Dear US Chamber Of Commerce: If A Site Advertises That It's Selling Fakes, How Is That Fooling Anyone?
from the rogue-sites? dept
The US Chamber of Commerce's point man on destroying the internet, Steve Tepp, has been doing a silly "rogue site of the week" feature on his blog, trying to promote PROTECT IP/E-PARASITE/SOPA. But he seems to have an odd interpretation of "rogue sites" at times. Take, for example, his recent post about a site called "lifetimereplicas.com" -- a site that no longer exists, because it was among those seized by the US government with no due process or adversarial review (the US doesn't censor, right?). But here's the thing: how is this a "rogue" site? No one is being fooled into thinking that the Rolex's on the site are somehow real. The damn site admits right up front that it's about making fakes. The problem with counterfeit goods is when they are tricking people into believing they're the real thing. Remember that whole "likelihood of confusion" bit in trademark law? Who's confused when they go to a site that advertises you're buying fakes?Furthermore, seeing as multiple studies have shown that when people are knowingly buying counterfeits, it's an aspirational buy, and they quite frequently later buy the real thing... it's hard to see how such products harm the economy in anyway. If anything, it suggests the opposite: such products help build up loyalty and sell more of the "real" product. So why would the US Chamber of Commerce, and Steve Tepp, go around claiming that such a site is "rogue," when it doesn't try to fool anyone? Perhaps it's because the Chamber can't find any examples of any real problems, and the check from certain monied interests doesn't come in unless they can fabricate a big problem that doesn't exist.
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: counterfeit, replicas, trademark
Companies: us chamber of commerce
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
h**p://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/11/piracy-problems-us-copyright-industr ies-show-terrific-health.ars
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Your comment has been queued for moderation by site administrators and will be published after approval."
Any bets on whether or not dissenting opinions will be "moderated" and suppressed? That's "freedom" for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
who decides
If this passes, how long before one company goes over a competitor's website because they found a few items that MIGHT be counterfeit? Think it won't happen - just look at how companies used the DMCA - my favorite being using the DMCA to prevent black friday sales prices from being listed prior to black friday.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: who decides
A better question would be; how long will it take to file the paperwork. I'd bet that a lot of places (RIAA, MPAA, Monster cable) already have the paperwork written up and waiting to be rushed off. "How long" is exactly how long it will take the message to get there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
But it would be a good thing if the world actually ended ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"I'm a lawyer"
Kinda answered your own question.
Funny post though
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: @AC "http://icanouttrollyou/" -- We humans concede the fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: @AC "http://icanouttrollyou/" -- We humans concede the fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: @AC "http://icanouttrollyou/" -- We humans concede the fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: @AC "http://icanouttrollyou/" -- We humans concede the fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: @AC "http://icanouttrollyou/" -- We humans concede the fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's a lost sale
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's a lost sale
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's a lost sale
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's a lost sale
Want $150 pants? Banana Republic. Want $75 pants? Gap. Want $25 pants? Old Navy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's a lost sale
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's a lost sale
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Going Rogue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Going Rogue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MAFIAA: What did you say?
Site: I'm selling lower quality replicas of [insert product here] for ppl who can't afford the original. It's written in capital letters in the front page so no1 will buy thinking it's the original.
MAFIAA: Oh. For a moment I thought you said you were selling replicas of the original while openly and honestly telling they were 'fakes' to your customers. Officer, please arrest him.
Site: ???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Genuine Fake Watches
https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos?hl=en&tab=wq#photos/114591754945846656481/albums/51 31408857954559345/5670763878211103442
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Disclaimer: I'm no supporter of Rolex, wouldn't have one.
But in general, LISTEN TO YOURSELF, Mike! You're actually advocating counterfeiting! And saying it's /good/ for not only the brand, but so idiots can parade around in status symbols. -- I bet that you wear a counterfeit Rolex, so this hits home.
The existence of counterfeit goods is fraud in itself, and if left unchecked, you won't be able to trust whether the watch you pay $1000 for even from a fancy brick and mortar store actually /is/ genuine. The seller could just point out the laser engraved small print on the package that says it's counterfeit.
Is that the kind of world you want? The visible emblems of success all faked? -- You should jeer at the emblems in the first place, as what fools who were born lucky decorate themselves with in absence of any real personal worth that comes from adding value to society. -- How about faked academic research, Mike? It's the same mentality: people want the emblems without having to bother doing the actual work, or bothering with such pesky details as getting their notions to match reality, not the other way round. (Hint: that last is aimed at you, Mike.)
So, for today it's FAKE MIKE. FAKE ARTICLES. FAKE DATA. We can't believe a thing you write or even reference, because you openly advocate FAKE.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Saying "yup, they are fakes" doesn't suddenly make the rest of the problem go away.
When you write this sort of piece, when you get so narrowly caught up in things, you show why many of your posts here are easy to object to. You cannot take a single law in a vacuum, it's the effects of all of the laws on the books combined.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Further, duplicating something (and including logos, etc) is a violation of trademark, and possibly copyright on design elements, etc). You don't even have to specifically hit counterfeiting to get this one shut down (and it's down, BTW).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Hey everybody, this AC is a mind reader! OK now what am I thinking now?
"Further, duplicating something (and including logos, etc) is a violation of trademark, and possibly copyright on design elements, etc)"
This sounds like a big assumption from you that they were doing that... oh wait you can read minds, so sure this *must* be true :)
"You don't even have to specifically hit counterfeiting to get this one shut down (and it's down, BTW)."
You are correct, apparently you do have to be able to read the minds of ICE to know whether they are going to shut you down or not since they don't give you any warning, notice, or even a chance to explain your side.
You can read their minds apparently, but what about the rest of us "normals"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
So should Ford slam the door on Cobra or Elinore replicas? What about Chevy slamming the door on Foose and other hot-rod designers? Wouldn't that be the same as in this scenario?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Because the original manufacturer of such cars is no longer selling them. A trademark only has value if it is being used to denote the source of the goods. In the case of replica cars, if the original manufacturer is not currently selling cars that display the mark of these famous cars, then there's no infringement because the manufacturer has no rights to the mark. On the other hand, Rolex still makes watches and uses the ROLEX mark to signify the source of such watches. Therefore, making a replica watch that displays the ROLEX mark would be an infringing use of the ROLEX mark.
So should Ford slam the door on Cobra or Elinore replicas? What about Chevy slamming the door on Foose and other hot-rod designers? Wouldn't that be the same as in this scenario?
Is Ford currently selling cars with the Cobra or Elinore mark? Is Chevy currently selling cars with the Foose mark? If not, then no, it's not the same. Why? Because if you're not using the mark, you have no rights to the mark.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
The automotive world is full of lawsuits, and likely more to come considering that both Ford and Chevy have gone back into the business of making "body in white" reproductions of their 60's classic cars (Ford with the original Mustang, Chevy with the original Camaro).
Can you give me an example of a replica of a famous car, that uses the car's name, and is an actually replica and not just a 'tribute'?
Trademarks are trademarks. You can't get around them very easily, especially if you try to use them in exactly the same marketplace.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Most evidence suggests people aren't fooled by a Prado bag.
Further, duplicating something (and including logos, etc) is a violation of trademark, and possibly copyright on design elements, etc). You don't even have to specifically hit counterfeiting to get this one shut down (and it's down, BTW).
Yeah... Hitting a website is really going to stop people from selling (or buying) counterfeit goods for a cheaper price
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Tricking your friends into thinking you own a genuine Rolex when you don't isn't illegal and it has nothing to do with the original sale, when you bought something you knew wasn't real. Trademark law exists to protect buyers from unscrupulous sellers, not to protect the buyers friends from being fooled into think the buyer has a better watch than he really does.
Duplication is not a violation of trademark a priori even when the trademark itself is duplicated. There is no fashion copyright. It is true though that you don't have to specifically hit any legal argument that's true to get things shut down. You just have to have friends in high places, like ICE.
I can't believe you would actually argue 'well obviously they're guilty or why would we have seized the domain' and think it's people other than yourself that make it difficult to have a discussion on this site. Suspicion and police action on that suspicion prove nothing on their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
Not.
There is an unbridled and unwarranted desire for control over that which is claimed to be a free market. Imaginary property legislation has ulterior motives, do you support this?
"visible emblems of success "
Ha ha - this is too funny.
"FAKE MIKE. FAKE ARTICLES. FAKE DATA"
This message brought to you by an authentic shill troll.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
I think I speak for the 99% when I say "Yes, yes we do."
In find it interesting that you place so much value on your image - your opinion that "true success" = "appearance of success" = "fancy expensive things" makes me pity you :(
P.S. Mike doesn't seem to say most of the things you say, maybe read the article again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with counterfeit goods is that they're counterfeit.
"The existence of counterfeit goods is fraud in itself"
This doesn't make sense. Absent a person to fool how can their, by definition, be fraud? There can't be, you're just making up definitions to suit your rhetoric.
"How about faked academic research"
If everyone knows its fake up front isn't is just science fiction at that point? Speaking of fiction isn't 'fake' a selling point for such things? OotB: Nope, fake is evil and should be hated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Counterfeit goods are frauds only when they claim to be something they are not. And no one here is arguing that that is a good thing. But if the product includes a disclaimer stating that the article is a replica, the term counterfeit simply cannot apply. True, it's not nice if it's done in fine print, but we're not talking about the fine print here. If I walk into a store named "Replicas," do you really think I should have any expectation that the watch I'm looking at is a Rolex?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, there probably are people who can make the continuous movement, but most cheap replica makers won't bother - it's expensive and therefore would put the price of the replica up, making it less desirable.
That's my two penny's to this discussion, probably not entirely relevant, but hey, that's me, not entirely relevant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Now let me ask a question. Who is held liable when someone is stabbed by a pencil? Is it:
A) The manufacturer of the pencil
B) The person who bought the pencil
C) The person who did the stabbing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
D) "Big Search."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If I really were curious about the authenticity of an item and couldn't determine authenticity myself, I would ask an expert to appraise it. If the expert cannot determine authenticity, I wouldn't buy it, or at least wouldn't buy it for any more than the price of a replica.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
For some part of the population, the brand is devalued by counterfeits. Mike is claiming that for a different part, the aspirational aspect of knock-off goods helps the brand. Nobody knows what the net result is.
> Rolex is far from being damaged and is actually in such a good position that people would pay to even look like they own one
I don't understand why anybody would buy a $5,000 watch that is going to be perceived by most to be a $50 watch. I do understand that people will buy a $50 watch to try to fool others into believing they have a $5,000 watch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"I don't understand why anybody would buy a $5,000 watch that is going to be perceived by most to be a $50 watch."
And yet they do so regardless of your understanding. That's what's actually important, not that you understand or that Rolxes be an attractive brand to you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
actual police work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
copy everybody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: copy everybody
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Real Rolex
All of the knock offs are made in China. Isn't China one of Rolex's biggest markets?
If you make a plastic gun that looks like a Glock, does it hurt Glock sales?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How a Status Symbol Can Become A Sub-Prole Artifact.
Of course there is a certain element of falsity in the Casio-wearer's position, as well. A timekeeper is only as good as the process of relating its reading to the real world. If you need to keep time to tenths of a second, the timekeeper needs to be built into some other machine, so that it can automatically record or initiate events. It cannot be a watch anymore, in short. The kind of watch a strictly rational person buys is therefore a cheap digital watch, which can be kept within generally accepted limits of punctuality by being adjusted once a year or so.
However, the real issue is going to be that the kind of people who work at McDonald's, and who obviously cannot afford a real Rolex will be wearing fake Rolexes, not as "passing," but as a kind of cargo-cult reaction, an expression of a fantasy totally detached from reality, of being a rock star instead of asking "Do you want fries with that?" The Casio-wearer might like you to think that he got a bigger bonus than he actually got, but, if you know him, you know approximately where he works, and in what kind of job, and you aren't very likely to mis-estimate his income by a factor of ten. The kind of person who is wearing a fake Rolex will be someone who will never even be within reaching distance of a real Rolex. If there are a hundred fake Rolexes for every real Rolex, someone wearing a real Rolex will be presumed, at sight, to be McDonald's counter help or something like that, and the people who could afford to buy Rolexes will refuse to buy Rolexes.
Suppose you see a woman on the street, wearing a tiara of "diamonds," comparing favorably in size and number with the British Crown Jewels. You don't for a moment think the things are real, of course, and you assume they were borrowed from a little girl's dress-up set. The only question remaining in your mind is whether the woman is a crazy street person, or an actress doing street theater (eg. a political demonstration). Suppose you raise a Rolex to that level. Back during the last war, the one in Vietnam, the Yippies had a star turn, two men in travesty of military uniform, with plastic airplane models glued to their hats, who were known as "General Hershey Bar," and "General Waste-More-Land," in mockery of the actual generals, Lewis Hershey and William Westmoreland. and who gave comic speeches. Imagine an Occupy Wall Street demonstrator, with about forty fake Rolexes stitched to his coat, in neat rows running all the way up the sleeves to the shoulders, declaiming "I am the uber-capitalist! The new Anti-Christ, and and I am the number of the Beast! I need all these six-hundred and sixty-six Rolex watches to keep track of how many jobs I am shipping to China!" And much more to the same effect. He gives a stylish performance, and gets lots of television coverage. At that point, it is conceivable that a great many potential Rolex customers would simply not want to wear Rolexes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How a Status Symbol Can Become A Sub-Prole Artifact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But if you actually go to the .com site, you get a defamatory statement then get redirected to that PSA video that is (apparently) itself pirated by ICE.
wouldn't it be nice if a government obeyed its own laws?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't care if it says ROLEX and isn't as long as it is accurate. My own watch is radio controlled from the atomic clock cost �25 UK. That keeps me in line with the clocks at the radio station.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
flagged ICE videos on youtube as spam
I flagged is spam mass advertising... hehe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
meh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]