NYTimes Threatens NYTClean Bookmarklet Maker With Bogus Trademark Claim

from the uh,-that's-not-how-trademark-works dept

Fri, Apr 1st 2011 2:40pm — Mike Masnick

We've already mentioned NYTClean, the four-line javascript bookmarklet that lets you remove the NY Times' paywall with a single click. Apparently, the NYTimes' lawyers, with their interesting interpretation of trademark law, have threatened the creator of those four lines of code, and bullied him into changing the name to NYNewspaperClean. The NYT claims that it's not complaining about the functionality, but just the name:

I am writing concerning your �NYTClean� bookmarklet, posted at http://euri.ca/2011/03/21/get-around-new-york-times-20-article-limit/.

As you obviously know, The New York Times Company has used its �The New York Times� trademark since at least as early as 1851 and today offers numerous products and services under its famous �The New York Times� trademark, including its online version of The New York Times at the URL NYTimes.com, and various blogs and electronic media products. NYTCo�s NYTimes.com website receives over 15,000,000 unique visitors each month. NYTCo owns numerous registrations for its �The New York Times� trademark in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and Canadian Trade-Marks Office and these trademarks are among the company�s most valuable assets.

We object to your use of our famous "NYT" trademark in connection with your application and your promotion thereof, which constitutes trademark dilution and trademark infringement under U.S. and Canadian trademark law.

Accordingly, we ask that you immediately cease use of the "NYT" trademark in connection with this application. This email is without prejudice to any action that may be necessary to protect the valuable rights of NYTCo in its intellectual property.

This is trademark abuse. There is no confusion here. No one using the NYTClean bookmarklet thinks that it's endorsed by the NY Times. No moron in a hurry is going to be confused into believing it's a product of the NY Times. The trademark that the company has on the NY Times does not give the company total control over NYT. It only allows them to stop situations where there is clear confusion or dilution, neither of which are likely here. This is just a form of trademark bullying.

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: nytclean, paywall, trademark
Companies: ny times

13 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

:Lobo Santo (profile), 1 Apr 2011 @ 2:41pm

Easy fix:
Just search for "Formerly NYTClean"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Markus Hopkins (profile), 1 Apr 2011 @ 2:58pm

I'm not totally sure it's clear cut.
I think the action was unwarranted, but let's say I'm a moron. Let's say I'm in a hurry. Let's say I see an article title about "New York Times Clean." I can see myself thinking, oh, they're putting out a "clean" version now? If I'm a na�ve moron in a hurry, I might just want that. Oh! Maybe that's what they could have done with the 40 mil! A bookmarklet that edits out all of the unhappy news from every story! See, that's a potential product, so they clearly needed to defend their mark.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JC, 1 Apr 2011 @ 2:59pm

Told ya that most of that $40 million was for lawyers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
lavi d (profile), 1 Apr 2011 @ 3:06pm

NYT Already
.
I NYT noticed that you NYT kept using NYT in your NYT post.

How many NYT times do you NYT think you can use NYT on your site before NYT sends you an NYT cease and NYT desist, NYT trademark dilution NYT nastygram?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ron Rezendes (profile), 1 Apr 2011 @ 3:36pm

Disagree....
I disagree with you on this one, Mike. It would seem entirely plausible that a program with NYT in the title that is devised to work on the NYT website, would imply to many to be an NYT authorized program. It really isn't that far fetched to think so IMHO.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
holeinthewall (profile), 1 Apr 2011 @ 3:59pm

Look, a feed of links to the Now Yerk Tames:

https://twitter.com/timeswiretap
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Apr 2011 @ 5:16pm

Re: Disagree....
Oh, sure. A bookmarklet that lets you bypass the NYT paywall. Everyone's going to think that came from the NYT. They spent $20 million on the paywall, and the other $20 million on four lines of javascript that let you bypass it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Apr 2011 @ 10:01pm

Moron in a Hurry
I think I got it. They only hire morons and make them hurry in the legal department. Everything is infringement for the rushed Morons. Of course how you get through law school and pass the bar with an IQ of 70 to 80 is another matter.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
G Thompson (profile), 2 Apr 2011 @ 12:27am

I always thought NYT stood for New York Twits.

Seems I was not mistaken
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Any Mouse (profile), 2 Apr 2011 @ 1:56am

Billable Hours
Come on, we all know this has nothing to do with trademark and everything to do with fattening that big ol' check the lawyers intend on getting from the NYT.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2011 @ 7:50am

NYTCo is just the company name. It had nothing to do with the Trademark 'The New York Times' NYT is not the trademark and I would have let them know that. Bullies! They sound like bullies and besides they're from New York and like who gives a damn about New York. The socialist state. Right next to Washington DC and the other socialist Wazoos. I won't even go to New York! What a nightmare place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 2 Apr 2011 @ 11:47am

Slightly inaccurate
The "four lines of JavaScript" part - though widely quoted in the media - is slightly inaccurate.

The bookmarklet is just four lines of JavaScript. However, all it does is create a link to a script called "nyt.js" on euri.ca. That script is actually about 30 lines long.

But there's no question he wrote it on his lunch break. I took a look at the code, and it's really basic, script-kiddie stuff. There must be dozens of ways to get around the paywall.

By the way, you missed the best part of the article:

For his part, David Hayes says he plans to comply with the Times� request and rename the script to something like NYNewspaperClean. But he also says the Times missed an opportunity:

"I�m a big fan of the newspaper in question; I would�ve taken the page down in exchange for a manila envelope with leftover detritus from Bill Safire�s old desk."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hmm (profile), 2 Apr 2011 @ 3:35pm

why not
call it "PRSFTTONY"..paywall removal system for the times of new york!
[ link to this | view in thread ]