Voyage Au Pays Des Nouveaux Gourous

Infobox Film
name = Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous


caption = "Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus", 2004
director = Karima Tabti
producer = France 3,
Elise Lucet,
Herve Brusini
writer = "Pièces à Conviction"
"(Incriminating Evidence)"
(French news program)
starring = Elise Lucet, Host/Moderator;
Laurent Richard, France 3 undercover investigative journalist;
Alain Roth, Landmark Education head, France;
Sophie McLean, Landmark Education spokeswoman and Landmark Forum Leader;
Jean-Pierre Jougla, Attorney;
Jean-Marie Abgrall, Psychiatrist, author of "Mechanics of the Sects";
Jean-Pierre Brard, Deputy Mayor, Montreuil, France;
Christian Lujan, Social psychologist, Psychoanalyst;
Jocelyne Berthelot, Landmark Education volunteer;
Mona Vasquez, former Scientology member;
Laurent Mournais, former participant;
Brigitte Thelier, former participant;
Pierre, anonymous former participant;
Thomas Lardeur, consultant
music =
cinematography =
editing = Pascal Richard,
[http://www.lightstalkers.org/lioneldeconinck Lionel de Coninck]
Emmanuel Charrieras
distributor = France 3
released = May 24, 2004
runtime = 65 minutes
country = France flagicon|France
awards =
language = French
budget =
preceded_by =
followed_by =
amg_id =
imdb_id =

"Voyage au pays des nouveaux gourous" ("Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus"), a controversial television-documentary, presented an investigation of the activities of Landmark Education. The investigative journalism program "Pièces à Conviction" ["Incriminating Evidence"] started filming the documentary in 2003, and the channel France 3 broadcast it in France on May 24, 2004.

The documentary has resulted in various legal repercussions in France, the Netherlands, Australia and the United States.

Subjects of the program

The documentary included Alain Roth, a Landmark Forum leader and former head of Landmark Education's now defunct division in France.

Part of the documentary recounts how journalists from "Pièces à Conviction" originally wanted to interview Roth, but that Landmark Education flew Sophie McLean from New York City to France to speak with them instead.

McLean dismisses the description of her company as a "cult" or even as "cult-like", and disparages the view that its business depends on brainwashing. In support of her contention, she cites three academics: Dr. Raymond Fowler (former president of the American Psychological Association), Prof. Dr. Norbert Nedopil (Chief, department of forensic psychiatry, University of Munich, [ [http://www.forensik-muenchen.de/ Homepage, Abteilung für Forensische Psychiatrie, Klinikum Innenstadt der Universität München] ] and French psychiatrist Jean-Marie Abgrall. Landmark paid Abgrall to do a report [http://www.rickross.com/reference/landmark/landmark227.html English] translation of Nouvel Observateur timeline.] on it, but later in the documentary Abgrall denies that he took a position either way on characterising Landmark as a cult or not.

In 2005, the "Nouvel Observateur" news magazine gave an assessment of the back-and-forth in the documentary, stating that "the broadcast of Elise Lucet denounces Landmark Education’s fiscal tax arrangements, the use of an army of volunteers and the existence of involvement as a defendant in prosecutions for "abuse of weakness and mental manipulations" into a murder case." The article went on to state that days after the airing of the documentary, Alain Roth had "strangely disappeared" from a guest introduction event at the Landmark Education offices. Sophie McLean presented the "Nouvel Observateur" staff with a "denial/disclaimer that carefully avoids the more sensible/delicate points of reporting" — which stated that Landmark Education is subject to criticism and being misunderstood, because of their "leading edge" pedagogy.

On-screen commentators

France 3's "Pièces à Conviction" series brought in several noted French academics and authors to sit on its commentator-panel during the program. And apart from those discussed below, the program included Jocelyne Berthelot (a participant in Landmark Education and a Landmark Education volunteer); former Landmark Education participants Laurent Mournais and Brigitte Thelier; and a person using the pseudonym "Pierre". Other notable commentators included attorney Olivier Morice, politician Phillippe Vulique, Catherine Picard, president of UNADFI, and Giles Boot, secretary general of MIVILUDES.

Solicitor Jean-Pierre Jougla

Jean-Pierre Jougla works as a solicitor with the Court of Appeal in Montpellier, France. He wrote the preface to the book "Les Sectes" ["Cults"] , and founded the department of "victimology related to the sectarian harmful effect" at the University of Lyon.

Asked to give his expert opinion on the Landmark Forum, and to analyze why individuals did not leave the room, Jougla painted a picture of the enrollees "in a state that made it impossible to leave". He went on further to describe what he referred to as "mental manipulation", and stated that one can often accomplished brainwashing through methods that seem harmless. Methods he observed included "confining people for 3 or 4 days in a room with no windows". He went on to characterize "mental manipulation" as just that: it happens "without the victim knowing it".

Later, Jougla commented on what he called the "doctrine" inherent within Landmark Education, stating that: "What influences public opinion is only the storefront." He believes that certain cults hide behind a "religious pretense". However, he also stated that though Landmark Education lacks a religious element, an evident doctrine still exists. He went on to describe this doctrine as Landmark Education's "concept of authenticity": "The basis of Landmark’s doctrine essentially rests on a philosophical concept. It’s the concept of authenticity. "We’re going to teach people to be authentic."

Psychiatrist Jean-Marie Abgrall

Jean-Marie Abgrall, M.D., a French psychiatrist, criminologist, specialist in forensic medicine, and graduate in criminal law, wrote "La mécanique des sectes" (Payot 1996 et 2004, ISBN 2-228-89505-9), which has appeared translated into at least ten different languages (English-language translation: "Soul Snatchers: The Mechanics of Cults", published by Algora, 1999: ISBN 1-892941-04-X). He has served as an expert witness in the Supreme Court of Appeal {"Court of Cassation (France) | Cour de cassation") and in the Court for Businesses ("Tribunal de commerce") in France on the subject of cults.Fact|date=February 2007 Landmark Education paid Abgrall €45,600 Euros to write a positive report on itself in 2001, and to declare the organization "not a cult".

"Pièces a Conviction" staff interviewed Abgrall and asked him to comment on his alleged assertion that Landmark Education is not a cult. He responded by saying "It's not true that I said it's not a cult! I neither wrote that it is a cult nor that it's not a cult." He went on to point out that " [t] here is no control of a psychologist". He continued by elaborating on his concern of the lack of training of the individuals who lead the Landmark Forum, saying: "These guys aren't trained, as if tomorrow you set up shop as a psychotherapist. I mean, that's what's shocking."

This interview also appeared in "Le Parisien". [ "The embarrassing report of the anti-cult expert", "Le Parisien", May 28, 2004. ] (MILS, the predecessor to MIVILUDES, dismissed Abgrall in consequence of a conflict of interest regarding the payment he accepted from Landmark Education. [ "Le Nice Matin", May 29, 2004. ]

Deputy mayor Jean-Pierre Brard

Jean-Pierre Brard, the deputy-mayor of Montreuil, France, served as the vice-president of the Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France ("Commission parlementaire sur les sectes en France") which reported its investigation on cults in France to the French National Assembly in 1995.

The television host Elise Lucet asked Brard to explain why his committee had classifed Landmark Education as a cult, without performing direct empirical research through observation. Jean-Pierre Brard explained the position of the investigating committee on cults. He stated that "there's a guru who destabilizes people to enslave them, to make them subservient, which has been said by witnesses." He also stated that features of the Landmark Forum's structure "make you relinquish critical thought, and break the person down so that they can pick up the pieces." He also referred to a "network of money", stating that "The ultimate goal is to press its power and clean out the students' wallets. And by using the students, to attempt to earn more." He summarized his position by pointing to three main criteria: "domination, a network of money, subordination and brainwashing. So it's a sect."

Psychoanalyst Christian Lujan

Dr. Christian Lujan, a psychoanalyst, psycho-sociologist and professor at ESCP-EAP European School of Management, has written two popular French books on human resource management.

He appeared in the documentary and commented on why the Forum Leader, Alain Roth, brought out "fears from childhood". When questioned by host Elise Lucet, Dr. Lujan responded: "The goal is to destabilize the individual and to negate - and I emphasize this - the notion of the subject. The individual doesn't own his own past. Only they know what's good for him. At any moment, an exercise like this can take away a person's introspection."

Mona Vasquez

Mona Vasquez wrote the book "Et Satan créa la secte" ["Satan Created the Cult: Memoirs of an escapee"] . A member of Scientology for seven years, she appears in the documentary addressing what she sees as extensive and precise similarities between Scientology and Landmark Education, especially the use of jargon.

France 3 television channel and the documentary

Allegations concerning fine

A statement released in French by Landmark Education hints that France 3 preferred to risk a "tiny" fine for a violation of the media's code of ethics rather than present a documentary more favorable to Landmark Education. ["Malheureusement, considérant que les amendes à payer sont minimes pour une violation du code de déontologie des médias, France 3 a décidé qu'il valait mieux pour son taux d'audimat payer ces amendes symboliques plutôt qu'offrir au public le reportage juste et objectif qu'il était en droit d'attendre."
Translation:
"Unfortunately, seeing how minimal the fines are for a breach of the media Code of Practice, France 3 determined it better for its audience share statistics to pay this symbolic fine rather than to offer the public the fair and objective reporting which it had the right to expect."
Unattributed statement published on Landmark Education's French web-site at http://www.landmarkeducation.fr/menu.jsp?top=20447&siteObjectID=21551 ]

Landmark Education's reply

Under French law, when journalists or the media mention or allude to an entity, that entity has a legal right of reply, and the media must publish that reply. [http://www.mediawise.org.uk/files/uploaded/Right%20of%20reply%20in%20Europe.pdf] Landmark Education's response started by thanking France 3 for publishing the response without adding extensive sound-effectsFact|date=February 2007 as it did in the broadcast. Landmark Education denied some of the points made in the documentary. (France 3 subsequently cancelled a scheduled rebroadcastFact|date=February 2007 and (according to Landmark Education) removed a transcript from its web-site. Note that the [http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://info.france3.fr France 3 website in 2004] generally held copies, but not transcripts, of "Pièces à Conviction" broadcasts.)

In Landmark Education's legal right-of-reply to France 3's documentary, a woman, after having seen the broadcast, complained: "My face is hidden, but my voice is not masked. I feel betrayed by this journalist who did not respect the necessary confidentiality in this broadcast." She went on to express her dismay at the manner in which the broadcast showed only a part of her conversation. Though she characterized the conversation itself as "difficult", she maintained that it enabled her to "live better" and to have a better relationship with her daughter. [http://www.landmarkeducation.fr/menu.jsp?top=20447&siteObjectID=21551 Landmark Education's legal right of reply] , [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.landmarkeducation.fr%2Fmenu.jsp%3Ftop%3D20447%26siteObjectID%3D21551&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8 translated] ]

Landmark Education responded to France 3's insinuation that Landmark Education gained large sums of money by using volunteers in France. It stated that Landmark Education lost money each year in France, but maintained its center open for its participants. France 3 estimated that the receipts of Landmark Education amounted to nearly 1.5 million euros "per annum", whereas, according to Landmark Education's assertions, they did not exceed 590,000 euros "per annum".

Landmark Education commented on Dr. Jean Marie Abgrall's position in its reply, stating that Dr. Abgrall had declared that, with regard to the ten elements identified by the Parliamentary Commission about Cults in France, only four "minor characteristics" applied to Landmark Education, but that "None of the six relative major elements of a cult applies to Landmark Education".

Art Schreiber, the General Counsel and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Landmark Education, commented on the France 3 broadcast in Landmark Education's subpoena to Google in 2006. He stated that "the apparent purpose of the report was to portray Landmark Education as a harmful cult." Schreiber went on to assert that the program contained inaccurate, biased statements as well as serious unfounded accusations. He accused France 3 of operating unprofessionally, and "using tactics including lying, manipulating, using illegally obtained materials, and intentionally presenting materials out of context." He claimed that France 3 had used unauthorized confidential footage of the Landmark Forum, shot by an undercover reporter attending the course under a false name. He stated that after the broadcast of the documentary in France, "Landmark's attorney in France sent a detailed letter to TV3 in which he refuted, point by point, the gross inaccuracies and defamatory and libelous representations in their program." Schreiber claimed that after receiving the letter, France 3 removed a transcript of the broadcast from their web site. [ [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/google_DMCAsubpoena.pdf Subpoena to Google] , Art Schreiber, October 2006]

In its reply, Landmark Education also quoted a 1995 letter from Dr. Raymond Fowler, past President of the American Psychological Association, which reflected his personal opinion. The Fowler letter stated that: "In my opinion, the Landmark Forum is not a cult or anything like a cult, and I do not see how any reasonable, responsible person could say that it is." Fowler went on to provide lack of evidence, stating that he did not directly witness anything in his experience of the Landmark Forum course that could be harmful to the course participants. Fowler expressed the belief that if the French government were to "look at the question more closely", they would conclude that Landmark Education appeared on the list of cults in error. [ [http://www.landmarkeducation.com/uploaded_files/694/Fowler.pdf "English Letter"] , 1995, Landmark Education website, Document number "L-014E".]

Commentary from "Pièces à Conviction" personnel

Pascal Richard, Editor-in-Chief of "Pieces a conviction" drew attention to the special circumstances of this documentary in a [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php note] on the show's official web-page. Richard described the program as a "difficult broadcast", which utilized the "modern tools of television". He went on to state that only through the use of hidden cameras and microphones could the producers "go the extra mile and deliver the facts". Richard stated that only by using these techniques could the journalists get past the "slick facade" projected by "this unusual group", as well as the statements which had been "carefully prepared and organized by a New-York communications firm". [ [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Archived version of the "Pieces a conviction" web-page of 6 June 2004]
C'est une émission difficile qui n'a pas l'écriture habituelle de "Pièces à Conviction". Nous avons pris ici le parti de nous servir des outils de TV modernes, comme ces caméras et ces micros dissimulés. C'était, en effet, notre seul moyen d'aller au-delà et de livrer l'info. Le seul moyen aussi de capter une autre réalité que la façade lisse qu'aimerait montrer cette étrange société. Et d'aller au-delà des discours soigneusement préparés et organisés par une société de communication new-yorkaise. [Translation: This was a difficult broadcast, one which did not have the usual "Pièces à Conviction" signature. In this case we adopted the use of the tools of modern television, such as these hidden cameras and microphones. Indeed, only in this way could we go the extra mile and deliver the facts. Also, only in this way could we get a different reality, rather than the slick facade which this unusual group would like to project. And to get beyond the statements carefully prepared and organized by a New-York communications firm.] ]

(The France 3 web-site continued to make these comments available on the web until at least the time of the archiving of the [http://web.archive.org/web/20040713033249/info.france3.fr/encadres/2801506-fr.php version] dated 13 July 2004. By 10 October 2004 the monthly program's [http://web.archive.org/web/20041010221851/info.france3.fr/encadres/4589420-fr.php web-page] had moved on in the normal manner of operation — to featuring more recent episodes of "Pièces à Conviction".)

Commentary from "France 3"

The version of France 3's web-page on the documentary shortly after the time of what it described as an "exceptional" broadcast ["C'est un numéro exceptionnel que Pièces à Conviction vous propose: une longue enquête..." [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Emissions/d'info - France 3] . Archived version dated 2004-06-06, retrieved 2006-12-19 from http://web.archive.org] presented the journalistic enquiry and the activities of Landmark Education in somber terms, picturing "a separate and problematic universe which bans television cameras and does not welcome journalists". ["un univers discret et problématique. Où les caméras de télévision sont interdites. Où les journalistes ne sont pas les bienvenus..." [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Emissions/d'info - France 3] . Archived version dated 2004-06-06, retrieved 2006-12-19 from http://web.archive.org] It noted the historical facts of Landmark Education's French commercial registration as a "professional training business" in 1992 ["Enregistrée en 1992 au Registre du commerce comme entreprise de formation professionnelle..." [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Emissions/d'info - France 3] . Archived version dated 2004-06-06, retrieved 2006-12-19 from http://web.archive.org] and its classification as a cult in a French Parliamentary Report dating from 1995. ["... cette société est surtout classée sectes dans un rapport parlementaire datant de 1995..." [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Emissions/d'info - France 3] . Archived version dated 2004-06-06, retrieved 2006-12-19 from http://web.archive.org] The commentary stated that "the money generated by numerous trainees and participants apparently does not appear in the company's accounts" ["L'argent généré par les nombreux stagiaires et participants ne semble pas se retrouver dans les comptes de la société [...] " [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Emissions/d'info - France 3] . Archived version dated 2004-06-06, retrieved 2006-12-19 from http://web.archive.org] and that police-officers of the Direction centrale des renseignements généraux (the French police intelligence service) compared Landmark Education's methods to "mental manipulation". [" [...] les méthodes pratiquées sont décrites par les policiers des Renseignements Généraux comme « de la manipulation mentale » ..." [...] " [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Emissions/d'info - France 3] . Archived version dated 2004-06-06, retrieved 2006-12-19 from http://web.archive.org]

The commentary concluded by saying that the documentary "reveals how this organization — classified as a cult, and featuring recruitment through families and friends — came to slip through all the regulations for more than ten years. And this in spite of several tragic facts which should have given the public authorities and the law pause for thought much earlier..." ["L'enquête de Pièces à Conviction révèle comment cette société classée comme secte, au prosélytisme familial et amical, est parvenue à passer à travers tous les contrôles depuis plus de dix ans. Et ce malgré quelques faits divers tragiques qui auraient dû faire réfléchir les pouvoirs publics et la justice beaucoup plus tôt..." [http://web.archive.org/web/20040606222805/info.france3.fr/emissions/1389638-fr.php Emissions/d'info - France 3] . Archived version dated 2004-06-06, retrieved 2006-12-19 from http://web.archive.org]

Over two years after France 3 allegedly pulled the transcript of the broadcast, the France 3 web-site [http://recherche.france3.fr/cgi-bin/findall?C=135&X=3&CAT=&SITERUBRIQUE=INFO&RUBRIQUE=&NUMCHAINE=3&REGION=&ARC=&SEARCHBOX=&SITE=&mode=web&KEYWORDS=Landmark+Education&x=8&y=5 search option] as of 2006 finds no mentions of the keywords "Landmark Education". A reference to Landmark Education's French web site (which features Landmark Education's legal-right of reply) appears alongside the null set of search-results in a panel reserved for advertising ("Liens publicitaires"). The advertisement includes a description of Landmark Education, which describes Landmark Education as a result of research into the way individuals and organizations communicate. An off-site link leads to Landmark Education's main web-page in French; the link disclaimer states that "France Télévisions cannot be held responsible for the contents of these links." [ [http://recherche.france3.fr/cgi-bin/findall?C=135&X=3&CAT=&SITERUBRIQUE=INFO&RUBRIQUE=&NUMCHAINE=3&REGION=&ARC=&SEARCHBOX=&SITE=&mode=web&KEYWORDS=Landmark+Education&x=8&y=5 Commentary] , France 3
"Landmark éducation est le résultat d'une recherche sur l'efficacité avec laquelle les individus et organisations agissent et leur façon de communiquer. / www.landmarkeducation.fr / France Télévisions ne peut être tenu responsable du contenu de ces liens" [Translated:] "Landmark education is the result of a research into the effectiveness with which the individuals and organizations act and their way of communicating."www.landmarkeducation.fr'. 'France Télévisions cannot be held responsible for the contents of these links."]

Repercussions

In France, Landmark Education "assistants" (participants in the Landmark Education Assisting Program) had the apparent French legal status of volunteer unpaid workers. In June 2004, a month after the "Pièces à Conviction" program aired, a French government agency ("L’Inspection du Travail", "Labour Inspection") investigated labor practices regarding these volunteer workers, and sent a report to the government.

According to a report published by the "Nouvel Observateur", on July 2004, Landmark Forum graduates arrived at the offices to find the doors locked. The French branch of Landmark Education had officially shut down. Semi-officially, the Landmark staff moved their operation to London and continued to recruit in France. As of May 2005, persons involved in the organization in France continued to communicate with each other via the Internet. Graduates met together and acknowledged that they felt they had lost a "family", and expressed deep regrets that they could no longer continue "to bring transformation to people". [ [http://www.prevensectes.com/rev0505.htm#19d A short timeline in French] .]

Report of the 1995 French Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry into Cults

The documentary refers to the 1995 report of the Parliamentary "Commission of Inquiry into Cults" { [http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/rap-enq/r2468.asp "Rapport fait au nom de la Commission d'enquête sur les sectes"] ) which listed Landmark Education ("Landmark education international - Le forum") as a "secte" (cult).

Coincidentally, on 27 May 2005 — a year after France 3 broadcast the documentary and many months after Landmark Education's operations in France had diminished to unofficial groups keeping in touch via the Internet — the then Prime Minister of France Jean-Pierre Raffarin issued a "circulaire" on the ongoing fight against cults in France. The "circulaire" suggests that that the list of specific cults appended to the report of the 1995 Parliamentary Commission 1995 had become less pertinent — because of the way in which organizations had changed and morphed and come to use the Internet — and suggested that in certain cases his civil servants should avoid depending on generic lists of groups. [ [http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/WAspad/UnTexteDeJorf?numjo=PRMX0508471C "Circulaire du 27 mai 2005 relative à la lutte contre les dérives sectaires"] ]

Credits and bibliography

The host Elise Lucet credited the following works at the end of the program:
* "Grande enquête sur la Scientologie: une secte hors la loi" ["Major inquiry into Scientology: a cult beyond the law"] , by Arnaud Palisson, published by Favre, 2003. ISBN 2-8289-0733-3
*"Les Sectes" ["Cults"] , by Thomas Lardeur, published by Presses de la Renaissance, 2004. ISBN 2-7509-0008-5
*"Charlie Hebdo", Hors Serie, " [http://atheisme.free.fr/Revue_presse/Sectes_charlie_hebdo.htm Landmark Education : Des métastases dans le business] " [Landmark Education: Transformations in business] , May 2004, 98 pages.

The news program's bibliography listed the following works: [ [http://web.archive.org/web/20040713033249/info.france3.fr/encadres/2801506-fr.php Bibliography (web.archive.org)] ]

* "Les sectes dans l'entreprise" ["Cults in the work-place"] , by Thomas Lardeur. Éditions d'Organisation.
* "Et Satan créa la secte" ["Satan Created the Cult: Memoirs of an escapee"] , by Mona Vasquez
* "Les sectes" ["Cults"] , by Alain Vivien. Éditions Odile Jacob. [2003, ISBN 2-7381-1284-6 ]
* "Méchaniques du destin [Mechanics of Destiny] ", by Pierre de Roo Calmann-Lévy [2004, ISBN 2-7021-3172-7 ]
* "L'Empire des ténèbres [The Realm of Shadows] ", by Brigitte Marouani. Jacques-Marie Laffont [2003, ISBN 2-84928-015-1 ]
* "Enquête sur les manipulations mentales [Investigation into Mental Manipulations] ", by Gordon Thomas. Albin Michel [1989, ISBN 2-226-03780-2 ]
* "Tous manipulés, tous manipulateurs [Everyone manipulated, everyone manipulating] ", by Dr. Jean-Marie Abgrall. First Editions [2003, ISBN 2-87691-743-2 ]
* "La Méchanique des sectes [The Mechanics of Cults] ", by Dr. Jean-Marie Abgrall. Payot [New revised and expanded edition: 2002, ISBN 2-228-89505-9 ]
* "Les sectes [: Savoir les reconnaître, Comprendre leurs mécanismes, Les combattre efficacement, Aider les victimes] " ["Cults: how to recognize them, how to understand their mechanisms, how to fight them effectively, how to help the victims"] , by Thomas Lardeur. Presses de la Renaissance. [2004, ISBN 2-7509-0008-5 ]
* "Grande enquête sur la scientologie [: Une secte hors la loi] " ["A Major Enquiry into Scientology: A cult outside the law"] , by Arnaud Palisson. Éditions Favre [2003, ISBN 2-8289-0733-3 ]
* "20 ans de lutte contre les sectes [20 Years of Struggle Against the Cults] ", by Janine Tavernier. Michel Lafon [ 2003, ISBN 2-84098-914-X ]
* "Petit traité de manipulation à l'usage des honnêtes gens" ["A brief treatise on the manipulation of ordinary folk"] , by Robert-Vincent Joule and Jean-Léon Beauvois. PUG [Presses Universitaires de Grenoble, new edition: 2004, ISBN 2-7061-1044-9 ]
* "La dérive sectaire [The Sectarian Drift] ", by Anne Fournier and Michel Monroy. PUF [Presses Universitaires de France, 1999 ISBN 2-13-049770-5 ]
* "Le retour du Diable [: Satanaisme, Exorcisme, Extrême droite] " "", by Paul Aries. Gloias [1997, ISBN 2-911453-21-2 ]
* "La scientologie, laboratoire du Futur [?] " " [Scientology, Laboratory of the Future?] ", by Paul Aries. Golias [1998, ISBN 2-911453-44-1 ]
* "Satanisme, le retour de la Bête [Satanism, the Return of the Beast] ", by Paul Aries. Golias
* "Ce que coaching veut dire [What Coaching Means] ", Gilles Forestier. Editions d'Organisation

The documentary on the Internet

From September 2006 onwards, anonymous posters sent copies of the documentary — including versions with English-language subtitles — to several video-sharing web-sites and bitTorrent sites. [ [http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#005029 Self-Help Group Backs Off Attack on Internet Critic] , Electronic Frontier Foundation, November 30, 2006. ]

In October 2006 Landmark Education issued subpoenas pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a piece of United States legislation which allows content-owners to issue subpoenas to identify alleged infringers — even without filing a lawsuit. Landmark Education sent subpoenas to Google Video, YouTube and the Internet Archive, demanding details of the identity of the person(s) who had uploaded copies (with English-language subtitles) to these websites.

Challenges to Landmark Education's efforts arose on multiple fronts. The Internet Archive commenced fighting its subpoena from Landmark Education, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed official objections on its behalf. The EFF (operating on behalf of the anonymous entity who uploaded the video) also planned to file a motion to quash Landmark's DMCA subpoena to Google Video. Google advised Landmark that it would not produce the requested information pending a ruling on that motion. YouTube sent notification to the user about its subpoena, and planned to give the user a reasonable opportunity to move to quash it. [ [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/#19d Landmark and the Internet Archive] . [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/archive_landmark_request.pdf#19d Landmark's Letter to the Internet Archive] . [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/google_landmarkdec.pdf#19d Landmark's Letter to Google] . [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/eff_letter.pdf#19d Internet Archive's Objections to Landmark Subpoena] . ]
Art Schreiber, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Landmark Education, commented on the issue, raising issues of intellectual property (IP) in "RedHerring Magazine" in an article dated 2006-11-03. Schreiber affirmed that the Electronic Frontier Foundation had released a statement characterizing Landmark Education's copyright claims to the documentary as "bogus". He went on to portray the claim of the Electronic Frontier Foundation as "entirely inaccurate". [ [http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=19552&hed=Landmark+Fires+Back+at+EFF&sector=Industries&subsector=EntertainmentAndMedia Landmark Education Fires Back At EFF] , Redherring.com
“The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) challenged our actions and alleged to the press that our copyright claims were bogus, which statement was then disseminated on the Internet.Landmark Education’s goal is not to silence anyone, but to protect its core IP resources, which were infringed by the video. While we appreciate the work of the EFF, the allegation that our copyright claim is bogus is entirely inaccurate. The facts are clear that the Landmark Forum program has for many years been copyrighted. Materials covered by this copyright registration were included throughout the video.” ]

On November 8 2006 the Electronic Frontier Foundation posted a "Draft Motion to Quash Landmark Subpoena" on their website. [ [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/ Landmark and the Internet Archive] ] Independent filmmaker Enric Cirne interviewed a representative from the Electronic Frontier Foundation on Landmark Education's usage of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. [ [http://techalley.cirne.com/2006/11/22/eff-on-landmark-educations-dmca-subpeona-621/ Video Interview with Electronic Frontier Foundation] , Enric Cirne, November 8, 2006, [http://techalley.cirne.com/ Tech Alley] . ] Cirne also interviewed another staff attorney on-camera about the Electronic Frontier Foundation's actions regarding the issuing of the DMCA subpoenas. [ [http://techalley.cirne.com/2006/11/27/jason-schultz-at-eff-on-dmca-take-down-notices-part-iv-556/ Second Video Interview with Electronic Frontier Foundation] , Enric Cirne, November, 2006, [http://techalley.cirne.com/ Tech Alley] . ]

On November 9 2006 the Electronic Frontier Foundation responded to Art Schreiber's commentary and raised the issue of fair use in a post entitled " [http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004994.php EFF and Landmark: Cards on the Table] ". In their statement, the Electronic Frontier Foundation argued that any use of alleged material — even if it were copyrighted — occurred "for purposes of criticism and commentary" and constituted a "non-infringing fair use". The Electronic Frontier Foundation asserted that Landmark's copyright claim remained "bogus". [" [http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004994.php EFF and Landmark: Cards on the Table] ", Electronic Frontier Foundation, November 09, 2006
"While we appreciate the kind words, we disagree with Mr. Schreiber's copyright analysis. To the extent that the documentary includes any materials copyrighted by Landmark, that use is clearly for purposes of criticism and commentary, i.e., a non-infringing fair use. Yesterday we released a draft of our motion to quash, which explains in detail (see pages 11-16) why Landmark's copyright claim does not hold water. Indeed, it's not even a close call. Sorry, Landmark, but your claim is still bogus."]

On November 10, 2006, the Reuters newsservice published an article about the dispute. [" [http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-11T025549Z_01_N10391903_RTRIDST_0_TECH-MEDIA-GOOGLE-VIDEO-COL.XML Google faces legal challenges over video service] "] "The Washington Post" and many other news sources subsequently disseminated this article.

The Cult Awareness Information Centre (Australia: http://www.caic.org.au/ ) has made a non-official copy of the video available in flash video format. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has cited this location, [ [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/ Landmark and the Internet Archive] , Electronic Frontier Foundation, case page, Landmark's Misuse of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act] as has an article about Landmark Education on the " [http://yadleachim.org/Index.asp?CategoryID=164 Yad L'Achim] website, [ [http://yadleachim.org/Index.asp?ArticleID=228&CategoryID=111 Landmark Education piece (Hebrew)] , [http://yadleachim.org/Index.asp?CategoryID=164 About Yad L'Achim (English)] , 2006. ] "InformationWeek" [ [http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=196601049 Landmark Drops Copyright Infringement Subpoenas On Google And Anonymous Critic] , "InformationWeek", December 1, 2006 ] and "Yahoo! News". [ [http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20061202/tc_cmp/196601049 TechWeb article] , Yahoo! News, December 1, 2006. ]

On November 17, 2006, the Apologetics Index website received a "cease and desist" letter from attorneys in Amsterdam representing Landmark Education. The letter stated that Landmark Education demanded Apologetics Index remove their hyperlink to the "Cult Awareness Information Centre"'s streaming video version of the documentary, due to alleged "copyright infringement" of their "Landmark Forum Leaders Manual" (TXu 1-120-461). The Apologetics Index responded on their site that after reading the responses from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, they did not intend to comply with Landmark's demands. [ [http://www.religionnewsblog.com/16570/landmark-education-vs-a-link-on-apologetics-index Landmark Education vs. a link on Apologetics Index] , Religion News Blog, Netherlands, Nov. 17, 2006, Anton and Janet Hein-Hudson ] Further information on this matter appears on the [http://www.apologeticsindex.org/l30.html Apologetics page] devoted to Landmark Education.

Within the same period of time, Landmark Education also sent a cease-and-desist letter threatening legal action to the Internet service provider of the "Cult Awareness and Information Center" website, "StudioSolutions", in Australia. Landmark again used the argument of alleged copyright infringement of material from their "Landmark Forum Leader's Manual". [ [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/caic_notice.pdf "Cease and desist" letter] , Landmark Education, to StudioSolutions, concerning "Cult Awareness and Information Centre", November 13, 2006.]

The Electronic Frontier Foundation issued a statement in a post on their website regarding Landmark Education's legal letters in Amsterdam and Australia, entitled: [http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005013.php "Landmark Forum's Internet Censorship Campaign Goes Down Under"] . The post includes a request to Landmark's General Counsel Art Schreiber, utilizing some Landmark Education jargon ("take a stand", "racket", "winning formula"):

In public statements, Landmark General Counsel Art Schreiber insists that Landmark supports free speech. We urge Landmark to take a stand for the principles of free expression and get out of the censorship racket--the answer to criticism is to explain and promote your own view. Landmark may believe that using copyright notices to takedown criticism is a winning formula, but it will ultimately come back to haunt Landmark. [ [http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005013.php Landmark Forum's Internet Censorship Campaign Goes Down Under] , Electronic Frontier Foundation, November 17, 2006.]

In an agreement reached on November 30, 2006, Landmark Education withdrew their subpoenas against Internet Archive and the anonymous poster to Google Video. [ [http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#005029 Self-Help Group Backs Off Attack on Internet Critic] , Electronic Frontier Foundation, November 30, 2006.
"In a settlement reached Tuesday, Landmark agreed to withdraw the subpoena to Google and end its quest to pierce the anonymity of the video's poster. Landmark has also withdrawn its subpoena to the Internet Archive. EFF represents both the anonymous critic and the Internet Archive." ] The settlement included the acknowledgment that the poster of the video will not repost it to the Internet "in whole or in part." [ [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/settlement_agreement.pdf Settlement agreement]
" [has removed the video] from Google and all other internet sites upon which he/she/it posted the video, and further agrees not to re-post the Video in any form on Google or any other internet site in whole or in part." ]

Parallels

Television broadcasts in Sweden impacted the activities of Landmark Education in that country. The airing of two documentaries on national Swedish television by the broadcasting corporation TV4 on October 28, 2003 and on March 15, 2004 called "Lycka till salu" (Happiness for sale) in the program series " [http://www.tv4.se/nyheter/kallafakta/286244.html Kalla Fakta] " [Cold Facts] contributed to the termination of official Landmark Education activities there. [ [http://www.lofgrensanalys.se/Innehall/Nyheter/2004-03-16-Kalla%20Fakta-Landmark2.htm Kalla Faktas Uppfoljning om Landmark Education] , 2004, Lofgrens Analys AB.]

Compare the impact of media in the United States of America: CBS television's "60 Minutes" program in March 1991 made allegations of family abuse, incest and rape against Werner Erhard, who originated and developed the courses and methodology of interpersonal relationships delivered by the then nascent Landmark Education. [
Pressman, Steven, "Outrageous Betrayal: The dark journey of Werner Erhard from est to exile". New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993. ISBN 0-312-09296-2, pages 256-257.] Erhard filed but then withdrew a lawsuit alleging "false, misleading and defamatory statements" on the part of CBS. [ Pressman, Steven, "Outrageous Betrayal: The dark journey of Werner Erhard from est to exile". New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993. ISBN 0-312-09296-2, pages 257-258. All allegations against Erhard were dropped.]

See also

* About-Picard law
* "The Century of the Self", [http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6111922724894802811&q=CENTURY+OF+THE+SELF episode part 3 of 4]
* Human Potential Movement
* Investigative journalism
* MIVILUDES
* Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France
* Status of religious freedom in France

References and footnotes

External links

* [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/ Landmark and the Internet Archive] , Electronic Frontier Foundation
* [http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/landmark_motion_quash_draft.pdf Draft Motion to Quash Landmark Subpoena] , November 8, 2006
* [http://cftf.com/french/Les_Sectes_en_France/cults.html Cults in France] , Recorded with the Presidency of the National Assembly on December 22, 1995, Mr. Alain Gest, Reporter, Mr. Jacques Guyard, Deputies. National Assembly, Tenth Legislature.
* [http://www.landmarkeducation.fr/menu.jsp?top=20447&siteObjectID=21551 Réponse officielle à France 3] , Landmark Education's response to the France 3 documentary.
* [http://www.miviludes.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=78 Presentation of International Landmark Education] , Interdepartmental Mission of Vigilance and Fight Against Sectarian Drifts, [http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.miviludes.gouv.fr/article.php3%3Fid_article%3D78&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=3&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522landmark%2Beducation%2522%2Bfrance%26start%3D20%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN (translated)] ;Media/Press
* [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/10/AR2006111001790.html Google faces legal challenges over video service] , "The Washington Post", November 10, 2006
* [http://presszoom.com/story_120492.html Landmark Forum Violates Constitution and Federal Law by Trying to Chill Speech] , PressZoom, November 1, 2006
* [http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10385 Landmark Ed, EFF, negotiations] , p2pnet.net News, November 10, 2006
* [http://techalley.cirne.com/2006/11/22/eff-on-landmark-educations-dmca-subpeona-621/ Video interview with Kurt Opsahl] , interview with Attorney for Electronic Frontier Foundation, regarding Landmark's DMCA Subpoenas, November 2006
* [http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=19552&hed=Landmark+Fires+Back+at+EFF&sector=Industries&subsector=EntertainmentAndMedia Landmark Education Fires Back At EFF] , Redherring.com
* [http://news.warez.com/p2pnet/youtube-copyright-row-141106084230.html YouTube Copyright row] , Warez.com News, November 14, 2006
* [http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=196601049 Landmark Drops Copyright Infringement Subpoenas On Google And Anonymous Critic] , "InformationWeek", December 1, 2006.
* [http://www.prevensectes.com/rev0505.htm#19d "At home with the gurus in neckties"] , "Nouvel Observateur", French newspaper, May 19, 2005, by Marie Lemonnier.