[JuanQuinQuin]

Is that even Legal? They are more than quoting the website without Rooshv's permission. I thought that what was written here was under copyright or something like that, similar to pictures in stockphotos.com or other proprietary websites.

[Cattle Rustler]

I'm jelly, hwuz got qouted.....had to instigate the RVF troll by expressing my disbelief. Hats off to hwuz!

Perhaps troll will find a "best of Rustler" comment.

   

[Sp5]

(07-11-2014 11:49 PM)JuanQuinQuin Wrote:  

Is that even Legal? They are more than quoting the website without Rooshv's permission. I thought that what was written here was under copyright or something like that, similar to pictures in stockphotos.com or other proprietary websites.

Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.

[Comte De St. Germain]

(07-11-2014 11:59 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

I'm jelly, hwuz got qouted.....had to instigate the RVF troll by expressing my disbelief. Hats off to hwuz!

Perhaps troll will find a "best of Rustler" comment.

Ha

[Windom Earle]

With the recent Gypsie tweets, I'm guessing the account was created by a Gypsie.

Wasn't there a Gypsie that was hating on Roosh last year?

[Samseau]

(07-11-2014 11:59 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

I'm jelly, hwuz got qouted.....had to instigate the RVF troll by expressing my disbelief. Hats off to hwuz!

Perhaps troll will find a "best of Rustler" comment.

If the hater is quoting a selection about gypsies, which are ethnically Indians, then the creator of this hater account is likely an IRT.

[Cheetah]

(07-12-2014 12:03 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 11:49 PM)JuanQuinQuin Wrote:  

Is that even Legal? They are more than quoting the website without Rooshv's permission. I thought that what was written here was under copyright or something like that, similar to pictures in stockphotos.com or other proprietary websites.

Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.

..what about that they use his picture/logo, presumably without his permission?

[Cheetah]

(07-12-2014 04:32 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 12:03 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 11:49 PM)JuanQuinQuin Wrote:  

Is that even Legal? They are more than quoting the website without Rooshv's permission. I thought that what was written here was under copyright or something like that, similar to pictures in stockphotos.com or other proprietary websites.

Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.

..what about that they use his picture/logo, presumably without his permission?

To answer my own question, I doubt that they are allowed to do so.

"A logo cannot be used in a way to suggest an endorsement by the logo’s owner where none exists."

It would be good if the logo is registered as a trademark (hint to roosh) while even if it isn't "[..]logos don’t have to be registered as trademarks to be protected under common law. The law allows the owner of a trademarked logo to attempt to prevent any appropriation of the logo for use on competing goods or services or any use that could cause consumer confusion on ownership or endorsement. The rights of the logo owner, however, are not absolute."

Source: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/fair-use-logos-2152.html

In addition to the aforementioned, usual copyright laws regarding the picture could also be looked into.

[Deluge]

(07-12-2014 01:43 AM)Windom Earle Wrote:  

With the recent Gypsie tweets, I'm guessing the account was created by a Gypsie.

Statistically very unlikely, gypsies are a very small population in the grand scheme of things. It's probably just a feminist posting a lot of Gypsie related tweets to paint RVF as racist.

[InternationalPlayboy]

"Hardcore progressives are, almost without exception, extremely mentally/emotionally dysfunctional."

I wonder what that says about this lurker who took the time to find all these quotes and make a twitter account.

[Cheetah]

(07-12-2014 05:25 AM)InternationalPlayboy Wrote:  

"Hardcore progressives are, almost without exception, extremely mentally/emotionally dysfunctional."

I wonder what that says about this lurker who took the time to find all these quotes and make a twitter account.

When they find out that no one wants to follow them when they publish selfies showing their short hair, they tend to get desperate to get any attention. This is just an example of that.

Rep point every month to the one who is most frequently quoted?

[rustylions]

Being new to the forums I really can't thank this person enough for this.

"Sperm is not only full of potassium, can shoot out at 60 mph, and it can cure aging too!"

I hope whoever it is keeps it coming, I don't have the time to trawl through everything for pearls like this.

[Teedub]

[AnonymousBosch]

(07-12-2014 05:25 AM)InternationalPlayboy Wrote:  

"Hardcore progressives are, almost without exception, extremely mentally/emotionally dysfunctional."

[Parlay44]

(07-12-2014 06:22 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

Aren't gypsies red pill They're basically anti-establishment and live the location independent lifestyle that we seek.

What does lack of teeth and showing have to do with anything?

[Sp5]

(07-12-2014 04:32 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 12:03 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 11:49 PM)JuanQuinQuin Wrote:  

Is that even Legal? They are more than quoting the website without Rooshv's permission. I thought that what was written here was under copyright or something like that, similar to pictures in stockphotos.com or other proprietary websites.

Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.

..what about that they use his picture/logo, presumably without his permission?

Roosh's logo is a trademark, because it's unique and has come to be associated with him.

Usually, if there is a flavor of parody or criticism in the use of the logo, it's fair use. It would not be fair use if someone selling travel guides or daygame material used it for commercial purposes to confuse buyers.

I don't see a commercial purpose for this Twitter feed, so it looks like fair use. Anyways, this is a form of flattery. Engaging in the marketplace of ideas, let freedom ring.

[Saweeep]

I think Roosh and Truth create all these hater profiles to drive traffic to the site lol

infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me


j/k guys before i get banned

[Cheetah]

(07-12-2014 07:10 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 04:32 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 12:03 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 11:49 PM)JuanQuinQuin Wrote:  

Is that even Legal? They are more than quoting the website without Rooshv's permission. I thought that what was written here was under copyright or something like that, similar to pictures in stockphotos.com or other proprietary websites.

Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.

..what about that they use his picture/logo, presumably without his permission?

Roosh's logo is a trademark, because it's unique and has come to be associated with him.

Usually, if there is a flavor of parody or criticism in the use of the logo, it's fair use. It would not be fair use if someone selling travel guides or daygame material used it for commercial purposes to confuse buyers.

I don't see a commercial purpose for this Twitter feed, so it looks like fair use. Anyways, this is a form of flattery. Engaging in the marketplace of ideas, let freedom ring.

I'm not so sure, someone could think that roosh is the actual owner of the twitter account if they just look at how the logo is used. If they made a parody of the logo I suppose that could be different, now it's more like that they associate the twitter account and the 'tweets' with his logo.

Try opening up a twitter account and use the coca-cola trademark or any other famous trademark and make a huge amount of tweets trying to criticise that company associated with the trademark. I bet that you won't last long.

[Icarus]

You guys could avoid writing things like "Sex is good for you're brain" or "Pakistan is an Arab country".

It makes us all look like illiterate ignoramuses. It's bad PR.

[runsonmagic]

"The fact more men sex change to women than women to men is proof of female privilege."

"Becoming a tranny is just a sexual strategy for gay men and men who won't approach to get attention."

"If the dating market were reversed, women would legalize rape in a day."

You're welcome haters

[Cheetah]

(07-12-2014 09:11 AM)Icarus Wrote:  

You guys could avoid writing things like "Sex is good for you're brain" or "Pakistan is an Arab country".

It makes us all look like illiterate ignoramuses. It's bad PR.

Any port in the storm to get quoted on that twitter account?

[runsonmagic]

(07-12-2014 09:16 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 09:11 AM)Icarus Wrote:  

You guys could avoid writing things like "Sex is good for you're brain" or "Pakistan is an Arab country".

It makes us all look like illiterate ignoramuses. It's bad PR.

Any port in the storm to get quoted on that twitter account?

Oh shit, I should put more spelling & grammar errors in my posts if I want to get quoted.

"Women who abort there children don't deserve you're offspring anyway."

There, how's that?

[Sp5]

(07-12-2014 08:16 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:10 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 04:32 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 12:03 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 11:49 PM)JuanQuinQuin Wrote:  

Is that even Legal? They are more than quoting the website without Rooshv's permission. I thought that what was written here was under copyright or something like that, similar to pictures in stockphotos.com or other proprietary websites.

Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.

..what about that they use his picture/logo, presumably without his permission?

Roosh's logo is a trademark, because it's unique and has come to be associated with him.

Usually, if there is a flavor of parody or criticism in the use of the logo, it's fair use. It would not be fair use if someone selling travel guides or daygame material used it for commercial purposes to confuse buyers.

I don't see a commercial purpose for this Twitter feed, so it looks like fair use. Anyways, this is a form of flattery. Engaging in the marketplace of ideas, let freedom ring.

I'm not so sure, someone could think that roosh is the actual owner of the twitter account if they just look at how the logo is used. If they made a parody of the logo I suppose that could be different, now it's more like that they associate the twitter account and the 'tweets' with his logo.

Try opening up a twitter account and use the coca-cola trademark or any other famous trademark and make a huge amount of tweets trying to criticise that company associated with the trademark. I bet that you won't last long.

Here's a Twitter account which uses the logo and publishes under Coca Cola Sucks:

https://twitter.com/coca_cola_sucks

See also: https://twitter.com/CocaCola24x7

with critical news.

You were saying? Don't argue with a former trademark and free-speech lawyer about trademark and free speech law.

Also, what Twitter, a private company, does is separate from whether the use of the logo is "legal" or not.

Sure, Roosh could complain to Twitter that his trademark is being misused. Twitter could make the user take Roosh's logo off under their own terms of service. From the Coca Cola examples, it looks like they follow the fair use doctrine.

If it went to court in any of these cases, it's a fair use and legal.

[Cheetah]

(07-12-2014 10:14 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 08:16 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 07:10 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 04:32 AM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(07-12-2014 12:03 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.

..what about that they use his picture/logo, presumably without his permission?

Roosh's logo is a trademark, because it's unique and has come to be associated with him.

Usually, if there is a flavor of parody or criticism in the use of the logo, it's fair use. It would not be fair use if someone selling travel guides or daygame material used it for commercial purposes to confuse buyers.

I don't see a commercial purpose for this Twitter feed, so it looks like fair use. Anyways, this is a form of flattery. Engaging in the marketplace of ideas, let freedom ring.

I'm not so sure, someone could think that roosh is the actual owner of the twitter account if they just look at how the logo is used. If they made a parody of the logo I suppose that could be different, now it's more like that they associate the twitter account and the 'tweets' with his logo.

Try opening up a twitter account and use the coca-cola trademark or any other famous trademark and make a huge amount of tweets trying to criticise that company associated with the trademark. I bet that you won't last long.

Here's a Twitter account which uses the logo and publishes under Coca Cola Sucks:

https://twitter.com/coca_cola_sucks

See also: https://twitter.com/CocaCola24x7

with critical news.

You were saying? Don't argue with a former trademark and free-speech lawyer about trademark and free speech law.

Also, what Twitter, a private company, does is separate from whether the use of the logo is "legal" or not.

Sure, Roosh could complain to Twitter that his trademark is being misused. Twitter could make the user take Roosh's logo off under their own terms of service. From the Coca Cola examples, it looks like they follow the fair use doctrine.

If it went to court in any of these cases, it's a fair use and legal.

That 'coca cola sucks' is such a small twitter account that it is probably forgotten or never seen. The 'cocacola24x7' seems like a much bigger and significant account. On that one, they clearly state that it isn't affiliated with coca-cola and they show a picture of a coca-cola bottle. They just don't use their logo, they show a picture of a bottle, like showing a picture of a car that you bash. It could be the difference between ok and not ok.

If you are lawyer, I am suprised that you write what a court would conclude, instead of saying what they probably would conclude.

Anyway, why not discuss something more important, such as what this forum is all about. Who is the next one to get quoted on that twitter account?

[Cheetah]

The twitter contributor has an account here on this forum.

If you look at the below 'tweet' you can see that they made a search via the forum as the search results are highlighted in yellow. You need to be logged in to this forum in order to make such a search.

https://mobile.twitter.com/rooshvforum_t...4017906691