Posted on May 18, 2015
1
1
0
I agree that some images are iconic and shouldn't be used in advertising. I also believe in free speech and being able to say and use imagery that is not trademarked or copyrighted. This is one of those difficult calls, while I would not have produced a shirt like this and think it is distasteful., I would say that it is allowable according to the constitution.
So, at what point is an image off-limits? Should UA have bowed to the pressure? Does this image bring recognition to the original event or does it somehow make the original event seem trivial?
http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/18/news/under-armour-iwo-jima-shirt/index.html
So, at what point is an image off-limits? Should UA have bowed to the pressure? Does this image bring recognition to the original event or does it somehow make the original event seem trivial?
http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/18/news/under-armour-iwo-jima-shirt/index.html
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
Under Armor (UA) is very popular with military and produces quality products. Their use of such an iconic image seemed over the top. I think pulling the product was the correct response.
(3)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
What's the big deal? Looks like a bunch of fellows setting up a basketball hoop to me...
(1)
(0)
LTC Gavin Heater
I think, my opinion only, that there are iconic images in all societies that instill a sense of Nationalism and Patriotism. When displayed in the same theme, and not for profit, they can be parodied. The First Amendment is very liberal as our Constitutional Framers intended it. So what is left...Good Taste versus Poor Taste. I think this image was in poor taste. Once again, just my opinion.
(0)
(0)
This is a question that can only be answered by those Marines that planted the flag of their family members. To include the photographer that took the picture and his family members.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next