RSS
Twitter
What's The Guinness World Record For Morons In A Hurry Sending Bogus Takedowns?
from the just-wondering... dept
I think we've set a new world record for any particular story being submitted to us here at Techdirt. I'd actually ask the folks at the Guinness Book of World Records to verify that... but I don't think they really want to have much to do with this story. You see, there's a wonderful blog out there called the Fail Blog. If you don't read it regularly, it's like you're not really online at all. It's quite amusing. It usually involves pictures of random (hilarious) "failures" of some kind or another. Last week, it had a great one. It involved the website of the Guinness World Record book, where it had an entry on the "most individuals killed in a terrorist attack." What was the failure? Well... it appears that the Guinness records' web template includes a link on each record for "break this record." Not quite the sort of thing you would think that GWR folks wanted to encourage when it comes to the most people killed in a terrorist attack.
So how does Guinness respond? Certainly not by fixing the screwed up template. And, apparently not by taking some time to think it over while drinking a tall glass of Guinness. Instead, it released the legal hounds on the Fail Blog and threatened the site with a totally bogus trademark infringement claim, saying that because the screenshot included the Guinness World Record logo, it was a trademark violation. Of course, that's preposterous. Still, Fail Blog complied, took down the original, but posted Guinness' letter, its own rather direct response, and a new version of the screenshot with the Guinness World Record logo pixelated. Nobody will ever figure it out now:
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
What a bunch of mooks. FailBlog wins this fight.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Um...
Just because someone says or does something you dont like about you, doesnt make it ILLEGAL.
Needless to say, FAIL.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
AND
Oh AND, I love the line in the letter that say "use of the GBW trademark without permission constitutes trademark infringement" without ANY qualifiers....as if ANY use of ANY kind IS IN FACT infringement, period, across the board. This is not always the case, trademark is NOT a blanket all-encompassing protection against ANY non-permission use.
Greedy Corporations + Soulless Bloodsucking Lawyers = Corruption of Law
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
FAIL FAIL WIN
Original website = small automated fail
Letter = EPIC FAIL
Response = WIN
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I'll tell you what's fail. The comment section of that page on fail blog.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Additional WIN
Also notice the link for the 'full legal response' is a Rick Roll. Epic to the end.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Legal Response
Check out the full legal response, too:
http://icanhaz.com/legalresponse
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Well thank you Guinness World Record, without your ham fisted attempt to censor the internet from exposing your own carelessness I would never have learned about your mistake, the Fail Blog, or your misconstrued interpretation of trademark law.
I hope your lawyers charged you a bunch for their shrewd legal insight.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Troof?
If you have no case under liable laws, on account of it actually happened, just go to the new standby of trademarks! They can't identify you using the identification you use!
OK, it's complete bullshit, but they'll have to spend thousands of dollars to actually call you on it. Everybody wins! (where "everybody"==you and your lawyers.)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I still don't understand why people continue to accept emails as legal and proper communications from corporate lawyers. Reply with a bounce message. Make them do some actual WORK if they want to be idiots!
Although I did like failblog's response!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Not "finally"
Actually, when the fail was first posted (a week prior to this), there was a note that said the record had already been removed from the Guinness site.
This line from FailBlog's response, though, is EPIC WIN:
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Uninteresting because fake
This would be much more interesting if the record was an actual fail by GBWR. Instead somebody just photoshopped a scrape of the GBWR site. A fake fail that includes a real trademark will get a legal response every time. Ho hum how boring.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Uninteresting because fake
Your response is photoshopped. Yay, I can claim everything is photoshopped too!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Uninteresting because fake
http://xkcd.com/331/
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Additional WIN
Icing on the cake.
I love failblog.
Spread the word to those I can who always enjoy a good laugh.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Uninteresting because fake
Actually, you FAIL.
Looking at the GWR Book of 2004, page 84 has the actual record of 2,823 people being killed during September 11th 2001.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
i think you're a big failure mike masnick, b/c you don't know a damn.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
"i think you're a big failure mike masnick, b/c you don't know a damn."
Don't you just love and respect those who have nothing substantial or relevant to share with the community? Instead, they post inane comments designed to insult or otherwise irritate the author of this blog and the other contributors. I admit, I know nothing about Trademark or Copyright law, but I do know that courteous and relevant commentary are necessary in order to better understand every point of view in a given subject matter. I know that this response will fall on deaf/blind individuals who will continue to post their "opinions". However, it is my hope that some will see the light and conform to more civil conversation.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
You fail at English.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
you fail at relevancy b/c your comment is irrelevant to the topic of this article.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
thank you for your preaching. you're better than the rest of us, and while we all burn in hell after death, you will go to heaven. thank you for being a better human being than others.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
jesus the original image is old as hell. i remember seeing it on ytmnd like ages ago (i'd say over 2 years ago).
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
"jesus the original image is old as hell. i remember seeing it on ytmnd like ages ago (i'd say over 2 years ago)."
Pix or it never happened.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Just a quick google reveals that indeed this picture was making the rounds a few years back as something that the Guinness World Book of Records featured but "took down".
Example:
http://www.javno.com/en-world/attack-on-wtc-enters-guinnesss-world-records_20278
So the "page" is certainly very old and was "removed" even earlier. And indeed it's quite probable that the page never existed. I could find no mention of a URL that we could check at the Internet Archive, I will try harder but I don't really expect anything.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Guinness go take a dip in the wading pool you bunch of babies.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Found it, the page existed since 2003 according to this post http://www.krikkit.com/2003/08/
The page was at http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/index.asp?ID=53241
Checked all existing copies at archive.org, from 2003 to 2006, none has "break this record" only "send to a friend" as an option.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
And finally, having a look at the source of the earliest archived pages reveals a commented out flash with id "RateThisRecord"". So
* either a "break this record" button existed in early 2003 and was quickly changed to "rate this record"
* or the button was really "rate this record" in the brief time it existed at all (which would explain the star next to it, btw)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Uninteresting because fake
Exactly! A fake photoshopped comment totally calls into question the credibility of the comment. Contrast that with a fake fail, which is funny in exactly the same way as a real fail!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I wonder how many morons in a hurry come to this blog expecting to find free music torrents?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
OK, that was bad. I just wasted an hour looking at the Fail Blog. :-P
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Yeah, I didn't hit the hour mark, but... yeah.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Morons
What a bunch of morons.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment