4 ms·
Is it any different if you are doing this in bad faith? The picture posted mentions "Is this a real business? Yes it is. But for legal reasons, Dumb Starbuck
by mehwoot 13y ago
Is it any different if you are doing this in bad faith? The picture posted mentions "Is this a real business? Yes it is. But for legal reasons, Dumb Starbucks needs to be categorised as a parody artwork". So they are clearly aware they are trying to get around copyright and this is probably pretty good evidence that they themselves don't really consider it as a parody artwork.
But would that actually make a difference if/when this goes to court?
- terabytest 13y agoYou could probably do it in bad faith as long as you don't say it out loud. Maybe those guys are doing it in bad faith too. You'd never know.
- MWil 13y agoI'm reminded of the movie Velvet Goldmine. It's intended to be biographical (very easy to figure out of whom) but because they couldn't secure the rights they just switched a few facts here and there, changed names and voila - successful truth-based movie without any rights secured.
- judk 13y agoor Citizen Kane.
- lifeformed 13y agoMaybe their explicitly aware attempt to bypass copyright is a part of the parody itself.
- jarrett 13y agoIntent is one of the factors for trademark infringement. So it might matter a little. You could argue that the statement shows the proprietors' intent is at least partly commercial. On the other hand, that much would be fairly easy to prove just by reviewing the company's financial records, operating agreement, etc. So I'm not sure the statement gets you anything that wasn't already a slam dunk.