6 upvotes, 2 direct replies (showing 2)
View submission: The history of the /r/xkcd kerfuffle.
So, this is me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiland-hall
Beck was asserting his trademark rights; trademark was in process, but ultimately the latter fact didn't matter; the claim was denied.
You're right about the Streisand effect; those three months in 2009 were a wild ride for me.
You're not right about Munroe being able to assert any right to /r/xkcd, however.
If it helps: I fought in support of demoting /u/soccer from /r/xkcd. But as an ex-default moderator (of /r/pics and /r/videos, among others), I know how the admins work, to some degree; and they will not interfere as things stand now, at least.
Comment by autowikibot at 10/02/2014 at 18:51 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiland-hall
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Beck v. Eiland-Hall** is a case filed in 2009 before the World Intellectual Property Organization[3] (WIPO), a United Nations agency[4]. It was filed by political commentator Glenn Beck[5] against Isaac Eiland-Hall, concerning the website "GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990.com". Eiland-Hall created the site as a parody[6] to express the view that Beck's commentary style challenged his guests to prove a negative[7]. The site's name was based on a joke first used by comedian[8] Gilbert Gottfried[9] at the 2008 Comedy Central Roast[10] of Bob Saget[11], in which Gottfried jokingly implored listeners to disregard the (non-existent) rumor that Saget raped and murdered a girl in 1990. Online posters began an Internet meme[12] comparing Gottfried's joke with Beck's style of arguing, by requesting Beck disprove he had committed the act in question. Eiland-Hall launched his website on September 1, 2009.
3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Intellectual_Property_Organization
4: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_agencies
5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Beck
6: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parody
7: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
8: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian
9: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Gottfried
10: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedy_Central_Roast
11: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Saget
12: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_meme
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^Interesting: ^Beck ^v. ^Eiland-Hall[13] ^| ^Glenn ^Beck[14] ^| ^A ^moron ^in ^a ^hurry[15] ^| ^Marc ^Randazza[16] ^| ^Eiland[17]
13: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beck_v._Eiland-Hall
14: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Beck
15: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry
16: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Randazza
17: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiland
18: http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&subject=AutoWikibot
19: http://www.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/wiki/index
20: http://www.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1x013o/for_moderators_switches_commands_and_css/
21: http://www.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1ux484/ask_wikibot/
22: http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/autowikibot&subject=Glitched
23: http://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/1xdwba/the_history_of_the_rxkcd_kerfuffle/cfbv6o8
Comment by ReallyEvilCanine at 10/02/2014 at 20:44 UTC
0 upvotes, 2 direct replies
So, this is me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiland-hall
I love you in a manly "I want to have your babies" sort of way. Still bitter that you handed it over at the end though.
You're not right about Munroe being able to assert any right to /r/xkcd, however.
We disagree and here's why: You won primarily because of "parody" under the clear precedent of *Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell* (485 U.S. 46). You also won on the other points: there could be no mistaking *GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990-dot-com* with anything under an actual Glenn Beck trade or service mark (that hurdle might've been tougher to clear had it been Howard Stern or Gilbert Gottfried), and there wasn't an underlying commercial interest. By giving Beck the domain you got him to associate himself with the domain -- a factor in that decision?
Beck was asserting his trademark rights; trademark was in process,
Ditto *Top Gear* from someone else's downvote-me comment, and the BBC prevailed because despite no formal registered trademark at the time, commercial use is one of the infringement tests and in that case it was the intent, unlike your case.
I argue that the primary factor in this case is the clear intent to deceive, and it's potentially quite damaging to Munroe's reputation as well. This abuse also doesn't come from a free-standing domain but rather an active area of a well-established, highly popular, respected domain (Bill Gates was just doing another Foundation-hawking AMA an hour ago) which can't claim a number of general Safe Harbour protections because of active moderation above and beyond user up/down ratings.
As for how the admins here... "work", you'll note I didn't address that. If reddit wants to boldface my nickname and make it red in exchange for being their ombudsman, I'm game. I generally approve of the hands-off approach but when people take advantage of a system to break it, the hammer needs to be brought down swiftly. I don't see why reddit tacitly condones an internal version of domain squatting and I expect that sooner or later, if Munroe doesn't act in self-defense, someone else will and the FP will be filled with popcorn-eating GIFs from /r/perfectloops.