« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
01/15/2010
Courage Campaign: We skirted ProtectMarriage's logo, not the law!
When we first heard that ProtectMarriage.com had issued a cease and desist letter to the Courage Campaign because of a parodic image that the latter created for their Prop 8 Trial Tracker site, our first thought was: "What the Hell? We've quite literally made a video wherein ProtectMarriage.com's logo eats the state constitution...
Where's our C&D letter?"
But after our self-absorption wore off, we found something else to love about Protect Marriage's letter. Namely: Their lawyer's full-on admission that Courage's parody, featuring a two-mommed family...
..is "substantially indistinguishable" from the dual-gendered one. Because we couldn't agree more: For all substantive matters, a same-sex family is indistinguishable from a heterosexually-headed one. And it's high time that ProtectMarriage.com drop their inevitably losing attempts to deny that actuality in the law! Their versions of "family values" and "fairness" are the crude imitations that truly need to cease!
Go read the C&D letter and Courage Campaign's perfectly-toned response to it:
ProtectMarriage.com issues Cease and Desist for Prop 8 Trial Tracker logo depicting family of two mothers with two kids [Prop 8 Trial Tracker]
Plus Julia Rosen's own take on the "substantially indistinguishable" irony:
Irony Defined [Prop 8 Trial Tracker]
Your thoughts
Hmmmm....
If Phred Phelps and his Phamily can get away with their "parodies"... this can pass.
And, why would a campaign of a past proposition still need copyright protection anyway?
Posted by: Bearchewtoy75 | Jan 15, 2010 10:22:51 PM
The irony, of course, is wonderful. The two families are, indeed, indistinguishable. The response to the prop8 guys is also wonderful!
I've been riveted to Courage Campaign all week, as, I'm sure many of you have been.
db
Posted by: dave b | Jan 17, 2010 12:25:09 AM
It's satire, covered under Fair Use (http://www.publaw.com/parody.html) Maybe after this trial, that's what we'll see sued/voted over next...
Posted by: UK Chris | Jan 18, 2010 9:16:41 AM
comments powered by Disqus
