Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: steve-b
As a guy who's written a number of parodies (see, Rainforest Man, for example), I agree with the decision.

The fact that the Beck parody is not based in any fact, is completely unfunny and slimy, is irrelevant. Taste is not for the judge to arbitrate.

Beck didn't sue for libel, he sued for infringement and had no case.

15 posted on 11/10/2009 4:09:41 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: dead

“Beck didn’t sue for libel, he sued for infringement and had no case.”

Agree, there was probably a lot better way to confront this.


26 posted on 11/10/2009 4:30:36 AM PST by 1776 Reborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: dead

I wonder why Beck didn’t sue for libel?

This is a good decision—I would hate to set a precedent that unaccountable world bodies get to rule on things like this.


32 posted on 11/10/2009 4:49:24 AM PST by ellery (It's a free country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson