Take Down Letters and Misusing Intellectual Property
Posted by Rand Bateman at 10/8/2009 4:30 PM 
Categories: Legal
Tags: Streisand effect; take down letters
Categories: Legal
Tags: Streisand effect; take down letters
Most people dislike being criticized. Sure, we should stop people from engaging in slander or libel, but how about when they are criticizing poor work? Do you have the right to avoid criticism.
Apparently RALPH LAUREN believes that it does. Recently RALPH LAUREN ran an add for its clothing. Apparently, the model it hired did not look quite anorexic enough, so they used a little PHOTOSHOP magic to show a woman you can wrap your hand around.
One could go on about the fashion industry and whether it is responsible for the problems of anorexia and bulemia in today's young women. After all, your typical teenager cannot use PHOTOSHOP to get down to 75 or 80 lbs. Boing Boing, however, simply made fun of the poor use of PHOTOSHOP.
Apparently RALPH LAUREN did not appreciate the criticism. They had their New York attorneys send a take down letter claiming copyright infringement. Fortunately Boing Boing did not cave.
Using the copyright laws to try and shut down criticism has two major draw backs. First, the copyright laws have a fair use exception that allows copying - and use for criticism is about as clear of a fair use as it gets. Second, it risks the "Streisand effect" - named for the singing Diva who tried to stop publication of a photograph that included her beachfront home. Not only didn't she succeed, the photo got far more attention than it would have.
When someone has done something you do not like on line, you need to ask yourself a few questions before you send cease and desist letters or take down letters. First - is what they are doing really violating your rights? If not, threatening legal action based on intellectual property only makes you look stupid. Second - even if they are violating your rights, is the cure worse than the disease? In other words, will threatening them merely result in more publicity of the improper post, etc., A prime example of the Streisand effect is DirectBuy's attempt to shut down dissent which only backfired, as I discussed a couple of years ago. Their cease and desist letter made DirectBuy and their attorneys look stupid.
Protecting your rights is important. Thinking before you act is more important.
Apparently RALPH LAUREN believes that it does. Recently RALPH LAUREN ran an add for its clothing. Apparently, the model it hired did not look quite anorexic enough, so they used a little PHOTOSHOP magic to show a woman you can wrap your hand around.
One could go on about the fashion industry and whether it is responsible for the problems of anorexia and bulemia in today's young women. After all, your typical teenager cannot use PHOTOSHOP to get down to 75 or 80 lbs. Boing Boing, however, simply made fun of the poor use of PHOTOSHOP.
Apparently RALPH LAUREN did not appreciate the criticism. They had their New York attorneys send a take down letter claiming copyright infringement. Fortunately Boing Boing did not cave.
Using the copyright laws to try and shut down criticism has two major draw backs. First, the copyright laws have a fair use exception that allows copying - and use for criticism is about as clear of a fair use as it gets. Second, it risks the "Streisand effect" - named for the singing Diva who tried to stop publication of a photograph that included her beachfront home. Not only didn't she succeed, the photo got far more attention than it would have.
When someone has done something you do not like on line, you need to ask yourself a few questions before you send cease and desist letters or take down letters. First - is what they are doing really violating your rights? If not, threatening legal action based on intellectual property only makes you look stupid. Second - even if they are violating your rights, is the cure worse than the disease? In other words, will threatening them merely result in more publicity of the improper post, etc., A prime example of the Streisand effect is DirectBuy's attempt to shut down dissent which only backfired, as I discussed a couple of years ago. Their cease and desist letter made DirectBuy and their attorneys look stupid.
Comments