Air America Radio Starts Mach 31st
http://www.airamericaradio.com/
On March 31, 2004 Air America Radio begins airlifting entertaining, progressive talk radio to millions of Americans who for far too long have been and are being neglected by talk radio broadcasters today.
Our on-air personalities and guests represent today's top political and popular humorists, commentators, activists and analysts.
Our irreverent, informative programming sparks the kind of challenging political and social dialogue that has been absent from AM radio for years.
Our programs will mix provocative conversation, challenging interviews and biting political satire.
The Two Shows I'm looking forward to are The O'Franken Factor and the Majority Report. I'll actually have somthing other than NPR to listen to now!
http://www.airamericaradio.com/index...ask=view&id=26
I know to some on here it means the beggining of the apocalypse...
On March 31, 2004 Air America Radio begins airlifting entertaining, progressive talk radio to millions of Americans who for far too long have been and are being neglected by talk radio broadcasters today.
Our on-air personalities and guests represent today's top political and popular humorists, commentators, activists and analysts.
Our irreverent, informative programming sparks the kind of challenging political and social dialogue that has been absent from AM radio for years.
Our programs will mix provocative conversation, challenging interviews and biting political satire.
The Two Shows I'm looking forward to are The O'Franken Factor and the Majority Report. I'll actually have somthing other than NPR to listen to now!
http://www.airamericaradio.com/index...ask=view&id=26
I know to some on here it means the beggining of the apocalypse...
Comments
2. It occurred to me: Depsite getting O'Reilly and Fox to drop the previous lawsuit, I think Al Franken may lost the next one. What lawsuit, you ask? The one that's coming due to the name The O'Franken Factor. That's a direct swipe at O'Reilly, and proving that Franken can capitalize on the "O" and "Factor" parts while possibly confusing consumers should not be hard (unlike the last suit...which was weak).
g
I don't think so.
Once again... PARODY! SATIRE!
No one is going to confuse AL's show with O'Liely.
Here's a hint... one is on radio the other on tv.
I hope they sue!
Originally posted by chu_bakka
hehehehe...
I don't think so.
Once again... PARODY! SATIRE!
No one is going to confuse AL's show with O'Liely.
Here's a hint... one is on radio the other on tv.
I hope they sue!
Mikerowesoft.com
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Here's a hint... one is on radio the other on tv.
I hope they sue!
Well, there is "The Radio Factor" now too so Bill is on the air for about 4 or 5 hours a day.
On another note... they took over WLIB? I didn't see that one coming.
I don't think so... he can't own the word "factor".
That means partisan democrat now?
Originally posted by Scott
"progressive"?
That means partisan democrat now?
Correct. Anything to avoid the word "liberal" - it's like last week's potato salad... you can't sell it.
Of course the entertainment value is what will decide if this thing lives or dies, probably much more so than the political perspective.
Nick
Originally posted by SDW2001
unlike the last suit...which was weak
Let's see what SDW said about the last one at the time:
The point is folks, that if Franken is using a trademarked phrase to SELL something, he's going to lose...
I am just amazed by the statements I am reading here. It's like some of you live on another planet.
Franken has two problems. One, he used a trademarked phrase to sell his product. Two, he even mimicked the look and feel of the trademarks owner....which COULD, in fact, result in confusion. Look at the cover...it's even in the same FONT Fox uses. There is no question that this is infringement.
I also have a fair understanding of copyright law, BTW.
But, the evidence is against Franken here...
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...n&pagenumber=1
But, you know, thanks for your input and all.
or disillusioned and politcally impotent?
Originally posted by giant
Let's see what SDW said about the last one at the time:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...n&pagenumber=1
But, you know, thanks for your input and all.
I stand by those statements. I'm not backing away from them. I still think Franken infringed last time, but in a legal context I was apparently wrong. Actually, we won't know, because Fox dropped the suit.
This particular case seems to be a more direct reference to O'Reilly's show. Franken stands to benefit financially from that. Reagrdless of stance, do you honestly disagree?
There's no way anyone is going to think this show has anything to do with O'reilly... ESPECIALLY if they're an O'Lielly fan.
See there's that word in there that might give it away... FRANKEN.
Sheeesh.
Originally posted by SDW2001
This particular case seems to be a more direct reference to O'Reilly's show. Franken stands to benefit financially from that. Reagrdless of stance, do you honestly disagree?
You are trying to make copyright law something it isn't. We already know your understanding of it is very weak, as reinforced twice now just this week (the other time being your misunderstanding of PM).
See, I actually have to deal with copyright issues on an hourly basis during my day. Literally. And even I know that cases like this are not cut and dry.
I also have an uncle who is the senior copyright lawyer at a major publisher. Because our professions have so many intersections, we talk shop all the time. Even as a copyright lawyer for decades, he still spends most of the time 'staring out the window,' which is his way of saying that even he has to think hard about this stuff.
You see, SDW, the reason you are so consistently wrong is that you think you can just infer everything from just a little bit of information. The fact is that copyright law is really complex when you get into individual situations. In fact, the law part of it is just a guidline, and every organization that works off that has a complex set of issues and solutions that move it far from the basic common understandings of copyright. You can't just infer this kind of stuff. The issues I deal with, for instance, require a TON of background knowledge. If you tried to deal with these issues you just end up tripping all over the place.
Is your gripe (not fox's, since they have yet to say anything) is legitimate? I don't know, and neither do you, no matter how much you think you think being a 5th grade music teacher in rural penn has taught you about the copyright issues large organizations and companies struggle with.
But my *guess* is that it won't go very far. If we are talking about two radio shows, then maybe, but I'm not sure how parody is handled.
The previous case that you were dead wrong about was totally stupid and impossible to win from the get-go, and this was painfully clear to anyone with even a basic knowledge of it. Franken is pushing the limits more this time. Clearly the lawyers they have working for them (who are likely fairly accomplished) seem to think they can get away with it. Who knows, though? Not you.
And you never will know anything until you start accepting that your judgement is often not accurate.
"Our country was based on the principle of free speech. We wish them well.''
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Actually Fox did comment.
"Our country was based on the principle of free speech. We wish them well.''
Well, there you have it, then.
Live and learn, unless you live in coatesville.