<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Clothes on PUNCHING KITTY</title><link>https://punchingkitty.com/tags/clothes/</link><description>Recent content in Clothes on PUNCHING KITTY</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:00:49 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://punchingkitty.com/tags/clothes/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The South Butt Creator is Like Totally Stoked Dude</title><link>https://punchingkitty.com/2009/12/23/the-south-butt-creator-is-like-totally-stoked-dude/</link><pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:00:49 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://punchingkitty.com/2009/12/23/the-south-butt-creator-is-like-totally-stoked-dude/</guid><description>&lt;p>&lt;a href="http://punchingkitty.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Screen-shot-2009-12-22-at-9.18.42-PM.png">&lt;img class="alignright size-full wp-image-2635" title="Screen shot 2009-12-22 at 9.18.42 PM" src="http://punchingkitty.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Screen-shot-2009-12-22-at-9.18.42-PM.png" alt="" width="192" height="157" />&lt;/a>“Its all thanks to North Face.”&lt;/p>
&lt;p>“When they tried to take me to court, it was like the best Christmas present ever.”&lt;/p>
&lt;p>oh and…&lt;/p>
&lt;p>“I really don’t know [why the North Face is trying to sue me].  I don’t see any similarities between the two companies.”&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Those are the words from Mizzou student and owner of the now famous parody brand “The South Butt”.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Jimmy Winkelmann &lt;em>[Editor’s Note: Great freaking name! Seriously.]&lt;/em> was recently interviewed by KSDK and came off calm, cool (totally rad?), and more than a little innocent as to trademark law.  (View the interview after the jump)&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Will Jimmy lose this case?&lt;/p>
&lt;p>From our research…probably.  Here’s what we found pertaining to copyright law and parody logos (&lt;a href="http://www.publaw.com/parody.html" target="_blank">Publaw.com&lt;/a>):&lt;/p>
&lt;blockquote>
&lt;p>Since copyright law prohibits the substantial use of a copyrighted work without permission of the copyright owner, and because such permission is highly unlikely when the use is to create a parody, it may be necessary for the parodist to rely on the fair-use defense to forestall any liability for copyright infringement. However, the fair-use defense if successful will only be successful when the newly created work that purports itself to be parody is a valid parody.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Although not every commercial use is presumptively an unfair use, and therefore conclusively determinative against fair use, this criterion emphasizes a preference that fair use will be granted to those works that are created for noncommercial or educational purposes rather than for commercial purposes.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>The burden of proving fair use is usually much easier to demonstrate if the new work is for one of the “favored” purposes: criticism, comment, scholarship, research, news reporting or teaching&lt;/p>&lt;/blockquote>
&lt;p>Winkelmann’s only hope is 2 Live Crew.  Yes 2 Live Crew’s case with Roy Orbison about the “parody” song “Pretty Woman”.  After going to the Supreme Court, 2 Live Crew’s version that they release and sold, was found to be a parody and thus protected, because they were found to be making a criticism of the original song.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>There Jimmy Winkelmann, is your legal safe house.  Go there now.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>You can get your own South Butt gear, while you can, at &lt;a href="http://www.thesouthbutt.com/" target="_blank">thesouthbutt.com&lt;/a>&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Oh and for the record, we think all of this is freaking hilarious.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>