by Mike Masnick
Wed, Dec 19th 2012 1:57pm
The EFF has a post up about how Victoria's Secret sent a legal nastygram to an ISP taking down a parody campaign by an anti-rape organization, FORCE, called Pink Loves Consent. The campaign was a parody designed to raise awareness of these issues, by mocking Victoria's Secret's "PINK" line of clothing, that includes underwear that says things like "sure thing" and "unwrap me." The parody campaign replaced those with things like "ask first" and "respect." The page showed what Victoria's Secret could have done to put forth a more positive, more respectful message... and the company's response was to go straight to the hosting company and demand the site be taken down (which it was, though they found a new host who was willing to put it back up). Parody is a key element of free speech -- and issuing a takedown over this seems like a pretty clear attempt to stifle free speech. And, really, it just makes Victoria's Secret look really, really obnoxious. Were its lawyers really so offended by positive messages, rather than pure sexual objectification?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Iceland vs Iceland Trademark Spat More Clear: Iceland Foods Opposed Iceland's Trademark Application
- Fake News About Fake News Leads To (Fake?) Defamation Threat
- Canadian 'Fashion Santa' Fight Leads To Copyright vs Trademark Food Fight
- Who Gets To Trademark Iceland?
- Referring To Your Unenforced Trademark As A 'Lottery Ticket' Is A Great Way To End Up With Nothing