YOU'RE GIVING THE MOTORCYCLE CLUB SCENE A BLACK EYE

#MCPROTOCOL #BIKERNEWS #OUTLAWMOTORCYCLECLUBS
YOU’RE PUTTING A BLACK EYE ON MOTORCYCLE CLUBS! I’ve been hearing that out of a lot of creators now, especially ones that would support the format for years. Why the sudden change? Well, it’s hypocrisy at it’s finest. It’s no secret clubs and their supporters are upset when they see their club in the news, but hey, get rid of them instead of being upset with the messenger.
00:00 Introduction YOU’RE PUTTING A BLACK EYE ON MOTORCYCLE CLUBS
01:00 Biker News isn’t anything new
04:15 Looking forward to show with Danny D Low and Black Dragon
07:43 If you’re not an independent you cant do biker news
10:20 The statement by Ed on the negativity
11:58 It’s about informing the biker community
13:29 If you don’t want those actions reported on don’t do it

🔥Trademark law does not let a trademark owner exert its trademark rights to stop news reporting about it or its products or services. You see proof of this everyday on the front pages of newspapers, the homepages of news websites, and countless blogs. Mainstream reporters and non-traditional journalists routinely report on earnings announcements, job lay-offs, and accounting scandals without worrying that they are infringing or diluting the trademarks of the companies and organizations they report on. There are several legal bases for this result: there is no risk of confusion between the news source and the trademark owner; nominative fair use protects this use of the trademark owner's mark; and the federal dilution statute expressly exempts "news reporting and news commentary" from a dilution claim. See 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(3)(B). As noted above, one court has held that a blogger's critical commentary on a company qualified as "news reporting and news commentary." See BidZirk, LLC v. Smith, 2007 WL 3119445 (D.S.C. Oct. 22, 2007).
Trademark law does not permit a trademark owner to use its trademark rights to silence commentary and criticism. As with news reporting, courts recognize the important First Amendment values at stake and usually deny efforts by trademark owners to encroach on legitimate commentary and criticism. There are several legal bases for this result: there is no risk of confusion between the commentator and the trademark owner, and nominative fair use may protect this use of the trademark owner's mark. Additionally, courts are likely to find that your use of a trademark in commentary or criticism is "not in connection with a good or service" and "noncommercial" (the argument is especially strong for the latter category). But note that some courts may find your use of a trademark for criticism and commentary to be commercial if you host advertising or link to commercial websites. In any event, to defeat a trademark dilution claim, you do not even need to show that your use is noncommercial. The federal dilution statute creates a categorical exemption for "criticizing . . . or commenting upon the famous mark owner or the goods or services of the famous mark owner." 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(3)(A)(ii). 🔥

#Harley
#HarleyDavidson
#Biker
#Protocol
#MotorcycleClub
#MC
#Tradition
#MotorcycleRally
#Motorcycles
#bikers
#outlawmotorcycleclubs
#bikerlife