Damn Olsen Twins!

[Pyser]

My friend had started a nice little side business by making "save mary-kate" t-shirts. suddenly, newspapers were calling her for interviews, and the shirts started selling like crazy.

but now this (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=796&ncid=787&e=5&u=/eo/20040923/en_celeb_eo/14997).

What, a BILLION dollars isn't enough?

[The_herd]

Its parody. Its legal. 'The Brand' has nothing to do with it.

[sabotai]

I'd be willing to wager that the cost of them protecting their rights to parody would cost them more against the Olsen Twins' laywers than they could possibly make off the t-shirts.

[Pyser]

i think her thinking right now is take the profits she already made and go quietly. which i cant argue with.

[The_herd]

I'd be willing to wager that the cost of them protecting their rights to parody would cost them more against the Olsen Twins' laywers than they could possibly make off the t-shirts.

I won't argue that. They are simply putting pressure on a small company knowing they aren't in a position to fight back.

[Raiders Army]

Why does your friend have to make money off some poor girl's misery?

Wait...poor girl? What the hell am I thinking? :)

[JonInMiddleGA]

When you don't enforce your copyright, there's a risk of losing your right to enforce it down the road.

[Huckleberry]

Fight the power!

Then countersue for legal fees.

[albionmoonlight]

When you don't enforce your copyright, there's a risk of losing your right to enforce it down the road.
This is true. While I will not let it change my opinion, born in jealousy, that the Olsens are evil and wrong people, they are kind of between a rock and a hard place once they are made aware of the use of the image.

[Draft Dodger]

groovalicious has always been my favorite font

[Raven Hawk]

They needed a T-shirt that had a picture of Mary-Kate that said:

"Finish your brussel sprouts, because children are starving in mansions"



Hmmm . . . I swear that was funnier in my head.

[SunDancer]

Its parody. Its legal. 'The Brand' has nothing to do with it.

But isn't using someone to endorse a product illegal? They use Mary-Kate pictures in the product? I believe that limits are set. The brand is build on Ashley and Mary Kate, with their faces and name.

[yabanci]

it's not parody and this has nothing to do with copyright. The primary claim against the t-shirt sellers would be the unauthorized commercial use of an individual's name and likeness, a violation of the right of publicity laws that most states have. These laws give individuals the exclusive right to license the use of their identity for commercial purposes. They would also throw in claims for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, unfair competition, etc., etc.

And the t-shirt sellers would have no chance of defending this case, not even close. This is exactly what these laws are designed to prohibit.

[Samdari]

When you don't enforce your copyright, there's a risk of losing your right to enforce it down the road.

Sure, but they appear to be claiming rights to the name "Mary Kate"

That's pretty ridiculous. What's next, they sue everyone who tries to name their child that?

[QuikSand]

Sure, but they appear to be claiming rights to the name "Mary Kate"

That's pretty ridiculous. What's next, they sue everyone who tries to name their child that?

The fact that there is an obvious likeness of this particular Mary Kate doesn't even factor into your thinking here?

While I'm not exactly rooting for goliath here, I think there's still room for reason to be involved.

[cuervo72]

The company, named Randy and Moss

Sombody alert Dante DiTrapano!

[flere-imsaho]

I dunno, www.whitehouse.org makes a pretty good living off of satirizing George Bush, whilst using his likeness and name to sell merchandise, and they don't appear to be shut down yet.

I'm sure there's wiggle room, but you'd need a good team of lawyers to get through it. Unless someone's willing to take the case on pro bono, there's no lack of honor in fading away.

[Samdari]

The fact that there is an obvious likeness of this particular Mary Kate doesn't even factor into your thinking here?

While I'm not exactly rooting for goliath here, I think there's still room for reason to be involved.

The letter the lawyer sends tells them they must desist in using the NAMES and likenesses. Obviously, selling her likeness without her consent should be stopped. But, selling t-shirts that have the words "Save Mary-Kate" without the likeness should be fine. Perhaps I am misinterpreting the letter, but it seems to me they are trying to claim a copyright to the names Mary-Kate and Ashley.

[SunDancer]

The letter the lawyer sends tells them they must desist in using the NAMES and likenesses. Obviously, selling her likeness without her consent should be stopped. But, selling t-shirts that have the words "Save Mary-Kate" without the likeness should be fine. Perhaps I am misinterpreting the letter, but it seems to me they are trying to claim a copyright to the names Mary-Kate and Ashley.

What is the copyright name of the Olsen's twins line?

[Bonegavel]

I dunno, www.whitehouse.org (http://www.whitehouse.org/) makes a pretty good living off of satirizing George Bush, whilst using his likeness and name to sell merchandise, and they don't appear to be shut down yet.

I'm sure there's wiggle room, but you'd need a good team of lawyers to get through it. Unless someone's willing to take the case on pro bono, there's no lack of honor in fading away.
I don't think political figures have the same privacy/IP rights.