http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beck_v._Eiland-Hall
Beck filed a complaint to the WIPO under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), arguing the domain name of the website was defamatory and asserted trademark infringement in its use of his name. Eiland-Hall filed a response brief to WIPO which cited the U.S. Supreme Court case Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, asserting the website's domain name was a form of free speech and satirical political humor.
Beck made a supplemental filing in the case arguing the domain name
was misleading and might lead individuals to believe it contained
factual information. Eiland-Hall filed a surreply and stated Beck had depreciated the value of the First Amendment
by attempting to evade its reach in a legal proceeding outside U.S.
courts. On October 29, 2009, WIPO ruled against Beck, concluding that
Eiland-Hall was making a political statement through parody in a
justified usage of the Glenn Beck mark.
For once, some moron's action yielded something positive.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Congratulations Demolition!
Yes, yes, pro wrestling is entertainment. Yes, it borders on propaganda. Yes, it's all scripted. And yes, the WWE isn't nearly as en...
-
https://blackagendareport.com/unhoused-why-its-always-about-land For those of us who aren't white or rich, having land means something. ...
-
This one person (WA license BWN5997) evidently thinks they and their children are immune to parking procedures, and violating fire safety l...
-
https://blackagendareport.com/settler-colonialism-light-f-fanon-algeria-yesterday-kanaky-today-part-1 https://blackagendareport.com/settler-...
No comments:
Post a Comment