Slashdot Mirror
Best Buy Hands Out Cease & Desist Letters for Christmas
arrenlex writes "Improv Everywhere, a NY-based comedy group, was served a Cease & Desist notice by Best Buy for selling 'improv everywhere' shirts modeled after the blue Best Buy uniform. But that's not the interesting part. From the blog post: 'Here's where the story gets interesting. Today, Best Buy sent a C&D to our friend Scott Beale over at laughingsquid.com threatening legal action unless he removes the blog post referencing our shirts! They're threatening to sue someone for just covering the news story of the shirts!'"
Courts don't honor C&D letters. C&Ds are sent to meet the requirement of giving notice to a party before filing suit against said party. You may be thinking of an injunction.
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
wayback machine ftw:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070410022442/www.bestbuysux.org
well for old entries anyway.
We've had this argument before:
You host can censor you. While possibly unfair, that is not a breach of the first amendment.
Someone can pay you to remove content. Assuming you consent to the "bribe" that is not a breach of the first amendment.
Someone can *not* sue you for speech, as that uses the courts(a branch of the government) to silence you, and that is prohibited by the first amendment.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Could Improv Everywhere being doing this as a gag? If memory serves, there was a fake suit from McDonald's?
Not saying this is a gag, but it is hard to trust pranksters. Also, this is assuming the news site is in on the gag.
My money is on Best Buy having no sense of humor and this is real.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Best Buy just sent us an apology letter for sending us a C & D letter just because we blogged about the Improv Everywhere shirts: http://laughingsquid.com/best-buy-apologies-for-sending-cease-desist-letter/ Here's the original C & D letter: http://laughingsquid.com/best-buy-cease-desist-letter/
I hate to defend Best Buy, but they've already admitted their mistake and apologized for the C&D letter sent to laughingsquid.com:
http://laughingsquid.com/best-buy-apologies-for-sending-cease-desist-letter/
Laughing Squid just received an apology letter.
They are still militant against the blue shirts, though. (rolls eyes)
Note that it was Best Buy's *lawyers*, but he then talked to Best Buy Corporate Public Relations Group, and they rapidly figured this one out - he got a quick retraction and apology.
"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order." - Ed Howdershelt
What they have to lose is their trademark on the "price tag" logo they've been using for years. If a trademark isn't defended, it can become diluted and unenforceable, like "Aspirin." It's the same as Adobe wanting you to say "modified with Adobe Photoshop software" instead of "photoshopped." It's silly, not unlike most of the legal system.
Now, what they have to lose if someone covers the story on their blog is a different question, so we now return you to the main point of this story.
I'm the sysadmin for improveverywhere's server (currently curled in the corner in the fetal position, sucking its thumb and begging for its mommy), and we got a DMCA takedown notice, in addition to the C&D improveverywhere got.
#####
Subject: Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Dear Sir or Madam:
I represent [OUR ISP]. Attached to this e-mail, or set out below, is a notice [OUR ISP] received alleging that material on your website infringes a copyright. This notice was sent to [OUR ISP] under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). A good summary of the DMCA can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA#DMCA_Title_II:_Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act
The DMCA has three steps. The notice [OUR ISP] received is the first step.
This notice triggers automatic removal or take down provisions under the DMCA. What this means is that the material identified in the DMCA notice must be removed by you, or taken down by [OUR ISP]. This must be done before you can dispute the claims set out in the notice. [OUR ISP] understands that this "guilty until proven innocent" aspect of the DMCA can be unfair, but its required by law.
If you believe the DMCA notice contains errors, you should immediately contact the person who sent the notice. Please let me know by e-mail if they agree to withdraw the notice. I will then contact them to verify the withdrawal.
After you remove the material, you may present [OUR ISP] with a "counter notice." This is the second step.
The elements of the counter notice are identified below, and in more detail in the wikipedia entry. Please make sure you fully understand the DMCA before presenting [OUR ISP] with a DMCA counter notice. It may be helpful for you to consult with your attorney. Unfortunately [OUR ISP] can not provide you with legal advice on this matter.
It is important that you take action immediately. Please let me know, within 5 days of the date of this e-mail that you have taken down the material. If I do not hear from you within this period of time, the DMCA requires [OUR ISP] to take down the material.
On behalf of the staff at [OUR ISP] I thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
[THEIR LAWYER]
Yes, they're called counter-notices and (as far as I understand) the only recourse after receiving one is to take legal action. Though the 'under penalty of perjury' claus probably discourages people from using these handy tools.
A nice template for such a notice can be found at http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Terrorism/form-letter.html.
I just read Slashdot for the articles.
http://www.laughingsquid.com/
Best Buy sent LS.com a letter by both email and next day delivery apologizing for sending the C&D to a news source.
I am impressed.
Check out http://www.laughingsquid.com/ front page for details.
> Someone can *not* sue you for speech, as that uses the courts (a branch
> of the government) to silence you, and that is prohibited by the first amendment.
This is incorrect. Someone *can* sue you for speech, or try to at any rate. Whether they'll get anywhere depends on various stuff. For instance, if they can make a coherent argument that your speech might be considered libelous, they'll probably be able to successfully drag you through the courts, and if they can make a _convincing_ argument that your speech _is_ libelous, they can potentially win the case. Libel is not the only kind of speech that they can successfully sue you for, either. Copyright and trademark violations are another example. Fraud is another (and one you can even be prosecuted for criminally, though generally you only will be if you cost the victims something tangible).
When the first amendment says "speech" and "press", it is, in context, clearly talking chiefly about political expression, not absolutely anything that anyone could ever say or write.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
While the C&D to Improv Everywhere and Neighborhoodies still stands (although the shirts seem like clear parody to me) If you actually look at laughingsquid.com you'll see that BestBuy apologized for sending them a C&D for reporting about the existence of the shirts as a matter of fact, and acknowledged they were in error.
-- The Hoss Man
It isn't like BB sent it in error though, here is a quote from Laughingsquid's original C&D post:
"One thing I wanted to mention is that before posting this C & D letter, I called the Best Buy attorney who sent it to confirm that they really meant to send it to a blogger who was just reporting on another blog post. They insisted that I was "promoting, not reporting" and that the demand letter was valid."
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
I work at best buy, and this is in no way below them. They might be one of the most evil businesses ever conceived. As a sales "associate" (i.e. salesman) it is my job to answer any questions you may have, and supposedly I will do so impartially since I'm non-commission. However, since my managers, and supervisors, are on commission, since they make a portion of the stores profit, they threaten termination and other forms of repercussion in an effort to force the non-commission sales staff to sell their shitty insurance policy (never ever buy Performance Service Plan, ever). In the same way, this C&D is just another way to insure a level of control over the use of their symbol. They don't want it being used in a way that doesn't convey a sense of comfort, since they want potential customers to view it as a seal of assurance. I myself am not allowed to discuss best buy policy, my wages, my fellow employees, or anything that I do at best buy, on my own personal time. This includes the use of "taggy" (the best buy symbol) as an image on one's blog or facebook profile.