Well yacky tacky schmachy! You were the one who generalized the statement by saying " coverered by first amendment? Yep"
Well, no. Retorts don't count when disposing a person or company's copyright- sho sorry.
If it was a clipart chimp we'd have a debate- but in the end someone always has a license and they will claim it anytime the controversy does not suit their product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uly55es1
Thanks for the legal. I am aware that the the owners of the copy rights for Curious George are looking into legal action. I will post the link to the article when I find it again.
However my point was that these kinds of negative images are all part of political discourse and are covered by freedom of speech. All politicians get hit with them. Obama can, has and will take his lumps just like everyone else.
As far as the bar owner, he will have to take his lumps for trying to be cute and ripping off copyrighted material.
edited to add.
http://www.ajc.com/wireless/content/...gans_0514.html |