On Copyright and Occupying the Wall Street Journal
Susie Cagle interviews the creators of various “Occupy” newspapers to see what reactions they’ve received from established brands. The question is whether appropriation of corporate logos, brands and marks is protected free speech or copyright infringement.
In Oakland, the Oakland Tribune sent the Occupied Oakland Tribune a cease and desist letter. In New York, the Wall Street Journal has remained silent about the Occupied Wall Street Journal.
In Chicago, there appears to be some absurdity going on.
Via The Atlantic:

A source with knowledge of to the Occupied Chicago Tribune’s legal situation who preferred not to be identified said the Chicago Tribune’s lawyer had pushed hard in the company’s demands in informal negotiations."Occupied Chicago Tribunesaid okay, we’ll use ‘Chicago’s Occupied Tribune.’ The lawyer objected. So they said okay, we’ll change it to ‘Occupied Tribune,’ and the lawyer objected. They said okay, we’ll change it to ‘Occupied Chicago Times.’ The lawyer objected again.”
"Then he allegedly said something like, ‘You cannot have anything that has a T in the name.’ And that’s when finally it had reached such a point of absurdity that they decided to fight back.”

Image: Inaugural issue of the Occupied Wall Street Journal, via Marcus Franklin.

On Copyright and Occupying the Wall Street Journal

Susie Cagle interviews the creators of various “Occupy” newspapers to see what reactions they’ve received from established brands. The question is whether appropriation of corporate logos, brands and marks is protected free speech or copyright infringement.

In Oakland, the Oakland Tribune sent the Occupied Oakland Tribune a cease and desist letter. In New York, the Wall Street Journal has remained silent about the Occupied Wall Street Journal.

In Chicago, there appears to be some absurdity going on.

Via The Atlantic:

A source with knowledge of to the Occupied Chicago Tribune’s legal situation who preferred not to be identified said the Chicago Tribune’s lawyer had pushed hard in the company’s demands in informal negotiations."Occupied Chicago Tribunesaid okay, we’ll use ‘Chicago’s Occupied Tribune.’ The lawyer objected. So they said okay, we’ll change it to ‘Occupied Tribune,’ and the lawyer objected. They said okay, we’ll change it to ‘Occupied Chicago Times.’ The lawyer objected again.”

"Then he allegedly said something like, ‘You cannot have anything that has a T in the name.’ And that’s when finally it had reached such a point of absurdity that they decided to fight back.”

Image: Inaugural issue of the Occupied Wall Street Journal, via Marcus Franklin.

117 notes

Show

  1. technotranceremex reblogged this from futurejournalismproject and added:
    Attention, everyone. The Chicago Tribune owns the letter “T”. Good luck using that letter in the name of your newspaper.
  2. churchonthemove reblogged this from onaissues
  3. thelolakate reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  4. declarationofserendipity reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  5. kornmolb reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  6. fewdull reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  7. not-tombishop reblogged this from wheresthemusic
  8. america-wakiewakie reblogged this from phroyd and added:
    This is a fantastic idea. Solidarity friends.
  9. labyrinthpodcast reblogged this from onaissues and added:
    Apparently, “occupy” newspapers can’t just name their newspapers whatever way they want. More from the Future Journalism...
  10. onaissues reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  11. lemaisonbachelorette reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  12. grumpyjones reblogged this from futurejournalismproject
  13. futurejournalismproject posted this

Blog comments powered by Disqus