Hide Techdirt is off for the long weekend! We'll be back with our regular posts tomorrow.

Goldman Sachs Doesn't Pay Attention: Threatens Gripe Site

from the this-will-end-badly dept

Just as we saw some corporate lawyers (finally!) advising clients not to freak out and go legal when they saw a “gripes site” show up, it appears that Goldman Sachs has done exactly that. The company and its lawyers have apparently been threatening the site GoldmanSachs666.com. The company is pulling out the oldest trick in the book, claiming that Goldman Sachs customers are “confused” by the site:

“Your use of the mark Goldman Sachs violates several of Goldman Sachs’ intellectual property rights, constitutes an act of trademark infringement, unfair competition and implies a relationship and misrepresents commercial activity and/or an affiliation between you and Goldman Sachs which does not exist and additionally creates confusion in the marketplace,”

This is a stretch. Many, many courts have found that such sites are perfectly legitimate, because no one would confuse a site complaining about a company for the company itself. It’s likely that Goldman Sachs felt that sending the cease-and-desist would scare the blogger into shutting up. But… as with so many of these things, all it’s actually done is draw a hell of a lot more attention to the site. You would think that the bank would have a few more important things to be focused on than some ranting blogger. Indeed, the fact that they seem to want him to shut up, gives him a lot more legitimacy than if the bank had simply ignored him. The fact that management or the lawyers (or both) think this is a big enough issue to deal with suggests that they’re actually concerned about what he’s saying.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: goldman sachs

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Goldman Sachs Doesn't Pay Attention: Threatens Gripe Site”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
ChimpBush McHitlerBurton says:

Re: Re: Cha Ching!

EXACTLY. What GoldSac doesn’t realize is who their *real* enemy is…

In reality, the “Blogger” is a plant, who gets a kickback from the lawyers, designed to give the law firm an excuse for billable hours.

Perfect exploitation of “Problem-Reaction-Solution”

Cha Ching!

Chronno S. Trigger says:

Re: Re:

It’s hard to tell after the fact, but from a quick look I see the following.

First, the websites look nothing alike.

Second, without looking too deep, it’s blatantly obvious that the site is a blog and not a main site.

Third, the website begins with this:

“This website has NOT been approved by Goldman Sachs, nor does this website have any affiliation with Goldman Sachs. This website was designed to provide information about Goldman Sachs direct from the public, and NOT from Goldman Sachs’s marketing and public relations departments. You may find the Goldman Sachs website at http://www.goldmansachs.com

This may have been added recently but I don’t know for sure.

Forth, I don’t see the logo, again possibly changed, but I also don’t see the logo on the main site (unless it’s that blue box).

Hulser says:

Re: Re:

If a legit site provides accurate information, and a gripe-site does not

So, you’re making a blanket statement that all gripe sites, by definition, don’t provide accurate information? Because that’s the only way that your statement makes any sense.

then wouldn’t it cause confusion (presuming that confusion is defined to include being confused about the accuracy or inaccuracy of information)?

No. Because the confusion in question is in regard to the source of the information, not its accuracy. Anyone is perfectly within their rights to create a blog and post their opinion that GS took illicit advantage of the bailout. What you can’t do is post that same opinion and make it look like it came from GS itself. (Which the blog in question went to lengths to not do.)

Jason says:

Re: Re:

Your presumption is wrong. The only confusion at issue here under the law is trademark confustion, i.e. whether or not the site IS, is owned by, or is affiliated with the Goldman Sachs brand. If people thought they were actually on a Goldman Sachs website, then GS would have a case.

Obviously, in this case, they do not.

Shawn says:

Re: Oh, they stole it

“Have you read the site they are trying to shut down? Those greed heads at GS got paid coming and going on the AIG bailout. Tens of billions taken from you and presented to them on a golden platter. No wonder they’re trying to shut down the whistle blower.”

I have never understood this complaint? We bailed out AIG so it could pay out its insurence claims and prevent the subsequent domino effect of defaults? So why are we angry when AIG pays Goldman Sachs claims . . . thats exactly what its supposed to do? I dont get the outrage?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: I don't understand the outrage

“GS had hedged that its contracts with AIG would default, got paid on that bet, and then we bailed out AIG which then paid GS on the failed contracts they had already been paid “

It sounds like people are angry about how many ways you can make money on wall street (and how good GS seems to be at it), I still dont get the outrage against Goldman Sachs regaurding AIG paying the very claims that we bailed them out to pay? Frankly they had alot more blood on thier hands regarding the Enron fraud then they do here really (they have behaved no MORE sleezy then anyone else who has worked on wall street over the last decade)?

Anonymous Coward says:

that takes care of ppl thinking the sites are related

“This website has NOT been approved by Goldman Sachs, nor does this website have any affiliation with Goldman Sachs. This website was designed to provide information about Goldman Sachs direct from the public, and NOT from Goldman Sachs’s marketing and public relations departments. You may find the Goldman Sachs website at http://www.goldmansachs.com

Anonymous Coward says:

Without addressing the merits of this particular matter, it is not in the least surprising that a company might seriously, and quite properly, consider the filing of a lawsuit under circumstances such as this. Of course, whether or not such a lawsuit should be filed is highly fact dependent and ultimately a decision to be made by company management and not its legal counsel.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...