[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Nerwen .. when you accuse me of something, please stick to that when reposting my previous thoughts so we can see if you were correct or not. That is only fair.
There is a disturbing trend here - not only here but on other boards also - where instead of directly meeting a persons point head on, people like to rephrase, paraphrase, change the meaning or wordsthe person used in an attempt to twist the original argument to bettermeet their own response.

Sauron. I have never attempted to twist your words.

All I am doing is trying to find out what your current position actually is. You seem to change it constantly. So I state things in my own words and ask you if that's what you mean. That's all.

And I did quote you directly. In my last post I gave a lengthy quotation from you. Here it is again:

Is it not possible, that a sharp legal staff with some innovative thinking, could well claim that they own the films rights to that material and anything published later and made known to the public can be used by them as well since it only details material which they already owned and had use of?

Could it not be legally argued that CT causing to be published the SIL after his fathers death, was the unfair diminishing of rights his father had already sold and were legally owned by others?

You attack my use of the phrase "legal aspect" when referring to this quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Legal aspect? legal aspect? What in the world is a legal aspect? Sounds like the broadest possible term you could come up with that takes in nearly everything that has anything to do with contracts, rights or the law. It says nothing about me urging anyone to sue anybody else as you claimed wasthe cornerstone of my argument.

I did indeed want to be as broad as possible. I was sure that if I used any more specific term you would fall back on your usual tactic of claiming that's not what you meant... without having to state what you do mean.

You are clearly nitpicking in order to evade my main point. Do you deny that you were talking about law in this post? I drew attention to it because you have recently started claiming that the question is a purely ethical one.

I challenge you to find anywhere that I said you were urging lawsuits. For someone who claims other people are twisting his words, you seem rather adept at it yourself.

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Please show me where I said the film rights holders can sue the Tolkien Estate for damages caused by publishing THE SIL. Please show me. I never said it. Some type of action may have come up in the discussion in passing over the last three pages but that was never my point.

Obviously you could not locate what I did not say and could back up your accusation.

It wasn't an accusation. I was asking you if that's what you meant. At that stage you were still talking about Christopher Tolkien having harmed Zaentz/New Line by diminishing the value of their film rights to LotR.

Edit: X'd with Sauron the White and The Saucepan Man.