Corporate Idiots In A Snit About Nothing

[dr_phil_physics]

As You Know, Bob

Long time readers of this LJ blog know that I have a fondness for reporting links for "March 32nd" postings, such as the ones for 2010 here and here, also 2009, 2008 and
2007 here and here.

So It Is With Some Great Amusement...

... that I present you this Cease and Desist letter that the people at Think Geek received, protesting the use of the phrase "The New White Meat" in regards to a canned meat product ad. Yes, the letter was from the National Pork Board, purveyors of "The Other White Meat" slogan.

What makes this so hysterical is that the ad in question was for Radiant Farms Canned Unicorn Meat. Oh yes, the meat that sparkles. Guess on which day they put that ad up on their website. Uh-huh. Right. And no, I don't think they're kidding. Their post shows the first page of a 12 page letter from a law firm.

Of Course I've Always Been Partial To...

This reminds me of a fake article on cannibalism, describing "long pork" as The Other Other White Meat. (snicker)

Dr. Phil

Comments

[dr-phil-physics.livejournal.com]

ThinkGeek has also done Tribbles and Bits breakfast cereal (http://www.thinkgeek.com/stuff/41/tribbles-and-bits.shtml).

[ken-schneyer.livejournal.com]

On the one hand, the Pork Board is being silly. There is no danger of confusion in the marketplace and no chance of loss of distinctiveness, so there's not a legal leg to stand on.

On the other hand, the argument that "it's parody" is a bad argument. There's no "parody" exception for trademark; that's a copyright principle.

On the third hand, large copyright and trademark owners have been known to file lawsuits just to cost the defendant a lot of money and make them back down. But if they did so, I might try to get a dismissal on the pleadings and then file a countersuit for abuse of process.

[dr-phil-physics.livejournal.com]

As near as I can figure out, your point (1) makes point (2) unnecessary, but it's still a shame. Otherwise Saturday Night Live is in big trouble for its ads. (grin) Your points (3A) and (3B) are always a threat and a counterthreat, I'm sad to say.

I brought this up when someone else put the link up on Facebook today because of the April 1st factor. That's what makes this embarrassing, from my point of view. And Unicorn meat? THIS is why people need a liberal arts and sciences education. (double-entry-grin) So they won't look like idiots in the public eye -- or before a judge. (evil-eye-grin)

Dr. Phil

[ken-schneyer.livejournal.com]

Yes, quite, point (1) does obviate point (2). But it pains me to see someone who has a perfectly good argument, mess it up by adding a bad one. Sloppy and counterproductive. If your opponent is accusing you of entering the country illegally and you've never been out of the country, it's silly to go on to point out that his shoelaces are untied.

As to (3B), it may be an ever-present threat, but I mean it. I still have enough of the naivete I had in law school to believe that the legal system is for redressing actual wrongs with actual evidence -- it offends me when people use it as a bludgeon or a public relations tool. (Don't even get me started on RIAA.)

I don't really think this was lack of liberal arts education; I think it was rote-machine stupidity. I think they have a form letter they send out to threaten people, and that some intern is paid to go on the internet and look up all examples where the trademark is used. Intern sends a list of names and URLs to clerical, clerical types up the letters, supervising attorney signs them in a stack. At no point does the information pass through anybody's actual brain. This also offends me; I like to think of the law as a profession, staffed by people who pay attention to WTF they're doing.

[dr-phil-physics.livejournal.com]

I dunno. Seems to me that a real liberal arts and sciences education won't let you get away with sloppy research -- it becomes engrained in your being. I for one don't want to forgive sloppy thinking.

And I would leave it alone and say it is just for pointing out the stupid, except I feel as strongly about science and technical gaffes as you do about the law.

Good points all around.

Dr. Phil