Slashdot Mirror
Using Your Own Name May Be Infringement, Part 2
phillymjs writes "We're probably all familiar with Uzi Nissan and his fight to keep his nissan.com domain name from the clutches of Nissan Motors. Well, more same-name idiocy came to light today-- the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is reporting that their staff music writer, Bill Wyman, has received a cease-and-desist letter from lawyers representing former Rolling Stone Bill Wyman, for "a seriously misleading and, arguably, an intentional, unauthorized exploitation of our client's name, goodwill and publicity value."
It should be interesting to see how this one plays out, because Bill Wyman the musician was born William George Perks and changed his name to Bill Wyman in 1964. Journalist Bill Wyman was given that name at his birth in 1961."
...a good start...
Why must we be so sue-happy that respectful citizens cant even enjoy their own names without some over-paid copyright lawyer hearing the crinkling of his clients not-so-hard earned money.
It's obvious Bill Wyman is going to win this case.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
I lucked out. Imagine my last name was McDonald? I wouldn't be able to refer to anything in the possessive!
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
though many people seem to ignore this simple fact. This guy did the right thing, which was to tell the wannabe-Wyman to shove it up his ass.
sulli
RTFJ.
Considering the name change and the dates involved, this one just *BEGS* for the "real" owner of the name to countersue and demand the other change his name back (or to something else).
;-)
Damn, though, *this* one takes balls. I have to admit, paranoid as I can seem, I didn't see it getting to the point where using one's one name in normal daily activities would count as infringment.
Ah well, too bad I don't read Rolling Stone, I can't cancel my subscription in protest.
Bill Wyman the writer should sue Bill Wyman the Stone for infringing on his name for the past 38 years, and should seek damages of about $50 million, claiming that William George Perks made a ton of money off of the Bill Wyman name that he stole.
---------------------------------------------
SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Keith Richard sends out Cease and Desist notices to cadavars because folks confuse them for him.
deserve's got nothing to do with it...
Because the average human is a loathsome, greedy, insensitive fool. As a result of this story, along with hundreds of others reported over the past decade or so (about how long I've really been following things), I am now convinced that our species will not survive past the next century.
the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is reporting that
Jeez. Here, "Atlanta-Journal-Constitution is" links to the (relatively useless) frontpage of the newspaper site, while "reporting" is the single word that links to the article. There's not even any space between the links!
Hello people! We know how to backtrack URLs to get to the main site....assuming it's not an obvious domain from the journal name, and even then it's highly likely that the actual article page will have a nice fat old link to the main site. Jeez.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
...but Mr. Nissan has been running Nissan Computers from before Datsun Motors changed its name to Nissan Motors.
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce
I respect Bill Wyman, the former Rolling Stone a lot (hey I am a bass player, too...) but I do hope that the journalist Bill Wyman wins this one. He had the name first, didn't change it ever and registered the domain name first. And, being a journalist, he does not infringe on any trademark Bill Wyman, the former Stone may own, because there is precious little overlap between their respective trades, however much they may depend on each other.
Bass player Bill Wyman can always register billwyman.com if he hasn't done so already.
Please, RTFA before you post...
This has NOTHING to do with cyberspace. Bill Wyman was simply WRITING ARTICLES using his own name. He didn't try to register the name on the internet -- at least not according to the article.
I admit that the slashdot preview doesn't make this clear, but thats why you should RTFA.
a) it's your legal (from birth) name
b) your not trying to profit off of the name
c) you registered the name first
I think it's Nissan's (the company) fault for not registering the name first. Now they are left out in the cold. Too bad, so sad. Better luck next time.
How is it that one careless match can start a forest fire, but it takes a whole box to start a campfire?
Is that an accurate description?
unique URLs based on DNA code
Identical Twins might object.
And let's be blunt, a 650 meg URL consisting of four characters in endless patterns is not an easy thing to rememeber.
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
This article isn't even about cybersquatting! It is about some guy who happens to work for this newspaper and who happens to sometimes write about the Rolling Stones. The musical Wyman wants the columnist wyman to put a discalimer on everything he writes that he is in fact NOT the musical Wyman! How ridiculous!
For those not familiar with the Nissan issue - Uzi Nissan has a real company named Nissan Computers, which he started several years before the Internet "took off", IIRC in 1991. Technically, he even registered his domain before the internet "took off", IIRC in 1994. "Nissan" is, and has been, his family name for many generations (whereas the other Nissan changed it's name from Datsun a couple decades ago).
---------------------------------------------
SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Odds are, the writer Bill Wyman's real first name is William. He should just go by William Wyman, or W. Wyman, or Willy Wyman, or something.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
I'm all for mocking the Yanks, even when their government is tramping around threatening to level everyone they don't like, but it should be noted that Bill Wyman is, in fact, English.
AFAICT, Bill Wyman the journalist has no website to call his own. I have no idea why this was posted under the Internet category, because I submitted it under News.
Anyway, the lawyers are objecting to Bill Wyman the journalist using his given name on the byline of the articles he writes for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (and, I suppose, any other publication for which he writes). Not because he owns any domain name relating to the name Bill Wyman.
This action strikes me as even more outlandish and insidious than anything the big corporations have done over real or alleged domain squatting. That's why I submitted the article.
~Philly
that the lawyers are also named Bill Wyman?
Sigs are bad for your health.
The law firm is in NYC. The Stones' Bill Wyman may not even know about the lawsuit. Lawyers are like that. Remember the fuss over "killustrator" in Germany?
* And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
what about the Uzi? This guy is flagrantly infringing on IMI's trademarks!
It's true. We live in a country(I'm actually canadian, but the argument is the same in either nation) where ignorance of the law is not a valid defence and yet the countries COMPLETE legislation could not be read by a single person in their entire lifetime. BTW, my given first name is Duff so(although the product in my case is fictional) I have a lot of experience with the name/trademark crossover. I don't own duff.com(warning... porno), but if I did, you can bet I would raise all hell if FOX tried to take it from me.
lysergically yours
The Atlanta Journal-Courier's Bill Wyman, who has regularly covered Rolling Stones news, wrote an article in the AJC about some of the ban's old albums. The band's lawyer decided (not unreasonably, I guess) that readers would think bassist Bill Wyman had written the piece, and demanded that a) if a journalist was calling himself Bill Wyman to cover Rolling Stones topics, he stop and b) if someone genuinely had that name, he should make that clear. The story hints that the lableing demand would extend to all work by the writer, but it's not clear that that's so.
Whatever the legal merits of this case, it has nothing to do with a domain name.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
... to hear the verdict:
All your bass are belong to us!!
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
Last name?
/runs and turns off Slashdot modding powers.
Nielsen.
Mental note. Rate nothing. Ever.
Happily, this appears to be simply an error on the part of Bill Wyman's attorney (the former Rolling Stone).
It looks like his attorney totally failed to do any research into Bill Wyman (the Writer) - a very big shame, especially given that many attorneys charge significant amounts of money to do research into such matters.
I wonder what the bill rate was for this letter. Maybe $6? Or maybe $1000? Perhaps $5000?
From imdb.com:
According to udpates at the bottom of this page, things aren't going so well for Uzi Nissan.
The latest:
September 2002
The previous court rulings did not end this case. Nissan Motors filed a second Motion for Summary Judgment trying (and has been successful) to get the Court to deprive me of the right to a jury trial on October 15, 2002. The Court, much to my surprise, changed its attitude on this issue and:
1. Changed the relevant date for "fame" from 1991 to 1994.
2. Found that no reasonable jury could find that Nissan was not famous by 1994.
3. Found that Nissan Computer and The Internet Center diluted Nissan Motor's trademark.
4. Found that the publication of information about this lawsuit, the comments made by many people -- on this www.ncchelp.org and my media campaign to bring this issue to the public, actually -- tarnished Nissan Motor's trademark.
Many legal experts view our case, not as a "law-breaking" case, but as a "law-making" case. The Court indicated during the hearing on this motion that certain aspects of this case may be creating new law as well.
The trial date has thus been taken off calendar and Nissan Motor is now asking the Court to take away my domain name from me entirely. We expect a ruling on this motion some time in November this year. Our legal team is evaluating our options, which evaluation can not be completed until we know the final ruling by the Court. We believe that the potential loss of our domain name in this fashion may set the wrong precedent for future cases and will open the door for any deep-pocket corporation to do the same. This may become "the law of the land" and may affect many others in a similar situation, it could affect you or someone you know.
This case received the attention of CBS Evening News, and has been looked at by other news agencies that have not yet published stories about it. Public attention to this type of corporate behavior is most important to get the issues properly debated. Your emails were very successful in CBS Evening News' decision to run a short story on this case. We are asking for your continued and crucial support by sending an email to the media and stating the importance of bringing these facts to the public. Remember that it was Public Opinion and Awareness that ended the Soviet Union, not missiles. Together we can make a difference.
---------------------------------------------
SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wait, let me rephrase: When Bill Wyman was 47, he started dating/doing a 13 year old girl.
Oh, That's the reputation that his lawyer is trying to protect.
Amusing sidenote: Bill's 31 year old son Steven started dating Mandy's 46 year old mother Patsy and at one point planned to marry her. (This is after Bill/Mandy's divorce). Still, it would have made Steven his own divorced step-grandfather.
It's one thing when Nissan sues you, yeah, I could deal with that. What are they going to do, run me over with a Nissan?
;)
But when the Uzi people finally get wind of this fellow, you can bet he'll change his tune.
It's just not wise to argue with Israelis armed with machine guns with a beef over territory or ownership rights.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
You better watch what you say, or I might sue you for slander. I am not insensitive....my toe hurts today.
They stuck me in an institution, said it was the only solution, to...protect me from the enemy, myself
TM
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
Wrong! Bill Wyman the author should not have to change his name, give up his domain, or pay any sort of monetary homage to Bill Wyman the bassist.
Assigning any sort of property rights to a person's *name* is assinine. Even as a trademark.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Actually, it's probably the firm of Ben Dover and Phil McCavity (say it fast)
I think you'll find it interesting.
I just searched for my own name (in quotes) on google, and found:
- A wildlife foundation under my name
- A gallery under my name
- A cricket player with my name
- A professor with my name
- A folk singer with my name
- Artists with my name
- About 14,000 other links with my name not related to me personally.
I already knew many companies operated under my last name, but didn't know so many used my full name!
So, how many of you are in danger of losing your names like this?
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
No one should ever be forced to change their given name. Period. Why can't people like you understand that real people are living real lives, and that they names are not properties to be bought and sold via lawsuits.
There is absolutely NO inconvenience if both Bill Wymans use their own names. Geez! Next thing you know you'll be arguing that there should be only one John Smith in the world.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
FUD? Oh, great, now Warner Brothers will get in the act. This could be a vewwy nasty case.
Sigs are bad for your health.
The answer is simple.
1.Name all children with a unique ID
like RTDSG4232342
and don't allow their children to have kids named
RTDSG4232342 Jr.
2.Reassign all adults new names as well.
3. ???
4. Profit
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Well, you could cancel any other magazine that you do subscribe to, considering that they would be as relevant to this topic as Rolling Stone.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
I'm free riding on Bill Wyman the musician's commercial goodwill in order to further the commercial interests of bill_wyman the Slashdot user and get more mod points.
Put yourself in his place. You register your name.com and put your business on it and, later on, a certain Japanese car company starts using their own name (which they hadn't been doing, in the US, rather using a pseudonym) and suddenly you start getting massive hits from people looking for cars, and you run a computer business?
I'd probably put up some links to car-sellers too, and if I could get paid for it all the better.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
should change his last name to "Datsun" to make them happy.
Check this out.
...
:)
"Lord Macdonald of Macdonald, premier clan chief of Clan Donald, has appointed Ronald W McDonald to be Sergeant-Major at Arms of the Guardians of Clan Donald: the linear descendant of the chief's bodyguard.
One specific aim is to offer moral support to Mary Blair, proprietor of McMunchies, a small sandwich bar in Fenny Stratford, Buckinghamshire, who is being threatened with legal action by McDonald's Restaurants, the fast food chain, for daring to use the prefix "Mc" in the name of her shop.
When interviewed in BBC2's "The Money Programme" a top trademark lawyer made it clear that McDonald's have not a legal leg to stand on. Instead they rely on their unlimited financial resources to bully small businesses who cannot afford to fight back."
Really.. read the entire press release, it just gets better and better. This is coming from a long extended thing that happened around 1996, when McDonalds decided they were going to start trying to crack down on anyone doing anything vaguely resembling their trademarks. I'm not sure if they ever got McMunchie's to change their name, but whatever happened they did manage to piss off, in the process, Scotland. The best bit about the whole thing was that, according to an absolutely fantastic 60 Minutes report on this and the McLibel case, Lord MacDonald of MacDonald was so enraged by the whole thing that he decided to open a restaurant in the traditional family estate of the MacDonald clan, and name it "MacDonald's". The restaurant serves things like duck, and whatever else is the U.K. equivilent of "gourmet" food. Thus far McDonald's Inc. of America has yet to challenge him over the name.
As my more-or-less universal online handle is an abbreviation of my last name, McClure (it's a degradation of MacLeod), i have to say this case holds a small bit of interest for me.. it is a discomforting thought to know that a corporation may possibly want to claim ownership to the first two letters of my slashdot logon
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Dewey, Cheatham, & Howe seems more likely to have taken up this case...
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Almost like this case, certainly very comparable to it, and in a way, even more absurd...
I once read a short story about an ordinary Joe who bore too much resemblance to a famous actor. The actor didn't want any 'unauthorized copies' out there, so he sued the guy and forced him to have plastic surgery to change his appearance.
If Bill Wyman (from birth) loses this one, how long until the science fiction story becomes true? Given the absurdity running rampant through the US legal system, I wouldn't bet against it.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
For a full treatment of Nissan history, click on this link.
To summarize, the first companies that would eventually become Nissan started in 1911. After a series of mergers, changed company names, and revisted models, they started selling cars with the Datsun name in 1932. However, the company was never known as Datsun Motors. Datsun was just the brand name of their cards, from "son of DAT." The company has been called Nissan Motors ever since the merger between DAT Automobile Manufacturing Company and Nihon Sangyo, another pre-existing automobile manufacturer.
Some other juicy bits that the enthusiast site I've linked to doesn't go well into is the fact that Nissan was the largest of the "new zaibatsu" and profitted quite considerably from the rape of Manchuria by the Japanese in the 1930s. The older zaibatsu, like Mitsui, Sumitomo, and Mitsubishi were all tightly controlled by greedy single families who weren't well liked by the wartime government. Companies like Nissan who were owned by multiple owners were treated more favorably and got the sweeter deals in exploiting the newly conquered Japanese territories.
Also, the website glosses over the labor struggles of the 1950s in Japan. Nissan was a "innovator" in breaking their unions and was one of the first companies to create a company-created union that would provide the model for all modern Japanese labor unions. Modern Japanese labor unions are all company (not trade) specific and are essentially a secondary tier of management over the workers used to keep them in line and in harmony with company desires, and striking is no longer allowed. Though as far as I know, Nissan's 100-day strike was very bloodless compared to many of the other labor struggles during the period, it was the pioneer in establishing the crippled system that exists today in Japan.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
You've raised some points that for various reasons have been on my mind over the last few months. In particular I've been thinking about the inability of the average American to afford (either by training or by purchase of service) access to our legal system. In what sense of the phrase is everyone "equal under the law" if some people/groups have access to better legal services than others. The obvious solution is this: nationalize the lawyers.
Now I'll admit I haven't spent a lot of time thinking this through but the idea has some obvious charms. Everyone from the poorest homeless person to the wealthiest corporation gets the same level of service and access. This could push the legal system to become more abritrative than adversarial - hopefully resulting in a renewed focus on the pursuit of justice rather than victory for its own sake. (I read about an interesting example of this a few years ago: A law firm started handling IRS audits on a flat fee basis. They had amazing settlement rates because the IRS knew they couldn't drag the proceedings out until the clients ran out of money to pay for their defense).
...the last few paragraphs of the posted article?
Wyman says he first used the name onstage in 1963. "In 1964 I adapted his name, and changed mine by deed poll," he writes in a footnote.
Me, I was born Jan. 11, 1961.
What I need now is a lawyer to ask Mr. Siegel that his client stop using a name I have claim to by several years.
How can we afford to ever sleep
So sound again
--ebtg
[dis: Posting Anonymously because the companies I reference have already sent me C&D letters because of posts I made on Slashdot]
The lawyers are being paid by someone to do what they do. I remember when I worked at InterAct Accessories, Inc. Some guy had registered InterAct.com way before InterAct was formed as a company. He didn't even use the domain name for a webpage, just mail. I remember my boss' conversation with the company lawyers. It went along the lines of, "Do whatever it takes, I want InterAct.com." After multiple failures to legally obtain the domain name, they had to settle for interact-acc.com. My boss didn't stop, he insisted that I somehow 'hack' the domain name so we could 'steal' it. I pointed out how this was illegal.
The lawyers aren't to blame. It's people like my boss. The people that grew up getting everything they wanted, and when that trait continues into adulthood, you get people like this. They don't care if someone has a legitimate claim to something, they want it, and they'll do anything to get it.
Funny thing is, he's Israeli. His name isn't Japanese, it's Hebrew. Read his site for the full story. Apparently, it's just a name over there. I guess an "Uzi" is just like a "Tommy Gun" in terms of origin.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
"Bill Wyman is hereby ordered to pay $50,000 in damages."
.. wha?
Plantif and defandant in unison: YES!
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
Complexity is Easy. Simplicity is Hard.
Unfortunately the sharks will just leave the lawyer alone. It's professional courtesy.
All editorial writers ever do is come down from the hill after the battle is over and shoot the wounded.
As a student in Computer science, we had to take a class in Intellectual Property.
After buying my own domain (lastname.org), I asked this specific question: "Do I have to worry about someone coming to take away my domain name from me?"
The answer was no. As long as I use it for my own use and do not infringe on today's copyright (if someone registers my lastname as a trademark later, I was first !)
An important question when discussing IP is "who used it first ?" If someone else comes along later saying "this is my name", too bad for them.
This morning, I heard a prank phone call from a local radio station to a guy named Harry Potter. They were pretending to be lawyers trying to cather up as many Harry Potters as they could for a class action suit against Warner Brothers.
Of course it was all a joke, and the person named Harry Potter seemed to be okay with the fact that his name was now something of a household word. His wife even found great amusement in telling everyone her husband was indeed Harry Potter.
It was mentioned that Harry Potter is quite a common name, and a web-search for people named Harry Potter would turn up quite a few people.
Just something to think about.
For the longest time I thought the name was "Hairy Potter" and it was about a hippy.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
I think it would have been nice if the Journalist BW had put a disclaimer on his Rolling Stones articles *as a courtesy* to prevent confusion, but no way in the world should he be forced to do so through threat of legal sanction. He has a greater claim to the name, in some ways.
Conversely, it would be equally nice that should Musician BW decide to write anything, he specify he is not the Journalist BW.
People overlook these things so often, by just leaping straight to legal threats and litigation. Had Musician BW (or his agent) just written a friendly letter to Journalist BW, asking him to consider qualifying his Rolling Stones articles as a courtesy, I'm sure it would have been readily agreed to. But no, people with lawyers always have to leap to the 'cease and desist'.
By way of example, former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill once received a polite letter from an American writer of the same name, asking very nicely if PM Churchill could qualify his byline (PM Churchill was also a published author of some note) to make clear the difference between the two. PM Churchill instantly agreed (in a quite amusing reply letter) to always include his middle intial when publishing texts in the U.S. Both sides were satisfied, quickly and without lawyers, by using a bit of civility and commonsense.
Doesn't seem to be as much of that about thesedays.
SofaMan -- Occasionally Battling Evil With His Mighty Powers Of Indolence.
My friends name is Russell Nash. Now after reading this article i told him he should probably hide or start the battle now .. since well u know .. "There can be only one"
dvNuLL
I don't know what they expected me to do about all those copies on BBSs out there, and I don't give a flying fsck what they like to call their software for short. I blew the letter off, and never heard from them again. (I did add to the docs that if anyone gets a complaint, they should rename it to pnamer.exe.)
If Salinon still around, I hope this bugs them: Namer.Zip
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Force Nissan to accept the url NissanMotors.com.
Force Nissan computers to accept NissanComputer.com
Remove Nissan.com from the registery for 5 years and let this
thing cool off. Force Nissan motors to pay ALL the legal
fees for both parties.
Anyway he still has Nissan.net.
King Salomen has spoken.
Actually, YES THEY DO. A lot of times a lawyer is retained to "protect trademarks and copyrights", and then they just go off hell-bent to do it without further direction from their retainee. I recall a good while back one of Microsoft's law firms went around cooking up business for itself by deleting the mouse driver off a laptop, walking around to computer retailers and seeing which ones would install the mouse driver to help them out. The ones that did got letters in the mail about their "illegal piracy" (since the mouse driver was copyrighted), and demanded a settlement of $5000 or some damn thing, a portion of which went to the law firm, the rest to M$. It later came out that Microsoft themselves had no idea their firm had taken it upon themselves to do this, and told them to stop when the negative publicity started piling up. This lawyer for Wyman probably is proceeding along similar lines to "defend" his client proactively (and of course bill for his time....)
In other news, McDonnell, world-renowned maker of fighter jets including the F-15, has decided to sue McDonalds, world-renown maker of fried heart-attack hamburgers.
McDonnell is apparently worried that the US Government, intending to go to McDonnell.com and buy an airplane, will instead go to McDonalds.com and buy a Happy Meal.
"Naturally," a McDonnell representative said, "We don't want McDonalds taking advantage of our good name and making 15 million dollars on a Happy Meal because the US Government got confused."
McDonald's has filed counter-suite, claiming that a family wanting to buy a happy-meal for $4.50 will become confused, walk into McDonnell Corp and buy a F-15 for $4.5 Million.
"Obviously," a McDonald's spokesperson said, "there is a great potential for consumer-confusion here. We just want to make sure that consumers intending to buy a Happy Meal will buy a Happy Meal and not an air-plane."
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Commercial law, when you are a rich country, is about how to divide the pie, not how to create it. So it makes sense for any individual or company to sue whoever if they have a case. If Mr. Nissan is preventing Nissan to use a domain that is important to them (and it IS very important, the first thing you WILL try is www.nissan.com) and he is not willing to sell it, they (for business reasons) have to sue. And get the best lawers of course.
So everything rests on what the law is, who can buy it and who your judges represent. Don't blame the lawers, they are just leechs playing for commercial entities the game of dividing the pie.
I mean: get GOOD judges, and support GOOD laws. That's the only way to keep sue-happiness from raping your rights.
unfinished: (adj.)
Charlie Watts is like the portrait of Dorian Gray. No, not Dorian Gray; the portrait.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon