Tuesday, June 29, 2004
Massachusetts can continue to perform gay marriages whether people like it or not, So says the First Circuit court of Appeals.
In summation:
"The resolution of the same-sex marriage issue by the
judicial branch of the Massachusetts government, subject to
override by the voters through the state constitutional amendment process, does not plausibly constitute a threat to a republican form of government."
Now I don't meant to nit pick, but this kind of case is a hail mary anyway. It was unlikely (in my opinion) that any court would actually want to get into the middle of a debate like this. In fact, I am surprised that they didn't kick this case on a jurisdictional finding. Go figure.
In summation:
"The resolution of the same-sex marriage issue by the
judicial branch of the Massachusetts government, subject to
override by the voters through the state constitutional amendment process, does not plausibly constitute a threat to a republican form of government."
Now I don't meant to nit pick, but this kind of case is a hail mary anyway. It was unlikely (in my opinion) that any court would actually want to get into the middle of a debate like this. In fact, I am surprised that they didn't kick this case on a jurisdictional finding. Go figure.
Monday, June 28, 2004
HoustonChronicle.com - Artist wins copyright suit in Barbie case
Ah the wonders of copyright law...can Barbie, for example, ever get out from under that weight of representing everything that is wrong with American consumerism?
I remember reading somewhere that Barbie was first made so that little girls would have a doll that actually had breasts (though no vagina, apparently). Now little girls can learn that breasts have no nipples, women have waists the size of their neck, and (still the same I am afraid), that women have no vaginas. What they do have, however, is thousands of outfits and vehicles and such.
Tom Forsythe has taken this little collection, and basically created some of that fantastic modern art in which that actual art is secondary to the meaning that is manipulated by the artist. There is an example here. In this photography, Barbie was stuffed in a blender and her hair was messed up. Now exactly what that means is open to discussion, but I think it is part of a general unease about the function of beauty in our society.
So is that trademark infringement? Methinks instead it is part of Mattel’s attempts to keep Barbie out of the news, at least in a negative way. They did the same thing with the “I’m a Barbie girl, in a Barbie world” song (the name of which eludes me). This type of stuff is so clearly parody that it is really embarrassing that they are suing. They need to take a lesson from Hormel, the makers of that wonderful whatever food SPAM. You don’t see them suing over people calling their junk email spam. I don’t recall them suing Monty Python. In fact, they have managed to use certain connotations to their advantage.
In summation, bravo to the courts, and a resounding BAH to Mattel.
Ah the wonders of copyright law...can Barbie, for example, ever get out from under that weight of representing everything that is wrong with American consumerism?
I remember reading somewhere that Barbie was first made so that little girls would have a doll that actually had breasts (though no vagina, apparently). Now little girls can learn that breasts have no nipples, women have waists the size of their neck, and (still the same I am afraid), that women have no vaginas. What they do have, however, is thousands of outfits and vehicles and such.
Tom Forsythe has taken this little collection, and basically created some of that fantastic modern art in which that actual art is secondary to the meaning that is manipulated by the artist. There is an example here. In this photography, Barbie was stuffed in a blender and her hair was messed up. Now exactly what that means is open to discussion, but I think it is part of a general unease about the function of beauty in our society.
So is that trademark infringement? Methinks instead it is part of Mattel’s attempts to keep Barbie out of the news, at least in a negative way. They did the same thing with the “I’m a Barbie girl, in a Barbie world” song (the name of which eludes me). This type of stuff is so clearly parody that it is really embarrassing that they are suing. They need to take a lesson from Hormel, the makers of that wonderful whatever food SPAM. You don’t see them suing over people calling their junk email spam. I don’t recall them suing Monty Python. In fact, they have managed to use certain connotations to their advantage.
In summation, bravo to the courts, and a resounding BAH to Mattel.
Thursday, June 24, 2004
Big news in Death Penalty stuff.
The New York high court has ruled New York's death penalty unconstitutional.
The US Supreme court has ruled that the limitations imposed last year requiring the death penalty to be imposed only by a jury and not by a judge is not retroactive because it was not a "watershed" rule change.
The New York high court has ruled New York's death penalty unconstitutional.
The US Supreme court has ruled that the limitations imposed last year requiring the death penalty to be imposed only by a jury and not by a judge is not retroactive because it was not a "watershed" rule change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
