...is Sony not a Japanese company?
Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE) (click here) is a subsidiary of Sony Entertainment Inc., which is a subsidiary of Tokyo-based Sony Corporation, and includes the following groups:
COLUMBIA TRISTAR MOTION PICTURE GROUP
SONY PICTURES DIGITAL PRODUCTIONS
SONY PICTURES HOME ENTERTAINMENT
SONY PICTURES STUDIOS
SONY PICTURES TELEVISION
I think there are a lot of problems regarding all this, including such a thing called jurisdiction. Where exactly was the company effected within the borders of the USA or at their corporate headquarters in Japan?
Four unreleased movies (click here) were leaked just days after the studio was forced to shut down its network in response to a security breach.
The scope of this cyber breach goes far beyond one movie as well. The graph is a casual measure of the distance from Tokyo to other major cities. Bejing is about 1300 miles from Tokyo, North Korea is going to be that much more, but, not as great a distance compared to Las Vegas.
I realize the issue of exporting terrorism is a concern, but, where did the breach happen in the USA or Japan? It is my opinion while this so called problem seems to be trivial to some extent; it really isn't; when one begins to recognize the depth of the cyber attack.
North Korea has it's own reasons for carrying out this 'mission' against the movie "The Interview," but, at the same instance there are major international laws and treaties involved with this. If Japan was breached and then the USA that shows proximity to North Korea is a problem for that hemisphere. But, if the attack took place in the USA, we are included in the country(ies) with an interest ending this type of aggression.
I don't think there is anything minor about these circumstances. So, while the theaters were really the impetus to retain the movie from being shown, there are a lot of complications for Sony in dealing with all this.
One of the statements by North Korea is that Sony was to end any and all leaks. That isn't even realistic. The leaks happened and it wasn't Sony that did it.
The controversy surrounding this that has been addressed is the idea this will lead to greater and greater infringements on the USA's freedoms and being co-opted by a foreign country in leveraging power over a corporation. That is quite frankly the least of the problem. The problem is huge and begins with the understanding the extent of the breach into Sony's corporate rights. The extent to which that is international as well as corporate has to be decided. The legal wrangling of all this is extensive.
I think Sony simply decided the relationships with theaters and all those currently involuntarily involved needed to be protected. I doubt they had policies to even address such a bizarre circumstance.
President Obama is correct in that having a motion picture of paramount importance to a distant country is extremely odd. There are films aired in the USA all the time that carry controversy, but, that is our country and not North Korea where minor blemishes to their dictator is a gigantic problem.
I also believe North Korea took offense at the idea the USA was lampooning their leader in asking unassuming people to 'take him out.' The reaction by the actors when asked was "Take him out to lunch?" So the oddity of the film was not appreciated and the idea of ending a young leader's life in that country in particular is very real. This is off topic, but, realizing there were members of Kim's family put to death, the entire dialogue about any death in North Korea is a sensitive issue. I know it is not the issue in the USA, but, when one puts it into context from the view point of North Korea their problems with the film becomes somewhat clearer. I am not justifying any of this, because, I think it is a very big problem now that it has come our shores.
I know from a military standpoint and having the upper hand the reaction by Sony is wrong in the eyes of the Commander and Chief and rightfully so, but, I still believe Sony and Japan have to weigh all the problems and do what is best for everyone. I think everyone has their viewpoint and all are valid. It is simply how one views the problem and impact that one may feel differently than someone else. I will leave it in Sony's hands to do the right thing for their country and expect countries to become involved in defining everyone's responsibility. The problem is tricky. Why take risks when human beings are involved?
Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE) (click here) is a subsidiary of Sony Entertainment Inc., which is a subsidiary of Tokyo-based Sony Corporation, and includes the following groups:
COLUMBIA TRISTAR MOTION PICTURE GROUP
SONY PICTURES DIGITAL PRODUCTIONS
SONY PICTURES HOME ENTERTAINMENT
SONY PICTURES STUDIOS
SONY PICTURES TELEVISION
I think there are a lot of problems regarding all this, including such a thing called jurisdiction. Where exactly was the company effected within the borders of the USA or at their corporate headquarters in Japan?Four unreleased movies (click here) were leaked just days after the studio was forced to shut down its network in response to a security breach.
The scope of this cyber breach goes far beyond one movie as well. The graph is a casual measure of the distance from Tokyo to other major cities. Bejing is about 1300 miles from Tokyo, North Korea is going to be that much more, but, not as great a distance compared to Las Vegas.
I realize the issue of exporting terrorism is a concern, but, where did the breach happen in the USA or Japan? It is my opinion while this so called problem seems to be trivial to some extent; it really isn't; when one begins to recognize the depth of the cyber attack.
North Korea has it's own reasons for carrying out this 'mission' against the movie "The Interview," but, at the same instance there are major international laws and treaties involved with this. If Japan was breached and then the USA that shows proximity to North Korea is a problem for that hemisphere. But, if the attack took place in the USA, we are included in the country(ies) with an interest ending this type of aggression.
I don't think there is anything minor about these circumstances. So, while the theaters were really the impetus to retain the movie from being shown, there are a lot of complications for Sony in dealing with all this.
One of the statements by North Korea is that Sony was to end any and all leaks. That isn't even realistic. The leaks happened and it wasn't Sony that did it.
The controversy surrounding this that has been addressed is the idea this will lead to greater and greater infringements on the USA's freedoms and being co-opted by a foreign country in leveraging power over a corporation. That is quite frankly the least of the problem. The problem is huge and begins with the understanding the extent of the breach into Sony's corporate rights. The extent to which that is international as well as corporate has to be decided. The legal wrangling of all this is extensive.
I think Sony simply decided the relationships with theaters and all those currently involuntarily involved needed to be protected. I doubt they had policies to even address such a bizarre circumstance.
President Obama is correct in that having a motion picture of paramount importance to a distant country is extremely odd. There are films aired in the USA all the time that carry controversy, but, that is our country and not North Korea where minor blemishes to their dictator is a gigantic problem.
I also believe North Korea took offense at the idea the USA was lampooning their leader in asking unassuming people to 'take him out.' The reaction by the actors when asked was "Take him out to lunch?" So the oddity of the film was not appreciated and the idea of ending a young leader's life in that country in particular is very real. This is off topic, but, realizing there were members of Kim's family put to death, the entire dialogue about any death in North Korea is a sensitive issue. I know it is not the issue in the USA, but, when one puts it into context from the view point of North Korea their problems with the film becomes somewhat clearer. I am not justifying any of this, because, I think it is a very big problem now that it has come our shores.
I know from a military standpoint and having the upper hand the reaction by Sony is wrong in the eyes of the Commander and Chief and rightfully so, but, I still believe Sony and Japan have to weigh all the problems and do what is best for everyone. I think everyone has their viewpoint and all are valid. It is simply how one views the problem and impact that one may feel differently than someone else. I will leave it in Sony's hands to do the right thing for their country and expect countries to become involved in defining everyone's responsibility. The problem is tricky. Why take risks when human beings are involved?
