Of course they censored the shirt so you can’t buy it. I guess their copyright takedown argued that the statement was true, and therefore not entitled to a satire/parody exemption.
3 Likes
The truth is a defense against libel/slander, it is not a defense against copyright claims. You don’t get to use somebody’s logo like that without their permission.
IIRC, old timers are cars, so i don’t take offense to your intention. :]
I remember the toughest part of going on vacation was finding the key to the house so that we could lock the doors … not that we had anything worth stealing. 
Of course, we didn’t live in an urban area where it seems that everything is worth stealing.
I do, but I’m not selling it to make a profit. I’m just wearing it because it’s true, and it’s winter … finally. If BIG TECH sues me, then I will probably remove enough of the logo to make it legal, but still obvious to all the kool kids, and then sell some.
What site was that?
If the area you’re searching provides open access to police crime reports, Spotcrime is very accurate. Well, it’s very accurate for the three time frames and geographic locations when and where I’ve used it.
Neighborhood scout’s data used to be decent, but they’ve gone subscription, so I don’t know how detailed their data is currently.
This was a little while back but touched on a lot of social media related issues, and also journalist failings in MSM.
There are no racial differences in police killings when accounting for whether or not the suspect was armed or a threat (“justified” vs “unjustified” shooting). While carbon emissions will rise in 2021 there is every reason to believe they will continue to decline in the future, so long as natural gas continues to replace coal, and nuclear plants continue operating. While climate change may be contributing to extreme weather events, neither the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change nor another other scientific body predicts it will outpace rising resilience to cause an increase in deaths from natural disasters. Researchers do not know if trans people are being killed disproportionately in comparison to cis-gender people, if trans homicides are rising, or if trans people are being killed for being trans, rather than for some other reason. Twenty-six states have decriminalizedmarijuana, and California and Oregon have decriminalized and legalized, respectively, the possession of all drugs. Progressive District Attorneys in San Francisco, Los Angeles and other major cities have scaled back prosecutions against people for breaking many laws related to homelessness including public camping, public drug use, and theft.
And yet many Americans would be surprised to learn any of the above information; some would reject it outright as false.
4 Likes
You’re still infringing on their trademark/copyright regardless of use. There is no fair use for trademarked logos. It’s illegal to reproduce their copyrighted property without explicit consent (such as a licensing agreement) regardless of purpose.
And if you modify their logo for your own use, the alterations must be so significant that no reasonable person could confuse that logo for the original. Clearly Youtube would likely not want their image/brand associated with your statement so, I’m guessing the no reasonable person evaluation would end up tested in court especially if you sell the shirts (instead of staying under the radar by only wearing it yourself). Still not legal even if not sued because they don’t know about it.
The United States trademark law as stated in the Lanham Act allows a non-owner of a registered trademark to make “fair use” of it without permission. Fair use includes using a logo in editorial content, among other situations.
1 Like
Their logo, they get to decide how it’s used, that’s that. There’s no exemption for not doing it to make a profit.
There’s a difference between a parody and a satire exception, and I think the shirt fell into the wrong one.
Care to elaborate on that given glitch 99‘s link in post on fair use of trademarks?
This feels to me more like simple protest than parody or satire.
Rand Paul quits the major big tech platforms over censorship, moves to Rumble.
1 Like
I beg to differ. My shirt is my free speech. Next, you’ll say I can’t put expletives on clothes because it’s offensive to conservative families.
OTOH, IANAL, and if the Googlios send me a cease and desist, I will probably post it, along with a copy of the offending material, and then a copy of the shredded sweatshirt to show that I’ve complied with the cease and desist.
2 Likes
And we all know that the only thing that counts is how you feel.
1 Like
Free speech is a protection against government limiting your speech. It is not permission to take someone else’s protected materials without permission.
1 Like
I think expletives are totally fine. They’re not trademarked or copyrighted or in any way someone’s property.
Couldn’t they argue that they could have sold the right to use their trademarked logo to a shirt seller to print that same T-shirt and derive a profit from the licensing? So clearly if you’re selling shirts where you use their logo, you’re making money off their intellectual property. I don’t think it’d be easy to claim fair use.
And because fair use is an affirmative defense, if they sued, it’d be your burden to prove that use was fair even if you did not sell any shirts but just printed your own. I’m not sure how long they could tie you up with that, but like you said, it’d very likely not be worth it to not comply with a cease and desist notice.
Exactly. The First Amendment is not a protection against being offended. Use all the expletives you want. The problem comes when you use someone else’s work. Their right to their work normally exceeds your right to make use of their work.
I didn’t take it without permission. I didn’t take it at all. I’m using it to express my opinion of their evil, dictatorial, racist policies. It’s my anti-slavery comment.
I’m shocked.
I’m not selling anything, and I’m unsure why you think I am. I am wearing one shirt which expresses my opinion of Google’s racist, un-woke, policies. If they would like to sue me, they are more than welcome to serve notice.
Like that of Betsy Ross?
1 Like
You are making an editorial comment. You havent taken anything from them, you are using the logo they’ve decided to use to identify themselves, to identify them.
1 Like