Trump and Cruz call Bernie a communist. I kind of get why this would get to Bernie's campaign, but going after this guy is bad optics.

owner was looking for trouble. If it were Obama or Hillary, even unreasonable people would say it.

But it's Bernie, so let's pretend he's wrong.

This is more one sided hypocrisy. It never ends here.

about it.

they will also know calling Sanders a communist results in a lawsuit and so he just might not be one.

And they might think twice about selling their own lying T shirts, mugs or other merchandise lying about Sanders.

A good days' work for the Sanders' campaign, IMO. Your results may differ, but that doesn't mean yours is the only way to look at it, or even the correct way.

The defendant can simply show all of the nice things that Sanders has said about Communists in the past. The bar for libel of a public figure is a high one.

Democratic Socialist, not a Communist and has so stated in many media. Again, I am familiar with the First Amendment cases. NONE says you can lie about a politician as much as you want.

He tried to sue Maher for making a joke comparing him to an orangutan.

Obviously, you know more about the law than they do.

they will also know calling Trump an orangutan results in a lawsuit and so he just might not be one.

And they might think twice about selling their own lying T shirts, mugs or other merchandise lying about Trump (being an orangutan)."

Just using your words, and inserting Trump and orangutan in place of Sanders and communist...

imaginary conversation with me. I'll be busy doing other things.

"they will also know calling Sanders a communist results in a lawsuit"

to mock politicians.

From Ed Meese, to Rick Santorum, to Gail Dines, to supposed "progressives" who want blasphemy outlawed, to legislators who propose ill-conceived, unconstitutional laws mandating a year long prison sentence for flag burners...

...

The first amendment remains a bedrock principle of liberty, repeatedly affirmed by the courts.

Courts in particular have broadly protected political satire.

It is worth noting that the legal objections here (if they turn out to be true, and actually coming from the sanders campaign) do not center on the content of the speech, but rather the similarity to the actual campaign logo.

But here, again, the right of people to spoof campaign logos, etc. is well established as protected political speech.

I suspect- if real- this is going absolutely nowhere and the lawyers in question will soon try to pretend it never happened.

"Communist" is an opinion, not a fact. And generally public figures aren't protected.

Here you go. They have some anti-Clinton t-shirts and buttons and stickers. (There's even an anti-Obama and Hillary one together.) 2 for 1. Have at it.

http://www.cafepress.com/+clinton-hillary+gifts

The oppressive tactics being used by the Sanders campaign are dismaying. Is this how they will treat all political opponents of the "revolution?"

and strongly defended by many here.

Paul Song's comment is probably all that is needed to fight the suit.

not just to the image of the T shirt?

From the excerpt it seems the "small business" received a written demand to stop before the lawsuit was filed and refused to stop.

The bar for defamation is extremely high. This is not libel, it is a political opinion and it is protected speech.

Bernie is not a member of the Communist Party, which is the clear implication of the T shirt. I believe that the owner of the company knows that very well and intended to harm Sanders by misrepresenting about that. That satisfies the intent/malice requirement of New York Times v. Sullivan. Moreover, misappropriation of a likeness so the "misappropriator" can profit from sales is not protected speech.

ETA: I find it both hilarious and adorable that every DUer who has heard of the First Amendment in some vague way considers themselves more knowledgeable about this than the lawyers for the campaign who actually went to law school, passed at least one bar exam and were good enough to be hired by the campaign.

And, for the uniformed who are so sure lawyers of that caliber just run around filing frivolous lawsuits, read this:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11

Sanders has a legal right to his likeness. That's pretty clear law.

You are incorrect.

you can't call Donald Trump a "fascist". Or Hillary Clinton a "corporatist".

I mean, this is obviously political speech, however stupid.

If you, and Bernie, think that shirt is "libel," then no way is he in any way prepared for a General Election.

That's freakin' child's play to the kind of stuff he would be facing int he GE. And if you think the courts will stop it, you are fooling yourself.

decided after it are relevant.

I think NYT v. Sullivan is a stretch. This will be tossed.

Remember, the SCOTUS recently ruled that political ads can flat out lie.

Have you seen some of the anti Hillary t-shirts?

It is a revolt against oligarchy. The current leaders in both races are unpopular career criminals, with every institutional advantage. All is fair in revolution.

Good to know that Sanders supporters would throw out our legal rights for "revolution". No thanks.

Economic and political oppression are rampant. It's unsustainable. It is in the interest of the people to overthrow TPTB by any means necessary.

I really hope so.

Do we live in an oligarchy, yes or no?

Parts of the ACA are somewhat progressive. Other parts are reactionary. I payed a tax penalty because I can't afford health insurance. That provision was drafted by health insurance lobbyists. Does that connect the dots for you?

you're picking the wrong target for your ire.

Errr...... okay.

And amended. The electoral college must be done away with. Voters rights must be protected. The uses of vast wealth for political advantage must be restricted and heavily regulated. But first the oligarchy must be overthrown.

The current assault on the Constitution began with the Reagan Revolution and was accelerated by the bi-partisan Southern Strategy. The Constitution is largely window dressing now for an out-of-control oligarchy which wages war on people around the globe and oppresses the American people.

to overturn the electoral college and really get involved. The internet is your friend and you should be able to make that happen by drawing like minded people to the campaign...not just a presidential campaign but one that will encourage the political revolution.

Good luck with your schadenfreude.

All of the issues support Bernie's candidacy.

I react to that in the same way I reacted when I found an item on ebay that was Obama-related and suggested a lynching. All I could do was complain to ebay and write to its CEO, but you can't let shit like this stand. Red baiting is out of bounds.

can be attacked and which are so "pure" that the 1st amendment doesn't apply to them. Yeesh.

It's basic law. How would you feel if the same outfit put out a "Hillary is a Liar" tee. Or "Hillary Killed People at Benghazi" tee. I hope you won't be outraged if those are the next products they sell.

Good grief, 1st amendment threads on DU are depressing.

One candidate does think the 1st amendment should be "fixed" to make libel laws cover political speech. His name is Donald Trump.

and get a whiff of the over the top nastiness. Regardless,politicians aren't protected from attacks on their reputations,that's the very essence of our 1st amendment rights. We don't have to be polite when it comes to politicians.

election and must refer to one another in totally false, very damaging speech that might influence public opinion negatively. Democrats are more like Republicans than I thought.

as I read your posts in this thread. "...damaging speech" like the things Jon Stewart used say about Bush on the daily show?

There have been countries that don't allow for "damaging speech that might influence public opinion negatively." Unfortunately they're controlled by dictators.

examples. Those are two that I know of. Are you seriously arguing against "damaging speech that might influence public opinion negatively."? Against politicians?

Satire is protected speech.

Please don't post nonsense. It just wastes everyone's time.

does not carry with it the automatic assumption of validity.

LibertyManiacs has already fended off similarly frivolous, butthurt lawsuits in the past, one from the NSA and the other from the Hillary campaign.

Step up and become #3, by all means.

Apparently, you did matriculate from Straw Man U, though. Congrats!

This is the prime difference between Clinton and Sanders sides; I will freely call her campaign out and criticize it for dumb things, like when they tried to sue this guy over the "I’m Ready for Oligarchy" print.

People like you think Saint Bernard farts plumes of gold unicorn dust and can do no wrong, going to far as to misstate libel law and lobby for the subversion of the 1st Amendment.

I sense the same is not so of you. If so, my condolences. ;hi;

Why is that?

Im a sanders supporter, but you're wrong on this one.

The 1st amendment protects speech, even speech we dont like. ESPECIALLY speech we dont like.

It is clearly protected political speech, and anyone with a basic knowledge of constitutional law will agree with that.

The idea that such an action based on the t-shirt could succeed is laughable.

The claims made on behalf the campaign are based on trademark and copyright law and are pretty flimsy. I think it's safe to predict that the campaign (to the extent it even authorized its lawyers to send the letter) will back down and leave the t-shirt company alone.

Even though you don't get it. We want to re-establish a government serving the people instead of the few. We live in an oligarchy that only serves the interests of the few.

when dismissing me, calling me the establish, .... I do not buy into the scam

Get a grip.

I'm a Sanders supporter but this is free speech.

Even red baiting is free speech. Even on DU.

But I find it amusing that supporters of an oligarchic criminal with every institutional advantage are suddenly concerned about the rights of a red-baiter.

they need to be convicted of a crime so that just makes YOU a liar. And since when does pulling for one candidate over another mean we give up the right to care about free speech? Your entire post is nothing but over the top bullshit obviously from someone who is upset about the results in NY.

Of course I am upset about a victory for oligarchy. America took a loss last night. Bernie has had losses but many more victories and he will have many more as the campaign unfolds. I'm old enough to know that this revolution will never be easy. Oligarchs will not go quietly.

As to your thoughts on the definition of the noun "criminal," I suggest a quick reference to any dictionary:

crim·i·nal
ˈkrimənl/
noun
noun: criminal; plural noun: criminals

1.
a person who has committed a crime.
"these men are dangerous criminals"

has she been convicted of? I can call you a criminal - doesn't mean a fucking thing until you've been convicted. But I guess it's like wishing for a pony - maybe if you wish really really hard.

The dictionary difference (and common parlance) define a criminal as one who commits a crime. It does not require that a criminal be convicted. Can you wrap your mind around that?

But RW trolls have first amendment rights, too. And Sanders is a public figure, so it's a pretty tough standard to show that this is "libel."

to what the right wing will throw at him if he's the nominee. They haven't laid a glove on him yet. Everyone thought Donnie would be the litigious in this campaign. Turns out it's Bernie.

Post a link that does more than point to a stupid picture, for crying out loud.

Unless you have a reason not to...

Last edited Wed Apr 20, 2016, 05:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Suing a small business over permissible speech is nothing less the intimidation. Intimidation has been a trademark of Bernies campaign.

Trying to stifle political speech, proposing laws outlawing flag burning, etc. are extremely bad ideas.

a "Capitalisty" thing, isn't it? My mistake!

comes down HARD on the little guy!

What a fucking joke! Your 27 dollars at work folks!

The part you didn't quote shows the focus was on the use of trade dress--the logo. The lawyer is correct in implying that the point could have been made without the confusion.

I tend to think that the shirt's fine. Libelous? Doesn't seem likely. Infringing on a trademark? Possibly.

political speech.

Do you remember all the extremely realistic logo-looking "Bush/Voldemort", etc. bumper stickers? I do.

all his privilege, suing what ever.

I see it as privilege trying to wrestle the party away from that vast majority of minority.

I see privilege, lost.

I have gotta get out of Texas and into Oregon or Washington. I have to. I must.

Fuck all this political shit, .... Priorities.

I really don't know how you stand it. I know I couldn't.

So much. I know, wow. Me. And breathe. Less than a year. I can do this.

It sure didn't seem that way when some of them were falling all over themselves to apologize for her noxious, pandering "flag burning" legislation.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/07/opinion/senator-clinton-in-pander-mode.htm

actually, I like the original title (no offense)



Bernie Sanders Is Threatened by a T-Shirt
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/20/bernie-sanders-is-threatened-by-a-t-shirt.html

The Vermont senator is trying to shut down a small business that makes satirical political T-shirts after it poked fun at his campaign.

Bernie Sanders cares about the little guy. Except when the little guy disagrees with him.........................