CAIR is ridiculous

[Dogma's Demise]

:lol:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/120580618/Hamas-CAIR-Cease-and-Desist-Letter-to-AFDI

Yes, legitimately parodying the "MyJihad" ad campaign is now trademark infringement.

Fuck CAIR.

 

[bluejatheist]

Lol what derps, if you're going to run a counter campaign you'd do well to not violate the law with such blatant plagiarizing of advertisement design and misleading URLs.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Nope, this is criticism / parody, it's protected. This threat of lawsuit is baseless, it's not going to stand up in court.


Also, the claim that URL myjihad.us is misleading or that the counter-campaign creates confusion is bullshit. Anyone should be able to tell it's parody and criticism of CAIR's "MyJihad" campaign. And if you go to "myjihad.us" it's explained anyway and the ad itself says who it's from on the bottom. It's not trying to impersonate either.

Most importantly, there's really no other way to effectively parody this without copying the style of the ads as well as the "MyJihad" or "#MyJihad" tags. Something less than that just wouldn't do justice.

 

[bluejatheist]

Incorrect. Calling your work a parody or criticism does not make it untouchable by legal action. What is happening here is legal action is being taken by one party making a claim that a second party is violating intellectual property rights by so directly copying elements of the design of advertisements and using a copyrighted domain name. Should it go to court a third party will evaluate the case and make a decision.

Given the (coming from someone with some experience with digital design) glaringly copied nature of the parody(propaganda) advertisements, the slanderous nature of them(associating a group of muslims with terrorists and mass murder) and the domain names(It is normal precedent for a group with a registered trademark or name to be rewarded rights to identical domain names) the case for CAIR is strong. Unlike you the judge probably won't pick a side based solely on which side is Muslim. You're the single best justification for groups like CAIR, judging from my viewing of their site, which is concerned with civil rights protection and education about Islam and diversity.(Sorry, no beheading videos and Al Qaeda recruitment links) Versus the AFDI site which notably has american flags plastered all over with firearms in the background.

Also,

ji,·had
/jiˈhäd/
Noun
(among Muslims) A war or struggle against unbelievers.
The spiritual struggle within oneself against sin.

That myjihad campaign was intended to make the second definition more well known. Something a left leaning atheist in the United States can appreciate since "liberal" and "atheist" are also in need of being depicted for what they are, and not what Neocons propagandize them to be.

Spent enough time on you, not bothering with your edits, type faster next time.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Incorrect. Calling your work a parody or criticism does not make it untouchable by legal action.

You're right, you can't simply call it parody/criticism. In this case however it is parody and criticism. (It should be noted that whether or not this criticism is valid is irrelevant as far as fair use goes.)

Read: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm#10

Should it go to court a third party will evaluate the case and make a decision.

They certainly have a right to waste their time and money with a frivolous lawsuit, they're just going to FAIL and fail epically. The counter-campaign is protected under "fair use".

Given the (coming from someone with some experience with digital design) glaringly copied nature of the parody(propaganda) advertisements

Duh, parody, like taking a song you make and only changing the lyrics to make fun of you. It's common.

the slanderous nature of them(associating a group of muslims with terrorists and mass murder)

This is complete crap and secondly due to it being a parody allows for exaggeration anyway, otherwise a song like Feminem (which depicts Eminem as a promiscuous homosexual) would probably not be "fair use". Nowhere in the ad does it say CAIR endorses Osama Bin Laden or Al'Qaida, it even explicitly says "That's my jihad, what's yours?" The whole point is that it's stupid to try to sugarcoat what jihad really is.

Even if Bin Laden never existed, and sure he's not exactly following his religion either (due to the killing of non-combatants), but there's plenty of material in Islamic tradition that define jihad as warfare against unbelievers simply because they're unbelievers. It's stupid to bury your head in the sand and pretend that never happened. You can start by googling the Shafi'i manual of jurisprudence "Reliance of the Traveler". Jihad certainly includes spiritual struggle, but it also includes warfare against unbelievers, plus the Qur'an calls for that in chapter 9 verse 29, unbelievers must be subjugated as dhimmis or fought against if they refuse the inferior status. (Remember, you can't reform something you don't even believe needs reform.)

It should be pointed out, Erdogan is also featured in the parody. He's not a terrorist or mass murderer, just an Islamic supremacist in the closet who wishes his country Turkey was more Islamic.

and the domain names(It is normal precedent for a group with a registered trademark or name to be rewarded rights to identical domain names) the case for CAIR is strong

That may be the case, but even if they get the domain, the AFDI will just get another website with a different name and the campaign will continue. CAIR can't stop this and by the time the trial is finished it won't even matter anyway.

Unlike you the judge probably won't pick a side based solely on which side is Muslim.

I don't care if they're Muslim. CAIR can counter-parody AFDI/JihadWatch's own ads as far as I'm concerned.

You on the other hand seem to defend them because they're Muslim and because you don't like AFDI.

Something a left leaning atheist in the United States can appreciate since "liberal" and "atheist" are also in need of being depicted for what they are, and not what Neocons propagandize them to be.

I believe there are moderate Muslims who are genuinely trying to reform Islam (take Zuhdi Jasser for example) and combat both terrorist and stealth jihadists (the cultural jihadists) alike.

I don't believe CAIR is a sincerely moderate organization, just like I don't believe DawahFilms is sincerely moderate Muslim individual. They're just propagandists with questionable ties and agendas.

CAIR has been named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial (a Hamas funding case). Two of their founders have been reported to have made supremacist statements in the past (wishing America would become Islamic), they were also high-ranking members of IAP (another group with questionable ties, listed in the Explanatory Memorandum as a Muslim Brotherhood front-group, that's the same document that calls for Muslims to "destroy western civilization from within" in a "grand civilization jihad".) a NY chapter leader has recently twitted "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free", something Hamas also chants to mean the destruction of Israel, not simply the occupation lifted and a peaceful two-state solution implemented, you think that's a coincidence? I don't. Add the fact that they whitewish the barbarism of Sharia all the time and make frivolous lawsuits.

(And as for DawahFilms, he's the perfect example of how you gullible people mistake a fundamentalist for a moderate.)

 

[Laurens]

Dogmas Demise, if this was a lawsuit about say a fast food restaurant filing a claim against someone parodying their material, would you care?

Lets say the legality is exactly the same and even if the lawsuit is frivolous, you only care about this instance because its Muslims doing it.

People make lawsuits out of all sorts of things. Whether rightfully or wrongly. Chill out, seriously, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

[australopithecus]

I'm considering merging all your shite into one large pile of shite, that way you may address the points in the threads you've ran away from.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Dogmas Demise, if this was a lawsuit about say a fast food restaurant filing a claim against someone parodying their material, would you care?

Depends if it's brought to my attention obviously.

Grand Theft Auto for example parodies pretty much every popular franchise, they tend to take the design or text, modify it slightly in a humorous way. And yes I would care. It's fair use.

http://www.gtagaming.com/gtaiv/inc/information/parodies

EDIT: Oh yeah and it should be noted it wouldn't be the first time I defended someone's fair use. I used to argue back and forth with VyckRo whether or not TF's video criticizing WLC was fair use (he used a short clip from WLC's presentation and DyckRo and several others all cried copyright infringement). Of course now you're just going to say I'm biased against theists, so here's my final say in this:

CAIR can parody JihadWatch.
WBC can parody "We are the world". I think it's stupid, but whatever, it's fair use.

People make lawsuits out of all sorts of things.

When did I say or imply they don't?

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

I like how we'd all jump on one big bandwagon to see that Real Science with Bobby is not a parody, but when someo0ne else does the same thing DD gets all flip-floppity.

 

[bluejatheist]

I like how we'd all jump on one big bandwagon to see that Real Science with Bobby is not a parody, but when someo0ne else does the same thing DD gets all flip-floppity.

I'd thought about that as well, I didn't see DD defending Bob Enyart(now I don't see DD at all thanks to the blocker) and playing make believe lawyer with another country's intellectual property rights legislation to this own agenda.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

I like how we'd all jump on one big bandwagon to see that Real Science with Bobby is not a parody, but when someo0ne else does the same thing DD gets all flip-floppity.

I'd thought about that as well, I didn't see DD defending Bob Enyart(now I don't see DD at all thanks to the blocker) and playing make believe lawyer with another country's intellectual property rights legislation to this own agenda.

How about you stop playing make believe lawyer? Take your own fucking advice and I never claimed to be a lawyer. (I might not be a lawyer but I can tell when I see a clear case of 'fair use' because real lawyers have actually explained it before. Criticism/parody makes a very strong case.)

And I didn't defend Bob Enyart because I don't know what you're referring to. When I feel like taking an interest in this I'll let you know if I think it's fair use or not.

to this own agenda.

Yeah, that's rich, like I can't see your obvious pro-CAIR anti-JihadWatch agenda.

No surprise there since you're a "left leaning atheist".

I like how we'd all jump on one big bandwagon to see that Real Science with Bobby is not a parody, but when someo0ne else does the same thing DD gets all flip-floppity.

Irrelevant.

Is AFDI's "MyJihad" campaign a parody or CAIR's "MyJihad" campaign or not? Come on, I want to hear you say it: Yes, it is.

Or do you need to me bring you a dictionary?

 

[australopithecus]

Yeah, that's rich, like I can't see your obvious pro-CAIR anti-JihadWatch agenda.

No surprise there since you're a "left leaning atheist".

:facepalm: