By now, you might have heard about the copyright infringement by the producers of Expelled. Wesley Elsberry points out a serious legal problem for the producers of Expelled if a lawsuit were to proceed–the discovery phase (italics mine):
If the “Expelled” folks think about this for more than five minutes or so, they will do everything in their power to comply with the XVIVO request, including screwing the distribution deal and holding off the premiere for another several months. Why?
…”Expelled” is a production linked into the persecution stories at the heart of IDC. They have had months of discussions and correspondence with the principal figures of the IDC movement. They likely have recordings of discussions in meetings and other places where all these folks felt free to chat….
Lawsuits come with the subpeona power of the courts for discovery. Depositions of witnesses are taken under oath. Cross-examination of witnesses is not restricted to a delimited field of questions; anything that could bear upon the credibility or trustworthiness of witnesses in court is fair game for inquiry. The court can compel answering awkward questions with contempt citations if needed….
Premise Media could accomplish what outsiders never have hoped to do: bring about the complete public discrediting of the IDC movement in its most basic claims to personal integrity and suffering in the face of persecution. And it would be a completely self-inflicted wound. All Premise Media needs to do is blow off the XVIVO letter and continue with their opening schedule unaltered.
If you don’t think discovery is serious, just ask Bill Clinton. They–and they means anyone involved with the film, even tangentially–can be asked all sorts of questions. This would far more revealing than the Wedge Document ever was. And I would love to hear sworn testimony as to their intent in interviewing Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers and others under the guise of a different movie concept….