CNN Doesn't Like Being Spoofed 70
scrm writes "After being online for only a week, the Fake CNN News Generator, a spoof of the CNN.com website, has been shut down after CNN sent them a threatening legal letter alleging copyright and trademark infringement. (Although the real reason is more likely to be because people were actually believing that the fake stories were true.)"
Shouldn't the headline be: (Score:3, Funny)
"CNN Doesn't Like Being Spo0fed", considering the domain name of the site in question?
Re:Shouldn't the headline be: (Score:1, Funny)
Damn a logged-in user got fp and 7 minutes after the story was posted.
Us ACs need to get on the ball!
Re:Shouldn't the headline be: (Score:2)
Re:Shouldn't the headline be: (Score:2)
CNN is a joke... there's more substance at Fox News (and whenever Rupert Murdoch's property is the "substance" property in a market, that's a fucking bad sign!). Hell, MSNBC has more substance than CNN.
Re:Shouldn't the headline be: (Score:2)
Re:Shouldn't the headline be: (Score:1)
It's true that Fox tends to have more talking-heads with their opinions. But Fox also tends to have a higher density of actual facts in their coverage. Also, since their biases tend to be so absurd (when they're present), it's pretty easy to filter the noise from the signal...
Re:So??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So??? (Score:1)
You don't have the right to use trademarks without permission. Should we have this right? well, we have a forum to discuss whether or not we should.
Re:So??? (Score:1)
Of course it is. Satire, and parody are protected speech. This is well established and not really debatable. He has an absolute right to do so. Sadly, he probably does not have the resources to defend himself when some mega corp wields the legal sword. As a result we all suffer a little. Each time this happens it makes the next guy have to think a little harder before he creates his content. This is the very definition of a stifling effect.
Re:So??? (Score:1)
If CNN can shut down these guys with a C&D, how would all the M$ bashers on Slashdot like it if "Evil Bill" could shut down Slashdot's use of his borg image? Oh the wailing and gnashing of teeth we'd hear then...
Pop-ups galore... (Score:5, Informative)
How irritating.
Re:Pop-ups galore... (Score:2)
-Vic
Re:Pop-ups galore... (Score:2)
Both (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Both (Score:3, Funny)
Your sig (offtopic) (Score:1)
AHHHHHHRRRRRRGHHH!!!!
So let me get this straight. (Score:2, Funny)
The Olsen twins are not attending my local University?
Pop ups. (Score:5, Interesting)
I realize that this will get lots of "Use Moz!" type comments, but I'm at work right now, so it isn't a possibility. Spo0fed.com unleashed a slew of pop-ups on me, and a number of them attempted to install some sort of software. Slashdot seems to be fairly united in its hatred of pop ups, so why support them by linking to sites that use them in such an aggressive manner? I feel that its just as annoying as registration required sites, and should be avoided in the same way.
I suppose I may just be on a system thats already been hit with spyware, and if thats the case, please mod this down into oblivion.
Re:Pop ups. (Score:2, Insightful)
Perhaps because the people at Slashdot who decided to post the story use Mozilla and turned off pop-ups? Or maybe they use IE and have a pop-up blocker?
Mozilla, and Yes (Score:1)
OTOH, popups are no longer as hateful to me, since they went away
(popup ads are quite bothersome though, when sitting at a computer without a worthy browser installed.)
timothy
@ School (Score:2)
BTW, the teacher was giving lecture so it was extra quiet.
Re:@ School (Score:2)
That sucks a nut, dude.
Back in high school, I neglected to turn down the sound on one memorable occasion when I was at home, and an unruly popup blasted one of those out while my parents were in the room.
I think I shut the speakers off fast enough so they didn't know what it was.... Unless they'd been surfing porn sites, and didn't want me to know that they knew what it was... urgh.
Use Moz! (Score:2)
Re:Pop ups. (Score:1)
Popups don't bother me since I turned the knob saying ``open popups in tabs'' in Galeon. Additional measure would be
user_pref("capability.policy.default.Window.open"
in prefs (or even noAccess, but this would break my ebanking).
I believe there are several browsers with tabbed browsing for every platform these days. For windows good chance would be Opera.
Robert
Re:Pop ups. (Score:1)
What are you doing reading Slashdot at work?
True stories are the metric? (Score:4, Funny)
If that's the case, perhaps Slashdot should cast a very critical eye on the bbspot slashdot random story generator. [bbspot.com]
You can see how this works... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:You can see how this works... (Score:2)
Yep... (Score:1, Informative)
I checked spo0fed.com (or whatever the URL is) yesterday and by the way the letter read (on their front page, not from CNN but from Spo0fed itself) was that they took it down because people were using it to make defamoratory 'news stories' about people.
Still, it was a dead-on generator. If it weren't for the URL, one might not've known it was fake.
I never could get to see the archives of generated stories though...
Fake CNN article about Olsen Twins hits local news (Score:3, Interesting)
**The rumor was so widespread (thanks to the genuinity of the fake CNN news generator) that the story actually hit local news that night!**
I tried to stomp out the rumor in it's infancy explaining to everyone that sent it to me that it was fake, but to no avail.
Olsen Twins going to every college simultaneously (Score:2, Informative)
What would have been really cool is if the generator page used your IP address to determine your location, then used a local university name in the "story". I don't know if that's how it was done, but it would be much more consistent in a given area than randomly generating a college name.
Re:Olsen Twins going to every college simultaneous (Score:2)
infringement (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, come on. The web site generated pages that included the CNN logo! The real reason is obviously because whomever created this little toy was using the CNN logo without permission.
This falls into exactly the same category as the Dow Chemical thing from a few weeks back. Parody is fine as long as you don't actually use somebody else's logo. That crosses the line from fair use into trademark infringement.
Comments including the phrase "chilling effect" will be summarily ignored for the senseless drivel that they are.
Do they really serve the logo? (Score:2)
If that is the case, wouldn't the best course of action be to block spo0fed.com's ip address?
I don't think a link can be infringement, especially if it links to a public site.
Re:Do they really serve the logo? (Score:2)
These guys were using the CNN logo without permission. They were doing so in a way that was intentionally deceptive. (Whether it was intended as a parody or not isn't the point; the point is that they intended for the generated page to look like it came from CNN's site.) Whether they were doing this via a link or through other means isn't relevant. It's still infringement.
So, in other words, a link most definitely can be infringment.
Re:Do they really serve the logo? (Score:2)
I don't know what CNN has against random news generators - after all... they already seem to use ones for their weather reports.
Re:infringement (Score:2)
I don't think that's entirely true. I believe you can use a trademark in a parody, but you should be sure your work actually falls under the legal description of a parody, i.e. it makes a critical commentary or statement about the original work. It isn't enough to just be funny.
'course, ianal.
Re:infringement - sad times are these (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't seem how this use of parody falls under this king of scrutiny, but one of the most important things about parody is that it is done in jest, not for profit, you cant sell things under the guise of another's trademark. While I don't like shitty pop-ups (I shut the filter off to see it, what crap), I seriously doubt anyone would buy into that porn crap because they think CNN sanctions or backs it.
It all comes down to a Jeffersonian thing. Can you light another's candle without vanquishing your own? Sure. Will CNN die or lose one penny because of parody? No. In fact, they spent more on the lawyers to write that stupid letter than all the damages they could have ever accrued from this "evil parody."
Lawyers are the real bottom feeding scum. Everyone's asses hurt around them. I've personally been take for a lawyer-ride (without lubrication), shareholders get raped by lawyers, Enron still has lawyers on the payroll to date while 401ks lie empty (due to foolish investment strategies and ignoring reality, but still, its a bit unfair to think lawyers take precedent here har har). In fact the inexorably complex US tax code is created, administered and massively profited off of by lawyers. Judges are lawyers. Politicians are lawyers. Anyone who isn't a scientist, a manager, a doctor, a musician, in the military, well, there is a class of people who are really ancillary to everything around them. This class finds themselves needing work because they are inherently useless. So instead of sticking to trial law, lawyers band together to form raping bands of hyenas that rove the corporate and political landscape raping everything in sight. Why cant Ted Turner just call the webmaster and say, Hey, can you cut the shit? Mano a mano? These fucking lawyers have no face, no use and no spine. BAR. What a crock. Barrister. Some crappy construct leftover from the days of King George of England.
Re:infringement - sad times are these (Score:3, Interesting)
"Why cant Ted Turner just call the webmaster and say, Hey, can you cut the shit? Mano a mano?"
So you just hate lawyers. Okay, go ahead, but it still doesn't make sense to say it would be fine if Ted Turner wrote a letter himself instead of having someone do it for him. And at this point, all CNN has done is write a letter, despite the article's claim that CNN "shut them down."
Re:infringement - sad times are these (Score:2)
CNN also reported that the Shuttle was going 18 times the speed of light.
See people talking of it here [google.com].
CNN said of the shuttle disaster: "officials were searching a 500 square mile radius"
See some Usenet-age on that here [google.com].
I nailed them two times already on one recent issue and I barely read them.
I could go on and on, especially on consistent failure to properly report historical facts.
CNN = disinfotainment
People who mislead the public are essentially committing either treason against them or are parodying the real news. Either way, I fail to see the need to protect them. CNN is a mega moneymaking media machine. They are the rainmakers. Feel not for them but for the rights of us to make fun of their complete and total shit reporting.
Re:infringement - sad times are these (Score:1)
I agree.
"People who mislead the public are essentially committing either treason against them or are parodying the real news. Either way, I fail to see the need to protect them. CNN is a mega moneymaking media machine. They are the rainmakers."
Right and wrong shouldn't depend on how much you like the people involved. This isn't about making fun of CNN, or of the "news" industry, you're still free to do both. But none of that makes it okay for anyone to use and abuse their trademark, even if they are bastards. I'm not defending CNN, I'm defending the law.
Re:infringement - sad times are these (Score:1)
You're an idiot. Do you think lawyers are really going around magically making money off the backs of "the little guy" without having someone to pay for their services? Do they do it for fun? Are they all independently wealthy?
If anyone should be on the receiving end of your vitriolic rant, it's the people who hire lawyers.
Of course, maybe we'd all be better off not having anyone to protect our rights from the government [mediageek.org].
Re:infringement - sad times are these (Score:2)
Sure I like the people working for EFF. But by the same token, lawyers will help to promulgate concepts that their own children would *never* want to live with and they do it. They do it for the money. If you don't admit that the archetype, "lawyer", is riddled with a greed stereotype for no reason, you are on crack. I have had to pay for lawyer services. Believe me I wasn't impressed. Lawyers know Judges as friends. That's most how it works. You get the wink and the nod half the time. For bigger civil and criminal stuff, the judges can't be so obvious, but im sure there is still room for greasing palms in any situation.
We have vastly departed from the original legal system envisioned by the framers of this country, assuming the US here.
An interesting take on law: George Copway (Kah-ge-ga-bowh) Ojibwa Chief 1818-1863 - "Among the Indians there have been no written laws. Customs handed down from generation to generation have been the only laws to guide them. Every one might act different from what was considered right did he choose to do so, but such acts would bring upon him the censure of the Nation.... This fear of the Nation's censure acted as a mighty band, binding all in one social, honorable compact."
Now, having said what I said, you know full well I don't hate all lawyers. It is amazing that employing melodrama and overstatement, a tactic used by every lawyer on the face of the earth, you fly out of your corner and try to maul me publicly. I hate when people get defensive.
It is the fundamental theory of all the more recent American law...that the average citizen is half-witted, and hence not to be trusted to either his own devices or his own thoughts.
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)
Lawyer: One who protects us against robbery by taking away the temptation.
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)
Judge: A law student who marks his own papers.
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)
It is inaccurate to say I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office.
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)
A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar.
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) (being mostly lawyers, I have to agree)
If...the machine of government...is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.
Henry David Thoreau
In matters of conscience, the law of majority has no place.
Mahatma Gandhi (12 jurors, a lawyer and a judge have let incontrovertibly guilty members of the KKK off back in the day - its documented. Only when they guilty were tried for civil rights violations did they finally get jail time.)
Laws are like sausages. You sleep far better the less you know about how they are made.
Otto Von Bismark (new laws usually get someone a new contract, and a few lawyers some money)
The more corrupt the state, the numerous the laws.
Tacitus (and boy do we have so many, made by lawyers)
Pussies! (Score:1)
Re:Pussies! (Score:1, Insightful)
Why do you think we keep seeing companies employing the same heavy-handed "scary lawyer" approach? Because it works, thats why. And why does it work? Because most people don't have the free available income to defend against a large company's attack lawyers.
I have an idea: why don't *you* step up and pay their legal defense fees? Whats the matter, are you too much of a "pussy" to put your money where your mouth is??
Re:Pussies! (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, aparently YOU didn't visit their website. When /. was threatened by the Church of Scientology because of DMCA infringement, CmdrTaco posted a large story detailing why they didn't like the fact that they had to give in, but were doing it anyway. In this case, not only did they give in, but they consented that they deserved to be shutdown, and offered to provide whatever information they had on users who had posted false information.
That is why they are pussies; not because they realized the practical infeasibility of a court battle, but because they so completely gave up. You, on the other hand, are an Anonymous Dumbass.
So what you are telling me... (Score:2, Funny)
g
Re:So what you are telling me... (Score:1)
g
That's not fair... (Score:3, Insightful)
Bringing the legal smackdown on this site for "libel" and "copyright infringment" is not only absurd, but simply fascist. This is an affront to free speech, which includes the right to criticize and parody anything you damn well please.
Re:YOU SAID THE MAGIC WORD! (Score:3, Insightful)
Godwin's Law is in effect. Return to your homes. Resist the urge to add further posts to the conversation. Repeat, do not continue this thread.
*EEEEOOEEEOOEEEEEEEE*
Re:That's not fair... (Score:1)
Well, to a certain extend. IMO, parody is fine, as long as it is rather clear for an 'average' person to see that it is parody indeed. It does not have to appear unabiguously (that would be no fun anymore), but it would have to appear.
However, this was not the case in this case, from what I have heard. When really imitating CNN, you're going the same way as selling fake Rolexes (statement without any prejudice, BTW). And I can imagine that CNN will sue you in that case for tort and trademark infringement.
As a intellectual property advisor in education, I would advise my client (when CNN) anyway to do so.
Then again, if I were to defend Spo0fed, I would make up a different story :-), but the above is my personal neutral opinion.
Of course, this is no legal advise, IANAL yet.
Site was run by toady cowards: (Score:1)
If this is their way of avoiding potential liability, and I were sued, I'd make sure they were dragged in somehow, legally or otherwise.
Why spoof CNN? (Score:1)
In that case Chaser non-stop news network (Score:2, Interesting)
CNNN - Australian satiric show based on CNN (Score:1)
The ABC (Australias Public TV Network) runs a commedy show called "CNNNN" which is a spoof of the CNN 24-hours News coverage.
A "mock" CNNNN news tickers is available from here:
http://www.cnnnn.com/
Jon