# Meme copyright. 2019 edition. Pepe the frog vs Infowars.



## FAST6191 (Jun 3, 2019)

So you thought the new EU copyright stuff was going to see memes troubled? Turns out the US fancied some of that action first. Granted it is not the first time -- notable for around here the then popular scribblenauts series saw trouble as far back as 2013 for including the then popular nyan cat and eternally popular keyboard cat.
https://gbatemp.net/threads/scribbl...for-nyan-cat-keyboard-cat-easter-eggs.347278/
An agreement was eventually reached there http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2013/09/keyboard-cat-nyan-cat-win-warner-bros-lawsuit.html with a payment being offered to the meme copyright holders (not sure if they were one of those copyright library types in the end).

Anyway it seems the owner of the pepe the frog character decided to go up against infowars (or their parent company -- some discussion in the video below, and in the document) for featuring the pepe the frog character in the background (though clearly recognisable as such) of a poster sold and promoted by them (I don't know if it was a work for hire from or just an avenue of sales for the artist at this point). For those unfamiliar then infowars is the satirical/conspiratorial/somewhat actual news program that saw it and its host Alex Jones banned near enough simultaneously from a variety of unrelated social media websites in what is probably going to be recognised as the start of the major "unpersoning"/deplatforming pushes back in August 2018 (Twitter of all places being the last major holdout and dropping the hammer in September of the same year). Prior to that it was a very popular show (several million monthly viewers), today I am not sure of the numbers but between its audience being its audience and Streisand effect I don't imagine they are doing too badly.
From the court document "Gross revenues from sales of the MAGA poster totaled $31,407.44." so far from nothing on that one.
Poster in question. Pink ring highlights the frog.
Click for bigger

 


Brief history of the concept, including the ascension to "hate symbol"

If videos are not your thing then you can go more in depth on
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/pepe-the-frog

Reading of and explanation the lawsuit in question by a copyright lawyer.


Short version of that then unless they come to some kind of arrangement then various summary judgements have been dismissed and upheld and a court date is likely in the future.

I found a copy of the court document itself on https://www.courthousenews.com/pepe-the-frog-v-infowars/ so attached it here as well for those that enjoy dry legal documents as much as I, or are maybe just curious. That said its pondering of fair use is quite interesting (the video above by Leonard French also covers it) and as we frequently see discussions on the matter (see the many rounds of Nintendo vs youtube/let's plays, and Nintendo vs a lot of things) then it could be of interest here for those looking to see how such things might be evaluated in the real world. Personally I still like https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ but real world also works, and is also how the courts tend to work.
For myself I am not sure where I would find myself. I would say a rendition is clearly there in a very recognisable capacity (one some of infowars' peeps recognised) and looking at the document I would need to see more to know if the pepe author essentially public domained his work (various notable quotes say yes, court document says they were satire and in fact the copyright was sought and respected all along) or was itself derived from something else (there is another popular cartoon frog made prior to the initial publication of the pepe in question from Argentina also called pepe), and beyond that it is a small part of the poster (prominent enough and not out of place for the context of the work) so we would also have to contemplate what goes on that.


----------



## Xzi (Jun 4, 2019)

Pepe's creator has been against his use as a symbol of the alt-right for a long time now, so this lawsuit isn't too surprising.  I don't really have an opinion on whether memes should be fair use or not, but I am in support of the creator in this instance.  Alex Jones is just another provocateur shitbird, willing to stoop to any low if it makes him a quick buck.


----------



## dAVID_ (Jun 7, 2019)

I still find it a bit funny that some people argue that Pepe is inherently a hate speech symbol.






And it's not like this situation hasn't occurred before.


----------



## Glyptofane (Jun 7, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Pepe's creator has been against his use as a symbol of the alt-right for a long time now, so this lawsuit isn't too surprising.  I don't really have an opinion on whether memes should be fair use or not, but I am in support of the creator in this instance.  Alex Jones is just another provocateur shitbird, willing to stoop to any low if it makes him a quick buck.


Alex Jones is a joke even to people in the artist formerly known as alt-right, he's just the only one with money. His team decided to use Pepe and latch onto its momentum months after it was a thing that was better and funnier than him and causing him to lose followers over being so gay and fake and not addressing the real problems with our society.


----------



## cots (Jun 7, 2019)

I'm not familiar with Alex Jones, but I'd have to do some research into if he's "far right" because it seems if you have a single republican value these days you're considered to be in this group. So I don't take that insult with much consideration. As far as fair use goes, usually the person with the most money invested into the case wins - well, from what I've experienced. I don't care for memes and still don't really understand their meaning or usage (yes, I've read various definitions) and this frog image, whatever it's purpose looks like a 2 year old drew it. I'd never include it in anything I created or posted. A swastika, in recent times, has been used as a symbol for hate. While using one with varying attributes and a certain direction may not be considered hateful, it's still going to cause you a lot of grief so unless you're purposely into causing outrage from the left and the right (of course, that would exclude real nazi's that actually respect the image) I'd advise not to include it in anything you post (give a few more hundered years and then maybe see if the meaning has changed) that is, unless you want Liberal outrate, which is akin to a bunch of babies with drown syndrome crying because they stubbed their toes (it sure does make a fun sight though).


----------



## Glyptofane (Jun 7, 2019)

cots said:


> I'm not familiar with Alex Jones, but I'd have to do some research into if he's "far right" because it seems if you have a single republican value these days you're considered to be in this group. So I don't take that insult with much consideration. As far as fair use goes, usually the person with the most money invested into the case wins - well, from what I've experienced. I don't care for memes and still don't really understand their meaning or usage (yes, I've read various definitions) and this frog image, whatever it's purpose looks like a 2 year old drew it. I'd never include it in anything I created or posted. A swastika, in recent times, has been used as a symbol for hate. While using one with varying attributes and a certain direction may not be considered hateful, it's still going to cause you a lot of grief so unless you're purposely into causing outrage from the left and the right (of course, that would exclude real nazi's that actually respect the image) I'd advise not to include it in anything you public (give a few more hundered years and then maybe see if the meaning has changed) that is, unless you want Liberal outrate, which is akin to a bunch of babies with drown syndrome crying because they stubbed their toes (it sure does make a fun sight though).


He's very right wing, but also watered down compared to what we have now. The guy was really probably like 20% responsible for converting me back in 2006. He's basically Fox News with conspiracy theories implemented. Never talks about Israel, blames China instead which is simply senile and insane.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 7, 2019)

cots said:


> I don't care for memes and still don't really understand their meaning or usage (yes, I've read various definitions) and this frog image, whatever it's purpose looks like a 2 year old drew it. I'd never include it in anything I created or posted.


Short phrases and simple images/image sequences have long been created and uttered, before then being remixed. Sometimes it is there to convey a message, sometimes it is to forestall thought, sometimes it is there to be an unexpected entry and thus throw things out of a groove (whether positively or negatively may depend upon your position, permanently or not may also be a thing to contemplate), sometimes the message might only be understood with context and knowledge not available and maybe only available to those steeped in a somewhat ephemeral but otherwise shared culture and other times it is simple enough to convey a message to just about anybody with knowledge of the language/general context.
The artistic talent (a different concept to merit) required to make it (or remixes thereof) has little bearing on this. In this case thought its simplicity coupled with "something is worth what someone else is willing to pay for it", and a lot of people seem to put great creed in the thing (when you have US presidential candidates and mass media decrying it publicly, regardless of basis for it, then you have surely achieved some considerable measure of notoriety), to launch this "character" deep into to consciousness of many.



cots said:


> which is akin to a bunch of babies with drown syndrome crying because they stubbed their toes (it sure does make a fun sight though).


?




I find misplaced outrage as hilarious as anybody, indeed derive considerable amusement from causing it/provoking it in loads of people of all sorts of approaches to the world (got to sip that devil's advocaat), but is this a "do as I say, not as I do" thing?


----------



## Xzi (Jun 11, 2019)

Alex Jones has reached a settlement to pay Pepe's creator $15,000 rather than risk taking the case to court.  Happy ending.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 11, 2019)

I would not have minded seeing some case law, or just an interesting case, but a net profit by all parties, give or take lawyer expenses. Could have been worse outcomes.


----------

