Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Again, that is trademark. Copyright has no such requirement.
http://notanumber.net/
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.
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
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?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Haven't those poor people been through enough already without you taking their memes away too?!?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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.
I stole this Sig
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.