1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Occupy Oakland copies Oakland Tribune logo, thinks it's free speech

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by CA_journo, Jan 7, 2012.

  1. CA_journo

    CA_journo Member

    BANG recently sent a cease-and-desist letter to the publisher of the "Occupied Oakland Tribune," which copies the Tribune's logo and its name.

    http://www.insidebayarea.com/oakland-tribune/ci_19691729

    The response from Occupied Oakland Tribune? Stop squelching our free speech!

    http://occupiedoaktrib.org/2012/01/07/press-release-oot-refuses-to-give-in-to-intimidation-by-bang/

    Give me a break...
     
  2. Matt Stephens

    Matt Stephens Well-Known Member

    Because newspaper employees are part of the wealthiest one percent and all ...
     
  3. lcjjdnh

    lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

    Well, perhaps not the journalists, but the Oakland Tribune is part of a larger corporation run by Dean Singleton, who, even if not literally part of the 1%, is certainly emblematic of the problem.
     
  4. I'm going to bottle tap water, print out Coke labels, sell them for a buck a pop and call it free speech.

    Although, I suppose I could just call it water and sell it for a buck a pop, too.
     
  5. Cubbiebum

    Cubbiebum Member

    The other Occupiers should denounce this blog. It is counter productive.
     
  6. HanSenSE

    HanSenSE Well-Known Member

    This will not end well.
     
  7. Azrael

    Azrael Active Member

    Satire and parody are both protected uses. And you can't say that a font as ubiquitous as Old English is in any way protected. So there are legitimate ways to argue this instance - although it's pretty obvious Occupy is infringing on something. Infringing on what exactly is the question.
     
  8. CA_journo

    CA_journo Member

    I get that, but it seems like every minor setback or every time "the media" isn't covering Occupy 24/7, it's some sort of oppression from the one percent. It just makes me laugh that a newspaper is now the one percent.
     
  9. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Trademarks protect a product. No reasonable person would confuse the Oakland Trubune with an "Occupy" rag. Stupid move by the paper.
     
  10. gravehunter

    gravehunter Member

    Since when does that matter? A lot of these occupy groups are fighting cops, homeless, people trying to get to work, and mom-and-pop shops, neither of who are in the 1 percent.
     
  11. Azrael

    Azrael Active Member

  12. franticscribe

    franticscribe Well-Known Member

    From a PR perspective it's a stupid move. But from a legal perspective it's exactly what they must do in order to protect their brand. If you fail to enforce your trademark in a timely manner, you can lose your ability to enforce it later. The Oakland Tribune is right to send a cease and desist notice.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page