, at least) US based company. The idea that South Korea, which is a US ally, might suffer for any off-the-cuff, immediate action is a strong consideration - in that a response needs to be well-considered, but respond we must. Letting this go unanswered will strongly embolden our enemies.
Also, congratulations on once again working Benghazi into an unrelated thread.
There is actually a very real concern that this might not have been North Korea.
There was a bit of a time-delay between the initial attacks and the subsequent claims by those responsible that "The Interview" was the reason why, which could indicate that those responsible were reaching for a justification.
Ouze wrote: I agree that there needs to be a state-level response to state-sponsored cyber attacks into what is a (partially, at least) US based company. The idea that South Korea, which is a US ally, might suffer for any off-the-cuff, immediate action is a strong consideration - in that a response needs to be well-considered, but respond we must. Letting this go unanswered will strongly embolden our enemies.
Absolutely. Shoot... I'd be happy for just a throwaway line at the WH Press briefing.
Also, congratulations on once again working Benghazi into an unrelated thread.
That get's a dakka bingo square for the dakkanaughts.
Well, this Administration has historically been fairly deliberate in making decisions, so I'm personally not concerned by the fact we haven't seen/heard anything publicly yet.
Kanluwen wrote: There is actually a very real concern that this might not have been North Korea.
There was a bit of a time-delay between the initial attacks and the subsequent claims by those responsible that "The Interview" was the reason why, which could indicate that those responsible were reaching for a justification.
I saw those concerns as well... because, my first reaction was:
"North Korea has the sophistication to pull this off"???
Mr. Burning wrote: Unless Sony plan on doing something else to recoup their costs why not............
'Leak' the movie onto pirate and torrent sites?
Play these guardians of idiocy at their own game somewhat.
Personally, I think Sony should issue every man, woman, and child in America a DVD copy of the movie, free of charge. If for no other reason than it will honk off the North Koreans.
And, from what I've seen on the BBC, NK has been building up a dedicated hacker force for several years. NK hackers have a higher quality of life than average NK citizens, and are given priviledges (access to Western media) other citizens don't get. I can absolutely see NK pulling off a hack of Sony (who has had issues with getting hacked in the past) without needing China's help. Besides, "Guardians of Peace" is so obviously a North Korean name... even a Chinese hacker group that was deliberately pretending to be North Korean would come up with a better name than that.
I've been reading snippets that the decision to forego streaming and DVD sales is the work of lawyers... apparently, in order to collect on insurance, Sony needs a total loss.
Which is odd because I would think an insurance company would want them to mitigate their losses...
whembly wrote: I've been reading snippets that the decision to forego streaming and DVD sales is the work of lawyers... apparently, in order to collect on insurance, Sony needs a total loss.
Which is odd because I would think an insurance company would want them to mitigate their losses...
Maybe films have a unique set of criteria for insurance. That way they don't pay out if someone just made a mediocre movie that flopped but still made a little money.
Ouze wrote: I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
I don't really blame Sony... they're a business.
So, we the feth is our government? Hello... John Kerry! Hello President Obama!
Stand up for American values!
Yeah! Everyone knows the Government needs to get involved in a business decision!
Ouze wrote: I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
I don't really blame Sony... they're a business.
So, we the feth is our government? Hello... John Kerry! Hello President Obama!
Stand up for American values!
Yeah! Everyone knows the Government needs to get involved in a business decision!
Ouze wrote: I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
I don't really blame Sony... they're a business.
So, we the feth is our government? Hello... John Kerry! Hello President Obama!
Stand up for American values!
Yeah! Everyone knows the Government needs to get involved in a business decision!
It is more then a business decision. It's a foreign government attacking our country, and it's values of free speech.
Is this something we go to war over? No. Is it something that we should rattle our sabre over? Possibly. Is it something we should ignore? Hell no.
I still think this is secretly a marketing gimmick, so in a couple weeks Sony can be like "OMG, we're allowed to show this movie now that there's no other movies coming out and we can have the bestest numbers of all, so come see it and give us moneys!"
Necros wrote: I still think this is secretly a marketing gimmick, so in a couple weeks Sony can be like "OMG, we're allowed to show this movie now that there's no other movies coming out and we can have the bestest numbers of all, so come see it and give us moneys!"
Necros wrote: I still think this is secretly a marketing gimmick, so in a couple weeks Sony can be like "OMG, we're allowed to show this movie now that there's no other movies coming out and we can have the bestest numbers of all, so come see it and give us moneys!"
It's more likely that it was a false flag attack by Disney, trying to destroy Sony so that the rights to Spiderman will revert to Marvel/Disney.
Necros wrote: I still think this is secretly a marketing gimmick, so in a couple weeks Sony can be like "OMG, we're allowed to show this movie now that there's no other movies coming out and we can have the bestest numbers of all, so come see it and give us moneys!"
I thought about that as well, but I think the fallout would be to great to make it worthwhile. I have no doubt they are trying to make the best of a bad situation but I don't think they invented the situation.
Paramount Cancels Team America Screenings Because Everyone's a Coward
In the wake of Sony Pictures canceling its release of The Interview, some theaters with actual balls opted to show Team America: World Police as a protest. No such luck. In a truly staggering act of cowardice, Paramount appears to be telling theaters to shut it all down. What the hell, guys.
Due to to circumstances beyond our control, the TEAM AMERICA 12/27 screening has been cancelled. We apologize & will provide refunds today.
— Alamo Drafthouse DFW (@AlamoDFW) December 18, 2014
Please note: Our Late Shift screening of Team America: World Police has been canceled by Paramount Pictures. pic.twitter.com/TlPVzIeICW
— Capitol Theatre (@CapitolW65th) December 18, 2014
Breaking Plaza news : Team America World Police pulled from all theatres as per Paramount Pictures .
— Plaza Atlanta (@PlazaAtlanta) December 18, 2014
This insane cancellation ostensibly comes from the same insane security concerns Sony Pictures folded to when it cancelled The Interview. Namely, the threat of full-on terrorist attacks at theaters by the Guardians of Peace, a organization that so far has shown prowess only in hacking Sony's internal network and bragging about it anonymously on Pastebin.
Terrorist threats are no laughing matter, of course, but the Department of Homeland Security has found no credible threat and evidence that the Guardians of Peace have any sort of manpower that could do anything within the boundaries of the United States (much less at thousands of locations simultaneously) is practically non-existent. This sort of panicked cowardice would be laughably absurd if it wasn't so damn sad.
We've reached out to some of the theaters to find out of Paramount is citing an additiona;, specific threat against theaters screening Team America: World Police in particular, or if the company is simply just assuming that theater-threatening boogeymen wouldn't be huge fans of this film either.
Evidence is mounting that perhaps North Korea itself is behind the Sony hacks, although that doesn't lend much more credence to threats of terrorist considering the North Korea is pretty well known for spouting limp threats and launching missiles that can barely make it off the launchpad.
We've reached out to Paramount and several of the theaters involved for comment.
It must take amazing levels of stupid to think that a fictional movie produced by a private business represents the viewpoint of the US government (and therefore the US people) to the extent of believing the US is committing "acts of war" upon NK by allowing a free society where people can express themselves however the feth they please.
I know that that state media is how things work in dictatorships and communist countries, but do they REALLY not know how things work over here? Do they just lack the intelligence to even COMPREHEND a free society?
This may come as a surprise to you in the wake of the last few days, but Sony is not an American company. It’s a Japanese one. I know, I know, this should be relatively basic and readily available public information. And the reaction to Sony’s decision to not release the Rogen-Franco The Interview on the basis of non-credible and non-specific threats issued by the alleged North Korean hackers has sparked a firestorm of justifiable outrage. I’ve got a piece in the works about exactly that, but for the moment I wanted to touch base with the geopolitics going on under the hood here.
Sure, when hackers claim they’re going to make a 9/11 style attack on theaters if the film is released, we have the reasonable reaction of well, where are you going to find a movie theater with more than six people in it these days? The threat is at face value silly, and not particularly specific or credible. And Sony gets hammered for backing down to bullies, because the only thing that pisses off Americans more than somebody being bullied out of free speech is the fact that other Americans have different political opinions.
But there’s a deeper problem than a movie on American soil made by Americans and primarily for Americans. There’s the problem of Tokyo and mushroom clouds. See, North Korea blew up their first nuke a few years ago. It was a pissant little thing, barely an eighth the size of Hiroshima.
But an eighth of Hiroshima is still somewhere in the ballpark of eight 9/11’s.
The North Koreans have got missiles that can reach California, but experts are pretty sure that they haven’t managed to figure out how to make a nuke small enough to fit on those missiles. Rudimentary nuclear weapons are massive things. We had to specially rig the Enola Gay to carry that first one we dropped. But experts are also pretty sure that they’ve got them miniaturized just enough to go on the medium range missiles that reach Japan, which is only 800 miles away as the missile flies.
And North Korea has made repeated threats over the last several years, threatening that if Japan did one thing or another they didn’t like, that Tokyo would be “consumed in nuclear flames.”
Sony is a Japanese company. When North Korea threatens them, they’re not threatening Burbank on the other side of the world, they’re threatening to turn to atomic ash the capital city of the only country to ever be burned by nuclear fire. While the credibility of threats to attack American theaters is minimal, that’s not the threat that is motivating Sony’s decision-making at the moment.
It is more then a business decision. It's a foreign government attacking our country, and it's values of free speech.
SPE's decision was just a business decision. The hack, and how the US should respond to such matters is a wholly separate issue with very far reaching implications.
It is more then a business decision. It's a foreign government attacking our country, and it's values of free speech.
SPE's decision was just a business decision. The hack, and how the US should respond to such matters is a wholly separate issue with very far reaching implications.
That's like saying responding to black mail is just a business decision. Oh wait, no you are just saying that.
Ouze wrote: I dunno. I want to see the movie, and I hate letting North Korea essentially have a veto over US moviemaking.
On the other hand, if I were Sony and released the movie despite clear public threats, and something did happen, I'd be pretty concerned about the liability, especially on a movie that was unlikely to have a huge box office return anyway. Making brave choices doesn't equate here to making profitable choices.
I don't really blame Sony... they're a business.
So, we the feth is our government? Hello... John Kerry! Hello President Obama!
Stand up for American values!
Yeah! Everyone knows the Government needs to get involved in a business decision!
It is more then a business decision. It's a foreign government attacking our country, and it's values of free speech.
Is this something we go to war over? No. Is it something that we should rattle our sabre over? Possibly. Is it something we should ignore? Hell no.
Ummmm...
Our 1st Amendment rights can only be abridged by our own government. This is not what is happening.
Bravery in situations where gain is improbable is not bravery, it is stupidity.
The gain is not handing the keys to your entire industry to every troll with an internet connection. This is not just about one movie, or even the three movies already affected, it is about any movie for which you can construct a madman's justification for hating it.
Give donkey-caves a heckler's veto, and they will use it.
AlexHolker wrote: The gain is not handing the keys to your entire industry to every troll with an internet connection.
That is assuming that we know everything there is to know on the situation, which we don't. Unless one is willing to tell corporate or state secrets odds are we don't know all the facts at this point.
The gain is not handing the keys to your entire industry to every troll with an internet connection.
That's hyperbolic nonsense. SPE and Paramount don't have the keys to the industry, and even if they did their actions don't constitute giving them away.
I'm saying that "haha, their leader almost OD'd on cheese" is a stupid argument to make when our leader almost died by choking to death on a pretzel in the White House.
The gain is not handing the keys to your entire industry to every troll with an internet connection.
That's hyperbolic nonsense. SPE and Paramount don't have the keys to the industry, and even if they did their actions don't constitute giving them away.
They have the keys to 20% of the industry, and another 58% is in the hands of just four other companies which haven't proven themselves trustworthy, they just haven't been tested yet. If they are willing to swallow multi-million dollar losses and sink finished movies to appease people who make terroristic threats, that's more authority than they'd give most of their own management.
d-usa wrote: I'm saying that "haha, their leader almost OD'd on cheese" is a stupid argument to make when our leader almost died by choking to death on a pretzel in the White House.
The decisions of Sony and Paramount probably have more to do with being worried about exposure of documents relating to some shady Hollywood accounting than any actual violent threats.
I don't understanding the reasoning most of you forum members are making, has anyone ever considered how offensive 'the interview' is to the people of North Korea? This movie should never had been made in the first place!
For those who do not know, the movie is about 2 american clowns going to North Korea doing dumb don't bypass the language filter like this. reds8n and killing their leader. It is not a fantasy or historic movie, the time and setting decipt current events. How can you not expect the North Korean leader to be pissed?
Also in case people are behind the news. NK's current leader Kim Jong-un is known to be even more ruthless than his dad and prone to make rash decisions. Why in God's name would Sony America want to provoke such a person? All behind the American values of freedom of speech?
I do not believe in bending over from terrorist threats, but to be the provoker to terrorist threats will gain no sympathy from me.
Can you envision a future where "American previals WW3 over North Korea! Our western seaboard was lost to premetive nuclear strike from NK, millions of lives were lost, but the war is won and NK now embraces the American lifestyle with the removal of their dicatorship. God bless the movie 'The Interview', the trigger to WW3..."
America, feth yeah!! So lick my butt and suck on my balls!!
Part two, apparently. Is Kim Jong Un another disgusting insect in a puppet like his father? Or just a fat feth who dies by explosion? Movie or real life, I'm not picky with my questions.
wufai wrote: For those who do not know, the movie is about 2 american clowns going to North Korea doing dumb language Reds8n and killing their leader. It is not a fantasy
I almost stopped at this quite amazing revelation, but I'm glad that I carried on to see how batgak crazy it got so I could see this absolute gem...
wufai wrote: God bless the movie 'The Interview', the trigger to WW3..."
...
But to be serious for a moment:
wufai wrote: has anyone ever considered how offensive 'the interview' is to the people of North Korea?
I doubt "the people" of North Korea have any idea it's a thing, they're too busy trying to scrape together enough food so they don't starve to death. It's the guy who just had to have surgery due to eating too much cheese that is pissed off, and to be quite honest, feth that guy.
timetowaste85 wrote: America, feth yeah!! So lick my butt and suck on my Swhelty balls!!
Part two, apparently. Is Kim Jong Un another disgusting insect in a puppet like his father? Or just a fat feth who dies by explosion? Movie or real life, I'm not picky with my questions.
Benjamin Franklin wrote: Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.
A lot of this has happened lately. The whole thing reminds me of that south park episode where they tried to pull an episode of family guy and were sticking their heads in the sand to avoid the problems.
Benjamin Franklin wrote: Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.
A lot of this has happened lately. The whole thing reminds me of that south park episode where they tried to pull an episode of family guy and were sticking their heads in the sand to avoid the problems.
wufai wrote: I don't understanding the reasoning most of you forum members are making, has anyone ever considered how offensive 'the interview' is to the people of North Korea? This movie should never had been made in the first place!
For those who do not know, the movie is about 2 american clowns going to North Korea doing dumb don't bypass the language filter like this. reds8n and killing their leader. It is not a fantasy or historic movie, the time and setting decipt current events. How can you not expect the North Korean leader to be pissed?
Also in case people are behind the news. NK's current leader Kim Jong-un is known to be even more ruthless than his dad and prone to make rash decisions. Why in God's name would Sony America want to provoke such a person? All behind the American values of freedom of speech?
I do not believe in bending over from terrorist threats, but to be the provoker to terrorist threats will gain no sympathy from me.
Can you envision a future where "American previals WW3 over North Korea! Our western seaboard was lost to premetive nuclear strike from NK, millions of lives were lost, but the war is won and NK now embraces the American lifestyle with the removal of their dicatorship. God bless the movie 'The Interview', the trigger to WW3..."
So you're saying to sit down and shut up? Be afraid, in our own country, to express an opinion or art that might offend someone? There are a lot of strongly stated opinions and art out there. Which one do we suppress next?
wufai wrote: I don't understanding the reasoning most of you forum members are making, has anyone ever considered how offensive 'the interview' is to the people of North Korea? This movie should never had been made in the first place!
For those who do not know, the movie is about 2 american clowns going to North Korea doing dumb don't bypass the language filter like this. reds8n and killing their leader. It is not a fantasy or historic movie, the time and setting decipt current events. How can you not expect the North Korean leader to be pissed?
Also in case people are behind the news. NK's current leader Kim Jong-un is known to be even more ruthless than his dad and prone to make rash decisions. Why in God's name would Sony America want to provoke such a person? All behind the American values of freedom of speech?
I do not believe in bending over from terrorist threats, but to be the provoker to terrorist threats will gain no sympathy from me.
Can you envision a future where "American previals WW3 over North Korea! Our western seaboard was lost to premetive nuclear strike from NK, millions of lives were lost, but the war is won and NK now embraces the American lifestyle with the removal of their dicatorship. God bless the movie 'The Interview', the trigger to WW3..."
I've been thinking it over - what we can do to respond to this. I don't think we really have a lot of tools in that box. More economic sanctions? Denouncing them? A UN Security Council resolution, which of course China will veto?
I think we should try something different. I wonder about the possibility of flooding the country with internet - tons and tons of uncensored internet. Hundreds of thousands of burner cell phones connecting to pirate transmitters, showing the North Korean people just how badly they're being screwed.
Have a speech at the WH denouncing this cyberattack and reaffirm that Americans are free to do these things.
Or better yet, invite a showing of The Interview at the WhiteHouse!
Oh, well if all you're asking for is symbolic gestures, then yeah.... he probably should do something like that.
*sigh*
It's about being a fething leader.
President Obama needs to call this cyber-attack on Sony studios what it is: A state-sponsored terrorist attack by North Korea upon the United States.
President Obama needs to reaffirm to Sony's Executive and America that we won't be intimidated and to demonstrate some fething spine.
Because Sony’s decision not to release The Interview are both valid and understandable... sure... but they are also unfortunately very cowardly actions.
So when Obama (and rest of the political class) see American livelihoods threatened as the result of an act of war conducted by a foreign power, we must present a strong face against such incursion. For instance, the US will no longer abide diplomatic courtesies, No more nuke negotiation and renew pressures to enact new sanctions.
I think we're getting bitch slapped here... and the bitch slapping won't cease until we get some spine back into the White House.
If Obama calls an attack by a person of the Muslim faith who's screaming Allahu Akbar while he's killing 14 and wounding 32 "work place violence" and not what it really is, do you think he'll call what the Norks have done terrorism?
wufai wrote: I don't understanding the reasoning most of you forum members are making, has anyone ever considered how offensive 'the interview' is to the people of North Korea? This movie should never had been made in the first place!
For those who do not know, the movie is about 2 american clowns going to North Korea doing dumb don't bypass the language filter like this. reds8n and killing their leader. It is not a fantasy or historic movie, the time and setting decipt current events. How can you not expect the North Korean leader to be pissed?
Also in case people are behind the news. NK's current leader Kim Jong-un is known to be even more ruthless than his dad and prone to make rash decisions. Why in God's name would Sony America want to provoke such a person? All behind the American values of freedom of speech?
I do not believe in bending over from terrorist threats, but to be the provoker to terrorist threats will gain no sympathy from me.
Can you envision a future where "American previals WW3 over North Korea! Our western seaboard was lost to premetive nuclear strike from NK, millions of lives were lost, but the war is won and NK now embraces the American lifestyle with the removal of their dicatorship. God bless the movie 'The Interview', the trigger to WW3..."
I'm pretty sure any NKorean in the west will be disillusioned with the great something or other and not care
Ouze wrote: I've been thinking it over - what we can do to respond to this. I don't think we really have a lot of tools in that box. More economic sanctions? Denouncing them? A UN Security Council resolution, which of course China will veto?
I think we should try something different. I wonder about the possibility of flooding the country with internet - tons and tons of uncensored internet. Hundreds of thousands of burner cell phones connecting to pirate transmitters, showing the North Korean people just how badly they're being screwed.
To be entirely fair, the rulers of NK are portrayed as gods in NK. Yet plenty of people have issues with films, books, people, concepts, which go against their religious beliefs; even to the point of violence.
Hell, Life of Brian was banned for years in some countries and faced significant hostility.
SilverMK2 wrote: To be entirely fair, the rulers of NK are portrayed as gods in NK. Yet plenty of people have issues with films, books, people, concepts, which go against their religious beliefs; even to the point of violence.
Hell, Life of Brian was banned for years in some countries and faced significant hostility.
To be entirely fair, no one in NK except for maybe some of their rulling class, will ever even hear about this movie or anything else that goes on outside their country.
We are talking about a place where watching SK soap operas is a crime punishable by death (making soap operas should be punishable by death everywhere in the world, watching them, not so much).
The FBI said Friday in an official statement that "the North Korean government is responsible" for the hacking of Sony Pictures Entertainment, and that the attack destroyed thousands of computers in the process.
"The FBI has determined that the intrusion into SPE’s network consisted of the deployment of destructive malware and the theft of proprietary information as well as employees’ personally identifiable information and confidential communications. The attacks also rendered thousands of SPE’s computers inoperable, forced SPE to take its entire computer network offline, and significantly disrupted the company’s business operations."
The FBI said its conclusion that North Korea was behind the hack is based, in part, on the following:
· Similarities in the data-deletion malware and other malware that the FBI knows North Korea previously developed. Specific lines of code, encryption algorithms, data deletion methods, and compromised networks are among the details.
· Significant overlap between the infrastructure used in this attack and other malicious activity the U.S. previously linked directly to North Korea. For example, the FBI discovered that several Internet protocol addresses associated with known North Korean infrastructure communicated with IP addresses that were hardcoded into the data deletion malware used in this attack.
· The tools used in the Sony attack have similarities to a cyber attack in March 2013 against South Korean banks and media outlets carried out by North Korea. The FBI said the "destructive nature of this attack, coupled with its coercive nature, sets it apart. North Korea’s actions were intended to inflict significant harm on a U.S. business and suppress the right of American citizens to express themselves. Such acts of intimidation fall outside the bounds of acceptable state behavior."
Finally, the G-Men promise to "identify, pursue, and impose costs and consequences on individuals, groups, or nation states who use cyber means to threaten the United States or U.S. interests."
Sigvatr wrote: So...NK commited an act of war against the US and there are no repercussions?
Is hacking a private corporation really an act of war?
I know the US likes to pretend that corporations are people, but this seems like a stretch.
If hacking Sony was an act of war against the US then the movie itself should qualify as an act of war against NK (or if the reviews are true against all mankind ).
Getting into a shooting match with NK over this "Act of War" is like trying to get a ice cold Slurpee in Hell. Sony is a private company that is not a part of US Government or infrastructure.
Sigvatr wrote: So...NK commited an act of war against the US and there are no repercussions?
Is hacking a private corporation really an act of war?
I know the US likes to pretend that corporations are people, but this seems like a stretch.
If hacking Sony was an act of war against the US then the movie itself should qualify as an act of war against NK (or if the reviews are true against all mankind ).
Act of War?
No...
But it is a State Sponsored attack.
Is the government going to do anything about it?
I'm not optimistic...
Even *I* don't have a good idea how to respond... other than have a "Interview" showing in the White House open to the public.
President Obama criticized Sony for pulling The Interview at his end-of-year news conference Friday.
“I think they made a mistake,” Obama said.
The president said he was “sympathetic to the concerns” at Sony after a massive hack exposed embarrassing internal emails and other corporate secrets. On Friday, the FBI said North Korea was responsible for the hack.
Despite the cyberattack, Obama said canceling the release of the film was caving to North Korean demands.
“We cannot have a society in which some dictator someplace can start imposing censorship here in the United States,” he said.
I would consider this an act of aggression, possibly war. Even if it is on a private japanese company. American citizens are affected. It is an attack on our way of life. I think 'Merica has gone to war over less.
SilverMK2 wrote: To be entirely fair, the rulers of NK are portrayed as gods in NK. Yet plenty of people have issues with films, books, people, concepts, which go against their religious beliefs; even to the point of violence.
They portray themselves as gods. But even if this was a real religion and not just a series of slavers getting their Big Brother on, it would still be wrong to capitulate. It is literally possible for someone to depict the gods of half a dozen religions in one big sacrilegious orgy and not be jailed for blasphemy, let alone be murdered by zealots, and that's a good thing. It is the exceptions - people who will murder a cartoonist for depicting Mohammed, or perform industrial sabotage and make terroristic threats against a foreign nation for producing art that offends them - that are the problem.
Think you all need to look up all the "incidents" that happen between North and South Korea over time. The 1996 submarine incident in that happen almost had the balloon gone up with a real shooting match. The hacking is just chump change compare to quite a few of them
They have the keys to 20% of the industry, and another 58% is in the hands of just four other companies which haven't proven themselves trustworthy, they just haven't been tested yet.
I don't see how this is a trust issue. Not releasing a movie is not the same as, say, revoking the license to a movie you purchased on iTunes. In the latter case you have made a financial investment, in the former you have done nothing beyond getting excited about a film's impending release. Hell, you have more right to complain about paying to see a bad film, than not being able to pay to see a film in the first place.
If they are willing to swallow multi-million dollar losses and sink finished movies to appease people who make terroristic threats, that's more authority than they'd give most of their own management.
I think you'll find that the management made both decisions, not the people making terrorist threats.
President Obama criticized Sony for pulling The Interview at his end-of-year news conference Friday.
“I think they made a mistake,” Obama said.
The president said he was “sympathetic to the concerns” at Sony after a massive hack exposed embarrassing internal emails and other corporate secrets. On Friday, the FBI said North Korea was responsible for the hack.
Despite the cyberattack, Obama said canceling the release of the film was caving to North Korean demands.
“We cannot have a society in which some dictator someplace can start imposing censorship here in the United States,” he said.
So says the president that blamed a youtube video for an embassy attack and persecuted the film maker.
d-usa wrote: Obama threatened terrorist attacks if the video wasn't removed from YouTube?
You appear to have already forgotten this administration blaming the embassy attacks in Libya on a youtube movie
Which is not censorship.
and jailing the film maker.
For refusing to take his video down?
Or for violating his probation from 2010 and using multiple aliases which he admited and plead guilty to?
Minus 10 points for ObamaIsEvildor for trying to pretent that "I will hack your studio, do hundreds of millions of damages to the studio, and threaten violent acts to any theater that shows this movie" is the same as "this movie is offensive" and throwing an idiot in jail that was stupid enough to be this public about his multiple parole violation.
d-usa wrote: Obama threatened terrorist attacks if the video wasn't removed from YouTube?
You appear to have already forgotten this administration blaming the embassy attacks in Libya on a youtube movie
Which is not censorship.
and jailing the film maker.
For refusing to take his video down?
Or for violating his probation from 2010 and using multiple aliases which he admited and plead guilty to?
Minus 10 points for ObamaIsEvildor for trying to pretent that "I will hack your studio, do hundreds of millions of damages to the studio, and threaten violent acts to any theater that shows this movie" is the same as "this movie is offensive" and throwing an idiot in jail that was stupid enough to be this public about his multiple parole violation.
Glad you don't think this administration intimidating a film maker, putting him at risk by making up a bull gak story, then jailing him is not censorship.
d-usa wrote: Obama threatened terrorist attacks if the video wasn't removed from YouTube?
You appear to have already forgotten this administration blaming the embassy attacks in Libya on a youtube movie
Which is not censorship.
and jailing the film maker.
For refusing to take his video down?
Or for violating his probation from 2010 and using multiple aliases which he admited and plead guilty to?
Minus 10 points for ObamaIsEvildor for trying to pretent that "I will hack your studio, do hundreds of millions of damages to the studio, and threaten violent acts to any theater that shows this movie" is the same as "this movie is offensive" and throwing an idiot in jail that was stupid enough to be this public about his multiple parole violation.
Glad you don't think this administration intimidating a film maker, putting him at risk by making up a bull gak story, then jailing him is not censorship.
There is the truth (idiot who was ordered not to use any aliases and the internet using three of them promoting a stupid movie on the internet for all to see and going to prison for it) and then there is the weird reality where the actions of a man who plead quilty to breaking these rules is somehow the result of Obama censoring him.
Which did nothing to actually "censor" the video by the way.
d-usa wrote: Obama threatened terrorist attacks if the video wasn't removed from YouTube?
You appear to have already forgotten this administration blaming the embassy attacks in Libya on a youtube movie
Which is not censorship.
and jailing the film maker.
For refusing to take his video down?
Or for violating his probation from 2010 and using multiple aliases which he admited and plead guilty to?
Minus 10 points for ObamaIsEvildor for trying to pretent that "I will hack your studio, do hundreds of millions of damages to the studio, and threaten violent acts to any theater that shows this movie" is the same as "this movie is offensive" and throwing an idiot in jail that was stupid enough to be this public about his multiple parole violation.
Glad you don't think this administration intimidating a film maker, putting him at risk by making up a bull gak story, then jailing him is not censorship.
There is the truth (idiot who was ordered not to use any aliases and the internet using three of them promoting a stupid movie on the internet for all to see and going to prison for it) and then there is the weird reality where the actions of a man who plead quilty to breaking these rules is somehow the result of Obama censoring him.
Which did nothing to actually "censor" the video by the way.
d-usa wrote: So is your position then that a person that is platanly and publicly violating his probation should not face criminal consequences?
Because these are our two options:
1) Let him break the law.
2) Obama is censoring him.
Let's talk Al Sharpton and his free access to Obama after being outed as a tax dodger if you are concerned about the president not letting people break the law.
d-usa wrote: So is your position then that a person that is platanly and publicly violating his probation should not face criminal consequences?
Because these are our two options:
1) Let him break the law.
2) Obama is censoring him.
Let's talk Al Sharpton and his free access to Obama after being outed as a tax dodger if you are concerned about the president not letting people break the law.
Let's answer the question:
Do you think that he should not have been prosecuted for his very public parole violation?
He was stupid and deserved that, I will grant you. But based off all the other people we see doing illegal things Obama gives a free pass to, it smacks of a politically motivated persecution.
d-usa wrote: So is your position then that a person that is platanly and publicly violating his probation should not face criminal consequences?
Because these are our two options:
1) Let him break the law.
2) Obama is censoring him.
Let's talk Al Sharpton and his free access to Obama after being outed as a tax dodger if you are concerned about the president not letting people break the law.
Let's answer the question:
Do you think that he should not have been prosecuted for his very public parole violation?
I do.
However, he should've NOT been scapegoated in the first place.
I'm saying he is the last one to decry censorship based on his record.
The Obama Administration didn't censor anything. And, even if it did, the two situations are not comparable at all.
Relapse wrote: But based off all the other people we see doing illegal things Obama gives a free pass to, it smacks of a politically motivated persecution.
Which people has Obama given a "free pass" to? He certainly hasn't given a "free pass" to Sharpton.
I'm saying he is the last one to decry censorship based on his record.
The Obama Administration didn't censor anything. And, even if it did, the two situations are not comparable at all.
Relapse wrote: But based off all the other people we see doing illegal things Obama gives a free pass to, it smacks of a politically motivated persecution.
Which people has Obama given a "free pass" to? He certainly hasn't given a "free pass" to Sharpton.
SilverMK2 wrote: To be entirely fair, the rulers of NK are portrayed as gods in NK. Yet plenty of people have issues with films, books, people, concepts, which go against their religious beliefs; even to the point of violence.
They portray themselves as gods. But even if this was a real religion and not just a series of slavers getting their Big Brother on, it would still be wrong to capitulate. It is literally possible for someone to depict the gods of half a dozen religions in one big sacrilegious orgy and not be jailed for blasphemy, let alone be murdered by zealots, and that's a good thing. It is the exceptions - people who will murder a cartoonist for depicting Mohammed, or perform industrial sabotage and make terroristic threats against a foreign nation for producing art that offends them - that are the problem.
I would not open up the can of "no true religion" if I were you
The point being that people are happy to lampoon the religious beliefs of others and see one of the heads of said religion killed who would be the first to shout their outrage if someone did the same thing to their beliefs...
And as you confirm, there are even plenty of people and groups who would kill or go to war over their make believe friends... and indeed plenty of other irrational reasons.
Could be worse, my gods are part of a long running comic book and multibillion dollar moving franchise. Personally I think you Abrahamic faith types need to get a sense of humor so my sci fi kaiju epic "Space Pilot Jesus Christ Vs. Mecha Pontious*" can finally get green lit.
*script inspired by and drafted with the aid of Yahtzee Croshaw
That is, also, not at all the same. Take your disjointed outrage elsewhere, please.
You asked for an example of people he gave a free pass to concerning this country's laws. I provided an example of not just one, but millions and you now try to change the goalpost.
You asked for an example of people he gave a free pass to concerning this country's laws. I provided an example of not just one, but millions and you now try to change the goalpost.
Ah, so were using "free pass" in some generic sense. Given your citation of Sharpton, a specific person, I assumed you were referencing Presidential pardons.
Strangely, this makes your outrage even more derisible as it involves you, again, mashing separate issues together for little reason.
North Korea denies Sony hack but warns U.S. : Worse is coming By Josh Levs, CNN updated 3:15 PM EST, Sun December 21, 2014
North Korea warns it will go after the White House, Pentagon and "whole U.S. mainland"
It insists it was not involved in the Sony hack
President Obama says the attack was "cybervandalism," not war.
(CNN) -- North Korea is accusing the U.S. government of being behind the making of the movie "The Interview."
And, in a dispatch on state media, the totalitarian regime warns the United States that U.S. "citadels" will be attacked, dwarfing the hacking attack on Sony that led to the cancellation of the film's release.
While steadfastly denying involvement in the hack, North Korea accused U.S. President Barack Obama of calling for "symmetric counteraction."
"The DPRK has already launched the toughest counteraction. Nothing is more serious miscalculation than guessing that just a single movie production company is the target of this counteraction. Our target is all the citadels of the U.S. imperialists who earned the bitterest grudge of all Koreans," a report on state-run KCNA read.
"Our toughest counteraction will be boldly taken against the White House, the Pentagon and the whole U.S. mainland, the cesspool of terrorism," the report said, adding that "fighters for justice" including the "Guardians of Peace" -- a group that claimed responsibility for the Sony attack -- "are sharpening bayonets not only in the U.S. mainland but in all other parts of the world."
The FBI on Friday pinned blame on North Korea for a hack into Sony's computer systems.
In an interview broadcast Sunday on CNN, Obama called it "an act of cybervandalism," not war.
While the film was the work of private individuals, North Korea insisted otherwise in its statement. "The DPRK has clear evidence that the U.S. administration was deeply involved in the making of such dishonest reactionary movie," it said.
"The Interview" is a comedy, with plans for an attempted assassination of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un a central plot point.
In a CNN interview on Friday, Sony Entertainment CEO Michael Lynton said the studio had not "given in" to pressure from hackers and was still considering ways to distribute the movie.
But that's not what the company initially said after canceling the film's release.
On Wednesday night, a studio spokesperson said simply, "Sony Pictures has no further release plans for the film."
Uh... On Topic, does anyone know when this movie is hitting the streaming services?
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Could be worse, my gods are part of a long running comic book and multibillion dollar moving franchise. Personally I think you Abrahamic faith types need to get a sense of humor so my sci fi kaiju epic "Space Pilot Jesus Christ Vs. Mecha Pontious*" can finally get green lit.
*script inspired by and drafted with the aid of Yahtzee Croshaw
Make this a reality, please.
I'm totally seeing Stigmata Missile Barrage in the cards.
The movie will surface either way and it will be torrented in the hundreds of thousands. Sony will still make a great loss of money and everyone who wants to see the movie will be able to do so. I do hope that Sony makes insane losses on the movie. Their disgusting cowardice fully justifies it.
Yahoo wrote:
Sony Lawyer Says 'The Interview' Will Be Released at Some Point
By Alex Stedman
The Interview will see the light of day, according to Sony lawyer David Boies.
Boies appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday and claimed that Sony’s controversial comedy The Interview “will be distributed.” How it will be distributed, however, he admitted is unclear right now.
“Sony only delayed this,” Boies told Meet the Press host Chuck Todd. “Sony has been fighting to get this picture distributed. It will be distributed. How it’s going to be distributed, I don’t think anybody knows quite yet. But it’s going to be distributed.”
On Wednesday, the same day Sony pulled the Christmas Day theatrical release of The Interview, the studio said it has “no further release plans” for the comedy, which stars Seth Rogen and James Franco as a duo attempting to assassinate North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.
On Friday, Sony Pictures CEO Michael Lynton said Sony “immediately began actively surveying alternatives” to release the film on a different platform.
Boies also touched on President Obama’s comments on the aftermath of the Sony hack attack.
“I think that what we have to do is use the president’s recognition of the importance of this issue as a rallying cry, so that all Americans can unite against what is really a threat to our national security,” said Boies. “If state-sponsored criminal acts like this can be directed against Sony, it can be directed against anybody.”
Obama has been critical of Sony’s decision in the last week, saying the studio “made a mistake” in pulling the theatrical release of the film.
“We can not have a society in which some dictator some place can start imposing censorship in the United States, because if somebody is able to intimidate us out of releasing a satirical movie, imagine what they start doing once they see a documentary that they don’t like or news reports that they don’t like,” Obama said. “That’s now who we are. That’s not what America is about.”
Obama also called the hack attack “cyber-vandalism” rather than an act of war.
“I’m not debating whether it ought to be called ‘criminal,’ ‘vandalism,’ ‘terrorism.’ What we know is that that was a state-sponsored attack on the privacy of an American corporation and its employees,” Boies said.
Sony pulled The Interview’s theatrical release after a number of large exhibitors refused to show it, due to threats in which hackers evoked the memory of 9/11 in claiming they would attack theaters that showed the film.
North Korea has called US President Barack Obama a "monkey" for inciting cinemas to screen a comedy featuring a fictional plot to kill its leader, and blamed Washington for an Internet blackout this week.
The isolated dictatorship's powerful National Defence Commission (NDC) threatened "inescapable deadly blows" over the film and accused the US of "disturbing the Internet operation" of North Korean media outlets.
The Internet outage triggered speculation that US authorities may have launched a cyber-attack in retaliation for the hacking of Sony Pictures -- the studio behind madcap North Korea comedy "The Interview".
Washington has said the attack on Sony was carried out by Pyongyang.
The NDC accused Obama of taking the lead in encouraging cinemas to screen "The Interview" on Christmas Day. Sony had initially cancelled its release after major US cinema chains said they would not show it, following threats by hackers aimed at cinemagoers.
"Obama always goes reckless in words and deeds like a monkey in a tropical forest," a spokesman for the NDC's policy department said in a statement published by the North's official KCNA news agency.
"If the US persists in American-style arrogant, high-handed and gangster-like arbitrary practices despite (North Korea's) repeated warnings, the US should bear in mind that its failed political affairs will face inescapable deadly blows," the NDC spokesman said.
He accused Washington of linking the hacking of Sony to North Korea "without clear evidence" and repeated Pyongyang's condemnation of the film, describing it as "a movie for agitating terrorism produced with high-ranking politicians of the US administration involved".
The film took in $1 million in its limited-release opening day, showing in around 300 mostly small, independent theatres. It was also released online for rental or purchase.
Sony execs. You in effect surrendered to a "nation" smaller than some of our states.
).
