After watching 「六四」紀錄片《天安門》(Gate of Heavenly Peace) again, I think it is very unfortunate that Jenzabar (a company that 柴玲 is president) is suing 《天安門》電影製作人 (Long Bow, a non-profit).
You can watch the film itself on YouTube and decide if the documentary is fair or not and if the lawsuit has merit.
To me, with the power of hindsight, the points made by the filmmakers may be painful to admit, but none the less, are something that cannot and should not be dismissed (and should try to learn from). The student leaders and others involved did what were thought right at the time. It is too much to ask or expect flawless decisions in the weeks and days lead up to June 4th, 1989.
May 7, 2009 The New Yorker “The American Dream: The Lawsuit“,
Now comes word that Chai Ling, the student leader who appeared on television screens around the world as the picture of fragile, furious idealism, is now suing the makers of an award-winning documentary about the Tiananmen Square demonstrations. “Gate of Heavenly Peace,” directed by the filmmakers Richard Gordon and Carma Hinton, is considered, by China scholars, to be a major work on the subject of the demonstrations. But it has been criticized by both the Chinese government and student leaders, neither of which come out looking especially good.
Having graduated from Princeton and Harvard, Chai (who now goes by Ling Chai) is now the President and Chief Operating Officer of Jenzebar Inc., a maker of educational software. She is reportedly suing The Long Bow Group, the nonprofit film group behind “Gate of Heavenly Peace,” claiming that a Web site accompanying the film infringes on Jenzabar’s trademark.
If you want to read the related legal documents, click on the following links, which are copied from this page at Long Bow.
“These legal filings are part of the public record. They are presented here in the interests of full disclosure and historical accuracy.
1. Complaint – May 14, 2007 (PDF)
2. Motion to Dismiss – October 2, 2007 (PDF)
2a. Defendant Long Bow Group Inc.’s Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss (PDF)
2b. Exhibits A and B to Motion to Dismiss (PDF)
3. Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Opposition to Long Bow Group, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss – Feb. 20, 2008 (PDF)
4. Defendant Long Bow Group Inc.’s Reply Memorandum in Further Support of its Motion to Dismiss – March 14, 2008 (PDF)
5. Decision on Motion to Dismiss – August 5, 2008 (PDF)
6. Answer of Defendant Long Bow Group, Inc. – April 23, 2009 (PDF)”