| DOW Threatens Verio, Verio silences
activists | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 62 comments | Search Discussion |
|
|
| The Fine Print: The following comments are owned
by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any
way. |
Does this surprise anyone (Score:2)
by MImeKillEr
(445828) on Monday December 23, @08:21AM (#4943803)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last
Journal: Thursday
September 26, @02:50PM) |
Given what happened to FatWallet over the Black Tuesday
adverts?
What the hell is DOW claiming under the DMCA?
The name? Give me a break. I hope there's such a HUGE stink
over this that it permanently tarnishes DOW and Verio's
reputations. Fscking corporate slimeballs. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
I don't know about these guys.
(Score:2, Informative)
by GigsVT (208848) on
Monday December 23, @08:34AM (#4943856)
(http://www.electronicschat.org/
| Last Journal: Saturday
December 21, @07:32PM) |
http://www.dowethics.com/r/environment/freedom.htm
l
They have that linked as "Dow's response" to the
incident, apparently yet another parody site, but I was sure
confused at first. I could see how someone could be misled to
believe it was a real Dow site.
These guys are pushing
the line a little too far I think. The site looks a whole lot
like an official site. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Naaa, the DMCA will never be abused...
(Score:1)
by GeekWithGuns
(466361) on Monday December 23, @08:37AM (#4943879)
(http://www.xaox.net/)
|
|
IANAL (God I hate it when people start posts like that),
but Wouldn't this be a great case to challenge the DMCA with?
If all the facts are straight here then DOW Chemicals has
enfringed on the first amendment rights of the person who
wrote the parody. Bill of rights should proove that this law
at least in this case should not be applied, but at best could
make the DMCA unconstitutional.
If that dosn't stir the pot, how about a lawsuit aganst
Verio. The DMCA says that the ISP (in this case it should be
Thing.Net must take down the material. DOW knew that Thing.Net
would have complied only to allow the counter notice and
reposting part of the DMCA to go into effect or just fired
back with a "Liar, Liar, we have Lawyers too" letter since
they specialize in activists sites. DOW chose wisely and
picked the ISP's ISP and pretty much guaranteed that Thing.Net
would have to bow to the pressure. And now Verio is cutting
off Thing.Net in 60 days?!? The DMCA dosen't say anything
about that! Get a lawyer and sue them to hell! |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
Free Speech (Score:1)
by zietlow (199661)
on Monday December 23, @08:38AM (#4943885)
(http://www.ninja-assassin.com/)
|
From the Site http://www.dowethics.com/r/environment/freedom.htm
l [dowethics.com]
Corporate Freedom of Speech
is one of our most precious Freedoms
Now granted I
didn't see the site (mirror anyone?) but what about Personal
free speech? In this day and age of governemnt where there
doesn't seem to be much for freedoms unless you invest a
couple hundred thousand in your favorite politicians wallet.
Why does DOW get free speech and they can threaten someone for
exercising thiers?
Was the company on Thing.net
causing them harm, cutting into thier billions of dollars of
profits for the year? |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- Re:Free
Speech by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday December 23,
@08:40AM
|
Legal grounds (Score:2)
by
MImeKillEr
(445828) on Monday December 23, @08:41AM (#4943898)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last
Journal: Thursday
September 26, @02:50PM) |
Before anyone stars foaming at the mouth about use of the
Dow name (and even the look of their corporate page, which I
didn't see the specific mention of) take a look at the
following links:
http://www.business2.com/articles/web/0,1653,9452,
00.html [business2.com]
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-1292.ZS
.html [cornell.edu]
http://www.chillingeffects.org/protest/
[chillingeffects.org]
http://overlawyered.com/topics/silicon.html
[overlawyered.com]
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
DMCA? HUH? (Score:3, Insightful)
by Twirlip
of the Mists (615030) <twirlipofthemists@yahoo.com>
on Monday December 23, @09:13AM (#4944028)
(Last Journal: Thursday
December 19, @11:55AM) |
Can anybody dig up independent confirmation that this has
anything at all to do with the DMCA? The RTMark press release
mentions it in the context, "Dow was not amused, and sent a
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) complaint to Verio,
which immediately cut Thing.net off the internet for fifteen
hours." But that doesn't make a whole lot of
sense.
More importantly, the New York Times article on
the subject (here
[nytimes.com]), makes no reference at all to the DMCA, instead
saying that "Dow's lawyers contacted Verio to complain that
the site infringed on its trademarks, among other sins." If
the DMCA were involved, I'm reasonably sure that the NYT
article would mention it.
If I had to take a wild-ass
guess, I'd say that what probably happened is that Dow simply
told Verio that they want the offending web site shut down,
and possibly that the site was making unauthorized use of
their trademarks or some such. Verio said to themselves, "On
the one hand we have a bunch of activists who pay their bills,
but who aren't a significant source of revenue for us. On the
other hand we have Dow Chemical, a gigantic multinational
corporation that could throw us a lot of money if we have a
good relationship with them." And they made a business
decision.
If that's what happened, I really don't see a
reason to get all up-in-arms. Yes, this is an inconvenience
for the activists. But, if it happened the way I'm guessing,
nobody did anything illegal, or even
unethical.
(Incidentally, the NYT article also says,
"When [Staehle] called Verio to ask why his entire network had
been unplugged instead of the sole offending site, he said, a
Verio lawyer told him that the Thing had violated its policies
repeatedly and that its contract would be
terminated."
The article goes on: "Verio had shut down
part of the Thing once before. In 1999 the online toy retailer
eToys.com asked a California court to stop an online arts
group from using its longtime Web address etoy.com. The
Electronic Disturbance Theater, a Thing client, staged a
virtual protest by overloading the retailer's site with
traffic during the holiday season. Verio blocked access to one
of the Thing's computers until the protest site's owners
agreed to take it offline."
Sounds like Thing.net isn't
merely the mild-mannered parody site it claims to be. Parody
is one thing. Actual disruption is something else altogether.
Though they're not commenting, maybe Verio had some really
good reasons to do what they did.) |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by Zapman (Score:3) Monday December 23, @10:19AM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by Twirlip of the Mists (Score:3) Monday December 23,
@10:33AM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by Zapman (Score:2) Monday December 23, @10:54AM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by Twirlip of the Mists (Score:2) Monday December
23, @11:07AM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by wolfgangsta (Score:1) Monday December 23, @08:39PM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by Twirlip of the Mists (Score:2) Monday December 23,
@09:00PM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by plagiarist (Score:1)
Tuesday December 24, @02:52AM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by Twirlip of the Mists (Score:2) Tuesday
December 24, @02:59AM
- Re:DMCA?
HUH? by plagiarist (Score:1) Tuesday
December 24, @03:51AM
|
I'm little unclear about the
specifics... (Score:1)
by RCO (597148) on Monday
December 23, @09:27AM (#4944091)
|
| As a few of you have already stated, I would like to know
how they are using the DCMA on this. I mean yeah, I can see
how DOW probably wouldn't like the parody, but if that's all
it takes, the US Prison system is about to become the funniest
place on earth with all the comedians that are about to be
sent up. But as things are stated in this article, it sounds
as if Things.net my have a case against Dow for the abuse of
DCMA. The flip side of it is even if Dow is proven wrong, what
are the odds that they will fix the situation, if history is
any indication... |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
Are you kidding me!?! (Score:1)
by DonFinch (584056)
<.ude.ucv.
.ta. .cnifjd2s.> on Monday December 23, @09:37AM (#4944152)
|
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. We applaud the courage of
Verio in taking this act, as it sends a strong signal to the
"artists, activists," and other blatantly non-commercial users
of Thing.net. That message can be stated simply: Corporate
America will defend its right to Free Speech on the internet
rigorously.
So "anylsis of society" should not be
protected under the 1st amendment according to Dow? And whats
this about "non-commercial users". Apperently Dow chemical
feels only those with billions of dollars should be allowed to
speak their minds! Please tell me this PISSES YOU OFF!! of
course this speech is blatantly non-commercial and
unproductive analysis and critique of Dow FSCKED ideas of
freedom, and therfore I should be shot and my corpse burned.
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Bad misstep... (Score:1)
by
lynx_user_abroad
(323975) on Monday December 23, @10:07AM (#4944314)
(http://slashdot.org/)
|
| I hope the parody site (whoever owns dowethics) hasn't
made a stoopid mistake with the copyright notice at the
bottom. Unless I'm wrong, they are not allowed to claim
copyright by "The Dow Company" unless they own a registered
trademark to that name (unlikely), and if they've falsely
attributed the copyright they could lose their copyright to
their parody page and be subject to hefty fines for their
false claims.
Losing copyright to the page would make defense of the page
(as a parody) more difficult in several ways...
Even if I was a lawyer, you would be foolish to believe
I'm licensed to practice law in whatever jurisdiction you
currently reside.
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
Dow - A Chemical Company on the Global
Playground (Score:2)
by Vryl (31994) on
Monday December 23, @10:18AM (#4944374)
|
http://www.dowethics.com/r/Homepage/index.html
[dowethics.com]
Did you know?
Dow is
responsible for the birth of the modern environmental
movement. In 1962, Rachel Carson wrote Silent Spring about the
side-effects of a Dow product, DDT, on North American bird
populations. Her work created a groundswell of concern,
sparking the birth of many of today's environmental action
groups. Another example of Dow's commitment to Living.
Improved daily. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Behold the power of a SLAPP suit!
(Score:2)
by uncoveror
(570620) on Monday December 23, @11:59AM (#4945018)
(http://www.uncoveror.com/)
|
| This is a perfect example of a greedy corporation
squashing free speech in the name of its lord and savior, the
almighty dollar. The artists, called the Yes Men, hosted by
thing.net were making a valid point with their biting satire,
and adding a "this is a joke, duh!" disclaimer would detract
from the icky feeling their satire was intended to evoke. If
they can get a legal defense fund, this could be the test case
to overturn the DMCA. It is more likely, unfortunately, that
Thing.net will die, and this Slapp will be successful. That
will be a tragedy. I would love to republish the materials in
question, but I will use disclaimers if the Yes Men agree.
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
RTMark are a bunch of spammers
(Score:2)
by sulli (195030) on
Monday December 23, @12:34PM (#4945321)
(http://www.sulli.org/ | Last
Journal: Wednesday
December 18, @01:30PM) |
| Fuck 'em. If they can't play by reasonable rules of good
behavior, I have no sympathy when they end up being smacked
down for (in this case) fraudulent misrepresentation of their
opponents. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
Time to boycott Verio? (Score:3,
Interesting)
by Travoltus
(110240) on Monday December 23, @12:34PM (#4945323)
|
Are there other providers who will not take action against
a hosted site unless pushed by a court order?
I know
newsguy.com is one such provider.
I have a site with
Verio. If I know of another site with php3/4, perl and mysql,
and which will not take any action without a court order, I'm
there and Verio is out another customer. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
No problem now (Score:2)
by
drew_kime
(303965) on Monday December 23, @12:48PM (#4945429)
(http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/board/show?boardid=1
| Last Journal: Friday July
12, @02:21PM) |
| As of 12:30 pm EST the offending site http://dow-chemical.com/
[dow-chemical.com] now points to http://www.dow.com/homepage/index.html
[dow.com] anyway. So apparently there is nothing to worry
about. Satiric criticism is erased by domain hijacking and
no-one has to be the wiser. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
You've Got It Backwards, As Usual
(Score:2)
by John Hasler
(414242) on Monday December 23, @02:35PM (#4946246)
|
> DOW is now using the DMCA to threaten
Verio,
No. Dow is using copyright law to threaten
Verio. The DMCA is forcing them to give Verio an opportunity
to remove the putatively infringing material and thereby avoid
any penalties. In the absence of the DMCA Dow could sue and
possibly collect damages even if Verio took the material down
as soon as they were notified. This would mean, of course,
that no ISP would ever let anyone put any parodies up at all.
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
3
replies beneath your current
threshold. |
DOW Threatens
Verio, Verio silences
activists
