Utah Rethinking Anti-Keyword Advertising Law

Eric Goldman writes "Slashdot previously reported on Utah's recent law banning trademark-triggered keyword advertising. This week, a group of technology executives met with Utah legislators to discuss the law, and it looks like the legislature is rethinking its position. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, 'Legislative leaders are looking to tweak a troublesome trademark protection program rather than defend it in court, after an unprecedented meeting with Internet power brokers who would prefer the new registry be scrapped.'"

Comments

fp

[Anonymous Coward]

fp

Twofo GNAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Advertising laws are for faggots.

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 2, June 1991

Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

Preamble

The licenses for most software are designed to take away your
freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public
License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free
software--to make sure the software is free for all its users. This
General Public License applies to most of the Free Software
Foundation's software and to any other program whose authors commit to
using it. (Some other Free Software Foundation software is covered by
the GNU Library General Public License instead.) You can apply it to
your programs, too.

When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it
if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it
in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things.

To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid
anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights.
These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you
distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.

For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
rights.

We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and
(2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy,
distribute and/or modify the software.

Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain
that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free
software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we
want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so
that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original
authors' reputations.

Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software
patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free
program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the
program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any
patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.

The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
modification follow.

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION

0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains
a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed
under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below,
refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program"
means either the Program or any derivative

Re:Twofo GNAA

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a reason proprietary and BSD-licensed software is of higher quality than GNU/*. Intelligence is GPL-incompatible.

This came as a surprise. Really.

[unity100]

I wasnt expecting that. The law they put out was just and up-to-standards on modern day technology. I cant see any reason why they should reconsider such an exemplary law.

Re:This came as a surprise. Really.

[Miseph]

The Utah legislature doesn't want to break their streak. They haven't written a good law since 1886, and by God, they want to keep it that way!

Utah is out of bounds

[SpacePunk]

Trademark is a Federal issue, not a state issue. Fuck Utah.

Re:Utah is out of bounds

[Jonny do good]

Trademark is actually covered under both state and federal laws.

Re:Utah is out of bounds

[SpacePunk]

In this case it's an interstate issue, not an intrastate issue which makes it federal territory.

LIKE A THROBBING COCK

[Anonymous Coward]

UP YOUR ASS!

beat u to it, whiney

[Anonymous Coward]

beat u to it, whiney

OT: Useless Sig

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

----- If you post AC, then you are a coward without conviction of belief. Therefore you will not be taken seriously.

And if you browse AC, then you won't be able to this sig.

Seriously though, profiling ACs? I don't think there's a group who could care less.

i told ya so

[krayyy]

see what happens when you get a state where 85% of the people vote republican...well, i'm not sure what you get other than real stupid shit.

Re:i told ya so

[boingo82]

Parent may appear to be trolling, but as someone who lives here, in a city where it's illegal to sell pornography or sex toys, in a city where we celebrated New Year's on Dec 30 and Independence Day on July 3 last year (both days had the audacity to fall on Sunday), in a city where you can't buy liquour except at the state-owned store, in a city...I think you get the picture. Parent may be trolling, but he's also accurate.

Re:i told ya so

[krayyy]

thank you. my intent is really not to bait anyone. my intent is genuine. i know many people from the state of utah. i know how this place operates. i'm kind of offended by the troll marking. sure, there are lots of nice things about utah, great skiing, beautiful country, etc; but when you have a state government leaning so heavily to the right bad things are bound to occur.

It all starts to make sense....

[baine]

when you start to look closely at the keywords they were trying to control : Brigham Young, Mormon, LDS, Mitt Romney, green jello, 2002 Winter Olympics, oh my heck, etc...

I think....

[owlnation]

I think that "rethinking" is not a good word to use. The implication is that they are thinking again. Which further implies that they were thinking in the first place.

Re:I think....

[Anonymous Coward]

replying to undo my accidental (and wrong) moderation.

Since 1886 !!! Hell yeah !!!

[unity100]

This is a fantastic example of perseverance and persistent stability. All sane citizens not only in united states, but in any constituencies in any country in the world should give support to Utah for continuance of this excellent example. There are tears in my eyes.

Figures

[Goldarn]

OhMyHeck, the Utah Legislature is listening to some rich business owners! That's certainly the first time that has happened!

Google hypocrisy

[Raenex]

I agree it's a bad law, and Google is one of the companies against it, but this little bit from the article is interesting:

All lawmakers want is for Google to protect other brands the way they shield their own, Eastman said. If a company tries to buy the trigger rights to the word Google, the following message pops up: "Due to trademark reasons, we do not allow advertisers to use 'Google' in their Google AdWords ads. This term may be trademarked either for a certain product or service category and may apply only in certain countries."

give them a little credit...

[Fogg]

Legislative leaders are looking to tweak a troublesome trademark protection program rather than defend it in court, after an unprecedented meeting with Internet power brokers who would prefer the new registry be scrapped.

Republicans did not rule out a repeal of the law. Nor did they dismiss the possibility that problems could be dealt with in an upcoming special session. But after Tuesday's meeting on Capitol Hill, lawmakers held out hope that a compromise could be reached.

The 'Internet power brokers' were "Google, eBay, Microsoft, America Online, Yahoo, 1-800 Contacts and Overstock.com", which makes the term seem unnecessarily loaded (when Overstock.com speaks, who listens, exactly?). It appears to me that legislative leaders passed a law in order to address the interests of businesses on the net by reducing what is essentially fraudulent use of trademarks (a perfectly reasonable goal, mind you), at the possible expense of purveyors of ads and search technology. When the purveyors of ads and search technology approached them and pointed out, probably in convincing detail, that the methods they chose were asinine, they listened, and might consider repealing the law, or at least revising it to make it slightly less asinine.

This isn't deeply impressive on its own, but in the context of the usual procedures of state and federal legislatures in the United States, it's actually kind of perspicacious.

Re:give them a little credit...

[Anonymous Coward]

Overstock and 1-800 are Utah companies.