Jay-Z profiting from OWS by selling T-shirts?

[TBMASE]

Evidently the money isn't going anywhere but into his pockets
Thoughts?

[alp227]

1. Well, shouldn't OWS be INDEPENDENT of corporations anyway?

And is OWS even trademarked formally?

[Fire Walk With Me]

2. "Little Banker".

Same disease.

[PoliticAverse]

3. Previous discussion on the T-shirt issue here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=5056535&mesg_id=5056535

[SomethingFishy]

4. Not any more.. they were pulled from the website

after Jay-Z took a wall of shit for profiting off OWS without peeling off a dime of the profits to help them. Just another greedy fucker trying to profit off of someone elses idea...

[Bluenorthwest]

5. The scab was shamed into stopping, but he should be boycotted

for doing it in the first place and for being an exploitative good for nothing.

[MADem]

6. He designed 'em, he copyrighted 'em, he contracted for the production of 'em, he's

paying the wholesale costs.

If you find his motives avaricious, and his unwillingness to give a percentage of his earnings away selfish, eschew purchasing the item.

Vote with that wallet of yours! We don't HAVE to consume every new product that hits the market.

[msongs]

7. at least it is better than his usual toxic stuff lol nt

[MADem]

9. I'm an old fart....I don't buy that pricy stuff! I have shirts that are older

than most of the kids in the streets.

Hey, use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without--that's what I was taught, and I'm sticking to it!

[Journeyman]

8. He only profits if people buy. . .

use that as your guide. . .

[frazzled]

10. There's an article in today's Tribune about all the people making money ...

off of OWS by selling junk. And none of the profits go to OWS. For the life of me, I can't find this article (titled "99% May Get 0% of Occupy Sales") on their web site, but it's in the print Sunday paper, page 3.

Some facts from it: Zazzle.com has more than 30,000 Occupy products for sale (!). And they're simply lifting logos designed by the local movements. The OWS people are not happy. (e.g. "We are not thrilled that people not at all associated with us are co-opting our name or image and making profits that are not given back to our movement," said Occupy Chicago spokesman Michal Philbrook.)

I think this should give people pause who are always arguing about copyright. And it's not about the money. Do you want some creeps selling junky, possibly carcinogenic mugs made in China appropriating your identity logo, designed by an artist, to use for whatever they want? Do you want your images and public image degraded by anyone who wants to use it? I doubt it. You should also then think of writers, artists, etc. who have a problem with this.