Message from @Tel Locus

Discord ID: 757364440269193357


2020-09-20 22:09:10 UTC  

they can't violate the first amendment but the rub becomes an issue of licensing and memes

2020-09-20 22:09:32 UTC  

well fair use is fair use

2020-09-20 22:09:44 UTC  

fair use is public domain content

2020-09-20 22:09:46 UTC  

pretty much what will need to be argued and hard

2020-09-20 22:09:57 UTC  

and the original video wasn't public domain

2020-09-20 22:10:06 UTC  

was licensed by Junkin media

2020-09-20 22:10:31 UTC  

i find it ironic that the kids in the original media aren't in the protest against the meme

2020-09-20 22:10:42 UTC  

it's ppl claiming to be the parents

2020-09-20 22:11:26 UTC  

considering the source content media which the kids are in just so happen to be the same age the 'parents' in the complaint just so happen to be ...

2020-09-20 22:11:43 UTC  

it's their parents, either that or they lied on official court documents

2020-09-20 22:12:01 UTC  

in which case that's a big ol perjury violation

2020-09-20 22:12:06 UTC  

well the source video is at least 20-40yrs old

2020-09-20 22:12:28 UTC  

the court filing says that it's the parents of the children

2020-09-20 22:12:36 UTC  

and the parents look like they're the same age as the the kids would be now

2020-09-20 22:12:42 UTC  

if it's not the parents of the children then that's perjury

2020-09-20 22:13:17 UTC  

if they were foster parents..then it opens up a whole new ball of wax

2020-09-20 22:14:03 UTC  

like was the vid done by the parents consent but not by the foster parents consent

2020-09-20 22:14:16 UTC  

and why was the kids in foster care to begin with

2020-09-20 22:14:56 UTC  

the parents licensed the video through Junkin media which means it's viable to be licensed for advertisement

2020-09-20 22:15:03 UTC  

sorry, brain wanders alot when into several discussions at the same time

2020-09-20 22:15:53 UTC  

point is the parents of the children have to be the parents are filing a copyright/licensing issue against Trump and a memer and calling it a Civil rights issue.

2020-09-20 22:16:15 UTC  

if no profit is to be made nor the made of intent of the meme use of the ad source video, then it's not in violation of licensing imho

2020-09-20 22:16:51 UTC  

they're arguing because it's posted by the trump campaign it's an ad

2020-09-20 22:17:09 UTC  

well either way, it's bait and trap of fair use content...and how long was the license for the media ad co

2020-09-20 22:17:26 UTC  

was it for life, or just for the selected ads used

2020-09-20 22:18:53 UTC  

well the video supposedly is around a year old

2020-09-20 22:19:14 UTC  

most licensed content is limited use license ..either limited by the ad agency, by the source suppliers or by the time limit involved ...it's like comparing old content ads from 30-80yrs ago and declaring it an icon because somebody remembers it or repurposes it

2020-09-20 22:19:18 UTC  

yeah the news videos are showing sept 11 2019,

2020-09-20 22:19:34 UTC  

the vid is way older

2020-09-20 22:20:00 UTC  

look at the cars

2020-09-20 22:20:20 UTC  

vid is pre 9/11

2020-09-20 22:20:32 UTC  

date posted 09 SEP 2019

2020-09-20 22:20:38 UTC  

ok, it's a few yrs old

2020-09-20 22:20:42 UTC  

and that's also when it's licensed

2020-09-20 22:20:52 UTC  

but it's a copy of a pre 9/11 style concept

2020-09-20 22:21:33 UTC  

twix did a vid of that style, so did coke and pepsi

2020-09-20 22:21:46 UTC  

date the video was supposedly made is september 9th, september 10th it was licensed and september 11th news stories were made about it

2020-09-20 22:22:17 UTC  

ya...seems they just had to make news stories about it...doesn't it

2020-09-20 22:22:34 UTC  

i still say it's older..it just came back in favor

2020-09-20 22:22:54 UTC  

yeah I can't find any videos of these kids older than september 2019