I really want to see this but I canât find out how. I live in Glasgow at the moment but there doesnât seem to be any screenings here. Do we know if it will be available to stream at some point?
And I remember what Penn Jillette said when you wondered about dropping Snowden a email about it. 
AS far as I can tell tonight is your last chance to see Citizenfour in Glasgow: http://www.londonnet.co.uk/cinema/glasgow-glasgowfilmtheatre.html
Looks like piratebay will be our friend here.
UmâŚ
*ignore this
Not in the immediate future it wonât be 
Just for infoâŚ
http://oldpiratebay.org
or
Now go and download your openly licenced movies and software! 
Actually it is deceptive and possibly unlawful. The deceptive review by Cory Doctorow is at a minimum misleading and possibly illegal. The author failed to disclose in the over the top BoingBoing positive review of CITIZENFOUR a prior prominent role as an actor in THE INTERNETâS OWN BOY, a Participant Media Project just like CITIZENFOUR. Here is the evidence: http://www.nytimes.com/movies/movie/476493/The-Internet-s-Own-Boy-The-Story-of-Aaron-Swartz/credits. Cory Doctorow may be liable under New Yorkâs Deceptive Trade Acts Statute, among others, and has violated movie review ethics of most major movie review publications.
This type of conduct has been carried out by Participant Media Executive Vice President Diane Weyermann previously and BOING BOING should remove the review due Doctorowâs failure to disclose a conflict of interest.
Sounds like a valid concern, in the abstract. But Iâd say Doctor Coryowâs post hardly qualifies as an actual review, itâs more of a personal account which doesnât go into much critical detail about the movie itself. Auditing it, I see: five short paragraphs - (1, 2, 3, 6, 7) most of the writing - are about he and his wife. One paragraph (5) is about Snowden himself. Which leaves one paragraph (4) which is specifically aboit Potras and her film.
To say that can represent a conflict of interest seems to suggest a rather formal, structured arrangement. Was Doctorow paid to write this post? Even if he has been involved with these people, isnât he still entitled to state his opinions about the movie? Why should we assume that âmovie review ethics of most major movie review publicationsâ apply here when this article is hardly a review, and the bOING bOING BBS is not a movie review site?
Conflict of interest disclosed! Case dismissed?
The Oscars are being voted on now and Cory Doctorowâs deceptive review appears at the top of the google search for Citizenfour news. Therefore, the concerns are nontrivial. Moreover, EVP Participant Media Diane Weyermann, who is Exec. Prod. of Citizenfour and quite likely primarily responsible for its expedited funding and distribution has been previously accused of using similar tactics.
Disclosure is not a sufficient remedy after the violation of the the Deceptive Trade Act Statute because the reader of the review is unlikely to read on BoingBoing the disclosure. BoingBoing should removed the deceptive and unethical review and shame on Cory Doctorow.
Not following. They read it here first, but they wonât read the disclosure? Who visits a comment forum, then disappears never to read again?
Not sure if âshame on Cory Doctorowâ is an enforceable judicial verdict. Iâve been content to remain confused as to where he has citizenship, residence, was raised and born, in what country he contracted to publish the suspect review.
I apologize for my ignorance of âdbslawâ. You specialize in an area of law that I donât regularly read. I am familiar with Dewey, Cheatem and Howe, however!
Itâs nontrivial because of âThe Oscarsâ? FFS, what a load of bollocks. If your deep personal ethics hinge upon what helps some fakey awards ceremony, I canât say as that I relate. And, as I had pointed out, Coryâs post is mostly about his own experiences and the circumstances of his seeing it, which Iâd argue he is in any case entitled to write about. By my standards, it doesnât even comprise a movie review in the first place. Anyway, he is one of the editors here, so he can basically write what he likes without making concessions. If he was writing this for some other site or magazine, then perhaps he or they would have some obligation to point out where he is coming from.
With all due respect, You should consult your lawyers and consider the legal and ethical implications of BoingBoingâs conduct under New York law. You are also in violation of your own terms of service in our view and my firm suggests you reconsider your position. As for your rude response and foolish rationalizations, you will have to reflect upon the consequences, if any, of such in the various ways such an unprofessional has been handled.
All rights fully reserved.
Smallman Law PLLC
Correction last line: response has been handled.
I appreciate the polite response. The applicable law is New York, USA. Cory Doctorow has written a #deceptive and #unethical #filmreview of #Citizenfour and may be subject to any proper civil and criminal remedies.
Actually, itâs about ethics in film recommendations.
