Slashdot Log In
White House Cease & Desists to The Onion
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Tue Oct 25, 2005 08:28 AM
from the now-this-is-not-a-joke dept.
from the now-this-is-not-a-joke dept.
raj2569 writes "You might have thought that the White House had enough on its plate late last month, what with its search for a new Supreme Court nominee, the continuing war in Iraq and the C.I.A. leak investigation. But it found time to add another item to its agenda - stopping The Onion (soul sucking, life sapping, irritating, obnoxious, but still free registration), the satirical newspaper, from using the presidential seal." The only joke here is that our tax dollars are being spent on this.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Everyone else is clamping down on their IP rights (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, with the recent frenzy over "intellectual property" restrictions, why shouldn't the government get into the restraining free speech business, like everyone else?
Re:Everyone else is clamping down on their IP righ (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Everyone else is clamping down on their IP righ (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I think you misspelled "corporations" there. :-)
Parent
Re:Everyone else is clamping down on their IP righ (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Everyone else is clamping down on their IP righ (Score:5, Insightful)
So, in fact, this story is entirely about free speech, as is perfectly obvious. And it's about the most important speech that's protected by our laws: criticizing the government. The government isn't just some corporation with a product, it's us, it's ours. Especially right now, while this government is run by people under indictment for suppressing info, attacking legitimate dissenters, publishing lies unchallenged by most media, violating conflict-of-interest restraints on commercial communications, secret deals to launder money for illegal advertising. We need more speech, more criticism of the government. And satire lets us do that without the truth drowning us in numbing cynicism. Hail to The Onion, America's Finest News Source.
Parent
well... (Score:5, Funny)
I dunno (Score:5, Insightful)
The point is, though, that the seal is used to indicate official documents, etc. Using it on the Onion does make it look official, to the uninitiated. I'd suggest they should use a modified version, like whitehouse.org [whitehouse.org] does.
Re:I dunno (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:I dunno (Score:5, Interesting)
Not everyone [snopes.com].
Parent
How about a disclaimer (Score:5, Insightful)
The Whitehouse thinks you're too stupid to realize this image is a satirical fake.
Parent
modifying the seal (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
No reg link (Score:4, Informative)
It is not a joke! (Score:5, Funny)
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Now this administration may be able screw up the invasion of the wrong country, leak the names of CIA agents, mismanage hurricane disaster relief efforts, funnel billions to Haliburton, put scientific research back decades, and turn the country into a joke in general, but they'll be *damned* if they're going to let some satire magazine use the Presidential seal in an article with a headline such as "Bush: Vacation ruined by 'Stupid Dead Soldier'".
Bravo!
Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps they might have a special dislike for The Onion too. Their headline the day after the 2000 election:
"Bush - our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over!"
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
- In Kosovo and Haiti, the death toll has been much lower than Iraq. In addition, in Kosovo, Clinton used this thing called 'the international community', which can be beneficial when conducting 'police actions'.
- FEMA did so well in Florida because they were, well, f'n embarrassed by Louisana (one n, thanks). In the case of LA, when your state is so devastated that the local infrastructure collapses, you have a right to expect federal help. There are documented cases where FEMA told police officers in various parts of LA to *email* them requests for help, when police stations and power stations were completely flooded and useless. Good job Brownie!
- Blowing about a blow job, understandable. Blowing the cover of a CIA agent because you're pissed that they uncovered one of your major lies for going to war, understandable but kind of much worse than the blowjob thing.
FYI, Bush != Conservative. I never thought a tax and spend Democrat would be preferable to a borrow and borrow and borrow and spend and spend and spend Republican.Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
Business Week, 5/19/97: "Clinton's 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity."
Goldman Sachs, March 1998: "on the policy side, trade, fiscal, and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget deficit."
U.S. News & World Report, 6/17/96: "President Clinton's budget deficit program begun in 1993... [led] to lower interest rates, which begat greater investment growth (by double digits since 1993, the highest rate since the Kennedy administration), which begat three-plus years of solid economic growth averaging 2.6 percent annually, 50 percent higher than during the Bush presidency."
Paul Volcker, former Federal Reserve Chairman, Audacity, Fall 1994: "The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that... and I think we're seeing some benefits."
While we're on the topic, the government shutdown was as much the fault of the Republican Majority in Congress and Clinton's. Alexis de Tocqueville once said that it is the nature of American Democracy to "view as virtuous an incomplete conquest." The willingness of BOTH the Republican Congress and the Democratic Whitehouse to ignore this sage wisdom was the cause of the shutdown. It takes two to tango.
While you're quite right that some of the actions taken by the Clinton administration militarily didn't turn out for the best, those actions were not unilateral invasions of a sovereign country with neither the backing nor support of the UN or NATO. Moreover, our involvement did not turn into the most costly and deadly American overseas deployment since Vietnam. As to Rwanda -- it was a tragic failure, and one for which I'll never forgive the Clinton Administration. It's good to see that Bush learned from that failure and is responding in the Sudan.... oh... wait....
Your depiction of the Plame case goes from evasive to outright lies, so we'll clear that up.
1 - You're right, no crime has technically been committed if no one was aware that Plame was undercover at the time since you can't expose someone who you don't know to be undercover.
2 - Plame WAS undercover at the time, according to ABC News [go.com].
3 - Even presidents are innocent until proven guilty in this country. Clinton was never convicted of perjury. That said, what he did smacks of dishonesty and was unquestionably wrong. Speaking of perjury -- it's interesting that the testimonies of Rove, Cheney, and Bush, and the various reporters being questioned are not only divergent, but don't even line up from session to session. You might see some GOP perjury indictments before this is all over.
Final Correction -- Your mischaracterization of Katrina is fairly misleading as well. A hurricane breaching New Orleans levees was on the FEMA list of nightmare scenarios. Bush's budget priorities transferred funds away from the Corps of Engineers levee projects, contributing to the collapse.
Also, don't forget that you can heap blame upon the state of Louisiana as much as you want - but the failure to Federalize the National Guard rests with one man alone. Bush had the authority to act and failed to. Did the state government screw up? Yes. But Bush -=LET=- them screw up. That matters.
Parent
Hurricane (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but I did not know that "the administration" was elected as governor of the state of Louisianna and the mayor of New Orleans. Oh wait, no... they weren't. It seems odd how they "mismanaged" this relief effort but did just fine and dandy during the most recent Wilma that hit Florida.
Sorry bub, but I happen to live in New Orleans. The governor and mayor did everything possible with the resources at their disposal, including the first ever truly successful contraflow evacuation of such a large American city. Afterward, with their resources scattered and the city under water, they begged the federal government for help. While the storm was still raging governor Blanco was on the phone with FEMA telling them what we would need -- helicopters, water, food, and tents, in more or less that order. Contrary to what you may have read in some quarters all of the paperwork was filled out properly and submitted ahead of time. The state of emergency was declared.
The Katrina disaster was much too large for the locals to handle it themselves; things like this are why we have a Federal government at all.
So what did the Feds do? Day 1: Nothing. Day 2: Nothing. Day 3: Nothing. Oh wait, not quite nothing. Blanco complained that they were very interested in "negotiating an organizational chart," e.g. figuring out who would be in charge. And by Tuesday they did get around to trying to strong-arm her into abdicating her position as our elected leader and federalizing the state resources that remained viable.
Oh, and they did manage to turn back anyone who "self-responded" like the convoy of rescuers with boats who assembled from the Lafayette area the day after the storm. They managed to turn back the trucks of water offered by Wal-Mart. Yeah, the Feds weren't entirely idle in those first few days; they managed to fucking TURN AWAY what little aid our local people managed to assemble when the government failed them. They managed to order doctors at the airport NOT to save lives because they hadn't been "federalized."
And what turned FEMA from the heroes of hurricane Charley to the rat fuckers who probably killed hundreds of my neighbors as they waited in their attics? After 9/11 they were wrapped into the department of Homeland Security and their focus shifted from disaster relief (first priority: save lives) to anti-terrorism police (first priority: establish control of the situation).
You can't blame that on Clinton or the Democrats. That reorganization was this Republican Administration's idea, passed by this Republican congress. And while the newly cop-oriented FEMA was polishing their guns and turning away help that didn't arrive with the right paperwork, my neighbors died. For that reason alone they all deserve to be tossed out of office and charged with malfeasance.
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
I call BS - and the usual 'conservative' attempt to rewrite history. The two sides went at it and the budget was balanced. You so called conservatives will soon be saying Reagan balanced his budgets.
>As opposed to Bill Clinton's invasion of two "wrong" countries Haiti and Kosovo... a "quagmire" I think we're still stuck in. Not to mention his poor execution of the efforts in Somalia and his indifference to the people of Rwanda.
More US soldiers died last month than in above mentioned actions. Also, Clinton didn't personally profit from his military adventures, unlike the current administration.
Rwanda I (and Clinton) will grant you, but imagine the Republican stink if Clinton had called out the troops.
And when some righty lies about national security it's ok because
>Hrmmm maybe it wasn't FEMAs fault afterall.
Take responsability for nothing, ever. Shout traitor. Stuff your fingers in your ears and mumble: "Lewinski, Lewinski" over and over. Your entire movement is morally bankrupt and incompetent. Your guys even make Clinton look good, and that takes some doing. Fiscally, conservatism has been a fraud since Reagan.
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
It was FEMA who turned away Wal-Mart trucks with water and supplies.
It was FEMA who told Amtrak they didn't want evacuation help.
It was FEMA who did not use available Navy ships and sent away the Coast Guard with diesel fuel.
It was FEMA who turned away volunteers with boats and hovercraft.
The recent Florida situation doesn't count because FEMA is trying to overcompensate now. Also your conspiracy theorist will tell you to look at who is Governor of Florida...
The fact is both governments screwed up, but FEMA is looking worst in this because they are the ones who are suppose to have the resources to provide aid. I point you to about 1/2 the way down the story here [phxnews.com]. An example of government preventing aid, and why I think (as a libertarian) that FEMA is nothing more then a unnecessary entity that has only gotten in the way of volunteer efforts.
I can probably find a few local and state government screw ups too (there was a Doctor licensing issue involving the state govt. I think). There is plenty of blame to go around, the fact is FEMA does share a lot of blame and to ignore that fact is pure ignorance.
Parent
Commercial purposes (Score:5, Informative)
Trademark Dilution (Score:5, Interesting)
The great point, which the NYT dutifully points out, is that someone in Washington with access to powerful ears reads The Onion. Whether or not this individual has a sense of humour is another story entirely.
-theGreater.
Re: Trademark Dilution (Score:5, Interesting)
So, for-pay encyclopedias can't include it in an article?
Parent
Re: Trademark Dilution (Score:5, Informative)
That use is expressly provided for via executive order.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/u
Parent
White House Staff Reads The Onion (Score:4, Insightful)
On another note, isn't this protected under parody? If not, could they take the logo and add a triangle around it and then say it's protected under parody?
Free != non-commercial (Score:5, Insightful)
The first thing I get when you go to the Onion's site is a full-screen ad. So, there is money being made. Just because it's free doesn't mean it's not commercial.
Two points (Score:5, Informative)
and paste
2) The Onion may be free, but it *is* commericial - it has a lead in ad as well
as ads on its pages.
3) The government does this all the time.. they are just glacially slow in doing anything about it.
The Presidential Seal (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, cause that's what you want to do (Score:5, Funny)
Alert your friends: The Onion might actually start getting funny again.
The Onion (Score:5, Funny)
Next Weeks Broadcast... (Score:5, Funny)
Recently, mi staff have informed me about a grave misuse of a seal. Apparently, this website, The Onion, is misusing the Presidential Seal of the United States of Merica. Now, I have not seen this seal - and I hope it's doing well, with all those hurricanes in Florida and whatnot, but to misuse a seal? Now that's nnanimal cruelty.
Now, I have talked to all my friends at Hallyburton about this, and we agree. Seals should be clubbed as babies to be used as coats. If the Seals are not going to be used as coats, they should be allowed to live out their natural lives at Seaworld and the like. You know, preforming tricks for the kids. Ya gotta member the children, they're our most precious resource. But I digress.
This website, The Onion, is misusing the Presidential Seal and it's got to stop. Our staff has sent a letter to The Onion, and they just made fun of us. How terrble is that? Even worse, some people have suggested that the seal be changed at The Onion. That's not good. How would you like it if we changed you?
Anyways, seals are great creatures. Make good coats, preform tricks for kids. Kids important. Onion misusing seals. Onion's bad, make kids cry. Now go out there and tell those bad liberals at The Onion to stop misusing seals and making kids cry.
Good night, and God Bless you.
Yer President
Update - breaking news flash (Score:5, Funny)
other official documents (Score:5, Interesting)
__________________________________________________ ___________
My "It would be funny but it happened to me too" story:
I was driving through South Dakota when I was pulled over for having a headlight out. This was about a year ago, and the police were still worked up about that little Sept 11 thingy.
A little background first: I have a bad habit of not throwing anything away, and happened to be playing/running a Live action vampire game when I lived in Houston. Certain Individuals and I created some items as "Props"
that looked pretty authentic, especially to the untrained eye. If the individual in question wants to tell ya what we made he can do it. The only hint I'll give is that they definitly looked official.
So, anyways, I got pulled over by this SD state trooper, K-9 no less. My hair was about 2 feet long, shaved on the sides and back, pulled into a pony-tail. I was wearing my "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke -- God"
shirt. Ratty assed blue jeans, with a pile of trash in my backseat. He takes one look at me and says, "Sir, I am going to need you to step out of the vehicle."
Well, like I said, I used to live in Houston. So, I unbuckeled my seatbelt and put my windows up (Second nature when I get out of my car). In one fluid motion, I took my keys out of the ignition, locked the door and slammed it shut. As I did this he yelled at me to "leave the car running and the doors unlocked." After slamming the door shut, he told me to unlock it. Being the good subversive asshole I am, I said, "Nope."
Then he asked if I had any weapons on me, luckily I had already taken my pocket knife outta my pocket to open a bag of beef jerky and it had fallen on the passenger side floor. I said no, and he told me to empty my pockets.
Seems I had a weapon after all, fingernail clippers, in my pocket. Then he asked me to step into his SUV.
As soon as I got in, his dog went apeshit and he asked, "Do you have any contraband in your vehicle?" To which I replied, "What do you mean by contraband?" Chalk one up to being either stupid or an asshole who really had no plans to get home that evening. He explained, "Drugs, Weapons, other illegeal things." My smartassed reply, "Do you mean illegeal in the state of South Dakota, or just plain illegeal." Then he asked, "May I search your car?" I figured that I am already fucked right now, so I say, "Hell no."
We sat in silence for about 20 minutes, then he got out with the dog and had it sniff the car. He got back in and asked, "Where are you headed?" My reply of "Home" didn't seem to improve our relations much. Then he asked, "Where is your home?" To which I said, "South."
"Where were you comming from?"
"The east."
About 20 more minutes of silence. Then, "Can I search your vehicle?"
"Nope, Am I being detained?"
"Uh, no sir."
This went on for about 3 hours, eventually I was able to spot the in vehicle camera and noted that it was still recording. So he asked to search again.
Finally I capitulated! I said extremely clearly and loud, "Since I have now been detained against my will for 3 hours and I am very tired, I will, under duress, consent to an illeagle search of my car at this time." Then he asked me for my keys, and I told him they were on the trunk. He was a little pissed as he took the dog outta the SUV.
He tore the hell outta my vehicle, finding the item in question along with several wanted posters from a certain federal agency. Sadly these posters had my pic on them and Zeds pic too. *sigh* So this cop calls in the, according to him, "Forged items".
I explain to him back in the SUV that I did not attempt to impersonate anyone, nor did I identify myself as belonging to any organization. He said I was going to jail. I asked to sp
Re:Big deal. (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides, they definitely aren't satirizing the seal itself. If they were, they'd probably be okay. But they're using the real seal.
Parent
Re:Wow... Just... wow (Score:5, Informative)
TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 33 713
(a) Whoever knowingly displays any printed or other likeness of the great seal of the United States, or of the seals of the President or the Vice President of the United States, or the seal of the United States Senate, or the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or the seal of the United States Congress, or any facsimile thereof, in, or in connection with, any advertisement, poster, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, public meeting, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production, or on any building, monument, or stationery, for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(b) Whoever, except as authorized under regulations promulgated by the President and published in the Federal Register, knowingly manufactures, reproduces, sells, or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seals of the President or Vice President, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(c) Whoever, except as directed by the United States Senate, or the Secretary of the Senate on its behalf, knowingly uses, manufactures, reproduces, sells or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seal of the United States Senate, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(d) Whoever, except as directed by the United States House of Representatives, or the Clerk of the House of Representatives on its behalf, knowingly uses, manufactures, reproduces, sells or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(e) Whoever, except as directed by the United States Congress, or the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives, acting jointly on its behalf, knowingly uses, manufactures, reproduces, sells or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seal of the United States Congress, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(f) A violation of the provisions of this section may be enjoined at the suit of the Attorney General,
(1) in the case of the great seal of the United States and the seals of the President and Vice President, upon complaint by any authorized representative of any department or agency of the United States;
(2) in the case of the seal of the United States Senate, upon complaint by the Secretary of the Senate;
(3) in the case of the seal of the United States House of Representatives, upon complaint by the Clerk of the House of Representatives; and
(4) in the case of the seal of the United States Congress, upon complaint by the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives, acting jointly.
Parent
You kids... (Score:5, Informative)
Let me help you.
If you're writing satire, you can use this kind of stuff. And particularly political satire is given wide latitude. So if I were the Onion, I would relish a court fight here. It would give them even more notority, and they would win.
This proves to me that the White House is actually manned by monkeys. No the smart ones, either.
Parent
Re:This is called a "joke?" (Score:5, Insightful)
Your kidding of course. Showing the Presidential seal does not fall outside of the bounds of Satire, because clearly they are not implying Presidential support or endorcement. Therefore the use is acceptable. And if there is any White House that deserves Satire it is this one. But then again this White House now understands that their public ratings are so low that they can't afford any Satire that exposes the sad humor of the current administration. Go Onion, go free speech, go America, America, America.
Parent
Re:This is called a "joke?" (Score:5, Informative)
Moreover, if the US Code states that the seal "is not to be used in connection with commercial ventures or products in any way that suggests presidential support or endorsement," then that pretty much paves the way for the White House to decide where the seal can be used.
Looks like the Onion is out of luck. (And out of humor too, starting about a year and a half ago, IMHO.)
Parent
Re:This is called a "joke?" (Score:5, Insightful)
Moreover, if the US Code states that the seal "is not to be used in connection with commercial ventures or products in any way that suggests presidential support or endorsement,"
I think it's safe to say that nobody would confuse the Onion as having presidential support or endorsement.
Parent
Re:This is called a "joke?" (Score:5, Insightful)
But the seal is routinely used on the cover of texts, novels and other punlications. In the case of the Onion, the seal wasn't used in in an ad, it has been used in parody articles, ones the present administration doesn't appreciate.
It shouldn't be an issue of taste or support. If the government wishes to enforce against the Onion, they need to enforce against all "unauthorized, commercial or illegal" use of the seal, supportive or not.
Parent
Re:This is called a "joke?" (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, no, they don't. The government gets to pick where they spend their law-enforcement resources and the executive branch makes the call. (Another example of this is the consistent case law declaring that the police have no obligation to protect any given individual from a crime or threat, no matter how grave or obvious in advance.)
A private individual or company has an obligation to take some action if his mark is being infringed to avoid it going public domain. But even there the requirement is not to pursue every infringer.
The closest argument to "must pursue all" is the requirement for equal protection. But even that only comes into play if there's a consistent pattern of only going after a suspect class of infringers, rather than making the pick in a way that doesn't discriminate, or discriminates only on some rational basis (such as biggest ones get the hit) with other things (like race) only present, if at all, as a side effect.
However, as a separate issue, satire is protected speech. If the seal was used in a clearly satirical way the Onion has legs to stand on. (I haven't seen the article in question yet, but given that it's the Onion it seems likely that's what they were doing.)
The problem with satire is that sometimes it looks too much like what it's satirizing and confuses people. I suspect that's what happened here - either because some functionary didn't get that it was satire, or thought others wouldn't.
Parent
Re:Endorsement? Oh please... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:This is called a "joke?" (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:no way to stop it (Score:5, Informative)
As for the mis-use of it congress put it rather high, 6 months jail time [cornell.edu].
Over all not that much of a big issue, someone complained, the customized form letter was sent out as required by federal law, and as you mention the onion will have to make some changes and will probably get a few funny articles out of it.
Parent
Re:I thought this was all public domain (Score:5, Informative)
Whoever knowingly displays any printed or other likeness of the great seal of the United States, or of the seals of the President or the Vice President of the United States, or the seal of the United States Senate, or the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or the seal of the United States Congress, or any facsimile thereof, in, or in connection with, any advertisement, poster, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, public meeting, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production, or on any building, monument, or stationery, for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both. (Emphasis mine)
Seems like this wouldn't apply to The Onion as a satirical piece.
Parent
Re:I thought this was all public domain (Score:5, Informative)
Read on:
(b) Whoever, except as authorized under regulations promulgated by
the President and published in the Federal Register, knowingly
manufactures, reproduces, sells, or purchases for resale, either
separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness
of the seals of the President or Vice President, or any substantial part
thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official
use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
And those regulations were specified by Richard Nixon (later amended by Gerald Ford):
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/u
Ex. Ord. No. 11649. Regulations Governing Seals of President and Vice President of United States
Ex. Ord. No. 11649, Feb. 16, 1972, 37 F.R. 3625, as amended by Ex. Ord. No. 11916, May 28, 1976, 41 F.R. 22031, provided:
By virtue to the authority vested in me by section 713 (b) of title 18, United States Code, I hereby prescribe the following regulations governing the use of the Seals of the President and the Vice President of the United States:
Section 1. Except as otherwise provided by law, the knowing manufacture, reproduction, sale, or purchase for resale of the Seals or Coats of Arms of the President or the Vice President of the United States, or any likeness or substantial part thereof, shall be permitted only for the following uses:
(a) Use by the President or Vice President of the United States;
(b) Use in encyclopedias, dictionaries, books, journals, pamphlets, periodicals, or magazines incident to a description or history of seals, coats of arms, heraldry, or the Presidency or Vice Presidency;
(c) Use in libraries, museums, or educational facilities incident to descriptions or exhibits relating to seals, coats of arms, heraldry, or the Presidency or Vice Presidency;
(d) Use as an architectural embellishment in libraries, museums, or archives established to house the papers or effects of former Presidents or Vice Presidents;
(e) Use on a monument to a former President or Vice President;
(f) Use by way of photographic or electronic visual reproduction in pictures, moving pictures, or telecasts of bona fide news content;
(g) Such other uses for exceptional historical, educational, or newsworthy purposes as may be authorized in writing by the Counsel to the President.
Sec. 2. The manufacture, reproduction, sale, or purchase for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, of the Seals of the President or Vice President, or any likeness or substantial part thereof, except as provided in this Order or as otherwise provided by law, is prohibited.
Richard Nixon.
Parent
Re:I thought this was all public domain (Score:5, Insightful)
Not really. Making fiction that includes references to a President either current or past is protected by the fact that the person is considered a "public figure", and has thus consented to having works made about them.
The problem with the Presidential Seal is that it's intended to carry the full power and weight of the office of the President and is NOT allowed to be used for anything that the President's office does not directly stand behind.
This "parody" thus places the President's office in a bit of a bind. It's not that they necessarily mind the parody, but they cannot have the seal used inappropriately, even if it seems harmless enough. Yet by requesting its removal, they look like the bad guys to the public.
The best solution I can think of is that the Onion should develop a "fake" seal that conveys the fact that it's fake in some way, shape, or form. In that way they would also parody the seal along with the President himself. This would be covered by fair use, and would not cause any confusion with the real seal.
Parent
Re:I thought this was all public domain (Score:5, Informative)
I will repeat myself. The Onion is WRONG. If they want to pursue this, it could become a matter of imprisionment for the Onion editors and/or writers. They do NOT want to mess with this.
Parent
Re:First amendment? (Score:5, Insightful)
The redesign sucks anyway, I don't know who bothers reading it anymore.
Parent
Re:First amendment? (Score:5, Informative)
If that's true, they should drop the banner ads, and they should definitely stop intercepting hits to their home page to display interstitial commercials. Today the Onion is trying to get me to buy shoes, watch TV shows, eat fast food, report software pirates, wear jeans, buy belts, buy The Onion books, and go to the theater. I certainly hope they're getting paid for all that.
and if you can find someone who reads one of these Onion pieces and believes it suggests presidential support,
Okay, here you go:
http://www.weeklyradioaddress.com/ [weeklyradioaddress.com]
This is the page that made me think they may have a case. I too thought that this was just another attempt by the Whitehouse to bitchslap dissent, because I thought that they were just talking about the presidential seal graphics that might be in photos used in obvious parody articles about the President.
But look at this page. There's no info about the Onion (you'd have to have started from an Onion page [theonion.com] to find out the connection), all the links go to official whitehouse.gov pages, the style is that of the official whitehouse.gov page, the server uses local copies of their potentially copyrighted graphics, and they've got a nearly identical (it says "Resident of the United States" now) copy of the Presidential Seal in the upper left corner: large enough to recognize, but small enough that the modification (even assuming it's always been modified) isn't obvious.
Could someone listen to one of these addresses and not realize they were listening to a parody? I doubt it, but then again I knew they were an Onion parody before I ever went to the site, and I've only listened to one address so far. Since the Onion's humor is sometimes of the prescient "it's funny [theonion.com] cause it's true [theonion.com]" variety, I could definitely imagine there being addresses in there capable of fooling people.
could you point them in my direction, as i've got this bridge i'd like to sell them.
Well, I'm not buying, but there's no story so ridiculous you won't find someone to buy it. Even the Onion's regular articles have fooled the Bejing Evening News, MSNBC, and some fundamentalist Christian groups [wired.com] in the past.
Parent