Lawsuit against Carpe Donktum citing civil rights violations over pro-Trump meme is thrown out of court.
President Trump and meme creator Carpe Donktum (Logan Cook) share a court victory today with the dismissal of the civil suit in which they both served as joint defendants.
Both Trump and Cook shared a video on Twitter that Cook had altered to make it look as though CNN was reporting a story about a racist white toddler chasing a black toddler.
The original, unedited viral video shows the toddlers running towards each other until they meet and give each other a hug. The video continues with the toddlers running in the same direction down the sidewalk together.
Cook altered the video’s following segment by inserting the CNN logo and a “BREAKING NEWS” banner to poke fun at the global news network’s race-based news reporting.
According to The Postmillennial, the plaintiffs in the case brought suit before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, but the defendants, Donald J. Trump and Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., asked for the charges to be dismissed. And they were.
Cook shared news of his legal triumph on Instagram posting, “CASE DISMISSED / JUSTICE PREVAILS / THAT IS ALL.”
Cook had suffered a permanent Twitter ban nearly a year ago over the meme, allegedly for copyright infringement. Those who believed their rights had been violated hired lawyers, but the case was dismissed once it reached the courts.
The Postmillennial reports:
The meme was in the public domain, according to Donktum, but the meme’s original creator sought legal action in an attempt to punish Donktum because the meme was popular with supporters of President Trump.
The plaintiffs then claimed that the video was used without their consent, and further was used for “advertising purposes and/or for the solicitation of patronage for Trump in the State of New York.” The alleged that they had endured “pain and suffering and mental anguish.”
…
The plaintiffs sought money from the defendants. The defendants, Trump and his campaign, said that the case should be dismissed because the “[p]arody [m]eme unequivocally involves a topic of significant public concern.” They argued further that “the video is protected because it is Satirical… and that it was not directed at any of the plaintiffs, whom they did not even know.”
…
The court determined that This Court finds that plaintiffs’ claims… are subject to dismissal on several grounds.” The meme was, the court found, “newsworthy.” The note that part of the campaign message, “as well as his presidency, was to incessantly attack the mainstream media as purveyors of ‘fake news’, including his claim that the media exaggerates the extent of racial division in this country.”
“Additionally,” the court continued, “‘works of fiction and satire do not fall within the narrow scope of the statutory phrases ‘advertising’ and ‘trade.'”
“[A]ny reasonable person watching the video knew, or should have known, that at least a portion of its contents was not real. Since the video is therefore a satire, albeit one which some may consider to be rather distasteful, this Court is constrained to find that it is not actionable.”
Jon Fleetwood is Managing Editor for American Faith.
