Metal Reviews :: View topic - Chuck Norris sues over 'mythical facts'

Norris, who rose to fame in the 1970s and 1980s as the star of such films as The Delta Force and Missing in Action, says the book's title would mislead readers into thinking the facts were true.

Chuck doesn't sue his lawyer is his foot and he will roundhouse kick this punk to the next dimension

Chuck Norris has publically supported these "facts" and enjoys them quite a bit, that does not grant a company liscense to market and print materials using his name and reputation as a means to sell books and make money.

But...

The publisher will win the lawsuit because parody is protected free speech. The only way Chuck has a leg to stand on in court is if he himself can prove that his own book of "facts" would suffer (due to copyright infringment). There is no such project on his end in the works, so this isn't likely to happen.

I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour?

Adveser wrote:

There is a difference between parody and totally using someone's name to sell a product. The publisher loses this battle.

Haha read this in the news this morning.

"Chuck Norris's tears can cure cancer, but unfortunately he doesn't cry" :lol:

I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour?

Zad wrote:

I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour?

He didn't start all of those stupid ass jokes though. And he is a legit badass, he even had the respect of Bruce Lee, and the two starred in one of the best Kung Fu fight scenes ever. Chuck's the good guy, the internet is the bastion of idiots making dumb jokes.

It's funny that because people started making Chuck Norris jokes he assumes people care about what he's doing at present.

Afro Lint wrote:

Adveser wrote:

There is a difference between parody and totally using someone's name to sell a product. The publisher loses this battle.

Too bad Chuck Norris didn't stop this earlier, if he had maybe he could make a claim that it has harmed his reputation and career, He certainly can't make that claim now years after the fact because he doesn't like HOW they are producing the material.

Essentially the parody statute is written in such a way, it supercedes trademarks, copyrights and anything else, even defamation, so long as it is not obviously "not really a parody" and as stated, no one takes this shit seriously, Chuck will lose the case because he is essentially trying to stop legal parading of his image because there's money being made, not because he objects to the content

Eternal Idol wrote:

Zad wrote:

I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour?

He makes Arnie look like a good actor.

Author:	flying_guitars [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:17 pm ]
Post subject:	Chuck Norris sues over 'mythical facts'
http://optuszoo.news.ninemsn.com.au/art ... 04&rss=yes AP - Tough-guy actor and martial arts expert Chuck Norris has sued publisher Penguin over a book he claims unfairly exploits his famous name, based on a satirical internet list of "mythical facts" about him.

Author:	Astaroth [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:41 pm ]
Post subject:
he he Quote: Norris, who rose to fame in the 1970s and 1980s as the star of such films as The Delta Force and Missing in Action, says the book's title would mislead readers into thinking the facts were true. I highly daubt anybody would think those facts were true

Author:	Adveser [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:46 pm ]
Post subject:
Chuck Norris has publically supported these "facts" and enjoys them quite a bit, that does not grant a company liscense to market and print materials using his name and reputation as a means to sell books and make money. But... The publisher will win the lawsuit because parody is protected free speech. The only way Chuck has a leg to stand on in court is if he himself can prove that his own book of "facts" would suffer (due to copyright infringment). There is no such project on his end in the works, so this isn't likely to happen.

Author:	unknownkadath666 [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:
yes it could be called parody, but they coukld argue that it is considered illegal use of his intellectual property if you argue that he he created a character of chuck norris and they are useing that likenes.

Author:	traptunderice [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:21 pm ]
Post subject:
Adveser wrote: Chuck Norris has publically supported these "facts" and enjoys them quite a bit, that does not grant a company liscense to market and print materials using his name and reputation as a means to sell books and make money. QFT. Couldn't the guy who created the original website sue them as well for stealing his list? Who knew that Norris' first name was Carlos?

Metal Reviews https://metalreviews.com/phpBB/

Chuck Norris sues over 'mythical facts' https://metalreviews.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=10550	Page 1 of 2

Author:	MetalStorm [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:59 pm ]
Post subject:
Chuck doesn't sue his lawyer is his foot and he will roundhouse kick this punk to the next dimension

Author:	Nicodemus [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:59 pm ]
Post subject:
MetalStorm wrote: Chuck doesn't sue his lawyer is his foot and he will roundhouse kick this punk to the next dimension For the love of God, no.

Author:	Afro Lint [ Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:03 pm ]
Post subject:
Adveser wrote: Chuck Norris has publically supported these "facts" and enjoys them quite a bit, that does not grant a company liscense to market and print materials using his name and reputation as a means to sell books and make money. But... The publisher will win the lawsuit because parody is protected free speech. The only way Chuck has a leg to stand on in court is if he himself can prove that his own book of "facts" would suffer (due to copyright infringment). There is no such project on his end in the works, so this isn't likely to happen. There is a difference between parody and totally using someone's name to sell a product. The publisher loses this battle.

Author:	Goat [ Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:43 am ]
Post subject:
I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour?

Author:	Radagast [ Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:54 am ]
Post subject:
Zad wrote: I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour? He'd be dead before his finger touched the trigger.

Author:	Adveser [ Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:29 am ]
Post subject:
Afro Lint wrote: Adveser wrote: Chuck Norris has publically supported these "facts" and enjoys them quite a bit, that does not grant a company liscense to market and print materials using his name and reputation as a means to sell books and make money. But... The publisher will win the lawsuit because parody is protected free speech. The only way Chuck has a leg to stand on in court is if he himself can prove that his own book of "facts" would suffer (due to copyright infringment). There is no such project on his end in the works, so this isn't likely to happen. There is a difference between parody and totally using someone's name to sell a product. The publisher loses this battle. Too bad Chuck Norris didn't stop this earlier, if he had maybe he could make a claim that it has harmed his reputation and career, He certainly can't make that claim now years after the fact because he doesn't like HOW they are producing the material. Essentially the parody statute is written in such a way, it supercedes trademarks, copyrights and anything else, even defamation, so long as it is not obviously "not really a parody" and as stated, no one takes this shit seriously, Chuck will lose the case because he is essentially trying to stop legal parading of his image because there's money being made, not because he objects to the content

Author:	hellraiser_xes [ Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:20 pm ]
Post subject:
Haha read this in the news this morning. "Chuck Norris's tears can cure cancer, but unfortunately he doesn't cry"

Author:	Radagast [ Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:34 pm ]
Post subject:
hellraiser_xes wrote: Haha read this in the news this morning. "Chuck Norris's tears can cure cancer, but unfortunately he doesn't cry" Welcome to last year sometime.

Author:	Eternal Idol [ Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:50 pm ]
Post subject:
Zad wrote: I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour? He didn't start all of those stupid ass jokes though. And he is a legit badass, he even had the respect of Bruce Lee, and the two starred in one of the best Kung Fu fight scenes ever. Chuck's the good guy, the internet is the bastion of idiots making dumb jokes.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC + 1 hour
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Goat [ Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:27 am ]
Post subject:
Eternal Idol wrote: Zad wrote: I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour? He didn't start all of those stupid ass jokes though. And he is a legit badass, he even had the respect of Bruce Lee, and the two starred in one of the best Kung Fu fight scenes ever. Chuck's the good guy, the internet is the bastion of idiots making dumb jokes. He makes Arnie look like a good actor.

Author:	noodles [ Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:45 am ]
Post subject:
It's funny that because people started making Chuck Norris jokes he assumes people care about what he's doing at present.

Author:	Afro Lint [ Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:36 am ]
Post subject:
noodles wrote: It's funny that because people started making Chuck Norris jokes he assumes people care about what he's doing at present. Considering he had a big hit TV show for like 10 years and is successful with his books, I'd say that the internet turds are, once again, completely wrong.

Author:	noodles [ Tue Dec 25, 2007 5:09 am ]
Post subject:
ORLY? why the hell would anybody read a book by chuck norris also, why the hell would anybody read a book full of lame chuck norris jokes i hope that author didnt get payed more than 20$ for it

Author:	unknownkadath666 [ Tue Dec 25, 2007 5:23 am ]
Post subject:
Adveser wrote: Afro Lint wrote: Adveser wrote: Chuck Norris has publically supported these "facts" and enjoys them quite a bit, that does not grant a company liscense to market and print materials using his name and reputation as a means to sell books and make money. But... The publisher will win the lawsuit because parody is protected free speech. The only way Chuck has a leg to stand on in court is if he himself can prove that his own book of "facts" would suffer (due to copyright infringment). There is no such project on his end in the works, so this isn't likely to happen. There is a difference between parody and totally using someone's name to sell a product. The publisher loses this battle. Too bad Chuck Norris didn't stop this earlier, if he had maybe he could make a claim that it has harmed his reputation and career, He certainly can't make that claim now years after the fact because he doesn't like HOW they are producing the material. Essentially the parody statute is written in such a way, it supercedes trademarks, copyrights and anything else, even defamation, so long as it is not obviously "not really a parody" and as stated, no one takes this shit seriously, Chuck will lose the case because he is essentially trying to stop legal parading of his image because there's money being made, not because he objects to the content It doesn't make a difference if its harming him or not. the parody law is all good and fine but it isn't written to serve the purpose of protecting the publishers in this case. They need to pay to use his likeness / get his approval.

Author:	Eternal Idol [ Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:03 pm ]
Post subject:
Zad wrote: Eternal Idol wrote: Zad wrote: I am sick and tired of this old twat milking himself for gain. Can't some Finnish nihilist pop one in his head and do us all a favour? He didn't start all of those stupid ass jokes though. And he is a legit badass, he even had the respect of Bruce Lee, and the two starred in one of the best Kung Fu fight scenes ever. Chuck's the good guy, the internet is the bastion of idiots making dumb jokes. He makes Arnie look like a good actor. Arnie is a fine, fine actor. That scene in End of Days, where he's looking at his dead wife's snowglobe and he's welling up in tears? Bloody brilliant.