Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canadian Government Controls Online Flag Displays

Posted by timothy on from the but-that's-unamerican dept.

SiliconEntity writes: "According to this article from Matt Gaylor's Freematt's Alerts mailing list, the Canadian Government has trademarked the Canadian Flag and has the power to force Canadian citizens to remove the image from their web sites. The claim is made by one Jan Ovens, ovens.jan@tbs-sct.gc.ca, of the Federal Identity Program, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. The site in question, a Canadian smokers' rights group, was forced to remove their image of the flag after Mr. Ovens contacted them. Ovens claims that the flag is a registered trademark of the Government of Canada and writes: 'The flag symbol is a global identifier of the Government of Canada. It is used to identify federal institutions and is protected under the Trademarks Act (Section 9 (1)(n)(iii) of the Act). The flag symbol was approved and entered as an official mark of the Government of Canada on the Trademarks Register held by the Canadian Trademarks Office, which is part of the Canadian Intellectual Property Office at Industry Canada, on 30 September 1987.' Are any other countries claiming the power to stop their citizens from showing the flag?"

5 of 124 comments (clear)

  1. Which Symbol by linuxbert · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Canadian Gov has a identifying mark whic is the word Canada with a cnaadian flag flying from the d, over the letter a. This Idnetifies gov departments and should not be used by others.

    The Candian Flag however should be free for all citizens to use in a respectfull manner.

  2. I'm gonna get modded to hell for saying this... by tregoweth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...but I wish the U.S. did the same thing with its flag, if only to reduce the flow of cheesy "patriotic" items that have appeared since September 11. Profiting from tragedy is always ugly.

    But anyway, if the U.S. or Canadian government got a royalty for every commercial use of its flag, it would have made a fortune. Canada can get a cut of the Maple Leafs' merchandise profits, the U.S. can get a cut of Tommy Hilfiger and Ralph Lauren's profits...

    1. Re:I'm gonna get modded to hell for saying this... by ElDuque · · Score: 2, Interesting

      After seeing those "Thanks for Traveling" signs at hotels on my way back to school, I began to wonder if those were legal. Turns out we already have a law, the U.S. Flag Code which states

      (g) The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature.

      Now, the Flag Code is an interesting piece of legislature, at the top of the link above it talks about the lack of penalties included, and how other, stronger, legislation has been struck down. The article also states

      The Flag Code may be fairly tested: 'No disrespect should be shown to the Flag of the United States of America.' Therefore, actions not specifically included in the Code may be deemed acceptable as long as proper respect is shown.

      We all know that those signs are marketing for the hotels as much they are promoting "Unity" and that jazz. Is that disrespect?

    2. Re:I'm gonna get modded to hell for saying this... by ElDuque · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is this what you are referring to?

      Criminal penalties for certain acts of desecration to the flag were contained in Title 18 of the United States Code prior to 1989. The Supreme Court decision in Texas v. Johnson; June 21, 1989, held the statute unconstitutional. This statute was amended when the Flag Protection Act of 1989 (Oct. 28, 1989) imposed a fine and/or up to I year in prison for knowingly mutilating, defacing, physically defiling, maintaining on the floor or trampling upon any flag of the United States. The Flag Protection Act of 1989 was struck down by the Supreme Court decision, United States vs. Eichman, decided on June 11, 1990.

      While the Code empowers the President of the United States to alter, modify, repeal or prescribe additional rules regarding the Flag, no federal agency has the authority to issue 'official' rulings legally binding on civilians or civilian groups. Consequently, different interpretations of various provisions of the Code may continue to be made. The Flag Code may be fairly tested: 'No disrespect should be shown to the Flag of the United States of America.' Therefore, actions not specifically included in the Code may be deemed acceptable as long as proper respect is shown.

      The Acts declared unconstitutional imposed penalties for desecration. I don't really understand how it can be all right without penalties, but unconstitutional in the "Flag Protection Act". The Flag Code is still on the books, and the "Thanks for traveling" signs are clearly in violation.

  3. Re:The Trade-marks Act Section In Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm no lawyer but...

    Exactly what 'Trade' is the government in?

    Notice that the trade mark legislation quoted above refers to connection with a business.

    Perhaps the Canadian government (like many western countries) is in the business of trying to attract only the wealthiest, most talented immigrants, and trying to prevent its citizens from moving to other countries so that it can collect their taxes. But somehow, all that doesn't strike me as a real business, in the legal sense. Do they invoice those activities?