Corey Feldman, child actor turned activist, had released a documentary, ‘My truth: the rape of two Corey’s.’ Among the diehard Feldman fans, the documentary was highly appraised, however, that’s where the applause ends. For others, it was viewed as a ‘circus act’ poorly constructed. For many, the documentary left more questions than answers, some even claimed that it hadn’t really proven the sexual abuse claims, and then there is the ‘money grab’ accusation, which we will get into a bit.
As stated, Feldman had released a documentary. His explanation behind it was to ‘expose the pedophile elites in Hollywood.’ However, the documentary, according to multiple sources, only names one; hence the start of the many questions. We were unable to see the documentary in full, but from what one of our team did see, Feldman spoke of a childhood masturbation session. It was, at this point, he stopped watching.
The fact the documentary fails to actually name anybody within this “elite group,” has lead many to believe that the documentary was a ploy for cash and not truth, as Feldman claimed. They back this claim with the fact that Feldman, if he were about truth, would had made the documentary open for all to see. However, what he did do is stamp a $20.00 per view to it. Now, we can continue diving into this documentary, but we have a DMCA to discuss.
Recently, journalist Meko Haze (Discuss Global,) did a multi-livestream. Within this livestream, he watched, and commentated on Feldman’s documentary. While this does fall under ‘fair use,’ since it was clearly done for commentary purposes, Feldman, and his publishing group, apparantly disagreed. So, let’s clear this up, was it copyright infringement?
When looking up the definition to ‘fair use commentary,’ we got this: “
a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright
This means, that because the journalist had clearly acted in this regard, it was not a copyright infringement, as Feldman claimed in his DMCA report. It also enforces the belief that the DMCA was only filed because the platform, “Discuss,” was critical of his work, as any journalist would be. While the video has been removed from Youtube, it can still be viewed here.
Notation: Should we obtain a copy of the DMCA claim, we will include it in this article.