Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Government The Courts News

White House Cease & Desists to The Onion 781

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This discussion has been archived.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.

White House Cease & Desists to The Onion

Comments Filter:
  • Opympic Rings (Score:2, Interesting)

    by wiredlogic ( 135348 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:32AM (#13871096)
    The bigger joke is that Congress gave the IOC complete control over any linked ring motif whether or not it has any conection to the Olympics or not or is a symbol created before the modern Olympic movement.
  • First amendment? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Alranor ( 472986 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:33AM (#13871111)
    Citing the United States Code, Mr. Dixton wrote that the seal "is not to be used in connection with commercial ventures or products in any way that suggests presidential support or endorsement."

    Well they're hardly using it to promote a commercial venture, and if you can find someone who reads one of these Onion pieces and believes it suggests presidential support, could you point them in my direction, as i've got this bridge i'd like to sell them.

    Wouldn't this be covered under the parody rulings made based on the First amendment?
  • by sgant ( 178166 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:33AM (#13871113) Homepage Journal
    I thought The White House and the President...whoever this may be...is all public domain stuff. Granted, I didn't read the article in a rush to post this uninformed rambling.

    But from what I remember, when the movie Contact used President Clintons image and voice they too were in the clear even when Clinton complained. They said hey, you're in the public domain pal.

    Thought that the Presidential Seal was also in the public domain.
  • Re:First amendment? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by julesh ( 229690 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:37AM (#13871153)
    Wouldn't this be covered under the parody rulings made based on the First amendment?

    Not necessarily. They can say the same things equally effectively without attaching the seal to them, so I don't see that it is necessary for them to have such protection.
  • no way to stop it (Score:3, Interesting)

    by netwiz ( 33291 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:38AM (#13871156) Homepage
    The seal is the property of the people of the United States of America. It's not copyrightable, it's not trademarked, and satire is protected speech under the constitution. I don't see how in the world there's even the suggestion that there's legality behind silencing the Onion. Okay, not really silencing.

    The Onion should be able to get around this by the smallest of photoshops to make the seal different. And if it's done in a parodic manner (like everything over there), then there's just nothing that can be done.

    As someone else posted already, your tax dollars at work! (not that it matters, this'll be a drop in the bucket compared to everything else)
  • Trademark Dilution (Score:5, Interesting)

    by theGreater ( 596196 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:39AM (#13871173) Homepage
    Think of it in those terms, and one has no choice but to agree (unless one subscribes to the idea of "IP" being bad-mmkay). The presidential seal is like a trademark; it cannot be used without approval. To allow use in unofficial printed/published matter (a la The Onion) dilutes its efficacy. Therefore this letter, to which The Onion properly responded by requesting formal permission to use said seal.

    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.
  • by Traegorn ( 856071 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:43AM (#13871210) Homepage Journal
    The Onion crosses political borders, and while it's Madison, WI roots may suggest a liberal sensibility, I can't believe that this is the smartest move (politically) that the White House could be doing.

    Regardless of the legal issue - as I am not a lawyer and cannot claim to speak to the limits of Satire and protected speech - many people who read the Onion are so called "Independents." Now, in this day and age, when the country is looking polarized, it can only further reinforce those who may only drift to the Democratic side into becoming much stronger Partisans.

    With the 2006 midterms coming up, and considering that it's those with strong partisan feelings who vote in midterm elections, this is really a part of a larger trend that may drive people away from the Republican party.

    ...wait, I'm a Democrat. Keep suing Bush! Keep suing!
  • Re:Opympic Rings (Score:3, Interesting)

    by div_2n ( 525075 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:45AM (#13871228)
    I guess Audi never got the memo. [audi.com]

    Neither did this bank. [integrabank.com]

    I'm sure there are more out there. But I'm not sure you are accurate on this. Check out the International Trademarks Association site for more information found here. [inta.org]
  • by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:46AM (#13871237)
    > The presidential seal is like a trademark; it cannot be used without approval. To allow use in unofficial printed/published matter (a la The Onion) dilutes its efficacy.

    So, for-pay encyclopedias can't include it in an article?

  • Re:Big deal. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @09:56AM (#13871322)
    Journalism really has gone down the mountain if Onion stories are routinely being run as actual news.... Have any linkage to one of these?

    Seeing an Onion story picked up by the AP would be about the funniest thing ever and a sure sign that we need to kill the all the news media and get a fresh start.
  • Re:no way to stop it (Score:2, Interesting)

    by netwiz ( 33291 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:00AM (#13871363) Homepage
    Uh, that code would only apply were the Onion trying to pass itself off as a representative of the POTUS. They're not. They've a long and hallowed tradition of parody and satire, both of which are protected speech. I submit that if the Onion really wanted to fight this, they'd be able to make a good case.

    Seriously, nobody reading the Onion is going to believe that they're really the mouthpiece of the President. It's obviously a satirical news site.
  • by darylb ( 10898 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:00AM (#13871366)
    With that rationale, there would be nothing to stop counterfeit FBI and Secret Service badges, not to mention currency, as all the artwork are works of the federal government, no? The law on the matter of the Presidential Seal is clear. The Onion can be as satirical as they want, but I don't see they have a defense against the "no commerical use without permission" rule. It would've been funnier for them to CHANGE the seal to something satirical anyway.
  • Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LarsWestergren ( 9033 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:11AM (#13871442) Homepage Journal
    This latest news together with the recent "war against porn" makes me wonder if the US administration isn't running out of things to distract the publics attention with away from their failures.

    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!"
  • Re:I dunno (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Zigg ( 64962 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:15AM (#13871472)

    Nah, everyone knows The Onion is a joke.

    Not everyone [snopes.com].

  • by schon ( 31600 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:27AM (#13871580)
    I think it's safe to say that nobody would confuse the Onion as having presidential support or endorsement.

    Don't be so sure. [mit.edu]
  • by deanj ( 519759 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:31AM (#13871609)
    However, the Onion is doing satire, and their use of the seal is perfectly valid.


    Actually, no, that's not the case:


    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/ parts/i/chapters/33/sections/section_713.html [findlaw.com]


    Now, don't get me wrong; I don't get this law AT ALL. I think it's kinda goofy. Then again, there are goofy laws all over the world.


    Anyway, satire doesn't overrule everything; if it did then people would use that as an excuse for dang near everything they do.


    Some people do hide behind satire as a way of expressing their political opinions. Frankly, I think that's pretty cowardly, because it's not satire. It's just plain old libel, hiding behind a satire label. Go check out the spine of various "political" books, and you'll see what I mean.


    To be clear, I *DO NOT* think The Onion falls into this category. They're in it for the humor of the situation, no matter who or what they're writing about.

  • by earthforce_1 ( 454968 ) <earthforce_1 AT yahoo DOT com> on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:37AM (#13871674) Journal
    When people went looking for pictures from the Mars Pathfinder project, many instinctively to nasa.com instead of nasa.gov

    At the time, nasa.com was a porn site, so visitors got quite an eyeful. The real NASA invoked some government edict from the 1960s that stated the acronymn NASA was reserved for use by their agency, and were able to unseat them. Yet when I go to nasa.com today, I find some sort of private detective agency, I am not sure what happened in the meantime...

  • Domestic ones too... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Meoward ( 665631 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @10:41AM (#13871717)

    Sadly, there are lot of people within the USA who think articles in the Onion are real.

    I heard Carol Kolb, the Onion's head writer, comment on NPR that their office gets a LOT of snail mail from church groups in rural Texas. Not as a reaction to the Onion's offensiveness, mind you: The Texans sincerely believe the content.

    Case in point, one of my favorite headlines: "Chinese Woman Has Septuplets: Has One Week to Choose". You get the idea, right? Some poor fictitious mom in China has to choose one child due to government policy, while the rest are thrown over a cliff. Really vicious and mean-spirited (so of course I adored it).

    After that headline hit the newsstands and the Net, the Onion was beseiged by heartfelt prayers for the poor woman via the U.S. Postal Service. And pleas for contacts to find out what good Christians could do to help. No, I am not making this shit up.

    And it keeps happening. Again and again.

  • Re:no way to stop it (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FidelCatsro ( 861135 ) * <.fidelcatsro. .at. .gmail.com.> on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @11:12AM (#13871959) Journal
    'Her name is wrongly close to Gehenna
  • by justin12345 ( 846440 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @11:41AM (#13872214)
    The corporations are the citizens. The non-corporate entities are just plebs.
  • why not the government?

    Because the government is supposed to represent the people, and therefore not to hold any exclusive IP. As others have pointed out, though, this is not an IP issue. Using the seal is more akin to copying someone's signature than copying their trademark, and it's forbidden by other laws. That doesn't mean that the government's action in this case is right or a good use of taxpayer money, but it's necessary to understand which laws and principles are involved before we can make that determination.

  • Re:I dunno (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gad_zuki! ( 70830 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @12:47PM (#13872745)
    Actually, its not fair to give credit to the onion for the Harry Potten is Satanism for kids meme. According to various religious groups the following have either sparked satanism or are satanic in themselves (from memory, but im sure there's a big list somewhere). I was around in the 80s when these mainstream groups were still considered fringe. Now they're respected guests on all the news shows.
    • Heavy metal music (ozzy) or Rock music (AC/DC)
    • Tolkien and tons of other fantasy writers
    • Role Playing Games (mostly D&D)
    • Scientology (not Christian, but not satanic other)

      I wish this was just satire.
  • by CyricZ ( 887944 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @01:07PM (#13872927)
    Would you support a publication that repeatedly pointed out you myriad of flaws, poor reasoning and simple idiocy?

    If I were the president of the United States, then yes. After all, any true American knows that the press should be there to do exactly that. Of course, it doesn't actually work that way in America these days, because of the corporate ties that the mass news media has. Perhaps that's why so many government mistakes, intentional or not, are allowed to pass over there.

  • I can't wait..... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by 8127972 ( 73495 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @01:14PM (#13873008)
    ..... for the Bush administration to sue The Daily Show. After everybody knows that that show is only kidding.....

    Oh wait.
  • About That Trademark (Score:3, Interesting)

    by thelizman ( 304517 ) <hammerattackNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @01:15PM (#13873023) Homepage
    Point in fact, Congress never paid Francis Hopkinson for his services in designing the Great Seal of the United States of America (of which the Presidential Seal is a derivative work), and many of the symbols associated with the Federal Government today.

    1. Until Congress pays the agreed fees, the rights to the Seal are solely that of the Hopkinson family;
    2. The White House has no legal claim to it's use.
  • by sckeener ( 137243 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2005 @01:29PM (#13873143)
    below is a story from one of my GMs in the past....at one point he ran a vampire LARP game where some of the players were FBI agents....hence where this story is going...here's the email unedited:
    __________________________________________________ ___________
    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:Well... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Just Another Poster ( 894286 ) on Wednesday October 26, 2005 @03:07AM (#13878724)
    And lets amend your historical corrections. Anyone with any degree of intellectual honesty credits the Clinton Administration with balancing the budget. Since I'm not going to make that assertion without facts to back it up...

    The "balanced budget" was only "balanced" using accounting tricks that would probably result in felony convictions if done in the private sector.

    2 - Plame WAS undercover at the time, according to ABC News.

    That's an Associated Press article, and it does not say that Plame was undercover at the time. The article does say, however:

    The notes also contain no suggestion that Cheney or Libby knew at the time of their conversation of Plame's undercover status or that her identity was classified, the paper said.

    Disclosing the identify of a covert CIA agent can be a crime, but only if the person who discloses it knows the agent is classified as working undercover.

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Working...