<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Britain: publicly funded films must advance diversity	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:19:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: David Schwartz		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296818</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Schwartz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:19:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296818</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@MattS: So if I tell a subordinate that she can only have a promotion if she&#039;ll have sex with me, the complaint should come from the other subordinates who didn&#039;t receive a similarly generous offer? The standing to complain about a benefit hinged on an impermissible condition comes from the coercive effect of the impermissible condition on the person to whom the offer is made, in their capacity as the person who must accept or refuse the offer.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@MattS: So if I tell a subordinate that she can only have a promotion if she&#8217;ll have sex with me, the complaint should come from the other subordinates who didn&#8217;t receive a similarly generous offer? The standing to complain about a benefit hinged on an impermissible condition comes from the coercive effect of the impermissible condition on the person to whom the offer is made, in their capacity as the person who must accept or refuse the offer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: David Schwartz		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296817</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Schwartz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:17:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296817</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Do you not understand that as a funder of art, the government is under no obligation to fund art it doesn’t like for whatever reason?&quot; &quot;The filmmakers might have standing to complain about how the money is being spent as taxpayers, they do not have standing to complain as filmmakers.&quot;

The government may have no obligation to give tax breaks to religious organizations too. But if it does so, and it conditions them on worshiping Jesus, it seems to me that the standing would be for those who are denied tax breaks on the grounds that they have the &quot;wrong&quot; religion.

If the government attaches an impermissible condition to an offer, it seems to me that the recipient of the offer has standing to complain about the coercive nature of the impermissible condition, even if the offer is for something to which the person is not entitled.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Do you not understand that as a funder of art, the government is under no obligation to fund art it doesn’t like for whatever reason?&#8221; &#8220;The filmmakers might have standing to complain about how the money is being spent as taxpayers, they do not have standing to complain as filmmakers.&#8221;</p>
<p>The government may have no obligation to give tax breaks to religious organizations too. But if it does so, and it conditions them on worshiping Jesus, it seems to me that the standing would be for those who are denied tax breaks on the grounds that they have the &#8220;wrong&#8221; religion.</p>
<p>If the government attaches an impermissible condition to an offer, it seems to me that the recipient of the offer has standing to complain about the coercive nature of the impermissible condition, even if the offer is for something to which the person is not entitled.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Hugo S. Cunningham		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296529</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hugo S. Cunningham]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2014 03:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296529</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@JS--

John Cleese, the current Minister of Silly Walks, could be given a second portfolio as the Minister of Diversity (though I suspect he would avoid said portfolio as radioactive).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@JS&#8211;</p>
<p>John Cleese, the current Minister of Silly Walks, could be given a second portfolio as the Minister of Diversity (though I suspect he would avoid said portfolio as radioactive).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: MattS		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296282</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MattS]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2014 13:32:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296282</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Remember it is not the government’s money but the taxpayer’s money they are spending.&quot;

I haven&#039;t forgotten or ignored that.   The filmmakers might have standing to complain about how the money is being spent as taxpayers, they do not have standing to complain as filmmakers.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Remember it is not the government’s money but the taxpayer’s money they are spending.&#8221;</p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t forgotten or ignored that.   The filmmakers might have standing to complain about how the money is being spent as taxpayers, they do not have standing to complain as filmmakers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Richard Nieporent		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296146</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Nieporent]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2014 00:06:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296146</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@MattS

As far as I know, there is no law in the UK that mandates a certain percentage of minorities be hired. Assuming that is the case then it should not be acceptable for the government to force filmmakers to do that. Remember it is not the government’s money but the taxpayer’s money they are spending. 
?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@MattS</p>
<p>As far as I know, there is no law in the UK that mandates a certain percentage of minorities be hired. Assuming that is the case then it should not be acceptable for the government to force filmmakers to do that. Remember it is not the government’s money but the taxpayer’s money they are spending.<br />
?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: MattS		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296084</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MattS]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:17:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296084</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@Richard Nieporent,

&quot;Do you not understand that under Communism the State controlled everything?&quot;  

Exactly, which is why it isn&#039;t in the least relevant to the issue in the UK.

&quot;Do you not understand that by controlling artistic expression it is no longer artistic expression?&quot;

Do you not understand that in the pre-government-funding days of arts patronage by the wealthy, the patrons had a lot of influence over the art produced?  Do you not understand that as a funder of art, the government is under no obligation to fund art it doesn&#039;t like for whatever reason?

Do you not understand that it has always been the case that artists who want complete artistic control/freedom need to fund their art out of their own pockets?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Richard Nieporent,</p>
<p>&#8220;Do you not understand that under Communism the State controlled everything?&#8221;  </p>
<p>Exactly, which is why it isn&#8217;t in the least relevant to the issue in the UK.</p>
<p>&#8220;Do you not understand that by controlling artistic expression it is no longer artistic expression?&#8221;</p>
<p>Do you not understand that in the pre-government-funding days of arts patronage by the wealthy, the patrons had a lot of influence over the art produced?  Do you not understand that as a funder of art, the government is under no obligation to fund art it doesn&#8217;t like for whatever reason?</p>
<p>Do you not understand that it has always been the case that artists who want complete artistic control/freedom need to fund their art out of their own pockets?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: No Name Guy		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296052</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[No Name Guy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2014 15:58:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296052</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[South Park makes fun of this tokenism with the &quot;Black&quot; family.  The kid&#039;s name is &quot;Token&quot;.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Token_Black#Token_Black]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>South Park makes fun of this tokenism with the &#8220;Black&#8221; family.  The kid&#8217;s name is &#8220;Token&#8221;.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Token_Black#Token_Black" rel="nofollow ugc">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Token_Black#Token_Black</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Wfjag		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296028</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wfjag]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2014 13:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296028</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[30% of the supporting cast who are &quot;minority&quot; is 1 &quot;tick&quot;. So, if I claim that the lead script writer is a closet Tranny (&quot;tick&quot; #2), my remake of &quot;Birth of a Nation&quot; will qualify for public funding on &quot;diversity&quot; grounds.  Quotas are such wonderful ideas.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>30% of the supporting cast who are &#8220;minority&#8221; is 1 &#8220;tick&#8221;. So, if I claim that the lead script writer is a closet Tranny (&#8220;tick&#8221; #2), my remake of &#8220;Birth of a Nation&#8221; will qualify for public funding on &#8220;diversity&#8221; grounds.  Quotas are such wonderful ideas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-296015</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:48:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-296015</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[So if I wanted to make a publicly funded film about, say, fire safety in the home, I&#039;d have to make sure that a certain percentage of the firemen were senior citizens and wheelchair users?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So if I wanted to make a publicly funded film about, say, fire safety in the home, I&#8217;d have to make sure that a certain percentage of the firemen were senior citizens and wheelchair users?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Steven Jones		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2014/07/britain-publicly-funded-films-must-advance-diversity/comment-page-1/#comment-295886</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steven Jones]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2014 20:41:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=47001#comment-295886</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I guess the British government wants to make the U.K. film industry more like the Australian one, an enormous train wreck. Far too many Aussie movies are about how the Aborigines are hard done by and that it&#039;s all the white man&#039;s fault. This is because the Aussie gov&#039;t film funding model strongly encourages it. Baz Luhrmann&#039;s film Australia = Exhibit A.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess the British government wants to make the U.K. film industry more like the Australian one, an enormous train wreck. Far too many Aussie movies are about how the Aborigines are hard done by and that it&#8217;s all the white man&#8217;s fault. This is because the Aussie gov&#8217;t film funding model strongly encourages it. Baz Luhrmann&#8217;s film Australia = Exhibit A.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
