Marc John Randazza 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (62) comment rss

  • On the post: Texas Judge Says Prior Restraint Is Cool And Legal While Silencing A Critic Of PTK Honor Society

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 08 Apr, 2025 @ 05:41pm

    I wish you had asked me for comment

    I wish you had asked me for comment because we had a hearing today where the judge listen thoughtfully to reason and reversed himself. And now… the anti slapp is coming for PTK

  • On the post: Why The DMCA's Notice & Takedown Already Has First Amendment Problems… And RIAA/MPAA Want To Make That Worse

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 23 Feb, 2017 @ 09:28am

    Reform should include 512(f) boosts

    This article discusses how § 512(f) needs a boost -- given a lot of the "reputation management" companies' abuse of the DMCA takedown process, I think we really need that: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers2.cfm?abstract_id=2773137

  • On the post: Techdirt's First Amendment Fight For Its Life

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 18 Jan, 2017 @ 10:41pm

    Re: Re: Well now...



    Someone call me?

    By the way, the "Novella Trick" of using the Plaintiff's home state anti-SLAPP statute is only one way of doing it.

    You can also use dépeçage to invoke the defendant's home state anti-SLAPP protections.

    The courts in the 7th Circuit are very comfortable with that. The 1st has not yet applied it in the exact Novella / reverse Novella manner.

    But ... you bet your ass, any defense here should be looking at that pretty French word ... dépeçage.

  • On the post: Publisher Threatens Writers Association With Defamation Suit After Being Kicked Out For Not Paying Royalties

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 31 May, 2016 @ 07:40pm

    Re: Why Would Any Lawyers Stoop To Be Involved With A Client Like This?

    After litigating against him for more than a year, I'll say he's a class act. He may be representing a client you find objectionable, but lawyers are not their clients. He's got a job to do, and he's doing it.

  • On the post: The Fight Over Copyrighting Klingon Heats Up, And Gets More Ridiculous

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 09 May, 2016 @ 10:32am

    Re: Hungry Lawyers

    In all fairness, I don't see Paramount's overall case as ridiculous. It is a fair question as to whether Axanar infringes on their rights.

  • On the post: The Fight Over Copyrighting Klingon Heats Up, And Gets More Ridiculous

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 09 May, 2016 @ 10:31am

    Re: majQa' Daj

    Agreed.

    Imagine if you wrote a poem in Nadsat or Newspeak -- but, you don't use any actual lines from A Clockwork Orange or 1984. You're then probably engaged in fair use.

    But, I think the Klingon angle goes one degree beyond that -- not just fair use, but that the "language" once it becomes an actual functioning language, all copyright bounds are then erased.

    Lets put it this way -- it is at lease possible that Klingon could become the lingua franca somewhere, no?

    The fact is, you deserve to have copyright protection for your movie ... but if that movie spawns something with its own independent life, that life does not belong to you.

    the Cohen brothers can't claim copyright protection in the Dudeist religion.

  • On the post: The Fight Over Copyrighting Klingon Heats Up, And Gets More Ridiculous

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 09 May, 2016 @ 10:15am

    Re: Re: Untimely amici

    That article on Ars is a complete lie, and the author has a personal axe to grind. If you'd like real information on my DMCA views, it is here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2773137

  • On the post: DailyDirt: Flying Faster Than The Speed Of Sound

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 05 May, 2016 @ 06:41pm

    If I'm at Mach 5, I won't get cranky about not having in flight wifi.

  • On the post: House Judiciary Committee Hears Concerns From Silicon Valley About Copyright Law

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 11 Nov, 2015 @ 02:37pm

    SLAPPY

    If you look at your first photo, Farenthold is the sponsor of the current federal Anti-SLAPP bill, and if you go to the fourth guy in that photo, that's Steve Cohen (D - TN) who was the first one to sponsor federal Anti-SLAPP legislation.

  • On the post: Law Professor Pens Ridiculous, Nearly Fact-Free, Misleading Attack On The Most Important Law On The Internet

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 04 Nov, 2015 @ 07:06pm

    Re: Not just any lawyer...

    she is not an IP lawyer. she's a fucking idiot who managed to get hired as an IP "professor." Find me one IP case she has ever worked on. I'll wait....

  • On the post: Democrats Screw Over Larry Lessig To Keep Him Out Of The Debates; Forces Lessig To Drop His Campaign

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 12:36pm

    "A better candidate could have gone further."

    That quote makes me respect Lessig a lot. I've alway thought highly of him since he published a piece criticizing himself for losing Eldred v. Ashcroft. (http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/March-April-2004/story_lessig_marapr04.msp)

    I greatly respect his self-reflection and his humility in the face of a loss.

  • On the post: Wikileaks Releases Final Intellectual Property Chapter Of TPP Before Official Release

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 10 Oct, 2015 @ 08:35am

    Trademarks

    Another issue I didn't like in it -- trademark registrations need not be renewed for at least 10 years.

    Under our current law, they expire if not renewed in 5 years. Since most businesses fail within 3 years, this gives a business ample time to get off the ground, time to fail, and time to sell off its assets, including its trademark -- or to succeed and renew.

    Trademark trolling is not all that common, so it isn't on the level of horrifying (as some of the copyright and patent changes are). But still, it shows a theme of maximizing IP and not considering the practical implications of it.

  • On the post: Court Hands Loss To Doctor Who Sued Over Blog Posts Criticizing His Questionable Alzheimer's Treatments

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 05 Oct, 2015 @ 11:01pm

    Nice article - slight correction

    Just a slight tweak suggestion: Tobinick was not an "IP abusing" claim, as it wasn't trademark infringement that he claimed under the Lanham Act, but rather "false advertising."

    If you're interested in the key docs in the case, here they are.
    http://bit.ly/1YUhnke

  • On the post: Music Licensing Groups Argue That A Homeowners Association Playing Music At The Pool Is A Public Performance

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 03 May, 2015 @ 02:14pm

    There is some authority suggesting your view might be right. See Hinton v. Mainlands of Tamarac, 611 F.Supp. 494 (1985) (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3210050263880336874&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr)

    But, a later case seems to focus it more. Fermata v. Champions Golf Club, 712 F.Supp. 1257 (1989) (http://www.leagle.com/decision/19891969712FSupp1257_11784.xml/FERMATA%20INTERN.%20MELODIES%20v.%20CHAMPIONS%20GOLF%20CLUB)

  • On the post: Music Licensing Groups Argue That A Homeowners Association Playing Music At The Pool Is A Public Performance

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 03 May, 2015 @ 02:09pm

    Wrong

    Tim,

    You're wrong. Legally speaking, it is a public performance. I actually dealt with this issue representing a homeowners' association.

    https://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/copyright-and-the-clubhouse.pdf

  • On the post: Comic Artists Claim Copyright On Metallic Suits And The Three Point Landing

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 29 Apr, 2015 @ 11:07am

    :)

    Yep, when a copyright case puts me and Masnick comfortably in the same boat, there's something unquestionably rotten about the case!

  • On the post: 5,000 Domains Seized Based On Sealed Court Filing; Confused Domain Owners Have No Idea Why

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 07 Oct, 2014 @ 06:19am

    Details... details....

    It might help if we knew what some of the domains were. (Might not, but might)

  • On the post: Disappointing That Twitter Threatened Twitpic, But Story Doesn't Add Up

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 06 Sep, 2014 @ 06:29am

    A possible explanation...

    Just speculation, but....

    The dispute between Twitter and Twitpic is at the TTAB. A TTAB proceeding is a limited proceeding over a trademark registration. Therefore, the issues are limited, making the costs also a bit more limited than full blown litigation.

    Nevertheless, during TTAB disputes, the parties will sometimes also at least discuss or mediate other potential disputes. Think of the TTAB proceeding as a low-risk place to have a skirmish, but sometimes you let that skirmish inform your decisions about how you'll handle other possible disputes.

    So, Twitpic may not be shutting down over the trademark issue - but the trademark fight is where the other issues got negotiated to this point.

  • On the post: USPTO: Again, Redskin Can't Be Trademarked Because It's A Racist Term

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 28 Mar, 2014 @ 03:04pm

    Re: Re:

    No, no, no, no...

    Losing the trademark registration does not mean that they lose the trademark. They can still enforce the mark, they simply lose some of the presumptions that come along with a registration.

  • On the post: USPTO: Again, Redskin Can't Be Trademarked Because It's A Racist Term

    Marc John Randazza ( profile ), 28 Mar, 2014 @ 03:00pm

    You receive no points, and may god have mercy upon your soul

    Tim, you wrote:

    And if the NFL team's mark was removed, it wouldn't mean Snyder had to change the name of the team, it would just mean that anyone else, were they so inclined, would be able to use the term in football commerce at that point (although, not the logo, or other trademarked identifiers for the team).

    Incorrect.

    All it would mean is that Snyder would lose his registration, which would cost him some presumptions in litigation, and some international priority rights. But, he would still have a common law trademark.

    HTH

Next >>