Trump filing a lawsuit against Blasio! (dollar, political, state, claim)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Before posting in such a partisan manner, you should at least look at both sides of the issue.
I have a passing familiarity with trademark law, thank you very much. And that citation doesn't actually help Trump's case any. From your own link:
Quote:
First amendment considerations are much stronger in the non-commercial context, in which the parodist is attempting to express an idea, than in the commercial context, in which the parodist uses the parody of the mark in association with his own goods or services.
Trump will need to make a case that people will somehow confuse "Make America Fair Again" hats for hsi "Make America Great again" ones, and purchase the wrong ones, to his detriment. And even if he makes that case (unlikely), the court will have to consider that in the light of the First's intended purpose - that of protecting political speech.
Classical Trump - "I can afford a more expensive lawyer, so the law should be on my side."
I have a passing familiarity with trademark law, thank you very much. And that citation doesn't actually help Trump's case any. From your own link:
Trump will need to make a case that people will somehow confuse "Make America Fair Again" hats for hsi "Make America Great again" ones, and purchase the wrong ones, to his detriment. And even if he makes that case (unlikely), the court will have to consider that in the light of the First's intended purpose - that of protecting political speech.
Classical Trump - "I can afford a more expensive lawyer, so the law should be on my side."
Have you seen the hats? They look exactly alike. Someone could easily mistake one for the other (although I'm not sure if De Blasio is selling them or not).
I have a passing familiarity with trademark law, thank you very much. And that citation doesn't actually help Trump's case any. From your own link:
Trump will need to make a case that people will somehow confuse "Make America Fair Again" hats for hsi "Make America Great again" ones, and purchase the wrong ones, to his detriment. And even if he makes that case (unlikely), the court will have to consider that in the light of the First's intended purpose - that of protecting political speech.
Classical Trump - "I can afford a more expensive lawyer, so the law should be on my side."
Fox tried to block then satirist Al Franken from using the words ''fair and balanced'' on the cover of his book, ''Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.''
Quote:
Calling the motion ''wholly without merit, both factually and legally,'' the judge, Denny Chin of United States District Court, said that a person would have to be ''completely dense'' not to realize the cover was a joke, and that trademark protection for the phrase ''Fair and Balanced'' was unrealistic because the words are so commonly used.
Have you seen the hats? They look exactly alike. Someone could easily mistake one for the other (although I'm not sure if De Blasio is selling them or not).
Ah, can't make them look alike. You mean, like this?
Sarah Palin wrote:.................................................. .................................Someone wrote a parody, called:
Have you seen the hats? They look exactly alike. Someone could easily mistake one for the other (although I'm not sure if De Blasio is selling them or not).
If he deosn't sell them, there's no case at all.
Yet, even if he did: The standard to meet is whether a reasonable person out to purchase a Trump hat would be likely to buy a Blasio hat by mistake.
Someone unwilling or unable to read the text, who didn't know what website he was on? It's laughable.
And that is before we take into account the clear intent of parody, and the fact that the hat is political speech, a category of speech that traditionally enjoys a higher level of protection.
Trump is just trying to squelch speak he doesn't like, and that's disturbing.
Parody is an easier defense when one is actually a comedian or using the product in a comedic context. It will be a little harder for a politician outside of an SNL skit to do this.
Trump is just trying to squelch speak he doesn't like, and that's disturbing.
No, it means how much he is willing to sacrifice to run for presidency. Trump has hundreds of millions of dollars worth of business in the city and so much of it depends on the goodwill in city hall.
Parody is an easier defense when one is actually a comedian or using the product in a comedic context. It will be a little harder for a politician outside of an SNL skit to do this.
Parody in political speech goes back centuries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
