Judge Orders Lil Nas X ‘Satan Shoes’ to Not Be Sold

Breitbart ^ | 4)1/21 | Hanna Bleau

[Impala64ssa]

The down low satan lover ran afoul of Nike's legal dept. If Nike was the "socially responsible" corporation they pretend to be they'd stop having their overpriced 💩kickers made in SE Asian sweatshops by children forced to work under dangerous slave like conditions.

[Persevero]

I don’t understand how anything containing human blood can be sold retail anyway. I’d think it would be illegal - biohazard etc

[montag813]

I doubt they even were made. He doesn't care. It was all a P.R. stunt to promote his deranged, homo-Satanic filth. That was always the plan. That's why he was selected to appeal to children with his "country crossover" hit Old Town Road. A perfect Trojan horse for the evil leftists to further degrade Western culture.

[wildcard_redneck]

Once he paid for the shoes he has every legal right to resell them because they are physical objects.

[Deaf Smith]

The shoes are a Bio Hazard with the blood.

[Joe 6-pack]

Back in the 1970s, the rock group KISS, with Marvel comics, printed a comic book with blood from the members of the group. The group each donated a small amount of blood which was then mixed into a vat of red ink used to print the comic book run.

Of course that was all pre AIDS.

[humblegunner]

Stops AIDS, don’t buy Little Naz’s shoes.
Wear them things and you’ll get AIDS and become a Qtard.

Nothing good can come of it.

[circlecity]

I remember back in the 70’s when the band Kiss released their comic book. Each band member made a production of poring a vial of their blood in the printer’s ink vat. They marketed the comics as containing the real blood of Kiss in each copy.

[Richard Axtell]

You can’t sell Satan’s Shoes, not without Satan’s socks.

[circlecity]

Lol - you beat me by 2 posts. I used have one of those Comics.

[PCPOET7]

from what I understand from a trademark lawyer there is only two thing that they have a problem with in the courts. the niki logo still being on the sneakers and mentioning that they are made from niki shoes in advertising. the changes that are needed is remove the Niki logo on the shoe and any mention of niki as the source for the shoe. then advertise as a limited run artistic piece.

[Sirius Lee]

Nike isn’t upset about the turd of darkness. Hell, they work him him. They’re just upset about the 10% for the big guy.

[kiryandil]

[Impala64ssa]

I wouldn't be surprised if it it is a stunt. Just a bunch of schticklach to ****####$$$$$&&&&ATTRACT ATTENTION TO HIMSELF!!!!&&&&&$$$$$#####***** Look at me! I'm edgy!

[Bullish]

I don’t buy anything Nike or Satanic.

[wildcard_redneck]

I still don’t buy the judgment on requiring the removing the logo. if not he’s going to slap it on every physical object they sell then they just have to live with people doing with it what they want.

[DesertRhino]

I want to know how long Nike retains rights to control the use of a product that somebody buys from them. If I buy 100 pairs of Nike shoes, and change the shoelaces to a different color and resell them. Can Nike tell me I can’t do that? If I buy a car from General Motors, and install different rims and tires and then resell it, should that be criminalized?

[DesertRhino]

If I buy a Chevy. And then decide to add some devil logos and then resell it, do I have to remove all Chevrolet logos on the tailgate?

[NohSpinZone]

[NohSpinZone]

Interesting question. I don’t think so. You are reselling an asset you own outright. This wasn’t a case of this clown selling one pair of his own shoes customized. He’s selling a line. That’s the distinction, I’d think.