Sanders Campaign Accused of Trademark Bullying By Web Site (buzzfeed.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Buzzfeed is reporting that "An online merchant has accused the Bernie Sanders campaign of 'trademark bullying'. after a Bernie 2016, Inc. attorney sent him a cease and desist letter regarding t-shirts, mugs, and sweatshirts depicting the candidate with historic communist leaders..." The t-shirt's designer tells Buzzfeed "He didn't seem to be the type of candidate, the type of guy, who would do something like this... I would think Bernie, or one of his staff members will step in and put an end to it. It appears to be pretty silly."
In January Ars Technica reported that lawyers for the Sanders campaign had demanded their logo be removed from pages on Wikipedia -- before later withdrawing that DMCA notice.

Comments

Re:Yawn.

[Zocalo]

Either way its not a story.

Given the sheer number of mostly negative and spin-heavy stories on US presidential candidates on discussion sites at the moment, almost all of which are submitted by anonymous readers, the cynic in me suspects that it's less a "story" and more and example of one of several organised smear campaigns going on, with said sites being handily manipulated by the shills... Yes, the US election, and the UK's EU referendum for that matter, are important for any number of reasons that are worthy of discussion, like broken political systems, relative merits of voting schemes, candidates views on tech and other topics, even copyright and trademark issues. Even so, a little more rigorous qualification criteria and objectivity in story selection wouldn't go amiss.

Trademark MUST be defended

[houghi]

Trademarks MUST be enforced. You snooze, you loose. This is standard. This is the law. If they do not react, they loose their trademark. e.g. Walkman used to be a trademark, but they did not react, so now it isn't anymore.

This is a bout trademark and that I can get behind. If it were copyright, that would be completely different.

Re:Judge for yourself

[Xyrus]

You are completely missing the point. This isn't about left or right. It's about trademark.

For example, you can't just take some trademarked item, make some merchandise, and sell it. It doesn't matter if it's Mickey Mouse, Coca-Cola, or Bernie Sanders. If there is an established trademark, you need to get permission first.

This isn't even a story. It'd be like some random schmuck making and selling Star Wars related merchandise without getting permission.

Re:Yawn.

[Anonymous Coward]

The things he has said about and to women were flagrant misogyny too - like his recent declaration that women who seek abortions should be punished.

Hmm ... no, this isn't misogynist. If you take the position that abortion constitutes murder, then punishing the formerly-pregnant woman as an accessory to murder is entirely in keeping with standard legal practice. If anything, the fact that most pro-lifers support punishing only the (usually male) doctor is an instance of misandry: treating women as equally culpable to men is unpopular with both the left and the right.

Re:Who gives a shit! WHO GIVES A SHIT?

[MachineShedFred]

I give a shit. Me, right here.

You asked, I answered. Why do I give a shit? Because political speech, and parody, are protected under the first amendment.

I have no idea what the rest of your post is on about, but you might see a doctor about adjusting your medication.

Re:Who gives a shit! WHO GIVES A SHIT?

[KGIII]

What's disappointing is Bernie's campaign in general. First, it's really shitty that the media has pretty much nullified much of his efforts but the gaffes are pretty rough to accept. He's not done a very good job at campaigning, not at all. I first noticed it when he allowed the microphone to be taken and the BLM folks to interrupt him.

I really like him - I've even met him. I'm very likely to still vote for him. I've sent his campaign some money. But, even with what the media has done to his campaign - he's NOT helping. Well, more accurately, the folks he has supporting him and working for him are not helping. It's much easier to campaign in small States and he really does seem an ill fit for the national campaign trail.

He's going to be yet another politician that I've voted for who hasn't a shot in hell at winning. I find that oddly comforting. I've only voted for the winning candidate, in the presidential election, once - and I've voted every chance I got since 1978.