Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Quick question --- where did you grow up? My guess is it was a redwood slat half-barrel deep under the Pacific. Regards!

I invented this.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Not Me
Second, no statute can trump your first amendment rights.

Ethel and Julius Rosenberg have a different experience of that.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
"To induce the sale of any goods or services," Hank. To put it in terms you can understand, 43 is at the second interview stage in front of a really large Recruitment Committee. But the end result is the same --- sale of services. It's hard to see when the prospective hire is already rich, I know, but it's there if you look.

Here's what i'd like for you to do. hash this out with Notme. I believe if the 2 of you engage on this point of law, the issues will crystalize and I can respond more efficiently to your questions.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
"To induce the sale of any goods or services," Hank. To put it in terms you can understand, 43 is at the second interview stage in front of a really large Recruitment Committee. But the end result is the same --- sale of services. It's hard to see when the prospective hire is already rich, I know, but it's there if you look.

Nice try, but no cigar* for you. All that statute does is prevent someone from selling a T-shirt or other goods with the Olympic rings on it or calling their sporting event the Olympics.

It certainly doesn't prevent non-commercial speech about the Olympics. If it did, the IOC could go after a newspaper for discussing the Olympics. Or even go after us for talking about the Olympics here. That of course would be unconstitutional.

The statute in no way affects the copyrights to a film. If you took a video tape of an event and tried to sell it commercially labeling it with the Olympic rings or even entitiling it with the name Olympics, that statute would apply, but not under copyright law; it would be a mark issue.



*I am sure you can get a cigar from your buddy Clinton, though. It might be a bit stinky, though.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Not Me
Nice try, but no cigar* for you. All that statute does is prevent someone from selling a T-shirt or other goods with the Olympic rings on it or calling their sporting event the Olympics.

It certainly doesn't prevent non-commercial speech about the Olympics. If it did, the IOC could go after a newspaper for discussing the Olympics. Or even go after us for talking about the Olympics here. That of course would be unconstitutional.

The statute in no way affects the copyrights to a film. If you took a video tape of an event and tried to sell it commercially labeling it with the Olmpic rings or even entitiling it with the name Olympics, that statute would apply, but not under copyright law; it would be a mark issue.



*I am sure you can get a cigar from your buddy Clinton, though. It might be a bit stinky, though.

Copyrights are the new polygamy

[SlaveNoMore]

Atticus Grinch
I invented this.

The poet doesn't invent. He listens

-- Jean Cocteau

[SlaveNoMore]

Atticus Grinch
Ethel and Julius Rosenberg have a different experience of that.

Yes, and Alger Hiss was innocent.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Copyrights are the new polygamy

No, copyrights are the new Gorelick.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Yes, and Alger Hiss was innocent.

Speaking of the Rosenbergs and Alger Hiss, the FBI says there is an Israeli spy at a high level in the Pentagon. That really pisses me off that they spy on us.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=6093117

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I invented this.

An original artist is unable to copy. So he has only to copy in order to be original.

--Jean Cocteau

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Raggedy Ann Coulter
No. A vagina.

Sans teeth

You say this like it is a bad thing.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Yes, and Alger Hiss was innocent.

I didn't say any of the above were innocent; I said that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg might have personal experience contrary to the recockulous notion, posted by an ostensible IP lawyer on a board filled with lawyers, that the First Amendment can't be abridged by a statute. "Congress shall make no law" was a bitter joke within moments of its ratification.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Anntila the Hun
How appropriate that a traitorous LIE-BERAL like TS should adopt a serpent as his mark. The Bible teaches us that serpents are the creatures of Beelzebub, and so it is with all TS's ilk. He's probably off somewhere in the Oakland docks taking pictures to pass along to his cohorts in self hatred. Be on guard!! Anyone with a camera could be your enemy!!

I understand how this could be entertaining to you. But, we don't fucking care. Go annoy the Infirmation folk.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
You're saying it might have been intentional, because it expressly states/clarifies that the medal was for valor?

Um, yeah, seeing as how it never states that the (oops, mistaken) medal was for pooping in fear.

[bilmore]

Get ten guys with liter-bikes, all on the PACE system. Hit the twisties. Do 450 miles in 5 hours. (Think "Miluakee".)(Okay, then spell "mill . . . whatever). Then drink heavily. (oh, then post)

Then come back here and read the FB. Suddenly your life looks really effin good.