Slashdot Mirror
UCSD Squabbles with Student Website
bunnie writes "Can publicly funded government organizations defend and prosecute their namespace? According to the University of California, yes. A student run website used as a public forum and text book exchange, ironically named ucsduncensored.com, was shut down under Education Code Section 92000. A nastygram from the university reflects the hard-line that UCSD is taking on this subject. Perhaps the UC Regents should trim some bored administrators from their payroll to help address the California budget crunch..." "UCSD" is clearly not an abbreviation of "University of California", so what's the problem?
University of
California
San
Diego.
"They can kill you, but the legalities of eating you are quite a bit dicier" -dfw
RTFA michael.
And here I thougt it was University of California Sunnydale.
Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
"UCSD" is clearly not an abbreviation of "University of California", so what's the problem?
Huh?
-Sean
dscuuncensored.com is currently not taken.
Damn Stupid California Universities Uncensored.
Register the domain and get back in operation.
Wallow in the free advertising you get until the
original domain is given back to you then use
both domains.
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
Uhh, speaking as a naive east coast boy, couldn't it "clearly" be the University of California at San Diego?
This spontaneous commentary thing might not be such a hot idea, eh Michael?
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
Michael, if you'd have taken the time to read the article for yourself, you would have learned that UCSD stands for "University of California, San Diego".
Do I need to spell it out for you? Please, editors, for the love of God--don't show so much contempt for your readership that you can't be bothered to read the articles yourself. If you can't take that much time away from your busy busy days, find another line of work.
--
$tar -xvf
The problem clearly is that Michael is an idiot.
To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
...Michael was being sarcastic...
I hope you were being facetious. "UCSD" is an extremely well-known abbreviation for the University of California at San Diego.
I looked at the "nastygram" and it wasn't particularly nasty; it was very straightforward, not unduly legalistic, and indicated that UCSD had contacted the ucsduncensored.com people a couple weeks ago and had apparently been blown off. Furthermore, this isn't a case where the USCD in the domain name was referring to something else (it was clearly "the" UCSD), and it wasn't a parody site that could claim First Amendment protection--it was a community site for UCSD students, and one that accepted advertising (look at Google's cache of the site).
You can argue UCSD is being undiplomatic or churlish, but they're hardly acting out of legal bounds here--and I'm not sure it's that ridiculous to start with, because it's not a UCSD service and putting "UCSD" in the front of the name suggests it is. Independent publications in college towns that are there to provide alternatives to official services don't use the college name in their name, even if they may use it in the subtitle. For instance, the "Independent Alligator" is referring to the University of Florida Gators, but they're not the "University of Florida Alligator," and if they tried to call themselves that, UF would be firmly within their rights to slap them. (Yes, "UCSD Uncensored" getting dinged for this is ironic, but the legal point still stands.)
Despite the Slashdot editor's incompetence about UCSD here, there is an important point to make about all this. The California law on the matter:t ion=edc&group=91001-92000&file=92000-92001 is a violation of the 1st amendment as it stands. It is clearly going much farther than the normal trademark protection.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?sec
UnpleasantCancerousStatistDicks.com
UCannotStopDissent.com
I could go on for hours, and a decent graphic designer can play games with the image in a way that lets you let off steam without getting more letters. If you're careful.
Fact is, the law states that the Uni is in the right here. So rub them through the mud. If this site was useful to students, then this is nothing but great publicity for the site now - use the short time you have to register something else and publicise it, and go from there.
Just don't get caught up on a losing battle over a name that you can't win. It doesn't matter if it is a dumb rule, it happens to be law. Make them not want to enforce it instead of just plain losing.
I forget what 8 was for.
By fighting with a student obviously seeking publicity, they generate positive publicity for the student and negative publicity for UCSD. The student looks like David fighting the jackbooted UC System Goliath. Nice going, UCSD, and way to foster open and honest communication in the academy.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
As much as I would love to follow the argument of the other posters that UCSD could stand for anything, and the author of the website could just re-write the acronym, it's pretty clear from this document [pdf file] (see page 2) that UCSD is a trademark owned by the Regents of the University of California.
Disclaimer: While I don't support either side really, I should mention I am a UC student (up here in Berkeley)
-Ryan
AUWYHSTOT (Acronyms are Useless When You Have to Spell Them Out Too)
ucsdsucks.com is unavailable.
Registering a domain with more extensions or similar names can be a smart way to ensure that
no other domain names are too close to your registered domain name. The following are some ideas to consider for multiple domain names or if the original domain name(s) you wanted is not available.
ucsdsucks.org
ucsdsucks.biz
uc
ucsdsucks.us
ucsdsucks.cc
ucsdsuck
ucsdsucks.tv
ucsd-sucks.com
universitiessu
university-sucks.com
universities-sucks.
personally, I like ucsdsucks.us
There are other meanings to the term.
I studied in the late 1980s at UCSD with Don Norman, who used to head the Cog Sci department at UCSD. Don used the UCSD acronym to mean "User Centered System Design".
It's UCSD's right to defend their trademark - I do however feel a little sad for the boys who ran this site - they had actually contacted UCSD before registering the domain and handing flyers out on campus. The University chose to respond after the website had been up a while...
That being said, as an alumnus and current staff member I feel I should point out that UCSD Administration is far from being the Gestapo; it is actually a pleasant place to work and go to school.
UCSD violated the GPL license and my copyrights on the jaxml Pyhon module during ten months. It was very difficult for me to make them comply, which they finally did.
They suck !
Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
But even if you own the trademark, do you own its acronym too?
1^2=1; (-1)^2=1; 1^2=(-1)^2; 1=-1; 1=0.
From a UCSD graduate student in Electrical and computer engineering:
I think the real problem isn't the phrase "UCSD"; it is apparent what the phrase means. The real problem is the overwhelming bureaucracy in the UC schools, and in the case of the UCSD admininstration the problem is their ability to destroy any sense of campus community. The school is boring. The administration is ineffective; they can't build a useful campus-forum website on their own. However, as soon as someone else does build such a website, and the administration can't control it, the administration shuts it down. They have done similar things in the past. Clearly, students demand such useful websites; a better solution would have been to incorporate the student's innovative solution into the institution instead of rejecting it outright.
Secondary to this problem, is the fact that the Administrators are notorious for handling students poorly and in an unprofessional manner. In fact, it is to the point where most of my friends have resorted to bringing publicly disclosed video cameras or tape recorders with them whenever dealing with the administrators. Otherwise, the administrators feel no accountability or reason to keep their promises to students. It may not be this way at every UC school, but there is a real problem here.
Whether or not enforcement of the usage of the school name (and abbreviation) is written in the lawbooks, doesn't mean that it is constitutional. This law (92000.a.3) conflicts with the first amendment, or at least comes too close for comfort. Perhaps similar laws have meaning for branded corporations, but this is a public institution for learning! The school is being incredibly harsh by threating to charge the starters of the website with a misdemeanor, and isn't acting in a way becoming of a publicly funded institution with the goal of education.
At the same time, the school blatantly funds special interests aligned with the campus administration's political views; for example, in the last california election, a number of student groups were using university funds to print flyers saying no to prop 54, and even professors were openly staging walk-outs from lectures to influence their students. This is clearly a violation of similar UC-neutrality codes, yet these people were not reprimanded since their intersets were in line with the administration's.
justis@ucsd.edu
Have a look at page 3 of their policy:
...etc...
UCSD's trademarks include, but are not limited to:
University name
UCSD seal
UCSD logo
Other UCSD trademarks include:
Any word, phrase, or image that implies association with the university
That last claim will get them laughed out of any court. They might be able to claim trademark dilution on one of their trademarks, but you can't trademark words that imply association!
The reason I submitted this story to YRO is not the details of the law, but rather, that the law exists. Can a publicly funded institution really enforce trademarks and their name against public use and possibly defamation? What right does UC have to "own" this name, paid for by the public? And if UC has a right to "own" such names, can other government braches do the same? For example, what is the difference if the feds decided that the "United States" or any acronym derived from that could not be used in conjunction with endorsement of a website or political cause? (well, I guess we do try to pass that flag-burning amendment every now and then... :-D) I thought public and political figures gave up some kind of right to their name, so that satire and similar commentary could exist.
Some point out the issue with "confusing" students with the UCSDuncensored website with official UCSD material, and hence the reason to defend the name. Here are my counter-arguments: (1) the name itself-ucsduncensored-is a political statement about how the campus administration restricts information flow (2) UCSDuncensored does not sound like a pro-UCSD or UCSD-endorsed website. Does it? I find it hard to believe that someone would really think that an educational instution would create a website admitting that it otherwise has a censorship problem. So I think that this website does pass both the political statement test for free speech and it also does not aim to confuse or misguide its users into believing that it is an endorsed website. If the website were named, for example, the "ucsdexchange" or the like, then that might be a problem.
Furthermore, a previous post in this thread indicated that the web designers did contact UCSD about their website's launch, but UCSD sat on the issue. To some extent, it is unfair to the public that UCSD can just sit on their butt until the website is up and running, and people have invested their time and interest in it, and then just expect to come in with the Hand of Righteousness as Writ in Law and wipe it all out. UCSD owes the public its diligence and vigilence.
Finally, I have conflicting information from the university itself about the useage of the name UCSD. For example, when I enrolled into a UCSD extension school class, I was told by a supervising administrator that UCSD Extension has nothing to do with UCSD, that it is its own financial entity and it is not beholden to public tax dollars (and hence I had no right to complain about how they botched my registration). So then why is it that the extension school website (http://extension.ucsd.edu/ sorry to lazy to put in tags) tries so hard to make it seem as if it is affiliated with the university? It seems like deliberate misrepresentation of a not-so-good institution by riding on the coattails of the UC system's good name.
Perhaps UCSD extension has a license for the name, but I feel that at least morally, creating such a high barrier of entry (such as requiring lawyers to negotiate name licensing) for the public to create useful services affiliated with the university is not right.
These kids probably created this website in their spare time; if the UC system had to do a similar site, I'd wager it'd cost hundreds of thousands of dollars: contractors, administrators to manage the contractors and ensure that all minorities are fairly represented in the project, the IT infrastructure to adapt to such "new" technology as a web forum. It just seems a shame that the UC system chooses to squander its resources shutting down useful services instead of building competitive services.
Then again, owning a monopoly on your name, your students, and controlling the flow of information within the system (I remember hearing how at least until recently, UC's financial books were not open for public audit) just encourages mediocrity.
Stranger still is that they did not register any of these things which they consider to be trademarks.
Random and weird software I've written.
Trademarks don't need to be registered, only used in conducting business. If you can prove that your unregistered trademark was used by you in conducting some form of business, then you can fight infringement of said trademark in court.
This is the difference between (R) a registered trademark and (TM) a (non-registered) trademark.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
They can make your life inconvenient. These places are a law unto themselves, and private institutions tend not to be too hot on due process.
The site needs to be offically run by a non-student for administration purposes. Then any challenges under state law can be challenged in a proper legal manner.
Would they have got any with it if it stated "Unofficial"?
A blog I run for the wealth
Like I said, it is stupid. It is also really easy to route around and use to make the university look as stupid as they are being.
I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and anyone who takes this as legal advice is a moron.
I forget what 8 was for.
Working in the Dotcom field, I think it is good that organizations like UC can protect their names. If you look around, you will find that there are thousands of companies creating hundreds of thousands of little doorway pages to web sites.
Just like email spam, this search engine spam is making money. Trademark law is giving legitimate companies a tool to fight SEO spammers. As with most legal issues. It is better just to handle the whole issue as a trademark issue, rather than on a piece by piece judging of the merits of the site.
Although there is a group of people who are geeky and feel wronged by the system. This is just standard domain name issue stuff. I would take as a lesson to learn by and not as a great censorship effort.
As pointed out, all this group needs to do is register a new domain. I suspect they would find the school would allow them to URL forward the old domain name to the new domain name.
As for SEO spam. Have you ever noticed that you often get a large number of garbage ad sites when you do web searches. It is people playing this search engine spam game.
bunnie is an idiot - his comments to his own post have convicted him as such.
...you blithering twit!
/. is run by Content-Nazis and Rob Malda hires/recruits them.
University of
California
San
Diego...
Gee - idiots like this get their articles posted like it's their job, and I only get this:
2001-06-12 01:00:48 The Connection between Bill Gates and D&D (articles,humor) (rejected)
2001-12-21 22:00:31 Spokane-based "hackers" steal 2,700 Credit (articles,news) (rejected)
2003-03-14 22:17:43 Security "Hole" found in Sun ONE Web Serve (articles,sun) (rejected)
2003-04-14 17:58:31 Human Genome/DNA Sequence Completed (articles,science) (rejected)
2003-09-24 23:37:32 Successfull first launch of "Aerospike" ro (science,science) (accepted)
2003-09-30 17:05:55 ForensicTec President Arrested for break-ins (articles,news) (rejected)
More proof that
Heil Malda!
ScottKin
I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
(a) The Legislature finds and declares that there has been a disturbing increase in lawsuits brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition for the redress of grievances. The Legislature finds and declares that it is in the public interest to encourage continued participation in matters of public significance, and that this participation should not be chilled through abuse of the judicial process. To this end, this section shall be construed broadly.
(b) (1) A cause of action against a person arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the court determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim. (2) In making its determination, the court shall consider the pleadings, and supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability or defense is based. (3) If the court determines that the plaintiff has established a probability that he or she will prevail on the claim, neither that determination nor the fact of that determination shall be admissible in evidence at any later stage of the case, and no burden of proof or degree of proof otherwise applicable shall be affected by that determination.
(e) As used in this section, "act in furtherance of a person's right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue" includes: (1) any written or oral statement or writing made before a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law; (2) any written or oral statement or writing made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other official proceeding authorized by law; (3) any written or oral statement or writing made in a place open to the public or a public forum in connection with an issue of public interest; (4) or any other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of petition or the constitutional right of free speech in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest.
There's real leverage in that section. It's cut way back on intimidation via judicial process in California. UC has lost SLAPP cases before, too.
Remember, they're free to post stupidity, you're free to ignore it.
There is a business known as United Couriers, Inc. which has trucks labeled with large letters that say "UCI". I've noticed them and wondered at first if they had something to do with the University of California, Irvine (I'm a graduate of both UCI and UCSD). Why are they allowed to operate?
That statement doesn't pass the laugh test.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
What everyone is dancing around is the students changing the name of the site. Now we all know, in reality, the University knows there is no confusion as to who runs the site but dislikes the content. That's the true tragedy. Trademark law doesn't mean you can't ever mention someone's trademark, but is there to prevent confusion of brands. (Meatspace spoofing)
So these students have two options. They can change their domain, which I believe to be unnecessary, or they can put a clear disclaimer on the site that they don't represent the university in any official capacity.
I'm also wondering--is it normal for criminal misdemeanor remedies to be applied for trademark infringement, as is the case here? Or is it more typically a civil penalty?
As someone who sometimes purports to be a college professor type, I must admit that I'm finding colleges and universities to be increasingly ways to ensure conformity, obedience and completely uncritical thinking. And all this time I had thought it was about encourging individuality, independence and critical thinking. No wonder tenure committees dont like me.
"What!" says you. "How dare you suggest the University is a drain on the public coffers! 'It's UCSD on tit' is an illegal and dememaning use of a noble trademark."
"But, no", says I. "That's not what it says at all! It simply states, 'It sucs, don't it?' The trademark isn't even in there."
Those La Jollans oughta be able to come up with something much better than this!
Frankly, I do see it but not easily. And no one that doesn't live in the immediate surrounding area would. I live in Ontario, and can recognize UWO as University of Western Ontario... as thats its name... it seems the Unversity's of California wants to claim anything that starts with UC or UOC.. no?
No, this is