'Going Rouge' To Come Out Same Day As Palin's Book

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TeamMaico

October 24, 2009 9:53 AM in reply to rbeats

You don't get it because you are quite possibly only educated to the 3rd grade or less. Or you have fallen so deep for the BullSh#t Obama is throwing out there that you are about to suficate.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

imadjdiva

October 24, 2009 11:16 AM in reply to TeamMaico

HA HA HA!! I guess you missed school on the day they taught how to spell suffocate....because you so obviously have a much higher level of education.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jweb271

October 22, 2009 4:14 PM

I think that's pretty brilliant. If this book gets stocked, and it should, it will inevitably end up under the wrong Christmas trees. I love that Rogue/Rouge is already a problematic word to spell correctly, so there should be plenty of Googling mishaps as well.

Nice play.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

speck

October 22, 2009 4:51 PM in reply to jweb271

Even better, subversive liberals everywhere can purchase "Rouge" as gifts for conservative family members and friends, while claiming they thought they were buying "Rogue."

Oops, my bad, Grandpa.

My Christmas gift list just got deviously shorter. : )

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jweb271

October 22, 2009 5:01 PM in reply to speck

Hmmm. If all of my Republican friends and family hadn't already jumped off that sinking ship, this would be a great idea.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

auntialias

October 22, 2009 9:13 PM in reply to jweb271

Turns out there isn't just one but two Going Rouge books. In addition to the one mentioned abolve, there's this:

Going Rouge: The Sarah Palin Rogue Coloring & Activity Book

Web site at http://www.goingrouge.net/

It's yet another book that Sarah Palin didn't write. Aaaaand..... It has pictures!

But our book is chock full of mazes (like “Help Sarah find her way to the White House”), puzzles, word games, and brilliant illustrations to color or chuckle over as we mercilessly lampoon and parody everything Palin in 48 pages of hilarity.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

auntialias

October 22, 2009 9:14 PM in reply to auntialias

ow. sorry. above. above.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GregorZap

October 23, 2009 2:18 AM in reply to jweb271

I'll bet dan Quayle will buy going Rouge on purpose, yet be wanting the Rogue version. hehehehe

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

_jonny_5_

October 22, 2009 4:20 PM

Repubs wont care, or notice if they got the wrong book.

How many people who were planning to buy this book were actually going to Read it.

It Still has Sarah's picture on it, so it will serve its purpose as decoration on the book shelf.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jweb271

October 22, 2009 5:00 PM in reply to _jonny_5_

The bedroom bookshelf for many.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AnswerFrog

October 22, 2009 5:02 PM in reply to _jonny_5_

LOL

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

draftedin68

October 22, 2009 4:20 PM

.

Duck!

I hope she wasn't choppin' up some moose meat (ya know, fer a pie) when she heard the news of the Goin' Red-face book.

Anyone in the vicinity would've been in grave danger of skull cleavage.

.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

kunda311

October 22, 2009 4:39 PM

Is this a joke or is one of those books really called "Going ROGUE" and the other one "Going ROUGE"?

They say life is its own metaphor. I guess Republicans and Sarah Palin are their own punchline as well.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 22, 2009 4:59 PM in reply to kunda311

um.. that's the joke. "Going Rouge" is a play on the title of her book.

She'll probably sue, and I'd imagine she'd have a good basis for it (but would like to hear what an actual lawyer would say). The "Rouge" book is seeking to capitalize on confusion with her book, looking like it's written by her by the placement of the subtitle. It'll probably have a clear "By the editors of The Nation" on the front by press time.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

cinesimon

October 22, 2009 7:15 PM in reply to SkippyFlipjack

She's far too much a part of public debate for the book to be considered a copyright issue. She may well try, but she will fail.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Lestatdelc

October 22, 2009 8:59 PM in reply to SkippyFlipjack

See, we do need tort reform. ;-)

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Mr.E.

October 22, 2009 11:26 PM in reply to SkippyFlipjack

Can't sue (or at least can't win). Satire and mockery of anything in the public sphere is perfectly legit. MAD magazine's been doing it for a couple generations. The closer the image, the better the satire. This is about as good as it gets.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GregorZap

October 23, 2009 2:20 AM in reply to Mr.E.

Tina Fey would have made a better cover for the Rouge version. She's like a LOT prettier.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

(RxR)

October 23, 2009 6:43 AM in reply to Mr.E.

U2's record label successfully hounded the group Negativland back in the early 90s for producing a similar product. their argument was that the album's design was meant to confuse buyers about whether they were purchasing a U2 album. i have no idea now how all that turned out after all the appeals and everything, but i'm pretty sure the parody had to be shelved after the first round.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Glow-Orb

October 23, 2009 10:56 PM in reply to (RxR)

Negativland lost. SST records couldn't take the pressure and wouldn't stand behind them. They talk about it in their book/CD "The Letter U and the Numeral 2."

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ejg3

October 22, 2009 4:43 PM

The title sounds like another way of saying putting lipstick on a pig.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

October 22, 2009 5:30 PM in reply to ejg3

Yah, you betcha!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

howie

October 22, 2009 4:53 PM

Who was the anchor who actually read "Going Rouge" when talking about the Palin book? I think it was David Shuster subbing for Olbermann. His news copy actually had a misprint.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

kunda311

October 22, 2009 5:55 PM in reply to howie

I saw a video with an news anchor saying this but I'm 95% sure it wasn't Shuster.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JimmyBobby

October 22, 2009 5:01 PM

I worry that this just puts her in another spotlight and gives credence to her victimhood at the hands of the vicious left. The best treatment she could possibly receive is to be totally ignored.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

VivaAmerica!

October 22, 2009 5:49 PM in reply to JimmyBobby

Yes, but she won't be ignored by the media even if the Left stayed quiet.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GregorZap

October 23, 2009 2:24 AM in reply to VivaAmerica!

The longer we keep her in their spotlight, the farther it is for the GOP to get any back. They aer so caught up in their blind loyalties they can't even cast out the Cheneys. I mean, the old guy is one taco away from his last heart attack and the girls are dumb as posts, which used to get someone into the VP slot until Gore. But now that a Vp has developed into a viable and useful position, none of the Cheney girls would ever fit the bill.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AnswerFrog

October 22, 2009 5:01 PM

Hilarous.

Good way to steal her thunder during her big PR roll out.

Let's hound this rightwing lying jackass.

Bravo!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

LFC

October 22, 2009 5:05 PM

She'll probably sue, and I'd imagine she'd have a good basis for it...

I'm not a lawyer, but this was hashed out when Al Franken wrote "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right." Faux News tried to sue, but I believe backed off without a case going to court. Satire has very long and deep judicial protections, and they apparently didn't stand a chance while definitely helping Franken's sales.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 22, 2009 5:16 PM in reply to LFC

Yes but I think you need to make it clear that it's satire. I don't think the current cover does that, and I'm not even sure if this collection of essays would qualify as a satirical take on her book. Also, Fox tried to sue to keep him from using the phrase "Fair and Balanced" on trademark grounds. In that case, its use was clearly satirical; CNN, for example, couldn't start using the phrase without a big fight from Fox.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

October 22, 2009 5:26 PM in reply to SkippyFlipjack

Well, I don't know: the subtitle on the knockoff is "An American Nightmare". And they've got a thunderstorm in the background rather than sunny skies. Those, along with the intentional play on words in the title, seem like sufficient tipoff to me. Then again, IANAL. But I should imagine The Nation has some good ones to call on.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

October 22, 2009 5:29 PM in reply to slb

Or I guess I should say that the second part of the subtitle is "An American Nightmare".

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 22, 2009 5:40 PM in reply to slb

that's what I mean; it appears at first glance to be written by her.

I imagine their lawyers are saying they should keep the provocative cover to get press now, then change it when it actually hits the stores.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Karl the Marxist

October 23, 2009 9:46 AM in reply to SkippyFlipjack

Complete nonissue.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

azpaull

October 22, 2009 5:24 PM in reply to LFC

It doesn't sound like the content will be satiric - I think they'll be able to get away with claiming that the cover is satire while the content is serious?

Maybe they could bolster their argument by putting a picture of Tina Fey on the cover instead.

Very clever stuff! We definitely need to make sure this gets display space near rogue.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 22, 2009 5:43 PM in reply to azpaull

yeah, and that doesn't sound like real satire, does it? if so, I'd take the cover of a Rush Limbaugh book, change the title ("The Way Thing Oughtn't Be") and fill it with my own short stories.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

salame

October 22, 2009 5:11 PM

I love it

You know that the reading challenged worshippers of the barracuda will
be confused and buy whatever has her picture on it. Rogue, Rouge -
too fabulous.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GregorZap

October 23, 2009 2:27 AM in reply to salame

But the kids will get a wonderful lesson when they open their gifts from grandma and grandpa!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

RobbyLove

October 22, 2009 5:17 PM

Petty. And will only breed sympathy for her on the knuckle-dragging right.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

NobleCommentDecider

October 22, 2009 6:22 PM in reply to RobbyLove

She doesn't care about getting the sympathy of the knuckle dragging right, she just wants their money.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

psyopswatcher

October 23, 2009 1:21 AM in reply to NobleCommentDecider

Touche!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Lou

October 24, 2009 8:57 PM in reply to NobleCommentDecider

It really is obviou$, isn't it she is all about the ca$h.....
if I hear one more time she is about family values I will be heading for the puke bucket.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mJJ

October 22, 2009 8:00 PM in reply to RobbyLove

I am a moderate Republican and I have NO sympathy for her whatsoever. The far right freaks have taken over our party so I and many just like me vote consistently with Democrats now. I stay in my party just to rabble rouse at precinct meetings. So even as a Republican, although a disenchanted one, I would buy the book. Further, I still have family who live in Alaska and I worry about the financial health of the state since Palin's governorship.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

MrSmith1

October 22, 2009 5:36 PM

Dyslexic Republicans will get a surprise. LOL
Bravo to whoever thought of this.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Winston Smith

October 22, 2009 5:42 PM

That's so funny. 29%ers won't be able to tell which is which.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 22, 2009 5:51 PM

Apparently, "trade dress" is the term we're looking for. Check Wikipedia; it basically prevents someone from making a nearly identical product in an attempt to confuse consumers. Not sure if a book that's not even out yet can be considered to have fixed itself in the public mind, though.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

witty1

October 22, 2009 6:10 PM

Can't wait for Taibbi's take on it!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

palinshutup

October 22, 2009 6:43 PM

Definition of 'rogue' [merriam-webster] vagrant tramp, dishonest worthless person...

I wonder if she bothered looking that up before she decided on the title. Guess not. Should have been Ghoulin Rouge.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mcrose68

October 22, 2009 6:45 PM

Just in case anyone is wondering :
From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rogue
–noun 1. a dishonest, knavish person; scoundrel.

Somehow it doesn't suprise me that the remaining GOP considers that an American dream.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GregorZap

October 23, 2009 2:29 AM in reply to mcrose68

They have no shame. That's a credential for them.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Norm

October 22, 2009 6:52 PM

Harper is doing a 1.5 million copy initial print run for the Palin book because of pre-sales. I doubt that "Going Rouge" will sell that many copies.

E-book orders for the Palin book have broken e-book sales records.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

NobleCommentDecider

October 23, 2009 1:00 AM in reply to Norm

How many did you order Norm?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

LimoLiberal

October 22, 2009 7:01 PM

This made my day!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

kirstjen

October 22, 2009 7:20 PM

I'm going to buy Going Rouge & take it to one of her book signings & see if she will autograph it for me.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

SJNewshound

October 22, 2009 7:43 PM

Great anagram in the title. I wonder if she knows what an anagram is? Or if her name anagrams to things like "Sharia Plan", or "Anal Parish".

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Lestatdelc

October 22, 2009 9:04 PM in reply to SJNewshound

Of course she knows what an "Anagram" is, "Anagram" was the name they almost picked out for Trig.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Susan L.

October 22, 2009 7:52 PM

We really need to convince Amazon.com to stock this book.

I emailed them with the request that they carry it and providing all the info.

If you want to do the same, here’s instructions, since it wasn’t easy to figure out how to send them a email.
From amazon.com home page - select help from the top right,
Next, select the yellow contact us button on the right a few inches down from the top.
Select the email tab.
Select Other questions and comments for the subject line.

By the way on amazon.com searching for Going Rouge will pop up Palin's book.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

sherifffruitfly

October 22, 2009 8:29 PM

I just don't care about Blithering Idiot. I just don't.

October 22, 2009 11:58 PM

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leftflank

If Sarah were asked questions about the content of her book, would that be a "gotcha moment"?

October 23, 2009 12:27 AM

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Nancy Irving

Why isn't the book listed on Amazon? A search for the title brings up only Sarah's tome.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

psyopswatcher

October 23, 2009 1:32 AM

Just wait till "Where the Wild Things Are" comes out on video and people end up bringing home Neve Campbell and Denise Richards in "Wild Things" for family night with the kiddies instead--sometimes by accident, sometimes accidentally on purpose. You know it's gonna happen.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ditto

October 23, 2009 3:30 AM

Great play on words. Libs will buy sarah's book by the millions. I mean come you libs are the same people that can't figure out a butterfly ballot. Conservatives who can actually read will not be duped at all. Libs have little ACORNS for brains.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

dupod

October 23, 2009 9:05 AM in reply to ditto

"Conservatives who can actually read will not be duped at all..."

Judging by the signs at TEA parties and the late night trolls who turn up here, 'conservatives who can read' don't seem to be the target audience for Palin's book.

Thanks for the morning chuckle, though. Nothing to brighten a dreary day like a semi-literate comment questioning the literacy of others.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

bondwooley

October 23, 2009 9:14 AM

If Sarah has her eyes on the White House, I hope she watches the new GOP re-branding video:

http://bit.ly/fxv3G

(satire)

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

juneau121

October 23, 2009 9:47 AM

This book, along with most of these responses, remind me of when I was in elementary school and saw a bully trip a kid walking down an aisle. He laughed, and so did all his sheepish followers, because it's just funny to see someone you don't like (or even secretly envy) fall down. Every one of you really should be ashamed. You resort to juvenile name-calling and insult-throwing aimed at Palin and anyone who may like her. You've even befriended the Republicans who don't like Palin. Just like a clique in school--the more people with you, the more secure you feel.

I hate to throw a little cold water on your Palin-bashing party, but I REALLY like Sarah Palin. I've even given MONEY to Sarah Palin. I'm going to READ her book. I'm probably even going to SEND MORE MONEY to her. I agree with what she says. AND I'M NOT ALONE BY A LONG SHOT. I look forward to her remaining in, and even dominating, America's political future. And, I have brain cells - a LOT of them. What may separate me from you, then? Perhaps it's my sense of morality because I don't think it's funny to trip someone and laugh when they're down. Instead, I cheer when they get back up. The authors of this book have done nothing to hurt Palin's popularity. Believe me, they've strengthened it. The authors' parents should be so proud of the adults their children have become. Simply vicious behavior masquerading as humor.

(On a side note, I continue to have my account disabled...perhaps my comments are unacceptable to the moderators?)

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 23, 2009 10:33 AM in reply to juneau121

Juneau123, you have a point and I share your discomfort with the idea of seeing people gang up on someone especially when they are down.

But, but, but -

I'm wondering, where do you get the idea that the content of this book will be vicious or mean-spirited? Looking at the list of contributors I see authors who are known for thoughtful, well-researched, and yes often sharply funny, political commentary.

I expect the book's content to be critical, and surely you can admit there is plenty to criticize in her record, her stated goals and vision for the future, her ambitions and how she attempts to get to where ever the hell it is she is trying to get to. That's politics, and that's fair game.

Another thing, I am really puzzled by your concern that anyone is kicking Palin "while she is down."

She's DOWN? Really? That I don't understand. Yes she lost the election, or more precisely McCain did, but in the process she has become incredibly famous, wealthy, and influential way beyond anything she could have hoped for say 18 months ago. She's got a multi-million dollar book deal, she's left the unfulfilling job and the burdens it entailed, she's building what looks like a castle on the lake (with a turret) and legions of admirers are donating money to her personal tax-free ATM, er, I mean AFT.

Seriously, where is the down in that? Why am I supposed to feel sorry for her, or believe that she is incapable of handling criticism when she has made her career in a field where criticism of what you do and how you do it comes with the territory, period?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

juneau121

October 23, 2009 10:53 AM in reply to NitPicker1

Do I sense a stone-thrower? It's always more comfortable to rationalize bad behavior when someone's making money. I'm sure this book will be very balanced and written from an objective perspective, right? The title, and the blatant attempt to draw attention from Palin's book, certainly says otherwise.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 23, 2009 2:23 PM in reply to juneau121

Bad behavior? What specifically is the bad behavior here?

This is a book of political commentary.

The contributors - Shannyn Moore, Jim Hightower, Noimi Klein, Jeanne Devon (AKMuckraker), Joe Canason, Max Blumenthal etc. make no secret of their political leanings. And so what? There really and truly is nothing inherently wrong with that. This book doesn't have to be "balanced" and "objective" any more than Palin's own book does. She gets to put out a book about herself told from her perspective, her critics get to put out a book written from a different perspective. Yeah First Amendment!

As far as taking advantage of Palin's memoir coming out, well, I guess Tina Fey was "drawing attention from" Sarah Palin's candidacy, too. :-)

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

speck

October 23, 2009 2:29 PM in reply to juneau121

Hold on a second.

First of all, the comments found here are quite mild in comparison to some I've seen on this site in response to other stories. Not to mention what I've seen on sites like HuffPost and KOS. I won't even get into the drivel you can find on various Tea Party sites and other right wing media outlets

Secondly, if you think there were more than 13 comments that involved juvenile name-calling and insult-throwing, you can consider yourself extremely sensitive. That 13 is including the one that expounded that "Libs have little ACORNS for brains," by the way. So, 13 out of 65... 20%. That's hardly most.

And let's be honest, your comparison of those comments to a bully tripping an innocent kid walking down the aisle is a bit over the top. A more apt comparison might be, say, snickering and commenting about the poor auditions that they showcase at the beginning of every American Idol series. And though I would agree that viewers should be ashamed of themselves for reacting that way to said auditions, (or for enjoying the show at all, for that matter) it's hardly comparable to assault.

If the comments on this particular item exceed your tolerance threshhold, you've got a lot of tsk-tsking to do, and it baffles me why you'd waste your time on something this innocuous.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 23, 2009 9:55 AM

You won't find this book on Amazon because it's being put out under O/R Books, a new publishing house using a new model of distribution - books are only printed on-demand when purchased and are non-returnable, available directly from the publisher or through independent bookstores only. No warehouses, no big retailer discounts, and no returns. They claim that efficiency will allow them to concentrate on marketing and publicity, and that theirs is a much more sustainable model in every sense of the word.

Looks like there will be little opportunity for careless customers to confuse the two books; they won't be lying side-by-side in the WalMart discount bins.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Joe Markowitz

October 23, 2009 1:43 PM

I see a Lanham Act claim in the making here.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ditto

October 23, 2009 1:44 PM

This is another attempt by a lib that wants to redistribute the wealth of others. They have no one that would buy a book they would write. So they try to CAPITALIZE off of someone by being deceptive. This is typical LIBERALISM. This is the redistributive wealth policies of the MAOBAMA administration. I'm sure Sarah will be happy for this person the same way she will be happy for LEVI that has nothing to offer of himself. The writer of this book is no different than LEVI. After this book is released and he or she becomes famous to the libs they will have their centerfold opportunity.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 23, 2009 2:29 PM in reply to ditto

Just a note: most of the contributors to this book are already famous...

And God help us all the day Jim Hightower gets a centerfold opportunity!

Seriously, thanks for the laugh.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Lou

October 24, 2009 9:12 PM in reply to ditto

From what Levi told US, with what he is doing to cash in, he sat around the Palin kitchen table too long. He said that was the talk....money money money

You cannot believe that the Dems are about redistribution of wealth....at no time in our history has the gap between the haves and the have nots been wider than on 1-19-09.

So if you think about it, sure the wealth has to be redistributed from the dirty hands who stole and distributed it to them and their cronies in that 95%.
I am all for it, go Robin Hood Obama, get the money that was stolen from US.

October 23, 2009 11:25 PM

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Damon Garcia

The authors and publisher of "Going Rouge" will all be sued for misappropriation of name and likeness and false advertising under the Lanham Act just for starters $$$ (not to mention the fact their book wouldn't sell even if it was free). Also, this book only shows their feelings of inadequacy and insecurity with regard to the success of Sarah Palin and the loyalty of her supporters. As the cover of the book palms itself off as a Sarah Palin book, the evil one mocks and mimics the good because inside he is selfish and perverse. These "writers" mock and mimic Gov. Palin. She is the real thing, with deep family values, work ethic, and love for our country. And what do ya know--she's conservative. More and more I'm discovering that these values define the true conservative movement, which is on the rise. This scares the ---- out of these writers and they will do everything they can in their weak attempt to discredit Sarah Palin. Keep on doin what you're doin Sarah! Do not fear these insecure, educated idiots. What they have created and contributed to our country has no value. Peace, Damon

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ditto

October 23, 2009 11:59 PM in reply to Damon Garcia

Great post Damon! They are definitely scared of us conservatives. They can not figure out how we can really be true to our convictions. Satan is definitely the author of confusion. And a liar from the beginning. This tactic does not seem to bother the left. I don't know if Sarah will or is able to sue over this. But it definitely seems to me that she should be able to. Our job isn't to win but be faithful in all things. Keep the faith and God Bless

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JP2U

October 26, 2009 4:15 PM

The people talking about the authors of this book being successfully sued are misinformed and apparently fail to understand what free speech is and how our speech tradition protects us all. It's no wonder to me that Palin supporters and conservatives more generally seem to be in the majority of those relishing the thought of judicial censorship of political speech.

Regarding the Lanham act: that has *nothing whatsoever* to do with this because no trademark, registered or not, is at issue. Is she going to trademark a cloudy and red dress so that no one else can ever use that combination again?

Also the purpose of both books is not (merely) "commercial advertising or promotion" but is sociopolitical speech. Any harm that came to Palin would be a result of that protected speech.

Relatedly, there are, presumably, no demonstrably false or misleading statements made by the authors of the parody. You might disagree with them but I doubt that the authors of the parody would be so foolish as to outright libel Palin by reporting objectively false information. It's the conservatives' habitual inability to distinguish between fact and opinion that is far more disturbing than anything that might be found in the parody.

As for the Negativland case: I don't know enough about that to make a close comparison but it seems that Negativland is a group that does little more than create sound collages. So if all they did was take U2's music and album covers and rearrange it then that very well might not have met the "minimal creative effort" criteria that is required to avoid copyright infringement.

But in the Rogue/Rouge case there are a few things to note: Firstly that, just as there is no trademark at issue, there is no copyright at issue. Will Palin copyright the sky and red dresses? Secondly, there certainly is new creative effort at least within the text of the Rouge book. In fact even the cover is a new creative effort since both the change to a business suit and the stormy sky help to distinguish the Rouge book and serve a speech purpose which any reasonable and reflective person would understand. And that brings us to the third point which is, just as previously, that the chief purpose of both books is, presumably, not mere album sales or money-making but the expression of general socio-political beliefs. Such expression is as fundamentally protected a right as can exist in our tradition.

Any efforts by Palin to suppress this book or sue the authors would backfire dramatically and would reveal to all that she and her supporters really are the would-be totalitarian statists which so many of us already suspect them to be.