Slashdot Log In
No EToy for Christmas
from the silenced-night dept.
etoy was founded in 1994 by a group of European artists who worked on the cutting edge, doing performance art at techno events and raves. Their focus has always been on the internet as new medium; this interview gives a feel for their perspective.
They picked the name "etoy" literally by consensus and running code. Being from Italy, England, and Switzerland, physical collaboration was difficult, so they got together on an IRC channel and went through a list of random names generated by a perl script. When "etoy" came up, they all knew that was the name they wanted; they first used it in October of 1994. In October 1995 they put up their website at etoy.com.
Christmas 1995 came and went.
In 1996, etoy won their first artistic award. Their work typically blurs the line between real world and art; in this case, they had undertaken to demonstrate how important and yet how fragile the system of search engines was. By subverting the meta tags of prominent websites like Playboy, they pulled inexperienced surfers to their site, where they put in a plug for Kevin Mitnick, and had a few laughs at the newbies' expense. They called it the "Digital Hijack."
A curious kind of art. In 1996 it was original enough to win an award from Ars Electronica. Nowadays everyone knows the trick, the search engines find it and disregard it, and some underhanded websites try to make a fast buck by stealing trademarks - but etoy did it first, for fun.
Christmas 1996 came and went.
In June 1997 etoys.com, with an S, began operations. It wasn't until October that their website went online. They filed for a U.S. trademark on their domain, at which point etoy got a little alarmed and filed for their own trademark on their own domain. Maybe because they're based in Europe, or maybe for some other reason, etoy says their application is still pending on some technicalities.
But it doesn't matter when their trademark is granted. Their website went online in October 1995, two full years before etoys', and it's date of first use that's important - not the date of filing.
Christmas 1997 came and went.
Christmas 1998 came and went.
But now it's 1999, the year of the e-tailer. Suddenly etoys.com, with an S, has gone public and is worth six billion dollars. Meanwhile etoy.com, without an S, again putting the spotlight on corporations and society, has raised money by "selling shares" of itself. I'm not quite sure how they did it, but at an artists' gathering, a half-serious, half-mocking exhibition-slash-fundraising they pulled in something over ten thousand dollars. (Which they then donated to their friends in the U.S., also working at the boundary of society and corporations, RTMark, best-known for their George W. Bush parody site.)
In the year of the e-tailer, what kind of speech scares corporations more than anything? Disrespect. Artists who don't play by the rules. People who don't understand that business is serious business.
Etoys.com, with an S, wants etoy.com, with no S. They offered money. At one point they were offering cash and (mostly) stock that would have been worth almost half a million dollars. No sale.
But that should give us an idea of how much they're willing to spend on lawyers.
Finally, in September, eToys filed a lawsuit against etoy, on the grounds that a potential customer had mistakenly gone to the wrong site and had seen the message that - if they wanted to enjoy etoy.com to its fullest extent - they should download "the fucking flash plugin." They also didn't like the pierced breasts or etoy's sense of humor.
To be precise, they claim that "the antisocial, obscene, and offensive images associated with defendants' use of the mark 'etoy,' both on the Internet and elsewhere, have tarnished the ETOYS® mark and the eToys brand name..."
Let this be a lesson to anyone whose domain is coveted by a multi-billion-dollar company: careful with the F-word.
In October and November the case was bounced from an L.A. court to U.S. District Court, and finally to a California State Court. In late November the judge refused a request to let the European artists attend the proceedings by teleconference. In those proceedings, the judge was told that the artists had engaged in "digital hijacking" (the 1996 project), and had sold shares of stock without being properly regulated on an official stock exchange (the 1999 fundraising exhibition). Worst of all, they were hosting illegal hardcore pornography (which was actually just a link to another site).
They claim:
"Defendants use the mark ETOY indiscriminately and in random association with unrelated concepts. For example, on the etoy web site alone, defendants use the mark ETOY in conjunction with other, randomly selected words to create phrases such as: 'etoy.research,' 'etoy.eternity,' 'etoy.timezone,' 'etoy.history,' 'etoy.servers,' 'etoy.strategy,' 'etoy.journeys,' 'etoy.universe,' and 'etoy.crew.'
"By using the mark ETOY in this random, indiscriminate manner, defendants cause both ETOY and the ETOYS® mark to lose any distinctive, signifying meaning."
Serious business.
The lawyers also kindly suggested that, since at least one etoy member is from Switzerland, they really would be more suited to a website in the .ch domain: etoy.ch. Never mind the years of work and the reputation that the artists have built around etoy.com - we all know that "dot-com" belongs to America!
Faced with a torrent of buzzwords, the judge issued a preliminary injunction barring etoy from: operating a website in the etoy.com domain; associating their domain name with the "digital hijack"; or selling their "shares" in the U.S.
Penalty for disobeying the injuction: $10,000 per day in fines.
On November 30, etoy.com shut down its Apache webserver. Its last access came from the eToys law firm (which has been monitoring it closely). They had no choice, really. In fact, when I talked with a member of etoy, he was very nervous about saying things which might get him in more legal trouble. Suddenly, the artists are afraid to speak.
How can this be, when, as the Village Voice wrote in an excellent article, this lawsuit doesn't even pass the "giggle test"? It's absurd to think that one website can shut down another for having a similar domain name - when the second site is not a domain poacher and has been operating two years longer than the first.
The date of the next court hearing, at which this preliminary injunction will surely be overturned: December 27th. How convenient! Just after the Christmas shopping season.
If you'd like to see more about etoy, their domain is down of course, and I don't know of any mirrors, but their fans have constructed a site at toywar.com that has some information. And etoy may put some or all of its site back online at its IP number (not name!): 146.228.204.72:8080.
Good rules have been written to prevent things like this from happening. Unfortunately, the rules have not taken effect yet for most domains. Even after they do take effect, their legal status will be uncertain until they are tested in court.
Those rules are ICANN's Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy. This policy ensures that the conditions under which a domain name can be disputed are strictly limited. For such a dispute even to proceed, a complainant must assert that each of three things is true:
your domain name infringes on a trademark;
you have "no rights or legitimate interests" to your domain;
and your domain name is being used "in bad faith."
As long as you're operating in good faith, or you have any legitimate interest in your domain, there is not even cause to bring up a dispute over a domain. Clearly this puts etoy.com on firm ground, because regardless of the trademark issue (which should be resolved once their mark registration is granted) they win on the other two points. This doesn't stop clueless judges from issuing injuctions, of course. But having these rules codified as official policy will give the legal system better guidelines to operate by.
These rules went into effect for some domain name registries on Wednesday, but will not apply to the most popular registry, Network Solutions, until January.
I can't even complain to eToys.com. I clicked all over their website looking for an email contact address and couldn't find one. When I filled in the web form to ask that someone get in touch with me for this story, all I got was a email form letter:
It is our goal to respond to all order-related e-mail within 24 hours. If your e-mail is not order-related, we will do our best to take care of your questions, concerns and suggestions as soon as possible.
It's 72 hours later, so my email must not have been sufficiently order-related.
In the meantime, I can at least have the satisfaction of taking my order-related business elsewhere this holiday season. I'm sure eToys couldn't care less, but it will serve me as a small comfort during the remaining 22 holy shopping days. In a world run by retailers, e-tailers, and lawyers, I need everything I can get to help me make sense of the bizarre orgy of spirituality-soaked commerce that serves as the endcap of each year. Hohoho.
Timely and useful: Thank You Slashdot (Score:5)
I have yet to start my Christmas shopping, and intend to do most of it on-line (for my nefew, four nieces aged one to six, and various other relatives). I probably would have wound up using etoys.com for at least some purchases, but in light of these events I will make a point in not doing so.
Those of us (in the US at least) conscientious enough vote every couple of years. ALL OF US vote with our money (dollars, yen, euros, whatever) every day. It is my profound pleasure to vote against the fucks at etoys.com for what they have done this Christmas season.
Supreme court ruling anyone? (Score:3)
am i missing something? (Score:4)
(ps - i don't know if i would file this under censorship. do you have a section for corporate extortion?)
- pal
ICANN rules don't override law (Score:3)
First, national trademark law overrides the agreement -- the agreement can't prevent people from defending their trademark (or it would erode everyone's trademarks -- trademark law is generally 'defend it or lose it').
Second, the agreement is between ICANN and the current owner of the allegedly infringing domain, not the person/entity doing the suing -- it's even possible the plaintiff has never heard of ICANN. And even if they do own domains, thus having entered into this agreement with ICANN, the agreement applies to domains they already own, not other people's domains that they don't like.
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht
Wow (Score:5)
Hear that FBI/BATF/CIA/WTO/etc? Something needs to be done about this site! Think about the children!
Finkployd
... (Score:5)
Now to the heart of the matter - we already know who's going to win this one. The domain dispute policy will be amended to allow etoys to excercise it's unfair domain grab, and in a few months nobody will care. That's how it happened with dozens of other sites, modulo a few featured here on slashdot. The question is, of course, why haven't we forcefully lifted control from the government and InterNIC? We have the authority to reprogram our own, personal DNS servers with whatever information we see fit. People are under the impression that the internet will fall apart if we don't maintain The One True Registry. Well... my vote is for The One True Democratic Registry. We need a digital haven - some place on the planet where politicians can stick a hot poker up their butt if they disagree with the content or purpose of the site (or for that matter, greedy corporations). Freedom of speech taken to it's logical conclusion.
My vote? Sysadmins of the world, unite! Form a second registry and use it. In the meantime.. anybody know if there's a country around that I can get enough access to kick of a "digital haven" - a country with no laws barring any online conduct and outside WTO and US control?
First come, first serve? (Score:3)
Domain Name: ETOY.COM
Record created on 13-Oct-1995.
Domain Name: ETOYS.COM
Record created on 03-Nov-1997.
------
There are always a few addresses you can use... (Score:5)
admin@etoys.com
abuse@etoys.com
sales@etoys.com
legal@etoys.com
webmaster@etoys.com
hostmaster@etoys.com
And, of course, they would be more impressed if we snail-mailed them and *gasp* called them or faxed them:
eToys
3100 Ocean Park Blvd., Suite 300
Santa Monica, CA 90405
US
Administrative Contact:
- Admin, eToys
- admin@ETOYS.COM
- (310) 664-8100 Voice
- (310) 664-8101 Fax
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
- eToys HostMaster
- hostmaster@ETOYS.COM
- (310) 664-8100 Voice
- (310) 664-8101 Fax
Billing Contact:
- Admin, eToys
- admin@ETOYS.COM
- (310) 664-8100 Voice
- (310) 664-8101 Fax
I suppose that those who host their DNS info really don't have anything to do with it, but it might be a reminder for them to know who their customers *really* are if we sent a *very* polite email referencing this article, and asking what their opinion of their customer's actions are...
DNS Servers:
NAME.ROC.FRONTIERNET.NET
NAME.PHX.FRONTIERNET.NET
NS1.IDEALAB.COM
NS2.IDEALAB.COM
PLEASE be nice in any and all communications with anyone! (Man, I wish I didn't have to say that!) We can be nice and still express displeasure in someone's actions.
-Adam
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence" - Napoleon Bonaparte.
This is a troll -- moderate down (Score:2)
There was a coordinated DoS attack against the rat bastards at etoys.com
Might these lawyer happy companies realize that the net has it's own rules and they can't just shove whatever they want down our collective throates?
} end hypothitical situation
I wouldn't _advocate_ such a thing though -- that'd be illegal
Re:Timely and useful: Thank You Slashdot (Score:4)
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht
watch out... (Score:3)
toywarS.com [networksolutions.com]
(-;
eToys contact addresses (Score:2)
Jonathan Cutler, PR Manager (jcutler@etoys.com)
More information on etoy ot dmoz.org (Score:2)
http://dmoz.org/Society/Activism/Media_Activism/C
If you find sites or news items related to etoy, please submit them there.
All going to end with internet taxes (Score:2)
Vote with your feet (Score:4)
A boycott could only work if it is sufficiently advertised. Hopefully, there are a few news services that monitor Slashdot and may make this case a bit more public. Maybe etoys.com can be made to withdraw the lawsuit. Who knows.
Ten years ago, reading USENET only generated smirks from the MBA types, telling me that I was wasting my time and to get a life.
Now those same MBA's have "discovered" the Internet, and are looking to push us out of "their" sandbox.
It's not going to work that way, fellas. Sure, you can sue all you want. Lawsuits don't generate good feeling by potential customers, though. The "little guy's" only recourse is to publicize such abuses as much as possible.
Of course, the next step is to have slime molds like etoys.com purchase cnn.com, msnbc.com, etc. and they won't have to worry about people hearing about such abuses.
So... as I wait to see the 1900's odometer turn, it is heartening to see Slashdot making at least SOME people aware of these types of things.
I still wonder what kind of Internet such companies are going to end up with. And what kind of Internet replacement that WE will come up with so that we don't need to swim in such soiled refuse-ridden sewage.
--
Re:My personal favorite... (Score:2)
Attention Fat Corporate Bastards! (Score:4)
Chuck
Re:... (Score:2)
i believe you idea is booth a Good Thing(tm) and a Truly Horrible Thing. imagine a world where everyone fights bitterly over not only which OS or browser to use, but which toplevel dns. some sites won't be accessible from some dnses (you can type the ip directly, sure, but in the age of virtual hosting that's not always enough), mail servers will reject mail from entire topdomains. and you can bet your sweet ass that a certain company will embrace and extend the market by launching ActiveTopDNS.
on the other hand, it's a good idea because it will give the people at internic something to think about.
--bogey
Re:Nice website you have here... (Score:2)
Heck, if 5 thousand people did that their site would crash and stay crashed.
Kintanon
Jam the WTO... Jam etoys.com (and /. censorship) (Score:5)
I was initially replying to this, but it was moderated down by the time I finished writing my post.
Actually, this seems like a plausible non-violent way to deal with the situation, and doesn't deserve the immediate down-moderation that it got. For all the /.ers who think DOS attacks are automatically wrong, take a look at how slanted this situation is against the little guy, and how the courts seem to be willing to rule for profits and against common sense, and think again.
If the powers that be had half a brain, we wouldn't have to think about stuff like this. But they don't, so we do.
Liberal minded moderators... keep an eye out for stuff like this and moderate it back up. We're part of /. too, and I for one don't buy the party line that attacks on computer systems are automatically wrong. etoys.com is using unjustifiable legal coercion, and they have no right to complain if people retaliate with a different form of coercion.
Re:... (Score:4)
And, in fact, your friends and family will be much better off. I found that except for ONE item on my son's wish-list, all were cheaper at other toy sites and even at brick-and-mortar sites than at etoys.com.
Examples:
In my opinion, eToys is just capitalizing on the growing popularity of e-commerce without actually offering the benefit that e-commerce is supposed to provide: lower prices. They've got their gorilla advertising dollars to spend on T.V. ads to get people shopping there, but an intelligent consumer would soon quickly learn that their prices aren't the best.
Re:There are always a few addresses you can use... (Score:5)
Customer Service Contact
If you would like to speak to a customer service representative about your order, please call us at 1-800-GO-ETOYS (1-800-463-8697). We are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Re:am i missing something? (Score:5)
Its all part of the American Empire. The US is the functional equivalent of a world Empire - courtesy of their economic strength and the US military which backs it.
Somehow we have let corporations become the law of the world. They have greater rights than the individual - because they have more money than that individual. This case is going to be *very* important - if Etoys.com wins this, then the entire domain name scheme is meaningless. If I register a good name, all that matters is how much money someone has if they want to take it from me. And what about .net and .org? I own a .net and the .com equivalent is registered to a company already, what if they dislike my content, can they have me shut down? I sure as hell can't afford a lawyer for more than a day.
In an equally meaningless lawsuit, and to show how patently stupid this judgement is, if I were the folks at Etoy I would now turn around and sue Network Solutions for selling them the Etoy.com domain when it was going to violate another company's copyright only a few years after the sale. Surely NS should have seen that, right?
It would make as much sense as this lawsuit.
Of course the biggest problem that the Etoy.com folks have is that their not US citizens. Were they US citizens there would be much more of a public and media outcry in the States, but since they are foreigners(sic) they have less attention/importance/rights in the world.
I suggest we promulgate a complete ban on dealing with Etoys.com - and try to convince as many other folks to boycott it as well. How 'bout a "Why I don't shop at Etoys.com" graphic you can display on your website and link to this story?
Perhaps a grass roots democratic demonstration of our collective displeasure might garner some results...
Re:... (Score:2)
Let's give the bite of a boycott some teeth (Score:2)
But we have the power of computers and databases on our side. Why not organize a list of online corporations we have gripes with, and interface it with client-side software that will warn us when we attempt to visit "sanctioned" sites?
ALERT: Amazon.com is currently filing a lawsuit against Barnes and Noble for violating their patented concept of "one click shopping." Though they do have a legal patent on the technology, this is an obvious non-innovation, and this patent and lawsuit is considered by many to be abusive and frivolous. Visit http://link.to.the/news/story.html for more information. Do you wish to proceed?
We can't personally keep tabs on every corporate bully, but to organize and be a veritable force for companies to be wary of, perhaps we can convince them our voices really do matter.
One might worry such organization would be forced to make overly subjective decisions, and eventually become political, but the choice would always be left to the user. The software and database would prodive the information (hopefully a link to a [mostly] impartial news story), and the user would choose, based on the information provided, whether to personally avoid the site or not. Personally, I imagine many would opt to support these boycotts.
Every dollar the monstrous corporations have came from someone's pocket.
Great article jamie (Score:2)
Keep it up!
No joke, but ... (Score:2)
I'm sure the government actually likes us posting to SlashDot, because if we're posting here, we're not actually DOING anything.
Oh: to see what's really happening in Seattle (jack-booted Gestapo thugs tear-gassing and rubber-bulleting peaceful protestors while allowing anarchists to do whatever they want in order to get an excuse to invoke martial law, which they did in a 40 block area of central Seattle), see the links on Salon's "Anti-WTO Activist Web Pages" [salon.com] page. Now THAT is subversive. Slashdot? Get real!
-E
Talk to IdeaLab (parent company) too (Score:2)
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht
You didn't read the article (Score:2)
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht
ETYS stock down $15 since this ruling (Score:4)
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht
Bad companies website? (Score:2)
If not, I think there should be.
iain
Re:Nice website you have here... (Score:2)
So no, this was a bad idea.
Another way to show protest (Score:4)
I have to laugh at all the perverts who end up at my site after doing a search for the Mitchell Brothers' adult theatre. (I mention them on my page because of the great (G-rated) murals on the outside of their building.)
What if all the gazillions of Slashdot readers went to the eToys web site [etoys.com] but didn't buy anything? If their webmaster checked the logs, he/she would see tons of hits, all originating from this story. Presumably they would check out the story and think "Omigod, look at all these people that aren't buying anything, and it's because we screwed eToy!"
Normally, they might just think, "Oh, the only people that will really care about eToy are a handfull of geeks, so we can go harass eToy," but if they see how many people really do read Slashdot, they might just change their minds.
Just a thought. In any case, I'm going to slide on over and not buy anything. (Funny thing is, I was going to buy some toys for my niece from them, until now.)
Contact your local media (Score:2)
Want to get eToys where it really hurts? Contact your local media outlets. Local TV affiliates are always looking for cheap news. If they get enough emails/phones calls/etc and it is a quiet news day, they might just run something primetime. Such comsumer news would counter millions of dollars of marketing for those *#@$*$#$% at eToys.
My email to eToys. (Score:5)
I have read recent reports of a case concerning the forced shutdown of etoy.com by etoys.com. When I first heard this I thought it was nothing more than a copy cat company trying to steal the thunder from etoys.com. If this were the case I would have backed your decision to take up legal action against etoy.com. However after reading what etoy.com was about, I became quite surprised that a company such as yours, with so much money in the bank would even care to take action against a site that is little more than people doing experimental design and having fun on the web.
I think what eToys needs to realize is that the web is a FREE place. Free in the sense of free speach. Unfair business pratice is one thing, but the web has been, and will always be about Open Information for anyone. The fact that etoy.com was running over two years before eToys.com and the fact that is has NOTHING to do with eToys nor is it a direct threat to eToys.com makes me wonder where your best interests are going after and attacking them.
I'm not void of these problems myself. I work at a company trying to make its name on the web, Imaginet.com, and we're doing VERY well on the web. Imagine my surprise when I found out that the domain imagnet.com was a porn site. But did we go after them to try to shut them down? NO. Why? Because that's not fair and that's NOT RIGHT. You cannot sue someone simply because they domain names are "similar".
I also own a personl domain, vitaflo.com. Vitaflo.com is an experimental graphic design and open source information site. Now imagine that in a year from now, someone sets up vitaflos.com, starts selling Farm equipment, and gets rich off of it. Then someone goes to my website, sees a swear word or some "unappropriate" material and then vitaflos.com tries to shut me down. Would I be pissed? You bet. Would I fight it? Till the day I died. This is exaclty what your company has done to etoy.com.
It makes me sad to see a company with so much potential throw so much of it down the drain. You can be sure I will never shop at your site ever again, and I have written to everyone I know to tell them the same (as I'm sure many others have done that have heard this news). As the PR Manager, I think it should be your job to keep the companies best interests in mind in how it deals with the public. This is NOT in your best interest. You will lose a lot more money playing the roll of "Bully" than you ever would have by just ignoring etoy.com. I am hopeful this letter, and letters like it, will help to reverse this aweful trend in online lawsuits that has been occuring so much recently. Set the precident, be the one company to actually LISTEN to its customers. We will all thank you if you do.
Thank you for your time,
-Brent Gustafson
Assignment of Blame (Score:2)
http://etoy.com !!! Loophole? (Score:2)
Of course, technically, you could run a domain redirector at www.etoy.com, but I don't think the judge would see the distinction as clearly. Heh.
CEOs name for letters: Mariam Naficy & Varsha Rao (Score:2)
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht
There is a feedback form... (Score:3)
Re:I don't give a damn about spammers (Score:2)
Anybody else getting spammed by them?
OOOPS! THAT'S WRONG! It should be: TOBY LENK (Score:2)
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht
This is the fucking point (Score:4)
PS: I can't get over the way people on slashdot make it seem like a domain name is some necessity of life like food, air, water or shelter. We were not born with them and they'll be gone before we die. So what's the fscking point of all this ruckus.
In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up becaues I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up becaue I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me - and by that time no one was left to speak up.
-- Pastor Martin Niemoller
Kaa
Re:The supreme court (Score:2)
Re:Timely and useful: Thank You Slashdot (Score:2)
Email I fired off (Score:2)
CC: postmaster@etoys.com
CC: manager@etoys.com
CC: root@etoys.com
How could you go and try and sue a company that had their name before you even existed? They have the legal right, not you. How can you go and squash the rights of other people? I will personally guarantee you that I will never, ever shop at etoys.com, and that I will inform all my friends, relatives, and any other people I speak with, to not shop at your site. If you were afraid some people would misspell your domain name, and not get to the intended site, you should have worked out a linking policy with etoy.com, just like how diamondmm.com and diamond.com have a linking policy.
You disgust me.
---
Re:I would have taken the $500k and here's why.. (Score:3)
The law isn't about causing the least trouble. If the president of the US came up and shot you in the head, should the court that he/she shouldn't have to go to jail because it'll cause much more trouble than is we just let him/her go?
The law is supposed to stand up for what is right, regardless of who's inconvienced. It's the principal of the matter. Big companies don't get to take things from little people just because it might be annoying for them if they don't have it.
You don't build a huge supermarket in a small lot and then try to force nearby businesses to give you their lots just because otherwise you'd have to go somewhere else or build a smaller market.
---
You're talking disobedience of a sort. (Score:2)
It turns out that the people who make the most noise are generally the people that are disgruntled with the current system... These people have made the polititions think that free speech and free thought are not what we want. Polititians must think by now that we want to be babysat - we dont want to think. We want things organized, we want parents again! And corporations are happy to fill the role. Now, they've gotten the wrong idea. We want freedom to think - we want democracy back! Its of course then our responcibility to make some noise. Changing DNS systems is a nice idea but infeasable to imlement very well. I think what we need is more of an online unity. More of an online union of sorts. of course, without union dues
What do we want to do? I think that we need public protest, stuff that gets on the news. People have been talking about the WTO issue online forever, but now people know more about it now that its on the news. Public protests need to be organized. Massive letter writing campaigns. Elect people who arent so dumb! hehe
I called the 1-800 number and .. .. (Score:4)
She claimed that eToys.com is not trying to shut them down, but trying to get them to move. She claimed that the case is not about trademark infringement, but that children might want toys and type-in "www.etoy.com" off of the top of their heads. She mentioned at least three times throughout the conversation how much pornography and cursing were on the etoy.com web page, and how bad it would be for children to see that. Basically eToys.com is claiming to be doing a public service, not defending a trademark.
You can believe that, or you can disbelieve that. I'm just reporting what the customer service department told me.
Turn the Injunction into a Two Edged Sword ??? (Score:3)
Clearly Etoys has bamboozled the judge. They have deliberately misinformed him over the rules governing Domain Names while scaring him with porno. Judges do not like to be lied to! They can and will charge liars with contempt of court including fines and jailtime.
The judge issued a preliminary injection in good faith to prevent harm. When it is explained that he was deceived and caused harm instead, some judicial outrage/coverup will occur. IMHO, it is important the the etoy defense team take a friendly stance toward the judge, explain how he was deceived in this admittedly arcane issue, and suggest contempt punishment. They could also countersue. If they don't approach this correctly, the judge will stonewall behind "porno".
Clearly etoys benefits immeasurably from this unjust preliminary injunction, and ought not be walk away with the loot.
-- Robert
Shareholder suit? (Score:4)
Interested in XFMail? New XFMail home page [slappy.org].