Do you agree with Sony Pictures' decision to cancel the Dec 25 U.S. release of the film "The Interview" after threats from a hackers' group?

I have conflicting feelings about this, and because I am on the fence I didn't vote either way in this poll.

As much as I advocate freedom of expression and dislike Kim Jong-Un (he is perfect fodder for comedy sketches), it is highly inappropriate to make a movie fantasizing about the assassination of a world leader unless it is a documentary about something that actually took place. Having said that, I would like to see this movie (and will if possible), particularly after all of the controversy.

Still, imagine if Hollywood had made a movie about the assassination of PM Abe or S. Korean President Park — it would have caused substantial damage to bilateral relations.

I agree.

All the major theatre chains pulled out, leaving Sony with one option: extremely limited release at independent theaters - which seems absurd for what has turned into one of the most high profile releases in recent memory.

Seems like a better business move to wait until the theaters agree to distribute. This story isn't going away soon, the media will make sure people are lined up around the block when it is released.

Anonymous has announced that they are going to release it to the public.

They should have released it, even with the cowardly pull-outs by the theatres, the publicity they've received for this film is amazing.

Regarding free speech, it's all or nothing. If you ban one thing, then you might as well ban it all.

@Strangerland Only if they can get their hands on it. Which would likely only happen by victimizing Sony again.

As for the people that said Yes, you clearly have no understanding of the importance of freedom of speech and how it should protect the content you object to the most. It is more important than profits and extremely unlikely terrorist threats. I would have put myself "on the line" on Christmas day if asked.

Sony should have gone ahead with the release. If the major theaters pulled out, then security could be concentrated on theaters that were willing to show the movie. If there was an attack on a theater it would either be concluded as a disturbed individual (domestic), a terrorist act (with a proper response), or an act of war (and good bye 'Best' Korea). What has happened between 1990 and 2014 has been the slow degrading of artistic expression where lines are being drawn what and what not can be displayed or joked about.

It's not like they had much of a choice. They got totally pwned by the hackers. Leaked emails, passwords, personal information, unreleased movies. Getting out of this crisis will cost them a ton of money and the hackers said it wasn't all. If Sony did release the movie, many of their employees could be at risk of losing their private savings and credit card information.

If you walk into a bank and there's a masked, armed individual inside, you don't complain that the bank is halting operation, do you?

@MissingCylonModel There is no masked, armed individual in this case. At least in a position to cause certain harm. And this would be like the bank telling you, "Well, we were robbed. Should have kept your money somewhere else." When they clearly didn't lose all their money as well.

I see hackers as masked (not revealing their identities) and armed (threatening Sony as a company and its employees) individuals, @scipantheist. Sony Studios is in pretty big trouble. I'd be surprised if they recover enough to make another Spider-Man movie.

Once it was confirmed that the hacking was done by the DPRK, Sony Pictures should have immediately released the film for free online.

I can't clarify how much this film doesn't fall under the category of free speech, but when it comes to art and film it is considered freedom of expression which is what this is.

As for the hackers, one should not threaten terrorist actions on foreign soil against normal citizens for watching a film in their own country because they chose to see or not see a film that was created by 2 individual actors using their freedom of expression. That is when the government of the country becomes involved which the hackers are now just realizing.

As for Anonymous considering a retaliation hack, they need to get their heads out their butts. They may be private citizens of many different countries, but they should just help their local governments track and identify information regarding the hack, not go vigilante. Being funded by a government is completely different than doing stuff solo as they forget governments have military and intelligence gathering capabilities. If they intend to assault NKs government infrastructure, they could just as easily start a war with a crazy nation (which many of us consider NK to be).

I think Sony did the right decision by canceling the movie premiere! The reason is because of the discrimination within the movie! Making a movie and publish it were the goal is to kill a national leader in a different country should be totally banned, this is an exaggerated use of The Freedom Of Expression!! North Korea is being absolutely excluded from the world society just because of their aggressive stance. I don`t think USA would have loved if North Korea made and published a movie public were the goal was to kill Barack Obama!! USA would have probably responded with sanctions!

Firstly, I believe that Sony execs made a poor decision to cancel the movie premiere. I believe that the decision was motivated primarily by their fear of additional embarrassing e-mail exchanges between execs regarding Hollywood celebrities. Bet those additional e-mails are leaked out anyway over time anyway...

Sony claims that 80 percent of the theaters would not show it as a reason for the cancellation. The better business decision would be to air the film in the remaining 20 percent of theaters and let the economic success (or failure) of the film drive the remaining theaters to reconsider screening "The Interview" or not.

If NK is behind this affair, I would advise President Obama to engage in the following policy: 1) The CIA buys the rights to "The Interview" from Sony 2) The movie is dubbed into Korean 3) copy the movie onto millions of little thumb drives 4) smuggle them into NK somehow or float them on balloons or whatever delivery method 5) Post the movie on various social media for free 6) Give media companies rights to show it for free

The funny (not "ha ha") thing is that this movie probably would have gone from theaters to DVD in a couple of weeks anyway without much fanfare. Now, it's a must-see for lots of folks, thanks to this hacking affair.

The real comedy is Mr. Kim's haircut; doesn't cost a dime to see it either.

I hear this movie is pretty darn tootin' funny, even though it's about murder

Ignorance has always been the weapon of tyrants; enlightenment the salvation of the free. Bill Richardson

This is wrong, so very wrong. We must be able to comment on, discuss, question, criticise, and satirise openly and freely. This movie itself may not be of any particular merit, however the minute we allow our freedom of speech and expression to be compromised, be it a movie, a cartoon, an article in a newspaper, a blog we have given those who would aim to control, suppress and ultimately be above scrutiny precisely what they want.

Don't cower to the dictator! Let him make a move, the movies storyline may become reality.

Easy to say don't give in to terrorists, be brave, etc. I wonder how many people who criticise Sony for being cowardly would be first in line to sue them if they were injured while watching the movie?

The North Korean threat (if it even was North Korea) is a weak one. But Americans who are so accustomed to suing over every misfortune, and bowing down to aggressive airport security, endless government regulations and militarised police aren't exactly the kind of people likely to stand up to even little threats.

Isn't North Korea the country that uses Windows XP to launch missiles?

Well... I couldn't vote on this either. Sony never said the movie wouldn't be released, they merely stated that it wouldn't be released Christmas Day. I think all of the "freedom of speech and expression" are carrying things too far, in light of the fact that SONY never agreed to never release the film. They lawyered up, and decided they didn't want to be at risk on Christmas Day for anything that could have happened, so they'll release it a week or two later... Big Deal. As to those who will definitely go see it, now that there is conflict over the movie... You've been duped. If you weren't going to watch this piece of garbage before, then why in the name of all that's unholy would you watch it now?

I'm not a big conspiracy theory guy, but I know the US(My) Government is full of liars, idiots, and charlatans. Consider this...

Mr Kim, did you just launch a missile over Japan?

Yes. Whatchu gonna do about it?

Mr Kim, did you just shell that S Korean island?

Yes. Whatchu gonna do about it?

Mr Kim, did you just test a nuclear device again?

Yes. Whatchu gonna do about it?

Mr Kim, did your troops fire shots over the border into S. Korea?

Yes. Whatchu gonna do about it?

Mr Kim, did you hack SONY Pictures?

No.

Absolutely ZERO respect or sympathy for Sony Pictures on this one. There are valid comments above, in my opinion, that you should not make a 'comedy' about the assassination of a leader, as much as you may loathe him or her, and not expect repercussions. That said, they bought the script and agreed to the movie, so the decision not to release it deserves no sympathy. Second, I could respect them SLIGHTLY if they had the courage to admit the decision was ultimately theirs whether to release it or not, but after their "We stand behind and respect our partners" speech they turned around and BLAMED them for a decision that "was not theirs at all (Sony Pictures')". They are cowards, and not only have they proven that by bowing down to CYBER-hackers, but by doing a 180 every 30 minutes and being unable to stand by any of their decisions.

Hack was real, threats were real (in terms of someone actually making them).... the cancellation is a marketing stunt, now everyone will want to see the movie when it does come out.

Is hate speech a protected form of speech? Is it worth putting lives on the line in defense of hate speech?

Those of us living in Japan need to remember that if full scale fighting renews, our ally South Korea will be first in line and Japan next.

I would be willing to take the risk if there was a legitimate freedom speech issue here. But I don't see one. If Kim were a citizen of the U.S. or Japan, he could sue, and I think he would win.

@tim can

Yes and yes.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law".[10]

In America:

Only speech that poses an imminent danger of unlawful action, where the speaker has the intention to incite such action and there is the likelihood that this will be the consequence of his or her speech, may be restricted and punished by that law.

Hate speech my be protected in America, scipantheist, but not in full. Internationally, this would not be protected.

In any case, the bounds of decency have been broken with extreme prejudice.

and I was exactly correct... freedom fries, servers bucking under the demand to watch it... total marketing

so now we are going to discover it wasn't an hackers group from NK but a corporate insider at sony

we are experience new form of ads, that is so sad for the humanity.

Wasn't even that bad of a movie. Wasn't like "OMG!" good, but it wasn't that bad. As for releasing it, why bother listening to some crazy people about releasing a movie? It got hacked and that's that. In my personal opinion, no matter what the situation is, people still saw it (including me), and quite frankly, I don't think anyone would have seen it save some people here and there without this controversy, mainly due to desire to see it.