EFF Teaches You How To Bake Mean-Spirited Censorship Pie
from the yum! dept
The EFF, who just moved into their new offices, seem to be making effective use of the new kitchen space. They’re baking up a special recipe: mean-spirited censorship pie. Yum! Most of you would call it “Derby Pie.” But a company called Kern’s Kitchen has been going around threatening everyone calling it Derby Pie based on its trademark. Kern’s has been forcing blogs to change what they call the pie when they post their own recipes:
* Also, please make your mean-spirited censorship pie before the trademark application on that name goes through and we all have to find another name.
Filed Under: censorship, derby pie, pie, trademark
Companies: eff
Comments on “EFF Teaches You How To Bake Mean-Spirited Censorship Pie”
I remember when
I remember when the EFF was about protecting rights, and wasn’t a pseudo PAC. Stuff like this really takes away from their standing, IMHO.
Re: I remember when
It’s taking a stand on the issue by showing how absurd it is.
People find this relatable and are better able to understand the issues with Intellectual Property.
Using their legal expertise is just as valid use of their time as educating people.
Re: I remember when
… So that doesn’t take away from the company trying to censor people?
No, EFF should be shamed for pointing out why a company is locking up language.
Great set of priorities you got there…
Re: Re: I remember when
EFF should be shamed for pointing out why a company is locking up language.
No, it’s just really that the EFF is sort of flailing around looking for something to get outraged about because it makes for good publicity, and not so much these days about the nuts and bolts in the background. They use to be the people who showed up for important court cases, now they seem to be everywhere, trying to be everything anti-copyright, anti-patent, and the all covering anti-censorship.
All things to everyone, soup to nuts. Just no longer as focused as they once were.
Re: I remember when
Huh? How does it take away from their standing? This just looks like an attempt to help people laugh a little in the midst of oppressive times. Surely they’re allowed to do that too.
Re: I remember when
I remember when I thought Mike was a somewhat reasonable person who had interesting things to say and who cared about truth. Oh well. I was wrong about that one.
Re: I remember when
This has nothing to do with political action (which, btw, EFF was involved in from its very beginning – remember, it started in DC before moving to SF) but is very much about protecting rights of people to use a commonly known term.
How is this possibly about political action rather than protecting rights?
Re: Re: I remember when
Okay, so if I want to call myself, “EFF Copyright” and devote myself to protecting copyright– a constitutionally guaranteed right, btw– the EFF won’t have a problem with that. I’m sure they’ll think it’s a complement to have everyone think that EFF is a generic term meaning “defender of rights.”
Re: Re: Re: I remember when
” a constitutionally guaranteed right”
It’s not constitutionally guaranteed. The constitution gives congress the legal right to grant copy’right’ but congress has no obligation to do so.
Re: I remember when
Exactly. The ability to trademark something is a protection that people have to avoid confusing the consumer. Yet the EFF is all about calling this “censorship”. That’s bogus. Censorship is when the government says you can’t express yourself– not when the government says you need to think of your own original name. Trademark law forces people to actually get off their duff and think of their own name.
Re: Re: I remember when
Yeah, and when people submit recipes for French fries they all owe royalties to France. I mean, it’s not like their fries come from France. Imagine all the trademarks that got hurt each time you call a non-French fry a French fry. The humanity!
Re: Re: Re: I remember when
I think we should call them bob fries from now on honoring our bright and enlightened friend for his honorable mentions.
Re: Re: Re:2 I remember when
What, to bob? Fuck no, I’d rather my royalties go to France. They need the help more, after the massive money sinkhole they called HADOPI.
Nothing wrong with this trademark IMHO
EFF is wrong on this one. And I think they’re almost never wrong.
Re: Nothing wrong with this trademark IMHO
I must admit, this is not an example of a guy claiming a trademark on a generic term, and then suing everyone. In other words, he’s not a trademark troll. His restaurant allegedly invented the pie and trademarked the name way back in ’68.
Do I think the term is generic? Maybe, but I’ve never heard of the pie by any name until today. Regardless, as of now no court has held that it is generic. So he has a valid trademark and he’s enforcing it.
I personally think he’s in the PIE business and should stop spending so much money on litigation, but it’s not my place to tell him how to run his business. And as a lawyer I commend his desire to employ us so handsomely.
Re: Re: Nothing wrong with this trademark IMHO
Do I think the term is generic? Maybe, but I’ve never heard of the pie by any name until today. Regardless, as of now no court has held that it is generic. So he has a valid trademark and he’s enforcing it.
Bloggers posting Derby Pie recipes to their website are not engaged in commerce, which is necessary for their to be a trademark violation…
Re: Re: Re: Nothing wrong with this trademark IMHO
Oh I get it. The guy (in my subjective opinion) is nuts. That’s what I get for not reading the link.
Re: Re: Nothing wrong with this trademark IMHO
Derby is the name of an english city with about 250.000 inhabitants. That is bound to be somewhat generic. How many different “London Pizza”‘s exist?
Re: Re: Re: Nothing wrong with this trademark IMHO
Reminds me of the whole “Sturgis Rally” trademark issue
The trademark should only apply to the item iself, not the broad general use of the word. (or city name!)
I remember when Mike at least tried to tackle problems.
Now he’s down to whining about pie names.
After fifteen years of Mike writing about copyright, no one has been able to pry out more of his position than that copyright is broken. Don’t you guys ever want to do more than whine? You can’t beat a focused industry without even the outline of alternatives, and that’s why the copyright maximalists keep winning every battle!
Take a loopy tour of Techdirt.com! You always end up same place!
http://techdirt.com/
Mike claims to have a college degree in economics, can’t ya tell?
11:39:58[m-522-4]
Re: I remember when Mike at least tried to tackle problems.
You seem to still fail at reading comprehension (or is it your memory failing?). Mike has stated his opinion many times. He has shown what can work, and shown what doesn’t work.
Re: I remember when Mike at least tried to tackle problems.
… Did OOTB just become AJ?
Or… Are they both separate personalities of the same deluded mind?
Re: Re: I remember when Mike at least tried to tackle problems.
I think they’re like Charles and Tara Carreon. AJ admits as much to posting naughty things on his wife’s laptop when he can’t be arsed to “sign in”. One posts nasty ad hominem and ridiculous arguments; the other posts batshit crazy 24/7.
After all, with today’s open-minded society, who said a wife had to be a woman? We’ve no reason to believe OOTB’s not a woman, either.
Sorry, but the new name needs work...
Instead, why not call it a Derpy Pie in honor of Kern’s derpy attempt to stifle people from posting the recipe!
Spirited?
I thought there would be some alcohol in the ingredient… no?
Well, when you can patent types of beef cuts, trademark pie names and copyright rounded corners you know something is wrong…
Humanity: The single most destructive force in the universe.
Censorship?
Does anyone else find it amusing that on a blog opposed censorship, enough readers have flagged comments expressing opposing views that they are hidden by default?
Re: Censorship?
There is “expressing opposing views”, and there is “compulsively being a whiny idiot”. The world in general is very unforgiving towards the latter.
It seems you’re new to this or simply trying to egg on a response, so I’ll give you a hint to help. Comments such as a snarkily-worded “charity comment” do not constitute as “opposing views” worthy of reading or viewing. When someone does this sort of jackass manoeuvre consistently, people will consistently hide nitwits like these by default.
Re: Censorship?
‘Hidden’ is a lot different to ‘inaccessible’, AC. IMHO, Techdirt actually does a great balancing trick whereby anybody is free to read the hidden comments simply by clicking on a link, but nobody is forced to read them by having them shoved in their face.
I did something like this
I found a story that the Brothers Grimm wrote down in 1812 in Deutsch, then shoved it through Google Translate before cleaning it up and changing a certain detail, then posting it on AO3 under the title ‘Girl with Black Hair, Pale Skin, and Red Lips’. All that to avoid infringing on Disney’s European trademark on ‘Snow White’. And I was allowed to use the trademark then, nominative fair use or whatever rule applies.