Oh Noes! Fake Chuck West Blog Gets Takedown Notice
Fake Canon Blogs Get Takedown Notice
What happens when a company has a dedicated, loyal fanbase who yearn for information and virtually none is forthcoming? Right- they go out of their way to speculate, make it up, and overblow the slightest little hints.
So it shouldn’t be surprising when pointless blogs open up and start filling in the information the companies won’t tell us.
On occasion, it’s taken too far though, and the companies object. Well one of the Canon guys took it a bit too far and has been reprimanded for by it several high-priced, humorless lawyers.
This is a shame all around- it’s up to the speculators to try and not take it too far and it’s up the companies to put enough info in the pipeline to keep everyone appraised of what’s happening. It’s become a whole different world over the last few years- it’s no longer just a few people in a local camera club gossiping and if the companies don’t like what they’re seeing, they should simply give us official information and sites that speculate and put out rumors will simply cease to be appealing.
And hey, what a good time to remind everyone that NikonWatch has no official relation to Nikon Corp or subsidiaries and has not been approved by them. The Nikon Watch logo is a parody of the official Nikon logo.
Every attempt has been made to ensure that NikonWatch is not confused with Nikon itself.
Tags: competition
February 16th, 2009 at 13:55
I don’t see how any manufacturer can stop a blog about their cameras unless the site posts unauthorized undisclosed information from insiders. About the only leg they have to stand on aside from “trade secrets” is trademark infringement, but that’s pretty weak.
That’s why Apple was able to stop one rumor site, but not the other two.
Of course, some guy operating out of his bedroom doesn’t want to incur the wrath/expense of lawyers and that’s what Canon was probably counting on. But Canon has no legal standing to do so…this is just harassment. Unfortunately, the laws do nothing from stopping big companies from engaging in this kind of behavior.
February 16th, 2009 at 15:10
Zoetmb- I differ- Fake Chuck did post some stuff could have been interpreted as violent as well as personal data (which isn’t secret, but isn’t sporting either).
He also used the Canon logo, but that objection was thrown in by lawyers just because.
He altered the logo, removed the possibly offensive violent reference and left everything else. Hopefully, that will be sufficient.
February 16th, 2009 at 23:14
I was speaking in general terms, not in terms of this case. I have since read the legal document and Canon based most of their arguments on the fact that the person violated WordPress’ terms of service…basically, Canon “cried to Mommy”.
If Canon’s arguments are accurate, this guy did use very bad judgement. But would anyone think Fake Chuck was real Chuck? There was also some guy posing as Steve Jobs, but everyone knew it was a joke and I don’t think even over-paranoid and over-sensitive Apple went after the guy.
February 17th, 2009 at 13:24
>But would anyone think Fake Chuck was real Chuck?
No, Canon’s just trying to throw things onto the wall and see what sticks.
Unfortunately, given that the US does not have a ‘loser pays’ system of lawsuits, lawyers and big companies get to play these games effectively.