NationStates Jolt Archive

Since the UN thing turned out not to be an April fools joke, and i didn't see another thread on this.
I was wondering how do you all see it ?

to me I see it as a parody and fair use. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc seems to make it clear that even if a parody is run for profit it is protected.

I wish the Admin had refused to change the name of the UN in game and written back that the Us of the UN name, symbol, and abbreviation was covered under parody and fair use laws.

I, for one, will welcome our new World Assembly Overlords. :D

I am not saying I am disappointed. just saying it would have been interesting so see them fight this. I understand why they did not though (lack of money for lawyers and court cost).

Though I do find the it really childish of the UN to view the copy right of their name in such a way. What next the US goverment charges me for flying the US flag at my home?

I am not saying I am disappointed. just saying it would have been interesting so see them fight this. I understand why they did not though (lack of money for lawyers and court cost). You're not saying you're disappointed? You had me fooled...
Though I do find the it really childish of the UN to view the copy right of their name in such a way. What next the US goverment charges me for flying the US flag at my home?False analogy.

I think it an extended prank... nobody took it in on April 1, so they had to continue it...

Things that suggest this is a prank:
-There is no mention of this Andrei Terekhov anywhere on the UN site or the internet in general. There is an Andrei Terekhov involved in the UN but from what google gave me I see no indication he is the Deputy Director of one of their legal teams
-The header on the two pages is different (no phone numbers on page 2)
-the URL for the WA page is still: http://www.nationstates.net/page=un
- It seems just too fiction legalese... like you read in fiction books

Things that suggest that it is not a prank:
- The fact that if it isn't max could be charged with forgery
- It is April 2 and still up
- Phone number and references check out

So, moral of the story is that, if it is a prank max is up on fraud charges, if it is not a prank, Max is up on Copy right charges...

I think copyright infringement carries a lesser jail term... So it may just be a not prank...

I propose we all prank call the UN :)

The UN has made some computer games so it is not far fetched to imagine that they might make a nation simulation game that revolves around UN resolutions. You may not use another's trademark in a field of business they are active in. You can't name hamburgers or computers Mac since that would infringe on McDonald's or Apple's trademarks in their fields.

The point UN makes that the use of their trademark could make it seem like NS is authorized, endorsed or sponsored by them is also valid.

No big deal, the name World Assembly is okay too.

So, moral of the story is that, if it is a prank max is up on fraud charges, if it is not a prank, Max is up on Copy right charges...

Either way it sounds like he's screwed.:(

I really do hope it is a prank, so i can become the UN Department again.:)

My guess is, it IS an AF joke, and it will continue until April 3, because that's when the current NS WA proposal passes or fails.

Either way it sounds like he's screwed.:(

Well.. unless it is not a prank and he complies...

Almost forgot to nitpick on that copyright and trademark are two entirely different things.

Copyright is an exclusive right to copy information you have authored meant to give you a chance to profit from authoring the information by selling copies of it.

Trademark is an exclusive right to use a name or emblem to identify your company or product meant to allow your customers to recognize your products as yours so you can establish an identity and a reputation in a market where you never meet your customers face to face.

Hmm, it looks like Max really DID get a C&D letter. It seems unreal, but it's not the first time an organization has done something dumb.

Hmm, it looks like Max really DID get a C&D letter. It seems unreal, but it's not the first time an organization has done something dumb.

Well, you have to look at it from the point of view of the UN... If the fake UN keeps on enacting resolutions every three days, people are gonna start expecting the real UN to actually do something... People are going to question the real UN, and the worlds leaders will all come and join our UN. And it will just be all downhill from there. Can you imagine all the countries of the world with the "Hippos are really quite large" legislation brought in?

Where's this C&D letter everyone keeps talking about? I don't see it on my NS page or anything.

http://www.maxbarry.com/misc/undemand.pdf

Yesterday, I was like "Hell, what a big thing, and no thread about it yet!?", but then I thought "Yeah, right, April 1st". But seeing it still today,...

But on the other hand:

1) If the World Assembly is not this year's prank, then what is it?
2) No mod has dropped by to comment that this is, in fact, a real thing - so I largely expect it to be this April's trickery.
3) The name "United Nations" and its logo is used in an infinite lot of other fictional works, ranging from Deus Ex to Command & Conquer. Nobody sued against that.

Yesterday, I was like "Hell, what a big thing, and no thread about it yet!?", but then I thought "Yeah, right, April 1st". But seeing it still today,...

But on the other hand:

1) If the World Assembly is not this year's prank, then what is it?
2) No mod has dropped by to comment that this is, in fact, a real thing - so I largely expect it to be this April's trickery.

http://www.nationstates.net/page=news

maybe its time the Internet smash this global organization for peace containing every man woman and child on Earth?

I think its an April fools on Max myself

I suggest we all go against the resolution, just to see what happens if it doesn't pass.

I like the idea of having a generic world assembly, to be honest >.>

therefore I desperately cling onto the notion that it's for real.

Edit: WA makes me think of "wabbit", though, so the name is a bit off =(

What caught my attention is actually the lack of a reference number. Although I'm not too sure if that is due to it being removed intentionally by Max. Working in a government institution I've handled similar papers and most of them contain a reference number, or no indication of the presence of any reference number so I'm assuming its an April Fools joke really but thats the only thing that felt odd to me. I understand the parodys are allowed under the copywright law but I'm not too sure about the laws regarding trademark issues.

With the world in self destruct mode...doesn't the UN have anything better to do than brow beat a bunch of innocent people trying to play a game???If they cared about their countries half as much as alot of us do,then they would earn the name United Nations. GEEZ!



(I do think the WA symbol should be a different color than green.It's hard to see on the smaller icons)

An AF joke that extends until the 3rd? Pretty elaborate. Yet easily picked apart

Although, I do think this is an AF joke...Do you really think that the UN would send a C&D letter via EMAIL?

Secondly for god's sake. Look at the date printed on the C&D letter, January 21st? if this was real, then the UN would have obviously done something about it themselves rather than letting NS continue with the name,logos and all associated titles up until April.

As already stated above me, No "andrei" is to be found anywhere.

"...uses the UN name and Emblem, without authorization"
and in the next paragraph "..by appropriate measures the use, without authorisation by competent authorities"

NOTICE?? american spelling of "authorization" in the first paragraph, Correct spelling of "authorisation" in the next paragrpah.

The UN would be far beyond the point of changing the conventions used within a formal, /legal/ letter. Not to mention, they constantly switch between "United Nations" and "UN" (without first establishing what UN stands for in the letter, as with correct legal convention)

Ending/Signature should be on the left of the notice, not the right, and the full title of the UN (in french) is NOT "Nations Unies" it's ONU (organisation de nations unies) and on all OFFICIAL UN letters it would say this...

A standard cease and desist letter would also have a paragraph containing the consequences if one doesn't comply, and a date to which one has to comply, this does not.

Lastly, UN resolutions are not written in the form "92(1) of december 1946" It would be written A/RES/2/92.1 (if that resolution did even exist.

My source:

I have participated in the MUN, and seen REAL UN letters and notices. not to mention a cease and desist letter would be sent by their lawyers, with contact details for them, not from the organisation itself.

I, for one, will welcome our new World Assembly Overlords. :D

Ditto!:D

But again, if it's an AF joke, it has fooled me so far.:eek:

I totally forgot about April Fools. This has me fooled if it is a joke, but if not I'm laughing my ass off. Because, seriously...

...is the UN so desperate for money that it targets the Overlord Max? Why do you target our Benevolent Dictator, oh UN?! WHY?! HE IS OUR MASTER, OUR LIFE! WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO HIM!??!?!?!?!?!

*cries*

I totally forgot about April Fools. This has me fooled if it is a joke, but if not I'm laughing my ass off. Because, seriously...

...is the UN so desperate for money that it targets the Overlord Max? Why do you target our Benevolent Dictator, oh UN?! WHY?! HE IS OUR MASTER, OUR LIFE! WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO HIM!??!?!?!?!?!

*cries*

*slaps*:eek:
Calm down!
*pats in the head*
This is what they want, to cause us pain, the horrid UN monster!!!:mad:

j/k

*slaps*:eek:
Calm down!
*pats in the head*
This is what they want, to cause us pain, the horrid UN monster!!!:mad:

j/k

THE MAAASSSTTE- *is slapped*

*sighs*

Yes, to cause us pain, to make us submit finally to the UN! THATS WHAT THEY WANT...

(Lol)

But yea, seriously....This has to be an April Fools joke. Our Benevolent Dictator for Life Max Barry surely wouldn't allow a puny world organization for peace and sekret money transfers to get to us! He has the most powerful imaginary army in the world! HE HAS SPACE SHIPS THAT CAN DESTROY PLANETS! He could stand before the UN and pretend to make them submit!

At least thats the threat I'm thinking the UN is afraid of....that everything we do here might actually become real. Lmfao.

THE MAAASSSTTE- *is slapped*

*sighs*

Yes, to cause us pain, to make us submit finally to the UN! THATS WHAT THEY WANT...

(Lol)

But yea, seriously....This has to be an April Fools joke. Our Benevolent Dictator for Life Max Barry surely wouldn't allow a puny world organization for peace and sekret money transfers to get to us! He has the most powerful imaginary army in the world! HE HAS SPACE SHIPS THAT CAN DESTROY PLANETS! He could stand before the UN and pretend to make them submit!

At least thats the threat I'm thinking the UN is afraid of....that everything we do here might actually become real. Lmfao.

That's a good forum participant.:D
Yesssss, we must think like this in order to fight back.

FIGHT THA POWAH OF THA UN!!!!:mp5:

That's a good forum participant.:D
Yesssss, we must think like this in order to fight back.

FIGHT THA POWAH OF THA UN!!!!:mp5:

Or we could just send Reploid Productions after them. They'd crap their pants in an instant and submit to her will.

*drool* Like she did me...

*sings*just one look..*sings*

I am still banned from membership...I just had to test that.

Given that the chance of this being an April fools joke is increasing.

I think it is best we proceed with this thread as though it is not an April fools joke.


here is the issue with the trade marks.
http://www.publaw.com/fairusetrade.html

the main quote from here is Generally, the use by an author of a trademark in a fictional work to describe or identify particular goods or services, such as "driving in my Ford", "eating a Hershey bar", "playing with my Beanie Baby" will not be considered an infringement

Here is why it is important to me things like this be fought. This is the UN saying "you can not use my name in fiction." Taken to this level of enforcement it would become impossible to write a fictional book, movie, or internet game with any reference to real world governments or international organizations. This isn't just this game it is line in the sand. To be perfectly honest the UN needs to be the most apt for parody because of its position in the world.

Well the chance of this being an April fools joking is increasing.
But i would like to proceed as though it is not an April fools joke for the time being.

Trade mark fair use issue: http://www.publaw.com/fairusetrade.html

Generally, the use by an author of a trademark in a fictional work to describe or identify particular goods or services, such as "driving in my Ford", "eating a Hershey bar", "playing with my Beanie Baby" will not be considered an infringement...

Seems pretty clear cut that this game is fiction, it is even based off of a fictional book.

This level of interpretation of trade mark and copy right laws would pretty much make it impossible to write fictional work set in the real world. It isn't just about this game it is about the right of author's everywhere to parody and write fictional accounts taking place in the real world.

Am I mistaken or is this still the ONLY thread dealing with this? And it has only 3 pages? People, this is BIG! Why is there so little discussion?

Well the chance of this being an April fools joking is increasing.
But i would like to proceed as though it is not an April fools joke for the time being.

Trade mark fair use issue: http://www.publaw.com/fairusetrade.html



Seems pretty clear cut that this game is fiction, it is even based off of a fictional book.

This level of interpretation of trade mark and copy right laws would pretty much make it impossible to write fictional work set in the real world. It isn't just about this game it is about the right of author's everywhere to parody and write fictional accounts taking place in the real world.

I'd say that if it is indeed not a protracted April fool's prank, that the problem comes from him using both the name and the emblem.

I'd say that if it is indeed not a protracted April fool's prank, that the problem comes from him using both the name and the emblem.

The name is even easier to use as it is covered under copy right fair use laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

I know it is wiki but it does a good job.


Another major issue with me is What right does the UN have to threaten an American Citizen? There is a reason I belong to a country it is so that anything I do over here in my country needs to be addressed to me through my own country. No Foreign goverment, no UN should have the right to directly threaten me so long as I live in a functioning nation state.

The name is even easier to use as it is covered under copy right fair use laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

I know it is wiki but it does a good job.


Another major issue with me is What right does the UN have to threaten an American Citizen? There is a reason I belong to a country it is so that anything I do over here in my country needs to be addressed to me through my own country. No Foreign goverment, no UN should have the right to directly threaten me so long as I live in a functioning nation state.

And that has what to do with this?

Another major issue with me is What right does the UN have to threaten an American Citizen?

I'd written approximately three paragraphs explaining when the UN does have the authority to take action against a citizen of a sovereign state, even if they are a US citizen, but I ultimately decided to go the much simpler route:

Max is Australian you twit.

True, it might not have been necessary for me to use the derogatory term "twit," it provides nothing constructive to this post and serves only to imply a hostility on my part which I do not truly feel, but seriously, who could refuse an opportunity to call somebody a "twit?" It's something that so rarely presents itself, and it feels oh-so-right. Come on, give it a try, you'll like it.

I'd written approximately three paragraphs explaining when the UN does have the authority to take action against a citizen of a sovereign state, even if they are a US citizen, but I ultimately decided to go the much simpler route:

Max is Australian you twit.

True, it might not have been necessary for me to use the derogatory term "twit," it provides nothing constructive to this post and serves only to imply a hostility on my part which I do not truly feel, but seriously, who could refuse an opportunity to call somebody a "twit?" It's something that so rarely presents itself, and it feels oh-so-right. Come on, give it a try, you'll like it.

You're a twit!

That was fun. :D

See, what did I say? Just be careful, one too many and suddenly you're hooked, spouting off in the middle of class and getting dragged out of church with accusations of possession, all the while screaming inflamatory insults at your teacher and pastor. Trust me, you need to keep control. Only use it when you feel an exceptionally strong urge, or when you can get the amusing response of "What the heck? Did this guy just call me a 'twit?'"

I'd say that if it is indeed not a protracted April fool's prank, that the problem comes from him using both the name and the emblem.

I'd written approximately three paragraphs explaining when the UN does have the authority to take action against a citizen of a sovereign state, even if they are a US citizen, but I ultimately decided to go the much simpler route:

Max is Australian you twit.

True, it might not have been necessary for me to use the derogatory term "twit," it provides nothing constructive to this post and serves only to imply a hostility on my part which I do not truly feel, but seriously, who could refuse an opportunity to call somebody a "twit?" It's something that so rarely presents itself, and it feels oh-so-right. Come on, give it a try, you'll like it.



it doesn't matter that he is Australian or American. My bad for assuming but the UN letter really went into the US laws. And still the UN has no right to threaten an Australian with criminal prosecution, fascism is something you should only deal with from your own goverment.

it doesn't matter that he is Australian or American. My bad for assuming but the UN letter really went into the US laws. And still the UN has no right to threaten an Australian with criminal prosecution, fascism is something you should only deal with from your own goverment.

Haha. Firstly, intellectual property law is international and secondly they weren't threatening him with a criminal prosecution.

It'd be nice to know what the effing hell you're talking about. I've gleaned that (joke or not) the subject is a threat against Max for using the term 'UN' in his books, or here on the site? Could someone be more specific please?

An AF joke that extends until the 3rd? Pretty elaborate. Yet easily picked apart

Although, I do think this is an AF joke...Do you really think that the UN would send a C&D letter via EMAIL?

Secondly for god's sake. Look at the date printed on the C&D letter, January 21st? if this was real, then the UN would have obviously done something about it themselves rather than letting NS continue with the name,logos and all associated titles up until April.

As already stated above me, No "andrei" is to be found anywhere.

"...uses the UN name and Emblem, without authorization"
and in the next paragraph "..by appropriate measures the use, without authorisation by competent authorities"

NOTICE?? american spelling of "authorization" in the first paragraph, Correct spelling of "authorisation" in the next paragrpah.

The UN would be far beyond the point of changing the conventions used within a formal, /legal/ letter. Not to mention, they constantly switch between "United Nations" and "UN" (without first establishing what UN stands for in the letter, as with correct legal convention)

Ending/Signature should be on the left of the notice, not the right, and the full title of the UN (in french) is NOT "Nations Unies" it's ONU (organisation de nations unies) and on all OFFICIAL UN letters it would say this...

A standard cease and desist letter would also have a paragraph containing the consequences if one doesn't comply, and a date to which one has to comply, this does not.

Lastly, UN resolutions are not written in the form "92(1) of december 1946" It would be written A/RES/2/92.1 (if that resolution did even exist.

My source:

I have participated in the MUN, and seen REAL UN letters and notices. not to mention a cease and desist letter would be sent by their lawyers, with contact details for them, not from the organisation itself.

Telekenesis makes several good points. Especially the point about how C&D letters are sent. If they were sent by email how would the sending organization know the letter got to its intended recepient. I also agree with telekenesis that it would be sent by lawyers representing the sending organization.

My hunch is that this is an elaborate AF joke played on Mr. Barry. :D

Well, you have to look at it from the point of view of the UN... If the fake UN keeps on enacting resolutions every three days, people are gonna start expecting the real UN to actually do something... People are going to question the real UN, and the worlds leaders will all come and join our UN. And it will just be all downhill from there. Can you imagine all the countries of the world with the "Hippos are really quite large" legislation brought in?Quoted

Telekenesis makes several good points. Especially the point about how C&D letters are sent. If they were sent by email how would the sending organization know the letter got to its intended recepient. I also agree with telekenesis that it would be sent by lawyers representing the sending organization.

My hunch is that this is an elaborate AF joke played on Mr. Barry. :D

C&D letters to my knowlege are ALWAYS sent by registered mail.

C&D letters to my knowlege are ALWAYS sent by registered mail.

Of course they aren't. Depends entirely on the jurisdiction, what method of delivery is required, and what services are actually available.

Of course they aren't. Depends entirely on the jurisdiction, what method of delivery is required, and what services are actually available.

I have recieved a cease and desist via email from the MPAA, so it's certainly possible.

it doesn't matter that he is Australian or American. My bad for assuming but the UN letter really went into the US laws. And still the UN has no right to threaten an Australian with criminal prosecution, fascism is something you should only deal with from your own goverment.It would be an interesting world if organizations were prohibited from engaging in legal activities to protect their rights...

Of course they aren't. Depends entirely on the jurisdiction, what method of delivery is required, and what services are actually available.

I have recieved a cease and desist via email from the MPAA, so it's certainly possible.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the information. :)

It'd be nice to know what the effing hell you're talking about. I've gleaned that (joke or not) the subject is a threat against Max for using the term 'UN' in his books, or here on the site? Could someone be more specific please?

Specifically targeted toward this site.

Why don't the new World Assembly draft a resolution declaring war on the UN. Someone can print it out in nice parchment and send it on it's way. Would be a funny right?

I actually thought it might be real.

Who cares though. It's not a big deal and let the UN have a victory for once...

Well, you'd think if the United Nations was really worthless and irrelevant they wouldn't have bothered with the C&D order to begin with.

It would be an interesting world if organizations were prohibited from engaging in legal activities to protect their rights...

They can but they need to go through proper channels. France can not show up in the Australia and threaten a Australian with arrest and fines. under the same notion the UN as a governing body to the world (in theory at least) can not contact an Australian and threaten him with imprisonment and fine. If the UN wants him to stop they need to go through the Australian goverment because we formed the modern nation state in order that we only have to put up with one fascist at a time, that being our own government.

Why don't the new World Assembly draft a resolution declaring war on the UN. Someone can print it out in nice parchment and send it on it's way. Would be a funny right?We'd send them a letter telling them how angry we are? Now that would be funny.
They can but they need to go through proper channels. France can not show up in the Australia and threaten a Australian with arrest and fines. under the same notion the UN as a governing body to the world (in theory at least) can not contact an Australian and threaten him with imprisonment and fine. If the UN wants him to stop they need to go through the Australian goverment because we formed the modern nation state in order that we only have to put up with one fascist at a time, that being our own government.Bullshit. The UN, and any other organization or individual for that matter, have to go through the Australian (or whatever other applicable) legal system, which appears to have happened. Whether the UN is a world governing body or a soda manufacturer is entirely irrelevant in this case, as is the Australian government getting involved.