Andrew Young hands over JRE sex tape to the judge..

[ddeclue]

just heard it on the news.

do we need popcorn for this one?

:popcorn:

:rofl:

[chelsea0011]

1. I haven't followed this closely. How did he end up with the tape,

and who made it?

[chasmj]

3. The sordid tale:

http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/5982978/article-As-Young-turns-over-tapes--questions-on-copies-surface?instance=homefourthleft

[Ozymanithrax]

2. Who cares?

[bluestateguy]

4. Wow this Andrew Young guy is really milking this for all that it is worth

I suppose a book deal for this nobody is already in the works.

[DURHAM D]

5. Its already been published. It was released a week or so ago. nt

[cbdo2007]

6. Update: Judge hasn't left his office all afternoon...

ha ha, just kidding

[customerserviceguy]

7. Now that was funny!

Good one, CB!

[unc70]

8. Young also showed it to ABC news, but has no rights to it

Because Young has now admitted he "showed" the video to ABC in connection with an interview promoting his book, he has undermined his prior assertions that he would not sell the tape or otherwise seek gain from it,

In spite of my lack of trust and low opinion of Hunter, if she made the video ("tape") and took the pictures then she is the copyright holder, with legal protection from the moment the works were created, and she retains all rights to their use, viewing, publication, copying, etc. as fully protected unpublished works. These rights are retained without regard to her possession of any or all copies, and any transfer of her rights must be in writing.

The current copyright laws (DMCA) leave absolutely no doubt to ownership, etc., making Young's claim of "abandoned property" moot, and any infringement of her rights would risk severe criminal and civil penalties. ABC would be foolish to use the video or its contents without acquiring that right, and it would be very difficult to justify their use otherwise as falling under any exceptons like "fair use", particularly since the video is unpublished.

If the video gets posted to the net, Hunter's legal rights and remedies can force sites to remove the content, but we all know the difficulty of enforcing such rights. On the other hand, Young and anyone else involved would be in big trouble, criminal and financial.

BTW Young in interviews has stated that he is not certain that the woman in the video with Edwards is actually Hunter, probably to cast doubt that Hunter holds the copyrights. But Young would still lack any rights to the video, unless he or his wife made the video themselves (whatever its content) or he possesses a document transfering those rights. (Any hidden camera video of this type made without consent of those involved would be illegal in most places.)

I don't understand why Young continues playing this risky gambit, unless to prolong this issue being in the news in hopes of generating sales of his book.