Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  1. I wonder if the Cangiamilla campaign paid the proper royalties to the estate of “Dr. Suess” before cheapening and demeaning a Christmas favorite?

    <

    p>To say I found Brion Cangiamilla’s Christmas card a nasty item is true.

    <

    p>Frankly, this guy [Cangiamilla] presented better then this in person – whomever created this tasteless parody did Cangiamilla no favor.

    <

    p>As a matter of disclosure, I already was a Marzilli supporter – but, frankly, felt too busy to do much these last couple of days.  This attack mail changed that at least for me.

    • http://www.copyright.gov/title…

      <

      p>

      § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

      Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

      • …from what I have seen,

        <

        p> for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching

        <

        p>in the fair use provision relate to criticism, etc., of the work itself, not to criticism of something that is not related to the work.

      • and believe that copyright laws are far too restrictive, but it’s not clear that this counts as fair use.  Generally, criticism and comment must be related to the author, the work, or the subject.  You can’t criticize or comment about something unrelated, as this post card does.  Otherwise we’d see 30 second clips of Mickey Mouse criticizing or commenting on all sorts of things — and you don’t.  Same applies to Mr. Grinch.

        <

        p>It’s clearly not news reporting since nothing Seuss-related is the relevant “news” and it’s certainly not necessary for teaching his five factoids — the five factoids stand on their own and the Grinch isn’t related except as humor.

        <

        p>So, I’d be willing to bet the courts would find it as infringement if he didn’t get permission first [and I seriously doubt they’d have given permission].  Now, will the Seuss copyright holders sue?  Doubtful.

            • but the parody requirements that it’s relevant to what is being parodied apply, just as criticism and comment require relevance.

              <

              p>It’s subjective and the “line in the sand” moves with each copyright case, but there is something like a relevance requirement.  Since the postcard isn’t parodying Seuss, it likely doesn’t fall into fair use territory.

              <

              p>But, IANAL and all that.

    • Nothing like an ugly attack ad to energize the opposition.

      <

      p>It’s not easy being green, but Jim Marzilli has a two Prius household.  He has the smallest carbon footprint, and the best garden, in Arlington.

      <

      p>GO JIM!

    • And this is mild as attack mailings go.  It’s got humor and is going to catch somebody’s eye, especially around Christmas.  And everything on it is truthful so it’s not negative in the least.  

      • And as long as it’s true in Cangiamila’s gut, the context of those quotes don’t matter. Frankly, I’m shocked that the campaign used a reference to a book to make their point — I don’t trust books. At least it was a children’s book, I trust those more than books on fair taxation “policy.”

        <

        p>…With apologies to Colbert…I just finished reading a good chunk of his book.

  2. first, i almost agree with eabo that this is not a negative mailer, although it was certainly intended to be.  the reason is that the grinch is, by the end of the tale, a beloved member of the community.  no doubt that jim marzilli is well liked by those he has served.  

    <

    p>but what i really want to know is who is really against curtailing the dangerous use of cell phones by drivers?  how many times have i almost been run down by some oblivious twit yakking while driving?  to put this issue on the level of tax gripes and immigration issues in an attack ad is really hilarious.

    <

    p>and finally, leave it to someone from the GOP (God’s Own Party) to cheapen the sacred celebration of the birth of the Christ with a misbegotten political attack ad.

  3. The logic behind the drivers licenses attack is ridiculous!

    <

    p>”Give drivers licenses to illegal immigrants so that they may drive uninsured and cause the public fatal harm.”

    <

    p>Does this man actually believe that no one without a license will ever drive uninsured? Heck, I’d go so far as to guess that a higher percentage of unlicensed drivers are uninsured than their licensed counterparts. Anyone have the data to prove me wrong?

    <

    p>By the by, who is MRSC?  

    • Let’s disamgiibuate two issues.

      <

      p>One, the regisration of an automobile, which does require a proof of financial responsibitility, including, but not limited to insurance; no insurance, no registration, and

      <

      p>Two, sufficient knowledge of the rules of the road so that they just might be not a significant danger to themselves and others.

      <

      p>Those  are two substantially difference issues, and states endeavoring to grant drivers’ licences to illegal/undocumented/whateveryouwanttocallthem, actually helps protect the rest of us.

      <

      p>NB: I have no idea who MRSC is.

      • The address listed is the same as on the MassGOP’s web site.

        <

        p>Anyone else think it’s interesting that even on a flier sent out by the state party, nowhere do they actually use the word “Republican”?

        <

        p>How are you supposed to rebuild a party when using its name is verboten?

        <

        p>They-who-must-not-be-named urge you to vote for Brion Cangiamilia!

  4. Looking at his issues page is interesting.  The first and second issues he lists are both  anti-gay stuff.  Since Cangiamila says he’s anti-marriage equality but doesn;t list that as an issue on his page, I wonder if that’s just a pander point on his part.  If taking a stand against gay marriage and other benefits for gay couples were important to me, I’d vote for the guy who seems to really take it seriously: Tom Fallon.  

Archives