LoisLane, I guess I don't follow you. Of course they are encouraging others not to go and see it. The surest way to communicate one's point is to hit the other person in the pocket.
Also, if the grounds for the boycott are juxtaposition of gang violence (I don't recall what the grounds were) you have to ask yourself juxtaposition of *what* with gang violence. That is where the trademarked symbols, the Fraternity's goodwill (i.e., rep) that is associated with the symbols, etc. comes in isn't it?
Perhaps I have missed your point. Not sure.
SC
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoisLane
You all have made some interesting points.
I too agree that as owners Alpha Phi Alpha has every right to enforce the use of their trademark as they see fit, and if that was their position, I could respect that.
However in the call to boycott letter that Darryl Matthews issued the first thing he stated was that it was on the grounds of juxtaposition of gang violence as though the movie is misaligned with the vision, goals, and objectives of the fraternity. If Rob Hardy's letter is accurate, it’s hard for me to imagine that someone could come to that conclusion without having seen the movie. If they had seen it and came to that conclusion, fine. They are encouraging others not to see it, but they haven’t seen it either. It leads me to believe that it’s ALL ABOUT MONEY, but isn't it always?
|
Threaded Mode
