Cheetah said:
Sp5 said:
Cheetah said:
Sp5 said:
Yes, it's legal. Fair use doctrine in copyright law. It's a fair use to quote material to criticize, parody, comment on, etc.
..what about that they use his picture/logo, presumably without his permission?
Roosh's logo is a trademark, because it's unique and has come to be associated with him.
Usually, if there is a flavor of parody or criticism in the use of the logo, it's fair use. It would not be fair use if someone selling travel guides or daygame material used it for commercial purposes to confuse buyers.
I don't see a commercial purpose for this Twitter feed, so it looks like fair use. Anyways, this is a form of flattery. Engaging in the marketplace of ideas, let freedom ring.
I'm not so sure, someone could think that roosh is the actual owner of the twitter account if they just look at how the logo is used. If they made a parody of the logo I suppose that could be different, now it's more like that they associate the twitter account and the 'tweets' with his logo.
Try opening up a twitter account and use the coca-cola trademark or any other famous trademark and make a huge amount of tweets trying to criticise that company associated with the trademark. I bet that you won't last long.
Here's a Twitter account which uses the logo and publishes under Coca Cola Sucks:
https://twitter.com/coca_cola_sucks
See also:
https://twitter.com/CocaCola24x7
with critical news.
You were saying? Don't argue with a former trademark and free-speech lawyer about trademark and free speech law.
Also, what Twitter, a private company, does is separate from whether the use of the logo is "legal" or not.
Sure, Roosh could complain to Twitter that his trademark is being misused. Twitter could make the user take Roosh's logo off under their own terms of service. From the Coca Cola examples, it looks like they follow the fair use doctrine.
If it went to court in any of these cases, it's a fair use and legal.