5 ms·

> The U.S. Federal Reserve is threatening to sue Bitcoin Magazine, alleging apparel that parodies its FedNow system is not protected speech, but copyright infri

by 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 ago
Uhhhh... 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 ago
  It 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 ago
    I'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 ago
      Whoever 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 ago
    The 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 ago
        Sure, 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 ago
        It 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 ago
You'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 ago
  Exactly, 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...

by neilv 3y ago

klyrs 3y ago

Uhhhh... 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 ago
It 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 ago
  I'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 ago
    Whoever 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 ago
  The 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 ago
      Sure, 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 ago
        It 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 ago

You'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 ago
Exactly, 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...