hi-law-rious

I've recently read about a couple more trademark-based lawsuits. With each one I get the feeling the defendants will be able to get off by saying they're parodies or something. But it's still pretty funny that they got sued.

The first one involves DC Comics suing over an artist exhibiting homoerotic paintings of Batman and Robin. I think artists are supposed to have special protection from getting sued or something. Plus, it's not as though the idea of something going on between the Dynamic Duo has never been suggested before. How else could there have been a Comics Code? Not that it helped.

The other lawsuit is even funnier: Slipknot is suing over those Burger King ads of the metal band dressed like chickens, complaining that it confused fans into thinking that they were endorsing BK. Actually, I had thought when I saw the ads "So they're like Slipknot, but chickens". But I didn't think it actually WAS anyone from Slipknot, so I don't think that will hold up in court. Also, my mother thought anyone who could be confused with people who dress up like CHICKENS and pimp BK food should probably be too embarassed to sue.

At least one of these stories has got to be a special report on The Daily Show at some point, they're just too good. In other news, I found on the latest update of superdickery.com that there's a new theory on why Superman is a Dick: because he has no dick. I guess that would explain it.