Posted on 11/10/2009 3:56:52 AM PST by steve-b
An arbitrator has rejected controversial talk show host Glenn Beck's contention that the domain name glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com infringes his trademark. World Intellectual Property Organization arbitration panelist Frederick Abbott ruled Friday that the less-than-flattering domain name was protected by fair use principles because the URL, when combined with the site's content, constitutes protected speech.
Abbott wrote that the site's creator, Isaac Eiland-Hall, "can be said to be making a political statement," which is a "legitimate non-commercial use" of Beck's name.
Eiland-Hall had argued that the site parodied Beck by using the same rhetorical techniques that Beck uses on the air. In legal papers filed on his behalf by First Amendment lawyer Marc Randazza, he referenced a YouTube clip of Beck interviewing Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), a Muslim, during which Beck asked Ellison to prove that he was "not working with our enemies."
Eiland-Hall also argued that the site doesn't infringe on Beck's trademark because there's no likelihood that Web users wrongly think he's affiliated with it. "Only an abject imbecile could believe that the domain name would have any connection to the complainant," Randazza wrote.
The domain name itself stems from a Web meme originating on Aug. 31, when a commenter on Fark.com posed the question: "Why haven't we had an official response to the rumor that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990?" The following day, Eiland-Hall set up the site.
The decision appears to mark a significant win for digital rights advocates because a ruling in Beck's favor could have encouraged other subjects of online parodies to take their complaints directly to the WIPO rather than U.S. courts, which are bound by the First Amendment. Some U.S. courts have ruled in other cases that parody sites don't infringe in trademark, even if they use a famous name in the URL.
Sam Bayard, assistant director of the Citizen Media Law Project, cheered the ruling for that reason. "It's good to see that this WIPO arbitrator had no interest in allowing Beck to circumvent the guarantees of the U.S. Constitution," he said in a blog post.
Although he won the case, Eiland-Hall on Friday offered to transfer the domain name to Beck. "I want to demonstrate to you that I had my lawyer fight this battle only to help preserve the First Amendment," he wrote in a public letter to Beck. "Now that it is safe, at least from you (for the time being), I have no more use for the actual scrap of digital real estate you sought."
Actually, the worst example of this sort of thing was “santorum.com”, which was evidently created by some gay activists who hated Rick Santorum. When you went there, you were treated to some content so disgustingly obscene I can’t repeat it here.
Speaking for others now? What lovely meglomania you have. Can you channel the dead too? What does Ghandi this of me? How about Jefferson?
I wonder if the domain name www.Eiland-HallIsADoucebagLoserFag.com is taken?
don’t you have any unflattering pictures of
orly taitz to post this morning, or is this your
new assignment?
“Beck didn’t sue for libel, he sued for infringement and had no case.”
Agree, there was probably a lot better way to confront this.
sorry-my post was meant for steve-b
the troll
didn’t mean to catch you in the cross fire
you sound like a good American
my apologies
“Whaddaya think?”
I think you’ve been having fun.
Beg your pardon. I think you have the wrong poster.
“sorry-my post was meant for steve-b
the troll
didn’t mean to catch you in the cross fire
you sound like a good American
my apologies”
You’re forgiven, my friend. It was only a mistake - we all make them. That’s why they put erasers on pencils.
thank you
I wonder why Beck didn’t sue for libel?
This is a good decision—I would hate to set a precedent that unaccountable world bodies get to rule on things like this.
ugh. Don’t you just want to scrub down your computer sometimes after erringly opening a site that is beyond gross in description? Sometimes I think the internet is the doorway to he)).
germ-X everywhere, please!
We never had a problem bashing Bush on this site when he did things wrong--ove, and over, and over--yet Glenn is Perfect to some?
Why is appealing to "international law" suddenly ok with some Beck fans?
It's about freedom, not siding with your fave celebrity and making excuses for why you suddenly aren't backing the conservative position.
What's a pencil?
You discover that there are a lot of folks around here who have little use for the constitution.
‘the site’s creator, Isaac Eiland-Hall’
So somebody is working on the
IsaacEilandHallrapedmurderedboy.com site right? Right?
I'm a conservative because I want these people to leave me alone. Even if I agree with their principles, Beck, and any politician you can name, is in it for themselves. Nothing wrong with that per se--they're doing their job the way I do mine, to earn a paycheck. But don't for a second beleive that for all their cool looks or rhetoric, they're there for you. YOU are there for you. They are there for themselves, and when they do things that show that when the chips are down they'll run to any "international" group they can to cover their interests, I sure don't think that's a credit to their loyalty to conservatism.
If Olberman did this we'd be calling him a one-worlder, and rightly so. "Our" guy does it, though...
FR has a sigline function; you don't need to sign your posts manually.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.