Lawyer Nation? (Neil Cavuto)

FOX News ^ | 8/13/2003 | Neil Cavuto

[sjersey]

There's more than a food fight going on in this country. It gets to the heart of something very wrong going on with this country. We are turning into a nation of babies. Not all of us, but enough of us, to make me worry about the whole lot of us.

[Quick1]

Ironic that this is the same channel suing Franken.

[Bluntpoint]

I thought the same thing.

[jigsaw]

We are turning into a nation of babies.

They don't call us Baby Boomers for nothing.   ;-)

[CrazyIvan]

I find your article extremely offensive. Expect to hear from my lawyer soon.

[caisson71]

"Believe me, there are many legitimate legal beefs in this country". I think you missed the point completely.

[Quick1]

No, FNC doesn't really have a legitimate legal beef with Franken. First of all, they're practically forced to sue because of the way copyright laws have been written, and second of all, they don't have a case because of the "fair-use" clause. Franken's title is obviously satire, and thus falls under the clause.

So really, FNC suing Franken simply proves Cavuto's point, which I most definitely got.

[LiteKeeper]

SITREP

[thulldud]

Actually, it's not copyright that they are going to law over, but a trademark. Copyright inheres in a work whether or not you defend it, but undefended trademarks evaporate into words that "anybody can use".

If Franken were parodying a work that FNC had produced, that would be "fair use". As it is, he's trying to dilute the association of the trademark phrase "fair and balanced" with FNC.

Trademark, not copyright. FNC has a case, you betcha.

[Quick1]

Eh, semantics. My first point is still valid, in that FNC is forced to sue because of the way trademark law is written, otherwise it becomes a phrase anyone can use.

My second point is also still valid, in that Franken's use of the trademarked slogan falls under the "fair use" clause, as the title is obviously satire.

Personally, I don't think Fox has a case.

But anyway, I completely agree with Cavuto that lawyers have entirely too much power in this country. Makes me think of the Farscape episode where they're on a planet of lawyers. I couldn't think of anything more scary! :)

[Quix]

Great article.

Much agree.

I think atnys should be limited in congress and state legislatures to at least 10% LESS than their percentage of the population.

There should be some penalty for their egregioius heavy handed mangling of our country and leadership for so long with so little done about it.

[thulldud]

My second point is also still valid, in that Franken's use of the trademarked slogan falls under the "fair use" clause, as the title is obviously satire.

"Fair use" is a defense against copyright claims, and parody is a "fair use." But trademarks are different. I can say or publish anybody's trademark, as long as I identify the trademark as such, and don't try to use it to market my product, especially if my product is similar or competitive with the owner's product.

This is not semantics. If it were, it wouldn't pay nearly as much. When did you last see a guy on the street with a cardboard sign, "Unemployed Lawyer: Will Represent for Food".

(I should ping Registered. THAT is a picture I'd like to see!)

Lawyers have too much power because the law is no longer perceived as coming from God -- instead it's an arbitrarily defined construct -- only definable by "experts", i.e. lawyers, and the measure of their worth is their ability to broker legal coercion on behalf of their clients.

Justice? That's the last thing anybody wants.

[nutmeg]

FoxFan ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my FoxFan list. *Warning: This can be a high-volume ping list at times.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!