I was excited to see she was in Wedding Crashers, I didn't realize it! Yay for her, she's awesome.

And i'm gonna request that both the original post with the *** out name and the one that names the particular alumna (which, btw, I didn't realize who it was either even though she's one of my fellow alums!).

Both posts were uncalled for and inappropriate.

gee...and all i was worried about was the poor presentation of texas.
eee-haaa for petes sake.
that's totally silly.

gee...and all i was worried about was the poor presentation of texas.
eee-haaa for petes sake.
that's ridiculous.

haha

same here

I had no idea until someone specifically named it

I didn't know either and I AM a brain surgeon.

I was just thinking about this, but couldn't Gamma Phi Beta nationals sue Johanna for wearing their letters in the show, especially she does anything on the show that they wouldn't want their letters associated with? If there was a written agreement between GPhiB and Johanna, there is clear proof that Johanna violated her part of the agreement.

Woo-hoo, alumnae bashing! I am always up for a good Ann Coulter bashfest. :D

I had no idea who the person roqueemae was talking about was until she was named either. So it wasn't super obvious!

Well yeah, but you can't get blood from a turnip. I.E. if she doesn't have any $$$ it would really be pretty pointless to sue her. They'd be better off suing MTV for wrongful use of symbols or something of the like. Although I'm sure MTV can claim ignorance on this one.

The First Ammendment allows Johanna to wear the shirt and act however she wants -- even if she's no longer a member. You may not like it, but if organizations could sue people for misbehaving while wearing their logos/letters/emblems/jerseys, we'd all be in trouble.

The First Ammendment is the same protection that allows alumni to come on these boards and post nasty rumors about anonymouse people from their own schools or organizations.

Actually, no.

Free speech isn't the end-all and be-all when it comes to such topics.

Nor should the "goings on" of this public message board be a comparison. However if you insist on making a comparison, what occurs in cyberland isn't completely immune from legal action, either.

This post isn't a challenge or a flame -- I want to know your honest opinion if you are experienced with First Ammendment Law:

Please explain your viewpoint further. Are you saying that people aren't allowed to wear greek letters on television shows if they aren't members?

Also, could someone/Greekchat members be sued for posting things about unamed members -- true or not true? Such as stuff about "gang bang" rooms being named after members? I know that is tip-toeing along the lines of libel -- but I thought that there were different rules when it came to public figures.

Please elaborate.

It's pretty self-explanatory.

OK,
If you don't want to give others a better explanation of your post or knowledge, fine.

I was just asking, in a very respectful way, for you to give those who aren't as familiar with slander/libel/First Ammendment issues a better explanation of what is acceptable and what isn't. Some people might not be as knowledgeable as you, so I was just hoping you could enlighten all of us. No need to be so arrogant.

Cool.

If you now admit to not being completely knowledgeable, you should avoid swooping in to provide insight and remind people of the First Amendment. ;) No harm and no foul.

I would never say that I'm 100% knowledgable on any subject, or claimed that I'm always right. But if you're going to shoot holes in my post, I'd just ask you to explain your position to others so they can understand the different interpretations of our laws. If you're not prepared to do this, don't flame people.

Don't be so sensitive and do not make this about you.

I don't think asking you to participate in a healthy discussion about online postings is being "sensitive" :) Just wanted to know your opinion, that's all. People on this forum are talking about what can be done about members who poorly represent others on national televison while wearing their letters.

*PMs were invented for a reason.*

Now back to your regularly scheduled thread. :)

Real World Austin, what?

There is a quote feature.

Do not use the phrase "flame people" if you do not want to appear sensitive or as if you are taking it personally.

It is not about my opinion. It is about the fact that freedom of speech is not the end-all and be-all. If the sorority so chooses, they will attempt some sort of recourse. If they have no legal ground to stand on, they will be informed as such. Until that point, we have laws of the land and organizational mandates that supercede aspects of freedom of speech. No one in this country is truly free to say and do whatever they want, especially if they are wearing symbols that are legally protected and reserved to some extent.

So there, wasn't that self-explanatory? ;)

shut up

Wow, touchy people....

I think Danny will return to Austin. I think Melinda is a WILD CHILD!!! What was it, one day in the house and she had kissed a girl and a guy? And a bf of 3 years? I bet he feels like a giant tool seeing this on TV, especially if she didn't warn him about it. Good entertainment, though I am tired of seeing her prance around in her "unmentionables" ;)

Wow, intelligent.

Apparently this is what people get now for trying to keep a thread on track. I am finished participating in anything in this thread that is not relevant to the subject.

And way to be grown up about it.

shut up

Was this thread about RW Austin in general or specifically about Johanna and Gamma Phi Beta?

Serious question.

It started about Johanna and GPhiB, but given the title of the thread, I think as long as it stays on RW Austin, I think it's ok.

Since you're keeping us on topic:

It's in Greek Life and it's still about Johanna and Gamma Phi Beta.

Ok, FINE, then keep it about that. Geez. I actually think it may be just about time to get rid of the whole thread. It's getting out of hand.

Boo hoo :rolleyes:

Wow.

I'm a little curious about the legalities too. Would the agreement that Johanna signed with GFB be considered "gratuitious" if she didn't receive anything in return? Can GLOs control who wears their letters? Sweatshirts and T's with letters sometimes show up at thrift shops. Also, the part about the GLOs requiring members to return anything with letters sounds pretty dubious. (Realistically, it seems strange that someone who left a GLO would *want* to keep wearing the letters, but I never saw it as a legal issue.)

Do any of the mods know if there is an existing thread on this topic? I also think it's an intriguing/controversial issue, but I think people want to discuss the Real World Austin or Johanna. If there isn't, let's start a new thread.

I think there might be a thread in the Entertainment forum about the show as a whole.

Check News & Politics, perhaps-- good idea to move it to a new thread!

ETA: for a discussion about 1st Amendment, that is! I agree, move Real World Threads to Entertainment!

Real World 16- Austin

Found it. :)

The First Amendment, also known as the Establishment Clause, is only applicable to government interference in freedom of speech, expression, and religion. In fact the whole Bill of Rights is about what government can or cannot do to individual citizens.

This thread is on topic. We're still discussing Johana and Gamma Phi Beta.

I was just curious about the limits of organizations' ability to control their trademarks vs. individuals right to express themselves and use goods that they purchased. For example, I'm a horrible runner. Could Nike say that I wasn't allowed to publicly run in their shoes because it might reflect poorly on them?

;)

LOL!! Help us all.

Shut up. :D :D :D