Ralph Lauren And Its Lawyers Discover The Streisand Effect On Bogus DMCA Takedown
from the someone's-bright-idea dept
Will they never learn? Issuing bogus DMCA takedowns to get content down that you don't like, rather than which is actually infringing, is going to backfire. Badly. Last week, the website Photoshop Disasters put up a post showing a ridiculous Ralph Lauren ad with a woman who was too skinny to be alive. Boing Boing put up a post about it, along with the tag line "Dude, her head's bigger than her pelvis." While some have questioned whether the ad is even real, one thing is clear: Ralph Lauren was not pleased. The company's lawyers at Greenberg Traurig sent DMCA takedown notices concerning both posts. Despite Blogger's new DMCA policy, Google still quickly took down the post at Photoshop Disasters, causing the site to ask whether or not Ralph Lauren or its lawyers have ever heard of the Streisand Effect (yay). BoingBoing's host, however, doesn't automatically take content down and passed along the info to BoingBoing, who quickly pointed out that this was clearly fair use (commentary, criticism, etc.) and the DMCA takedown wasn't being used to stop infringing content, but to stifle speech.
So, not surprisingly, BoingBoing put up a nice post explaining the whole thing, including a nice quote from lawyer Wendy Seltzer about fair use... and, of course, another version of the image, and dared Ralph Lauren to sue. Hopefully Ralph Lauren and its lawyers get the message and offer a quick apology. In the meantime, it makes you wonder what the hell anyone was thinking in sending out such a bogus DMCA. Do people really not recognize the consequences?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, dmca, streisand effect, takedown
Companies: ralph lauren
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
old vs new
since the MSM does such a crappy job (hey, at least they're consistent), nowadays other people do a better job of covering relevant news and thus situations like this don't just pass by without people knowing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: old vs new
google cache of the original link that was pulled down.
http://tinyurl.com/LookHereRalph
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: old vs new
"In the days pre-internet" I don't think the DMCA would have applied. Thus there would have been no method to stifle anyone's speech.
fw
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: old vs new
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heh.
More likely they'll realize their mistake and just shut up, allowing this to fade.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Heh.
I hope for their sake you're right. Any bets on if this will be the case however?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RL may not sue, but the model will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RL may not sue, but the model will.
Loooooooots of cheeseburgers...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: RL may not sue, but the model will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: RL may not sue, but the model will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RL may not sue, but the model will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RL may not sue, but the model will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what I want to know is....
FWIW, I know a few women with figures like this. Most are from corset training.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: what I want to know is....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: what I want to know is....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: what I want to know is....
Yeah, I'm with you. The thinnicity of the girl aside, those clothes are just plain goddam awful.
If my girl came out of our bedroom wearing those, it'd be a quick, "Hey, the extremely gay lumberjack convention is NEXT weekend, woman. Now get back in there and change into something that doesn't remind me of a Monty Python sketch."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: what I want to know is....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: what I want to know is....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: what I want to know is....
Remember this add. It marks where the skinny obsession has gone too far. Where obtaining this look would require the person to not be alive (or a physical deformity that I've never heard of before). This is why the French are bitching about photoshop.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: what I want to know is....
Further, I get annoyed when "society" is blamed for skinny obsessions and anorexic kids. The reality is kids learn those behaviours from their parents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: what I want to know is....
You and I must see two distinctly different sets of parents on the streets, my friend. Every time I'm running up the stairs to catch the El and I have to sqeeze by the four people that standing sideways manage to take up the entire width of the escalator I think about what a wonderful living I could make as a dietary consultant.
Of course, my "program" would just consist of karate chopping people's hands everytime they reached for food, but the point is results, people, results!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: what I want to know is....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: what I want to know is....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The consequences should be huge punitive damages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
2) Even if the ad were photoshopped to make her skinnier, it would clearly be protected as both parody and commentary
Trademarks serve to protect brands from imposters, not to give the owner total control over any appearance of the marks anywhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apparently someone doesn't as this continues to happen. It's either poor lawyering or clients who are unwilling to heed their lawyers' advice (I'm guessing the first). To me this is a sign that I will be successful post law school even in this over crowded JD market; it is clear that too many people don't understand the legal and business implications of their decisions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you communicate to prospective clients that you understand that business goals indicate using legal action sparingly, and that you're not looking to maximize billable hours by maximizing legal engagement, you'll do just fine in the market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Which makes the lawyer more money?
then dealing with the responses and and further letters and other fallout?
Answer that question and I think you'll have why so many bogus DMCA takedowns get sent out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.blogherbaldiet.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/ralph-lauren.jpg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skinny Legs and All...
http://i36.tinypic.com/dbpqj6.jpg
Hey, isn't that Sandra Bernhard?
CBMHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bogus DMCA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bogus DMCA
The DMCA was issued to keep Photoshop Disasters from making fun of the skinny model in the ad; BoingBoing saw right through it and denied the DMCA, while Blogger took it down (despite saying they've improved their DMCA process).
The DMCA was being used to stifle free speech (in this case, parody/satire/social commentary), and Ralph Lauren and their lawyers are going to learn what the Streisand Effect can do.
Hope they have fun with trying to DMCA the entire Internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bogus DMCA
RTFA!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google Cache your friend, but not Ralph Lauren's ;-)
or http://tinyurl.com/LookHereRalph for easier copying and pasting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, you are missing the fact that there is nothing wrong or illegal with posting a Ralph Lauren ad and commenting about it. There is no infringement going on here (fair use, they are commenting on an actual Ralph Lauren ad, not trying to pass something off as a Ralph Lauren ad that isn't.) Therefore the DMCA is bogus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, you are missing the fact that there is nothing wrong or illegal with posting a Ralph Lauren ad and commenting about it. There is no infringement going on here (fair use, they are commenting on an actual Ralph Lauren ad, not trying to pass something off as a Ralph Lauren ad that isn't.) Therefore the DMCA is bogus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google's fast disappearing cojones!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skinny teenagers ?
Kids these days generally are not skinny. Overweight kids (boys and girls) far outweigh the small numbers who have anorexia. Shifting the population bell curve towards the slim end would not be a crisis.
Point 2
I find the idea that skinny Parisian catwalk models are responsible for teenage anorexia to be garbage. If you look at a teenager's role model it is more likely to be a TV or movie actress or a pop star (or a sports figure), than some skeleton in New York wearing a dress that looks like a cake.
These pop stars are all generally fairly fit, well proportioned people. Most pop stars these days perform dance routines (not so many pale goths in teen culture these days) and if a teenager with half a brain cell wants to look like their role model they know it will take 200 sit ups and some running, not starvation.
So if there are anoprexic kids, it's isn;t coming from skinny models.
It is the adults around them, and the advertising, that messes kids up. Regardless of target weight, the problem is the prevalence of ideas that
a) self esteem is inseparable from looks
b) changing one's body shape is caused by dieting, not a change in exercise habits. This is the predominant dietary message of all advertising that is targeted at the teenager's mother.
If kids eat proper food and do the hour a day of proper exercise they need, the amount they eat won't actually be an issue.
Back to the original post....
I have not yet understood for certain whether the original photoshopping was done by Ralph Lauren (RL) or was part of the parody. I assume the latter, so has anyone located the original ?
I'd have thought that showing the parody without making it clear this was photoshopped (and not by RL)was defaming RL (implying RL condoned skinny models).
But DCMA ? It's a transformative work, surely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Skinny teenagers ?
Unfortunately many people don't realize(and your statement seems to reinforce) the fact that in order to be healthy and lean you have to have both good nutrition and exercise. Exercise alone while ignoring your body dietary needs is extremely unhealthy. Also, there is actually more than one type of Anorexia. One form of Anorexia involves overexercising, where a person may exercise for 6-10 hours per day. This type of Anorexia actually causes even more problems than just not eating.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Photoshop disasters have many like this. It is a widespread phenomena in the faSShion industry. The only difference is RL think they can use the power of money to silence criticism. What a bunch of idiots!
See for yourself
http://i36.tinypic.com/zjjg8x.jpg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://tiny.cc/IRTM2
And a reference to actual human proportions.
http://tiny.cc/Y2k3l
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More Exposure
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/33250063#33250063
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
more streisand effect bs from Masssnick
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ResellerRatings.com bogus DMCA
You can still view the google cached version here.
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:BuDQWkmWCssJ:www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/resell erratingscom-c94794.html%3Fsort%3Ddated+complaints+board+resellerratings&cd=1&hl=en&ct=c lnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Great
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]