Dow vs. Parody

tres3 writes "I stumbled across this item on Wired about Verio cutting off The Thing's Internet access after seven years of service. It seems that The Yes Men have upset DOW Chemical with their parody press release concerning a poison gas leak at the Union Carbide plant (now owned by Dow) in Bhopal, India, in 1984, that killed thousands. It was posted by RTMark.com, one of hundreds of customers (mostly artists and political activists) of The Thing, but has gone missing following the DMCA claims by DOW. Some European sites are now hosting the site here and here (slightly different). What really sent me into orbit was Dow's response to all of this. While writing this submission I noticed that I have become a victim of The Yes Men and "Dow's" response is actually one of their parodies! :-) The story is still valid but the only thing I could find that really came from DOW was the DMCA complaint (pdf) to Verio. To add insult to injury (and death (pun intended)) Dow has committed a reprehensible act, even for corporate America, by suing the survivors for ten years of income ($10,000) for protesting Dow's failure to clean up the mess. Greenpeace has set up a site for you to protest this action." We did an earlier story on this.

Their Thing?

I stumbled across this item on Wired about Verio cutting off The Thing's

Did anybody else read this as "Verio cutting off their Thing"?

I wonder if the framers of the constitution...

...had foreseen what corporations have become if they wouldn't have put a few special clauses in especially for them.

Re:I wonder if the framers of the constitution...

Im talking about the trend these days to value corporate freedom above individual freedom. I mean, when did a *corporation* get the right to free speech? The people that make up and run that corporation certainly have that right, but this trend of treating corporate entities as individuals is getting out of hand.

Forcing a number of (presumably) individuals with something to say off the web with the stroke of a pen doesn't seem totalitarian to you? Due process isn't even an option due to the cost.

Re:I wonder if the framers of the constitution...

Nope, for two reasons. First, they didn't have the right to say what they said in the first place; false representation and defamation are illegal...(Parody is, of course, but this work was not a parody. It was fraud.)

To be defamation, or more precisely, libel Dow would have to show false facts. What are the false facts that have been published?

Second it is not false representation. Parody by nature requires one to create an image of what you are making parody of. To be fraud, they must be attempting to get something of value.

Second, this activity wasn't a government action at all; the government was never involved. Rather, Dow complained to Verio and asked that they enforce their AUP, and Verio complied. The rules were laid down right from the beginning; Thing.net chose to ignore them, so they lost their service.

Asking a court to restrict someone's right or penalize someone for their speech is an infringment of the first amendment. Using the threat os this should also be considered the same.

Re:I wonder if the framers of the constitution...

Whether this was parody or fraud should have been a matter for the courts to decide. Thanks to the provisions of the DMCA, they didn't have to get involved for censorship to occur. This is what is meant by the term, "Chilling Effect." As for defamation, printing negative information is not libel if it is true, no matter how negative. A biting satire of the company that continues to ignore their responsibility for Bhopal, and is even suing Bhopal survivors, that appears at first glance to be Dow's real website is a valid exercise in free speech in my opinion. I think that the Supreme Court would eventually agree if they heard this case, as it did in the Larry Flynt vs. Jerry Falwell case. Dow deserves to have the screws put to them. I support the Yes Men, and Greenpeace for doing just that. Dow could have avoided a lot of negative publicity by ignoring the yes men. Now, more people than ever before are learning that Dow is Union Carbide, and people are still dying every day because of their irresponsibility.

Look up the history of. . . `

the Virgina Colony. The Hudson Bay Trading Company. The East Indian Trading Company. Etc.

The framers of the Constitution knew damn well what corporations "would become." They had *already* become them.

Provisions were made in the Constitution and legislative law to deal with this issue. Great essays were written on the subject by learned minds such as Thomas Jefferson. 50 years later such matters were still uppermost in the minds of America's great social philosopher's, such as Thoreau.

Our forefather's weren't idiots, weren't ignorant and weren't "cavemen." Their world was, in many respects, "more like our own than our own."

Stock markets, insurance companies, leveraged buyouts and hostile takeovers, all done on a global scale, were already a century or more of old news before the first shot of the revolution was fired on the green at Lexington.

For God's sake man, Jefferson and Adams were *lawyers* and had actually participated in such actions. They learned their loathing of them first hand.

So what went wrong?

Well, let me put it to you this way. Do *you* still do business with these large corporations, giving them the money and power to buy law? Traded a little freedom for luxury items and security maybe?

I forget who it was, but an ancient historian, commenting on the aculturation of the Britons under Roman rule, wrote something along these lines:

"And so, the gullible natives, eventually came to call their slavery "culture.""

Ring any bells close to home?

That's the problem with republicanism, don't you see. The problems start at the top, more often than not, but *responsibiltiy* always, always, alway, falls to the bottom.

People don't want responsibility. They want a Big Mac while bopping to the latest Brittney Spears "tune."

KFG

Re:Look up the history of. . . `

I forget who it was, but an ancient historian, commenting on the aculturation of the Britons under Roman rule, wrote something along these lines: "And so, the gullible natives, eventually came to call their slavery "culture.""

Tacitus, Agricola [aol.com] (hagiography of his father-in-law, a Roman governor of Britain), s.21.

"To accustom to rest and repose through the charms of luxury a population scattered and barbarous and therefore inclined to war, Agricola gave private encouragement and public aid to the building of temples, courts of justice and dwelling-houses, praising the energetic, and reproving the indolent. Thus an honourable rivalry took the place of compulsion. He likewise provided a liberal education for the sons of the chiefs, and showed such a preference for the natural powers of the Britons over the industry of the Gauls that they who lately disdained the tongue of Rome now coveted its eloquence. Hence, too, a liking sprang up for our style of dress, and the "toga" became fashionable. Step by step they were led to things which dispose to vice, the lounge, the bath, the elegant banquet. All this in their ignorance they called civilisation, when it was but a part of their servitude."

OMFG

That was the most incomprehensible story summary I've ever read.

There was the group, and we'll give them some forgettable name, and they did some stuff, and DMCA, and ow what hit me, the end.

Re:OMFG

Heh.. you forgot the "Oh, but wait, as I'm writing this I realized that the first half of my submission was utterly ridiculous and actually wrong, but I'm continuing anyway..." and the "Oh wait, we already said this" from the Slashdot editors. ;)

how is this different from the earlier story?

OK, here I go again, grousing about my stories that get rejected, but apparently all I need to do is dig up a previously covered story and link it all to hell.

There's really nothing new here, other than to say 'wired picked up a story that we did two weeks ago.'

Re:how is this different from the earlier story?

There's really nothing new here, other than to say 'wired picked up a story that we did two weeks ago.'

The news that Dow is suing the Bopahl survivors to try to silence their protests over Dows failure to clean up is news to me.

The Union Carbide disaster at Bopahl was due to sheer negligence and greed. Dow still refuses to clean up the site of the disaster and has yet to pay compensation to most of the victims.

Perhaps if students stopped and considered the wisdom of joining a company that could kill 800 people with its negligence and not care a damn Dow might have a lot more difficulty recruiting on campus.

If you are choosing an employer in the chemical business their safety record should be your first concern. If you work for a company like Dow that is saying that they can kill 800 people, create pollution that will kill even more and they just don't care you are quite litteraly putting your own life on the line for their corporate profits.

The same goes for communities that have Dow installations near them, or planned to be built near them. Make sure that your representatives are aware that Dow cannoit be trusted.

Pretty convincing

I read through the original discussion. It was really interesting, especially posts like this one [slashdot.org] and its replies. [slashdot.org] The parody site is pretty convincing.

These types of stories need MORE publicity

This is the kind of stuff that threatens to GUT one of the most important benefits of the internet. The ability to ridicule a company or government for things it has done to cause real harm to others is quite possibly one of the most important types of freedom of expression.

It is absolutely vital to the continued existence of the internet as a medium of free speech that large corporations are NOT allowed to squelch opinions that do not cast them in a favorable light.

There is, however, a place where the line should be drawn. When creators of parody sites or critical sites start publishing people's real life names, home addresses, and other personal information against their will, then they have gone to far. At that point, they are putting actual people and their families at risk. When you create a parody or critical web site, you do not know what kind of people will visit the site. Some of the people who visit the site may be very unstable individuals capable of all sorts of terrible things. For a host of reasons, they might decide to utilize the personal information in order to cause real physical harm to the person being criticised or that person's family.

Perhaps the web site riled up their anger, or perhaps they thought the site was so amusing that they want to "thank" the creators by going out and causing real harm to the targets of the web site. This kind of stuff DOES happen folks, so don't blow it off as mere paranoia.

The reason I even bring up this issue is because of this part of the article:

> "We even put down James Parker's real home
> address! Very funny, right? Yes! Funny!"
> the Yes Men said in a statement.

Actually no, that is not funny. The only funny part about that was that James Parker was able to seize the domain name by presenting his drivers license and proof that he was the James Parker in question. ;p

> "But on Dec. 4, James Parker himself, with the
> help of a team of Dow lawyers, sent a Xerox of
> his driver's license and a letter by FedEx to
> Gandi.net, saying, basically, "This domain
> belongs to me. See, that's my home address,
> too. Give it to me!"
>
> According to rules established by the Internet
> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers --
> an organization responsible for, among other
> chores, Internet address disputes -- Parker was
> correct and Gandi.net had no legal choice but
> to hand over Dow-Chemical.com to James Parker.

That part I find absolutely hilarious =).

So while it is absolutely IMPERATIVE that governments and corporations NOT be allowed to squelch parody sites or sites that are critical of their behavior, it is equally important that the creators of such sites be prevented from distributing personal information about individuals.

The dangers inherent in the former put our freedoms at risk, just as the dangers inherent in the latter put lives at risk.

Re:These types of stories need MORE publicity

Isn't it James Parker's actions that put him and his family (THINK OF THE CHILDREN!) at risk?

What you are suggesting is - effectively - that those with power and influence must be protected from the consequences of their own actions. Does anything strike you as wrong with that?

Do not pass go, do not collect $200

I think for once, the parody artists have gone too far and I have to line up on the side of the big business.

Even the /. poster admits that he got fooled into thinking the "response" from Dow was really from The Yes Men. That's over the line. It's one thing to be critical of Dow's actions, but it's another thing all together to confuse people into thinking you are Dow while making statements that Dow doesn't want make.

Yeah, Dow was a little underhanded to make the phone call after business hours, but The Thing could have blocked that trick simply by having a 24/7 answering service and an admin with a beeper. It's hard for them to try to claim that they aren't responsible for striking a website when they are told that what the site owners are doing is against the law, and I don't see why doing exactly what they were doing should be legal.

Re:Do not pass go, do not collect $200

The entire point of the Yes Man's actions has always been that it is confused with the real thing. They've done a couple things that make you really think about it, and they could only do it the way they did.

If corporations have free speech, why can't the Yes Men? Honestly, what's the worse crime - poisoning a couple thousand people, or impersonating someone who isn't even a person?

Corporate Freedom of Speech ....

Corporate Freedom of Speech [google.com] only shows up 42 times in google (web) and only 8 [google.com] times in google groups.

Yet according to Dow's press release, Corporate Freedom of Speech is one of our most precious Freedoms [dowethics.com].

Obviously it's one of those freedoms that nobody except Dow talks about. (In fact, many of the google links are about Dow.)

Of course, the troubling part is that obviously it's more important than `generic' Freedom of Speech. At least according to Dow.

Their press release alone reads like a parody. I really hope it is. And if it's not, I hope they get spanked hard for it.

But, did you know the net is only for commerce?

(If anyone says "who cares," when they dump the chemicals in your neighborhood and your kid is born with flippers, realize that the great wheel has come full cirle. You get back what you deserve!)

What gets me here is that, get this, from Dow's own web site:

The provider, Verio, graciously complied with our letter citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Not only did they shut down Dow-Chemical.com, but as a good corporate citizen, they agreed to shut down an entire network (Thing.net) of websites many of which, while unrelated to dow-chemical.com, appear to serve no commercial purpose, being dedicated to the unproductive analysis and critique of society and corporate behaviour.

Yep, that's right, sports fans. If you serve no commercial purpose, you have no right to exist. Such corporate arrogance is horrid. In true W-esque fashion, unless you consume, you're worthless. What do these guys want? Web sites for companies only? What a yawn that would be. Remember the article a while back, noting that the web has been growing in capabilities and innovation not by big corporate bozo's but by, yep, web porn. We may not like it, but those sleazy guys are the ones Dow can sell fiber in the first place!

Lastly, I am so pleased to have Dow no inform me as to the unproductive analysis and critique that Thing.net was providing. Before, I considered it merely satire or commentary. Now I see what it truly was . . . a communist plot to keep Dow from cleaning our water and preserving our precious bodily fluids. Thanks Dow!

Re:But, did you know the net is only for commerce?

basically this whole story is a troll and people will be falling for it for the next 24 hours or so.

good times.

Re:But, did you know the net is only for commerce?

Um, no. The above quotations are from DOW Ethics.com [dowethics.com], which is obviously one of the parody sites.

I say obviously, because I do not for one hot second think that anyone here can or should defend DOW Chemical in this matter. Yes, The Onion is an obvious parody, but not because of the disclaimers or the site design, but because of the content. And don't pull out your tired and elitist "Joe Average" arguments, because Joe Average is probably not surfing the DOW chemical websites anyway. Those sites are for investors and business types and if they aren't smart enough to tell when they are being had, well, fuck 'em.

These are very strange times we live in today, and strange times call for strange measures. Yes, the parody people took some extreme steps (ripping off corporate design, registering similar domain names) but that's what it might take to get attention. And it certainly did get some attention, now didn't it? How many of you would even be thinking about the policies and procedures of DOW chemicals today if it weren't for this story? Probably three of you. Certainly not me, I'm nursing a headache from lack of sleep.

This is interesting...

I happen to think that for the most part you have the right to put anything you want on your website. If you want to run a parody of Dow, the Pope or John Lennon, go for it.

However, with that being said. Your ISP doesn't necessarily have to put up with that. They also have a right to decide what content they will host on their servers. If they take offense at your postings or bow to pressure from a corporation or the government, that's well within their right.

They run a business. Just because you want to take a risk with something you choose to write. Doesn't meant they have to take the risk with you.

The Yes Men could be at fault

OK people, let take a chill pill and look at the situation. In my opinion a parody should be an original creation, be distinct from the object of satire, and not be deceptive. The Onion [theonion.com] is an excellent example of effective and creative satire.

In the case of the "Yes Men" the attempt seems to be using parody and satire to effect social activism. This, in itself, is not a bad or uncommon thing. However, if one is going to do this, one has to make sure the creation is actually satire.

The main tool that they use on the web appears to be 'Reamweaver', a tool to copy a website and modify in small ways. From the Reamweaver website we have
Reamweaver has everything you need to instantly "funhouse-mirror" anyone's website, copying the real-time "look and feel" but letting you change any words, images, etc. that you choose.
and
Use Reamweaver for fun, or, if you like, for lots of fun... by obtaining speaking opportunities on behalf of your adopted organization. Here's how to that:
1. (Optional) Register a domain not too different from your target's domain - e.g. we-forum.org, world-economic-forum.com, wtoo.org, rncommittee.org .
2. Put Reamweaver on your domain.
3. Tell search engines about your domain.
4. When invitations arrive, accept them!
This does not seem to a tool conducive to satire. This appears to be a tool that is to be used to misrepresent, decieve, and ultimately allow an individual to go into the community as the perceived representative of the company under attack.

Social activism is good. Trying to create a better world is good. However, when you invite a person from Dow Chemical to your office, one would expect that the person is actually from dow chemical. Furthermore, I am not sure I would equate the Reamweaver technique to a person who registers a slightly misspelled domain name and then puts up tons of pop ups and installs viruses when some unsuspecting visitors accidently hits the site.

I understand that the intention of the Yes Men are probably just. I understand that they are probably good people,. However, copying someone else's website and representing it as your own is not good. It is one thing to rip other artists CDs for personal use. It is another thing to rip those CDs and then sell the copies. It is yet another thing to rip those CDs change a few seconds, and then represent the tracks as your own. What they are doing might be peaceful disobendience. It does not seem to be satire

Potential Profits

Another example of the corporate concern with possible and potential profits taking precicence over any sense of ethics.

the mafioso mentality continues to spread. It must be nice as a stock holder, to have someone like this, who will make money for you without any heavy duty ethical pondering on you part.

Flush the toilet before it backs up ..... oops, too late.

Didja all catch...

...that bit about DOW suing the families that were destroyed/hurt by their Bhopal disaster?

A bunch of women marched on DOW HQ in India, delivering some of the contanimated soil and water from Bhopal. The protest lasted two peaceful hours. A single DOW employee greeted them.

DOW is now suing them for the equivalent of US$10K -- a helluva lot of money, particularly in India -- for "lost wages" because of the "work disruption."

Disgusting. First they slaughter hundreds and thousands of employees and families through cost-cutting, undertraining, and poor plant maintenance; then they refuse to clean up the mess; then they sue the very people who were hurt by the accident.

Sometimes it would be e'er so nice to be able to punish CEOs as if they'd committed the crimes themselves.

Re:Didja all catch...

...that bit about DOW suing the families that were destroyed/hurt by their Bhopal disaster?

How do we know that that story isn't another "parody"? I can find no reference [google.com] to it outside of Greenpeace [greenpeace.org] (which is not high on my list of reliable news sources,) and it seems even more absurd than The Yes Men's original forged press release.

Half of the "informative" posts on this article cite anti-Dow hoaxes as "facts," and use them to justify their opposition to Dow's attempts to suppress hoaxes. If that doesn't prove libel, I don't know what could.

(Having said that, I can't see what any of this has to do with the DMCA. But hey, libel cases are expensive. Why bother suing, when you can just say the magic words and make any website dissappear?)

Something is up here...

If I posted this on my isp's webspace I would be the one to get in shit, not the ISP so forcing them to close down.

Its another case of a big company killing off an enemy/rival who cannt fight back, and the world will be worse for it.

"peaceful protest"

... of 200 women survivors from Bhopal delivered toxic waste from the abandoned Carbide factory back to Dow's Indian headquarters in Bombay...

From reading between the lines of the article, it appears that they are suing the protesters, and not all the survivors, for what sounds like an irresponsible protest rather than a peaceful one. If someone showed up at my company's door with deadly chemicals, we'd have to shut the place down for security reasons, at a cost to the business.

Dow may be wrong or negligent in compensating the survivors, but protesters causing a business to loose money to gain their attention or try and get them to change their action is about as effective as spanking a child when they don't eat their peas. They're just going to grow up hating those that spank them.

I am truly disgusted

Dow chemical suing people who have a yearly income of $1000 for $10000 after the tragedy in Bhopal (which still hasn't been cleaned up) is so low and disgusting that one wonders what kind of snarling inhuman lunatics run that company.

It is this kind of thing that breeds terrorists and whips up frenzy amongst people who have no recourse to medical care, much less fat corporate lawyers.

I can't carry on because I am absolutely speechless with disgust at those fucking bastards.

Play a little devils advocate.

First off there seems to have been a genreal uproar over dows "response" link, notice even the author raelised it was a parody and not in any way from dow, so you can't really fault dow for that peice (though the author says " While writing this submission I noticed that I have become a victim of The Yes Men and "Dow's" response is actually one of their parodies! :-) The story is still valid " - umm, dow didn't write it but lets hate them for it anyway? plenty of reason to hate dow but using a parody to hate them really weakens your position.)

I don't really know why the copyright violations in this are DMCA, it seems that normal copyright and trademarks cover thier violations, and yes they are violations. They were before DMCA and still will be if the DMCA is repealed. Though this should not have forced the whole site down, just the removeal of the copyrighted/trademarked images (hey, make some parody version of them - that's legal, but you can't just copy thier images and pretend to be them). Plus they quote cybersquatting statutes, they don't really seem to be cybersquatting (though using dow-chemical is iffy on copyright, had they used something like dow-chemical-sucks they would have easily been in the parody/protest stuff, but they seemed to have intentionally tried to fool someone into thinking they were dow to get them there).

And lastly "Dow has committed a reprehensible act, even for corporate America, by suing the survivors for ten years of income ($10,000) for protesting Dow's failure to clean up the mess." No, even according to the greenpeace article the survivors carried contamited material to thier site - that's not legal. While I greatly sympathise with them (and definatly think they got screwed royally) that doesn't give you the right to do that. As neither does being rich give someone the right to pollute with impunity. Much like in the US many protestors seem to think that the first amendment gives them the right to trasspass and destroy property, it doesn't - gather on public land all you want, don't block traffic and not only are you legal but you garner much more sympathy.

In sum, they have a very legitimate complaint, dow chemical did some VERY bad stuff and deserve to be raped in court, and never have and probably never will. But that doesn't give you the right (in the US, or apparently india either) to do whatever you feel (eye-for-an-eye, tooth-for-a-tooth isn't in the constitution). Plus my final complaint is that we have only heard one side, greenpeace isn't really know for being exactly unbiased and giving complete stories. There are much more effective ways to try and get something, they failed, now all they do is make people much less sympathetic overall to their cause (maybe it makes them feel better though).

How the DMCA got involved

This kind of misrepresentation and use of Dow's trademarks in a way that makes people thing The Yes Men's site belonged to Dow has always been illegal under assorted trademark and copyright laws, and has nothing to do with the DMCA.

Where the DMCA kicks in is the takedown provisions. Dow called Verio and said "Get this off the Web now!" and Verio was required to honor that request. Verio tried calling The Thing, but they weren't available because they had shut down for the day and didn't leave anyway to contact anyone in control. Verio had no way to delete the site other than to pull their whole line, so they did.

Eventually The Thing pulled the illegal site, and Verio restored access. However, because The Thing caused this whole mess by not having somebody on call who could respond to the takedown demand, they downtime was theirs even though Verio is taking the blame. Verio has now decided they don't want to do business with The Thing anymore, because they don't like being blamed for their customer's inactions.

Thing needs help

Feel like defending the right to parody, free speech, etc? Grab your Paypal and push that loading bar [thing.net] to the right.

Umm...

Is anyone else more than a little confused about what is and isn't a parody in all of this?

Dow killed lots of people and released a press release about it and now people have made a parody of it but the parody supposedly infringed on the DMCA and DOW released another press release but that was just a parody but DOW is really suing people but that's a parody of a parody and now the DMCA has grown arms and a mouth and is devouring babies?

Dow's Responses

Far be it from me to think walking away from an ecological disaster is a good thing, but from what I can see, according to both the US and Indian courts, Dow has done everything they said they'd do relating to this, and everything the lawsuits against them said they had to do.

The paid ~$500 million to the Indian Government for ongoing cleanup, to create a medical program for anyone who lives in the affected area, and to cover things like ongoing monitoring of the chemical creep. They also paid out an additional ~$20 million to build and maintain a new hospital specifically in the area to handle any related medical claims. They also added an additional ~$55 million dollars to the hospital support funds when they bought out UCI.

They actually have paid out far more than the lawsuits against them in US courts originally stated (where the Indian government received a ruling for ~$350 million). I think all told that Dow has produced over $600 million for cleanup and ongoing support and healthcare.

All in all, most of the cleanup, treatment and monitoring of chemical contamination in the area is supposed to be handled by the Indian Government, not by Dow directly. If those hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent somewhere else, are people asking the government (or whoever they've appointed to handle the situation) where it's going?

This is especially apt as many of the court cases have focused on Dow's liability, and the majority still uphold the 'reasonable doubt' that Dow was criminally liable (which is why they still haven't tried very hard to get Warren Anderson shipped their for homicide charges), and even some went so far as to support the findings of 3rd party teams that the chemical release was a result of a deliberate act by a disgruntled worker.

Now, it's been 18 years, and I don't personally have any knowledge of anything to do with Bhopal beyond what I can read. However, based on that information, I think a lot of this is the result of PR by Greenpeace and others who conveniently ignore the things that Dow *has* done.

As an aside, I don't work for Dow, have any relatives who work for Dow, or own stock in Dow (unless one of those pathetic 401k funds that are basically WORTHLESS right now has shares, in which case I don't give a damn). I just see a lot of knee-jerk reactions and wonder if a lot of people who 'know about bhopal' have ever done more than read 1 website or less? Could Dow be a tool of Satan designed to make life on Earth a living hell, run completely by unfeeling demons who want to kill and maim innocent people? Sure. Is it probably that black-and-white? I really doubt it. It's only fair to research both sides.

Whither Globalization?

I grew up in India and whenever I think back to the Bhopal tragedy, I still feel nauseated. American politicians today who scream about Iraq gassing its own people should take a look at this.

A negligent American company releases poisonous gases in a third-world country and kills or injures tens of thousands of (dark-skinned) people. You would think the world would be outraged.

No. Suddenly, Dow chemicals was no longer a global company - it was an American company, run by American citizens who are bound only by American laws! The Indians had to struggle very hard to bring these people to court - it is still not over, 18 years after the 'accident'.

Globalization is a wonderful thing, but only if all such aspects are dealt with. People tend to forget that free markets in countries like the USA work well only when the companies are governed by law and regulated by watchdog organizations. While the West aggressively pushes for global free markets, they don't seem to realize that there is no global law and no global watchdog or regulatory body.

What Dow chemicals did is an extremity, but there are many other simpler violations. Think about it - Coke sells cans in USA, among hundreds of other countries. That is great. But, how many of these countries have proper recycling facilities? Many third world countries are being pressurized by the world bank to open up to MNCs and are they are all becoming dumping grounds for these multi national companies. Heck, most of these countries don't even have proper drinking water for its population, but Coke and Pepsi are available everywhere!

Re:Whither Globalization?

American politicians today who scream about Iraq gassing its own people should take a look at this.

A negligent American company releases poisonous gases in a third-world country and kills or injures tens of thousands of (dark-skinned) people. You would think the world would be outraged.

Your comparison between Carbide and Hussein is morally bankrupt.

There is a very large difference between the negligence (if there was actual negligence) of Carbide and murderous intent of Saddam Hussein to commit genocide. Carbide certainly did NOT go out and say 'let's kill off a bunch of folks using MIC to cut down on these local protests'.

There is also the fact that the UCarbide plant in West Va, had problems with MIC accidents as well. The concept that Carbide was doing anything in India because it felt that Indians were less worthy than Americans is speculative, to say the least.

UC does bear a great deal of responsibility for what happened in India. But it was not genocide, murder, chemical warefare or any other such act. It was an unintended industrial accident of unprecidented impact.

Maybe UC was negligent in it's operations of the Bhopal plant - but the fact is that best practice standards then and now are two very different things. And the fact is that ultimately that local management of a chemical plant is in the best position to address safety issues. That local management must share a great deal of the responsibility for what happened, including ultimately the leaky valve that was the immediate cause of the accident. That local management was Indian.

USA - the world's biggest polluter. So what's new?

The United States is the world's biggest polluter. This isn't trolling. This isn't flaming. This is fact.

Four percent of the world's population, 25 percent of the pollution. Way to go, USA.

Recent American achievements in the "who cares if your kids got asthma?" race:

• Torpedoing any serious effort to curb greenhouse gas emissions in the 1997 Kyoto agreement (thanks, Bill Clinton).
• Later reneging on America's commitment to ratify that agreement, despite the fact that 178 other nations have done so (thanks, George W. Bush).
• Failing to tackle arsenic pollution in its own drinking water (currently at levels way above those that would be illegal in Europe and elsewhere) until 2004 (thanks again, Bill).
• Attempting to reverse that legislation, only to have it blow up in his face (thanks again, Dubya).
• Allowing Alcoa, the world's third largest Aluminium maker, to profit from a loophole in Texas environmental laws by further polluting that state with 60,000 tons of sulphur dioxide each year (from which Paul O'Neill, Dubya's Secretary to the Treasury profited).
• Cutting funding for research into cleaner, more fuel efficient cars by 28% (Dubya again).
• Reversing an age-old bi-partisan policy of demanding more fuel effieciency from car makers (Bill again).
• Carrying on that policy (Dubya again).
• Exempting SUVs from having to meet the same minimum mileage requirements of other cars (Bill again).
• Cancelling the 2004 deadline for car makers to develop prototype high-mileage cars (Dubya again).
• Breaking a campaign promise to invest $100 million into rain forest conservation (Dubya again).
• Vetoing a proposal to increase public access to information about the potential consequences of chemical plant accidents (Dubya again).
• Refusing to honour an international accord to enforce a 1972 treaty banning germ warfare (Dubya again).
• Cutting $500 million from the Environmental Protection Agency's budget (Dubya again).
• Ignoring campaign promises to regulate carbon dioxide emissions (Dubya again).
• Proposing the opening up of previously unspoilt national monuments in Alaska and elsewhere in the hunt for yet more coal, oil and gas (Dubya again).
• Permitting oil and gas developments off the coast of Florida and in Montana forests (Dubya again).
• Attempting to reverse legislation protecting 60 million acres of national forest from logging and road building (Dubya again).
• Promoting the development of "mini-nukes, in direct violation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (Dubya again).
• 
  
  The list goes on and on.
  
  Not only is the US the world's biggest polluter, it's also the world's biggest consumer. Per capita, Americans use more energy, more oil, more gas than any other nation in the world.
  
  Even the most patriotic simpleton has got to see that this isn't something to be proud of - if nothing else, the shit's going to hit the fan sooner or later. Why not try and do something about it?

How many people...

...are going to use the Greenpeace letter generator [greenpeace.org] to send a complain to the Dow CEO? It'd be interesting to get a gauge on how much mail he'll be getting...

This is the best part of DOW...

"we firmly believe that those who violate the right to Corporate Free Speech have no place on a commercial network like the internet.

It's another example of our committment to Living. Improved Daily. With an internet shaped by Corporate Free Speech.

Just another example of some PR manager having his head too far up his ass.

Free Speech

A lot of people don't understand the concept, so I'll explain. Everyone in America can think of at least 10 good laws about speech that would improve society. I know I can. Ban hate speech, ban those psychic ball-gazing frauds, ban tobacco advertisements, and so on. And those would be good laws. In my opinion.

Unfortunately, everyone else has a different set of good laws for restricting speech. And I probably don't agree with most of them. The only way to come to agreement on how we restrict speech will therefore be through our elected officials.

The founders understood that. And they also understood that the government bodies they were setting up simply wouldn't be perfect enough to be trusted with making these kind of laws. For that reason they put up a fence around that area of the law. The First Ammendment establishes that the government can't make laws regarding speech, and that it can't make laws regarding religion. Sure, some good might be accomplished if the fence wasn't there, but eventually the damage would outweigh the good.

So everytime you see some piece of speech that you think shouldn't be allowed, restrain yourself. Don't call for it to be banned. The government isn't smart enough to be messing around in there. Protecting that speech protects your speech.

This is a good thing.

RTMark sent out spam. Unsolicited mass email. Whether it was a political rant, a parody, or "INCREASE YOUR PENIS SIZE" doesn't matter, I didn't ask for it, I didn't want it, and it still arrived in my (and many other people's) mailbox.

I sent a message to RTMark's ISP (The Thing), complaining about the message, and that it violated their Terms of Service. This isn't the first time that I have received spam from RTMark, or is it the first time that I have complained about it, and yet it had not stopped. If The Thing refused to do anything about it, or if they condoned it, then they are no better than a bunch of worthless spammers, and I'm glad that Verio cut them off.

My letter to Dow

Don't ya just love the web? Here's the link [greenpeace.org] to instantly write a letter to Dow.

And here's what I just sent them:

As the new CEO and President of Dow Chemical Company, I am stunned at your actions against the survivors of the Bhopal, India industrial tragedy. Dow has been a respected name in corporate America for so many years. But this incomprehensible treatment of the poor and sick, when you should be doing everything in your power to make things right, to offer aid and rebuilding, health care and clean up, changes my vision of Dow and its executives and my family and I have lost all respect.

Once again the almighty dollar rules a corporation rather than the fundamental care of the people who once supported it. It matters not that this incident occurred under Union Carbide, you knew this when you bought them.

You know quite well that if this had happened in the U.S., this would have been fixed by now. To attack a poor and innocent people, those that have lost many family and still struggle to survive, shows your true bully side. To think that you would do this because they dared to perform a peaceful protest is nothing more than shocking to me. Dow was always such a respected name.

When you add to that your treatment of the parody site Dow-chemical and the whole YesMen fiasco, to use such an ill-gotten law as the DMCA to silence the web and force the take down of not only a web site, but also an entire ISP is unfathomable. It shows that your new stance is to merely silence those who would dare stand up to you, and this is nothing more than a cartelish, mob mentality than can no longer have respect.

I implore you to correct this. To drop your charges against the poor and suffering of India, and to drop your charges against a parody web site, which under the US copyright law, it is perfectly legal to parody just about anything.

I have begun my march to inform those in my family and my place of work of your actions. Others are doing the same. Will you sue me too just to silence me?

I grew up with the name of Dow and have always believed it be an important and respected company. Unless these serious issues are corrected, I can no longer ignore the truth, nor can I think of Dow with any high regard.

Take note that I am writing this to you via the convience of the web. Yes, the Internet is a wonderful and rich thing which allows us to recieve such information and respond accordingly, even on New Year's Day. The DMCA does nothing but silence this information. But I include my own salutation, because I do not agree with the one built into this online form.

With utmost sincerity,

A very aware U.S. citizen-
(name here)

well....

I never find myself on this side of the argument, but the only thing I see here which is not steaming troll meat is the Dow DMCA complaint, which is actually pretty reasonable. The owner of the dow-chemical domain is not named George Dow-Chemical, images and text WERE taken from the dow web site without their permission, and all of this was used to deceive the public as to the intents and actions of Dow.

One could actually make a pretty good argument that those opposed to the DMCA wish only to plagarize and deceive, based on the actions of these parodists. For this reason, I cannot support their efforts. Freedom of information is too important to me.

A link to a Register Article about the issue.

I tried to send this to the story gods at slashdot as an amendment to my posting of this story. I guess that it didn't get there in time or they chose not to amend my submission (Although it was edited from the way I submitted it). Anyway here is a link to The Register's article [theregister.co.uk].

Adam's Family

Yes, I thought "The Thing" was in reference to the Adam's family (you know: dum, dum, dum! dum dum! dum dum ... No? Oh...). Of course then I read the article and...

Might as well go after Universal Pictures too

The movie Problem Child 2 [imdb.com] has a scene where LaWanda Dumore is going through Junior's file which has most of his shenanigans from the first movie and also reveals... He's the one resposible for the Union Carbide plant explosion.

Of course, when you're a movie studio, your right to parody is backed up by your high priced lawyers.

Is this guy Related to Hitler?

"We are being portrayed as a heartless giant which doesn't care about the 20,000 lives lost due to Bhopal over the years," said Dow President and CEO Michael D. Parker. "But this just isn't true. Many individuals within Dow feel tremendous sorrow about the Bhopal disaster, and many individuals within Dow would like the corporation to admit its responsibility, so that the public can then decide on the best course of action, as is appropriate in any democracy. "Unfortunately, we have responsibilities to our shareholders and our industry colleagues that make action on Bhopal impossible. And being clear about this has been a very big step." This Parker guy is truly evil. He has no conflict whatsoever about what he's doing . He even admits it within his comments. "Many others" might be outraged that Dow is responsible for the deaths and suffering of thousands and thousands of people, but not Mr. Parker! The fact then Dow is (then) able to use the DMCA to cut off discussion of their nightmarish deeds gives the perfect example of why this evil law needs to be overturned.... NOW!!!

Dow complaint seems valid

If anyone bothers to read the Dow complaint pdf, they'll note that Dow is suing for trademark infringement, and for sqatting on dow-chemical.com. I don't know what the law says about using a companies trademarks in a parody, but I can see where they'd have a case. Their website name claim is clearly valid as well. If you're going to make a parody site, you should do so within the law. I can see why their ISP dropped them.

This organization is getting sued, too

It ain't easy doing battle with the big boys.

This owners of this web site, www.slaverready.com [slaverready.com] is also getting sued. Not for the content of the site but because the logo on the site supposedly infringes on Labor Ready's logo. What a bunch of BS.

You may not be able to fight city hall but you can't fight corporations without getting crushed.

Good.

Let's see them thrown in jail with lots of publicity- provided the WHOLE story is told.

In news today, terrorist group The Yes Men are threatened with jail for impersonating representatives of Dow Chemical. The Yes Men sent email and built a web site parodying Dow's recent lawsuit against Bhopal survivors.

The lawsuit was brought when 200 women survivors of the Bhopal chemical disaster brought toxic waste to Dow corporate offices in Bombay. The protest was said to be peaceful and nonviolent. Under Indian law, Dow inherits responsibility for criminal acts of Union Carbide, which it acquired. The survivors have been in fruitless negotiations with Dow headquarters in Mumbai for over a year, in efforts to persuade the company to undertake cleanup of the disaster site.
The disaster of almost 20 years ago left tonnes of toxic waste on the plant site, which still remains and is leaching into the ground water of the area. Union Carbide did not clean up the toxic waste, though they did pay a settlement to the Indian government in 1989 that amounted to a few hundred dollars for each person affected, injured or killed by the continuing disaster. Health care costs for those living in the area with the toxic waste have rapidly passed this figure. Dow has expressed its regret and states that it cannot justify the expense of a cleanup of the disaster site.
Back in the US, the Yes Men are looking at jail sentences for their activities- which largely consist of putting cruder words in the mouths of Dow representatives to justify actions Dow is actually taking. The lesson for all of us- it's not what you say, it's how you say it!
Over to you, Binky...

And that's not a parody at all...
:)

Swept away

The amazing thing to me is that no mainstream media seems to have picked up that astonishing, week-old "Dow sues protestors" story. It doesn't seem to exist outside of indie and activist sites. Guess that's not the sort of anniversary they want to allude to this time of year? Another reason to hate xmas, I suppose - it makes the media even more useless than it usually is.

Boycott Dow??

Dow is a Corporation. As such, they don't really respond to moral issues -- only financial issues that fall out of moral upsets. Saying "oh, Dow are nasty people" won't do much to get their attention. Cutting Dow purchases by 10%, on the other hand, would.

If you want to get Dow's attention, tell people to stop buying their produ cts, and tell them why. At the end of Dow's 2001 financial report [dow.com], they have a partial list of Dow and associated company trademarks.

I peeled out that data, paired it with the company name, and then sorted the result.. If you want to boycott Dow products, these names would probably be a good start.

I'll also place a copy of this list on my website ( http://www.bcgreen.com/dow/trademarks.html [bcgreen.com]) where I can update it as necessary. (147 references so far).
damn lameness filters force reformatting.

Affinity :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Amerchol :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Amplify :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Aspun :: The Dow Chemical Company
Attane :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Betabrace :: Essex Specialty Products, Inc.
Betadamp :: Essex Specialty Products, Inc. | | Betafoam :: Essex Specialty Products, Inc.
Betaguard :: Essex Specialty Products, Inc. | | Betamate :: Essex Specialty Products, Inc.
Betaseal :: Essex Specialty Products, Inc. | | Blox :: The Dow Chemical Company
Calibre :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Carbowax :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Cellosize :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Confirm :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Covelle :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Cyracure :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
D.E.H. :: The Dow Chemical Company | | D.E.N. :: The Dow Chemical Company
D.E.R. :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Daxad :: Hampshire Chemical Corp.
Derakane :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Derakane Momentum :: The Dow Chemical Company
Dithane :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Dow :: The Dow Chemical Company
Dowex :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Dowfax :: The Dow Chemical Company
Dowflake :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Dowlex :: The Dow Chemical Company
Dowper :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Dowtherm :: The Dow Chemical Company
Drytech :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Dursban :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Elite :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Emerge :: The Dow Chemical Company
Envision :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Ethafoam :: The Dow Chemical Company
Ethocel :: The Dow Chemical Company | | FilmTec :: FilmTec Corporation
FirstRate :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Flexomer :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Fortress :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Fulcrum :: The Dow Chemical Company
Garlon :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Gas/Spec :: INEOS plc
Glyphomax :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Goal :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Grandstand :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Great Stuff :: Flexible Products Company
Hamposyl :: Hampshire Chemical Corp. | | Immotus :: The Dow Chemical Company
Insite :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Inspire :: The Dow Chemical Company
Insta-stik :: Flexible Products Company | | Instill :: The Dow Chemical Company
Intacta :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Integral :: The Dow Chemical Company
Intrepid :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Isonate :: The Dow Chemical Company
Isoplast :: The Dow Chemical Company | | LP Oxo :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Lamdex :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Lifespan :: The Dow Chemical Company
Liquidow :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Lontrel :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Lorsban :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Magnum :: The Dow Chemical Company
Maxicheck :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Maxistab :: The Dow Chemical Company
Meteor :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Methocel :: The Dow Chemical Company
Mimic :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Mustang :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Mycogen :: Mycogen Corporation | | Neocar :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Opticite :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Optim :: The Dow Chemical Company
PAX System :: Michelin North America, Inc. | | Papi :: The Dow Chemical Company
Peladow :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Pellethane :: The Dow Chemical Company
PhytoGen :: PhytoGen Seed Company | | Polyox :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Polyphobe :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Prevail :: The Dow Chemical Company
Primacor :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Procite :: The Dow Chemical Company
Pulse :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Quash :: The Dow Chemical Company
Questra :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Redi-Link :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Responsible Care :: American Chemistry Council | | Retain :: The Dow Chemical Company
Safe- Tainer :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Saran :: The Dow Chemical Company
Saranex :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Sentricon :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Shac :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Si-Link :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
SiLK :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Spectrim :: The Dow Chemical Company
Spider :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Starane :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Stinger :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Strandfoam :: The Dow Chemical Company
Strongarm :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Styrofoam :: The Dow Chemical Company
Styron :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Styron A-Tech :: The Dow Chemical Company
Syltherm :: Dow Corning Corporation | | Synergy :: The Dow Chemical Company
Syntegra :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Tanklite :: The Dow Chemical Company
Telone :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Tergitol :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
The Enhancer :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Thermax :: The Dow Chemical Company
Tone :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Tordon :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Tracer Naturalyte :: Dow AgroSciences LLC | | Treflan :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Trenchcoat :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Triton :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Trycite :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Trymer :: The Dow Chemical Company
Tuflin :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Tyril :: The Dow Chemical Company
UCAR :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | UCAT :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
UCON :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Ucartherm :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Unigard :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Unipol :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Unipurge :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries | | Unival :: Union Carbide Corporation, & subsidiaries
Versene :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Vikane :: Dow AgroSciences LLC
Voracor :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Voralast :: The Dow Chemical Company
Voralux :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Voranate :: The Dow Chemical Company
Voranol :: The Dow Chemical Company | | Voranol Voractiv :: The Dow Chemical Company
Vydyne :: Solutia Inc. | | Woodstalk :: Dow BioProducts Ltd.
Zetabon :: The Dow Chemical Company

read this (supposed) dow chemicals internal memo

Dow Addresses Bhopal Outwage, Explains Position [internalmemos.com]

cynism at its best...

is this for real ?

Its been Said before, but

The website was an affront to our right to Free Speech, and we immediately contacted the upstream provider for this false website, gently requesting that our rights be protected.

The provider, Verio, graciously complied with our letter citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Not only did they shut down Dow-Chemical.com, but as a good corporate citizen, they agreed to shut down an entire network (Thing.net) of websites many of which, while unrelated to dow-chemical.com,

The web site was an "affront to our right to Free Speech".

So something someone else said was an affront to their right to free speech? How the hell is that possible? You can talk about slander and liable, but saying something on a web site is affecting their right to free speech?

"Not only did they shut down Dow-Chemical.com, but as a good corporate citizen", I don't have much to say here but good corporate citizen? God that just sends chills down my spine. Thank god for those corporate citizens who kowtow to their corporate betters.

"appear to serve no commercial purpose, being dedicated to the unproductive analysis and critique of society and corporate behaviour. "

How dare they! Serve no commercial purpose!

But the worst is the statement of what they do instead of serving a commercial purpose. Analysis and critique of society and corporate behavior?

All I can say is Thank God people do that! What the hell is wrong with Dow for saying any of that?

I used to think that freedom of speech was one of those protections for the little guy (individual), to keep the big guy(corps, and gov) from squelching his point of view.

America is truely becoming a corporate state, and this is just sad.

Sorry if its a tad over the top, up at 4 am will do that.

Here's a theme song...

I thought it was out of date, but sadly, it isn't.

Our House is Burnin' (2:57)

A fusion of African, Japanese and Classic Blues rhythms.
Lyrics [curbside-recording.com]. download mp3 [curbside-recording.com] (2.6MB).

SCREW THE DMCA AND ALL THOSE WHO SUPPORT IT!

DMCA = Fat Angry Politicans who want more money and who are too chickenshit to earn it, so they steal it by whining like a little baby until they get their way... Another example of this crappy country's ability to get even worse..

Dow indoctrination, "perception is reality"

When I graduated from college in 1991, I took a job as a programmer at Dow Chemical. At that time, they sent all new hires to a week-long indoctrination course, consisting mostly of how to carefully word memos and email so that The Company could not be harmed if the memos were brought up in court. This was during the time when their silicone breast implants were failing and customers were suing (and winning).

At first it all sounded like good business sense but gradually I realized what they were saying. One session drilled home the idea that "perception equals reality" - and therefore, if can make the public to PERCEIVE them as being safe and clean, and all will be good.

In other words, don't fix the problem, just word things so that The Company looks like it's doing the right thing, and so that they cannot be held liable for damages that it caused.

who cares?

About the abuse of America through the DMCA, or the abuse of the people by Dow overall? Lots of people, I'd wager.

Re:in soviet russia....

I think rainman does care, but he's upset that he was close to first-post...but not quite.

Take it easy rainman, you'll get your chance someday.

Re:They keep going on about

Shouldn't it work both ways? Shouldn't parodies be allowed? Not allowing parodies is a violation of invidual Free Speech, surely?

Not According to G.W. Bush, he himself said "There ought to be limits to freedom" when he was talking about Parodies of his campaign website.

Re:greenpeace

Agreed.

But out concern here at /. isn't really with the environmental issues (though, some /.ers may have concern with that), but rather with the free speeach issues.

Re:Go to bed micheal!

The author ofthe number is not using the british system, but the European system. This is evident from the use of -illards, the absence of 'and', and a few other things.

The selected number here is 2^64, the decimal expansion of which is 18 446 744 073 709 551 616.

USA = eighteen pentillion, four hundred forty six quadrillion, seven hundred forty four trillion, seventy three billion, seven hundred nine million, five hundred fifty one thousand six hundred sixteen.

EUR = eighteen trillion, four hundred forty six billiard, seven hundred forty four billion, seventy three milliard, seven hundred nine million, five hundred fifty one thousand six hundred sixteen.

UK = eighteen trillion, four hundred and forty-six thousand, seven hundred and forty-four billion, seventy-three thousand, seven hundred and nine million, five hundred and fifty-one thousand six hundred and sixteen.

NEW = three hundred and sixtynine billion, one cention, fiftyseven thousand, thirtyone hundred and eleftynine million, fifty centions, seven thosand, ninety hundred and sixteen.

Nevertheless...

when Down acquired Union Carbide, they acquired all of Union Carbide's unmet responsibilities. Trying to keep the assets of Union Carbide and ignore the liabilities is grossly irresponsible - that is to say, typical corporate behavior.

Re:They keep going on about

Shouldn't parodies be allowed?

Parodies should be allowed, but the supposed parody web site did not look like a parody to me. It was trying to pass itself off as the real Dow site, which is not allowed. Fraud. Deception. etc...