Glenn Beck Not Allowed To Rape And Murder An Internet Meme

from the nice-try dept

Fri, Nov 6th 2009 3:40pm — Mike Masnick

Back in September, we wrote about Glenn Beck's misguided attempt to gain control over the domain name used as part of an internet meme that is critical of Glenn Beck, GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990.com (it's a dead site now, keep reading). If you're unfamiliar with the meme, it's mocking a favorite tactic of various cable news talk show hosts, to "ask questions" that are accusatory in nature, whether or not there's any substance to back them up. Glenn Beck didn't accuse the site of defamation or anything, but filed a domain name complaint, saying that it violated his trademark. As we noted at the time, the trademark claim was really questionable -- and, of course, only served to draw more attention to the site and the internet meme.

The site brought on lawyer Marc Randazza who filed one of the most brilliant responses (pdf) to a legal threat that you'll ever see. It's quite amusing. Randazza takes the old "moron in a hurry" test up one level, using the "abject imbecile" test. And then there was this:

We are not here because the domain name could cause confusion. We do not have a declaration from the president of the international association of imbeciles that his members are blankly staring at the Respondent's website wondering "where did all the race baiting content go?" We are here because Mr. Beck wants Respondent's website shut down. He wants it shut down because Respondent's website makes a poignant and accurate satirical critique of Mr. Beck by parodying Beck's very rhetorical style. Beck's skin is too thin to take the criticism, so he wants the site down.

Apparently, Randazza's letter worked wonders. The WIPO Arbitration Panel has rejected the attempt to take the domain, saying that it was a legitimate use of Beck's name:

In the present context, this Panel considers that if Internet users view the disputed domain name in combination with a visit to Respondent's website, the "total effect" is that of political commentary by Respondent, capable of protection as political speech by the First Amendment under the Hustler Magazine standard. Respondent appears to the Panel to be engaged in a parody of the style or methodology that Respondent appears genuinely to believe is employed by Complainant in the provision of political commentary, and for that reason Respondent can be said to be making a political statement. This constitutes a legitimate non-commercial use of Complainant's mark under the Policy.

Either way, now that the site's owner has prevailed, he apparently feels he has made his point, and has agreed to voluntarily hand over the domain (pdf), along with an explanation in the First Amendment and how not to respond to internet memes:

It bears observing that by bringing the WIPO complaint, you took what was merely one small critique meme, in a sea of internet memes, and turned it into a super-meme. Then, in pressing forward (by not withdrawing the complaint and instead filing additional briefs), you turned the super-meme into an object lesson in First Amendment principles.

It also bears noting, in this matter and for the future, that you are entirely in control of whether or not you are the subject of this particular kind of criticism. I chose to criticize you using the well-tested method of satire because of its effectiveness. But, humor aside, your rhetorical style is no laughing matter. In this context of this WIPO case, you denigrated the letter of First Amendment law. In the context of your television show and your notoriety, you routinely and shamelessly denigrate the spirit of the First Amendment....

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: domain name dispute, glenn beck, parody, trademark

41 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 6 Nov 2009 @ 3:45pm

I notice that Glenn has still not answered the most important question, though, I guess he's too busy worrying about the conspiracy to steal his organs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Poster, 6 Nov 2009 @ 3:48pm
  
  Re:
  Why isn't everyone worried about that? WHY?!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Duncan Yoyo (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 5:47pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Wurlitzer right is worried about an organless Beck and the next skating party.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob Ramsey (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 4:25pm

Must be doing something right to sir the LEFT!
That a boy Rush! Keep all these left-wingers on their toes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Derek Reed (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 4:46pm

Hooray
That is so freaking awesome that he handed the domain over. I can't imagine how much better this whole thing could have gone. Talk about taking the high road and throwing salt in the wound. "Oh, yeah, that domain you wanted, here you go, it's meaningless. I win, the first amendment wins, you lose you pitiful excuse for human being."

Thanks for the tiny glimmer of hope before the weekend Isaac.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Nov 2009 @ 4:51pm
  
  Re: Hooray
  +1
  
  Couldn't have said it better myself, so I didn't.....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
SpongeRush FatPants, 6 Nov 2009 @ 5:02pm

But But
the terrorists have won
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Nov 2009 @ 5:02pm

What a bunch of morons, worried about the first amendment come on you shit all over the constitution all the time if it's some left wing idiot, trying to do it. Just wait till the fcc diversity czar, fairness doctrine, and net neutrality go into effect, the first amendment will be gone completely. Yet you make fun of one of the only Americans who is actually trying to keep your first amendment rights safe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 6 Nov 2009 @ 5:06pm
  
  Re:
  The world of Glenn Beck: Where attempting to stifle free speech is keeping free speech safe.
  
  Also, net neutrality has nothing to do with the 1st amendment.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Duncan Yoyo (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 5:50pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I get feeling that if Glen Beck wipes his ass he uses the constitution. That of course is a big IF given the way he smells.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Nelle Gilmore, 22 Nov 2009 @ 7:23am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Wipe all or not
      Why not just flush the whole turd?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lisa (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 6:58pm
  
  Re:
  "Just wait till the fcc diversity czar, fairness doctrine, and net neutrality go into effect,"
  
  Net neutrality means ISPs can't censor speech. Besides, the internet originally had net neutrally due to common carrier rules that were set in place to regulate the phone companies. Guess what? Free speech didn't die.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Designerfx (profile), 7 Nov 2009 @ 6:56am
  
  Re:
  Glenn beck is only trying to keep uninformed people uninformed. That's not a way to keep first amendment rights safe.
  
  Accusatory questions that imply guilt which cannot be refuted by the other party is a great way to get people to believe that the first amendment is gone when in fact it may have been weakened lately, but it's still there.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Nov 2009 @ 5:14pm

I can't stand by and let this happen
Why doesn't this case address the real issue? I'm talking about the confusion of imbecile-Americans. Clearly the champagne-sipping elite of the universities and... I don't know... web scripting collectives? are using blatant misdirection to confuse people who--let's remember--can't perform the necessary mental tasks that enable most of us to arrive at conclusions that make sense. I mean, it contains the words! Sure, we know that it also contains other words that contextualize the whole thing, but you have to understand that Imbecile-Americans don't recognize most of the other ones! Look, I not saying it's an organized attack on a marginalized group, all I'm saying is we need to be asking these questions and we need to keep asking until we get an answer. Look how the lawyers for the site and even the activist court just glossed over the parts about confusing the imbeciles and just went straight to what the case is actually about! What is that? Is that justice? Is that what you were brought up to believe in?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Sounds Familiar, 6 Nov 2009 @ 9:08pm
  
  Re: I can't stand by and let this happen
  Glenn?
  Is that you?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- chris (profile), 8 Nov 2009 @ 9:49am
  
  Re: I can't stand by and let this happen
  Look, I not saying it's an organized attack on a marginalized group, all I'm saying is we need to be asking these questions and we need to keep asking until we get an answer. Look how the lawyers for the site and even the activist court just glossed over the parts about confusing the imbeciles and just went straight to what the case is actually about! What is that? Is that justice? Is that what you were brought up to believe in?
  
  there was a march on washington. the morons in this country are organizing and taking to the streets:
  
  http://www.theonion.com/content/news/nations_morons_march_on_washington
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nelle Gilmore, 22 Nov 2009 @ 7:20am
  
  Re: I can't stand by and let this happen
  AC you double speaker, are hard to follow. What you said could be red several ways. Clarity requires exposition!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom Betz (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 6:02pm

For what it's worth, the latest version still resides in the Google Cache, so if you want to take one last trip down memory lane, do it now!

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Nov 2009 @ 6:47pm

The answer is very funny. It highlights internet memes stating "[internet memes] are as old as the internet itself", which is also funny because that is also an internet meme.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DS, 6 Nov 2009 @ 6:49pm

Dumbest meme ever.

(And no, I don't like Glenn Beck, Bill O'Riley, Keith Oberman, or any of the bombthrowers.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Really?, 6 Nov 2009 @ 9:11pm
  
  Re:
  DS -> "Dumbest meme ever."
  
  Clearly you are not experienced in the topic of internet memes
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
davebarnes (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 7:33pm

I thought it rude to blot out
the username and password.

What fun someone could have had.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Isaac Eiland-Hall, 6 Nov 2009 @ 9:02pm

Just to let you know... The site is still up...
Once Beck does whatever he's going to with the domain - you can still get to the site by going to gb1990.com. :-)

Thanks for a great article! :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danny (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 9:02pm

I love this line
"We do not have a declaration from the president of the international association of imbeciles that his members are blankly staring at the Respondent's website wondering "where did all the race baiting content go?""

It is worth the price of admission alone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danny (profile), 6 Nov 2009 @ 9:06pm

But but but
Well, maybe the question of whether Glenn Beck Raped and Murdered a Young Girl in 1990 is now resolved.

But Glenn Beck still hasn't addressed the question of whether he raped and murdered a young girl in 1991!!!

People, why are we the only ones asking these questions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rose M. Welch (profile), 7 Nov 2009 @ 12:18am

Yay!
Thank God for tits and Larry Flynt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Nov 2009 @ 12:53am

The website is still up, it just no longer uses the domain in question, just a slightly modified one.
http://didglennbeckrapeandmurderayounggirlin1990.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cameron, 7 Nov 2009 @ 9:54am

Couple of responses.
3. Bob Ramsey
Lots of things get the left mad. Blatant racism, sexism, homophobia, for example. People cut down by legally owned firearms and churches protesting funerals. Abortion providers being shot dead in their church by madmen.
Yeah, you guys are doing allllllll right.

7. Anonymous Coward
The first amendment is being used to cover stranger and stranger things these days. Churches who want to keep their right to call homosexuals "Demon infested". People who want to try and convince people that the government is implanting tracking chips, or the Jews are trying to control the world. In Canada, it used to be illegal to willfully spread false news. Why can't we have that back? We have the right to lie and incite hatred, apparently.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lulu, 7 Nov 2009 @ 5:47pm

Ohhh...
Ohhh...

didObamaRapeAndMurderAYoungGirlin1990.com

Not taken (yet).

:)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Nov 2009 @ 8:39pm

Glenn Beck "officially" denied it?
Handing over the domain name is brilliant.

Imagine this: Some random internet surfer hits an article that says "Glenn Beck sues...", tries to go to the site in question, and finds that the site has closed down. Assumption from this: Glenn Beck is censoring all information about this issue for some "unknown" reason.

That's right, all through his own actions he's ascended his own meme, and validated it. Congratulations Beck, you just won the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Nov 2009 @ 10:14am

The site is still up
The site still exists at http://gb1990.com/

Here's the letter to Glenn Beck (warning: PDF)
http://gb1990.net/legal/solution/Dear%20Mr%20Beck.pdf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lex, 8 Nov 2009 @ 8:01pm

Techdirtshiddenagendtolegalizechildporn.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
boost, 9 Nov 2009 @ 4:57am

tools
Tools, all of you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steven Hoy, 9 Nov 2009 @ 5:13am

Humour
But, humor aside, your rhetorical style is no laughing matter.
Hmm - if you set humour aside, then there can be no laughing matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mechwarrior, 9 Nov 2009 @ 6:09am
  
  Re: Humour
  A humorous thought, in hindsight.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Xander C (profile), 9 Nov 2009 @ 7:51am

Now I'm not saying that Glenn Beck may be an asshole, but why hasn't he come out already to dispute this claim that many people have been making?

To anyone that have heard about this "rumor" that Mr. Beck is not only an asshole, but also keeps his secret stash of "pedobear favorites" with him at all times to "use" during his commercial breaks, I assure you that I do not believe it might be true. I also don't think it might be true that Glenn B might of ran over 20 cats and laughed with sheer glee and pleasure while getting a "quick-fix" special from a very drugged up clown that he slipped roofies two not much an hour ago.

All I'm saying is that, if he comes out and admits none of this happened, then we can drop the questions and rumors.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Xander C (profile), 9 Nov 2009 @ 7:52am
  
  Re:
  (Wow, this crap writes itself! I wonder if GB needs a another writer in his staff?)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
james, 9 Nov 2009 @ 8:40am

Never even heard of this before, so is this true, or what? http://bit.ly/39oJo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jomama, 11 Nov 2009 @ 9:46am

30.Nov 8th, 2009 @ 8:01pm
by Lex

Techdirtshiddenagendtolegalizechildporn.com

^^^ fail
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nelle Gilmore, 22 Nov 2009 @ 7:46am

Should Clowns be required to .........
use full clown attire and makeup facts?

Perhaps Beck could charge, then maybe? it wouldn't be a "free speech" tissue.

Seriously, Glen Beck is not the problem. He is just using the problem to fatten his bank account. The has always been and will always be some people who are strangely arranged. We should be thankful they self-identify themselves.

Most people [IMHO] would cringe at the thought of identifying with Glen Beck in public.

Then, since when to we go around kicking dogs because they are dumb?

Last, if for some idiotic reason Beck's reasoning becomes common place, the human race will [INHO] self-destruct making the whole deal moot, whatever!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
fodder99 (profile), 30 Jun 2012 @ 10:28am

This is one funny article, it made me chuckle for ages hehehe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]