Louisiana sues MoveOn.org over Bobby Jindal billboard

[Sgent]

Source: Nola.com

Louisiana is suing national left-leaning policy group MoveOn.org in federal court, saying it violated copyright law when it put up a billboard and commissioned video ads critical of Gov. Bobby Jindal that use the state's tourism logo and motto.

Republican Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne has been locked in a pitched battle with the group for weeks, unsuccessfully calling for it to take down the billboard that is currently up on the I-10 coming into Baton Rouge from Port Allen.

"We have invested millions of dollars in identifying the Louisiana: Pick Your Passion brand with all that is good about Louisiana. No group should be allowed to use the brand for its own purposes, especially if it is for partisan political posturing," Dardenne said in a statement announcing the suit.

"MoveOn.org has every right to attack Gov. Jindal, the state's refusal to accept Medicaid or, for that matter, me personally. But they do not have the right to use our protected service mark, which is used solely for the purpose of promoting and marketing Louisiana. We own the mark and its use is under the direction of my office, not the Office of the Governor."

Read more: http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/03/moveon_louisiana_jindal_darden.html#incart_m-rpt-2

[Iliyah]

1. Petty bullshit. GOPers are sick minded assholes.

[DonViejo]

2. A little more info:

Jindal Strikes Back In Billboard War: Obamacare Hurts Disabled

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024663589

[Iliyah]

3. Can GOPers EVER TELL THE TRUTH?

[mdbl]

4. No it's against their immoral principles

[Lasher]

9. And if they did nobody would vote for them.

"Vote Republican so we can tank the economy again."

[blkmusclmachine]

10. ^This.^

[Cha]

19. No, but they can Connoct Bigger LIES in an attempt to Cover their

dirty business.

[SoapBox]

5. Free speech for me...but not for you!

Pukes can never deal with the truth.

[damnedifIknow]

6. Why doesn't he explain how

Louisiana became the prison capital of the world instead of this lame act.

[Gore1FL]

7. Cool! Publicity!

They'll get a lot more than they would have gotten if they would have just ridden it out.

Now everyone's looking.

[Nanjing to Seoul]

8. Every time the GOP does this, they lose.

[tomm2thumbs]

11. Jindal's attack dogs will lose and embarrassingly

Commentary, opinion and critique... and moreso parody, especially in the political arena, have much more breadth of protection than commercial speech.

I guess they don't teach them varmits in the Louisiana statehouse much learnin' these days.

And even in the commercial arena, there is a lot of room for expansion.... just ask Barbie and Monopoly who have been mocked and parodied to death and cannot do a thing about it.

Poor, poor Jindal. You'll never be a playah... and it is so pitiful to watch you try.

[groundloop]

15. Opinion etc. is protected, however, there might be a case if a copyrighted photo was used

Copyright laws are pretty cut and dry when it comes to using copyrighted photos without permission. I'm guessing Move-On might have a fight on their hands about that.

[cosmicone]

16. Satire is "fair use"

Their lawsuit doesn't stand a prayer's chance of winning, especially moveon.org is not profiting from a competing product.

[JoeyT]

18. And doubly (Triply?) so if

it's something no reasonable person is likely to confuse with an official statement by the owner of the image. As the state tourism board is unlikely to put up a billboard that amounts to "Welcome to Louisiana. We elect fucking idiots.", their case is sunk.

[BlueStreak]

27. If the font and color scheme are iconic, there could be a problem

If, at first glance, it strongly resembles the billboards put up by the state, there could be a problem with that. I don't think the legal standard is that, after studying and thinking about it long an hard, a reasonable person would conclude something ain't quite right with that billboard. If the use of the service mark is found to intentionally confuse, they could lose that case.

But the point still stands that MoveOn will get a whole lot of free publicity in the process, so I am all for them leaving it up and putting Jindal on the defensive. The average person will understand the lack of health care a lot quicker than they will understand the intricacies of service mark law.

After all, Jindal could end the whole thing tomorrow by simply doing the right thing for his citizens. And in the process he would be adopting a no-brainer economic development program that is guaranteed to generate enough additional economic activity in Louisiana that the additional collection of taxes would be greater than any outlays LA would have to bear, even in the out years. Medicare is a freaking intelligence test. Anybody who refuses that program is a complete moron on purely economic grounds, even if they don't give a damn about the health of their citizens.

[groundloop]

25. I'm talking specifically about the use of a copyrighted photo

Satire etc. has nothing to do with the use of a copyrighted photo. More than likely Louisiana payed a photographer for images to use in their ad campaign, and that photographer would have licensed the state to use those photos for a certain purpose for a certain amount of time. The photographer always retains all rights to their photos (unless they agree to sell the copyright), anyone who wants to use a photo has to negotiate with the photographer as far as a fair price and terms of use. What I'm saying is that the state probably doesn't have a case against move-on (because as has been pointed out, satire is generally protected speech) but the photographer who holds the copyright to the photos that were used probably does have a case (if he chooses to pursue the matter).

[TexasTowelie]

26. Then the photographer should sue moveon.org

rather than the state government.

[Lasher]

12. From the article's comments section:

bywaterbob1 hour ago

The State of Louisiana is doomed to lose this case. The taxpayers will be left with a multi-million dollar legal bill all because Jindal's feelings got hurt. Parody is specifically recognized by the US Copyright Office and the US Supreme Court as a permitted fair use of copyrighted work. You can use the copyright to make fun of a politician. End of story. This is basic settled law that Jay Dardennes learned in law school. Under Federal Copyright law not only would we be paying legal fees to Jindal's lawyers, but its likely the taxpayers would be required to pay the legal fees and costs of MoveOn. If the Court finds that the lawsuit is frivolous and not based on law (which it certainly is not), the State could face further sanctions and fines for filing the law suit. Bobby's hissy fit is going to cost us big time.

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Lying Republican hypocrites. Always the victim. Always dishing it out but just can't take it.

[adirondacker]

13. billoard pic...

[NBachers]

24. Sorry, I just don't have an appetite to eat any of those big dead bugs in the picture.

[Sunlei]

14. Louisiana wasted millions trying to create a 'brand' with a word? It's never going to be a state

tourists care to visit. Other than the drunk street party Mardi Gras for a day or two, who wants to visit a swamp.

[Gothmog]

17. Fair use is a great defense to these claims

This is a dumb lawsuit by Louisiana

[DeSwiss]

20. It's the water.

K&R

[SunSeeker]

21. Jindal will lose. Just like Falwell lost against Hustler over the Campari ad parody.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell

It's classic political parody speech. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Larry Flynt, 8-0, including Scalia and Rehnquist (who was Chief Justice at the time in 1987).

Flynt took to his Hustler magazine to run a parody of the cheesy old Campari liquor ads which featured people talking about their "first time." Flynt showed not only an image of Falwell, but also featured a bottle of Campari, next to which Falwell talks about how his "first time" was in an outhouse outside Lynchburg, Virginia...with his mother. Vintage Flynt move. MoveOn's ad is quite tame in comparison.

[onehandle]

22. Jindal is a criminal poodle molester.

Sue me.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

23. Can't sue you ... you didn't say ...

Pick your passion! Jindal is a criminal poodle molester!

Of course, there are probably a bunch of billboards with stuff like "Pick your passion! Come visit onehandle's gumbo shack! All the crawfish you can eat!" And if those billboards exist, that won't help Louisiana's case.

[marshall]

28. Reminds me of the Obama Hope poster lawsuit

That ended up being settled out of court. Probably where this is headed, after all the posturing is over.