>>2974027>>2974023I'm not saying it DOESN'T make sense in any way at all, just that the image presents several possible interpretations that all seem feasible at first glance but end up being nonsensical
It makes sense in that Anon is illustrating his point with a symbolic reference to the meaning of a well-known comic/meme image, i.e. that BJ fucked himself.
And if BJ is supposed to be the guy riding the bike, then I get how he was using the Leica name as a vehicle (actually a great obvious interpretation I hadn't thought of)
However it makes less sense once you start trying to match BJ's situation to the other diegetic action in the comic. For instance just what is "copyright" in the abstract? Why is BJ the one wielding it and not the actual holder of the copyright, i.e. Leica? In BJ's situation, he made the site, everything was going fine, and then someone from Leica got wind of it etc. etc. The comic makes it seem like he did something after he'd already set up the site to screw himself over, when in reality, assuming that he did screw himself over, this screwing took place at the very beginning with the act of making the site.
Basically, it doesn't make sense to separate "leica" from "trademark law" in the context of the comic. If anything, BJ was wielding "leica" and leica was wielding the trademark.
It doesn't make sense as soon as you
