8 ms·
Federal Reserve is threatening to sue Bitcoin Mag over parody product
- neilv 3y ago> The U.S. Federal Reserve is threatening to sue Bitcoin Magazine, alleging apparel that parodies its FedNow system is not protected speech, but copyright infringement. Looks like infringement of trademark, not of copyright. It might be protected speech, but I suspect that Bitcoin Magazine isn't consulting a lawyer as much as they should.
- klyrs 3y agoUhhhh... what? Doesn't the Copyright Act of 1976 place government works into public domain? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_status_of_works_by_the_federal_government_of_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_status_of_works_by... Yes, yes it does. Reading the Fed's C&D, their complaint is about the trademark, not copyright. The magazine's lawyer's response is also about trademark, not copyright. The author of this article isn't as familiar with the law as the lawyers are.
- neilv 3y agoIt appears that they didn't have a lawyer review the final version of an article about a legal case in which they're involved (since I think a lawyer would've caught the "copyright" bit). When you're being sued, you should be careful about what you say about that, especially what you put in writing, and publish globally. So I think this is one example of them not consulting a lawyer enough.
- klyrs 3y agoI'm not a lawyer but I suspect that confusing copyright and trademark isn't going to land them in particularly hot water. And, their lawyer's response is pretty decent. I think that there's lots wrong with everything cryptocurrency, but their shirt looks like a rock solid parody.
- neilv 3y agoWhoever posted an article doesn't seem to have been qualified to know what might and might not land them in hot water. So they should've had a lawyer review the final version. If they're missing that one, what else are they missing.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kolanos 3y ago> Doesn't the Copyright Act of 1976 place government works into public domain? The Federal Reserve is about as federal as Federal Express.
- mindslight 3y agoThe Federal Reserve is a de facto branch of government. To the extent that it manages to legally and politically suppress this fact, and perhaps even has a plausible claim to create "trade" marks and whatnot, is just part of the general corruption surrounding it.
- kolanos 3y ago> Is the Federal Reserve a privately owned corporation? > > Yes and no. The Federal Reserve (the Fed) enjoys a unique public/private structure that operates within the government, but is still relatively independent of government to isolate the Fed from day-to-day political pressures in fulfilling its varying roles. > > The Federal Reserve System is considered to be an independent central bank. [0] [0]: https://www.frbsf.org/education/publications/doctor-econ/2003/september/private-public-corporation/#:~:text=The%20Federal%20Reserve%20(the%20Fed,in%20fulfilling%20its%20varying%20roles https://www.frbsf.org/education/publications/doctor-econ/200...
- mindslight 3y agoSure, so not like Federal Express at all. Just because a part of the government is insulated and less accountable than the rest of the government, doesn't mean it isn't government - regardless of this "independence" it's still setting inescapable policy.
- kolanos 3y agoIt has government oversight, but so does every other bank that operates in the United States. So not much of a distinction there. The Federal Reserve is in effect a consortium of banks acting as an independent central bank more so than a government entity. > The Fed is independent in the sense that monetary policy and related decisions are made autonomously and are not subject to approval by the federal government. [0] It isn't just insulated, it is independent. The Federal Reserve's shareholders are the member banks, not the public. > Federal Reserve Banks' stock is owned by banks, never by individuals. Federal law requires national banks to be members of the Federal Reserve System and to own a specified amount of the stock of the Reserve Bank in the Federal Reserve district where they are located. [1] Federal Express, too, is subject to similar government oversight being a publicly traded private corporation. [0]: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/041515/why-federal-reserve-independent.asp#:~:text=The%20Fed%20is%20independent%20in,must%20be%20confirmed%20by%20Congress https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/041515/why-f.... [1]: https://www.cga.ct.gov/PS95/rpt/olr/htm/95-R-1200.htm#:~:text=Federal%20Reserve%20Banks%27%20stock%20is,district%20where%20they%20are%20located https://www.cga.ct.gov/PS95/rpt/olr/htm/95-R-1200.htm#:~:tex....
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- striking 3y agoYou're really underselling it. They're replying to the Fed as if their cease-and-desist letter were no more than some sort of internet argument on Reddit or something. Here's a sample, to encourage folks to read the article and have a good hearty chuckle themselves: > > “The Federal Reserve has extensively used and promoted the FEDNOW mark and has built up substantial goodwill in this invaluable asset. Financial institutions and consumers associate the FEDNOW mark with the Federal Reserve and its services.” > An interesting point. For starters, what goodwill has the Federal Reserve built up? Have you seen the state of the working class today? Perhaps you have already forgotten how Fed policy directly led to mismanaged bond portfolios in regional banks across the country, such as Silicon Valley Bank, Signature, Silvergate or First Republic? Perhaps you have already forgotten about the historic inflation rates seen throughout the U.S. since government-imposed lockdowns all but forced the Treasury’s hand to stimulate the economy to the tune of trillions of dollars? > There is no goodwill, Mr. Murphy. And certainly not substantial goodwill either. Edit to add: there is an actual legal reply by an actual lawyer, to which you can assign your own value.
- gs17 3y agoExactly, I don't understand how >Have you seen the state of the working class today? is a better response in their minds than pointing out that FedNow has only really been around since the end of July, relatively few people are aware of it (AFAIK), and financial institutions are not going to confuse the Federal Reserve and a magazine. It's not about the Fed's goodwill, it's about the goodwill associated with the FedNow trademark, but they seem to think inflation is a counterargument. Personally, I would have gone with "FED NO" on the shirts or included the "The digital panopticon is here" tagline on them.
- Aunche 3y ago> For starters, what goodwill has the Federal Reserve built up? Have you seen the state of the working class today? The Fed is why America can send pieces of papers and bits and receive trillions of dollars worth of goods and services. Thanks to this, Americans have the highest average disposable incomes in the world and the highest median income in the world behind a tiny tax haven. If Americans aren't able to benefit from this, they have no one to blame but themselves or the other parts of government. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_capita_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_c...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- vitiral 3y agoFedNow: https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow Apparel: https://store.bitcoinmagazine.com/products/fednow-shirt-1?_pos=1&_sid=6ce5b79ca&_ss=r https://store.bitcoinmagazine.com/products/fednow-shirt-1?_p... Not a trademark attourney, but the styling is distinct enough. The use of identical name could be problematic I would think? However, I don't see how this is a "parody" -- I thought parodies have to be clearly different but use similar styling, i.e. call it "FedThen" and cleverly include the `24/7` or something in the lettering, maybe inside the "e" which gets shaped kind of like the "o"
- nostrademons 3y agoThe "End the FedNow!" merchandise is pretty clearly parody. The stuff that just has the "FedNow" logo is borderline. I wonder why organizations do this, highlighting the logos of organizations they oppose. I have an EFF hoodie that says "National Security Agency" on the front and "Defund Big Brother" on the back, and I get questions all the time of "Do you work for the NSA?" and then have to turn around and show them the back. I wish parody apparel was always parody at a glance.
- ry4nolson 3y agoI think even just the "FEDNOW" standalone stuff could be considered parody. It's different from the real logo and I'm pretty sure the "O" is supposed to imply surveillance or that the fed is watching you.
- autoexec 3y agoI thought it might have had something to do with CBS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cbs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cbs) but I think you're probably right. Different Eye.
- tomjakubowski 3y agoit's parody on the level of "MiKKKro$haft" - parody by idiots and for idiots. so it should be protected, of course
- Mistletoe 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect even pursuing this by the Fed.
- Animats 3y agoWell, at least it will get FedNow some attention. It's hard to find a bank that actually offers it to customers. FedNow is basically a speedup for bank to bank ACH transfers. ACH is 1-3 days; FedNow is a few seconds.
- samus 3y agoI don't completely agree with the point of Bitcoin Magazine, but the blatant attempt to suppress satire and criticism is deeply troubling.
- tedunangst 3y agoIt's deeply troubling that this t-shirt is the most original criticism they can come up with.
- ClarityJones 3y agoI appreciate that they used the least original means of criticism that was never-the-less sufficient to agitate the Fed into threatening legal actions. It's easy to agitate a federal agency if you do something novel or extreme. The fact that this was sufficient really highlights how petty the Fed's actions are.
- empath-nirvana 3y agoThis is a routine trademark enforcement case.
- samus 3y agoThat might be the case. However, the point is the motivation of the Fed to pursue this case. Most countries in the West might not nominally apply censure, but copyright, trademark, and libel laws are a complex minefield that the press and anyone politically active must carefully navigate, lest the Powers That Be use it to gleefully sue their opposition and pesky dissenters into oblivion.
- epakai 3y agoTrademarks require enforcement or they can become effectively invalid. Any alternative motivation is speculative, trademark simply REQUIRES this action. I don't think the Fed has any special status in this respect.
- rchaud 3y ago[flagged]
- futureamish 3y agoI don't have a problem with surveillance. I have a problem with surveillance under the undemocratic, nightmerican system of goverence with non-existent to weak checks and balances across the entire polis and an outdated constitution. That said, Bitcoin is a state sponsored pyramid scheme, and only someone riding the coattails of early adoption and espousing permanent oligarch rule through its lack of taxation could ever speak highly of its poor design, replacing centralized banking with a centralized computing infrastructure arms race to the detriment of the world's resources. There, I said it.
- kolanos 3y ago> That said, Bitcoin is a state sponsored pyramid scheme, ... I would say the same about the Federal Reserve.
- sonicanatidae 3y agoAnd the stock market.
- ForkMeOnTinder 3y agoI can't wait to start getting my social security checks 30 years from now.
- sonicanatidae 3y agoYou'll get them, but you'll have to be 91 to start collecting, and they will be worth less than it took to print them, because some "people" think that giving more tax breaks to those that need it the least is a better use of the money you've been forced to pay into the system.
- sharemywin 3y agoof course without either of these every Americans incomes, wealth, etc would shift to the left by 1 if not 10 decimal places.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tomjakubowski 3y agoWhere's the Fed's merch store? I'd buy a genuine FedNow t-shirt.
- BXlnt2EachOther 3y agoThe St. Louis Fed, a block from the Arch, has an "Economy Museum" with a gift shop. I wonder what they'd have, or if other branches have gift shops (I think they do tours at least?). They say you can get some free shredded money as a souvenir.
- asimpletune 3y agoThey should have called it FedLater and then it would have been funny and made more sense
- fortran77 3y agoThis is a big nothingburger. Trademark holders have to actively show that they're defending their trademark.
- Kon-Peki 3y agoWell, it appears that just because this is a parody does not mean it is fair use. I noticed that in the lawyer response, a court case was cited. I did a search for this court case and found plenty of analysis. It turns out that the Congress passed a law, the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, which specifically provided protections from parodies. But... > ... the concern with the TDRA's "fair use" parody clause is twofold. First, it is too broad in some respects by immunizing all non-source-denoting parodies from liability in one fell swoop. The main criticism of such a broad-brush approach is that it fails to assess the message communicated by the parody and its effect on the reputation of the mark. Second, the clause is, quite ironically, too narrow in other respects, as it excludes from its ambit certain source-denoting parodies that might be deserving of protection. So the question, I guess, is whether this parody is excluded by the poorly-worded TDRA. Remember that earlier this year the Supreme Court sided with Jack Daniels in a trademark parody dispute against a dog toy manufacturer! [1] https://scholarship.law.campbell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1563&context=clr https://scholarship.law.campbell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art...