"We distort. You comply" - T-Shirts comparing Bill O'Reilly to Hitler (Blatant trademark violations)

Salon ^ | June 26, 2003 | Katharine Mieszkowski

[brazos.357]

Hey there is such thing as a conservative lawyer. I am in the process of becoming one.

[dark_lord]

I guess this is a warning to any FReepers who want to sell "Communist News Network" tee shirts......

[per loin]

Yes, TRADEMARK law. (insert midddle of night cop out here).

In the hypothetical CNN T-Shirt case, do you believe that consumer confusion would exist as to whether or not they were a "CNN" product.

[Dan from Michigan]

It's parody

And these ambulance chasers need to be slapped in the side of the head. I don't care if it is right or left.

Ambulance chasers SUCK.

[Xenalyte]

Although the T-shirt peddlers say that they're just trying to make enough money from the shirts to keep their tiny alternative media site up and running, could they be prosecuted for profiting from Fox's trademark?

This seems like the key to me. Is profit actually being made? Could one argue that making enough to run a Website constitutes profit?

[agarrett]

And that is the difference, alter a Logo of a private company and it is stealing. Parody a politician and it is protected. Both are different.

  I think you're getting at something fairly significant here - and the resolution is not at all obvious. First off, I personally think the defendant is in the right here - the logos are clearly political in nature, and I think they should fall clearly under 1st amendment protection. Whether or not that will happen, of course, is a different question.

  Now, the analogy I'd like to make is to the case that Nike is currently involved with in, I think, Oregon or California. They responded to some attack ads about their business practices with their own version of the story. The people who put out the attack ads found some error or other, and sued under a law banning false advertising, claiming that it was commercial, not political, speech. I disagree with them, again, but their case rests on the idea that a private, commercial company only engages in commercial speech.

  And that seems to be at the root of this case as well. Fox is, I assume, trying to maintain that they are a commercial company, and this parody is commercial, not political, speech. Especially for a news outlet, I find this tenuous - maybe laughable. Fox and CNN regularly engage in political speech, so do a host of other companies. When they do, they deserve the protection we afford such speech. But they should also take the blows, that other people can engage in such against them.

  These t-shirts are attacking Fox and CNN's political views. The original writer may not find them clever, but personally, I did. I don't agree with them, but I thought they were amusing. More, I thought they were very clearly political themselves. Thus, I think they deserve a very high degree of protection.

Drew Garrett

[PatrioticAmerican]

"Somebody tell the moderators!"

Yeah! We don't like cussing around here!

[Michael121]

FOX is not a politician, or political party. It is a business. They report news, they have commentators they do not run for office. It is theft of their copyrighted material, plain and simple. The Shirt boys are tying to capitalize on someone else's artistic creation.

Whether FOX News engages in reporting political speech does not mean they are speaking politically. They were not elected to serve. If one individual personality does something like get a DUI then it can be reported. They are considered public figures to an extent. But the network is not.

[nutmeg]

FoxFan ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent FoxFan list.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[weegee]

Here's the Salon Stock Deathwatch.

Seems right for them to be profiling liberal bottom feeders.

[wishywashy]

Bill O'Reilly is a thinskinned, loudmouthed, hypocritical dishonest bully who can dish it out but can't take it.

But that is typical of those humorless reich wingnuts.

The Fox Fascists may win in court - President Karl Rove and his Ayatollahs have pretty well eviscerated the Bill of Rights, so censoring free speech they don't like will be nothing new for them.

The t-shirt is original and funny, and paints a true picture of O'Reilly and his O'Reilly brownshirts.

[djf]

While I am not a professional lawyer, I might ask:

What's the difference between this and "Sore-Loserman"?

If you're gonna dish it out, ya gotta be ready to take it.

[Dont Mention the War]

What's the difference between this and "Sore-Loserman"?

Try reading the thread first. Particularly (but not only by any means) post 35.

If you're gonna dish it out, ya gotta be ready to take it.

I posted this on June 28, and I'm still here.

[krb]

Hahaha...I think it's funny. I don't agree with them, but they are damn creative.

[Dont Mention the War]

The t-shirt is original and funny...

Proof the t-shirts are not "original."

[Admin Moderator]

Sign up in 2000, make all of four posts, with one of them being that? Sheesh.

[djf]

Sometimes I don't have time to read a thread, I reply to the article.

I have never heard that "We report, you decide" was trademarked in any way, and in fact I was quite opposed to MickeyD's trademarking "We love to see you smile".
And all FoxNews need do is come up with about three more of their stupid graphics, and they could corner the entire English language. I want content. Not some kids idea of creativity. To be fair, all the news networks suffer this problem.
I at least want those who share my ideals to have a spine.

[jimt]

Sorry. I side with the teeshirt company.

It's a parody, and political speech, even if they are doing it for money.

Faux News - We distort, you comply. I think it's pretty cute. Fox looks pretty silly with this action. If they had a brain they'd have let it die. Now I may buy myself a teeshirt.