Russell Brand plans to trademark Ron Paul's R3VOLUTION logo!

[Valli6]

I know it was created by Ron Paul's supporters, not his campaign - and it was never trademarked, but it still pisses me off that this self-absorbed, socialist turd has the gall to trademark Ron Paul's logo!

May 9, 2015

He’s the self-styled revolutionary who backed Ed Miliband at the Election and advocates the overthrow of ‘corporate tyranny’.

But The Mail on Sunday can reveal Russell Brand is himself embracing capitalism, trademarking a logo using his own spelling of ‘revolution’.

With supreme irony, his company has reserved the right to use the logo, with backwards letters spelling ‘love’, on trinkets, stationery, wallets – even lingerie.

He has been selling T-shirts with a similar logo on his website. Customers can ‘pay what you want’, though a minimum £30 applies – with anything above that ‘donated to various charitable causes’.

The logo is on the cover of the book he released last year in which he rails against capitalism.
n the book, which has sold tens of thousands of copies, Brand admits he is one of the richest one per cent in society ‘a tourist in poverty’.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ts-masses.html

[S.Shorland]

Thought that was the creation of a Ron Paul supporter

[GunnyFreedom]

Thought that was the creation of a Ron Paul supporter

It was. Russel Brand is a liar, a commie, and a usurper. This pisses me off.

[GunnyFreedom]

As if we didn't have enough problems already with idiots associating Ron Paul's platform with the hard left.

[afwjam]

$#@!er

[Sola_Fide]

As if we didn't have enough problems already with idiots associating Ron Paul's platform with the hard left.

You're right...I see that happening on the internet all the time.

[GunnyFreedom]

Here is the rehost of the proken image, by the way.



This filthy POS needs to eat shirt and die. I was ambivalent about this jackhole before, now I despise him worse than Juan McFake and Lindsay Grahaaaaamnesty.

[GunnyFreedom]

We need to put a call out to the guy who originally designed the logo, put together a crowdfund and fight this. This is Ron Paul's legacy this communist jackhole is stealing.

[heavenlyboy34]

Thought that was the creation of a Ron Paul supporter

Man, I've been railing about IP laws and this sort of thing forever...hopefully this is a wake-up call for people.

[presence]

I've been thinking about patenting a method to draw anarchy symbols with a red rattle can.

[heavenlyboy34]

I've been thinking about patenting a method to draw anarchy symbols with a red rattle can.

Perhaps someone should copyright Mr Russell's name and image-give him a taste of his own medicine.

[wizardwatson]

We need to put a call out to the guy who originally designed the logo, put together a crowdfund and fight this. This is Ron Paul's legacy this communist jackhole is stealing.

The legacy that no one cares about?
The legacy that half the supporters are ashamed of?

We aren't using it are we?

Why should we throw a fit about it if we aren't actually using it? Are we going to go ballistic over nostalgia?

Even when we were using it, it never had 100% support.

[GunnyFreedom]

The legacy that no one cares about?
The legacy that half the supporters are ashamed of?

We aren't using it are we?

Why should we throw a fit about it if we aren't actually using it? Are we going to go ballistic over nostalgia?

Even when we were using it, it never had 100% support.

You got a mouse in your pocket? Speak for yourself.

[Valli6]

I googled "Ron Paul's logo" and "Russell Brand" and found this comment supposedly from Ernie Hancock (seems legit). It's his response to an Amazon book reviewer who pointed out that Brand stole the logo he used on his book cover.

Posted on Dec 31, 2014 9:51:15 AM PST

This is the first comment I have ever made regarding the use of this artwork that I have been credited with creating. I was inspired by a similar logo I remember seeing associated with the Beatles' back... a long time ago. The 'logo' was created as part of a campaign I ran here in Arizona in 2006 (do an image search for "Still Voting?" and you'll see our first use of the artwork). Ron Paul has been a regular speaker at our Freedom Summits here in Phoenix since 2001 and I knew that the philosophy he would advocate in his run for POTUS would be best represented by the 'LOV3olution' artwork. The impact on people here in Arizona during its limited exposure in 2006 convinced us immediately the role this concept would have on the planet when combined with the history and rhetoric of Dr. Ron Paul. The only "ownership" I claimed to the artwork was only enough to make sure that no one "owned" it and that it would be as open source as the Peace Symbol.

So as Russell Brand continues his journey towards the philosophy of a "Peaceful and Voluntary leave me aloneist world" I am encouraged by the spreading of the idea that revolutions based in love are not only desired but possible. If Russell strays too far from 'the Brand', there will be plenty of us to remind him and his supporters of why this particular piece of art was so powerful so quickly. While we may disagree on many things, I am of the opinion that most activist are motivated by the desire to do good. Libertarian philosophy needs to remind as many as possible that only good means will produce a good result. And I think Mr. Brand is on this path of awareness.

Ernest Hancock - Publisher FreedomsPhoenix
http://www.amazon.com/Revolution-Rus...ews/1101882913
(You have to scroll down to "Why did he rip Ron Paul's Logo?" and then click on comments)

I'd say Brand has "strayed too far" now that he's chosen to trademark it so he can print it on crap he wants to sell.

[NoOneButPaul]

I'll gladly take the help where it comes from I just hope he admits it's not their logo.

[Mr.NoSmile]

I know it was created by Ron Paul's supporters, not his campaign - and it was never trademarked

socialist turd has the gall to trademark Ron Paul's logo!

...well, it wasn't trademarked, so...

It's nice to people getting so worked up over a nine letter word.

[GunnyFreedom]

I googled "Ron Paul's logo" and "Russell Brand" and found this comment supposedly from Ernie Hancock (seems legit). It's his response to an Amazon book reviewer who pointed out that Brand stole the logo he used on his book cover.


I'd say Brand has "strayed too far" now that he's chosen to trademark it so he can print it on crap he wants to sell.

Aye, all this means is that the logo was created by Ernest Hancock, and NOT Russell Brand. The logo did appear on Hancock's site in 2006:

http://web.archive.org/web/200610130...sthancock.com/

It's a shame that the logo creator seems okay with it being copyrighted by a communist. I think I've just lost every ounce of respect I ever had for 'freedoms' phoenix.

Just WTF does Hancock think copyrighting a logo means??

It means we can't use it without Brand's permission.

[Valli6]

The only "ownership" I claimed to the artwork was only enough to make sure that no one "owned" it and that it would be as open source as the Peace Symbol.

So I wonder if Ernie Hancock has some sort of open source license for it - which would negate anyone from trying to claim it exclusively - like Brand wants to do now?

[GunnyFreedom]

So I wonder if Ernie Hancock has some sort of open source license for it - which would negate anyone from trying to claim it exclusively - like Brand wants to do now?

If so, it's time for Hancock to step the heck up because it's about to get coopted by a blatant communist.

[pcosmar]

It was released copy-left,, so it can not be copyrighted..

I do not believe it can be legally trademarked either.

it may be tried,, but doubt it will hold up to legal challenge.

[phill4paul]

It means we can't use it without Brand's permission.

Meh. Come at me, bro. Is this not a R3VOLUTION?

[thoughtomator]

"prior art" should nuke any suit Brand tries to file

[heavenlyboy34]

It was released copy-left,, so it can not be copyrighted..

I do not believe it can be legally trademarked either.

it may be tried,, but doubt it will hold up to legal challenge.

The "Happy Birthday" song is copyrighted, even though it theoretically should be public domain. No one ever said IP is rational...

[heavenlyboy34]

Meh. Come at me, bro. Is this not a R3VOLUTION?

If ya have to ask permission, it's not really and truly. (IMO. Others may have a different understanding of what Freedom (TM) means)

[VoluntaryAmerican]

What an ass hat.

[phill4paul]

If ya have to ask permission, it's not really and truly. (IMO. Others may have a different understanding of what Freedom (TM) means)

If you're pissed off because someone has copyrighted your revolutions logo you are not doing your revolution right.

[tod evans]

Who in the Sam Hell is Russell Brand?

Some Tee-Vee personna?

[angelatc]

It was released copy-left,, so it can not be copyrighted..

I do not believe it can be legally trademarked either.

it may be tried,, but doubt it will hold up to legal challenge.

This. Pete is right. The problem is that the lawyers will still bully you. Shabby Chic is trademarked, but she has lost every case that has gone to court. That does not stop her lawyers from bullying people who try to use it.

[angelatc]

The "Happy Birthday" song is copyrighted, even though it theoretically should be public domain. No one ever said IP is rational...

Why should "Happy Birthday" theoretically be public domain? (I agree that legally it should be public domain, but that's a matter of lawyers picking dates.)

[GunnyFreedom]

Who in the Sam Hell is Russell Brand?

Some Tee-Vee personna?

A British Communist who tries to claim that all the freedom on the planet belongs to his personal philosophy.

ANd 'communist' is not hyperbole.

He's basically an An-Com