Slashdot Mirror
Glenn Beck Loses Dispute Over Parody Domain
CuteSteveJobs writes "Glenn Beck fought the law and the law won. Parody website DidGlennBeckRapeAndMurderAYoungGirlIn1990.com attacked Beck using the same straw man arguments Beck himself is famous for: 'We're not accusing Glenn Beck of raping and murdering a young girl in 1990 — in fact, we think he didn't! But we can't help but wonder ... Why won't he deny that he raped and killed a young girl in 1990?'
Beck didn't see the humour and tried to have the site shut down. He sued the creator on the grounds the site 'violated his name as a trademark.' But in a sudden outbreak of common sense, WIPO rejected Beck's complaint finding the site 'can be said to be making a political statement,' which is a 'legitimate non-commercial use' of Beck's name. But after winning, the owner voluntarily handed Beck the domain anyway. Still, it's comforting to know that satire — the only weapon politicians and talking heads fear — is still safely in the hands of the public where it belongs."
tell beck why the results of his arrogance is now something he has in common with barbra streisand. he'll love the comparison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
They should have handed the domain to someone who could have done even more with it, say AdBusters. Glenn Beck is evil and must be destroyed... not literally of course, but he must be combated intelligently (as in this example!) which is the only way to take away his power. Actually snuffing him would make him a martyr and that would be disgusting.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Because Beck never does that....oh wait.
Handing back the domain after the decision strikes me as a way of setting a precident protecting such usage of a public figure's name, while gracefully ending the joke when it's done what it's supposed to. Well done.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Let's say its any other commentator, for example, Rachel Maddow. This doesn't seem right. The argument on here goes "Well, Glenn Beck uses the same tactics."
All the partisans on the 24 hour cable news networks use these tactics.
[FromTheMorning]
The funny thing about Glenn Beck is that the only people more idiotic than his rabid fans are his rabid anti-fans.
The "did he kill a girl" satire isn't as powerful as the satire Beck actually uses (about, say, the Marxist leanings of numerous Obama appointees who ... actually cite Marx, or Mao, or Chavez as heros, etc), because he trots out video tape to keep it topical. When satire - a la The Daily Show - is anchored to your target's actual utterances, foibles, gaffes, and poor judgement, it's a lot more potent.
As for the "man, I sure hope I'm wrong on this" rhetorical technique: again, it's more effective when (as Beck has humorously done), he has a yes-the-White-House-Press-Office-knows-the-phone-number hot line, right to his studio, that he begs them to call, so that they can point out how the video taped comments of some of their idiots are wrong, or not meaningful. Obviously, the Whtie House doesn't want to take the bait, because then they'll have to actually talk about those idiots directly. But you know he's getting on their nerves when they refer to his time slot (rather than him, you know, he's "he that shall not be named") as being not actual news. Which is funny, since it's not positioned as such in the first place, any more than are, say, Keith Olbermann or Diane Rehm.
Yes, it's important that we preserve the rights to be satirical snots as needed, and at whomever we think needs to be on the receiving end. So this is a good development, no matter what you think about any of the parties involved or their positions. The only scary development is the resurgent muttering, on the left, about the actually evil "fairness doctrine."
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Glenn makes personal attacks of this very nature, so it is entirely appropriate that this was done to Beck. After all, if he didn't rape and murder a young girl, why doesn't he just prove it? Should be as easy as proving you were born in this country.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
You must not be familiar with the Glenn Beck Show.
Because there is none. Quit confounding parody and satire with humour. Both are often very unfunny (which is not to say they should not be protected: they should).
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
"moderate republican? "
More like Republican that was more liberal than the Dem.
Why do you bother? You are right but why make the effort?
I swear that the people on Slashdot have pushed the art of bias to new extremes.
To answer your question. No I am not furious that the decision was legal. And no I wouldn't be upset if the other URL was found legal.
I an and would be furious that both exists and I am a little ticked that Slashdot puts it on the front page and NOT under politics which I have set to not show up on my front page of Slashdot.
Yes it is good that it is legal it is bad that idiots create such crap and that other sites then give them free PR.
BTW if you hate Glen Beck you do know this will only help him with his faithful don't you?
Just so everybody can see the results of this action and understand just how STUPID it is I will explain it to you.
Some Beck hater posts this website.
People that HATE Beck will think it is funny.
People that Love Beck will hate those that think it is funny,
Beck takes them to court and doesn't get the site taken down.
The people that HATE Beck still think it is funny.
The people that LOVE Beck will see it as proof that the courts are biased and hate them. They will become more politically active and work harder for consertives to get elected.
The result is this is preaching to the base and will do nothing but amuse one base and rally the other.
End result more polarization which is exactly what WE DON"T NEED.
For people like me that don't love or hate Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, President Obama, or NPR.
We get anoyed that we have to see this stupidity.
Of course why did I bother to make this effort since it will be unread or I will be modded down as a troll.
PS. I bet Health Care will not pass. Both parties are expert at the art of active inactivity.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
beck/ limbaugh/ fox traffic in lies, propaganda and demagoguery. to point lies, propaganda, and demagoguery back at the crap flingers is to merely use their own tactics against them
i am not aware of michelle obama engaging in smears and vindictive hysterical FUD against people she dislikes. but of course, that doesn't stop the likes of beck and limbaugh from pointing smears and propaganda at people they dislike for ideological reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with the accusations they throw at people
that someone should point the same bullshit at them: exactly where is the hypocritical rule written that people who fling mud can't have mud flung at them?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Nobody is saying he's a rapist and a murderer, they're just pointing out that he's never denied.it. He attacked an Arab-American senator, saying that they've never gone on record stating they aren't a terrorist, and never really presented any solid proof they aren't working for Al Quaida, so basically the website is operating under the assumption that if he can give it, he can take it.
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Has Glenn Beck denied having raped and murdered a young girl in 1990?
If not, why not?
I'm not saying he did or anything, and I think he didn't, but I think that many of the readers will wonder why he has yet to deny these rumors.
To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
So he's a conservative, then.
I would imagine most of the comments I just read were by those who have never even seen or listened to Beck's show.Calling the accusation of fictional rape of a young girl parody is ridiculous.
I have listened to Beck and I also consider his approach to calling anything or anyone who proposes a government run this or that as communist and socialist (and the "fact" that the left has a "hidden" agenda to turn the US into a communist state) is also ridiculous and extremely distasteful
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Glenn Beck almost certainly did not rape and murder a young girl in 1990. However, with people raising the issue, he should step forward and deny that he raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. I mean, the man has a TV show, a very public forum to state that he didn't raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. He could open tomorrow by saying that he didn't rape and murder a young girl in 1990.
Instead he's now suing people who say he raped and murdered a young girl in 1990! I don't think this allegation is true for a second, but seriously, people, that doesn't look good.
In case you honestly don't get the joke, this is one of the many ways that Glenn Beck operates. He will explicitly state rumors, over and over, to assert he doesn't believe in them, but the Democrat involved, usually Obama, should deny them. So someone figured out, hey, he should have a rumor of his own to deny.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
And in the end, nothing of any significance will change. So continues the failed experiment of big government and big bureaucracy..
"He is very conservative"
I'm a liberal but I think it's an insult to conservatives to call him that (seriously, there are intellectual, reasonable conservatives). He's just crazy. The best way to describe him is to call him a very successful television troll. I don't think he really has a position. He just want to get people riled up and attract as much attention to himself as possible.
EvilCON - Made Famous by
Wow! You got a virtual unknown conservative candidate within 4% of winning in a district that has elected Republicans since the 1880s!
And, honestly, you would have probably succeeded this time if the voters were not still entirely rejecting the right and everything you stand for. So there's that comfort.
Maybe next year, you'll actually manage to replace a Republican or two from, say, Utah! Assuming they're still electing Republicans over there.
You're exactly what the Republicans need, people kicking them in the head from behind because they suddenly are voting exactly the way they've always voted WRT to spending. Makes them honest. Honest and unconscious.
All of us here on the left are rooting for you.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
And we know the left (with an agreeable media) NEVER tries to take down someone they don't like. Just like the claims of Rush Limbaugh and racism...oh wait!
Wait. Does that mean you were being sarcastic the whole time? Because I thought it was pretty obvious to anyone who has listened to more than 10 minutes of Limbaugh that he IS racist. I know you probably want quotes. Don't have them off the top of my head as I try to scrub all memory of his hate-filled speech from my head. But I'd be glad to get them for you when I get off work.
You, my dear sir or madam, missed the point entirely, of course he didn't rape and kill anyone, it would certainly hit his ratings so he wouldn't do that, what the domain "parodied" was the style favored by Mr. Glenn "I do more research ..." Beck: make a statement about a target, imply its validity and ask why the target does not defend that accusation, because if he doesn't defend that accusation, then it must be true.
That *is* character assassination and he was called on it, quite publicly.
Remember, “if it weights more than a duck, it must be a witch"
Quoting the article you linked to:
"You don't have to accept the definition of how to do things, and you don't have to follow other people's choices and paths, Okay? It is about your choices and your path. You fight your own war. You lay out your own path. You figure out what's right for you. You don't let external definitions define how good you are internally. You fight your war. You let them fight theirs. Everybody has their own path."
I watched the video of her delivering the speech, and it's perfectly plausible that her explanation is true. "...two of my favorite political philosophers: Mao Zedong and Mother Theresa" has all the hallmarks of a poorly delivered joke. She may, in fact, have heard that quote and backstory from Lee Atwater as she claimed.
So Beck, in his usual form, runs right out and connects her to all of Mao's atrocities, instead of to the quote she offered. He implies, AS YOU DO HERE, that she's a student of his work, and that she agrees with all of his choices. In no way can that be supported from anything else she's said, and it certainly can't be concluded on the basis of even this one isolated quote.
Beck does not back up most of his stuff. He implies. He solicits emotional response instead of enlightenment. He draws casual lines and tosses them aay without backing them up. He hammers his points, and you suck it up like his greedy little lap dog.
Wait a second... he's Michael Moore! Should have seen it before.
I stopped reading at "democrat party".
Wotta loon.
I really get tired of hearing that all the hate comes from the right when the left is just as guilty of it, if not more so in recent times. The Rush debacle was probably the lowest point some major media outlets reached since Dan Rather and CBS did in 2004.
Glen Beck makes himself a target and I bet he comes away richer for it. However, try this same type of website against someone who is black, gay, or Muslim, and see how long it lasts; if Beck were either of the tree I bet it would have been taking down by intimidation long before this. The media essentially ignored this site because they enjoyed it but if you touch one of the areas they are sensitive too I know it will be front page "hate crime" news.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
And I'd also add: Don't be such a pussy - anything you dish out you should fully be able to take. I'd love to hear an explanation on why it's fair when you do it and unfair when it's done to you.
And on top of that: If you love 'Murica as much as you say you do, then you should at least learn how she works. We're actually pretty proud of the First Amendment. Too bad you're not.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
his goal is to get attention, whether positive or negative. in fact, getting negative attention from his ideological opponents is probably more dear to him than getting positive attention from his admirers
you have to understand the man and the nature of his business: he's a professional troll. his goal is to create and generate emotional responses, whether positive or negative, its all the same to him. this is his business, and he's good at it. proof being, sites that mock and satire him: its proof of success
in fact, i'd bet he actually doesn't mind the site, it doesn't really bother him personally, but he shrewdly calculated that feigning outrage as a reaction would win him more response. i mean look at this giant shitstorm generated on slashdot over this ego-pumping pointlessness. we're all talking about glenn beck. beck, beck, beck, blah blah blah: he wins, he has our attention, he's the subject of our speech and occupies our thought. that's his goal
the man is a professional demagogue. this is what he does, and he does it well: he generates heat, pointless emotion, mindless easy outrage in service of a cause. of course, its all lies and smears, but what does that matter? truth is not the issue, influence is. and in politics the truth means something, but influence means even more
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
That's entirely unreasonable. Socialism != Government-run. You don't think the U.S. military is socialist do you? Policemen and Firefighters aren't socialist are they?
The real problem is that too many Americans have no idea what Socialism is. The term has been shrewdly twisted by people who profit from Laissez-faire policies to effectively mean any and every service the government provides. But that is not socialism. The "means of production" is not defined as the ability to produce any product or any service like you seem to think.
It could just be that people are ignorant in general, and because they resent and distrust intellectuals, they end up getting their history lessons from buffoons like Glen Beck. The result is that a disturbing number of people end up truly believing that Nazism, Communism, Socialism, and Fascism are all the same. How can America hope to remain an innovative, dominant competitor in a global economy with such widespread ignorance?
-Grym
Because I thought it was pretty obvious to anyone who has listened to more than 10 minutes of Limbaugh that he is NOT racist.
Fixed that for you.
Obviously, the Whtie House doesn't want to take the bait, because then they'll have to actually talk about those idiots directly
They don't want to "take the bait" because all it would legitimize Beck and drive up his ratings. Haven't you ever heard that you shouldn't argue with a madman? The people who are convinced by his ravings won't be convinced by your good arguments.
which begs the question who put that lady in as the Republican candidate? i mean, did she just walk in off the street and nobody noticed?
i mean doesnt the Republican party (ANY PARTY) choose its own representatives? i find your post disingenuous to a fer high degree, sir. i fear the only one you may be deluding is yourself.
i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
Is Beck actually playing a joke on everyone?
As I don't know Beck personally I am of the opinion that the character that Beck plays on air is an anti-intellectual, fear mongering, fact misrepresenting, isolationist who uses logical fallacies to further his points. And as such the actual Beck is most likely a shrewd, capitalistic genius in being able to exploit the American public in the way he does in exchange for $$$. The possibility that Beck is actually like the character he portrays is even more scary than the entertainment show that he fronts. All entertainers have their schtick and Beck has found one that has attracted a large audience
"The Glen Beck Show - A fusion of entertainment and enlightenment" (my emphasis)
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
mod parent up! I wish the republican party could be taken back over by intellectual conservatives who actually believe in less spending. I don't care if Glenn Beck is a member of the Green party, he is just crazy.
So, the doctor who delivered Obama, and the newspaper that printed his birth announcement must be in on the scam? And the certificate that Hawaii issued was the only official certificate at the time. No controversy, just a bunch of hateful morons who can't stand the idea of a successful black man. Why would Obama even bother to speak to these wingers? That would just encourage them to waste more of his time.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
If you look at the language of the site, they're specifically not accusing him of rape (odd, that you should pick that over murder, but oh well).
The point is that he uses exactly the same kind of language to accuse people of all sorts of things -- f.ex. accusing a Muslim congrescritter of being a terrorist by using absurdly leading language such as "Now, *I'm* not saying that you're a terrorist, but some people might think .... Why don't you deny the rumour that you are a terrorist?"
Glenn Beck is a fucking pussy who can't handle being confronted with his own tactics and he no moral high ground in this case.
HAND.
I consider neither of them to be journalists in any useful sense of the word.
Exactly it. As Jon Stewart noted, they're theater and not news.
And I agree with Jon - they're hurting America. Remember when people would ask you what your stand was on a given issue? People don't really do that anymore, do they? They ask (in one form or another) what side you're on. And that's a huge difference.
Political discourse used to be a discussion of issues. Each individual and separate. Political discussions used to be like a trip to the salad bar. Now it's two choices A or B.
Take Kral_Blbec above, who got downmodded to oblivion. I said something that ran contrary to some position of his. He therefore assumed I must be from the other party. "Your beloved leader doesn't seem..." To people like him who are so heavily polarized, it seems impossible to partially disagree with his party. You're either one of us, or one of them. You can't get these types of people to actually think about anything. They just recite their set sound bites and want their side to win. It's infuriating.
It's entirely possible to make up your mind on every individual issue on your own. And these talking heads are slowly robbing us of this.
It's depressing how low political discourse has sunk just in the span of my lifetime.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.