Argue the case if you can, keep certificates of where my head is out of this. GoI's legal notice is just that, BBC would have had its lawyers look it up before going ahead.
Its not my job to argue the case, that's for the lawyers on both side. We only have the facts that are out in the open.
Neither is GoI foolish to send a notice to BBC without thinking things through.
Forget about my understanding and stick to worrying only about your own. BBC still won't be liable. Any action by GoI will be subject to a challenge in a court.
Yes, but Indian courts and Indian law which you so wish to run away from. Haha. Sure, BBC can challenge and they will lose if they have violated norms and obligations as the legal notice of GoI suggests.
They violated no norms in India, Indian norms are not applicable to the U.S. or the U.K. which have their own norms. Revoking licenses etc are subject to be dealt with by appellate courts . There is no contract that the BBC breached and even the argument that there has been a breach of contract by the film maker has yet to be proven. Merely stating that there is a breach does not make it so. Has to be so adjudicated. Maybe you should get a better understanding of how the law works before you get all worked up.
You are going in circles. The permission was given for a non-commercial documentary. BBC is a commercial entity. The BBC was informed of this breach of contract by the filmmaker, the still went ahead, thus violating Indian law. You can't claim that even though the good was stolen, since I obtained it legitimately, I am not liable of I ignore the fact that i was stolen.
I have zero interest in US or UK laws, they are irrelevant to what happens to the BBC in India.
The GoI can act and BBC can whine to the courts. We can, or atleast I can enjoy. There is no point debating law with you here, you seem too emotionally invested in this silly movie and do not demonstrate understanding.
Anyway, as I said, the silly movie will be out of news come Monday and then the ball will be BBC's court as to how they respond to the legal notice, if they don't as they haven't before, GoI can and should act.
of course it'll be forgotten, just as everything is
Indians were plenty out in the streets when this happened.
still a stupid self defeating move to ban this, there would hardly have been any talk if they had just let it be shown.
Indians were out in street for the real horror incident, not some silly movie with an agenda. That's my point.
Its not self-defeating. The filmmaker and BBC violated obligations, they cannot be allowed to go free else such incidents will reoccur.
People can talk all they want, that's irrelevant. People talk about Kim Kardashian, so what?