Posted on 05/16/2008 6:43:38 AM PDT by dbmurray
The publishing company that owns the Curious George image says it is considering legal action to stop the sale of a T-shirt depicting Barack Obama as the monkey from children's books.
The T-shirts are being peddled by Marietta bar owner Mike Norman at his Mulligan's Bar and Grill in Cobb County. They show a picture of Curious Georgie peeling a banana, with the words "Obama '08" underneath.
Rick Blake, a spokesman for publisher Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, which owns Curious George, said Wednesday that the company didn't authorize the use of the character's image, but hasn't been in touch with anybody selling or manufacturing the shirts.
"We find it offensive and obviously utterly out of keeping with the value Curious George represents," Blake said. "We're monitoring the situation and weighing our options with respect to legal action."
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
Houghton Mifflin is considering a lawsuit, but did they sue Maxim?
If the shoe fits, wear it.
countdown to zot from mods
remember how monkey images were given to Bush and the libs laughed but hey do it to a dem and they got all their panties in a twist.
really must be confusing to be a lib
the selective outrage is amazing
I don’t think they’re “confused” at all.
When nothing you believe is based on anything logical and all on emotion, there is no problem with double standards, hypocrisy or contradiction.
“countdown to zot from mods”
What is that supposed to mean??
This story was posted yesterday from a UPI source. The mods pulled it and listed “No stories about blacks as monkeys, period”
Maybe the bar owner should explain patiently that he’s upporting BHO as the T-shirt indicates, and that the monkey image represents our President, to remind everone how awful he’s been.
Ah, I missed that. Thanks for the info.
Exercising her 1st Amendment right to ask for yours to be limited. Cute.
We're safe then, as this story is about double standards.
Not fair to the monkeys ???
I didn’t see that.
My liberal university brainwashed son, an Obama supporter was a huge Curious George fan. He would probably buy the T-shirt and wear it with pride.
Why should it? Is Maxim selling t-shirts with the image for profit?
Mr B
I enjoy reading your posts
very true again with what you say
And I agree that Obama does look like a monkey with those big ears! Come on, folks. What goes around comes around!
Um...Maxim does profit for those magazines, you know. They don’t just magically appear under a your 14-year old brother’s bed.
Satire is protected speech, I think the guy can publish to his pocketbooks content.
By the way, the “banana” in Curious Barack’s hand isn’t a banana. Ask Larry Sinclair for details.
No wonder.
Right. Do you see any Constitutional problems with going after editorial cartoonists?
Yes, there are problems just as there are Constitutional problems with going after any form of free speech.
This is clearly a use of a recognized character to convey a political message. Whether you agree with the message or not, whether you find it funny or not, it’s still protected by the Constitution. Whether the message is delivered on a t-shirt vs. in the pages of a magazine is irrelevant. You can’t logically bring up the selling price of the shirt without also addressing the selling price of the magazine.
And here's your problem. Logically, and legally.
Ever try to talk your way out of a speeding ticket by claiming, "but others speed as well?"
This ‘Curious George’/Obama comparison was first brought up by a caller to Rush Limabaugh’s show. The caller told Rush that her young daughter saw Obama and immediately made the comparison. This what at least a month ago.
It’s waiver. Ask Klenex or Xerox.
Yeah. That's the ticket.
Please elaborate. Are you suggesting that the company manufacturing Kleenex has given-up its trademark because the general public uses the name in general conversation?
It hasn’t “given up” its trademark, but, yes, a trademark ceases to be enforceable if the owner allows is to become generally used, such as in “go xerox this report.”
That said, the issue is the selective enforcement by the publisher of Curious George, which speaks volumes about its political agenda, not the arcane minutia of intellectual property.
So I can open a tissue-making factory, and sell my product under the brand name, Kleenex? Yes or no?
“I’m also not seeing the logic behind the argument that one’s copyright rights cannot be defended unless one defends it in all cases.”
Who made that argument? It’s Houghton Mifflin’s choice to bring suits they think they can win...and at this moment, they’re still weighing their options. The point is that it’s free speech which should (in my opinion, of course) fall under fair use just as the Maxim article should fall under fair use.
“selective enforcement by the publisher of Curious George”
By which I refer to the hundreds of various curious George t-shirts available on the Internet that bash Bush (some examples above), not to mention entire cartoon strips in national magazines.
But a bar owner somewhere bashes Obama? The horror!
It’s clearly political.
That’s a distraction from the point of the article, if you would like to Freepmail me, I will answer your questions so as to not disrupt the thread.
Just everyone who is claiming, "double standard." And there ya' go, even if Houghton-Mifflin is holding a double-standard, it is their double-standard to make.
Again, the issue is the selective enforcement by the publisher of Curious George, which speaks volumes about its political agenda, not the arcane minutia of intellectual property.
No thanks, I’d rather you answer a simple yes-or-no question here, because it goes directly to the source of your misunderstanding.
OK, live in ignorance.
If you guys think this story is bad, you should read this idiots blog.
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/badie/entries/2008/05/15/fuss_over_shirt.html
His selective outrage is pathetic. I asked him if Obama needs some “enlightenment” after referring to a woman as “Sweetie”. This article is an Obama infomercial disguised as an Op-Ed.
Nice. And maybe you should consult with a patent/trademark/copyright attorney before inflicting your novel legal theories upon the rest of us.
I have several on my staff.
Then for God’s sake, talk to them!
Again, the issue is the selective enforcement by the publisher of Curious George, which speaks volumes about its political agenda, not the arcane minutia of intellectual property.
But I would still be happy to answer the minutia in freepmail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.