Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Jezebel)   Mitt Romney ignores Peter Berg's letter demanding he stop using "clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose" as a campaign slogan and starts producing crappy wristbands using it for $10 a pop   (jezebel.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Peter Berg, Mitt Romney, wrist bands, slogans, eyes  
•       •       •

5606 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 23 Oct 2012 at 12:06 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



128 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-22 09:06:55 PM  
Rules don't apply to rich people.
 
2012-10-22 09:17:40 PM  

ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.


This.
 
2012-10-22 09:45:06 PM  

Revek: ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.

This.


This.
 
2012-10-22 10:35:53 PM  

basemetal: Revek: ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.

This.

This.


Those.
 
2012-10-22 10:58:47 PM  
This man sucks...
 
2012-10-22 11:12:11 PM  
Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?
 
2012-10-22 11:15:05 PM  
My question is this: is the line directly from Berg's movie/TV script, or is it lifted from Bissinger's book? In which case, Bissinger is a Romney supporter.

Still, dick move.
 
2012-10-22 11:36:50 PM  

Techhell: Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?


Well, we'll see if Peter Berg sues him, but isn't it his intellectual property? Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.

propasaurus: My question is this: is the line directly from Berg's movie/TV script, or is it lifted from Bissinger's book? In which case, Bissinger is a Romney supporter.

Still, dick move.


"Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose" is directly from the Berg script for the pilot and a wholly invented line for the TV show, it was NOT used at Odessa Permian or in Buzz's book at all.
 
2012-10-23 12:03:39 AM  
In Mitt Romney's world, Jason Street would not be able to get health insurance because of his pre-existing condition.

That should tell you all you need to know about this hypocritical and shameless plagiarism.
 
2012-10-23 12:05:28 AM  

robsul82: Techhell: Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?

Well, we'll see if Peter Berg sues him, but isn't it his intellectual property? Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.

propasaurus: My question is this: is the line directly from Berg's movie/TV script, or is it lifted from Bissinger's book? In which case, Bissinger is a Romney supporter.

Still, dick move.

"Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose" is directly from the Berg script for the pilot and a wholly invented line for the TV show, it was NOT used at Odessa Permian or in Buzz's book at all.


Well, there ya go. Thanks.
 
2012-10-23 12:07:54 AM  
What the fark does this shiat even mean?
 
2012-10-23 12:11:15 AM  
"Full hearts?"

Pretty sure we're talking about "full wallets" for the rich he's going to be taking good care of the next 4 years. Because they create jobs or something.

Something derpy.
 
2012-10-23 12:11:34 AM  

robsul82: Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.


We've got to have some paralegals on Fark.
 
2012-10-23 12:12:57 AM  

dbirchall: robsul82: Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.

We've got to have some paralegals on Fark.


As opposed to some of the mental paraplegics we often just end up putting on ignore.
 
2012-10-23 12:13:41 AM  
Oh and I'm guessing the wristbands were made in China. Good job, there.
 
2012-10-23 12:15:31 AM  
i.imgur.com
Wow.
 
2012-10-23 12:17:52 AM  

moothemagiccow: What the fark does this shiat even mean?


I'm presuming by "full heart" they mean you are not currently suffering from a pulmonary gas embolism.
 
2012-10-23 12:18:29 AM  
Wait, is this the same Peter Berg the director of Battleship? I'm debating who I want to win in this fight. Better nuke them both from orbit just to be sure.
 
2012-10-23 12:22:51 AM  
This, from a man, who, on this very evening, said he would fight against China's theft of our intellectual property.
 
2012-10-23 12:23:26 AM  

whidbey: Oh and I'm guessing the wristbands were made in China. Good job, there.


Probably. What are the odds of the wristbands being lead-tainted or otherwise toxic?
 
2012-10-23 12:25:00 AM  

lelio: Wait, is this the same Peter Berg the director of Battleship? I'm debating who I want to win in this fight. Better nuke them both from orbit just to be sure.


This isn't a game of Battleship. ;)
 
2012-10-23 12:26:25 AM  

Fluorescent Testicle: whidbey: Oh and I'm guessing the wristbands were made in China. Good job, there.

Probably. What are the odds of the wristbands being lead-tainted or otherwise toxic?


Bonus: Or made out of petroleum products imported from Iran.
 
2012-10-23 12:29:00 AM  

dbirchall: robsul82: Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.

We've got to have some paralegals on Fark.


It's a thin case at best. The plaintiff will need to have rock-hard evidence that Romney intentionally infringed that particular registered copyrighted material and made at least $25,000 off it.
 
2012-10-23 12:29:40 AM  
What a bunch of whiny losers the first four posters are.

It's called 'Fair Use'.

Deal with it.

Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.

Farking allah you people are stupid.
 
2012-10-23 12:32:08 AM  
daynage.files.wordpress.com

Wow.
 
2012-10-23 12:32:47 AM  

GranoblasticMan: [i.imgur.com image 300x169]
Wow.


Damnit, I need some eye drops. I scrolled through and didn't see this.
 
2012-10-23 12:34:54 AM  

Techhell: Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?


Conservatives can't tell. That's why they employ undocumented workers without moral conflict since profit is involved.
 
2012-10-23 12:35:33 AM  

douchebag/hater: What a bunch of whiny losers the first four posters are.

It's called 'Fair Use'.

Deal with it.

Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.

Farking allah you people are stupid
.


what is this i don't even
 
2012-10-23 12:36:31 AM  

douchebag/hater: What a bunch of whiny losers the first four posters are.

It's called 'Fair Use'.

Deal with it.

Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.

Farking allah you people are stupid.


Nah, it doesn't appear to clearly fit withing the guidelines for "fair use."

And, Obama earned his money the old fashioned way. He worked for it.
 
2012-10-23 12:37:17 AM  

douchebag/hater: Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.


Here's the difference:

Romney is that kinda guy that, were you to meet hiim face-to-face, he would put on a good show of concern and discuss your ideals and priorities, and what you want most out of a leader... Then later you'd see him dragging your name out in a stump speech as an endorsement that he understands "the poors."

And when you're like, "What? I'm not that p... also, Dude, 'The Poors' is not the preferred nomenclature. 'Impoverished Americans,' please."

And then Romney would summon legions of fanatics like you to swarm in denouncing "political correctness," while he slinks on to the next venue & continues abusing your name.
 
2012-10-23 12:37:44 AM  
Somewhere, a bald eagle is so moved that he's crying a star-shaped tear.

image.blingee.com

Close enough?
 
2012-10-23 12:39:23 AM  

douchebag/hater: What a bunch of whiny losers the first four posters are.

It's called 'Fair Use'.

Deal with it.

Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.

Farking allah you people are stupid.


Fair use doesn't qualify if you attach said stolen line to a piece of merchandise and sell it without cutting the copyright owner in on the profits.

That's why copyright laws exist.
 
2012-10-23 12:42:04 AM  
Wow you guys sure like that troll. Maybe you should do a group marriage.
 
2012-10-23 12:43:27 AM  
Not sure if you folks are aware or not, but fair use doesn't qualify if you attach said stolen line to a piece of merchandise and sell it without cutting the copyright owner in on the profits. That's why copyright laws exist.

That and all sorts of other wisdom will be in my soon to be released book. Buy it.
 
2012-10-23 12:44:02 AM  

mahoggin: lelio: Wait, is this the same Peter Berg the director of Battleship? I'm debating who I want to win in this fight. Better nuke them both from orbit just to be sure.

This isn't a game of Battleship. ;)


images3.wikia.nocookie.net
Ah! Ah! He said it! He said it!
 
2012-10-23 12:45:02 AM  
Romney vows to fight China and their stealing of our intellectual property, and he turns around and is guilty of the same thing.

/nice
 
2012-10-23 12:45:11 AM  
Holy shiat, this asshole was using that sacred phrase? FARK YOU

Seriously, this is the worst thing of the entire campaign. I'm not kidding.
 
2012-10-23 12:48:21 AM  
Mr. Romney, you decry the intellectual property theft by companies in China, and yet you steal a slogan from an American without permission. Is this like Mr. Reagan misappropriating Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA" without understanding what it meant with respect to the war in Vietnam?

How do you feel about Becky Sproles' abortion? Should she have "borrowed money from her parents"?
 
2012-10-23 12:49:16 AM  
No man ya see it's totally different. Ours goes da din din din din din din din din and their's is din din din da da din din. Two totally different beats...
 
2012-10-23 12:52:04 AM  

RedPhoenix122: basemetal: Revek: ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.

This.

This.

Those.


You can't triple stamp a double 'this'!!
 
2012-10-23 12:53:55 AM  

VTGremlin: Not sure if you folks are aware or not, but fair use doesn't qualify if you attach said stolen line to a piece of merchandise and sell it without cutting the copyright owner in on the profits. That's why copyright laws exist.

That and all sorts of other wisdom will be in my soon to be released book. Buy it.


iseewhatyoudidthere.jpg
 
2012-10-23 12:58:09 AM  

Elmo Jones: This, from a man, who, on this very evening, said he would fight against China's theft of our intellectual property.



Because it needs to be seen and repeated.
 
2012-10-23 01:07:16 AM  

RedPhoenix122: basemetal: Revek: ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.

This.

This.

Those.


And these again.
 
2012-10-23 01:12:01 AM  
Didn't Zira say that?
 
2012-10-23 01:12:40 AM  
The Angel Moroni wrote it on the golden skillet first.
 
2012-10-23 01:14:00 AM  
What's next, every kiss begins with Mitt?
 
2012-10-23 01:17:21 AM  

stoli n coke: Fair use doesn't qualify if you attach said stolen line to a piece of merchandise and sell it without cutting the copyright owner in on the profits.


Not true.

There is a four factor test to fair use.

1.) the purpose and character of your use
2.) the nature of the copyrighted work
3.) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
4.) the effect of the use upon the potential market.

It is by definition a subjective question. By no means are you prevented from using that for profit if enough of even one of the other factors makes it a fair use example.

I can't imagine that Romney's use would pass the 4-factor test, but still.
 
2012-10-23 01:31:24 AM  
I'm holding out for the "For the Horde!" bracelet.
 
2012-10-23 01:53:57 AM  
Berg should send Landry to butcher him for this transgression.
 
2012-10-23 01:57:16 AM  

missiv: What's next, every kiss begins with Mitt?


ba da ba ba ba i'm lovin mitt
 
2012-10-23 01:58:57 AM  

you are a puppet: missiv: What's next, every kiss begins with Mitt?

ba da ba ba ba i'm lovin mitt


Just do Mitt.
 
2012-10-23 02:04:19 AM  

robsul82: Techhell: Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?

Well, we'll see if Peter Berg sues him, but isn't it his intellectual property? Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.


Honestly? Probably not. Since we're talking about a film, there's a pretty good probability that the IP rights have been transferred a dozen or so times and are currently held by some company no one here has ever heard of, whose property consists solely of a warehouse, a P.O. box, and a ton of IP.
 
2012-10-23 02:10:40 AM  
In the meantime, Silver bumped O's chances back up to 70.3% right before the debate. Says even a 1 point swing toward Obama would bump the model up to 80% in favor of an Obama win.

It's now a battle between Obama's two debate wins vs. being outspent on advertising the final two weeks of the campaign. Donated another $25 to the Dems right before the debate.
 
2012-10-23 02:11:39 AM  

moothemagiccow: What the fark does this shiat even mean?


This


/Empty rhetoric is empty.
 
2012-10-23 02:12:25 AM  

Emposter: robsul82: Techhell: Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?

Well, we'll see if Peter Berg sues him, but isn't it his intellectual property? Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.


Honestly? Probably not. Since we're talking about a film, there's a pretty good probability that the IP rights have been transferred a dozen or so times and are currently held by some company no one here has ever heard of, whose property consists solely of a warehouse, a P.O. box, and a ton of IP.


It was from his TV show, which Berg's production company and Brian Grazer co-owned. Grazer has had the rights to the story since the book came out and he tried to get Ron Howard to make it in the 90s.

Given that the show ended just a year ago, it's doubtful the rights have been shuffled around very much, especially when there's DVD and Netflix money to consider.
 
2012-10-23 02:14:33 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: In the meantime, Silver bumped O's chances back up to 70.3% right before the debate. Says even a 1 point swing toward Obama would bump the model up to 80% in favor of an Obama win.

It's now a battle between Obama's two debate wins vs. being outspent on advertising the final two weeks of the campaign. Donated another $25 to the Dems right before the debate.


However, as a previous article mentioned, the ad blitzes may not be as effective now that many households have DVRs.
 
2012-10-23 02:14:52 AM  

douchebag/hater: Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.



I guess I missed the part where Obama is fighting to give himself more tax cuts, and Romney is against it.

Also, the phrase in question isn't "fair use" if it's being sold on merchandise. However, the show's creator likely doesn't own the phrase -- it is likely owned by the television network and/or production company that made the show.

You have a tendency to talk about things you know nothing about.
 
2012-10-23 02:16:17 AM  
The Romney campaign continues to affirm my belief that most republicans are assholes.

... but strangely enough, Romney spent most of his time claiming he's really just like Obama.
 
2012-10-23 02:17:14 AM  

stoli n coke: However, as a previous article mentioned, the ad blitzes may not be as effective now that many households have DVRs.



They will also be less effective because this late in the race, more minds are made up. It's a strange strategy. My only conclusion is that they knew Obama would be the better debater, so they saved their money to run more ads during and after the debates to off-set the debate impact.
 
2012-10-23 02:17:19 AM  

ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.


Bookmarling moyjrtfarkeing drunkenness
 
2012-10-23 02:18:40 AM  

ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.


ts2.mm.bing.net
 
2012-10-23 02:19:01 AM  

stoli n coke: Given that the show ended just a year ago, it's doubtful the rights have been shuffled around very much, especially when there's DVD and Netflix money to consider.



It's most definitely still owned by the production company or network that produced/distributed the show. They're still making money off of all of the ancillary licensing deals.
 
2012-10-23 02:19:08 AM  
I hope he never stops. Goddamn crybabies.
 
2012-10-23 02:20:51 AM  

STRYPERSWINE: I hope he never stops. Goddamn crybabies.


derp
 
2012-10-23 02:31:55 AM  

douchebag/hater: What a bunch of whiny losers the first four posters are.

It's called 'Fair Use'.

Deal with it.

Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.

Farking allah you people are stupid.


Fair use doesn't involve selling things for profit, but thanks for your input, fark lawyer.
 
2012-10-23 02:39:11 AM  
His next round of merchandise includes Calvin peeing on the Obama logo, the McDonald's "Golden Arches" for the M in Mitt and boxes of 100% fiber Colon Zamboni to help you process all the bullshiat.
 
2012-10-23 02:41:56 AM  

stoli n coke: shower_in_my_socks: In the meantime, Silver bumped O's chances back up to 70.3% right before the debate. Says even a 1 point swing toward Obama would bump the model up to 80% in favor of an Obama win.

It's now a battle between Obama's two debate wins vs. being outspent on advertising the final two weeks of the campaign. Donated another $25 to the Dems right before the debate.

However, as a previous article mentioned, the ad blitzes may not be as effective now that many households have DVRs.


I'm also thinking ad blitzes at the end may not work any more as many people participate in early or mail in voting... the key is to get em to vote for you as soon as they can... Even if Romney had a miraculously good moment in the next two weeks, it's already too late.
 
2012-10-23 02:45:01 AM  
that's nothing. if Romney wins it won't be cheap wrist bracelets, it will be arm bands. on school children marching to class. watch and see.
 
2012-10-23 02:45:57 AM  

FuryOfFirestorm: ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.

[ts2.mm.bing.net image 160x158]


KAIBA 2012
 
2012-10-23 02:47:28 AM  
Ads at this point aren't aiming to convince you to vote for their guy. They're entirely trying to get you disgusted with the entire election and get you not to vote. And they can still be very effective at that.

Rmoney's big bounce after the first debate came after a massive ad blitz in swing states meant to adjust the enthusiasm numbers. Which is why his bounce was so much more pronounced in "likely voter" models than "registered voter" models.
 
2012-10-23 02:59:04 AM  

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: Ads at this point aren't aiming to convince you to vote for their guy. They're entirely trying to get you disgusted with the entire election and get you not to vote. And they can still be very effective at that.


Still useless in regards to early voters, though.
 
2012-10-23 02:59:23 AM  

STRYPERSWINE: I hope he never stops. Goddamn crybabies.


so you support theft. at least you're honest about it.
 
2012-10-23 03:10:02 AM  

robsul82: Techhell: Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?

Well, we'll see if Peter Berg sues him, but isn't it his intellectual property? Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.

propasaurus: My question is this: is the line directly from Berg's movie/TV script, or is it lifted from Bissinger's book? In which case, Bissinger is a Romney supporter.

Still, dick move.

"Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose" is directly from the Berg script for the pilot and a wholly invented line for the TV show, it was NOT used at Odessa Permian or in Buzz's book at all.


therefore, copyright infringement ...
LOL
probably not enough time to get an injunction to stop them from making and selling them.
but, probably enough to win a lawsuit against the campaign ... LOL
 
2012-10-23 03:13:20 AM  
White knuckles, full colon, can't shiat.
 
2012-10-23 03:28:44 AM  

ManateeGag: Rules don't apply to rich people.


i48.tinypic.com
 
2012-10-23 03:31:39 AM  

namatad: robsul82: Techhell: Dick move on Romney's part, but is what Romney doing illegal or just immoral/unethical?

Well, we'll see if Peter Berg sues him, but isn't it his intellectual property? Obviously someone with more than a GED in Law would know more and should chime in.

propasaurus: My question is this: is the line directly from Berg's movie/TV script, or is it lifted from Bissinger's book? In which case, Bissinger is a Romney supporter.

Still, dick move.

"Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose" is directly from the Berg script for the pilot and a wholly invented line for the TV show, it was NOT used at Odessa Permian or in Buzz's book at all.

therefore, copyright infringement ...
LOL
probably not enough time to get an injunction to stop them from making and selling them.
but, probably enough to win a lawsuit against the campaign ... LOL


Can he file a DMCA claim against Romney's website?
 
2012-10-23 03:40:06 AM  

namatad: therefore, copyright infringement ...


Dude, I don't know. I think it's a dick move, but I don't know and that's why the "should chime in" sentence is there.
 
2012-10-23 03:53:26 AM  

douchebag/hater: Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.


Um, Obama is rich and fine with admitting he's more fortunate than many. Note how many times he said something like, "Not everyone in the US has the same level of financial security as you and me" to Mr. Romney. Additionally, Obama has only been rich for about a decade, as a result of writing a best-selling book.

Romney is rich and keeps trying to hide it because he is (I'd say rightfully) ashamed of the source of his wealth, and thinks that us commoners are like dogs and if he tousles our ears and growls a bit we'll totally accept him as one of our lowly, mutt-filled, disgustingly filthy pack, because dogs are too stupid to match a rich man's brilliance. Additionally, Romney has been rich since birth and insists that, having been born on third, he clearly hit a triple, and he's maintained that wealth by buying healthy companies with loads of long-term potential, stripping them of "assets", i.e. firing everyone in what was formerly a healthy company, and then liquidating everything down to the kitchen sinks for a quick short-term buck, sometimes taking the market and selling it to a company in China to add insult to injury.

Perhaps the reason we feel there's a slight difference is more clear to you now?
 
2012-10-23 04:13:47 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: I'm holding out for the "For the Horde!" bracelet.


Romney is obviously Alliance.
 
2012-10-23 05:09:33 AM  
If my last name was Berg, I would name my son Ice, and my daughter Christy.

/Christy Berg
//Get it?
///Got nothing else
 
2012-10-23 05:27:15 AM  

blog.zap2it.com


"The Hills Have Eyes. Angelheart. Footloose."

 
2012-10-23 05:31:59 AM  

Hillbilly Jim: No man ya see it's totally different. Ours goes da din din din din din din din din and their's is din din din da da din din. Two totally different beats...


Romney is Under Pressure on copyright infringement?
 
2012-10-23 05:33:38 AM  
Chris Deberg?
 
2012-10-23 06:14:14 AM  
Did he ask him to stop or present him with a cease and desist (sp?) letter? If all he did was ask, Mitt isn't obligated to stop. But he should.
 
2012-10-23 08:10:52 AM  
What a stupid phrase anyway. Sounds like it belongs on one of those lame No Fear t-shirts.
 
2012-10-23 08:31:51 AM  
I'm currently on season 3 of FNL on Netflix, so I'm getting a kick...

/that's some original thinking there,Romney. Idiot.
 
2012-10-23 08:39:47 AM  

jm105: DMCA


that would be epic trolling
 
2012-10-23 08:41:19 AM  
What's missing?

Soon there will be no real Friday night football at real Texas high schools. Not with Republican education cuts.
 
2012-10-23 08:53:27 AM  

BitwiseShift: What's missing?

Soon there will be no real Friday night football at real Texas high schools. Not with Republican education cuts.


The cuts will be to science and arts. No new lab equipment or budget for the school play. But there will always be money for sports.
 
2012-10-23 08:57:55 AM  
Who the hell is Peter Berg?
 
2012-10-23 09:01:58 AM  

andrewagill: stoli n coke: Fair use doesn't qualify if you attach said stolen line to a piece of merchandise and sell it without cutting the copyright owner in on the profits.

Not true.

There is a four factor test to fair use.

1.) the purpose and character of your use
2.) the nature of the copyrighted work
3.) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
4.) the effect of the use upon the potential market.

It is by definition a subjective question. By no means are you prevented from using that for profit if enough of even one of the other factors makes it a fair use example.

I can't imagine that Romney's use would pass the 4-factor test, but still.


You forgot the rest of the first factor: "... including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes."


Also, from the U.S. Copyright Office:

The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: "quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported."
 
2012-10-23 09:03:22 AM  

redTiburon: Who the hell is Peter Berg?


Character actor from the 90s, got some critical praise for "Chicago Hope" and "Cop Land," then in the late 90s, he moved into writing and directing. He made "Very Bad Things," "The Rundown," and the adaptation of "Friday Night Lights," then developed a TV show of "Friday Night Lights," in which he was the executive producer, show runner, and the writer of the line that the Romney campaign decided to put on bracelets to sell. 

Basically, a guy whose been in show business long enough to recognize a blatant intellectual property theft.
 
2012-10-23 09:03:46 AM  
Good thing Mitt didn't just go on a big shpiel about China not respecting our trademark or copyright laws. If that had happened he'd look pret-ty hypocritical by now. And...


redTiburon: Who the hell is Peter Berg?


Don't act like you're not familiar with the cinematic landmark that was "Shocker."
 
2012-10-23 09:04:07 AM  
Never watched the show so I was unaware of this. Romney should've respected the request... just like when musicians tell politicians not to use their songs for their campaigns.
 
2012-10-23 09:21:57 AM  

give me doughnuts: andrewagill: stoli n coke: Fair use doesn't qualify if you attach said stolen line to a piece of merchandise and sell it without cutting the copyright owner in on the profits.

Not true.

There is a four factor test to fair use.

1.) the purpose and character of your use
2.) the nature of the copyrighted work
3.) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
4.) the effect of the use upon the potential market.

It is by definition a subjective question. By no means are you prevented from using that for profit if enough of even one of the other factors makes it a fair use example.

I can't imagine that Romney's use would pass the 4-factor test, but still.

You forgot the rest of the first factor: "... including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes."


But it doesn't prohibit commercial use of the stuff. It's only one of the four factors. For example, in MATTEL INC. v. WALKING MOUNTAIN PRODUCTIONS:

In the action before us, Plaintiff Mattel Corporation asks us to prohibit Defendant artist Thomas Forsythe from producing and selling photographs containing Mattel's "Barbie" doll. Most of Forsythe's photos portray a nude Barbie in danger of being attacked by vintage household appliances. Mattel argues that his photos infringe on their copyrights, trademarks, and trade dress. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to Forsythe.
[...]
Having balanced the four § 107 fair use factors, we hold that Forsythe's work constitutes fair use under § 107's exception. His work is a parody of Barbie and highly transformative. The amount of Mattel's figure that he used was justified. His infringement had no discernable impact on Mattel's market for derivative uses. Finally, the benefits to the public in allowing such use - allowing artistic freedom and expression and criticism of a cultural icon - are great. Allowing Forsythe's use serves the aims of the Copyright Act by encouraging the very creativity and criticism that the Act pro- tects. Kelly, 336 F.3d at 819-20. We affirm the district court on its grant of summary judgment on Mattel's copyright infringement claims.
 
2012-10-23 09:34:10 AM  

Mr. Cat Poop: BitwiseShift: What's missing?

Soon there will be no real Friday night football at real Texas high schools. Not with Republican education cuts.

The cuts will be to science and arts. No new lab equipment or budget for the school play. But there will always be money for sports.


Cuts have already started  Just electing the same-old same-old Republicans in Texas is in for a big shock.
 
2012-10-23 09:39:35 AM  

PsyLord: Never watched the show so I was unaware of this. Romney should've respected the request... just like when musicians tell politicians not to use their songs for their campaigns.


later, he can pull out the ole, "mistakes were made" comment.
 
2012-10-23 09:46:32 AM  
Mitt Romney is a self-important assclown who doesn't believe he has to follow the same rules as normal people and has no compulsion to be anything remotely close to honest. More at 11 when we'll also investigate whether the oceans are still wet or not.
 
2012-10-23 09:55:52 AM  
This was an iconic phrase in the show. The coaches would say "Clear eyes, full hearts" and the team would shout "Can't Lose!". If I remember correctly, it may have even been the last line of dialog at the end of the series. It's similar to catchphrases like "Norm!" in Cheers or "Did I do that?" in Family Matters.
 
2012-10-23 09:58:53 AM  

warrenn: This was an iconic phrase in the show. The coaches would say "Clear eyes, full hearts" and the team would shout "Can't Lose!". If I remember correctly, it may have even been the last line of dialog at the end of the series. It's similar to catchphrases like "Norm!" in Cheers or "Did I do that?" in Family Matters.


Or ""Yeah, that's the ticket!" by Mitt Romney Jon Lovitz's Tommy Flanagan character on SNL.
 
2012-10-23 10:04:34 AM  
People, people! We're forgetting what's important here:

slanchreport.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-10-23 10:06:34 AM  
What is the deal with rule breakers and wristbands? I bet the funds aren't even going to campaign research or election strategy, instead it all goes to election awareness.
 
2012-10-23 10:27:37 AM  

LarryDan43: What is the deal with rule breakers and wristbands?


I'm surprised more of the GOP aren't wearing this.

www.alrdesign.com
 
2012-10-23 10:40:50 AM  

EyeballKid: LarryDan43: What is the deal with rule breakers and wristbands?

I'm surprised more of the GOP aren't wearing this.

[www.alrdesign.com image 364x176]


Yeah, because that only goes one way, right?
 
2012-10-23 10:44:45 AM  
Mitt just wants to open the windows in a plane. He's never had a beer. His horse competes in multimillion dollar events. Hes cool with stepping on the common man. Just what the doctor ordered, right?
 
2012-10-23 10:47:40 AM  

Crewmannumber6: EyeballKid: LarryDan43: What is the deal with rule breakers and wristbands?

I'm surprised more of the GOP aren't wearing this.

[www.alrdesign.com image 364x176]

Yeah, because that only goes one way, right?


www.usnews.com
b-b-b-b-but ACORN!!!!
 
2012-10-23 11:06:13 AM  
My assumption is you don't own a trademark or copyright on a line just because it exists in a script.

If you could, Lucas would have sued everyone that said " May the Force be with you " in the last 35 years.
 
2012-10-23 11:12:30 AM  

stoli n coke: you are a puppet: missiv: What's next, every kiss begins with Mitt?

ba da ba ba ba i'm lovin mitt

Just do Mitt.


Not even with someone else's vagina.

/Mitt's in your mouth, not in your hands.
//ewwww. I made myself sick.
///I think I'll skip lunch today.
 
2012-10-23 11:28:54 AM  

zerkalo: Chris Deberg?


Don't pay the ferryman, Mitt! Don't even fix a price, until he gets you to the other side!
 
2012-10-23 11:35:53 AM  

whidbey: Oh and I'm guessing the wristbands were made in China. Good job, there.


If they're fan-made, maybe, but if they're official campaign swag, I'm betting not. I'm not a mittfan, but having official campaign stuff made somewhere other than the USA is like running for President as a Democrat or Republican and not having your logo be red, white, and blue. It's just not done, and as many mistakes as Romney's had, Chinese-made official swag hasn't been one thus far (amusing photoshops notwithstanding).
 
2012-10-23 12:10:01 PM  
Let's all pretend to be outraged, cuz that would be fun.
 
2012-10-23 12:30:37 PM  

andrewagill: give me doughnuts: andrewagill: stoli n coke: Fair use doesn't qualify if you attach said stolen line to a piece of merchandise and sell it without cutting the copyright owner in on the profits.

Not true.

There is a four factor test to fair use.

1.) the purpose and character of your use
2.) the nature of the copyrighted work
3.) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
4.) the effect of the use upon the potential market.

It is by definition a subjective question. By no means are you prevented from using that for profit if enough of even one of the other factors makes it a fair use example.

I can't imagine that Romney's use would pass the 4-factor test, but still.

You forgot the rest of the first factor: "... including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes."

But it doesn't prohibit commercial use of the stuff. It's only one of the four factors. For example, in MATTEL INC. v. WALKING MOUNTAIN PRODUCTIONS:

In the action before us, Plaintiff Mattel Corporation asks us to prohibit Defendant artist Thomas Forsythe from producing and selling photographs containing Mattel's "Barbie" doll. Most of Forsythe's photos portray a nude Barbie in danger of being attacked by vintage household appliances. Mattel argues that his photos infringe on their copyrights, trademarks, and trade dress. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to Forsythe.
[...]
Having balanced the four § 107 fair use factors, we hold that Forsythe's work constitutes fair use under § 107's exception. His work is a parody of Barbie and highly transformative. The amount of Mattel's figure that he used was justified. His infringement had no discernable impact on Mattel's market for derivative uses. Finally, the benefits to the public in allowing such use - allowing artistic freedom and expression and criticism of a cultural icon - are great. Allowing Forsythe's use serves the aims o ...


Please note the selected word. You seem to be implying that the Romney campaign's use of the copyrighted phrases are used in a parodic manner.
It is not.

If someone were to start selling yellow rubber bracelets with the legend "CHEATSTRONG" molded into them, then that would fit the fair-use parody exception.
 
2012-10-23 12:41:44 PM  
Even if Michael Moore wanted to use my music, I would be flattered that I was popular enough to be wanted for that sort of thing and I would thank him for the the further publicity.
 
2012-10-23 12:43:15 PM  
You can always go spend your money at the Obama Store. They are having a BIG CLEARANCE SALE.
 
2012-10-23 12:45:51 PM  

STRYPERSWINE: Even if Michael Moore wanted to use my music, I would be flattered that I was popular enough to be wanted for that sort of thing and I would thank him for the the further publicity.


We have established what you are. We are now merely haggling over the price.
 
2012-10-23 12:57:30 PM  

lelio: Wait, is this the same Peter Berg the director of Battleship? I'm debating who I want to win in this fight. Better nuke them both from orbit just to be sure.


Battleship was one of the greatest boobie free movies ever created. It was way way better than the hate it gets suggests.
 
2012-10-23 12:58:50 PM  

douchebag/hater: What a bunch of whiny losers the first four posters are.

It's called 'Fair Use'.



This is not an example of fair use.

Here's a clue: Fair use does not mean "I get to use a little of whatever I want."

I will leave it to you to determine what it does mean.
 
2012-10-23 01:18:56 PM  
Forget the commercial or copyright aspects of this, the headlines are now "Writer does not endorse Romney."

The optics of that more than negate whatever good these bracelets and this slogan are doing for the Romney campaign.
 
2012-10-23 01:30:08 PM  

redqueenmeg: whidbey: Oh and I'm guessing the wristbands were made in China. Good job, there.

If they're fan-made, maybe, but if they're official campaign swag, I'm betting not. I'm not a mittfan, but having official campaign stuff made somewhere other than the USA is like running for President as a Democrat or Republican and not having your logo be red, white, and blue. It's just not done, and as many mistakes as Romney's had, Chinese-made official swag hasn't been one thus far (amusing photoshops notwithstanding).


Oh please. Romney already got shiat for having China-made flag pins.

No way these bracelets are from the USA.
 
2012-10-23 03:33:47 PM  
UNLEASH THE PATENT TROLLS!

/They exist purely for this moment.
 
2012-10-23 08:02:19 PM  
Romney 2012!
 
2012-10-24 12:23:05 AM  

redTiburon: Who the hell is Peter Berg?


He was good in this movie

i30.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-24 06:37:05 AM  

cetacei: redTiburon: Who the hell is Peter Berg?

He was good in this movie

[i30.photobucket.com image 382x567]


Veri Bad Things. Just when you think things can't get worse, they do.
 
2012-10-24 07:41:35 AM  

ManRay: My assumption is you don't own a trademark or copyright on a line just because it exists in a script.

If you could, Lucas would have sued everyone that said " May the Force be with you " in the last 35 years.


However, Lucas can, and has sued people that put "May the Force be with you," on a T-shirt they're trying to sell.

Your assumption is wrong. If you look at the credits or any movie or look into the first couple of pages of any book, you'll see something called a copyright.

That means whoever owns the copyright has a say on how that line, a.k.a. intellectual property, is marketed or merchandised. The only exception to this is if it is done in parody.
 
2012-10-24 08:07:40 AM  

give me doughnuts: Please note the selected word. You seem to be implying that the Romney campaign's use of the copyrighted phrases are used in a parodic manner.



No I am not. Please note my earlier comment below.

andrewagill: I can't imagine that Romney's use would pass the 4-factor test, but still.

 
2012-10-24 09:47:54 AM  

stoli n coke: ManRay: My assumption is you don't own a trademark or copyright on a line just because it exists in a script.

If you could, Lucas would have sued everyone that said " May the Force be with you " in the last 35 years.

However, Lucas can, and has sued people that put "May the Force be with you," on a T-shirt they're trying to sell.

Your assumption is wrong. If you look at the credits or any movie or look into the first couple of pages of any book, you'll see something called a copyright.

That means whoever owns the copyright has a say on how that line, a.k.a. intellectual property, is marketed or merchandised. The only exception to this is if it is done in parody.


There are many exceptions to copyright under fair use (NOTE TO THOSE JOINING US: ROMNEY'S USE IS PROBABLY NOT FAIR USE). Parody is only one example. For example, Blanch v Koons was about a collage, Niagara, which was not a parody.

"Niagara," on the other hand, may be better characterized for these purposes as satire -- its message appears to target the genre of which "Silk Sandals" is typical, rather than the individual photograph itself. See Rogers, 960 F.2d at 310 (concluding that a previous work by Koons was not a parody because "the copied work must be, at least in part, an object of the parody" and it was "difficult to discern in Koons's work] any parody [*255] of the photograph . . . itself").

[And yet the opinion concludes]

We therefore conclude that neither he nor the other defendants engaged in or are liable for copyright infringement. We affirm the judgment of the district court.


The Supreme Court has said in the past that satire is not protected, unlike parody. ``[A] humorous or satiric work deserves protection under the fair-use doctrine only if the copied work is at least partly the target of the work in question''. The distinction here is that other factors are involved which make Niagara fair use.

One other thing is that copyright does not really apply for very short things like slogans or taglines. That is trademark law, and fair use for trademark does not include such clear allowances for parody or many other things that are essential parts of copyright fair use, hence the suits against Victor's Little Secret or Sam Buck's Coffee.
 
2012-10-24 07:20:13 PM  
The last case I read of an artist demanding politician stop using his song, it turned out the campaign people had done the necessary legal steps of actually licensing the song. Is it possible that is also the case here?

Note to artists, if you don't want politicians to use your song, don't sign the rights over to an agency that doesn't care what your political beliefs happen to be.
 
2012-10-24 07:22:22 PM  

MrPenny: douchebag/hater: What a bunch of whiny losers the first four posters are.

It's called 'Fair Use'.

Deal with it.

Oh and btw OBAMA is rich, too, to the tune of several millions of dollars but I guess that's ok because he's
a 'Progressive' and rich CONSERVATIVES are bad.

Farking allah you people are stupid.

Nah, it doesn't appear to clearly fit withing the guidelines for "fair use."

And, Obama earned his money the old fashioned way. He worked for it.


I didn't realize a career in community organizating was so lucrative.
 
Displayed 128 of 128 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report