Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Clearing up misconceptions about IDG's threats (Score 3) 179

Being a "victim" of an IDG cease and desist campaign, i would like to correct the notion that they only go after commercial, non-parody, "infringing" sites.

I used to host a webpage called "Unified Field Theory for XXXXX" (XXXXX being something i'm restricting from saying, due to "trademark" law). This was hosted at an EDU (non-commercial) site.

This was a CLEAR parody work using a modified version of an IDG book cover.

When i responded to the C&D request (threat) (for which i was given THREE days notice to comply, which is NOT a polite request in my view), I indicated that i considered my work to be covered under the non-commercial and parody clauses. IDG's lawyer responded that there was no such thing, and again demanded that i comply (again with a 3-day allowance).

When i yet again replied that this was clearly a parody work, i was told that since IDG's "...for dummies(tm)" series was itself a humorous entity, a "parody" claim could not be held.

This is utter and complete bullshit, but i, as many common low-life, am not ready, willing or able to put up a legal fight. (thus the site came down)

The whole point here is that IDG was trying to supress my clearly negative views about the entire "...for dummies(tm)" series. They can do so because they have a well-funded cadre of highly-paid legal bulldogs. It doesn't matter if they are in the right or not.

remember the "Radio Shack" Tandy holds the trademark rights to the word "Shack" issue? It is a clearly valid criticism of the PTO that they are willing to allow trademark of common language terms. These TM's should NOT be allowed to stand.

BTW, non-commercial alone isn't necessary. See the case of Penthouse magazine's parody "land's end" (iirc) catalog. It was in a commercial context, yet ruled non-infringing.

P.S. this legal bullying is one of the reasons i believe that a substantial portion of punitive damage awards should go toward funding the "public defenders" office instead of just paying off greedy lawyers and plaintiffs. This would help balance out the little guy's ability to stand up to corporate bullying)

Slashdot Top Deals

Type louder, please.

Working...