Sure we do. Rah.<\/p>\n
After spending I don’t know how many hours reading and fulminating about the vast emptiness of the latest email “scandal”<\/a>–my biggest question is: how do so many people manage not to read facts but to opinionate based on their own problems with Mommy or\u00a0 Daddy?…<\/p>\n Oh hell. Didn’t mean to get into that.<\/p>\n Meant to tell you what I just picked up from the New York Times. Which is, the Supreme Court has decided to hear a major matter about…CHEERLEADING UNIFORMS. Rah. I put that in caps in the hope the CAPS will so overwhelm my paragraph about emails you don’t really notice the paragraph about emails but instead concentrate on this important copyright case.<\/p>\n Cheerleading uniforms and their decorations. Should one company be able to claim an extended copyright on the little things it puts on cheerleading uniforms? Stripes, chevrons, I don’t know what else. Bluebirds of happiness?<\/p>\n I’m thinking: why is a stripe pattern copyright-able anyway? I’m thinking this to avoid thinking about, well, you know. One of those paragraphs up there. Here’s an explanatory excerpt:<\/p>\n To qualify for copyright protection, images must be able to stand alone as \u201cpictorial, graphic or sculptural works,\u201d federal law says. Star Athletica, a small, 6-year-old apparel company, contends that Varsity\u2019s decorations do not qualify.<\/em><\/p>\n The disputed designs have no meaning on their own, but identify an outfit as a cheerleader uniform, Star Athletica says. Without the decorations, a uniform \u201clooks exactly like the ubiquitous little black dress,\u201d Star said in its brief.<\/em><\/p>\n Do you get the feeling that the even-numbered Supreme Court is choosing to hear cases that either give them a giggle or distract them from what’s not going on in the Senate (confirming Merrill Garland), or could be reasonably decided by that eight-person bench?<\/p>\n “Hey, here’s a case we can decide! Who’s got an opinion about copyrighting emblems on cheerleading uniforms? Raise your hands! OK, we have seven. Where’s Clarence’s hand? No? I see, so Clarence is fixating on the cheerleaders’ derrieres and I don’t think we can drag him back in time for issuing our decision, so…”<\/p>\n The court will hear a case about whether Varsity Brands, the giant of cheerleading apparel, should keep its copyrights on certain decorations, like chevrons or stripes.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Source: Who Owns Cheerleader Uniform Designs? It\u2019s up to the Supreme Court – The New York Times<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n Grudging note: I’m sure this case has deeper implications about copyright law and in other times, other places, I wouldn’t be making fun of the Supreme Court. So I’m sorry. But, on the other hand, I’m not deleting anything up there. So…rah.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Sure we do. Rah. After spending I don’t know how many hours reading and fulminating about the vast emptiness of the latest email “scandal”–my biggest question is: how do so many people manage not to read facts but to opinionate … Continue reading