MoveOn's bad trademark claims

Robert Cox:

Internal documents obtained by The Examiner shine new light on MoveOn.org’s “General Betray Us” ad and raise fresh questions about the far-left advocacy group’s misleading statements on the issue and its relationship with Google, a major donor to its political action committee.

The documents show how MoveOn.org used dubious claims of trademark infringement and threats of litigation to silence critics of its recent controversial full-page ad in The New York Times attacking Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. general in Iraq, which appeared the day he was testifying before Congress on the war effort. Among those critics was Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who is seeking a third term.

...

Jennifer Lindenauer, MoveOn.org’s communications director, likewise sought to create distance between the trademark complaint and the “General Betray Us” controversy. According to an Oct. 15 Wired magazine report, Lindenauer said MoveOn.org filed its complaint with Google to prevent “fraudsters” from using the advocacy group’s name to collect contributions under false pretenses. She said MoveOn.org “opted out” of the complaint as soon as it become aware of the controversy over the Collins campaign ad.

Documents obtained by The Examiner show, however, that MoveOn.org’s complaint to Google was part of a broader effort by the advocacy group to silence its critics through threats and intimidation and had nothing to do with preventing fraud.

MoveOn.org filed its trademark complaint with Google on Sept.19 in the midst of the bitter public debate generated by the Petraeus ad. On the same day, MoveOn.org’s Carrie Olson sent a “cease and desist” letter to CafePress.com demanding that the online merchandiser stop selling anti-MoveOn.org T-shirts designed by “Waitress Polly,” a blogger from a military family who created the T-shirts to protest the “General Betray Us” ad.

None of the complaints filed by MoveOn.org with Google or CafePress.com asserted that a “third party” was making fraudulent use of MoveOn.org’s name to collect financial contributions.

...

There is much more. Based on the facts presented in Cox's piece it is hard to see how MoveOn could make a good faith claim of trademark violations in the case of the Collins ad yet:

... Google’s complaint form used by MoveOn.org required that the trademark owner make a legal affirmation that the complainant has a “good faith belief” that the use of the trademark is not “permissible under law.”

Google has much to explain in this episode and so far has produced little. Since this episode MoveOn has conceded that the Collins ads are permissible under the law.

Google is hurting its own reputation with this kind of conduct and is in effect associating itself with a controversial organization that has been widely condemned for its egregious attack against Gen. Petraeus. Google needs to take action to distance itself from MoveOn.