• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

WalMart Attacks Free-Speech

Tony

Penultimate Amazing
Tony
Joined
Mar 5, 2003
Messages
15,410
http://www.local6.com/money/7813452/detail.html

ATLANTA -- A Georgia man has filed a lawsuit against Wal-Mart in federal district court in Atlanta in a fight over his T-shirts that compare the retailer's business practices to the Holocaust.

Charles Smith has been marketing shirts that read, "I (heart) Wal-ocaust" T-shirts. Wal-Mart filed a cease-and-desist order in an attempt to make him stop printing the shirts.

The company said Smith is engaging in trademark infringement. It has threatened to sue Smith if he continues to display the logos on his Web site and to print them on his products.

The 48-year-old Smith is a computer repairman and said he has no deep connection to the company. But he claims using the logos is a free speech issue.
Click to expand...


I don't see where this guy is using WalMart's "logo". He is merely using a similar font to the one they use. Unless WalMart retains exclusive rights to the font, they have no case.

http://www.walocaust.com/site/
 
Last edited:
Well, even if their logo WAS used, it falls under Fair Use--specifically, for parody. At the same time, Wal-Mart is right--they kinda *have* to go after him and "defend" their trademark. I think they know full well there's no chance it'll hold up, but they have to go through the motions.

That said, much as I loathe Wal-Mart, I find this guy's shirts to be tasteless, horribly offensive, and while I defend his right to make them I'd never buy one.
 
Cleon said:
Well, even if their logo WAS used, it falls under Fair Use--specifically, for parody. At the same time, Wal-Mart is right--they kinda *have* to go after him and "defend" their trademark. I think they know full well there's no chance it'll hold up, but they have to go through the motions.

That said, much as I loathe Wal-Mart, I find this guy's shirts to be tasteless, horribly offensive, and while I defend his right to make them I'd never buy one.
Click to expand...

Well said :)
 
Cleon said:
That said, much as I loathe Wal-Mart, I find this guy's shirts to be tasteless, horribly offensive, and while I defend his right to make them I'd never buy one.
Click to expand...

I find WalMart more tasteless, and offensive than this guy's t-shirts.
 
Cleon said:
Well, even if their logo WAS used, it falls under Fair Use--specifically, for parody. At the same time, Wal-Mart is right--they kinda *have* to go after him and "defend" their trademark. I think they know full well there's no chance it'll hold up, but they have to go through the motions.

That said, much as I loathe Wal-Mart, I find this guy's shirts to be tasteless, horribly offensive, and while I defend his right to make them I'd never buy one.
Click to expand...
Close the thread. Cleon wins.

The only thing I'd add to that is that it would be better if the rules regarding trademark "abandonment" were loosened. As Cleon says, Wal*Mart almost has to go after this guy, lest they later lose their trademark through abandonment. If they could defend against abandonment claims simply by sending guys like this a letter noting the trademark similarity, conceding the fair-use exception up front and including a warning not to exceed fair-use guidelines I think that would be better. No company would ever do that of course, but then at least we could make fun of them when they brought loser suits like this.
 
manny said:
Close the thread. Cleon wins.
Click to expand...

Quoted for posterity. Or, possibly, blackmail material. :D

The only thing I'd add to that is that it would be better if the rules regarding trademark "abandonment" were loosened. As Cleon says, Wal*Mart almost has to go after this guy, lest they later lose their trademark through abandonment. If they could defend against abandonment claims simply by sending guys like this a letter noting the trademark similarity, conceding the fair-use exception up front and including a warning not to exceed fair-use guidelines I think that would be better. No company would ever do that of course, but then at least we could make fun of them when they brought loser suits like this.
Click to expand...

No disagreement there.
 
I hate cases like this. On the one hand, I know that Wal-Mart is wrong, is whistling in the wind here, and is wasting valuable time and money on a case that probably isn't going anywhere; but on the other hand, I know that only a powerfully-sucking a**hole would make a shirt comparing a company's stance on employee benefits to the Holocaust. I suppose this choad doesn't understand the irony of his using such a tactic to expose Wal-Mart's shameless exploitation...
 
Luke T. said:
It's not even that clever.
Click to expand...
It's execrable.

But it doesn't seem clever, to me, to draw attention to it. I didn't know about it, now I do because a lawsuit prompts a thread on some obscure forum. I get the point about trademark abandonment, but isn't that a bogey-man summoned up by lawyers? "You're scared of me; there are lawyers out there far scarier than me that are poised to leap on your trademark the moment they see an opening."

It's my impression that the US is a society hag-ridden by lawyers. It will not go out with a bang, it will go out in a welter of litigation.
 
All Wal-Mart employess should riot and burn churches and stuff.
 
Actually, I think the guy filed suit. What the story described as a "cease-and-desist order" was more probably a "cease-and-desist" letter. That is to say, a letter demanding he stop. Then he would file suit to get a declaration that he need not cease.

It could be that the company went to all the trouble of getting a court order; I'm not going to give the guy a hit to his website to find out. But it's more likely as above.
 
manny said:
Actually, I think the guy filed suit. What the story described as a "cease-and-desist order" was more probably a "cease-and-desist" letter. That is to say, a letter demanding he stop. Then he would file suit to get a declaration that he need not cease.
Click to expand...
But the letter was sent at the prompting of a lawyer, and can said lawyer have been unaware of the inevitable response? Pro bono lawyers that would otherwise be watching day-time soaps are not a scarce resource on your side of the pond. They might well outnumber unemployed actors by now. MBA's are coming up strongly on the inside ... :)
 
Joshua Korosi said:
I hate cases like this. On the one hand, I know that Wal-Mart is wrong, is whistling in the wind here, and is wasting valuable time and money on a case that probably isn't going anywhere; but on the other hand, I know that only a powerfully-sucking a**hole would make a shirt comparing a company's stance on employee benefits to the Holocaust. I suppose this choad doesn't understand the irony of his using such a tactic to expose Wal-Mart's shameless exploitation...
Click to expand...

Are you sure that his T-shirts are about lack of employee benifits and not about what Wal-mat's presence does to small businesses?
 
TimmyBerry said:
Are you sure that his T-shirts are about lack of employee benifits and not about what Wal-mat's presence does to small businesses?
Click to expand...
Does it matter? Do you think that Wal*Mart rounds up small businesses by the millions, puts them on railcars to work camps where they face starvation and disease and then gasses the survivors?
 
TimmyBerry said:
Are you sure that his T-shirts are about lack of employee benifits and not about what Wal-mat's presence does to small businesses?
Click to expand...

Manny is correct - if his T-shirts are about one thing or the other, it doesn't change the fact that it is the outrageous hyperbole of an exploitive d*ck.
 
Tony said:
http://www.local6.com/money/7813452/detail.html




I don't see where this guy is using WalMart's "logo". He is merely using a similar font to the one they use. Unless WalMart retains exclusive rights to the font, they have no case.

http://www.walocaust.com/site/
Click to expand...

Personally, If it were some show like Family Guy, Drawn Together or South Park I wouldn't be annoyed because I know they don't take there own insults seriously and they were'nt making anybody " buy " their programmes in order to watch them.
 
Joshua Korosi said:
Manny is correct - if his T-shirts are about one thing or the other, it doesn't change the fact that it is the outrageous hyperbole of an exploitive d*ck.
Click to expand...

Captalisim lives on, as you so brilliantly put it, exploitive d*cks so get used to it!
 
manny said:
Actually, I think the guy filed suit. What the story described as a "cease-and-desist order" was more probably a "cease-and-desist" letter. That is to say, a letter demanding he stop. Then he would file suit to get a declaration that he need not cease.

It could be that the company went to all the trouble of getting a court order; I'm not going to give the guy a hit to his website to find out. But it's more likely as above.
Click to expand...

Perhaps if WalMart had done the same, and ignored the guy, this wouldn't have even been a story. Now everyone is seeing the logo that they want to try and suppress. Kinda dumb on their part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom