anton zuykov

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

JamesBrickley said:

The use of the Apple logo is ballsy.  Pretty sure Apple could nail them in court on that one.  

The detailing of specific tech specs is a cheap shot. The entire holistic experience of an iPhone is far superior to any Android.  Samsung has touted all these ridiculous features that no one uses because they do not work.  Their facial recognition was horrific especially compared to FaceID.  Samsung has a lot of quality control issues with high failure rates.  The Snapdragon was smoked by the A11 Bionic CPU.  Yes, the Intel radios suck compared to the Qualcomm and perhaps the S9 is slightly better on LTE but most people don't hit max speed anyway.  Yes, there is no headphone jack but if you use the AirPods they are remarkably excellent.  If you must use wired headphones use the lightning dongle, big deal.  So what if you have to charge the iPhone and who cares if need to buy an iPad charger to quick charge and a 2.1 amp car USB adapter.  Already got them.  

Samsung ads, meh... 

it is not ballsy, but stupid and illegal. Apple has to give a written permission for that.

All these ads are clearly a parody of Apple, which is protected.

To be more clear, parody is protected, satire is not.

A parody  is a work created to mock, comment on, or make fun at an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric or ironic imitation. Parody is protected as a form of “Fair Use”, a defense to claims of copyright infringement.  Cases dealing with this issue, however, look to how much of the original work is taken, holding that only that minimum amount necessary to “conjure up” the original work may be taken.  Courts have also held that the parody work must actually make fun of  the original work or its author.

Satire, […] is primarily a literary genre or form in which  vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.  Typically, a satire pokes fun at larger issues, rather than the original work or its author.   Satire is NOT considered Fair Use when it copies an earlier work.

• https://firemark.com/2011/01/17/asked-answered-parodysatire-copyright-infringement/

You dont need an actual Apple logo to perform a satire. Also, how do you distinguish a case of a bad satire from weak watered-down slander?

1) No idea why you stated that since we're talking about parody and what is allowable under the law, but you are technically correct that "you don't need an actual Apple logo to perform a satire."

2) I have no idea what your question is suppose to mean since, again, we're talking about parody, but I'll do my best to answer: Both satire and slander would not be allowable under the law, but each for different reasons.

3a) Here are a couple SNL skits using their right under the law to create ads that mock Apple and/or their products





3b) It's why SNL can also have their own version of Celebrity Jeopardy where a cantankerous Sean Connery can call Alex Trebek's mother a whore, and Robin Williams and Catherine Zeta-Jones are being fun of. You can choose to see these as slanderous, but under US law you're not correct.



I can't imagine the world you want to live in that would outlaw parody.

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

JamesBrickley said:

The use of the Apple logo is ballsy.  Pretty sure Apple could nail them in court on that one.  

The detailing of specific tech specs is a cheap shot. The entire holistic experience of an iPhone is far superior to any Android.  Samsung has touted all these ridiculous features that no one uses because they do not work.  Their facial recognition was horrific especially compared to FaceID.  Samsung has a lot of quality control issues with high failure rates.  The Snapdragon was smoked by the A11 Bionic CPU.  Yes, the Intel radios suck compared to the Qualcomm and perhaps the S9 is slightly better on LTE but most people don't hit max speed anyway.  Yes, there is no headphone jack but if you use the AirPods they are remarkably excellent.  If you must use wired headphones use the lightning dongle, big deal.  So what if you have to charge the iPhone and who cares if need to buy an iPad charger to quick charge and a 2.1 amp car USB adapter.  Already got them.  

Samsung ads, meh... 

it is not ballsy, but stupid and illegal. Apple has to give a written permission for that.

All these ads are clearly a parody of Apple, which is protected.

To be more clear, parody is protected, satire is not.

A parody  is a work created to mock, comment on, or make fun at an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric or ironic imitation. Parody is protected as a form of “Fair Use”, a defense to claims of copyright infringement.  Cases dealing with this issue, however, look to how much of the original work is taken, holding that only that minimum amount necessary to “conjure up” the original work may be taken.  Courts have also held that the parody work must actually make fun of  the original work or its author.

Satire, […] is primarily a literary genre or form in which  vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.  Typically, a satire pokes fun at larger issues, rather than the original work or its author.   Satire is NOT considered Fair Use when it copies an earlier work.

• https://firemark.com/2011/01/17/asked-answered-parodysatire-copyright-infringement/

You dont need an actual Apple logo to perform a satire. Also, how do you distinguish a case of a bad satire from weak watered-down slander?

1) No idea why you stated that since we're talking about parody and what is allowable under the law, but you are technically correct that "you don't need an actual Apple logo to perform a satire."

2) I have no idea what your question is suppose to mean since, again, we're talking about parody, but I'll do my best to answer: Both satire and slander would not be allowable under the law, but each for different reasons.

3a) Here are a couple SNL skits using their right under the law to create ads that mock Apple and/or their products





3b) It's why SNL can also have their own version of Celebrity Jeopardy where a cantankerous Sean Connery can call Alex Trebek's mother a whore, and Robin Williams and Catherine Zeta-Jones are being fun of. You can choose to see these as slanderous, but under US law you're not correct.



I can't imagine the world you want to live in that would outlaw parody.

claire1 said:

anton zuykov said:

JamesBrickley said:

The use of the Apple logo is ballsy.  Pretty sure Apple could nail them in court on that one.  

The detailing of specific tech specs is a cheap shot. The entire holistic experience of an iPhone is far superior to any Android.  Samsung has touted all these ridiculous features that no one uses because they do not work.  Their facial recognition was horrific especially compared to FaceID.  Samsung has a lot of quality control issues with high failure rates.  The Snapdragon was smoked by the A11 Bionic CPU.  Yes, the Intel radios suck compared to the Qualcomm and perhaps the S9 is slightly better on LTE but most people don't hit max speed anyway.  Yes, there is no
headphone jack but if you use the AirPods they are remarkably excellent.  If you must use wired headphones use the lightning dongle, big deal.  So what if you have to charge the iPhone and who cares if need to buy an iPad charger to quick charge and a 2.1 amp car USB adapter.  Already got them.  

Samsung ads, meh... 

it is not ballsy, but stupid and illegal. Apple has to give a written permission for that.

I don't think Apple minds the free advertising!

JamesBrickley said:

The use of the Apple logo is ballsy.  Pretty sure Apple could nail them in court on that one.  

The detailing of specific tech specs is a cheap shot. The entire holistic experience of an iPhone is far superior to any Android.  Samsung has touted all these ridiculous features that no one uses because they do not work.  Their facial recognition was horrific especially compared to FaceID.  Samsung has a lot of quality control issues with high failure rates.  The Snapdragon was smoked by the A11 Bionic CPU.  Yes, the Intel radios suck compared to the Qualcomm and perhaps the S9 is slightly better on LTE but most people don't hit max speed anyway.  Yes, there is no headphone jack but if you use the AirPods they are remarkably excellent.  If you must use wired headphones use the lightning dongle, big deal.  So what if you have to charge the iPhone and who cares if need to buy an iPad charger to quick charge and a 2.1 amp car USB adapter.  Already got them.  

Samsung ads, meh... 

mike1 said:

Marketing 101. Talk about your features and benefits. If you feel the need to disparage your competitor or their customers, you're in a bad place.

lordjohnwhorfin said:

Quality issues? How about sending all your pictures to a random contact without warning and without trace? If Apple had done anything like that people would be rioting in the streets, Samsung pulls this stunt and the press doesn't pick it up. WTF?