Quote:

---

ADT acts as a distributor/outlet of screeners to it's many reviewers, and also has paid the way for many of said reviewers to attend the conventions. Sooo, there is consideration...what's so unlawful about the copyright?

---

Actually, they don't pay for most, if any, of their reviewers to go to Vegas. Reviewers can get press credentials without them (hint: they are FREELY provided by those managing the shows) to most industry events and not all of the reviews are written based on screeners (though again, those are provided FREE by the production companies, some going directly to reviewers and others filtering through by a third party nowadays from what I've been told).

Copyright law is a very boring topic for most and not nearly as simple to understand as some would lead you to believe, especially thanks to the multitude of issues relating to the internet. Still, as I said in the other thread, the validity of the OP has not diminished since it was made and is a worthy topic of conversation regardless of the specific websites. I think that Gene, a former writer for AVN that has made NUMEROUS claims regarding his previous employer's practices, understands that and ran with it using good faith. If it hits a sore spot with some website owners, it tells more about them than Gene, myself, or others discussing it now.