from the enjoy-your-self-immolation-crowdstrike dept.
CrowdStrike has sent a DMCA takedown notice to parody site ClownStrike, a clear abuse of United States copyright law, as the site in question is undoubtably covered by fair use in United States copyright law. Editor: See first link for more detail.
It is unfortunately well known that the DMCA is used by corporate cyberbullies to take down content that they disagree with; but, is otherwise legal. The Counternotice system is also hillariously ineffective. The DMCA requires service providers to "act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the infringing material;" yet, it gives those same "service providers" 14 days to restore access in the event of a counternotice! The DMCA, like much American legislation, is heavily biased towards corporations, instead of the actual, living, breathing, citizens of the country.
It's absolutely asinine and I would love absolutely nothing more than to have a lawsuit "win" against CrowdStrike. That would be absolutely amazing for marketing! Especially given the timing of such events...
Additionally, using the Digital Millenium Copyright Act to attempt to takedown a parody site for Trademark Infringement is absolutely hillarious.
There are several ways that anyone is allowed to use a trademark belonging to "others." This is considered "Fair Use." Fair Use is an important aspect of trademark and copyright law. It is a right to use trademarks and copyrighted works for parody, criticism, transformative works, news reporting / journalism, education, etc. Corporate cyberbullies don't like that anyone else has rights. Again, I don't care, because the only thing that matters is the law, and what a court thinks about it.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Saturday August 03 2024, @02:34AM (8 children)
> the site in question is undoubtably covered by fair use in United States copyright law
Any suit, with or without merit, may be brought in court and must be answered.
When it comes to fair use, there is little that is undoubtable, and similarly little that can be bounced from court with a simple motion to dismiss.
Trademark infringement can be claimed due to the similarity: ClownStrike vs CloudStrike, easily argued as easily confused by the general public, and dilutiory of the now much better known CloudStrike brand which has material value to the trademark holders. There is no such thing as bad press, vastly more people around the world know the CloudStrike trademark today than did a month ago, it arguably has significantly more value as a trademark now, and must be vigorously defended to maintain that value.
>Fair Use is an important aspect of trademark and copyright law.
Absolutely, it gives lawyers lots to argue over - on the billable clock.
>Again, I don't care,
That is your opinion
>because the only thing that matters is the law, and what a court thinks about it.
"what a court thinks" comes down to what the judge thinks, and virtually all judges used to be lawyers - they are inextricably linked to the profession and rarely do anything to devalue it.
As for the law, there's the legislative basis, applicable case-law precedents, and arguments before the bench to consider. These things take time...
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by darkfeline on Saturday August 03 2024, @03:31AM (5 children)
> Any suit, with or without merit, may be brought in court and must be answered.
True, but
> ClownStrike vs CloudStrike, easily argued as easily confused by the general public
Is ClownStrike offering a similar and/or competing service that could mislead potential customers of Cloudstrike?
I don't think you can argue that this doesn't fall under parody clause of fair use in good faith.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Saturday August 03 2024, @11:12AM (4 children)
>I don't think you can argue that this doesn't fall under parody clause of fair use
But, I just did.
>in good faith
That Is very much a matter of opinion. Political events of the recent 7-8 years have been very much arguments not in good faith, in my opinion, but not every.judge in the land seems to agree.
>Is ClownStrike offering a similar and/or competing service
As a matter of law, I don't believe that the similar and/or competing product is a necessary criteria for the devaluation of a trademark. Emblazoning organic fertilizer dump trucks with the golden arches and business name Mack-Donald's would be considered devaluing of the McDonald's registered trade.marks, no matter how funny the accompanying website is.
You want to commit financial suicide? Invest in anything that puts mouse ear hats on their branding.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Saturday August 03 2024, @05:04PM (1 child)
> You want to commit financial suicide? Invest in anything that puts mouse ear hats on their branding.
Or buy Intel stock. Better said: have recently bought Intel stock. Maybe now is a good time to buy?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday August 03 2024, @06:18PM
>Maybe now is a good time to buy?
The Pentium Bug reaction was certainly a good buying opportunity, but past performance is no guarantee of future results...
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday August 03 2024, @06:21PM
Missed opportunity: Mack Donald's Cow patties. Millions and millions served, hot and fresh.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by SpockLogic on Sunday August 04 2024, @12:40PM
How about Muck-Donalds?
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday August 04 2024, @08:35AM (1 child)
While I can certainly see why they might be concerned that people might confuse Crowdstrike and Clownstrike these days, it's still obvious parody.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday August 04 2024, @11:14AM
In my dealings with the court system, the legal term "obvious" only shares spelling with the commonly used word "obvious". The differences in functional use are, like many aspects of the court system, far from obvious.
In other words: real court with real lawyers playing for real money bears very little resemblance to Judge Judy (American popular TV show.)
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Saturday August 03 2024, @02:57AM
Isn't parody like, uhhhhh, EVIL or something? /sarcasm
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Saturday August 03 2024, @03:49AM
Is there an exception to Trademark for parody? This looks very much like the logo on the front page of the site. USPTO Trademark search [uspto.gov]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 03 2024, @05:06AM (1 child)
"crowdstruck" is being usedas a verb. To paraphrase: "CI is broken because github crowdstruck us with a bad rust compiler update". AKA: usable any time an automatic update from a vendor breaks your infrastructure.
fsck those guys
(Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday August 03 2024, @10:38PM
An honor to coin a new word that precisely describes a situation, forever immortalizing in the language...
Remember Bushusuru? That is to puke into your host's lap during dinner?
https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=bushusuru [duckduckgo.com]
I will be proud to add the word "crowdstruck" to my lexicon. This situation is so common since we embraced push technology. Until now, I have not had a concise word for it.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 5, Informative) by Brymouse on Saturday August 03 2024, @05:46AM (7 children)
This means this notice is improper and has no legal standing.
#5 on the USPTO DMCA Good General Practices For Service Providers [uspto.gov] is
and #2 for Notice Senders
I'd be reporting an attorney that drafted such a notice to the state/federal bar.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PiMuNu on Saturday August 03 2024, @09:46AM
> I'd be reporting an attorney that drafted such a notice to the state/federal bar.
It's an interesting approach - if viable - which attacks Evil lawyers without protection from EvilCorp that funds them. i.e. countersuing EvilCorp extracts money from EvilCorp but lawyers are untouched.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Thexalon on Saturday August 03 2024, @10:57AM
The people who rebranded trademarks, copyrights, and patents as "intellectual property" have been very very keen, though, on acting like they're all the same thing, and claiming the megacorps who own them should have whatever gives themselves the most control over the situation.
And since the DMCA basically creates a "megacorp gets while they want while the little guy who may or may not have the right to do what they're doing decides if they can afford a lawsuit" situation, odds are pretty good they'll get what they want, whether or not it is legally correct. Basically, a Cease-and-Desist, except that the default is that the threat works.
And since we're living in an era where the courts are just plain making up the law as they go along, I don't see much motivation for CloudStrike to not do it. They're supposed to not do it, in theory they could be punished for doing it, but in practice there will be no negative consequences to anybody except their victims.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday August 03 2024, @11:15AM (4 children)
Not presenting a legitimate offer on a property for sale to the seller is illegal for licensed real estate brokers, full stop. Yet, they get away with it all the time when they think it's something they don't want to do.
Try your bar complaint, tell us how that goes.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 03 2024, @11:33AM (3 children)
> ... when they think it's something they don't want to do.
Too many pronouns? This sounds interesting but I can't quite figure out who is doing what, can you expand or give an example?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Saturday August 03 2024, @12:29PM (2 children)
We bought 10 acres, then made an offer to the agent offering the neighboring 10 acres for sale. The land had been on the market for $6000 per acre for over 5 years with no buyers. We offered $3200 per acre, the agent presented the offer to the seller and the seller countered with $4500 per acre. We counter offered $4200 per acre with some financing terms, in writing to the broker with a confirmation phone call that the broker received the offer. No response for over 2 weeks.
We presented in person at the broker's office, she resisted communication and all but refused to present any offers below $6k per acre "in her county" until we threatened to walk across street and give half the commission to a competing broker. Then she came out with "oh, you know these darn FAX machines..." Implying she tried to send the offer but somehow had technical difficulties, for over two weeks. After a brief shouting match with the broker threatening us "you are going to lose this deal!!!" she finally got the seller on the phone and we closed at $4450 per acre with favorable financing.
The agent who initially presented our $3200 offer was the broker's husband. After the wife heard what he did she forebade him from speaking with us anymore.
The broker was attempting to enforce a price floor on land in the county, by illegally withholding offers to sellers who wanted to hear the offers. She's not the only one who was doing that there at that time. The Florida Real Estate Commission who is supposed to care about enforcement of these laws on their brokers doesn't actively pursue complaints, instead they put the burden of proof and presentation of that proof to their infrequent review meetings, on the plaintiff. Then they might consider issuing a written warning to the offending brokers...
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 03 2024, @04:19PM (1 child)
Thanks for the story. While I hate to say it, this only reinforces my low opinion of Florida in general, and Florida real estate in particular as something to be avoided.
I wonder who your bad broker was taking orders from? Or how many other brokers she was in cahoots with? Or, if she was doing this on her own account, just to keep her commissions up?
Around here (NY State, far from NY City) there was some redlining in the past on racial lines, for example, using mortgage "unavailability" to keep certain suburbs lily white. But I haven't heard anything about that in the last 40-odd years. Have never heard anything remotely like your story, although I guess it's possible.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday August 04 2024, @12:42AM
I believe they were each doing it on their own without specific collusion, but under the misguided idea that they were somehow improving property values in their county, by holding properties out on the market for years and years without selling?
Anyway, unrelated? aside: broker's husband killed himself a few months later driving drunk... Sad for that, but happy that the broker retired shortly thereafter.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday August 05 2024, @03:45PM
I think it's time you issue a DMCA takedown, someone is trying to use your effect.