Slashdot Mirror
White House Cease & Desists to The Onion
raj2569 writes "You might have thought that the White House had enough on its plate late last month, what with its search for a new Supreme Court nominee, the continuing war in Iraq and the C.I.A. leak investigation. But it found time to add another item to its agenda - stopping The Onion (soul sucking, life sapping, irritating, obnoxious, but still free registration), the satirical newspaper, from using the presidential seal." The only joke here is that our tax dollars are being spent on this.
why not the government?
Seriously, with the recent frenzy over "intellectual property" restrictions, why shouldn't the government get into the restraining free speech business, like everyone else?
I mean... they could find somebody dull enough to believe the Onion was actually a real presidential announcement.
The point is, though, that the seal is used to indicate official documents, etc. Using it on the Onion does make it look official, to the uninitiated. I'd suggest they should use a modified version, like whitehouse.org does.
Besides, they definitely aren't satirizing the seal itself. If they were, they'd probably be okay. But they're using the real seal.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
The first thing I get when you go to the Onion's site is a full-screen ad. So, there is money being made. Just because it's free doesn't mean it's not commercial.
Like a red semi-transparent banner across the seal, with the following words;
The Whitehouse thinks you're too stupid to realize this image is a satirical fake.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Thought that the Presidential Seal was also in the public domain.
Not really. Making fiction that includes references to a President either current or past is protected by the fact that the person is considered a "public figure", and has thus consented to having works made about them.
The problem with the Presidential Seal is that it's intended to carry the full power and weight of the office of the President and is NOT allowed to be used for anything that the President's office does not directly stand behind.
This "parody" thus places the President's office in a bit of a bind. It's not that they necessarily mind the parody, but they cannot have the seal used inappropriately, even if it seems harmless enough. Yet by requesting its removal, they look like the bad guys to the public.
The best solution I can think of is that the Onion should develop a "fake" seal that conveys the fact that it's fake in some way, shape, or form. In that way they would also parody the seal along with the President himself. This would be covered by fair use, and would not cause any confusion with the real seal.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
IANAL. But, if they took down the ads and got rid of the registrations then it would not be a commercial venture. However, since they are using the articles to drive traffic to the ads and they are being paid for ad placement, it _is_ a commercial venture.
The redesign sucks anyway, I don't know who bothers reading it anymore.
Because the government belongs to . . . (drumroll please) . . . the citizens of the United States!
You took "in any way" out of context... Let me revise for you:
Moreover, if the US Code states that the seal "is not to be used in connection with commercial ventures or products in any way that suggests presidential support or endorsement,"
I think it's safe to say that nobody would confuse the Onion as having presidential support or endorsement.
Hmmm witty sig or funny sig? Maybe elitest techy sig!
You're correct that the US Code states the seal is not to be used in connection with commercial ventures, etc.
But the seal is routinely used on the cover of texts, novels and other punlications. In the case of the Onion, the seal wasn't used in in an ad, it has been used in parody articles, ones the present administration doesn't appreciate.
It shouldn't be an issue of taste or support. If the government wishes to enforce against the Onion, they need to enforce against all "unauthorized, commercial or illegal" use of the seal, supportive or not.
...carrier dead.....
"Satire will only cover you so far."
Your kidding of course. Showing the Presidential seal does not fall outside of the bounds of Satire, because clearly they are not implying Presidential support or endorcement. Therefore the use is acceptable. And if there is any White House that deserves Satire it is this one. But then again this White House now understands that their public ratings are so low that they can't afford any Satire that exposes the sad humor of the current administration. Go Onion, go free speech, go America, America, America.
If someone is stupid enough to be fooled by "Study Reveals Pittsburgh Unprepared For Full-Scale Zombie Attack" or "Bush Disappointed To Learn Chinese Foreign Minister Doesn't Know Karate" then something tells me a slight modification to the presidential seal isnt going to make any difference.
Sorry, but I did not know that "the administration" was elected as governor of the state of Louisianna and the mayor of New Orleans. Oh wait, no... they weren't. It seems odd how they "mismanaged" this relief effort but did just fine and dandy during the most recent Wilma that hit Florida.
Sorry bub, but I happen to live in New Orleans. The governor and mayor did everything possible with the resources at their disposal, including the first ever truly successful contraflow evacuation of such a large American city. Afterward, with their resources scattered and the city under water, they begged the federal government for help. While the storm was still raging governor Blanco was on the phone with FEMA telling them what we would need -- helicopters, water, food, and tents, in more or less that order. Contrary to what you may have read in some quarters all of the paperwork was filled out properly and submitted ahead of time. The state of emergency was declared.
The Katrina disaster was much too large for the locals to handle it themselves; things like this are why we have a Federal government at all.
So what did the Feds do? Day 1: Nothing. Day 2: Nothing. Day 3: Nothing. Oh wait, not quite nothing. Blanco complained that they were very interested in "negotiating an organizational chart," e.g. figuring out who would be in charge. And by Tuesday they did get around to trying to strong-arm her into abdicating her position as our elected leader and federalizing the state resources that remained viable.
Oh, and they did manage to turn back anyone who "self-responded" like the convoy of rescuers with boats who assembled from the Lafayette area the day after the storm. They managed to turn back the trucks of water offered by Wal-Mart. Yeah, the Feds weren't entirely idle in those first few days; they managed to fucking TURN AWAY what little aid our local people managed to assemble when the government failed them. They managed to order doctors at the airport NOT to save lives because they hadn't been "federalized."
And what turned FEMA from the heroes of hurricane Charley to the rat fuckers who probably killed hundreds of my neighbors as they waited in their attics? After 9/11 they were wrapped into the department of Homeland Security and their focus shifted from disaster relief (first priority: save lives) to anti-terrorism police (first priority: establish control of the situation).
You can't blame that on Clinton or the Democrats. That reorganization was this Republican Administration's idea, passed by this Republican congress. And while the newly cop-oriented FEMA was polishing their guns and turning away help that didn't arrive with the right paperwork, my neighbors died. For that reason alone they all deserve to be tossed out of office and charged with malfeasance.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
> Bill Clinton did not balance the budget, the Republican Majority balanced it. In fact, Bill Clinton vetoed the budget causing the longest shutdown of the federal government. He then went on to sign it as he was practically forced into.
...?
I call BS - and the usual 'conservative' attempt to rewrite history. The two sides went at it and the budget was balanced. You so called conservatives will soon be saying Reagan balanced his budgets.
>As opposed to Bill Clinton's invasion of two "wrong" countries Haiti and Kosovo... a "quagmire" I think we're still stuck in. Not to mention his poor execution of the efforts in Somalia and his indifference to the people of Rwanda.
More US soldiers died last month than in above mentioned actions. Also, Clinton didn't personally profit from his military adventures, unlike the current administration.
Rwanda I (and Clinton) will grant you, but imagine the Republican stink if Clinton had called out the troops.
And when some righty lies about national security it's ok because
>Hrmmm maybe it wasn't FEMAs fault afterall.
Take responsability for nothing, ever. Shout traitor. Stuff your fingers in your ears and mumble: "Lewinski, Lewinski" over and over. Your entire movement is morally bankrupt and incompetent. Your guys even make Clinton look good, and that takes some doing. Fiscally, conservatism has been a fraud since Reagan.
Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
No, free speech means saying anything you want, no matter who said it (or thought it) first, or any other qualification. Practical free speech means some limits necessary to running a working society are imposed, like the proverbial "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater' (except from the stage, or when there's a fire). Those limits do not prohibit satirical speech, because private commercial interests are overbalanced by the public interest in commentary. Especially where the government is concerned, satire is more important. There's no prohibition on profiting from satire - the profits enable the satirist to satirize.
So, in fact, this story is entirely about free speech, as is perfectly obvious. And it's about the most important speech that's protected by our laws: criticizing the government. The government isn't just some corporation with a product, it's us, it's ours. Especially right now, while this government is run by people under indictment for suppressing info, attacking legitimate dissenters, publishing lies unchallenged by most media, violating conflict-of-interest restraints on commercial communications, secret deals to launder money for illegal advertising. We need more speech, more criticism of the government. And satire lets us do that without the truth drowning us in numbing cynicism. Hail to The Onion, America's Finest News Source.
--
make install -not war