Pepe the Frog's Creator Is Sending Takedown Notices To Far-Right Sites (vice.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Pepe the Frog creator Matt Furie has made good on his threat to "aggressively enforce his intellectual property." The artist's lawyers have taken legal action against the alt-right. They have served cease and desist orders to several alt-right personalities and websites including Richard Spencer, Mike Cernovich, and the r/the_Donald subreddit. In addition, they have issued Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown requests to Reddit and Amazon, notifying them that use of Pepe by the alt-right on their platforms is copyright infringement. The message is to the alt-right is clear -- stop using Pepe the Frog or prepare for legal consequences. Furie originally created Pepe as a non-political character for his Boy's Club comic, but Pepe later became an internet meme and during the 2016 U.S. presidential election the alt-right movement appropriated the frog in various grotesque and hateful memes.

Comments

You can't selectively apply the law

[guruevi]

Him and his lawyers basically shot themselves in the foot with that expression. You either enforce your copyright or you don't. Selecting a group of people regardless of definition, means you're not enforcing your copyright consistently and you are going to lose it.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[fyrewulff]

Please come back when you learn the difference between trademark and copyright.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[jellomizer]

In terms of copyright infringement you can. Hormel for example will have the lawyers send people approval to use their copyright logo of SPAM when it is used in a way they like, the lawyers send this approval because the people are actually violating copyright so they are approving it to protect they rights, without having to fight positive use of their IP. However if used in a way they don't like and the person is using the IP illegally then they can sue the heck out of them for damages.
Being the Alt-Right has twisted the IP to express an idea the created doesn't want, he could sue them.

It isn't open source, it is IP so the owner kept his rights on how the material is used.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a moron. Stick to your little lights and resistors, kid.

Re: You can't selectively apply the law

[that this is not und]

You are obviously a fucking suit. Leave Slashdot. Scat! Get outta here.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[ravenshrike]

Except Pepe was created in 2005 and he has not ever done so apart from a single book, which had it actually gone all the way to court and been fought the person he sent the C&D letter to probably could have won. Pretending that a business that sends C&D's or grants limited use to people as soon as it becomes aware of them is remotely the same at what Matty boy is trying to do is rather dishonest.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[PopeRatface]

Him and his lawyers basically shot themselves in the foot with that expression. You either enforce your copyright or you don't. Selecting a group of people regardless of definition, means you're not enforcing your copyright consistently and you are going to lose it.

Good luck trying to sue thousands of random trolls on 4chan. Even if he wins this case (doubtful), there are too many people cranking out their own Pepe memes to shut down.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[Anonymous Coward]

Except copyright is valid for 70 years past the life the owner. Thank you Disney. He is well within his rights. Trademarks require active enforcement like someone else was mentioning about Hormel. Copyright is up to the owner. He'll be limited on damages based on past behavior but he can certainly get them to stop violating his copyright. There are limitations for parody but good luck proving that's the intent from alt-right sites.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[guruevi]

That still implies the existence of a license and agreement. He is arguing that left-wingers can use his copyright while right-wingers can't, in both cases without any sort of agreement or explicit license. If he had an explicit license (eg. CC-NOT-THE-RIGHT), then you could potentially go ahead and invalidate the contract (depending on locality) for discriminatory business practices.

Re: You can't selectively apply the law

[Anonymous Coward]

What a world view you have. Like a child's.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[Anonymous Coward]

You either enforce your copyright or you don't.

Funny when smart people think they know something, but actually have a fundamental misunderstanding that makes their pontificating laughable.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[jellomizer]

You can choose to not enforce or go after every breach of the law.
So he can target right wing group because he can.
The law doesn’t accept look see the other guy is doing it, as much as your parents don’t.

Re:You can't selectively apply the law

[EvilSS]

That still implies the existence of a license and agreement. He is arguing that left-wingers can use his copyright while right-wingers can't, in both cases without any sort of agreement or explicit license. If he had an explicit license (eg. CC-NOT-THE-RIGHT), then you could potentially go ahead and invalidate the contract (depending on locality) for discriminatory business practices.

Nope. It's his IP, he can do with it as he pleases, including letting some use it and other not. There is no legal requirement for a license and he is free to selectively enforce his IP rights as he sees fit.

Actually you can

[rsilvergun]

you're thinking of Trademark, this is copyright. He can grant license to and take license from pretty much anyone he damn well pleases. The rules are a little hazy for music because of radio, but print media's pretty cut & dry.

Re: Actually you can

[that this is not und]

I would wager pretty good money that most of the far-right renditions of pepe are not digital copies but instead new artwork.

Who is providing the funding behind this legal action? Pepe was never a particularly successful commercial endeavor. The artist musst have backing from somebody with a political axe to grind.

Re: Actually you can

[ELCouz]

He raised around $34,757 to save pepe! https://www.kickstarter.com/pr...

Re: Actually you can

[John Meacham]

It doesn't take funding to send a copyright infringement letter and his case is pretty clear cut. He just doesn't want his character being appropriated by those groups. He has already said as much several times. No need for a conspiracy.

Re:Actually you can

[ravenshrike]

Yes, he can grant license to use it. But that requires either establishing something akin to the creative commons license with more restrictions in writing, or personally giving the go ahead to each individual work. Instead he not only has not done either of those things, but in an interview with the Daily Dot several years ago pretty explicitly abandoned copyright of Pepe.

Re:Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, he really can't. What you wish would happen and reality are two different things.

Re:Actually you can

[AvitarX]

More than likely, by not pursuing, he has less financial damages (as he has pretty much been allowing it to be used license free for ages), but he can definitely send take downs and what not.

Just no willful infringement damages because "it was a meme everybody was using consequence free blah blah" should (though maybe not in reality) be a valid defense against knowing infringement.

Absolutely he can at any time ask any person to not post it, especially in the context of DMCA (which I assume will be the bulk of the efforts). If nobody can post Pepe publicly, it's good enough for him I'd think.

Re:Actually you can

[AvitarX]

Note, I'm unaware of the actual interview, so I could be wrong on all counts...

Re: Actually you can

[ArmoredDragon]

Big deal. The MPAA has billions of dollars in its war chest, and it never succeeded in keeping the AACS keys off of the internet, and ultimately gave up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re: Actually you can

[OrangeTide]

... are not digital copies but instead new artwork.

Copyright law is based on protecting Mickey Mouse. Drawing any likeness of Mickey and trying to display it publicly can get the attention of Disney's lawyers and in most cases they'd have a very real stance with copyright laws to defend their case.

Re: Actually you can

[cfalcon]

> He just doesn't want his character being appropriated by those groups

With "parody" being a thing, he may or may not have a choice. Regardless, it will be interesting to see it play out in court.

Re:Actually you can

[ravenshrike]

The relevant portion.

Thoughts on Pepe becoming the mascot for 4chan?

        Pepe offers you complete support, attention, and embraces how capable you are of birthing your own Pepe. As your God, my hope is to enhance your Pepe birthing experience by empowering you through it. Obey Pepe. Obey Me. Bow down to your leader. Worship me. Give me genital love or non-genital love. Both are wonderful.

But 4chan went crazy for Pepe, yes?

        I believe that the most important thing I can do as an artist is to protect the voices of anonymous people on the Internet and help ensure that that those voices are honored. It is my job to help 4chan have the experience that they want without judgment or criticism. In the end, I want 4chan to feel they were supported by being heard, respected, and part of the decision-making process. Instead of promoting my own agenda, it is my goal to promote 4chan. Different things work for different people. Let me support you in the way you choose to draw Pepe.

What about people profiting off of Pepe?

        I believe in supporting people’s decisions to profit off of Pepe in order to provide them with the most positive business experience possible. I strive to be an advocate for Pepe in both love and enterprise and hope to help business people to have an empowering and joyful experience while making an ocean of profits as limitless as the universe.

While he still has control over his original Pepe works the idea that he maintains control over anything else after those statements is ludicrous.

Re: Actually you can

[hey!]

Well, if even if you won that wager it wouldn't make any difference. Copyright includes the right to control the creation of derivative work.

Re: Actually you can

[hey!]

Appeal to the stone.

Re: Actually you can

[HornWumpus]

You're thinking of trademarks, Mickey cartoons are copyrighted, Mickey is a trademarked character. Even if the copyrights ever expire, the trademark will remain. So long as it's worth buying out of the eventual bankruptcy(s).

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Such ignorance. "New artwork" of someone else's IP equals yet another new unique instance of breaking IP law. Just stick with the crazy conspiracy theories, it's literally all you are good it.

Re: Actually you can

[viperidaenz]

Isn't that because they were trying to enforce copyright on a number? Someone that's never been done before (and probably should never be done).

Re: Actually you can

[HornWumpus]

But doesn't prevent parody.

Re:Actually you can

[AvitarX]

Yeah, certainly makes the case a lot harder. In a sane copyright system, at the very least anything posted to 4chan first would be free of encumbrance.

Re: Actually you can

[OrangeTide]

No, I'm thinking of Copyright. You will find it troublesome if you draw your own version of Steamboat Willy and try to publish it. Even though it's not an exact copy.

Copyright law is also why you can't publish fan-fict of your favorite series. Even though you think it's a brand new story, but using the characters and setting of the original story.

Re: Actually you can

[American AC in Paris]

I would wager pretty good money that most of the far-right renditions of pepe are not digital copies but instead new artwork.

It doesn't matter if someone is making their own copy of Pepe the Frog. It's still Pepe the Frog and is not theirs to copy. This is why you don't see Tony the Tiger on your local store brand of frosted cornflakes; you might see a generic cartoon tiger, if that store brand is particularly small and feeling exceptionally lucky.

Who is providing the funding behind this legal action? Pepe was never a particularly successful commercial endeavor. The artist musst have backing from somebody with a political axe to grind.

Pepe is Matt Furie's creation. It doesn't matter if he hasn't earned a single penny from it; it's still his creation do do with as he pleases.

Matt Furie is getting pro bono legal support from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP. Pro bono means "for free".

As it turns out, there are lots of people who believe very strongly that the alt right is an active threat to civil society and antithetical to American values. Many of these people will happily donate their time, energy and money to shutting the alt-right down through legal action, political advocacy, and public outreach. There's nothing nefarious, illegal, or immoral about that in America. It's a free country.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes and no. If he publishes without claiming copyright then it's public domain, and too bad for him if he wants to change it later.

But in this case the Pepe memes are mostly a combination of satire and derivative works and his copyrights aren't relevant. Itâ(TM)s another abuse of the DMCA.

Re: Actually you can

[Monster_user]

He wanted his creation to go viral, and net him publicity, and a gravy train.

He gambled, and apparently he lost. Pepe when viral in a bad way. Lesson learned.

Re: Actually you can

[alvinrod]

I don't think he'll be successful at all. 4chan did much worse to Ben Garrison where they took it beyond turning his cartoons into antisemitic versions, but also turned the cartoonist himself into a meme of sorts. At this point it's probably better for him to just consider the character dead and gone or just wait for the meme to play itself out.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Appeal to the stone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
Heheh

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Aaah, it must be nice to be so ignorant of how copyright law actually works. Big hint, digital renditions didn't exist when the idea of copyright came about...and this part of the law regarding filing the claims doesn't really cost anything but time.

Re: Actually you can

[jedidiah]

> No, I'm thinking of Copyright. You will find it troublesome if you draw your own version of Steamboat Willy and try to publish it. Even though it's not an exact copy.

That sounds like an episode of Futurama that's still out there in the while being shown on TV and published in box sets despite the obvious "similaries".

Re: Actually you can

[CohibaVancouver]

I would wager pretty good money that most of the far-right renditions of pepe are not digital copies but instead new artwork.

You create 'new artwork' of Mickey Mouse and Disney can still go after you. Same deal here.

http://www.speakgif.com/wp-con...

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, nearly all ugly pepe drawing originate on 4chan. Their use by neonazis and shitheel right wing terrorists is a newer use resulting from the lack of enforcement. Conservatives tend to steal from the internet because nothing stops them, they see nothing morally wrong. Liberal-socialists steal from the internet because they are just assholes.

Re: Actually you can

[hey!]

Irony is not your strong suit, I see.

I just pointed out that the poster didn't actually refute anything.

Re: Actually you can

[OrangeTide]

Perhaps. But there are multiple well known issues when dealing with the estates of authors when it comes to writing books based on their worlds and characters. The estates of Edgar Rice Burroughs and of J. R. R. Tolkien come out as examples where complete books were written and then ordered destroyed because of copyright issues.

Re: Actually you can

[hey!]

True, but you need to check the definition of "parody". It's not just *any* humorous or satirical use of the material. By its very nature, it requires the use of the specific source material in a way that no other material will do.

In other words there is no way to write a parody of Lord of the Rings without using Lord of the Rings. If what you're doing could be done with *other* materials, it's not parody.

Re: Actually you can

[Pseudonym]

Huh? How is killing off a character in a storyline is not the same thing as relinquishing control of the (ugh, hate this term) intellectual property?

Believe me, Disney/Lucasfilm hasn't relinquished control of Han Solo. Oh, wait, spoiler alert.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Parody in fair use would require the uses to be parodying Pepe, not appropriated for random causes.

Re: Actually you can

[Pseudonym]

It's fairly well-established that parody is only a valid defence if the thing itself is being parodied. If you're not making a parody of Boy's Club or Pepe, then you can't validly claim fair-use parody.

What you're talking about is "satire" (i.e. using the work to criticise something else), which is on shakier grounds, legally, and an active topic of discussion.

Re: Actually you can

[Lordpidey]

Any digital data can be converted into a number. It might be REALLY long, but it's doable.

Re: Actually you can

[Pseudonym]

"Parody", in this sense, means using the thing to comment on the thing. It's clear that is not what is going on in most (all?) Pepe memes.

It's probably legally okay (sort of) to use Mickey Mouse to parody Mickey Mouse, Disney, the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act, the animation industry, Bob Eiger, etc. It probably isn't okay to use Mickey Mouse to parody Kim Jong-un. In that case, the thing being used is not the thing being parodied.

Re: Actually you can

[ArmoredDragon]

It doesn't matter, either way they were trying to enforce copyright, and nobody actually challenged it in court. Furthermore, even if they couldn't copyright this, they still have the DMCA anti-circumvention clause on their side.

Sites like Digg and Reddit were trying to delete that number from their site, but the more they did it, the more people just kept posting it, so they just gave up. Digg made a public comment that they'll stop trying to delete them and that they'll just have to find a way to deal with any lawsuits that come. However, the MPAA never did anything beyond issuing DMCA takedowns, and I strongly suspect that they spoke with social media platforms and realized that even if they did win money and injunctions, it still wouldn't succeed at anything other than killing off these social media platforms outright, which wouldn't do them any favors.

Re: Actually you can

[ArylAkamov]

the artist musst have backing from somebody with a political axe to grind.

From what I read, you're right. The lawyers are not charging him anything (so far).

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Were you as supportive of abusing the legal system for political reasons when Peter Thiel was suing Gawker into bankruptcy?

I'm not the person you are responding to, but no. I am not supportive of the fact that he was so secret about it, and it's unfortunate that this was never tested on appeal. Almost every big test case that you can think of was bankrolled by someone with money. This is nothing new. Those who do usually own it.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

It already is...

10100101100011110001101011

Re: Actually you can

[Foo2rama]

Did you suffer a large head wound? Killing off a character is not relinquishing control. If so... Lets look at the long list of things you could try and profit over and get sued...

Re:Actually you can

[AmiMoJo]

That was an obviously frivolous interview with the Daily Dot. I notice you didn't link to it, presumably so people can't see the context.

He has every right in law to control the use of his character. People are publishing far right anti-immigration comics using Pepe, and he has a right to ask Amazon to respect his copyright and their own rules on intellectual property.

Consider some if the silly statements that other artists have put out over the years. It doesn't invalidate their copyrights.

Re: Actually you can

[SuperDre]

but you take alt-right people serious? (just like you should also not take lefties serious btw).

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Big deal. The MPAA has billions of dollars in its war chest

Did you actually read the thread? He was answering the conspiracy nut's question about the funding. It had nothing to do with asserting effectiveness.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

He also relinquished control of Pepe., so...

How did someone with obvious brain damage manage to use a five-dollar word like relinquish? Very good, you're making progress!

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Your first comma ought to be a colon.

Re: Actually you can

[drinkypoo]

Were you as supportive of abusing the legal system for political reasons when Peter Thiel was suing Gawker into bankruptcy?

Gawker got sued into bankruptcy because a> nobody loved them and b> they engaged in unlawful activity while nobody loved them. And no fucks were given, because nothing of value was lost. Literally everything they ever posted was sensationalized clickbait. Even when they were right, they were insufferable.

It's a free country*

*unless you're a conservative, in which case NO PLATFORM FOR HATE!!!1

You're still trying to use someone else's soapbox, while ranting about pulling one's self up by one's bootstraps. You don't even know what you believe.

Re: Actually you can

[hackwrench]

He didn't create the name Pepe or frogs. Too not novel to be copyrightable. Copyright is a crime against sentient beings anyways as it appropriates culture.

Re: Actually you can

[hackwrench]

He didn't invent the name Pepe or frogs. Also, there are fair use provisions. Not clear cut. Copyright is a crime against sentient beings anyways as it appropriates culture.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

did you read the kickstarter page? it says he's gonna bring him back.

Re: Actually you can

[Entrope]

No, they were trying to stop the spread of a "circumvention" tool that bypasses a mechanism that "effectively controls access to" a copyrighted work. The DMCA made sharing such information effectively the same as direct copyright infringement. I don't think any court ever got around to pointing out that legitimate research into the mechanism would be protected by the First Amendment.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Satire has enjoyed Fair Use protection, even at the Supreme Court level, and for commercial profits.

I wouldn't call it a slam dunk, but his lawyers are definitely going to ask to be paid up front...

Re: Actually you can

[Entrope]

Why do you think "his case is pretty clear cut"? What facts and case law do you rely on in that judgment? Are you aware that determining whether something is copyright infringement "can be maddeningly complex, and frustratingly (or entertainingly) fact specific"?

Did Furie's targets copy an image to the extent that his Pepe "really constitutes the story being told" by their uses? Has he defeated the fair use factors that supported 2 Live Crew when they were sued over Pretty Woman ?

If Furie was bringing a trademark lawsuit, his case would be pretty strong, but the DMCA does not allow take-down notices over alleged trademark infringement, and sending a take-down notice with the intention of pursuing trademark claims would be a blatant violation of the "good faith" claim required in the DMCA takedown notice. That's the kind of thing that can lead to a judge throwing a plaintiff's complaint right out of court.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

"Parody" and "satire" are synonyms.

What you're trying to say is that the new work may only parody the original work and that you can't use the new work to parody an unrelated work.

Re: Actually you can

[hipp5]

Here's a pro bono tip for you, avoid sprinkling semicolons around if you don't know how to use them. Yes I know you do it in an attempt to look smarter, but it ends up having the opposite effect.

Mmmmmm nope. American AC used them correctly; semi-colons can be used to closely join two independent clauses to connect closely related ideas.

Re:Actually you can

[ravenshrike]

While taken alone the interview might be frivolous when considered in combination with the fact that he went 11+ years without making any copyright claims over Pepe whatsoever including many instances of people making money off the property that he was aware of means that it could easily be considered binding

Re: Actually you can

[GLMDesigns]

Not to mention the fact that he is going to lose the meme war big time. He's taking on reddit and 4chan. ha ha ha ha

Pepe is a subversive meme used by people who getting an anti-authoritarian, anti-SJW as well (but to a far less degree) by the racist Alt-Right.

Legal action against pepe is only going to make it stronger - like the Streisand Affect on steroids.

If Matt Furie thinks this will stop the use of Pepe he's a fool. If he's doing this to separate himself from Kekistanis others who have adopted Pepe then ... whatever. No one will link the two,

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

If he publishes without claiming copyright then it's public domain,

For fuck's sake, the retards are out in force today.
Copyright is and has been for many years *automatic*. It's only public domain if you explicitly make it so.

Re: Actually you can

[penandpaper]

You're still trying to use someone else's soapbox

Then why do we still allow nazi's to get phone lines? They can use that to call each other and organize or spread their hateful ideology!

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Even spelled it right.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

> "Who is providing the funding behind this legal action?"

If only there was some information other than the summary which could provide us with more information about that.

I wish that Slashdot would bother to link articles, then we could read them and find out details such as perhaps they already sued one person and are using that hypothetical settlement to fund further legal action.

But alas, all we will ever know is the summary, so we're free to ask pointed questions and engage in baseless speculation.

Re: Actually you can

[ArmoredDragon]

Al Yankovich uses other works for satire all the time; take for example his "bought it on ebay" song.

Even if your argument held true, at all, I doubt it would make any difference. I haven't read the comic at all, but my guess is that they could defend it on the grounds of saying that pepe is a nazi, or something like that, based on events in the comic.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh neat, so because Yondu died in the latest Guardians of the Galaxy movie his character is up for grabs then.

Christ on a cracker you're a whole lotta dumb, son.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Philosophically, turning data into binary doesn't generate a number any more than English words are numbers in Base 26

Re: Actually you can

[tepples]

Or Mr. Yankovic could have written "eBay" as a parody about buying Backstreet Boys CDs.

Re: Actually you can

[jae471]

Weird Al also clears his songs with the original artist first...

Re: Actually you can

[sexconker]

In interviews he has stated he has given up on the whole matter.

Re: Actually you can

[sexconker]

The entire idea of using Pepe as a racist symbol was itself a parody orchestrated by 4chan to show how fucking stupid the media is.
The media reported on it because they fell for some fake 4chan tweets. They media reported on it a lot.
Then people started using it to mock the media. I have no idea whether or not actual racists use it now, or what it means if they actually do use it.

Either way, it's clearly parody and political expression. He won't win a copyright lawsuit if the defendant has a competent lawyer.

Re: Actually you can

[sexconker]

You're wrong. If you were correct, South Park wouldn't be on the air.

Re: Actually you can

[sexconker]

Copyright law is also why you can't publish fan-fict of your favorite series.

Except you can. So many comic books and "expanded universe" shits started out that way.

Re: Actually you can

[sexconker]

By its very nature, it requires the use of the specific source material in a way that no other material will do.

False. South Park wouldn't have been able to air last week's episode about Alexa if that were the case because other material (Google Home, Siri, Bixby, etc.) would have worked. The episode includes Google Home & Siri, but is primarily focused on Alexa. It also uses the actual brand names, product likenesses, etc.

You don't know SHIT.

Re:Actually you can

[DRJlaw]

While taken alone the interview might be frivolous when considered in combination with the fact that he went 11+ years without making any copyright claims over Pepe whatsoever including many instances of people making money off the property that he was aware of means that it could easily be considered binding/

Nope. Petrella v. MGM was quite clear that latches does not apply within the statute of limitations (3 years). Thank you for playing "Doh! An IP layer caught my gross misstatement concerning the law!"

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is providing the funding behind this legal action?

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP are working pro bono. Very good law firm, Cernovich is likely already negotiating a settlement that will leave him with a home to live in.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

The entire idea of using Pepe as a racist symbol was itself a parody orchestrated by 4chan to show how fucking stupid the media is.

So the people using pepe as a symbol said they were using it as a racism symbol and then when they were called out on it they said "IT'S JUST A PRANK BRO LOL I GOT YOU SO HARD"

Either way, it's clearly parody and political expression. He won't win a copyright lawsuit if the defendant has a competent lawyer.

It's really not clearly parody. Pepe is not being parodied here, he wont get fair use protection. There's a reason one of the best IP firms in the country took this pro bono. The problem here is the judgement will be almost impossible to enforce against individuals. But reddit and other larger websites will ban pepe. It'll be interesting to see how T_D deals with this. Maybe they'll threaten to go to voat again and then wimp out.

Re: Actually you can

[datavirtue]

I say: "Good one Streisand!"

Re: Actually you can

[datavirtue]

When I first learned of Pepe I was told it was a racist meme. It took a lot of convincing and I still didnt buy it. This explains it.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes I know you do it in an attempt to look smarter, but it ends up having the opposite effect.

No. No, you don't know that. And pretending that you do merely advertises your complete lack of self-awareness. Look up "projecting" some time.

Pretty much anyone who repeats this tired line is a tool.

Re: Actually you can

[viperidaenz]

and DMCA takedown notices are only effective against entities that have a US presence. Just like you can't sue me for violating a US software patent if I have no business there.

Re: Actually you can

[Pseudonym]

South Park is careful not to rely on fair use.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends on your philosophy.

Re: Actually you can

[sexconker]

No, they trolled the media. Just like when they trolled them into thinking the "OK" hand gesture was code for white power. (The pinky, ring, and middle finger form a W, the thumb and index finger form the P.) This one got less lasting attention.

You can go and read the 4chan posts where this was orchestrated, watch their reactions as news media took the bait, etc.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

You can go and read the 4chan posts where this was orchestrated, watch their reactions as news media took the bait, etc.

The same board it was orchestrated on IS a cesspool of racism and they not only admit it but encourage it openly. It wasn't so much "bait" as an attempt to come out publicly and see if they could get away with it. When it backfired they went with the "it's just a prank bro" approach. Not only are they racist fuckwits but they're cowards who can't even stand up for their principals, misguided as they may be.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

In interviews he has stated he has given up on the whole matter.

Great, so 70 years after Furie dies they can claim it's in the public domain. In order to legally release the copyright to the public domain before that he would have to sign a legal binding document indicating such. Which as of yet no one has been able to produce, even Cernovich cant provide one.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

if it came from 4chan it DID come from racists

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

The entire idea of using Pepe as a racist symbol was itself a parody orchestrated by 4chan to show how fucking stupid the media is.

The fact that racists seem to have fallen for it too probably says something.

Either way, it's clearly parody [...]

No, the legal term is "satire", and that's not a clear basis for a fair-use defense.

[...] and political expression.

Irrelevant.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

In further news, Walt Disney didn't invent the name Mickey or mice.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember ASCII art of pepe or whatever they called him in 1992, perhaps earlier. Look around you can still find it online.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Because telephone companies are generally common carriers. Application providers and websites are not. You can go to another website or start your own. You probably can't start your own wired or wireless carrier because pole space and spectrum are limited resources, the latter arguably a public resource.

It never ceases to give me a little hit of joy whenever a conservative whines about a private company refusing them service.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Copyright applies to the original work, pepe memes are derivitive, and memes likely fair use in most cases.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Anti-authoritarian? The alt right are the biggest proponents of authoritarianism that has probably ever existed in America. There is a reason Holocaust survivors unanimously worry about the rise of Trump and compare it to the rise of Hitler.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

American AC used them correctly; semi-colons can be used to closely join two independent clauses to connect closely related ideas.

They can, indeed; but when the second clause acts as an explanation for the first, I would generally recommend the full colon:

American AC used them correctly: semi-colons can be used to closely join two independent clauses to connect closely related ideas.

Re: Actually you can

[Mattcelt]

It appears you need to brush up on your understanding of basic copyright law.

If it's recognisable as Pepe, it is a derivative work, not 'new artwork'.

You can't take a song, change one line, and pretend you didn't rip it off. Remember that Disney enforces it's mickey mouse copyright on nearly anything with three overlapping circles.

Re: Actually you can

[OrangeTide]

I gave specific examples of why you cannot.

I hope everyone has fun getting their J.D.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Then it would be worth it just to have Richard Spencer testify under oath that nobody should take him seriously.

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

No they are not. They took the case pro Bono. Meaning they are not asking to be paid at all

Re: Actually you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Yankovic is both parody and satire. It parodies the original work while also satirising something else.
Even so he only gets away with it because other artists consider it an honor to be done by him. Much as it was once the greatest honor in Hollywood to be mocked on Animaniacs.
He hasn't always gotten away with it either. Lada Gaga threatened to sue him over 'perform this way' because the video was 'too similar to the original'.
And that one was just a parody. Yankovic responded by posting the song on YouTube with the video blacked out and a message about the lawsuit. Gaga then changed her stance after facing a major backlash from her own fans

Point is : it's not as simple as you seem to think. Even for your own chosen example.

Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[Anonymous Coward]

Presumably, most of these are user created, how could this dude issue C&D's on content he didn't create

Re:Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[Anonymous Coward]

For the same reason I can't make a movie with Disney characters, and no memes probably don't fall under fair use.

Re:Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[AvitarX]

If it's not directly commentary on the character Pepe (satire), it likely isn't fair use.

Though the fact that they're not monetized does help the case.

Likely it will be too expensive to pursue a fair use case for each and every instance, so the DMCA will win out.

Re: Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[DaHat]

There is a bit of a difference between a full Disney movie and say... Fan art. https://www.plagiarismtoday.co...

Re:Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[HornWumpus]

For definitions of 'win out' equalling to 'play automated whack a mole against scripts'.

Have you been on youttube lately?

Re: Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[maorb]

The relevant part from your link being:

"but always remember that your creations only exist through the good graces of the copyright holder and they can change their mind at any point"

Full fan movies and fan art fall into the same category legally speaking. The copyright holder has a large deal of freedom in choosing who, if anyone, to bring a case against.

Re: Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[DaHat]

They can change their minds yes, but you missed the earlier part of the article:

That being said, fair use may protect some fan creations from being an infringement, but that is handled on a case-by-case basis, looking at the facts of the actual work.

Did you ever hear about the 'artist' who put together a gallery of screenshots of different peoples Instagram photos? He's been in court previously for claims of copyright infringement wrt using someone elses work as the basis for his... and he won.

The law on this (and precedent)... is interesting, and not quite as clear cut as most thing.

Re: Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as they aren't making any money off of it, anyone can use it pretty much. If people wanted to sell pepe shirts or something then they could't but memes are pretty much legal.

Re:Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[AvitarX]

I know I often get frustrated looking for things because blocked videos.

I imagine it's harder to block altered content on a site like reddit though.

Re: Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[Pseudonym]

It's definitely not clear cut, but Prince has at least a good legal argument, that his art comments on the original work. The Cariou case hinged on the fact that Prince never straight-up said he was commenting on the original photos, but the appeals court made it clear that any reasonable art-lover would know that he was.

Now fast forward to the Instagram photos. Remember, he's been through this before, and has found that appropriation art can be fair use if it comments on the original. In the case of the Instagram photos, the "commenting on the original" was literal. His artwork literally made a comment on social media.

Don't you think that's just a little bit clever?

Oh, the guy is a grade A dickhead, don't get me wrong. But the ingenuity is undeniable.

Re:Don't user created memes fall under fair use?

[Anonymous Coward]

Though the fact that they're not monetized does help the case.

Didn't help any non-commercial pirate sites.

It's not enough to not be monetized, you have to step away from "commercial scale".
Artists typically gets paid for political imagery that is used to push an agenda.

This Is Going To Work

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure the interent will be free of Pepe pictures by this time next week.

Re: This Is Going To Work

[that this is not und]

Streisand effect.

Re:This Is Going To Work

[PopeRatface]

Things were headed in that direction, already. I've sure seen a lot less Pepes recently then I used to. Now that the lawsuit is getting fired up, I bet I'll be seeing a lot more of them again. Maybe that was the point. There's no such thing as bad publicity.

Re:This Is Going To Work

[Anonymous Coward]

It will just drive up the market value of rare Pepes.

Re:This Is Going To Work

[Anonymous Coward]

It's an old-ass meme that they honestly probably would've moved on from long ago if not for this type of shit; by 4chan standards it's had a longer life than it otherwise would have. Things like the creator getting butthurt about it or Hillary fucking Clinton spending actual time and money during the campaign going to war over it definitely prolonged its popularity.

Re:This Is Going To Work

[myowntrueself]

Things were headed in that direction, already. I've sure seen a lot less Pepes recently then I used to. Now that the lawsuit is getting fired up, I bet I'll be seeing a lot more of them again. Maybe that was the point. There's no such thing as bad publicity.

This will only serve to make the rare Pepes more valuable.

Re:This Is Going To Work

[Anonymous Coward]

That you're defending pepe as a meme of the alt-right when it's basically a mockery of them that they picked up as a result of refusing to admit they just don't get it says enough about you, but the idea that you can put a price on a rare Pepe should disqualify you from being your own legal guardian.

Re:This Is Going To Work

[myowntrueself]

That you're defending pepe as a meme of the alt-right when it's basically a mockery of them that they picked up as a result of refusing to admit they just don't get it says enough about you, but the idea that you can put a price on a rare Pepe should disqualify you from being your own legal guardian.

You never went to 4chan.

Also *whoosh*, that was the sound of irony flying over your head at great speed.

Re: As a content creator

[John Meacham]

Again, that is trademark. Copyright has no such requirement.

Sorry

[negRo_slim]

Sorry I'm not familiar with Mr. Furry's work but the times I've seen his Pepe it has appeared fairly different from the one most commonly in use online.

Re:Sorry

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr. Furry sounds like he needs a free helicopter ride.

Plenty of public record to prove in court that he

[Anonymous Coward]

failed to defend, and abandoned his copyright. Any trial will be filled with reading of press articles to that point and endlessly replaying the few video clips of his exasperated declarations of giving up.
Can drag it out as long as either side wants.

Parody

[JBMcB]

Also, in nearly all of the renditions I've seen, it's been used in a satirical sense, mostly to poke fun at anti-fascists, and, even more hilariously, at fascists themselves.

Re:Parody

[AvitarX]

That's Parody, not Satire (in the legal sense).

Parody, using a piece to make fun of something else, is less protected than people realize

https://www.techdirt.com/artic... (discusses a 1997 ruling).

Re:Parody

[Theaetetus]

Also, in nearly all of the renditions I've seen, it's been used in a satirical sense, mostly to poke fun at anti-fascists, and, even more hilariously, at fascists themselves.

Ironically, your post includes the answer to why this is irrelevant. Notice how your subject line was "parody", but in the body, you say "satire" (well, "satirical")? Those are different things under copyright law.

The short version is that:
(i) parody makes fun of the thing it's copying. Think Weird Al's "Smells like Nirvana", which explicitly makes fun of Nirvana and Smells Like Teen Spirit, or his "Perform That Way" which makes fun of Lady Gaga and Born that Way. Parody falls under fair use because, since you're making fun of the thing you're copying, there's no way to do so without copying it.
(ii) satire makes fun of something else.Think Weird Al's "Eat it" or "I'm fat", which make fun of obesity, but do not make fun of Michael Jackson or those songs, except stylistically. He could have made fun of obesity with countless other songs, so the copyright on those songs do not limit his expressive rights. That's why satire does not fall under fair use.

So, if those renditions you've seen are making fun of, say anti-fascists or Hillary Clinton or what not, they're satires. They are not parodies of Pepe the Frog, and therefore are not protected by fair use, unlike if they had actually been parodies.

As an aside, Weird Al always gets permission from artists before he copies their songs, and while it's primarily because he's such a nice guy, the above satire/parody divide is another significant reason.

Disclaimer: I am an IP lawyer. I am not your IP lawyer, and this is not legal advice.

Re:Parody

[Anonymous Coward]

I would argue that "Perform That Way" doesn't make fun of Lady Gaga more than it defends her.

Re:Parody

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you. I appreciate the clear explanation.

Re:Parody

[Mr.Radar]

This is the most informative comment I've seen on Slashdot in literally years.

Re:Parody

[Linux Torvalds]

satire makes fun of something else.Think Weird Al's "Eat it" or "I'm fat", which make fun of obesity, but do not make fun of Michael Jackson or those songs, except stylistically. He could have made fun of obesity with countless other songs, so the copyright on those songs do not limit his expressive rights. That's why satire does not fall under fair use.

Good point in theory but it seems like it might be a tough case to make. Let's say Jackson were to sue Weird Al over either Eat It or I'm Fat, using your reasoning here. How exactly do Jackson's attorneys show that Yankovic is making fun of obesity and not the songs themselves? All Yankovic's people have to say is "Nuh-uh, we're commenting on the intellectual vacuity of Beat It and Bad by associating even more vacuous lyrics with the same music."

As soon as they say something like that in court, it's not just a legal matter anymore, but a slippery subjective argument about critical theory. Once Yankovic's people start rambling on about Derrida and Barthes, the judge will (presumably) throw up his hands in surrender and ask Jackson's people to show damages. Which of course they won't be able to do, because regardless of whether Yankovic's work is satire or parody, it's not the least bit rivalrous.

A more clearcut situation might be the Downfall outtakes where new subtitles are used to poke fun at various completely unrelated topics and public figures. You can make fun of Xbox Live without putting words in Hitler's mouth, but assuming you wanted to make fun of Michael Jackson's lyrical skills, how do you do that effectively without incorporating the key elements of the music you're commenting on?

Re:Parody

[Theaetetus]

satire makes fun of something else.Think Weird Al's "Eat it" or "I'm fat", which make fun of obesity, but do not make fun of Michael Jackson or those songs, except stylistically. He could have made fun of obesity with countless other songs, so the copyright on those songs do not limit his expressive rights. That's why satire does not fall under fair use.

Good point in theory but it seems like it might be a tough case to make. Let's say Jackson were to sue Weird Al over either Eat It or I'm Fat, using your reasoning here. How exactly do Jackson's attorneys show that Yankovic is making fun of obesity and not the songs themselves? All Yankovic's people have to say is "Nuh-uh, we're commenting on the intellectual vacuity of Beat It and Bad by associating even more vacuous lyrics with the same music."

"Well, counselor, if that were true, why did you need to copy those particular songs? Aren't there other vacuous songs you can think of? Is there anything specific about your alleged parody that refers to those songs?"
And the answer is no, which is why it's satire.

You can say it's a good point in theory, but it's also a good point in practice, having been litigated all the way to the Supreme Court.

As soon as they say something like that in court, it's not just a legal matter anymore, but a slippery subjective argument about critical theory. Once Yankovic's people start rambling on about Derrida and Barthes, the judge will (presumably) throw up his hands in surrender and ask Jackson's people to show damages. Which of course they won't be able to do, because regardless of whether Yankovic's work is satire or parody, it's not the least bit rivalrous.

"We'll take the $150k in statutory damages plus attorneys fees, thank you, your honor."

Also, no, the judge isn't going to throw up his hands when Yankovic's attorneys start rambling on about unrelated artists, he'll tell them that's irrelevant and if they can't answer why this song is a parody rather than a satire, then they should sit down. Real courts are not like the movies, judges don't simply give in if you babble for long enough.

Re:Parody

[Anonymous Coward]

This would be informative if it wasn't wrong. The person who posted this is clearly not a lawyer is does not know what they are talking about. When satire is aimed at political issues, it can be construed as political speech, which is the most protected form of speech under the first Amendment. The use of satire is different than the use of parody and is not always protected, but when used as a form of political speech there is no question that it is protected.

Re:Parody

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the most informative comment I've seen on Slashdot in literally years.STOP IT IMMEDIATELY, that's not what we're here for!

FTFY :D

Re:Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not how copyright works, genius.

He should listen to this before he continues

[Anonymous Coward]

P.E.P.E.- Shadilay [Italian Version] soothes the soul!

So now you're going to copyright a Meme...

[Noishkel]

Yeah good luck with that. Especially given that the original 'sad frog' meme has metamorphosed so man times over the years as to be completely unrecognizable. Are you going to try to claim that all carton frogs are the same now? How far does this thud-fuck think he's going to be able to take this?

That still doesn't matter

[rsilvergun]

if I freehand copy an X-Men comic book that doesn't give me copyright to it.

As for the funding, thanks to the DMCA it's trivial to send take down notices. And yes, the artist probably does have an Ax to grind. His character's been made into a symbol for a group of at best Nazi sympathizers and at worst actual Swastika flag flying Nazi's. A character he intended for childrend's books. Any sane person would be furious.

If they'd done it to the Coca-Cola polar bear or Mickey mouse what do you think the reaction would be? Would you still be writing the phrase "an axe to grind" or questioning the artist's motives?

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you know? There were only 2 political thinkers in all of human history: Mao & Hitler.

Anyone who isn't a Maoist is automatically a Nazi.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[PopeRatzo]

tens of millions of people "nazis"

I think we saw at the "Mother of All Rallies" (#MOAR) that it's more like 120 people than it is "tens of millions".

Re:That still doesn't matter

[jedidiah]

> if I freehand copy an X-Men comic book that doesn't give me copyright to it.

At least half of each major publishers characters are shameless knock offs of the others.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously never browse 4chan. Pepe is a normal meme appropriated by stormweenies, thanks to Hillary /pol/ now knows it can make a serious splash and people on there are always trying to make racist memes of otherwise benign things in order to trigger normies.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

All the tight wing Nazis already do.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Our crew is big and it keeps on getting bigger......

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Not GP.

You guys appear to only define yourself by your opposition, which as a centrist, I must say it's very sad and off-putting.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[MightyMartian]

First of all, I doubt it's even a million. Second of all racism is hardly merely a "political opinion".

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

1) It's a few thousand nationwide if you're lucky, and 2) Slapping the label "racism" on something you don't like doesn't invalidate it. Border security isn't "racist". Deporting illegal immigrants isn't "racist". Wearing high heels on a rainy day isn't "racist". Your team losing the big game isn't "racist". A bird crapping on your windshield isn't "racist"....The left really fucking needs to learn a new tactic of persuasion other than bullying people into submission by calling them "racist".

Furthermore, there's a whole shitload more involved with being a "nazi" than just being racist.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Pfhorrest]

We don't call them Nazis just because of their repugnant political opinions, we call them Nazis because they wear swastikas, give Nazi salutes, and chant Nazi slogans. You know, like Nazis.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

A character he intended for childrend's books.

You haven't read Boy's Club, have you?

Feels good man.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

The word you're after is "collaborators".

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the Juggalos you're thinking of.

WHOOP WHOOP

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Going by the volume of traffic on their right-wing twitter alternative, I'd doubt it is more than a few thousand.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[liefer]

Yes, absolutely. But more importantly is your claim that it's been made a symbol of extremist groups which is just not true. Sometimes they use it, perhaps, but in the overwhelming majority of cases it's used for silly memes. I'm honestly surprised people on this site can be so out of touch with internet culture

Re:That still doesn't matter

[AmiMoJo]

This is how they gaslight you. They claim the Kekistan flag isn't related to the Nazi swastika flag at all, but they know that it really is and use it as a signal to each other. If you point this out they accuse you of wild conspiracy theories and of calling everyone a Nazi.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[johanw]

> Second of all racism is hardly merely a "political opinion".

Then what do you cal it? A scientific fact?

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

A bird crapping on your windshield isn't "racist"

But it was a blackbird!

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

....The left really fucking needs to learn a new tactic of persuasion other than bullying people into submission by calling them "racist".

Strange assertion. Calling people commies has been working really well for conservatives the past 50 years. Why should the liberals abandon effective tactics?

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

"Libtard" sounds dumb. It seems like it's something that you'd say to hurt someone's feelings but I just don't think it resonates with people that don't already agree with you. Maybe it's just a little too extreme. Like, liberals know that they're not actually mentally retarded, so I think that's why it doesn't get under their skin. Anyway, name-calling is a pretty tricky business considering those that resort to it.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, in the sense that people who actually defend liberty and free speech also happen to "enable Nazis". I have no problem with that.

Of course, totalitarians leftists are not "Nazi enablers", they simply happen to be totalitarians themselves.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

But their shit is white!

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

as a centrist

Translation: If I refuse to align with anyone, I can act superior to everyone.

Translation: My limited world view only allows for two viewpoints to exist and I'm intellectually intimidated by anyone who doesn't fit into my warped perception so I have to resort to childish behavior.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

The main problem with fascists is that they prioritize hatred over logistical and practical realities. If they see a population of millions starving, then they immediately organize extermination camps.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[penandpaper]

Technically the Nazi's lost and there are no more National Socialists parading that platform. We used to call them neo-nazi's to distinguish it but Neo changed all that.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Kielistic]

You are being mocked by children. That you think you are being gaslighted by an illuminati of "kekistanies" is, frankly, pathetic. You can't honestly believe that a group of mostly pre-20s are actually some secret cabal of nazis? Right...?

Re:That still doesn't matter

[AmiMoJo]

The actual Nazis at the Charlottesville rally didn't seem too bothered by the Kekistan flags that you think were mocking them.

Don't fall for it.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats ok, You'd just rather they ALL stay there and die. Or you recommend we send the military. As a veteran who served in Iraq I should inform you that the military's job is destroying the enemy, nothing about it is good at nation building.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[computational super]

No, no, all Trump supporters are literal Nazis. All 63 million of them. That's why America has adopted the swastika as its national flag since Trump's election and brownshirts roam the streets virtually unopposed.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[penandpaper]

Was everyone at Charlottesville a nazi? How many neo-nazis do you think exist in the US?

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait wait wait here. Are you praising Trump for dealing with the dems in trying to give the dreamers amnesty?

Shoot man, do you have no self respect?
Or does it not matter what Trump does, you support him cause its him?

Re:That still doesn't matter

[AmiMoJo]

Considering that the Nazis at Charlottesville were firing their guns at and even murdering counter-protesters, their reaction to being openly mocked by Kekistan flags only metres away from their swastikas seems rather understated.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[stinerman]

Border security isn't "racist". Deporting illegal immigrants isn't "racist".

In and of itself, no. But if you're for increased border security and deporting illegal immigrants specifically because you don't want people of latino persuasion in the country, then yes, that is racist. And from the people I've met, they aren't really concerned about people from Ireland overstaying their visas. They're specifically worried about people of European descent becoming a minority in the USA.

I don't know anything about you so I have no idea what you believe. And there are a good number of people who believe we should have increased border security (I'm one of them!), but there are also a good number of people who just so happen to be for these things specifically because they think that there are too many non-Europeans in the country as it is. That is racist.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

If this is being done only against actual nazis, why is Furie sending takedown notices against Mike Cernovich and the Donald Trump subreddit?

Also, racism as spouted by modern leftists is almost never an accurate accusation.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

murdering counter-protesters

Counter-protester. It was getting violent, but only one person was murdered.

Ironic captcha: behead

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Mashiki]

This is how they gaslight you. They claim the Kekistan flag isn't related to the Nazi swastika flag at all, but they know that it really is and use it as a signal to each other. If you point this out they accuse you of wild conspiracy theories and of calling everyone a Nazi.

This is how you prove you have no understanding of internet culture in one easy step. While at the same time, failing to understand that the entire basis of the meme is reflecting identity politics back at the left. Eg: "You get special privileges because *insert gender/race/sex here*, thus you can't be *insert thing here*" Kekistani memes do the same, by creating a fictional front and turning that identity politics back on it's source. Since kekistani's are "true" in the oppositions eyes, as seen by your post. You're actually discriminating against them by holding the position that you do.

Which means, that not only are you a bigot. But you can also be a racist, sexist, and anything else they want. They're mocking you, using your own rules and you don't even understand it. Either because you live and breath identity politics and are unable to reflect on the fact that you actually are everything you claim to hate. And to the "normies" aka everyone else except "cuckistanis" you look like an idiot, especially since you're getting so worked up over a cartoon frog.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[penandpaper]

1) the guy was arrested. http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/27/...
2) the police were not doing their job separating the group allowing violence to happen. when that happens people take the law into their own hands
3) that doesn't answer the question, how many nazi's you think were there and how many in the us
4) how is Kekistan any different than Charley Chaplin in The dictator?
5) many sported the US flag, does that mean the US flag is a symbol of nazis?

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Mashiki]

Oh you're talking about the people with the "flags on their shirt" aren't you? FYI those weren't kekistani flags. Those were actual "white supremacy" flags on their shirt, good job on showing that you like repeating false talking points though. Maybe you can get together with Charles Johnson of LGF, and also claim the Tennessee state flag is a sub-group flag of the KKK.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[AmiMoJo]

That's the other part of the gaslighting. They go on 4chan's /pol and Reddit and post far-right, literal Nazi stuff, and then when called out on it claim that it's all a joke and you can't take a joke and why are you such a sensitive snowflake kek

What is your deal Mashiki? Are you part of it, are you trying to gaslight me, or are you just an idiot? You fell for Pizzagate... So it's hard to know if you are just gullible or deliberately putting this stuff out.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[AmiMoJo]

No, I mean these actual Kekistan flags: https://www.google.com/search?...

Re:That still doesn't matter

[eaglesrule]

The left really fucking needs to learn a new tactic of persuasion other than bullying people into submission by calling them "racist".

Indeed. There is violence, and threats of violence, to stiffle speech on college campus and political events, even parades. In addition there is the current campaign of deplatforming and censorship of opposing voices (or whoever triggers them) at flagship services such as youtube and twitter. There is also the professional protesters.

I'd say they're really branching out.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

> if I freehand copy an X-Men comic book that doesn't give me copyright to it.

But what if you freehand draw Wolverine with the goal of expressing your political speech?

You still have a case, but it sure isn't cut and dried.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Links to the firing their guns part?

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a textbook strawman argument. Perfect example, thank you.

This is one of the fantastic reasons why Trump won.

You sit there and listen to a rational, sane, effective, and intellectually honest argument about why it is important to enforce border laws... And your only response is to scream like an autistic child about racism, despite no racist assertion having been made.

You abdicated the rebuttal, instead opting for an idiotic emotional bumper sticker reaction.

Meanwhile, people who aren't fucking morons like you hear the original argument, see that you have no counter, and decide for border enforcement on merit.

Again... Thank you.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

They see a population who made a series of idiotic decisions (ex: Venezuela) and have the courage and constitution to not make those same mistakes, despite the morons amongst them (you) trying desperately to die as well.

Re: That still doesn't matter

[sexconker]

I too, am down with the clown.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Darinbob]

If they're not real Nazis, then we should sue them for copyright violations for using Nazi symbols.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

And from the people I've met, they aren't really concerned about people from Ireland overstaying their visas.

That describes me, yes. There are other differences between Irish overstaying and illegal Mexicans:

• the number of them. For the most part Irish follow the rules, so the existing penalties for overstaying work, in fact probably needlessly extreme to maintain bulk compliance with our policy.
• the number of them. "diversity." Why do we want so many Mexicans, just because we ended up with them? Why can we not implement diversity by policy, if it's something we believe in?
• the conditions in Mexico and the "race to the bottom". Flooding the US with Mexican workers could reduce our poorest to the working conditions of Mexico because we will compete with workers from desperate poverty.
    This is well underway. Irish will simply go home if abused in the workplace.
• reciprocal policies. I want immigration rights to Ireland, not Mexico. I would favour loosening immigration policies with EU in exchange for broader rights for Americans in EU.
• fairness. We can't welcome the whole world all at once; no first-world country does that. Waves of amnesty that reward scoffing at our laws are not the right place to make the sad and harsh decision of who gets to come here.

I don't know anything about you so I have no idea what you believe.

This is a good point. There's a procedure for deciding political things in this country sanely without resorting to civil war, riots, or people talking past each other. We have a process for agreeing on a policy and implementing it.

The leftist position is to undermine immigration policy entirely by shreiking "crazy racist" at anyone who won't agree it's immoral simply to have an immigration policy. Back off. First agree it does not make you a racist to have a policy and enforce it. Then we'll discuss forming a policy that represents our cultural ideals.

The problem is, if you actually did that, discussion would end. The policy would quickly settle on welcoming people regardless of race, in limited numbers, and then you would discover that we already have more than enough Mexicans, in fact too many, and need fewer and different kinds of people to meet our non-racist cultural ideals. You want the policy to be, "we only want people who can walk here," and are smarming around trying to get that by shaming people.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, all those Jewish, black and gay Trump supporters (and yes, there's far, far more than you think) are all SEKRIT NAZIS.

The Kekistan flag is mocking Reich symbology for one reason and one reason alone: To prove the left is made up of drooling retards.

You bein' trolled, and you're too busy drooling over yourself to realize it.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

The Kekistan flag is mocking Reich symbology for one reason and one reason alone: To prove the left is made up of drooling retards.

You know mein kampf did the same thing, claimed it was just mocking. Right up until Hitler seized power and started gassing jews his followers insisted it was just mocking to prove the jews were just drooling retards.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

5) many sported the US flag, does that mean the US flag is a symbol of nazis?

Nope, just the British East India Company

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

When the fuck did 4chan/ED/whatever become synonymous with internet culture?

If you don't remember Kibo, GTFO.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

That you see being treated as a human being as "special privileges" is really illustrative of your worldview.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Mashiki]

You're not even hitting the coherent part of reality today, I'm not sure if you understand the difference between satire and mockery. But I guess that's understandable if you think there's nazi's hiding behind every lamp post. Which funny enough reminds me of something else.

So what's your deal? You still believe that gamergate is about harassment, even though your face has been rubbed in the FBI's own investigation documents which said there is no harassment from them but 3rd party actors. But you still cling to that narrative. And FYI: I said there was highly circumstantial proof of it, never mind that Iceland's government just collapsed because of something just like that happening. Or did you miss that?

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Mashiki]

Don't see any pictures from charlottesville there, portland, berkeley, berkeley, seattle, more seattle, knoxville.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Mashiki]

That you see being treated as a human being as "special privileges" is really illustrative of your worldview.

Treated as human = treating everyone equally.

Giving special privileges because sex/race/gender = not treating everyone equally.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Mashiki]

When the fuck did 4chan/ED/whatever become synonymous with internet culture?

When we got old, and there's an entire generation of kids that have grown up on it.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

You know mein kampf did the same thing, claimed it was just mocking.

You know, it didn't. It's nice to lie about this stuff to make your little echo chamber feel good about itself, but his followers weren't joking. Hitler wasn't joking either, he laid it out as a manifesto of what had to be done in his eyes.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Anonymous Coward]

The right really needs to learn a new tactic of persuasion than being transparently racist and then pretending they're not. It doesn't even work on most right wingers anymore, which is why their political movement is currently in shambles.

Re:That still doesn't matter

[The Insane One]

Oh, Charles didn't actually say that, did he? I knew him way back when we were coding for the Atari ST. I always thought he was a level-headed fellow. Did he have a stroke or something?

Re:That still doesn't matter

[Mashiki]

Most people think it's two things. He had some kinda breakdown right around the time that pamela geller said she'd never have anything to do with him. And he was threatened by an islamic organization, since the tone of his site suddenly changed. That was also right around the time he started purging his site of anyone who didn't fall in line with the new orthodoxy, think that ended up being 40k-50k users.

Not sure if the site that tracked his insanity is still around or not, but the entire descent into madness was hilarious.

Won't someone PLEASE think of the Kekistanis?

[elrous0]

Haven't those poor people been through enough already without you taking their memes away too?!?

Re:Won't someone PLEASE think of the Kekistanis?

[Nicolas Cage]

Kek have mercy!

Re:Won't someone PLEASE think of the Kekistanis?

[Anonymous Coward]

Normies have no mercy have no mercy

Re:Won't someone PLEASE think of the Kekistanis?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kek be praised.. I thought that kek was kind of irrelevant now that 4chan.... err Russians defeated Hillary.

Re:Won't someone PLEASE think of the Kekistanis?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't like to think about keksuckers unless I'm getting paid.

That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[rsilvergun]

when they tried it with "American McGee's Strawberry Shortcake" and it won't work here. The thing is you can Parody Pepe the Frog all day long if you want. But that's not what you're doing. You're parodying the Anti-Fa movement _using_ Pepe.

Parody is only fair use when the thing you're using is what you're making fun of. Otherwise you're just borrowing other folks work/art/ideas because you couldn't get your point across with your own. Either try harder or come to terms with the thought that your ideas don't have a strong enough foundation to stand on their own.

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[cfalcon]

> when they tried it with "American McGee's Strawberry Shortcake" and it won't work here

IIRC Penny Arcade didn't actually go to court in any fashion.

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[AvitarX]

It's still the general law from a 1997 case.

I disagree with the part about GPs post of trying harder blah blah, and think the law is wrong, but it is the law.

I personally think using shared culture to convey ideas quicker is good and efficient, and should be permitted, but it's not.

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[AmiMoJo]

Pepe is just one more symbol that the alt-right has adopted in an attempt to gaslight "normies", i.e. people not part of the movement.

They adopt symbols like the OK hand emoji, brackets around the names of Jews, coded language and other innocuous looking things that have some plausible deniability. When people call it out they claim that it's all innocent and they are seeing conspiracies where there are none, while being able to signal to other members of alt-right.

Pepe in particular was also adopted by 4chan and especially it's /pol and /r9k boards. The latter is a board for "incels", guys who are bitter that they can't get laid. Essentially Pepe was seen as something of an ugly loser, who manages to win and get his revenge on society by screwing with people and getting far right politicians elected. Basically a proxy for many 4chan users.

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not just alt-right and neo-nazis.

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play.

They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

- Jean-Paul Sartre, Anit-Semite and Jew

The nazis arguments never held up to scrutiny and they were always spineless weaklings that couldn't stand up for their opinions.
Modern nazis aren't different from the old ones and don't believe for a second that they are going to shy away from the atrocities that old nazis committed.
Treat them as if they were their old counterparts because there aren't really any difference.

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[drinkypoo]

Essentially Pepe was seen as something of an ugly loser, who manages to win and get his revenge on society by screwing with people and getting far right politicians elected. Basically a proxy for many 4chan users.

He's similar in that he's an ugly loser, but oh so different in that he has made something of himself.

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[Anonymous Coward]

Essentially Pepe was seen as something of an ugly loser, who manages to win and get his revenge on society by screwing with people and getting far right politicians elected

I think you're reading far too deep into the meme. Pepe started out as a reaction image that people would use to emphasize when they were talking about (usually) unconventional things that they enjoyed. The most popular image was this one. It does relate to the scene from the comic Boy's Club, but it's not necessary to know the comic to get the image.

People appropriated and created other images of Pepe to overall refer to feelings of smugness and superiority. It was (and is) often contrasted with the Feels Guy, who is associated with sadness, helplessness, and disappointment.

Basically, /pol/ (and much of 4chan) have appropriated Pepe for whenever something happens in the news that's favorable to them. His image gets exaggerated further to emphasize the news and to contextualize it under an ideology. It doesn't have anything to do with him being an "ugly loser" (I'm not sure if you're using this as an attack against 4chan users or if you were mislead). Pepe could have been easily adopted as a meme of the far left and it would have nothing to do with how the movement sees themselves as people

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[Anonymous Coward]

How about I visit your (in the general sense of your) FaceBook page and copy a picture of one of your kids and start using it for racist and Nazi memes.

Furie probably feels like that about Pepe.

Fuck Nazi's, fuck racists, and fuck the unemployed mom's basement dwelling Trumpaloopa's who are using Pepe in their childish and cowardly little memes.

Any annoyance Furie is providing these freaks is reward enough.

Re:That didn't work for Penny Arcade

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a meme, you dip.

Re: As a content creator

[Anonymous Coward]

Beats me. I'm currently taking a content marketing course. No coding required.

Kekistan

[MrKaos]

Lets just hope the Kekistani that have come here to anonymously maintain their cultural practice of shitposting aren't too traumatized by the ordeal.

Re:Kekistan

[Anonymous Coward]

Since it's doubtful takedown notices will do much to end an internet meme, and the DMCA is being tortured to produce an outcome favorable to the strident authoritarians on the political left possibly violating fair use and protest speech, I'd say the only people traumatized are those who are trying to suppress it.

Re:Kekistan

[Anonymous Coward]

They're such fucking snowflakes, it's hilarious! Whaaaa! The mean liberal media is making me out to be a bad person just because I don't condemn neo-nazis and think that the government is trying eliminate my cultural identity as a bigot-American

Re:Kekistan

[Boronx]

Hmmmm...maybe we should raise the voting age.

Re:Kekistan

[MrKaos]

Hmmmm...maybe we should raise the voting age.

Maybe we should cap it. Then open it to children as young as, say speaking age loaded up with all the responsibility for running society that you can't escape until about 40, maybe 50 years old at which time you are subjected to all of the consequences of your own decisions for the rest of your life.

It sounds crazy however that's how the free Kekistanis promote the values in their society. What most don't realize is because frogs can change their sex, not using an individual's gender pro-noun is considered to be hate-speech in Kekistan.

Re:Kekistan

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmmm...maybe we should raise the voting age.

Maybe we should cap it. Then open it to children as young as, say speaking age loaded up with all the responsibility for running society that you can't escape until about 40, maybe 50 years old at which time you are subjected to all of the consequences of your own decisions for the rest of your life.

It sounds crazy however that's how the free Kekistanis promote the values in their society. What most don't realize is because frogs can change their sex, not using an individual's gender pro-noun is considered to be hate-speech in Kekistan.

Shut up you stupid fucking Nazi.

Re:Kekistan

[penandpaper]

I hope you look deep in your heart and find Kek to help you with your troubled life.

Kek be with you.

Re:Kekistan

[Anonymous Coward]

They're such fucking snowflakes, it's hilarious! Whaaaa! The mean liberal media is making me out to be a bad person just because I don't condemn neo-nazis and think that the government is trying eliminate my cultural identity as a bigot-American

You're just a nazi sympathizer.

Re:Kekistan

[MrKaos]

Shut up you stupid fucking Nazi.

Just like Aloha this is how the Keks say hello, goodbye and, I love you. You must be a Kek telling me that you love me too. It was baffling, at first, I mean, can you imagine, what does any sane person say if someone calls them a Nazi - gee I must be cause you say so? I love you too AC, I love that you have the free speech to demand that I don't have free speech, it's the Kek way.

The Keks would say Shut up you stupid fucking Nazi and I didn't get it until a female (I think female) Kek tried to kiss me while saying Shut up you stupid fucking Nazi, then I got it, "s/he" was hot for me.

Then it all made sense. At night I would hear safety, trump, Safety, Trump, SAFETY, TRUMP, SAFETY,TRUMP,SAFETY,OMG,TRUMP,TRUMPSAFETY and at first put it down to the moronic machinations of SJW and alt-right arguing in naivety about their obsolete political constructs that make no sense and neither of them could see that they were both being extremists dragging all of us into fascism, but then I realized they were just fucking each other and they can't wait to fuck the rest of us.

goddamn gommies

[Anonymous Coward]

Give me back my memes!!!!!! REEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeee

Re:Do77

[ILoveFatCashews]

Do you want some spam-flavored macadamia nuts with your whine?

Re: As a content creator

[Anonymous Coward]

Read up on promissory estoppel.

Re: Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[that this is not und]

Correct. So people who have made direct copies can be told to desist. However, likenesses that are not copies are more like trademarks.

This could be a good thing, if it further strains the tenuous legal precedent that keeps 'the mouse' in business.

That said, the image of pepe is like an infowars.com link. My reflex when I've been tricked into loading a page on alex's festerpit is to click it closed without further review. Pepe images or avatars on comment forums are useful the same way as 'ignore this' markers.

Re:Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[Anonymous Coward]

If he's made public statements in the past that abandon his claim to Pepe, and these alt-right sites have relied on that promise, and he's now trying to go back on those statements? It totally -is- how the law works.

Re: As a content creator

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure. Slashdot is my fishbowl for this experiment. We will find out in the months ahead.

That ain't gonna work

[Anonymous Coward]

Fair use explicitly covers derivative works, such as the imperial fuckton of variations on "feelsgoodman". Most of them aren't directly derived anyway, but rather based on a "spurdo spärde" style redraw.

But yeah, guess the tankie left is resorting to DMCA abuse now.

Re:Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[Anonymous Coward]

You are not required to defend copyright, that is a trademark.

prior art

[Anonymous Coward]

He's going to lose in court, considering pepe the frog first showed up in 1986

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnDzttF9dig

So I googled the original art

[rsilvergun]

Looks spot on to me. Matt Furie's an amateur, so he doesn't always draw his characters perfectly, but the overall design of the character is surprisingly easy to recognize. Which is probably why the alt-right jumped on him. Making an easy to recognize character that's not also generic is surprisingly hard.

Re:So I googled the original art

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's BS - the great majority of the pepe cartoons I've seen were ANTI-alt-right. definitely pro-Clinton/sanders/dnc/etc.

Re:So I googled the original art

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess this shows you're living in a bit of a bubble

I'd rather see shorter copyright

[rsilvergun]

I think a 20, maybe 30 year tops copyright would solve the problem while letting artists control their creation. In the absense of our current copyright law I could easily see, for example, a big video game company like EA or Activision co-opting Gabe & Tycho's characters and essentially stealing them without credit. That said, I don't think their great-great-great grandchildren (or the folks who bought the rights along the way) should have perpetual rights to their vast back catalog of John Romero's Daikatana and Sega 32x jokes.

Re:I'd rather see shorter copyright

[AvitarX]

I agree with that too.

I simply think that if something has been woven into the cultural fabric, using it in obvious satire should be allowed.

Like, it should be completely legal to use a character, even a recent one, to criticize (or praise) a politician by invoking the attributes of said character. Currently that's copyright violation.

Like comparing a caricature of a politician as Tony Soprano should be unambiguously fair use (IMO), but because the commentary is not on the original subject, it is not (the fact that it's political may tip it into fair use though).

A shorter term would allow recycling of good IP, which is a wholly different argument I have many opinions on too...

I just don't think it's cheap to take a something woven into the cultural fabric (even if recently) to comment on something else, especially if it's for commentary and not profit.

Re:I'd rather see shorter copyright

[rtb61]

Nah, user pays. You don't pay to have you work validated as having social worth or making that claim for copyright protection, than you don't get it. There is simply too much content out there to bother protecting at enormous tax payer expense, especially when the content industry is renowned for cheating on taxes to the nth degree. Don't pay for copyright and prove worth, than you don't get it.

Keep pushing, please.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does the far right exist in its present form? Please exert more pressure on everyone right of center, it's great for recruitment.

Ban cartoon frogs, I am sure it will go well for you.

Good luck with that

[argStyopa]

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ov...

In fact, his pursuing rigorous legal claims over such a stupid use makes him prone to parody or satire, which opens up fair use even further.

Well played!

Re:Good luck with that

[ckatko]

That's a damn good point. Pepe is being used in various protests. (IANAL but) I recall protest being the highest, most protected right of speech, like when that guy wrote a "Fuck you to the TSA" on his chest for when he got body scanned even though the airport was scared of "muh security".

If we really think you can take down Pepe, then shouldn't everyone burning a Trump face be sued into oblivion? And for another comparison, shouldn't every political cartoon be subject to banning? What's the difference between a political cartoon featuring a caricature to make a point, and a meme... featuring a caricature to make a point? I'm honestly out of ways to cut and slice it any further... political cartoons are 100% legal.

The "only" difference I can think of--if pressed--is someone might say some pepe memes are directly copy-and-pasting his original creation (and then added their derivative work). But what about all "pepe" memes that were written by hand by a new creator?

This guy is turning the Streisand effect up to 11. And the other posts about "who is funding it?" are really good questions to ask. Because this guy is either getting paid by someone, or, his fellow liberals are making his life a living hell and he's trying to "atone" for it to get them off his back. Because who gives a freakin' shit about a meme being used by other people? I mean, how many memes (containing OTHER'S copyrighted content) has this guy copied-and-pasted throughout his lifetime?

Re:Good luck with that

[Anonymous Coward]

You have far too much faith in the alt-reich's intelligence. If they spent any time making parodies/satire regarding this, they wouldn't have time to burn crosses and call people racial slurs. What'll happen is they'll tuck their tail between their legs and find something else to abuse.

Re:Good luck with that

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't believe people modded you insightful, this is the dumbest thing I have read on /. today.. and that says alot.

Fair use doesn't apply unless Pepe is somehow the subject of the satire, or commentary.

Re:Good luck with that

[quantaman]

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ov...

In fact, his pursuing rigorous legal claims over such a stupid use makes him prone to parody or satire, which opens up fair use even further.

Well played!

From your link:
In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. In other words, fair use is a defense against a claim of copyright infringement. If your use qualifies as a fair use, then it would not be considered an infringement.

Alt-right Pepe memes do not "comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work". They use his work to "comment upon, criticize, or parody" unrelated targets.

I can make a cartoon that parodies The Simpsons, Family Guy has an element of that.

But I can't make a cartoon parodying environmentalists staring Homer Simpson. Fox would sue me out of existence.

Re:Good luck with that

[gsslay]

I suggest you go look up the terms "parody" and "satire". You clearly don't understand what they mean.

Hint: they don't mean "being funny, with someone else's copyrighted material" or "criticising something unrelated, with someone else's copyrighted material"

Re:Good luck with that

[Anonymous Coward]

the reason pepe got popular outside 4chan was because someone shouted PEPE at one of her rallies
thats when the whole muh pepe nazi thing started

pepe would be nothing without 4chan and this twat should just find solace in that he was part of a zeitgeit
cant copyright that shit

Re:Good luck with that

[argStyopa]

Except you entirely missed my point. Now they CAN claim it's parodying someone chasing a stupid copyright claim.

Re:Good luck with that

[penandpaper]

Which is interesting because as technology and culture evolved it is obvious the law has not kept up. Are memes subject to fair use? By their nature they are limited and it can be argued that they are transformative. i.e. 'feelsbadman' is more about the sadness in the picture than Pepe. It just so happened that Pepe was chosen for that emotion for that meme.

If I post a "feelsbadman" pepe on a post explaining that I was dumped by my girlfriend, is that fair use? That is the real question at hand, do memes fall under fair use? I think the courts are slowly catching up to culture and technology with examples like the h3h3 copyright lawsuit in regard to reaction channels on youtube.

Re:Good luck with that

[Anonymous Coward]

Except you entirely missed my point. Now they CAN claim it's parodying someone chasing a stupid copyright claim.

Only in so far as can be established they are parodying his court case. 90% of the usage on T_D and Cernovich's website would not be illegible for this protection. That usage as well as the usage before the court case are still eligible for a minimum of $750 per copy (ie each time someone accessed Cernovich's website thats $750 per pepe). Guys about to lose everything and hes banking on ruling the berne convention invalid lol.

Re:Good luck with that

[Anonymous Coward]

The law doesn't need to "catch up". People are using someone else's creative work, without his permission, for their personal benefit, in this case to grind their favorite axes. It's no different than if I were to put together a video advertising my car dealership and using "I Can't Drive 55" as the soundtrack without paying for it.

You can parody him all you want

[rsilvergun]

you can even use Pepe to do it. What you _can't_ do is borrow a completely unrelated piece of art to do it. e.g. you couldn't do a comic of Mickey mouse talking about how much you hate the Pepe take down notices. Disney can and will sue you and win. That's because Mickey Mouse has nothing to do with the parody, and you would have used it just to get attention for your parody.

Re:You can parody him all you want

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, in that particular case probably be OK since Mickey has become the poster child for copyright abuse. I can easily see a cartoon as you describe being a parody of Mickey, Disney and the way that the length of copyrights seems to always get extended any time Mickey gets close to becoming public domain.

Re:You can parody him all you want

[Anonymous Coward]

So I can use Pepe to parody the Pepe takedown notices?

Re:You can parody him all you want

[Anonymous Coward]

What you _can't_ do is borrow a completely unrelated piece of art to do it.

Sure you can. Now, this will run afoul of the law in certain countries, but the act itself is trivial. Eventually we are going to have to admit that copyright is an anachronism that is unfit for purpose. These days the productive lifetime of a creative work is measured in months. A copyright of decades (or centuries) is nonsense. I support people ignoring such stupidity, right along with those who ignore(d) sodomy or prohibition laws.

Re: Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[Anonymous Coward]

My reflex when I've been tricked into loading a page on alex's festerpit is to click it closed without further review.

ad hominem is ad hominem, brah.

Cernovich is a Lawyer

[DatbeDank]

Probably not a good idea to send a legal threat to someone who is a trained and bar'd attorney. Furie is going to quickly discover the mistake he made.

Re:Cernovich is a Lawyer

[Anonymous Coward]

Orly Taitz is a licensed attorney too and she tried to have Obama's victory in the 2008 election ruled invalid because she believes he isn't a natural born US citizen. Mehmet Oz tries to sell people on reiki therapy and he is a professor of medicine at Columbia University. There are lots of quack lawyers and doctors running around.

Re:Cernovich is a Lawyer

[Ksevio]

What mistake did he make? Sounds like he's got a solid legal case

Re:Cernovich is a Lawyer

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably not a good idea to send a legal threat to someone who is a trained and bar'd attorney

Read Cernovich's response. He's not a particularly good lawyer. He seems to think the Berne Convention was never joined by the US and that Furie uploading it to 4chan put it in the public domain. He's way out of his league when it comes to IP.

Furie is going to quickly discover the mistake he made.

Furie has some of the best IP lawyers in the country working pro bono for him. He's going to slaughter Cernovich if they go to court and Cernovich has assets he can go after. Cernovich will settle out of court.

Re:Cernovich is a Lawyer

[Anonymous Coward]

He's a shitty lawyer, and he should know to cease and desist immediately.

Re: Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[Anonymous Coward]

discrimination is another word for negative assessment. discrimination itself is not the problem. This does not mean "the left"-type philosophies are incorrect just cos y'all can only reduce greedily.

It does take funding to get this sort of firm

[DeplorableCodeMonkey]

Mike Cernovich is one of the parties being sued, and he pointed out that it's a rather big law firm that charges an arm and a leg that is suing him.

Now let's be serious. Do you honestly think a partner at such a firm wouldn't automatically fire someone for pursuing cases like this without a source of funding? This is damn near SLAPP territory (and probably will be in the case of Cernovich, who is based in CA). There's money behind this because big law firms don't just pursue for altruistic reasons Daily Stormer readers who shitpost and post dank memes.

Re:It does take funding to get this sort of firm

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF are you talking about? This is one of the most non-SLAPP cases ever. I'm tempted to judge you by your handle, but instead I'll judge you by your inane drivel.

Re:It does take funding to get this sort of firm

[Pseudonym]

IANAL etc etc.

I suspect it would be tough to sustain a SLAPP challenge in this case. Unless an authorised use of Pepe is to parody or comment on Pepe, Boy's Club, Matt Furie, or something else related, the parody defence is not available. Using Pepe to comment on something else is not, legally speaking, "parody". There may be some other fair use defence available, but not that one.

The stupid part is that Cernovich admits this in the piece: "What’s weird is that I don’t even care about Pepe and hardly ever talked about him."

Having said that, a journalist reporting on a Pepe meme is probably okay if they reproduce it as part of the reporting.

cernovich isn't alt right

[Anonymous Coward]

You can repeat it over and over and continue to go with the lie, but Mike Cernovich is not and never has been alt right. If you are going to keep repeating it then we know you are either a liar or an idiot that falls for MSM bullshit since they're the ones who keep repeating it. Guy's wife is even non-white.

Re:cernovich isn't alt right

[Boronx]

Is his Wikipedia page accurate? If so, then he might not be considered alt-right, but only because he's too crazy to hold coherent views.

Dude made his money in a divorce settlement with his successful ex-wife.

BTW, if you hang around the world long enough, you'll meet plenty of racists who date or even marry white women. Love truly is blind.

Heck, I once worked with a total red neck. Pick up truck with gun rack, the works. He was also the most racist piece of shit I ever met outside the deep South. His girlfriend was Mexican. Beautiful. Black hair, dusky brown skin, almond eyes, accent. This guy tried to convince me she was really a white chick! He did this unprompted, by the way. I never said anything about it.

Re:cernovich isn't alt right

[Anonymous Coward]

You can repeat it over and over and continue to go with the lie, but Mike Cernovich is not and never has been alt right.

He calls himself "new right." Here's a quote* from him: "diversity is code for white genocide." He also promotes the pizzagate nonsense among with other tin-hat conspiracies. Call it new right, alt right, whatever you want, I call it hate bullshit.

*https://medium.com/@Cernovich/here-is-the-full-60-minutes-interview-transcript-with-mike-cernovich-a0cb58a80ba0

Re:cernovich isn't alt right

[Anonymous Coward]

You can repeat it over and over and continue to go with the lie, but Mike Cernovich is not and never has been alt right.

He is an alt-right idol, that much is accurate to state.

Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot is the only place where I've ever heard of this character.

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hillary and CNN had it on their showcase quite a bit during the campaign. Where were you? Doing something much more productive I assume. Good work. Can you believe she got defeated by a frog picture and people posting frogs that got mistaken for Russians?

Re:Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[ichthus]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the creator voluntarily relinquished control of Pepe to the Internet at large. What of that?

Exaggerations

[Anonymous Coward]

Not far right.

A lie makes it half way around the world while the truth is still getting it's shoes on.

I predict..

[Anonymous Coward]

they ignore him and use of pepe continues unabated.

He would lose in court

[Anonymous Coward]

Use of pepe by the alt right is parody protected by the first amendment

Re:He would lose in court

[gsslay]

You are clueless about parody and the first amendment.

Re: As a content creator

[Anonymous Coward]

Promissory estoppel requires that the person making the promise could or should have reasonably forseen the action based on the promise. Just because you have a liberal fanfic policy doesn't mean that you have promised that all possible uses (e.g. politics that you find abhorrent) are allowed.

I'm sure estoppel will be asserted as a defense (it's on much stronger ground than any fair use defense) but it will likely only have the effect of limiting punitive damages.

Matt Furie eat a furry dick

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a fight you can't afford. This is the Battle of the Bulge for whatever jackass you represent. You nuts.

Fair Use

[Anonymous Coward]

He can do nothing about fair use

Re:Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right, but no need to be a dick about it. Not everyone knows everything.

Re:Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[91degrees]

Winning a lawsuit is time consuming though, and potentially expensive (especially if you lose).

Most people who post these memes don't have enough of a vested interest to fight this.

fun stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone being so furious about Pepe is clearly epic win for 4chan. Also good luck with that Streisand effect, I'm pretty sure now we'll see Pepe everywhere.

Bleed them dry

[Millennium]

There is little hope of stopping the meme, unfortunately. Streisand effect and all that. But bankrupting white supremacist leaders and profiteers via legal fees and damages would still do a lot of good in its own right, so I support this anyway.

I hope the proceeds get donated to Antifa's legal defense fund. The thought of using appropriated Nazi funds to help Nazi-punchers get off in court makes me all tingly inside.

Re:Bleed them dry

[ckatko]

Wow. If you only understood how many fucked up things you said in a single post. Advoca

This site really is dead.

Re:Bleed them dry

[Archangel Michael]

There is no leadership in the "alt-right" anymore than there is leadership in the ANTIFA movement. On purpose. They are mirror images of each other, both being Fascist in nature.

And by Fascist in nature, I mean in the "We don't like you, we are going to beat you up and shut you down" nature.The only difference is, there are more people who support the ANTIFA crybabies (those who need their "service animal" to comfort themselves when they get arrested for rioting).

As for Pepe the Frog, and the Alt-Right, thanks to the ANTIFA movement, I know way more than I wish I did. Kind of a corollary to the Streisand Effect.

Re: Bleed them dry

[Millennium]

Ooh, hit a nerve, did I? Couldn't even get all the words out? Self-defense against genocidal maniacs get you scared for some reason?

Re: Bleed them dry

[Anonymous Coward]

PROTIP: Self-defense is when your gang of college-age LARPers get shot dead after trying to jump the wrong person. I'm just waiting to see which comes first: them becoming irrelevant, or them becoming reviled.

Re:Bleed them dry

[Anonymous Coward]

You just said the most authoritarian movement in US history has no leadership :P

Here's a primer to find the leadership of the alt-right.

If they get interviewed or take photo ops, they are leadership.
If they parade around with a cadre of 8-13 year old boys, they are leadership.
If other alt right leaders accuse them of repeatedly raping those 8-13 year old boys, they are leadership.
When those accused alt right leaders unintentionally admit to the accusation by calling it "grooming", they are leadership.

There's no accounting for taste

[sabbede]

But you can't silence someone because you think their humor is in poor taste.

That said, I can understand why the creator is upset. Bill Watterson was pretty pissed off about "peeing Calvin", but I don't know offhand how his lawsuits turned out. In his case, people were selling counterfeit merchandise, so there's a financial aspect not present with Pepe.

hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Matt Furie sounds less like a name and more like a build-a-bear specification.

Alt left

[Anonymous Coward]

They can keep their racist Pepe lol

Pepe for pres, but which Pepe?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Although it hasn't been to the Supreme Court yet, some lesser courts have forbidden the use of copyright law to forbid use by a disfavored faction. The reasoning is that copyright is in the context of earning money for the holder, and stopping that does the opposite.

Now theze cases were music being played at potical events, and music has ways to pay for its use in the matter of course, independent of who uses it. There is no such thing for Pepe here. Also, use by right wing could devalue the value, but on the gripping hand, if he isn't selling right to use it, no money is lost.

But copyright is not a full property right, just one in the context of creating a trur monopoly to earn the owner money.

Already granted license

[Anonymous Coward]

"I believe in supporting peopleâ(TM)s decisions to profit off of Pepe in order to provide them with the most positive business experience possible. I strive to be an advocate for Pepe in both love and enterprise and hope to help business people to have an empowering and joyful experience while making an ocean of profits as limitless as the universe."

Having stated this, it's going to be hard to get damages of any kind. I suppose he might argue its revocable and he is revoking it, but "limitless" might be a problem there. A plain reading of the interview suggests he intended the symbol itself to enter the public domain.

Even if he can succeed in any of this, he'll never beat the trolls. Expect a new Great Meme War over this.

Welcome...

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to the revolution, comrade! We now own the means of meme production. Pepe is owned by the collective, not by the individual. The green frog meme has grown far beyond your silly "feels good man" origination anyway.

fact

[soulleech]

There is no difference in satire & parody. And anyone can use homemade fair lasting clips cut from movies if you block out or switch out the sound/text or other fair use. for example make a review or just bash the movie to your hearts content. jesus are slashdot full of retarded bots?

Baw, baw, baw

[Millennium]

Mommy! Mommy! The people I'm bullying are hitting back and it's not FAIIIIIIIIIIR! MAKE THEM STOOOOOOOOOP!!!!!!!1!

You're not getting anything you haven't brought on yourselves.

A problem created by political nonsense

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the tale of how some green frog turned into a political symbol: Pepe the Frog was a widespread meme used by many different people for many different things, mainly for silly reaction faces. Some idiot in the Hillary Clinton's campaign decided it was a white supremacist symbol because a few white supremacists used it too. The end result: due to their silly persecution of this meme it actually turned into what they thought it was. A self-fulfilling prophecy. It is funny when you think about it. The right move would be to ignore the idiotic claims of politicians, but for some reason there are people who actually give any resemblance of value to what politicians say. Remember: a politician is always lying until proven right.

Can't believe what's become of /.

[t0qer]

I'm surprised fair use is even being argued here. 20 years ago we wouldn't have argued over fair use. There's far right, far left, and then there was Slashdot, YRO informing the greater /. public at large about how laws were being created to change the legality of things we loved the most, hacking, figuring out how stuff worked.

When Bill Clinton brought forth the DMCA ALL of us banded together for the fight. We picked it apart, tried telling all of our family and friends (whom most of the time just stared back at us slackjawed with expressionless faces) go contact your senator! Write a letter! We lost that one, but those early days of slash are what formed my opinions for a long time to come. Open source wasn't just a license, it was a license for freedom of expression and derivative works.

Unfortunately I see knucklheads on this site now that have no clue about what this site is anymore. Maybe it's not the same, no more cowboyneal, cmdrtaco. Hell, I even miss Michael and his shitty submissions. Hey, we're still here though. A lot of people here are from long ago, and we mustn't forget that as shitty as the alt-right racists are, this is a derivative work. Yes, we hate how it's being used, but it's a derivative work none the less and that freedom MUST be defended.

To those claiming it isn't fair use, how was this fair use? Because it is derivative. I can't think of anything more vile than seeing my creations entwined in a orgy of bestial romance, but even vile works deserve to be protected under the 4 rules of copyright exception. Pepe falls under derivative, plain and simple.

Re:Plenty of public record to prove in court that

[Anonymous Coward]

the creator voluntarily relinquished control of Pepe to the Internet at large.

You really are blinded by your alt-right loyalty, aren't you? If you were actually thinking rationally you would realize that story says nothing of the kind. Maybe you should questions your political beliefs. They are preventing you from thinking.