Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (174526)	8/26/2003 11:20:01 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1579943

It was a trademark infringement case. Franken is clearly capitalizing on the trademark of Fox. I think the attorney bungled it and that opened the door for the judge to rule as he did. Fox has done the right thing in returning Franken to his relative "obscurity". He is so weak intellectually that they probably ought not to have given him a forum or this added publicity.

To: Alighieri who wrote (174526)	8/26/2003 1:08:43 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1579943

The first amendment protects freedom of speech, unless Franken slanders, which apparently he did not do or you can bet that Faux News would attack him on that basis. As I understand it, the main claim of the suit contended that readers could construe from the cover that Franken worked or represented Faux News. <gg> Knowing Fox, they probably didn't get the trademark rights on 'fair and balanced' put together because the White House didn't tell them to. As if 'fair and balanced' is something incredibly original. We really need to set up a separate country for them where they can whine to their heart's content. Of course, then, they won't have any liberals to blame for all their problems......and trust me, there will be tons of problems. <g> ted