http://www.vancouversun.com/news/shirt+tempest+tests+copyright/8016293/story.html
http://metronews.ca/news/vancouver/539930/surrey-up-in-arms-over-the-future-dies-here-spoof-hoodies/
Today in class we discussed the place of parodies within copyright law. Similar discussions are also being had in Surrey, Vancouver. Recently, a local resident and entrepreneur started to sell clothing that read, “Surrey, the future dies here.” The city’s actual motto is, “Surrey, the future lives here.” The gun logo resembles the shape of the city’s skyline in the actual logo. In America, parodies are given more liberty to copy original works. Canada, however, only recently added parodies to its list of what is protected under copyright law. If the Canadian judicial system uses precedent like the American judicial system does, a future lawsuit could begin to clarify the freedom that parodies to mock work in Canada. That would be pretty important, eh?
Goldstein deals with that idea directly in the text Copyright’s Highway, when he discusses the rights authors have in different countries due to the differences in copyright laws from country to country. Personally, I believe there should be a more unified system of copyright law throughout the world (with exceptions in each country for whatever reasons they feel are necessary). In the example you provided, it would give authors, entrepreneurs, and comedians more freedom for parodies and more security over their intellectual property.
Does the city even have a copyright over its own motto? I suppose it would, to make it unique among other city logos. I think a main point of tension in the article though is the political nature of the parody. We might be getting into discussions of slander over discussions of intellectual property.