Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bitcoin Trademark Troll Now Sending Bogus DMCA Takedowns

Posted by Unknown on from the my-claims-are-legit dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A couple weeks ago, Slashdot wrote about a lawyer named Michael Pascazi, who was trying to trademark Bitcoin. Techdirt picked up on the story, including Pascazi's evidence of the trademark. Pascazi has now sent Techdirt a bogus DMCA takedown request over the post, claiming that the header and footer in his stationery, which appears via an embed on the story, violates his copyright. He appears to be claiming that simply posting any version of his stationery is a copyright violation. It's not clear if the content in question is even copyrightable, and if it is, how Techdirt's use isn't fair use."

70 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He should be summarily executed as an example and to prevent such foolishness in the future. We don't need him polluting our gene pool.

    1. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Today, in news, Michael Pascazi was launched into the sun by a unanimous vote of the worlds population, on charges of being a complete douche.

    2. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by Manos_Of_Fate · · Score: 1

      Today, in news, Michael Pascazi was launched into the sun by a unanimous vote of the worlds population, on charges of being a complete douche.

      If we make a habit of this, we probably have enough complete douches here to keep the sun going for a few million extra years. Not to mention what this would do for our population issues...

      --
      Isn't enough that I ruined a pony, making a gift for you?
    3. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by uxbn_kuribo · · Score: 1

      Isn't "giving lawyers a bad name" akin to saying "Lord Voldemort is kind of a douche?"

      --
      No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
    4. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Well, there goes everybody in the Senate and Congress. And the President. And all the governors and state representatives.

      Now, who's up for running for office?

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Today, in news, Michael Pascazi was launched into the sun by a unanimous vote of the worlds population, on charges of being a complete douche.

      If we make a habit of this, we probably have enough complete douches here to keep the sun going for a few million extra years. Not to mention what this would do for our population issues...

      Assuming the average douche weights 80 KG and is consistent with the human body (10% hydrogen) that's 8 KG of hydrogen per douche, how long until we place enough fuel in the sun before the ratio of hydrogen to helium causes the sun well...

      to explode (or at least eject some douche matter)?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    6. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      Techdirt knows how to deal with the guy. The only thing that they would be worried about is maintaining their safe harbor status, thus they'll react, probably not in the manner this obvious troll expects. I am sure they have been waiting on challenge like this. Mike Masnick isn't even surprised I'd expect.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    7. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by kpainter · · Score: 1

      He should be summarily executed as an example and to prevent such foolishness in the future. We don't need him polluting our gene pool.

      Agreed. But as to giving lawyers a bad name, no he doesn't. Lawyers already have a more than bad name. IANAL, thank god!

    8. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

      So... quality decline == shut down instead of, I dunno, making sure higher standards are made/maintained? Backwards thinking - a problem saturating anything is not automatic grounds for outright disposal.

      --
      If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
    9. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

      I dunno, usually the term "internet tough guy" and "internet vigilante" referrs to people claiming to want to do X, Y, Z, not necessarily feeling that thing X should be done to person Y for his/her act Z.

      --
      If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
    10. Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Isn't "giving lawyers a bad name" akin to saying "Lord Voldemort is kind of a douche?"

      I kind of like Voldemort. I guess it's because he hangs around with Bellatrix Le'Strange. Now she is absolutely everything I want in a woman.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  2. Not news by YodasEvilTwin · · Score: 1, Funny

    Arrogant and dumb person does arrogant and dumb things: Show at 11.

  3. Fraud by sentientbeing · · Score: 2

    This is just simple fraud. Surely.

    --

    ------
    beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    1. Re:Fraud by erroneus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Worse than simple fraud, it is wilful abuse of the DMCA provisions for takedown notices. This is no simple businessman who might not understand the technical details of the DMCA -- this is a person whose profession is the practice of law -- someone who should know better and is expected to know better. I'd like to read the next story about him being disbarred.

    2. Re:Fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes. So please show me how your great judicial system works fairly now. Show me how this person will be punished. Oh, he will not? Really?

    3. Re:Fraud by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You know what would be hilarious? If a legal fund to get him disbarred was set up and it took bitcoin donations. If it were to be successful he would be defeated by the very thing he sought to control.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    4. Re:Fraud by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I'm adding this to my to-do list for this week.

    5. Re:Fraud by Aneurysm · · Score: 1

      With a nick like that I'm sure a lot of stuff goes on your todo list

    6. Re:Fraud by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      You have no idea....

  4. As the article said... by JabrTheHut · · Score: 1

    If you're going to misuse trademark law you might as well misuse copyright law as well.

    --
    Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
  5. Meta Voting on Humanity by DreamArcher · · Score: 2

    Once you hit -10 you instantly die. Same with meta voting on driving. Every car has a heads-up display and you can instantly vote other drivers up or down. At -10 your car turns off. PS, I patented both of those already.

    1. Re:Meta Voting on Humanity by geekoid · · Score: 2

      As someone how used to race to see how fast we could get new account to +50, and then aack down to zero I suspect your ideas would be subject of abuse.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  6. Deal with this the slashdot way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Time for Slashdot to deal with this ourselves.

    Someone get and post his address, then everyone send him all the junkmail you can.

    If it works for spammers, trolls should enjoy it too.

    1. Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Pascazi Law Offices PLLC
      1065 Main Street, Ste. D, Fishkill, New York 12524 U.S.A.
      Ph: +1 845.897.4219 / Fax: +1 845.468.7117* E-mail:Info@pascazilaw.com*

    2. Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Fuck you.

      --
      Is 1563649 a prime number?
    3. Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... by Vastad · · Score: 1

      Heavens to Murgatroid, that picture.

  7. Re:LulzSec, Attack! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm Michael Pascazi, and I'm SUING YOU because you won't acknowledge the DMCA take-down I sent you, after your continued violations regarding my PATENTED INSANITY HELMET!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  8. HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right! by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A trademark, according to US law, has to be an adjective. Hence "Band-Aid brand bandages". He's using it purely as a noun "Bitcoins are..." His trademark can be easily struck down on that basis alone. Ironically, using a trademark as a noun is exactly the thing that depreciates the trademark as a protectable entity. (Again: See Band-Aid. They fought and fought to make sure that people not just call all bandages "band-aids", because using their trademark as a noun instead of an adjective is what dilutes it.)

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
  9. So sue them. by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Informative

    1.Sue them, for filing a false DMCA claim.
    2.Collect damages - monetary losses and legal expenses.

    http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/Internet-Law-and-Intellectual-Property-Articles/Consequences-of-filing-a-false-DMCA-Takedown-Request.shtml

    Stop whining, and put your money where your mouth is, people.

    --
    Please help metamoderate.
    1. Re:So sue them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1.Sue them, for filing a false DMCA claim.
      2.Collect damages - monetary losses and legal expenses.

      ...

      Stop whining, and put your money where your mouth is, people.

      That would work great for Techdirt, the recipient of the takedown notice, but people can't just go around filing lawsuits when someone does something they don't like. You need to have standing to sue. You need to have been harmed by someone before you "put your money where your mouth is."

    2. Re:So sue them. by spikenerd · · Score: 1

      Geeks suing a lawyer--Great idea! And let's hire a bunch of lawyers to write software and configure firewalls!

    3. Re:So sue them. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And now back in reality when I sue you, you're not going to be defending yourself against me. You'll be defending yourself against lawyers. Because ... you know these things called lawyers ... they actually provide a service to people who need to do just this kind of stuff.

    4. Re:So sue them. by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      From the article: Payout was $125,000 out of court settlement for falsely sending DMCA takedown notices over emails published regarding Diebold eVoting machines.

      Something tells me the lawyers involved cost more.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  10. Trademark is marked 'DEAD' at USPTO now by whiteboy86 · · Score: 2

    Went to USPTO to see it with my own eyes. The record in question is currently marked as "Abandoned July 7, 2011" and effectively DEAD - the trademark seams invalid. Could somebody elaborate, doesn't this only mean that the trademark is in some limbo stage before it goes "live" or something?

    1. Re:Trademark is marked 'DEAD' at USPTO now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Pascazi abandoned his attempt to trademark Bitcoin in the US because the US is a "first-to-use" country, the first person to use the term in commerce gets the mark. He's continuing his efforts in "first-to-file" countries where the first entity to file for the mark gets it.

  11. Disbar by PickyH3D · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All involved lawyers should be disbarred. Not only for the initial, in-bad-faith filing, but also for abusing the legal system with in-bad-faith DMCA letters.

  12. "The Talking Asshole" personified. by bmo · · Score: 1

    Where to start.... *looks* Ah fuckit. I can't even begin pointing out what's wrong with this without getting into a dissertation on trademark and copyright law. This guy that sent the letters is obviously a "talking asshole" or what is called (in technical terms) a "cartooney." You find them everywhere on the 'net and if you go through life never being impotently threatened by idiots like this, you aren't trying hard enough. (You get extra points if you get cartooneyed by a "lawyer" in Italy defending the "honor" of a porn website)

    It's things like this that makes me think that, some day down the road, victims of moronic vexatious litigants are not going to bother with court anymore to rectify shit like this, but rather just have the asshole in question killed outright. And I would stand by and watch the entertainment and approve.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:"The Talking Asshole" personified. by bmo · · Score: 2

      I didn't invent the term.

      It was William S. Burroughs that did.

      The Man Who Taught His Asshole to Talk

      (aka âoeThe Talking Asshole Routineâ from Naked Lunch)

      William S. Burroughs

      Did I ever tell you about the man who taught his asshole to talk? His whole abdomen would move up and down, you dig, farting out the words. It was unlike anything I ever heard.

      This ass talk had sort of a gut frequency. It hit you right down there like you gotta go. You know when the old colon gives you the elbow and it feels sorta cold inside, and you know all you have to do is turn loose? Well this talking hit you right down there, a bubbly, thick stagnant sound, a sound you could smell.

      This man worked for a carnival, you dig, and to start with it was like a novelty ventriliquist act. Real funny, too, at first. He had a number he called âoeThe Better âOleâ that was a scream, I tell you. I forget most of it but it was clever. Like, âoeOh I say, are you still down there, old thing?â

      âoeNah I had to go relieve myself.â

      After a while the ass start talking on its own. He would go in without anything prepared and his ass would ad-lib and toss the gags back at him every time.

      Then it developed sort of teeth-like little raspy in-curving hooks and started eating. He thought this was cute at first and built an act around it, but the asshole would eat its way through his pants and start talking on the street, shouting out it wanted equal rights. It would get drunk, too, and have crying jags nobody loved it and it wanted to be kissed same as any other mouth. Finally it talked all the time day and night, you could hear him for blocks screaming at it to shut up, and beating it with his fist, and sticking candles up it, but nothing did any good and the asshole said to him: âoeItâ(TM)s you who will shut up in the end. Not me. Because we dont need you around here any more. I can talk and eat and shit.â

      After that he began waking up in the morning with a transparent jelly like a tadpoleâ(TM)s tail all over his mouth. This jelly was what the scientists call un-D.T., Undifferentiated Tissue, which can grow into any kind of flesh on the human body. He would tear it off his mouth and the pieces would stick to his hands like burning gasoline jelly and grow there, grow anywhere on him a glob of it fell. So finally his mouth sealed over, and the whole head would have have amputated spontaneous â" (did you know there is a condition occurs in parts of Africa and only among Negroes where the little toe amputates spontaneously?) â" except for the eyes, you dig. Thats one thing the asshole couldnâ(TM)t do was see. It needed the eyes. But nerve connections were blocked and infiltrated and atrophied so the brain couldnâ(TM)t give orders any more. It was trapped in the skull, sealed off. For a while you could see the silent, helpless suffering of the brain behind the eyes, then finally the brain must have died, because the eyes went out, and there was no more feeling in them than a crabâ(TM)s eyes on the end of a stalk.

      --
      BMO

  13. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by JustSomeProgrammer · · Score: 1

    I'm not entirely sure that this is 100% correct... after all I think the Google Search Engine still owns the trademark on Google but no one says Google Search Engine. This could be said as Bitcoin Virtual Currency.

  14. will this count as strike? and you will pay $35 by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    will this count as strike? under the new ISP copyright plan and you will you have to pay $35 to clear your name from the this BS?

  15. Re:Another vapid Bitcoin story by geekd · · Score: 2

    Actually, it's a copyright abuse story. The bitcoin part is just incidental.

  16. Shakespeare almost had it right. by gstrickler · · Score: 1

    But it's not appropriate or necessary to kill ALL the lawyers.

    --
    make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
  17. Re:LulzSec, Attack! by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

    Actually, if you ignore a DMCA take-down notice, going to court to enforce it is the next step. Of course, suppressing publishing of legal documents based off the premise the letterhead it is printed on is copyrighted is pretty bogus, likely to be outright dismissed by the judge.

  18. Yes, trademark is dead, as of July 7, 2011 by Animats · · Score: 1

    The applicant explicitly abandoned the trademark "BITCOIN". They formally abandoned it on July 7 via the USPTO's online system, and immediately followed up with express mail. This is quite unusual. They'd only filed the application on June 30, and the USPTO hadn't even replied yet.

    It's dead.

    1. Re:Yes, trademark is dead, as of July 7, 2011 by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      The applicant explicitly abandoned the trademark "BITCOIN". They formally abandoned it on July 7 via the USPTO's online system, and immediately followed up with express mail. This is quite unusual. They'd only filed the application on June 30, and the USPTO hadn't even replied yet.

      It's dead.

      Lovely currency you have there. Shame if something should happen to it.

  19. /. needs a "Number of days since last BTC story" by sirwired · · Score: 2

    Slashdot needs a "Number of days since last BitCoin Story" thing on the homepage, kind of like those "Number of Days Since Last Accident" signs at some factories.

    I can't imagine we'd need more than three bits (unsigned) to express that value.

  20. Re:LulzSec, Attack! by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

    I imagined that as being said by Billy Mays

  21. Re:LulzSec, Attack! by jcr · · Score: 1

    That's the kind of thing that can lead to a litigant learning why it's a bad idea to irritate a judge.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. Re:LulzSec, Attack! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Or... B.A. Barakus.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  24. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

    Windows Operating System.

    Nope. Sorry boyo:

    Word Mark MICROSOFT WINDOWS

    It is not a mark for "Windows Operating System" as you falsely claim.

  25. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

    Yes, and that is taken from rules of the International Trademark Assocation not US law.

  26. Is this the guy? by cvtan · · Score: 1

    From http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2006/02/6222.ars : "So who is this Michael Pascazi? He was once president of a firm called Fiber Optek, which in 1999 won a US$4 million contract to construct a fiber-optic infrastructure along from Hartford, Connecticut to Springfield, Massachusetts. Fiber Optek attempted to purchase the failed Global Crossing company in 2002 before going bankrupt itself, a victim of the dotcom implosion. Pascazi went on to study law. He also claims to be starting a biotechnology company, although details about this are scarce."

    --
    Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
  27. Re:/. needs a "Number of days since last BTC story by localtoast · · Score: 1

    That's a good idea. They should do it for each category and also include an "average number of days between stories". I felt like we were overdue for a Bitcoin story.

  28. Bitcoin has a topic icon on frontpage already? by kingbilly · · Score: 1

    It took years to get Slashdot to add an Ubuntu logo so that stories didn't have to use the Debian one. Why does bitcoin get fast-tracked?

    1. Re:Bitcoin has a topic icon on frontpage already? by coolmadsi · · Score: 1

      It took years to get Slashdot to add an Ubuntu logo so that stories didn't have to use the Debian one. Why does bitcoin get fast-tracked?

      Maybe the icon designer was bribed... with bitcoins.

  29. Re:LulzSec, Attack! by Nursie · · Score: 1

    Why would Lulzsec or Anon want to do anything about this?

    The bitcoiners are getting an IRL trolling from this guy. I would have thought the Anon reaction would be to reach for the popcorn...

  30. ...wait... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't anyone report him to ACLU to have him disbarred for fraudulent litigation?

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:...wait... by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      For that matter, just report him to the state bar for unethical behavior. He doesn't own the trademark, nor the copyright, and he's acting in bad faith.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  31. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    From this page:

    "Microsoft trademarks should never be used in the possessive or plural form. They should be used as a proper adjective followed by an appropriate descriptor."

    Does that mean it is doubly illegal to say "I installed both my copies of Windows"?

  32. Re:Is it a false claim? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    1.Sue them, for filing a false DMCA claim.

    Is it a false claim if he has a current trademark application?

  33. A great service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This lawyer could be doing all geeks a great service.

    If handled correctly this could end up in a review of the DMCA rules, possibly (but I am not that naive) a change of the law to make it more compliant with the real world.

    And the same with the copyright... And possibly the patent system... After the ruling that you can't copyright something that someone else have made and the sue them, perhaps the same will go for patents, you can no longer patent someone else's inventions and sue them over it?

  34. Re:StationEry by mcvos · · Score: 1

    That's why editors should actually know the language. You can't rely on technology to fix your piece of crap for you.

  35. Fool by Issarlk · · Score: 1

    So that guy is Bitcoin, right? I wouldn't like to be him when bankers, governmnents, IRS, wall street etc. want Bitcoin dead.

  36. It was interesting for a little while... by sirwired · · Score: 1

    BTC's are indeed interesting in a geeky way. And indeed I participated most vigorously in several stories about it. (Personally, I reject it for a lot of reasons that mostly have to do with the complete economic ineptitude of the creation curve.)

    But they are not so interesting that we need twice a week stories about it that have absolutely nothing to do with its geeky aspects.

  37. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

    Wrong:

    Word Mark MICROSOFT WINDOWS

    Didn't even bother to do the couple of minutes of research instead of making false claims?

  38. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

    No. Nowhere is it said to be illegal by Microsoft or anyone else. Microsoft's statement comes from rules of the International Trademark Association for the prevention of your trademark from being diluted.

  39. Re:StationEry by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

    and I have been hanging onto that broken turd for so long

    --
    The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  40. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin digital currency alternative. :-P

    (P.S., *ANYONE* can use to "claim" a trademark. It's just easier to defend when you file it with the USPTO. Once they have accepted it, you can use ®.)

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
  41. Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 1

    A "Word Mark" covers the exact graphical presentation of the words. So, for example, "Coca Cola" is a word mark covering the words "Coca Cola" in the script font the Coca Cola corporation uses. Likewise "Ford" written in the script font is a word mark of the Ford Motor Company.

    For example, the Ford Motor Company owns the text trademark on "Ford" as it relates to automobiles. However, it has been allowed for non-automotive companies to use the name "Ford". These other companies CANNOT, however, use the script "Ford" in a blue circle, because that is a Word Mark assigned to Ford Motor Company.

    A text Trademark covers the name itself, not an exact graphical representation.

    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.