29 September 2009

Driberally tonight

Drinking Liberally is a weekly social gathering where progressives talk politics and get to know one another. In Center City Philadelphia, we meet on Tuesday nights at Triumph Brewery's upstairs bar, where there are drink and food specials from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. I hope to see you there!

Triumph Brewery is at 117 Chestnut Street in Old City. It's conveniently SEPTA-accessible via the Market-Frankford El (2nd Street station), all the buses that turn around at or near Penn's Landing (5, 12, 17, 21, 33, 42, 48), and a few other buses that pass nearby (9, 25, 38, 40, 44, 47, 57, 61).

This week's topic: Glenn Beck is not happy about the successful registration of "glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com," so he's filed an official complaint (PDF) of trademark infringement with the WIPO. What domain name should the respondent have registered to avoid the problems of confusing similarity, no legitimate interest, and bad faith?

Note that "didglennbeckrapeandmurderayounggirlin1990.com" redirects to the same exact website, and Beck does not appear to be challenging that domain name -- because he can't?!

Also note that the filed response (PDF) compares the website creator's efforts to the ad at issue in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988) (patently offensive ad is protected speech because parody directed at a public figure). Too funny!

Of course, the Hustler Magazine case was about intentional infliction of emotional distress, not defamation (both state tort-law claims, not criminal charges or constitutional challenges), but still,
"Yes, Your Honor, there is a public interest in making [Glenn Beck] look ludicrous -- insofar as there is a public interest in having [Respondent Eiland-Hall] express the point of view that [Glenn Beck] is full of B.S.! And [Respondent Eiland-Hall] has every right to express this view" (from 2:16):



The law geeks can read or listen to attorney Isaacman's actual, entire oral argument at Oyez.com, or even listen to it.

"Come for the beer, stay for the check"

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are half right about Hustler v. Falwell. Initially, the Reverend filed an action for both defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. However, at the trial level, Falwell lost on the defamation claim because it was proven that *nobody* would believe the claim that he screwed his mom in an outhouse.

Glomarization said...

I appreciate the clarification. I was trying to simplify, in order to keep the post brief, but I clearly simplified too much.

Anonymous said...

Well, still... you got the spirit right. That clip you posted was the precise thing that made me go to law school, by the way.