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?
The bigger joke is that Congress gave the IOC complete control over any linked ring motif whether or not it has any conection to the Olympics or not or is a symbol created before the modern Olympic movement.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
hahahahahahahah ha ha haha ha. YOUR tax dollars.
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.
Citing the United States Code, Mr. Dixton wrote that the seal "is not to be used in connection with commercial ventures or products in any way that suggests presidential support or endorsement."
Well they're hardly using it to promote a commercial venture, and if you can find someone who reads one of these Onion pieces and believes it suggests presidential support, could you point them in my direction, as i've got this bridge i'd like to sell them.
Wouldn't this be covered under the parody rulings made based on the First amendment?
I thought The White House and the President...whoever this may be...is all public domain stuff. Granted, I didn't read the article in a rush to post this uninformed rambling.
But from what I remember, when the movie Contact used President Clintons image and voice they too were in the clear even when Clinton complained. They said hey, you're in the public domain pal.
Thought that the Presidential Seal was also in the public domain.
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Here
For the Onion to use the seal is not a job but is "satire". For the current administration to use it is a "joke".
Please mod me 1 or troll. It's where the truth is these days, even on Slashdot. Beware the power of moderators everywh
I gotta say, I give the White House (and more specifically the current administration) some credit on this. Sure, Clinton didn't give a shit when The Onion used the presidential seal, but that was just a sign of the contempt that budget balancing whore had for the office of President.
Now this administration may be able screw up the invasion of the wrong country, leak the names of CIA agents, mismanage hurricane disaster relief efforts, funnel billions to Haliburton, put scientific research back decades, and turn the country into a joke in general, but they'll be *damned* if they're going to let some satire magazine use the Presidential seal in an article with a headline such as "Bush: Vacation ruined by 'Stupid Dead Soldier'".
Bravo!
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, the satirical newspaper, from using the presidential seal.
The newspaper regularly produces a parody of President Bush's weekly radio address on its Web site (www.theonion.com/content/node/40121), where it has a picture of President Bush and the official insignia.
"It has come to my attention that The Onion is using the presidential seal on its Web site," Grant M. Dixton, associate counsel to the president, wrote to The Onion on Sept. 28. (At the time, Mr. Dixton's office was also helping Mr. Bush find a Supreme Court nominee; days later his boss, Harriet E. Miers, was nominated.)
Citing the United States Code, Mr. Dixton wrote that the seal "is not to be used in connection with commercial ventures or products in any way that suggests presidential support or endorsement." Exceptions may be made, he noted, but The Onion had never applied for such an exception.
The Onion was amused. "I'm surprised the president deems it wise to spend taxpayer money for his lawyer to write letters to The Onion," Scott Dikkers, editor in chief, wrote to Mr. Dixton. He suggested the money be used instead for tax breaks for satirists.
More formally, The Onion's lawyers responded that the paper's readers - it prints about 500,000 copies weekly, and three million people read it online - are well aware that The Onion is a joke.
"It is inconceivable that anyone would think that, by using the seal, The Onion intends to 'convey... sponsorship or approval' by the president," wrote Rochelle H. Klaskin, the paper's lawyer, who went on to note that a headline in the current issue made the point: "Bush to Appoint Someone to Be in Charge of Country."
Moreover, she wrote, The Onion and its Web site are free, so the seal is not being used for commercial purposes. That said, The Onion asked that its letter be considered a formal application to use the seal.
No answer yet. But Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman, said that "you can't pick and choose where you want to enforce the rules surrounding the use of official government insignia, whether it's for humor or fraud."
O.K. But just between us, Mr. Duffy, how did they find out about it?
"Despite the seriousness of the Bush White House, more than one Bush staffer reads The Onion and enjoys it thoroughly," he said. "We do have a sense of humor, believe it or not."
KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
From the NPR report this morning, it seems to revolve around use of the seal of the president for commercial purposes. Pretty cut and dried. Everyone else from IBM to the Red Cross protects their identification. The question is: Is the Onion the only high profile entity to use the symbol? I don't know. Does Saturday Night Live use the exact symbol? Or do they change it slightly? Seems the Onion could do the same. Everybody goes away happy.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
The seal is the property of the people of the United States of America. It's not copyrightable, it's not trademarked, and satire is protected speech under the constitution. I don't see how in the world there's even the suggestion that there's legality behind silencing the Onion. Okay, not really silencing.
The Onion should be able to get around this by the smallest of photoshops to make the seal different. And if it's done in a parodic manner (like everything over there), then there's just nothing that can be done.
As someone else posted already, your tax dollars at work! (not that it matters, this'll be a drop in the bucket compared to everything else)
Does this mean I can use the Slashdot logo any way that I see fit and it's ok with the taco? My guess is that it would not be ok with his overlords.
Think of it in those terms, and one has no choice but to agree (unless one subscribes to the idea of "IP" being bad-mmkay). The presidential seal is like a trademark; it cannot be used without approval. To allow use in unofficial printed/published matter (a la The Onion) dilutes its efficacy. Therefore this letter, to which The Onion properly responded by requesting formal permission to use said seal.
The great point, which the NYT dutifully points out, is that someone in Washington with access to powerful ears reads The Onion. Whether or not this individual has a sense of humour is another story entirely.
-theGreater.
The whole thing is a joke. Just like Bush's Presidency.
Unlike The Onion, the Bush Presidency is a bad joke.
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.
Something is sad, but I think it's around your comments assigning blame to the DMCA. Like it or hate it the Onion is potentially in violation of the law.
TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 33 713
(a) Whoever knowingly displays any printed or other likeness of the great seal of the United States, or of the seals of the President or the Vice President of the United States, or the seal of the United States Senate, or the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or the seal of the United States Congress, or any facsimile thereof, in, or in connection with, any advertisement, poster, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, public meeting, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production, or on any building, monument, or stationery, for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(b) Whoever, except as authorized under regulations promulgated by the President and published in the Federal Register, knowingly manufactures, reproduces, sells, or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seals of the President or Vice President, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(c) Whoever, except as directed by the United States Senate, or the Secretary of the Senate on its behalf, knowingly uses, manufactures, reproduces, sells or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seal of the United States Senate, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(d) Whoever, except as directed by the United States House of Representatives, or the Clerk of the House of Representatives on its behalf, knowingly uses, manufactures, reproduces, sells or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(e) Whoever, except as directed by the United States Congress, or the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives, acting jointly on its behalf, knowingly uses, manufactures, reproduces, sells or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seal of the United States Congress, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(f) A violation of the provisions of this section may be enjoined at the suit of the Attorney General,
(1) in the case of the great seal of the United States and the seals of the President and Vice President, upon complaint by any authorized representative of any department or agency of the United States;
(2) in the case of the seal of the United States Senate, upon complaint by the Secretary of the Senate;
(3) in the case of the seal of the United States House of Representatives, upon complaint by the Clerk of the House of Representatives; and
(4) in the case of the seal of the United States Congress, upon complaint by the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives, acting jointly.
I heard this on NPR this morning on the way to work. The reason why the White House office even knows about it is because their own staff reads The Onion because at least they have a sense of humor.
On another note, isn't this protected under parody? If not, could they take the logo and add a triangle around it and then say it's protected under parody?
The Onion crosses political borders, and while it's Madison, WI roots may suggest a liberal sensibility, I can't believe that this is the smartest move (politically) that the White House could be doing.
Regardless of the legal issue - as I am not a lawyer and cannot claim to speak to the limits of Satire and protected speech - many people who read the Onion are so called "Independents." Now, in this day and age, when the country is looking polarized, it can only further reinforce those who may only drift to the Democratic side into becoming much stronger Partisans.
With the 2006 midterms coming up, and considering that it's those with strong partisan feelings who vote in midterm elections, this is really a part of a larger trend that may drive people away from the Republican party.
...wait, I'm a Democrat. Keep suing Bush! Keep suing!
TRHOnline - Staggering Towards Brilliance
The Onion advertises and sells goods through its website and hardcopy version, which is indeed "commercial."
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," then that pretty much paves the way for the White House to decide where the seal can be used.
Looks like the Onion is out of luck. (And out of humor too, starting about a year and a half ago, IMHO.)
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.
1) To the original poster - are you incapable of writing your own summary? Nice cut
and paste
2) The Onion may be free, but it *is* commericial - it has a lead in ad as well
as ads on its pages.
3) The government does this all the time.. they are just glacially slow in doing anything about it.
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.
You actually bought into the notion of IP.
Let me help you.
If you're writing satire, you can use this kind of stuff. And particularly political satire is given wide latitude. So if I were the Onion, I would relish a court fight here. It would give them even more notority, and they would win.
This proves to me that the White House is actually manned by monkeys. No the smart ones, either.
"Despite the seriousness of the Bush White House, more than one Bush staffer reads The Onion and enjoys it thoroughly," he said. "We do have a sense of humor, believe it or not."
He went on to state that the White House staffer that found it is actually a closet libertarian, doesn't really like Bush, and kept shaking his head when his supervisor insisted they "look more into this satan-worshipping-pinko-commie-hippie-website".
I say, give the damned seal his fish ration and be done with it.
Money for nothing, pix for free
When dealing with a satirical website, you want to give them ammunition and a reason to use it.
Alert your friends: The Onion might actually start getting funny again.
The Onion savages that corporation-killing George W. Bush every chance they get. Nobody who reads the Onion could possibly think the that the President supports them...would you support a publication that repeatedly pointed out you myriad of flaws, poor reasoning and simple idiocy?
Blar.
As a work of the federal government, isn't the seal in the public domain? Wikipedia certainly think so. If that's the case, the government can't do much of anything to stop the Onion from doing whatever they want with it.
There's something to be said for reserving one's stamp of authenticity, whether it be a signature or not, for things that are actually from one. It seems unnecessary and precisely akin to protecting one's signature from appearing on material that pokes fun at oneself -- there's nothing funny about the seal itself, and it would not change the humour to replace that seal with a mock seal. Parody should be seen to be a nearly blank check when it comes to making fun of the attributes of someone or something, and in my opinion, traditional intellectual property law totally sucks, but protecting one's sigil/signature is a reasonable thing to do.
Obviously, this is not forgery with an intent to fool, but like posting unaltered dollar bill photographs on a website, it's at least uncool and asking for trouble.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
Is it just me, or did that article read like something printed by... I don't know, The Onion?
www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,53048,00.html
Sometimes I doubt your committment to SparkleMotion!
With that rationale, there would be nothing to stop counterfeit FBI and Secret Service badges, not to mention currency, as all the artwork are works of the federal government, no? The law on the matter of the Presidential Seal is clear. The Onion can be as satirical as they want, but I don't see they have a defense against the "no commerical use without permission" rule. It would've been funnier for them to CHANGE the seal to something satirical anyway.
The problem is that many people may confuse some of the stupid remarks made by The Onion with the stupid remarks made by President Bush and therefore may become confused...after all, we don't want the world associating the official US Government Seal with misinformation and stupidity, do we?
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
Because the government belongs to . . . (drumroll please) . . . the citizens of the United States!
Yes, and the Bush Administration is saying they don't need The Onion's help to make them look foolish.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
On that topic, CNN Global now runs The Daily Show's "World Edition" and you *can't* tell the difference.
Are we really willing to give in that easily?
I like how you bold "in any way" to imply no qualifications, when the phrase is immediately followed by the actual qualification "that suggests presidential support or endorsement". Was that intentional, or are you just happy to boldface whatever makes the government correct? I'm sure they'll make their case, no reason to make it for them.
The enemies of Democracy are
Not sure where they're coming from with this. The use of the seal is covered in Tile 4, Chap 2, sec 42 of the US Code which reads,
The Secretary of State shall have the custody and charge of such seal. Except as provided by section 2902 (a) of title 5, the seal shall not be affixed to any instrument without the special warrant of the President therefor.
The Onion is obvioulsy a parady which is surely covered by the First Amendment. This is basically a sacred-symbol-protection law which didn't work for flag burning and probably won't for the seal. Be interesting to hear what the courts have to say.
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!
Argh. Generally, government-created works are considered to be in the public domain and are not subject to copyright. Just as in trademark law, you can't put up your own website and use the FCC logo, the EPA logo or any of a number of other government logos in a way that might confuse people. Under the Necessary and Proper clause the government has the power to do exactly this sort of thing.
I suspect that the seal itself is, for copyright purposes, in the public domain in that anybody can reproduce it. But, there are limitations on its use imposed by other laws.
Here's another example: O'Reilly uses a bunch of public domanin line drawings on the covers of their books. But, they would have a valid trademark infringement claim against anybody who used the same line-drawing of a camel on the front of a competing book about Perl. The drawing is still in the public domain, but cannot be used in certain ways because of trademark law. The government seals & logos enjoy similar protection.
I can't believe some of the comments here. It looks like no one is educated enough to realize using the seal in the way they are is in violation of the law. I don't know why they even made a big deal of it. It doesn't matter how corrupt anyone thinks the government is, 2 wrongs don't make a right. Just modify the seal so that its not the same and get on with life.
What's new about this? This law has been on the books for years:
/ parts/i/chapters/33/sections/section_713.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18
Dear mi fellow Mericans.
Recently, mi staff have informed me about a grave misuse of a seal. Apparently, this website, The Onion, is misusing the Presidential Seal of the United States of Merica. Now, I have not seen this seal - and I hope it's doing well, with all those hurricanes in Florida and whatnot, but to misuse a seal? Now that's nnanimal cruelty.
Now, I have talked to all my friends at Hallyburton about this, and we agree. Seals should be clubbed as babies to be used as coats. If the Seals are not going to be used as coats, they should be allowed to live out their natural lives at Seaworld and the like. You know, preforming tricks for the kids. Ya gotta member the children, they're our most precious resource. But I digress.
This website, The Onion, is misusing the Presidential Seal and it's got to stop. Our staff has sent a letter to The Onion, and they just made fun of us. How terrble is that? Even worse, some people have suggested that the seal be changed at The Onion. That's not good. How would you like it if we changed you?
Anyways, seals are great creatures. Make good coats, preform tricks for kids. Kids important. Onion misusing seals. Onion's bad, make kids cry. Now go out there and tell those bad liberals at The Onion to stop misusing seals and making kids cry.
Good night, and God Bless you.
Yer President
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.....
"used in connection with commercial ventures or products in any way thatsuggests presidential support or endorsement,"
Pardon me but if anyone that thinks that the Onion is not a joke and the the use of Bush's picture (and seal) is anything but satire, then you need to get out more, and I have a nice east coast bridge to sell you.
That being said the syntax above includes the qualifying phrase, "in any way thatsuggests presidential support or endorsement" whis is key. The in any way in not unquailified. Political satire by its nature is not-endorsed nor suggesting of endorsment or support. On the contrary is exactly the opposite, an un sanctioned criticism. Political Satire is also protected speech. So the White House counsel clearly did not read the law he put in his letter, or he was just telling the Onion that they certainly did not have support or endorsement of the White House. So now the Onion knows that that they are really doing Political Satire that is biting a little. Good for them.
You obviously didn't read your quote or understand the English of it. I think that makes you a prime canditate for a Bush White House appointment to a top critical Cabinet level post.
But, for it to be satirical for that moron, he would have to say NICE things about them. That wouldn't bother me at all. That said, even if it was for his asinine and hateful reasons, it should be protected. The first amendment is supposed to protect political speech, and not just the speech you or I like. Even the village idiot gets a voice.
You don't have to listen.
You don't have to like it.
You do have to allow it.
Well, it's that or just use the U.S. Constitution for toilet paper since it's of no value if you can cherry pick why, when, and how you apply it.
after all, we don't want the world associating the official US Government Seal with misinformation and stupidity, do we?
Good point. Let's take the seal out of whitehouse.gov ASAP!
I think it's safe to say that nobody would confuse the Onion as having presidential support or endorsement.
Don't be so sure.
Yeah but read sect a) again, my emphasis:
...for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof,
The Onion is a parody. They're not seriously conveying the impression of sponsorship or approval. There was a similar law about buring the sacred flag but that was struck down as unconstitutional. I would guess the courts would say people have a right to make fun of the government and the seal.
I could be wrong.
"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.
"are NOT the property of the people of the USA they are the property of the government of the USA and there is a major difference between thoses two"
I've never heard that before. Can you point to a link that explains the difference? It sounds interesting.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Actually, no, that's not the case:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18
Now, don't get me wrong; I don't get this law AT ALL. I think it's kinda goofy. Then again, there are goofy laws all over the world.
Anyway, satire doesn't overrule everything; if it did then people would use that as an excuse for dang near everything they do.
Some people do hide behind satire as a way of expressing their political opinions. Frankly, I think that's pretty cowardly, because it's not satire. It's just plain old libel, hiding behind a satire label. Go check out the spine of various "political" books, and you'll see what I mean.
To be clear, I *DO NOT* think The Onion falls into this category. They're in it for the humor of the situation, no matter who or what they're writing about.
When people went looking for pictures from the Mars Pathfinder project, many instinctively to nasa.com instead of nasa.gov
At the time, nasa.com was a porn site, so visitors got quite an eyeful. The real NASA invoked some government edict from the 1960s that stated the acronymn NASA was reserved for use by their agency, and were able to unseat them. Yet when I go to nasa.com today, I find some sort of private detective agency, I am not sure what happened in the meantime...
My rights don't need management.
Sadly, there are lot of people within the USA who think articles in the Onion are real.
I heard Carol Kolb, the Onion's head writer, comment on NPR that their office gets a LOT of snail mail from church groups in rural Texas. Not as a reaction to the Onion's offensiveness, mind you: The Texans sincerely believe the content.
Case in point, one of my favorite headlines: "Chinese Woman Has Septuplets: Has One Week to Choose". You get the idea, right? Some poor fictitious mom in China has to choose one child due to government policy, while the rest are thrown over a cliff. Really vicious and mean-spirited (so of course I adored it).
After that headline hit the newsstands and the Net, the Onion was beseiged by heartfelt prayers for the poor woman via the U.S. Postal Service. And pleas for contacts to find out what good Christians could do to help. No, I am not making this shit up.
And it keeps happening. Again and again.
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
You sir, have rendered me speechless. I am at a total loss of words as to how to respond to this.
Hold on, I've got it. We need to outlaw comedy. Then the stupid people will be safe from being taken advantage of by the funny people in the world.
No! We need more that that. We must have a constitutional amendment banning anything that could be misinterpreted! We'll start a grass roots movement. We'll call it DUMBUP (Don't Use More Big Ugly Phrases). Our tag line can be ", but think about the morons." We will get universities outlawed so there won't be any more literature and rhetoric majors to say things that make our heads hurt!
Power to the Sheeple! Fight the brains! Dumb power!
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.
NEWS FLASH: Onion countersues White House for "stealing all the good jokes". Joe Jones, an Onion spokesman, was quoted as saying "They're running us into the ground. How can we make jokes about the White House, when they haven't said something non-humorous in weeks? Harriet Miers as "qualified"? They stole our front page story!!"
What? You mean the Pittsburgh Zombie Attack preparations story isn't true? Get me George Romero on the phone!
Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
Here is the standalone version of the site Weekly Radio Address. Not once during the Clinton administration did they send a cease and desist letter to the parodies aired on the Rush Limbaugh show. Looks like The Onion isn't the only thing that's thin skinned.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
but I don't see they have a defense against the "no commerical use without permission" rule
But that's not the rule. The rule is about commercial use that implies endorsement, as in selling "Presidential" Hair Care Products with the seal on them, or putting the seal on an ad for your product to lend your product credibility (ha, not that that would be implied with this administration). The Onion is obviously satire, and it should be obvious to any reader that the seal is not implying any endorsement of The Onion or what is written in it. Satire is protected by the first amendment, and they shouldn't have any difficulty making a case here, if they wish to do so.
Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I think you misspelled "corporations" there. :-)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
The seal is used in movies, too. No one seems to care about that, either.
The Onion, along with Comedy Central, are practically the only media outlets that have actually hurt the Bushists in the last five years. They are Cheney's #1 targets for vengeance.
Although he might want to hurry up. One of his little campaigns for payback is about to bear fruit as a series of indictments from a federal prosecutor. He's going to be a busy man, trying to take down the justice system.
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.
Actually, no, they don't. The government gets to pick where they spend their law-enforcement resources and the executive branch makes the call. (Another example of this is the consistent case law declaring that the police have no obligation to protect any given individual from a crime or threat, no matter how grave or obvious in advance.)
A private individual or company has an obligation to take some action if his mark is being infringed to avoid it going public domain. But even there the requirement is not to pursue every infringer.
The closest argument to "must pursue all" is the requirement for equal protection. But even that only comes into play if there's a consistent pattern of only going after a suspect class of infringers, rather than making the pick in a way that doesn't discriminate, or discriminates only on some rational basis (such as biggest ones get the hit) with other things (like race) only present, if at all, as a side effect.
However, as a separate issue, satire is protected speech. If the seal was used in a clearly satirical way the Onion has legs to stand on. (I haven't seen the article in question yet, but given that it's the Onion it seems likely that's what they were doing.)
The problem with satire is that sometimes it looks too much like what it's satirizing and confuses people. I suspect that's what happened here - either because some functionary didn't get that it was satire, or thought others wouldn't.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
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:[.]
"...for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title..."
So where is this not the case? I don't see anyone excepting a single reporter in China a few years back taking The Onion seriously... And the commercial clauses would have to show that The Onion purposely used the seal to gain profit. Not a lawyer, but I think that'd be hard to prove in most cases of use of the presidential (etc.) seals. I think they'd have a better case against book publishers and movie makers who seem to use the seal often on political thrillers because the medium the seals are conveyed on are specifically on items that are not free access. You have to buy your ticket, book, whatever.
I get your point, but unless The Onion can't defend itself in court somehow I don't see this lawsuit going very far. Especially with the negative repercussions in an already poor public opinion atmosphere at the White House. It's not enough of a smoke-screen issue to distract the public from the current scandals there, so this is really a puzzling move. Carl Rove must be slipping. :D
Maybe the fear is that people will think the current administration is a joke too. Oh wait...
:(
The fact that your post was modded as funny makes me wonder whether I should laugh or cry
I am guessing it has something to do with this
Let's do some "history correction".
Sure, lets.
Now this administration may be able screw up the invasion of the wrong country...
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.
I am no fan of Clinton, but you can't seriously be comparing the scope of Haiti and Kosovo to Iraq.
leak the names of CIA agents...
At this point unfounded speculation at best. Besides, it's not a crime to "leak" the names of CIA agents unless the intent was to expose them. In this case, it was hardly the intent to expose an undercover CIA operative (which Mr. Wilson's wife was not), but simply to disclose how Mr. Wilson got the assignment. But speaking of breaking laws, who was it that lied to a Grand Jury abou a blow job? Oh yes, that was Bill Clinton.
First off, yes, it is a crime to leak the name of an undercover agent (or any other classified information) regardless of intent. And yes, despite the administrations carefully worded talking points she was undercover, and the information was classified as "secret" in the memo the CIA provided to the WH.
And the "intent to disclose how Mr. Wilson got the assignment" fib has been sunk by the time lines--unless you are claiming they began an organized campaign to clarify a statement three weeks (mid June) before the statement was made (early July) and are intending to split hairs about the distinction between why Wilson in particular was send (selected by the CIA, after being suggested by his wife) from the real question of why anyone was sent on this particular assignment (do obtain more information, as requested by Cheney).
As for the "unfounded speculation" aspect, you may want to catch up on the news. We now know that the administration has repeatedly lied about this issue, including the claim that Rove & Libby had "nothing to do with it" which was changed to "first heard about her from reporters" and then to "were acting alone, not as part of any organized campaign" and that they were doing it "in response to Willson's NYT opinion piece" but started weeks before the piece was even written and did so in an amazingly unified and coherent fashion. We were told that "Cheney knew nothing about it," even though today we learn that Libby's hand written, dated notes of a meeting with Cheney in the days before the campaign started include the salient details.
But I guess all this overshadows the fact that the 9/11 commission says Mr. Wilson lied about the Nigeria-Iraq connection, which is what the liberals want.
Stripping the political baggage from your statement (facts don't care who "wants" them), Wilson was disputed on a single point; he said he "saw" that the documents were forgeries, but had not in fact personally "seen" the original documents. Understandable as a miscommunication, and hardly discrediting, especially as (IIRC) he clarified the point as soon as he was called on it. He has been proven correct and Dick "We know they have WMD" Cheney has been proven incorrect on every substantive point.
--MarkusQ
P.S. For the record, I was up in arms about Clinton and the BJ too. Both for the perjury and (perhaps more importantly) for the effect on his family. Hillary can take care of herself, but imagine the effect that must have had on his daughter. Not to mention that the Democrats would have been up in arms, crying sexual harassment if a CEO or the president of a university had done something similar.
But just as I hold the Democrats responsible for their actions, I expect the leaders of my own party to behave themselves in a way that brings credit, not shame, on the party. And this cabal of nincompoops is doing more damage to the Republicans than any Democrat could dream of doing.
Examples:
From Title 18, Section 713, Paragraph (b):So the question is, do the Onion editors want to go to jail?
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
The corporations are the citizens. The non-corporate entities are just plebs.
Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
Because the government is supposed to represent the people, and therefore not to hold any exclusive IP. As others have pointed out, though, this is not an IP issue. Using the seal is more akin to copying someone's signature than copying their trademark, and it's forbidden by other laws. That doesn't mean that the government's action in this case is right or a good use of taxpayer money, but it's necessary to understand which laws and principles are involved before we can make that determination.
Slashdot - News for Herds. Stuff that Splatters.
You know we're fucked when the White House doesn't even understand the first amendment or parody exemptions.
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
This cease and desist letter is just what most are... a scare tactic. The only difference here is that when the govenment trys to scare you is called a Civil Rights Violation and the person who sent it should be imprisioned.
So I'm at least partially right. It's been several years since I took a serious look at copyright laws. In any event, the Feds do not hold a copyright on the seal of the president. I haven't found any evidance that it's at all trademarked either (though my research is limited to a few quick searches on Google). And from a strict constituitonal view, my statement that restrictions on the seal are limited to areas of interstate commerce is correct, though the prevailing 5-4 majority of SCOTUS seems to have an absurdly expansive view of what constitutes interstate commerce. In any event, the Onion is clearly engaged in a commercial venture (selling advertising) across state lines, and that is depenant upon their publication of a satirical newspaper.
But beyond all that, I thank you, sir, for educating us all about our schizophrenic government.
Perhaps the Onion can make a spoof seal with a picture of George W. Bush pissing on taxpayers, and half of them smiling as they drink it up.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Leave it to the intarweb's finest to misinterpret everything. Let me clarify: Remove said bums from the train station, placing them in a warm and safe shelter where they will be fed and clothed and maybe even be treated like a human being. Wet concrete steps hardly seem to be the place for man or beast. Let's not forget the hazardous conditions posed to the said bums and commuters should someone actually trip down 40 stairs.
If Katrina had spared us that probably would have been the next thing on the agenda. Of course there's a lot more to it than cranking up the buses and driving them toward Houston; you have to have destinations lined up, and because you have to also plan for the hurricane NOT to hit you also have to have a plan for getting the buses back. Of course it's easy to forget little details like that if you're back-seat driving and ragging on the locals to deflect attention from the high-level failures.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
Too bad I'm without modpoints just now, or you'd certainly get a "+1, Illegal" from me!
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
here. Google turns up many more ("katrina"+"flotilla"+"turned back"). A lot of the reporting is partisan, but can you blame them? There is little doubt that it happened.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
Would you support a publication that repeatedly pointed out you myriad of flaws, poor reasoning and simple idiocy?
If I were the president of the United States, then yes. After all, any true American knows that the press should be there to do exactly that. Of course, it doesn't actually work that way in America these days, because of the corporate ties that the mass news media has. Perhaps that's why so many government mistakes, intentional or not, are allowed to pass over there.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
I guess that the people at the Onion aren't creative enough to make up a satirical seal...
..... for the Bush administration to sue The Daily Show. After everybody knows that that show is only kidding.....
Oh wait.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
Point in fact, Congress never paid Francis Hopkinson for his services in designing the Great Seal of the United States of America (of which the Presidential Seal is a derivative work), and many of the symbols associated with the Federal Government today.
1. Until Congress pays the agreed fees, the rights to the Seal are solely that of the Hopkinson family;
2. The White House has no legal claim to it's use.
below is a story from one of my GMs in the past....at one point he ran a vampire LARP game where some of the players were FBI agents....hence where this story is going...here's the email unedited:
__________________________________________________ ___________
My "It would be funny but it happened to me too" story:
I was driving through South Dakota when I was pulled over for having a headlight out. This was about a year ago, and the police were still worked up about that little Sept 11 thingy.
A little background first: I have a bad habit of not throwing anything away, and happened to be playing/running a Live action vampire game when I lived in Houston. Certain Individuals and I created some items as "Props"
that looked pretty authentic, especially to the untrained eye. If the individual in question wants to tell ya what we made he can do it. The only hint I'll give is that they definitly looked official.
So, anyways, I got pulled over by this SD state trooper, K-9 no less. My hair was about 2 feet long, shaved on the sides and back, pulled into a pony-tail. I was wearing my "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke -- God"
shirt. Ratty assed blue jeans, with a pile of trash in my backseat. He takes one look at me and says, "Sir, I am going to need you to step out of the vehicle."
Well, like I said, I used to live in Houston. So, I unbuckeled my seatbelt and put my windows up (Second nature when I get out of my car). In one fluid motion, I took my keys out of the ignition, locked the door and slammed it shut. As I did this he yelled at me to "leave the car running and the doors unlocked." After slamming the door shut, he told me to unlock it. Being the good subversive asshole I am, I said, "Nope."
Then he asked if I had any weapons on me, luckily I had already taken my pocket knife outta my pocket to open a bag of beef jerky and it had fallen on the passenger side floor. I said no, and he told me to empty my pockets.
Seems I had a weapon after all, fingernail clippers, in my pocket. Then he asked me to step into his SUV.
As soon as I got in, his dog went apeshit and he asked, "Do you have any contraband in your vehicle?" To which I replied, "What do you mean by contraband?" Chalk one up to being either stupid or an asshole who really had no plans to get home that evening. He explained, "Drugs, Weapons, other illegeal things." My smartassed reply, "Do you mean illegeal in the state of South Dakota, or just plain illegeal." Then he asked, "May I search your car?" I figured that I am already fucked right now, so I say, "Hell no."
We sat in silence for about 20 minutes, then he got out with the dog and had it sniff the car. He got back in and asked, "Where are you headed?" My reply of "Home" didn't seem to improve our relations much. Then he asked, "Where is your home?" To which I said, "South."
"Where were you comming from?"
"The east."
About 20 more minutes of silence. Then, "Can I search your vehicle?"
"Nope, Am I being detained?"
"Uh, no sir."
This went on for about 3 hours, eventually I was able to spot the in vehicle camera and noted that it was still recording. So he asked to search again.
Finally I capitulated! I said extremely clearly and loud, "Since I have now been detained against my will for 3 hours and I am very tired, I will, under duress, consent to an illeagle search of my car at this time." Then he asked me for my keys, and I told him they were on the trunk. He was a little pissed as he took the dog outta the SUV.
He tore the hell outta my vehicle, finding the item in question along with several wanted posters from a certain federal agency. Sadly these posters had my pic on them and Zeds pic too. *sigh* So this cop calls in the, according to him, "Forged items".
I explain to him back in the SUV that I did not attempt to impersonate anyone, nor did I identify myself as belonging to any organization. He said I was going to jail. I asked to sp
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
When your boys investigated Clinton's real estate investments in Whitewater, all they came up with was a blowjob years later. I think it's another dismal loss for the Bush gang that no one got anything like that while they were screwing America.
Some more distinctions: no treason, no sueing parody newspapers. Even the indictments score is incomparable, especially on the charges. Oh, yeah, the job approval ratings are inverted. And, wait, er, the Bush administration is actually running the country, while Clinton is long gone. Is that all you've got, invoking your worst nightmares from 2 terms ago?
--
make install -not war
People who don't vote for these animals don't have to feel as bad. People who vote for someone better get to feel good about our part. People who get other people to vote for someone better get to feel even better. And when we get people who actually manage our government in the interest of our citizens, we get to feel like real Americans - the best feeling in the world.
--
make install -not war
The feds said "get out of there" DAYS before it hit. Your own mayor didn't concur until it was too late.
This is absolutely untrue. I remember it QUITE well because I was in Detroit, MI on Friday evening, and went to bed thinking (along with the locals, the feds, the NOAA, and the rest of the country) that Katrina would be a cat 1 to cat 2 event for northern Florida. When I woke up Saturday morning I found out at the airport that it was going to be a cat 5 headed right up my arse.
About 36 hours later -- mid-day Sunday -- if you weren't out of town, it was too late. All previous evacuation planning had assumed a 72 hour window of opportunity, and we barely got 48 this time (and that realistically starting in the middle of the night). NOBODY was advising evacuation before Saturday morning, unless you count the "gee why does anybody live there at all" crowd. The fact that we managed to get everyone who had the means out in that time frame is a miracle. Nobody, including the people in charge, really expected it to work that well. It didn't work that well for Dennis a mere three weeks before. It had never worked that well in the 10 years or so that contraflow plans have been on the drawing board.
So where do you get this bullshit idea that "the Feds told us to get out days before?" Maybe from the same bullshit source that said those school buses were "intended for evacuation?" Here's a clue: Those school buses were "intended" to carry kids to school. Nobody in their right mind would have loaded them up with people when their most likely fate based on all of our experience would be to get caught out on a gridlocked overwater crossing when the hurricane arrived.
However vulnerable they are, buildings are safer than vehicles on the road in a hurricane. We live here. We know that.
Had Katrina spared us as so many other threats did, we might have gotten around to forming bus plans in the future. It's not as simple as it sounds. You have to have places to drive the buses to, and you have to have a plan for getting them back if the hurricane doesn't hit. And you have to expect the evacuation to succeed, which it never had in the past. We got that right just in time. It's easy for back-seat drivers who have never seen NOLA to snipe about what we coulda shoulda done, but out here on the porch it ain't that simple when you ain't got the 20/20 hindsight and you don't know what the fucking storm is actually going to do.
I will repeat this: I live here. I flew home only to evacuate 24 hours later myself. I have watched local officials prepare for this kind of event for my entire life. Kindly refrain from telling me how things are in my home when you obviously have no clue what you are talking about, kthx.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
I don't see anything wrong with current deficits (when compared to historical deficits and corrected for inflation. Same with gas prices.) One look at my credit card statements will support that I don't find anything wrong with borrowing money or living on credit.
If it was up to me, many of the social welfare programs, including social security, would be cut back severely with serious restrictions. Food stamps, for example, would only be able to be used for staples (flour, sugar, produce, milk), not processed foods like frozen pizzas, candy, hamburger helper or soda. Social security would be virtually eliminated and people would have to learn how to save for retirement instead of having it forced on them. Or, maybe they might have to work all of their lives like my great-grandparents and father and mother did.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
Yep...when I was young I ate a lot of beans (beans made in a bean pot to save money) with fatback cut up in it for flavor. My mother used to make 'potato soup', which was soup made from potatoes, a little milk, and flour. I never knew until I became an adult what salads were really like; I thought they were just lettuce with vinegar/oil dressing. We used to have beef and noodles for dinner. Guess what it was?? That's right, the cheapest cut of beef cooked for hours to try and make it tender and some noodles and mashed potatos. Lucky for us we lived in the corn belt and could buy corn very cheaply, cook it, and can/freeze it. I ate a lot of potatos and corn growing up. A lot of milk, but hardly any soda. We grew a lot of tomatos and cucumbers in a little garden.
When I grew up and got stupid and moved out (by then my parents were doing OK), I had many periods where my paychecks didn't cover my bills (mostly because I was stupid). I got by remembering how to eat very, very cheaply. It's amazing how much of a paycheck can go to food when they don't spend wisely. Or the cable bill, or the telephone bill, or the car, or other things that I have gone without many times because I couldn't afford them.
When I see people on food stamps buying potato chips and soda and frozen pizza, I see them spending my money. I wish I could teach them how to make each dollar go as far as it can AND eat better. I get tired of the 'they are people, the deserve special treats.' Bull shit...when they can afford to buy their own frozen pizza with their own money, then they can have it. The sad part is, the people that can manage their budget are often too proud to ask for help, just like my parents.
Now I make over $100K a year and eat whatever I want (and have the waistline to prove it.) It took me 40 years to get that far, I don't accept that other people can't travel that same road with minimal handouts from the government.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
I may not be an expert in DP/DR planning, but I happen to live here and I have seen the process. I have watched things improve a little every time the city tries this. It is fucking annoying to watch a bunch of nerds sit in their mother's basements and pronounce how they would have handled the situation so much better and what a bunch of morons a bunch of people they never heard of before are.
We actually succeeded in getting more than a million people out of the city -- about 90% of the population -- in less than 48 hours. The people who are ragging on Nagin and Blanco for what they didn't do should actually be on their fucking knees thanking them for their efforts. This required coordination between more than 10 parishes and counties and two state governments.
I have been in these traffic jams. I have stayed at times because I weighed the traffic jam potential against the hurricane. I have watched them get better at it every time they try. What in the name of Bob makes you think they haven't been looking and learning?
For Katrina nearly every existing plan at the local level actually went smoothely, many for the first time ever. To complain that such-and-such other plan wasn't in place is stupid and rude. Maybe a few more cycles down the road there would have been bus evacuations. There was no infrastructure for that this time nor was there any sane reason for such infrastructure to have been introduced. It's very easy to show pictures of the flooded buses and yell "Nyahh nyaah" but there are damn good reasons those buses stayed where they were. A lot of this bullshit is propaganda that was deliberately constructed to deflect blame from FEMA, which did not content itself with merely not showing up in time to save hundreds of lives but actively thwarted the efforts of people and agencies that did show up. Do not talk to me about what Nagin and Blanco didn't do when FEMA was turning away rescuers and aid and ordering doctors not to work on dying people because their papers weren't in order.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
Kinda like how in PHP, 1 == true, but 1 !== true?
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'