The New Wisconsin Logo “Live Like You Mean It” and Its Early Criticism: Much Ado About Nothing?

Newspapers, web sites, and blogs are all talking these days about the newly launched Wisconsin slogan (“Live Like You Mean It”) that will replace the slogan “Life’s So Good” in promoting Wisconsin as a tourism and business destination. In the words of Governor Doyle, “This is another tool we’ll use to keep loyal visitors coming back, communicate why a business should relocate or expand here, and let talented employees know why they should choose Wisconsin.” Even if it is certainly “catchy,” the new slogan has already attracted a fair amount of criticism, primarily because it is not so “new” as we may think.

Instead, as Ryan Foley from Associated Press reports, “motivational speakers, authors and even wine and spirit maker Bacardi have already used the phrase in marketing campaigns,” and an Internet search can easily shows several other uses of the same slogan with respect to different already existing products or services. As a result, the State could face a lawsuit for trademark infringement, should its use of the “new” logo provoke confusion among consumers with any of the preexisting products or services that already carry the same slogan to identify them.

Continue ReadingThe New Wisconsin Logo “Live Like You Mean It” and Its Early Criticism: Much Ado About Nothing?

The Obama “Hope” Poster Case — What’s a “Visual Reference”?

(This is the sixth in a series of posts on Fairey v. Associated Press. See below for other posts in the series.)

This is a (second) unplanned additional post in my series on the copyright and litigation issues raised by the Obama “Hope” poster case. One of the key fights in the case is going to be over what, exactly, the relationship between the two images above is. Is it the use of a photograph for a transformative purpose, or is it merely plagiarism for commercial benefit?

One hint at how Fairey’s lawyers are going to argue this question is in the complaint‘s use of the phrase “used as a visual reference.” (Compl. ¶¶ 18, 34.) In a previous post, I expressed puzzlement at that phrase, which appeared to me to be just a way of obfuscating the creation process behind the poster. The AP’s lawyers may have been puzzled too, because they did not refer to the term at all in their lengthy counterclaims; instead, they simply referred to Fairey’s “copying.” (Answer ¶ 129.) But I’ve since come across an indication that “reference” may be a technical term in the art world, one that appears to mean the target of an intended visual allusion.

Assuming that’s what it means, I’ve got three quick comments on the use of the term “reference” in the complaint.

Continue ReadingThe Obama “Hope” Poster Case — What’s a “Visual Reference”?

The Obama “Hope” Poster Case — AP Strikes Back

(This is the fifth in a series of posts on Fairey v. Associated Press. See below for other posts in the series.)

Today, the AP filed its response to the Fairey complaint—and as I predicted, the AP is asserting counterclaims for copyright infringement. Like Fairey’s complaint, the AP’s counterclaims go well beyond merely stating a cause of action, and attempt to win the battle for positive publicity as well. (Note to my Civ Pro students: Take a look at these pleadings if you want to see skillful examples of what I was talking about when I mentioned complaints that go beyond a “short and plain statement.”) Both sides in this case have their eye not just on the law, but on the ordinary, nonlegal intuitions of the press, the judge, the jury, scholars, and bloggers such as myself. (Indeed, I got a copy of AP’s press release by email. To Fairey’s attorneys: Feel free to reciprocate!)

I have a few quick observations.

Continue ReadingThe Obama “Hope” Poster Case — AP Strikes Back
Newer Posts
Older Posts