|
Editorials: Editoriality Archives - Animations Commentary Pandora's Box! Video What Is? Contact Us Voices of the People Home |
“Hi! I’m Al Franken, and I’m an idiot!” How’s that for a parody?
In 1977, a girl named Meredith accused me of stealing something of hers that she claimed was intellectual property. It was for a 4th-grade project that was designed to reveal a little bit about ourselves. One of the things we were supposed to describe was "Things That I Hate." Unfortunately I wasn't sophisticated enough to include Lyndon "Beagle Ears" Johnson on my list, so I put "Pain" and "Broken Pencils." Meredith insisted that these were two items I pilfered from her from a project from two years before.
To this day I don't remember the project in question. My right-brained cranium probably liked the sound of the words, bounced 'em around in there for a couple of non-alcoholic years, and used 'em in a setting I saw fit.
Two years later, in an effort to win friends as well as legendary status, I offered my nerdy services as the solver of the notorious Rubik's Cube puzzle. How did I solve the puzzle you ask? I wrote the Rubik company for the answer, copied it on a piece of paper, and like the power-hungry narcissist I was, waited for an opportunity to become Mr. Popular. Some daft suckers at the time were willing to shell out cash for the answer. Ah, When We Were Very Young.
Now in which of these scenarios should I have been lambasted and strung up by my underwear by a jury of my peers? The latter, thank you very much.
If Meredith had trademarked the words "Pain" and "Broken Pencils" and used them patently in every money-making project on Madison Avenue, I would, and should be, in trouble. But you can't put a copyright on those three words, and that is the basis for Franken's argument. However, using a legally- protected formula to gain ground, influence people and increase one's earning potential during the whole process-- that's a crime. The only thing that saved me from an intellectual property lawyer knocking down my door is the fact that the Rubik's Cube people actually posted the solution to the puzzle. Nonetheless, I passed it off as my own.
And it is for that reason I think Al Franken's book "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right" is not a parody, it’s an obvious attempt to slam (or slander, I haven't read the book; but I'd be willing to bet there's a lot of whiny embellishment in it) Fox News.
The decision made by a New York judge in the Fox News v. Al Franken “Fair and Balanced” case set a horrible precedent. Obviously neither he nor Franken understand copyright law and they surely don’t understand what constitutes parody. Rather, Franken's work seems to me just as juvenile as the characters in the stories above. This is what happens when judges with an axe to grind against corporations get to sit on the bench for a case that can catapult them to activist status faster than you can say Learned Hand. This case does not protect you and me from corporate influence. This case will ultimately hurt artists and creatives everywhere in the U.S.
If Franken had used “A Fairly Unbalanced” Look at the Right, THAT is parody. If he had put "Fair and Balanced" in quotes, if he hadn't used a Fox Studio in the background, if he hadn't mentioned Fox News up and down in the book, I would be on par with the decision. What this judge and Franken apparently don't get is that parody is not copying someone’s slogan and using it for their own commercial gain. Why do you think corporations get copyrights and trademarks on slogans and creative material to begin with? What good is that protection if liberal judges are just going to let second-raters and pseudo-intellectual entertainers capitalize on it?
I go to great lengths to create original material. I have respect for those agencies, individuals and entities, great and small, who have successfully marketed their creative material. I would hope that when a person pays money to get their creative work copyrighted or trademarked, that they will have some protection from goofballs who want to steal their ideas. Otherwise, what’s the point?
Perhaps Fox should have taken higher ground in the matter. Aiming for a book banning isn't going to get you far with anyone; I don't understand their stand much more than I do Franken's. But all Franken should have to do is remove the "Fair and Balanced" and try doing something original. Then maybe I would find it funny.
Nonetheless, I guess I should have nothing to fear when I place
“All the News That’s Fit to Print and Other Liberal Crap” along with Al Franken’s likeness on a T-shirt. Anyone interested? Send an e-mail inquiry to: voices@editoriality.com.
