DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Relations on the Net.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Relations on the Net.Pdf Public Relations on the Net Winning Strategies to Inform and Influence the Media, the Investment Community, the Government, the Public, and More! Second Edition Shel Holtz American Management Association New York • Atlanta • Brussels • Buenos Aires • Chicago • London • Mexico City San Francisco • Shanghai • Tokyo • Toronto • Washington, D.C. Special discounts on bulk quantities of AMACOM books are available to corporations, professional associations, and other organizations. For details, contact Special Sales Department, AMACOM, a division of American Management Association, 1601 Broadway, New York, NY 10019. Tel.: 212-903-8316. Fax: 212-903-8083. Web site: www.amacombooks.org This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. Various names used by companies to distinguish their software and other products can be claimed as trademarks. AMACOM uses such names throughout this book for editorial purposes only, with no intention of trademark violation. All such software or product names are in initial capital letters or ALL CAPITAL letters. Individual companies should be contacted for complete information regarding trademarks and registration. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Holtz, Shel. Public relations on the Net: winning strategies to inform and influence the media, the investment community, the government, the public, and more! / Shel Holtz.—2nd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8144-7152-8 (pbk.) 1. Internet in public relations. I. Title. HD59 .H596 2002 659.2Ј0285Ј4678—dc21 2002001993 ᭧ 2002 Shel Holtz All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This publication may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in whole or in part, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of AMACOM, a division of American Management Association, 1601 Broadway, New York, NY 10019. Printing number 10987654321 To my children, Benjamin and Rachel, who still don’t understand what I do for a living beyond spending an inordinate amount of time online. Their amusement always helps keep things in the proper perspective. CONTENTS Preface to the Second Edition vii Acknowledgments ix Introduction xi Part One: Communications on the Internet 1 1. A Report Card on PR Use of the Internet 3 2. How Communication Has Been Forever Changed 21 3. Public Relations Tools of the Internet 50 4. The Principles of Influencing Audiences Online 92 5. How to Be the Eyes and Ears of Your Organization or Client 127 Part Two: Audiences 155 6. Media Relations 157 7. Investor Relations 205 8. Government Relations 217 9. Community Relations 229 10. Cause and Issue Communication 250 11. Employee Communications 269 12. Activism on the Net 281 13. Crisis Management in the Wired World 312 14. Going Directly to the Public 341 15. Measuring the Effectiveness of Your Online Efforts 348 Appendixes Appendix A. Working with IT Staff 357 Appendix B. Promoting Your Online Efforts 362 Appendix C. Writing for the Web 371 Appendix D. Online Resources 388 Appendix E. Recommended Reading 400 Appendix F. Internet Fundamentals 403 Glossary 411 Index 437 v PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION HE COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSION lags woefully be- ‘‘Thind much of the Internet community.’’ I wrote those words in the first chapter of the first edition of this book back in 1998. Only four years have passed since Public Rela- tions on the Net first appeared; in ‘‘Web years,’’ however, four years is an eternity. (The rule of thumb suggests that one calendar year equals ten Web years; consequently, forty virtual years have passed.) Four years or forty, that is plenty of time for the communications profession to get its act together and to begin using the Internet as a strategic communications tool. Sadly, the profession hasn’t progressed much since then. The only significant change is that research now corroborates my belief. The Council of Public Relations Firms (CPRF) commissioned a study in the summer of 2000 that was released in the first quarter of 2001. The study, titled The New Economy Initiative: The Future Im- pact of the Internet on the Public Relations Industry (which I cite frequently in the early parts of this book), notes that professionals who communicate for a living have a long way to go before they are meeting client needs and fully tapping into the new channels the Internet provides for delivering messages. There continues, therefore, to be a need for this book. However, since four years is a long time on the Internet, there was also a need to update the book. Reading back through the pages I wrote in the late 1990s, I realized several elements could stand change. First of all, the first edition of Public Relations on the Net used a fair number of pages to explain the fundamentals. What is e-mail? What is a discussion group? What is the Web? When I wrote the first edition, I was still running into a frightening number of professionals who did not have a firm grasp on the basics of these new media. It was important, therefore, to explain to practitioners new to the Net exactly what they were dealing with. I tried to draft these sections so that they were meaningful to communicators, and not merely a car- bon copy of what you could find in any Internet-for-beginners book. But today, four years later, I no longer find that to be an issue. Those vii viii Preface to the Second Edition elementary explanations have nearly been excised, and have been rel- egated to an appendix. Second, research has revealed more about the dynamics of on- line communication. Hundreds of research projects and studies have been completed and volumes have been written. The discussion of the many-to-many nature of communications—one of the center- pieces of the first edition—has been greatly expanded to cover new conclusions about how to communicate on behalf of institutions in a networked environment. Finally, the case studies in the first edition were, frankly, an- cient. Not that they were bad case studies. For the late 1990s, when the examples used were implemented, they were shining examples of public relations professionals who had figured out how to use the Internet to achieve strategic objectives. They are still good examples, but as an increasing number of practitioners integrate the Internet into their efforts, the number of sophisticated examples has in- creased. Virtually all of the case studies in this edition are new. There are other changes throughout the book—new models, new ideas, and enhanced explorations of certain concepts (such as the integration of online and offline communication). In the appen- dixes, new books are in the bibliography and the listing of useful Web sites has been updated. In other words, almost the entire book has been revised—from cover to cover. As always, your comments and other input are appreciated. You can e-mail me at [email protected], or send your remarks through my Web site at http://www.holtz.com. Enjoy the read! ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Y APPRECIATION FOR the Internet’s capabilities as a tool Mfor achieving two-way symmetrical public relations outcomes is the result of years of contact with others who share my passion for the Net’s capabilities and potential. My continued admiration goes out to all of them, including: My fellow members of NetGain, the first virtual consortium of electronic communications professionals: Peter Shinbach of The Birmingham Group and Tudor Williams of Tudor Wil- liams Inc. Then there is the rest of the group that certain members of the International Association of Business Com- municators (IABC) refer to as the Technology Mafia: Craig Jolley, and Charles Pizzo of P.R. Public Relations. Others who have been influential and deserve recognition in- clude: Dan Janal, author of Dan Janal’s Guide to Internet Marketing, good friend, and regularly available conversationalist. Jeffrey Hallett, now retired, whose insight into the synchroniz- ing of the electronic media with the transformation of the business economy has been a revelation. Don Middleberg, whose recognition of the Internet as a neces- sary component of communications planning has led the in- dustry. Katherine Paine, CEO of The Delahaye Group, and Angela Sin- ickas, principal with William M. Mercer Inc., have raised the measurement of Internet effectiveness to an art. Carol Kinsey Goman, who never lets me forget to consider the human side of high tech. For their continued willingness to share ideas online and off, and in no particular order: Jerry Stevenson, John Gerstner, Sheri ix x Acknowledgments Rosen, David Sussman, Mike Vincenty, Matisse Enzer, Tim Hicks, Brian Kilgore, Steve Crescenzo, Sharon McIntosh, David Murray, Dan Oswald, David Skwarczek, and Peter Dean. No listing of acknowledgments would be complete without rec- ognizing the importance of IABC in my life. This professional associ- ation is, without question, the single most significant contributor to any success I may have achieved in my career. To the members and the tireless staff go my undying gratitude. And, of course, my wife Michele, who claims she isn’t an In- ternet professional, but uses it in her daily activities. That makes her a model of the Net’s potential. And I also have to recognize her increasing tolerance for the amount of time I spend online, writing about being online, and talking about being online. INTRODUCTION HE INTERNET REPRESENTS one of the most significant tools Tever employed in the practice of public relations (PR).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mattel V Walking Mountain Productions.Malted Barbie
    FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MATTEL INC., a Delaware Corporation, No. 01-56695 Plaintiff-Appellant, C.D. Cal. No. v. CV-99-08543- RSWL WALKING MOUNTAIN PRODUCTIONS, a California Business Entity; TOM N.D. Cal. No. FORSYTHE, an individual d/b/a CV-01-0091 Walking Mountain Productions, Misc. WHA Defendants-Appellees. MATTEL INC., a Delaware No. 01-57193 Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, C.D. Cal. No. CV-99-08543- v. RSWL WALKING MOUNTAIN PRODUCTIONS, N.D. Cal. No. a California Business Entity; TOM CV-01-0091 FORSYTHE, an individual d/b/a Misc. WHA Walking Mountain Productions, Defendants-Appellants. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding and United States District Court for the Northern District of California William H. Alsup, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted March 6, 2003—Pasadena, California 18165 18166 MATTEL INC. v. WALKING MOUNTAIN PRODUCTIONS Filed December 29, 2003 Before: Harry Pregerson and Sidney R. Thomas, Circuit Judges, and Louis F. Oberdorfer, Senior District Judge.* Opinion by Judge Pregerson *The Honorable Louis F. Oberdorfer, Senior Judge, United States Dis- trict Court for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation. 18170 MATTEL INC. v. WALKING MOUNTAIN PRODUCTIONS COUNSEL Adrian M. Pruetz (argued), Michael T. Zeller, Edith Ramirez and Enoch Liang, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, Los Angeles, California, for the plaintiff-appellant- cross-appellee. Annette L. Hurst (argued), Douglas A. Winthrop and Simon J. Frankel, Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rab- kin, APC, San Francisco, California, and Peter J.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Is Really Protecting Barbie
    University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 7-1-2008 Who is really protecting Barbie: Goliath or the Silver Knight? A defense of Mattel's aggressive international attemps to protect its Barbie copyright and trademark Liz Somerstein Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umialr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Liz Somerstein, Who is really protecting Barbie: Goliath or the Silver Knight? A defense of Mattel's aggressive international attemps to protect its Barbie copyright and trademark, 39 U. Miami Inter-Am. L. Rev. 559 (2008) Available at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umialr/vol39/iss3/7 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Inter- American Law Review by an authorized administrator of Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Who is really protecting Barbie: Goliath or the Silver Knight? A defense of Mattel's aggressive international attempts to protect its Barbie copyright and trademark Liz Somerstein* INTRODUCTION .............................................. 559 I. LEGAL REALISM: AN OVERVIEW ....................... 562 II. MATTEL'S AMERICAN BATTLE: MATTEL, INC. V. WALKING MOUNTAIN PRODUCTIONS ................... 563 A. The Walking Mountain case: Background ........ 565 B. The Walking Mountain Court's Analysis ......... 567 i. Purpose and character of use ................ 568 ii. Nature of the copyrighted work .............. 570 iii. Amount and substantiality of the portion u sed ......................................... 570 iv. Effect upon the potential market ............ 571 III. AT LOOK AT WALKING MOUNTAIN UNDER THE LEGAL REALIST LENS .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Beebe - Trademark Law: an Open-Source Casebook
    Beebe - Trademark Law: An Open-Source Casebook III. Defenses to Trademark Infringement and Related Limitations on Trademark Rights ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 A. Descriptive Fair Use ............................................................................................................... 3 1. Descriptive Fair Use and Consumer Confusion ................................................ 3 KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc. .................... 4 2. The Three-Step Test for Descriptive Fair Use ................................................ 10 Dessert Beauty, Inc. v. Fox ................................................................................. 10 Sorensen v. WD-40 Company ........................................................................... 21 3. Further Examples of Descriptive Fair Use Analyses .................................... 27 International Stamp Art v. U.S. Postal Service ......................................... 27 Bell v. Harley Davidson Motor Co. .................................................................. 29 Fortune Dynamic, Inc. v. Victoria’s Secret.................................................. 30 B. Nominative Fair Use ........................................................................................................... 32 1. The Three-Step Test for Nominative Fair Use ................................................ 32 Toyota Motor Sales,
    [Show full text]
  • Confusion Isn't Everything William Mcgeveran University of Minnesota Law School
    Notre Dame Law Review Volume 89 | Issue 1 Article 6 11-2013 Confusion Isn't Everything William McGeveran University of Minnesota Law School Mark P. McKenna University of Notre Dame Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons, and the Litigation Commons Recommended Citation 89 Notre Dame L. Rev. 253 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Notre Dame Law Review at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\N\NDL\89-1\NDL106.txt unknown Seq: 1 25-NOV-13 9:31 CONFUSION ISN’T EVERYTHING† William McGeveran* and Mark P. McKenna** The typical shorthand justification for trademark rights centers on avoiding consumer con- fusion. But in truth, this encapsulation mistakes a method for a purpose: confusion merely serves as an indicator of the underlying problems that trademark law seeks to prevent. Other areas of law accept confusion or mistake of all kinds, intervening only when those errors lead to more serious harms. Likewise, every theory of trademark rights considers confusion troubling solely because it threatens more fundamental values such as fair competition or informative com- munication. In other words, when it comes to the deep purposes of trademark law, confusion isn’t everything. Yet trademark law’s structure now encourages courts to act otherwise, as if confusion itself were the ultimate evil with which trademark law is concerned and as if its optimal level were zero.
    [Show full text]
  • Annals of the University of Craiova, Series
    Annals of the University of Craiova ANALELE UNIVERSITĂŢII DIN CRAIOVA ANNALES DE L’UNIVERSITÉ DE CRAIOVA ANNALS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CRAIOVA SERIES: PHILOLOGY -ENGLISH- * YEAR XVIII, NO. 1-2, 2017 1 Annals of the University of Craiova ANNALS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CRAIOVA 13, Al. I. Cuza ROMANIA We make exchanges with similar institutions in Romania and abroad ANALELE UNIVERSITĂŢII DIN CRAIOVA Str. Al. I. Cuza, nr. 13 ROMÂNIA Efectuăm schimburi cu instituţii similare din ţară şi din străinătate ANNALES DE L’UNIVERSITÉ DE CRAIOVA 13, Rue Al. I. Cuza ROUMANIE On fait des échanges des publications avec les institutions similaires du pays et de l’étranger EDITORS General editor: Aloisia Sorop, University of Craiova, Romania Assistant editor: Ana-Maria Trantescu, University of Craiova, Romania Editorial secretary: Diana Otat, University of Craiova, Romania Reviewers: Professor Sylvie Crinquand, University of Bourgogne, Dijon, France Associate Professor Patrick Murphy, Nord University, Norway Professor Mariana Neagu, “Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati, Romania Associate Professor Rick St. Peter, Northwestern State University, USA Associate Professor Melanie Shoffner, James Madison University, USA Dieter Wessels, Ruhr University Bochum, Germany Associate Professor Anne-Lise Wie, Nord University, Norway The authors are fully responsible for the originality of their papers and for the accuracy of their notes. 2 Issue coordinators: Associate Professor Florentina Anghel, PhD Associate Professor Madalina Cerban, PhD Senior Lecturer Claudia Pisoschi, PhD Senior Lecturer Mihai Cosoveanu, PhD CONTENTS FLORENTINA ANGHEL Past and Present in T.S.Eliot’s Avant-Garde Poetry ………………… 7 ARDA ARIKAN Characters as Animals in Dreiser’s Sister Carrie ....................... 16 SORIN CAZACU Culture Clash in Toni Morrison's Tar Baby .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Organizations in Greater Seattle
    Seatt'p Public Library UTERATUWE FEB 1 55 1978 Special New Year Edition Section A & Tm^MS(DIEHFlf, A Welcome Visitor to Greater Seattle Jewish Homes for SI Years Volume LI No. 15 Seattle, Washington September 3, 1975 yv -n> urn nr po (vwm rr£j>o mi inn D n KmucDi Page 2A The Jewish Transcript September 3,1975 Around the town . SAMUEL COHEN, Mercer Island realtor, boasts he's one of the original readers of the Transcript since its founding back in 1924, and follows it closely for news of the community . SAMUEL AND ALTHEA STROUM received a warm letter of appreciation from UW Pres. John R Hogness and Dean George M. Beckmann of the College of Arts and Sciences for their fund grant which made possible the upcoming Samuel and Althea Stroum Visiting Lec­ tureship in Jewish Studies there, starting in the fall. Pres. Hogness stressed the program will provide "a happy blend of scholarly and artistic achievement." MRS ESTHER SOLOMON of Capetown, South Africa, was a recent visitor in Seattle where for the first time, she met members of her family, including her cousins, Mrs. Frank Jones, Mrs. Ceorge Mosler and David Clazer and their families. During her stay, she was entertained and toured the Greater Seattle area . Seattle Sephardic Youth Federation, those between the ages of 18 and 25, visited Israel last month on a three-week tour, and included members Shelly Adatto, Terry and Tommy Damm, Stanley and Jean Ann Lorber and Sherry Rind, the latter former REUNITED AT LAST-former Prisoners of Zion Lassal Kaminsky and Lev Yagman (with dark glasses), office manager for The Jewish Transcript, who returns to both sentenced to five years hard labour in the second Leningrad trial of 1971 arrived in Israel, where they UW this month to continue her studies for her Master's and had a tearful reunion with their wives and children who had been allowed to immigrate earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • The Barbie Case
    The Barbie® Case Introduction When on October 11, 2005, Neil B. Friedman was promoted from his position as head of the successful Fisher-Price® division to become the President of the combined operations of the merged Mattel® and Fisher-Price® units, he might have considered this promotion to be a daunting task to take on. At the start of this job as the President of the Mattel® Brands Division, the sales of Barbie®, Mattel®'s signature doll and profit engine, which account for an estimated 251 to 35%2 of Mattel®'s sales had fallen for seven straight quarters on a year-to-year basis.3 Barbie®'s global third-quarter sales in 2005 were down 18% from the previous year, and U.S. sales decreased 30%. This decrease in sales affected Mattel®'s overall performance as shares tumbled to their lowest point in four years. 4 The toy industry overall was struggling, with sales down 5.3% through the first nine months. U.S. retail sales of dolls fell 6% in that period, according to market researcher NPD Group. Analysts believe the slide will continue as more kids choose video games and digital-music players over action figures and board games.5 In addition, Friedman was confronted with an anti-Barbie climate with campaigns challenging Barbie®’s beauty ideal launched by The Body Shop and more recent ones by Dove® and Nike® as well as a tradition of Mattel losing legal battles time and again against artists who parodied Barbie®. 1 The Barbie® Case 1. History of Mattel, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposition Actes
    AVANT-PROPOS Le présent document est la transcription des interventions effectuées à l’occasion du colloque Archimages10, qui s’est tenu à paris les 17, 18, 19 novembre 2010. Suivi éditorial : Marc Vernet – Conseiller pour le patrimoine cinématographique, Inp. Loraine Pereira – Chargée de mission pour le patrimoine cinématographique, Inp. Transcription : Téléscribe RESUME On a connu jadis le cinéma permanent, où l’on pouvait à toute heure entrer voir un long métrage de fiction à vedettes. Aujourd’hui, les débats autour du numérique ont remis en avant la permanence de l’enregistrement sur pellicule analogique, par opposition à l’inconnu du devenir des oeuvres sur support numérique. Mais la création, si attentive aux matières et aux dispositifs, a suivi, pour à la fois en bénéficier et en jouer, tous les méandres des évolutions technologiques du cinéma et de l’audiovisuel, ce qui pose aujourd’hui de nombreuses questions de conservation et de présentation. A l’heure du franchissement des frontières entre cinéma et vidéo, de la mutation des salles de cinéma, Archimages10 se propose de faire le point sur le statut, la place et le rôle de l’oeuvre audiovisuelle, en particulier au sein des institutions patrimoniales. On abordera les différents moments (et les multiples difficultés) des politiques à mettre en oeuvre, dans les musées comme dans les cinémathèques : production, acquisition, conservation, migration et duplication, exposition, avec des interventions d’experts, de créateurs et de conservateurs. Friedrich Kittler ouvrira les travaux où alterneront pendant trois jours interventions et tables rondes. Coordination générale : Comité de pilotage : Inp, en association avec le Collectif 24/25, Président : Bruno Racine (BnF) la BnF et le CNAP.
    [Show full text]
  • If You Pitch It, They Will Eat
    _______________________________________________________________________ The New York Times, New York, NY If You Pitch It, They Will Eat August 3, 2003 David Barboza <<<>>> This document is available on the Education Policy Studies Laboratory website at http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl/CERU/Articles/CERU-0308-149-OWI.doc ________________________________________________________________________ The McDonald's Corporation wants to be everywhere that children are. So besides operating 13,602 restaurants in the United States, it has plastered its golden arches on Barbie dolls, video games, book jackets and even theme parks. McDonald's calls this promotion and brand extension. But, a growing number of nutritionists call it a blitzkrieg that perverts children's eating habits and sets them on a path to obesity. Marketing fast food, snacks and beverages to children is at least as old as Ronald McDonald himself. What's new, critics say, is the scope and intensity of the assault. Big food makers like McDonald's and Kraft Foods Inc. are finding every imaginable way to put their names in front of children. And they're spending more than ever -- $15 billion last year, compared with $12.5 billion in 1998, according to research conducted at Texas A&M University in College Station. "What really changed over the last decade is the proliferation of electronic media," says Susan Linn, a psychologist who studies children's marketing at Harvard's Judge Baker Children's Center. "It used to just be Saturday-morning television. Now it's Nickelodeon, movies, video games, the Internet and even marketing in schools." Product tie-ins are everywhere. There are SpongeBob SquarePants Popsicles, Oreo Cookie preschool counting books and Keebler's Scooby Doo Cookies.
    [Show full text]
  • Barbie™ Dan Hunter F
    Barbie™ Dan Hunter F. Gregory Lastowka* Intellectual property laws are the means by which corporations allow access to their products. Mattel Inc.’s Barbie doll is highly dependent on the intellectual property system, and this Article provides the first serious account of the development of Barbie as an object of intellectual property. It demonstrates the significance of Barbie as an intellectual property object, and it traces how intellectual property laws emerged as such a powerful technology of control in the period from Barbie’s birth in 1959 to the present. The Article also shows that the great unrecognized feature of the intellectual property system is its ability to manipulate desire. I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 133 II. WORD MADE FLESH-TONED: CONCEIVED IN SIN .......................... 136 III. FLESH AND CONTROL ....................................................................... 142 IV. SEX AND POWER ............................................................................... 152 V. THE VENUS OF HAWTHORNE ........................................................... 159 I. INTRODUCTION Most discussions of intellectual property law miss the point. Authors tend to pick apart some small aspect of a law, explaining why their proposed reform will provide better policy outcomes, or they examine a court decision and explain why the judges there have gotten it wrong. Although many of these articles are useful contributions, they miss the larger story of how the intellectual property system works in practice, and particularly how the system has changed over the years, and how it has come to be so important in our modern day society. These accounts also fail to explain how companies have responded to the intellectual property system, and how they have engineered changes in the system over time. Although there are notable counter-examples, in general we have few accounts of the larger story of the development of © 2015 Dan Hunter and F.
    [Show full text]
  • ARTISTIC EXPRESSION TODAY: CAN ARTISTS USE the LANGUAGE of OUR CULTURE? MARK SABLEMAN* to Many of Us Who Came of Age in The
    ARTISTIC EXPRESSION TODAY: CAN ARTISTS USE THE LANGUAGE OF OUR CULTURE? MARK SABLEMAN* INTRODUCTION To many of us who came of age in the era of the Vietnam War and the Nixon administration, Senator Thomas F. Eagleton epitomized the model democratic legislator—a smart and eloquent champion for what is right, even when it is not popular. Those who knew him primarily in the last decade of his life (at least those few persons with whom he did not share his views on another mistaken war and arrogant president), may have seen a different person. Particularly as his hearing loss progressed, Senator Eagleton readjusted his sensory focus and became an enthusiastic connoisseur of visual art. He visited museums and galleries, and filled his home and office (and, to the delight of his colleagues, the corridors and rooms surrounding his office) with a hand-picked collection of paintings, photographs, and posters. Eagleton the passionate policymaker, and Eagleton the art collector, may seem like two different persons, or at least two quite different personas of a multi-faceted man. But there are many connections between art and politics— and in particular between art and political persuasion—at least one of which was a lifelong passion of Senator Eagleton. Political cartoons are born at the confluence of art and politics. Senator Eagleton loved crafty and effective editorial cartoons. He collected cartoons, * Mark Sableman is a partner with Thompson Coburn LLP in St. Louis, Missouri. He is an honors graduate of Georgetown University Law Center where he was Articles Editor of the Georgetown Law Journal.
    [Show full text]
  • Beebe ‐ Trademark Law: an Open‐Source Casebook Part III 1 III. Defenses to Trademark Infringement and Related
    Beebe ‐ Trademark Law: An Open‐Source Casebook III. Defenses to Trademark Infringement and Related Limitations on Trademark Rights ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 A. Descriptive Fair Use ............................................................................................................... 3 1. Descriptive Fair Use and Consumer Confusion ................................................ 4 KP Permanent Make‐Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc. .................... 5 2. The Three‐Step Test for Descriptive Fair Use ................................................ 10 Dessert Beauty, Inc. v. Fox ................................................................................. 10 Kelly‐Brown v. Winfrey ....................................................................................... 22 3. Further Examples of Descriptive Fair Use Analyses .................................... 48 International Stamp Art v. U.S. Postal Service ......................................... 48 Bell v. Harley Davidson Motor Co. .................................................................. 50 Fortune Dynamic, Inc. v. Victoria’s Secret .................................................. 51 B. Nominative Fair Use ........................................................................................................... 53 1. The Three‐Step Test for Nominative Fair Use ................................................ 53 Toyota
    [Show full text]