"Tricking him" by paying for him to say stuff over Cameo, something he agreed to.
In fact, the only way he didn't know what he was being tricked into was that he didn't read what he said before he said it since you can say no to any request. It was fucking obvious he was being trolled. Here's one of the things he was paid to, and did, say and it wasn't even the most ridiculous:
Enjoy being laughed out of court, George.
Holy fuck. Reading that, how was it not obviously a troll/joke? Are our politicians that out of touch? Seriously. Are they actually that. Badly. Out. Of. Touch?
If so, I’ll be pouring one out for America. I know they are generally old, but come on!
Like I said, that wasn't even the most ridiculous one. This was. And yes, he said it.
TBF he got kicked out of congress for his shenanigans, is literally a national laughing stock for his idiocy, and also needed the money badly so likely would have said anything. A lot of moving pieces with this guy.
No need to pour one out, at least, not over this.
"Frankly, Kimmel’s fake requests were funny, but what he did was clear violation of copyright law,”
How?
Cameo sounds like work for hire to me. You pay, it's yours.
For each CAMEO Video (other than a Business CAMEO Video), you hereby grant to the User and the Recipient a non-exclusive, royalty-free, fully paid, worldwide, sublicensable, and perpetual license to use, reproduce, distribute, and publicly display the CAMEO Video, in each case, solely in accordance with the Site Terms, in any and all media, whether now known or hereafter invented or devised (including social media channels and third-party websites and platforms).
I'm only a humbly country space chicken lawyer but the terms explicitly say that Kimmel can do whatever the fuck he wants with the recording.
The idea that Kimmel doesn't have a legal team that checks for this stuff is laughable.
Oh, I'm sure they did, and made sure to get their payment up front
I'm really not surprised. They wouldn't even want to limit commercial use, because I'd assume companies paying celebrities for little blurbs for company parties and stuff like that is a meaningful chunk of their business.
Hard to take a lawyer seriously when the language is so clear and the direct premise of the site, though. It's not some obscure power grab in the EULA of a site focused on something different. It's what you're getting paid for.
I didn't even know about the Kimmel segment, now I'm gonna go find it and laugh at Santos. Thanks George, I wouldn't have known about these unless you sued
For anyone curious, I'll save you a click. I don't think it's particularly funny, but Santos is an idiot, so more power to them I guess.
Wait, they didn't even chop up the clips and play them out of context or anything? The fuck is Santos even complaining about?
He said on his show that he was going to make Santos talk to him on Cameo before he even did it.
George Santos doesn't like being deceived, and would have taken different actions if he knew better?
Do tell.
It's not news that santos is a fool but to think he feels he has a chance here against a media conglomerate... No way his lawyers are doing this on contingency right?
It's not about that. It's just a way to continue to get media attention.
Sure, but lawyers aren't usually free and I can't imagine who would be willing to take this case pro bono.
I can't imagine what for.
He is already a footnote. Nothing will change that. It's better than he deserves already. What will more attention give him? It's there literally a single person that doesn't hate him? I've never heard of anyone being a fan of him.
Let me get this straight. You were made fun of by a guy who works for Disney. An organization that's ridiculously protective of their brand and famous for not being fucked with. One of the most litigious organizations, with an army of lawyers who know more about entertainment law than anyone on the planet. And you're plan is to sue these people? Good luck.
Lucius, get back to work.
This fuckwit will need to sue every mirror manufacturer
Oh, George. Keep wasting that sweet Cameo money on lawyers because you're too stupid to realize they're fleecing you.
Enjoy losing that case, snowflake
At least it's just George Santos, nothing to worry about.
Good thing Kimmel didn't piss off that Devolder guy, though. I hear he's an excellent lawyer for the MIT rowing team.
This Santos guy needs to be in a facility where his connection with reality can be reestablished. He's clearly got some loose screws rattling around in his head.
I think he's broke and looking for a way to make some big bucks. Probably needs more plastic surgery or something.
I was actually confused when I saw the video because I didn't know how they could have possibly gotten George Santos to make it.
Amazing what a dedicated grifter will do for a couple hundred bucks.
Well somebody here isn't telling the truth, but the question is whom....hmmm....
So.... is he going to return the money?
This thing deserves all the ridicule it’s suffering.
I assume it won't be too long before Santos shows up at OnlyFans. Then he'll probably not only say whatever anyone wants for money, but also do whatever they pay him for. But please beware: he will probably sue everyone who "forced" him to provide "strange" services.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.