Portal:Freedom of speech/Selected article/53

Beck v. Eiland-Hall is a case filed before the United Nations agency the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in 2009 by political commentator Glenn Beck concerning the satirical website "GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990.com". The site was created by Isaac Eiland-Hall as a parody of Beck's commentary style. Its name was based on a joke initially used by comedian Gilbert Gottfried at a 2008 comedy roast of Bob Saget, in which Gottfried jokingly implored listeners to disregard the (non-existent) rumor that Saget raped and murdered a girl in 1990. Online posters began an Internet meme comparing Gottfried's joke with Beck's style of arguing, by requesting Beck disprove he had committed the act in question. Eiland-Hall launched his website on September 1, 2009. Beck filed a complaint to the WIPO under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), asserting that the domain name of the website was defamatory and claimed trademark infringement in its use of his name. Marc Randazza represented Eiland-Hall and filed a response brief to WIPO comparing the case to the U.S. Supreme Court case Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, asserting that the website's domain name was protected political speech and satirical political humor. Randazza asserted that Beck's action (going to the WIPO to get the website taken down) contradicted his previous statements that he preferred U.S. law over international law. On October 29, 2009 the WIPO ruled against Beck, and concluded Eiland-Hall was making a political statement through parody in a justified usage of the Glenn Beck mark which did not seek profit. Commentators noted that Beck's actions triggered the Streisand effect; his suit against the website drew increased attention to it. Representatives of Public Citizen, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Citizen Media Law Project agreed that Beck's trademark claim in his complaint against the website was ridiculous. The assistant director of the Citizen Media Law Project commented at the conclusion of the case, "It's good to see that this WIPO arbitrator had no interest in allowing Beck to circumvent the guarantees of the U.S. Constitution."