As part of Greenpeace’s Barbie campaign to draw attention to Mattel’s use of packaging connected to deforestation in Indonesia, Greenpeace USA ran satirical Facebook ads like the one above.
After running the ads for three days, we received a notice late last night that the ads were being removed due to a third-party complaint on trademark infringement. Click here to see a screenshot of the whole notice.According to our legal analysis prior to the campaign, this complaint to Facebook that Greenpeace violated trademark rights is a meritless attempt to stop us from conveying to the public the practices of Mattel that contribute to deforestation.Greenpeace used Ken and Barbie in a satirical, noncommercial way, which falls outside of trademark protection.This is an attempt to silence our right to free speech, the sharing of information on the internet and our work to make Mattel protect rainforests and the 400 remaining Sumatran tigers in the wild.We are all being silenced by this action, so please join in telling Mattel’s CEO to cut his company’s ties to deforestation.The web should be a free and open conduit for information and ideas.
Can you help us keep it that way by promoting this mock Ken Facebook profile demanding Mattel protect forests?
Guess the police have to continue to look like the fools they act like in order to support the likes of Mattel and other corporations who support the ...
Guess the police have to continue to look like the fools they act like in order to support the likes of Mattel and other corporations who support the destruction of Rainforest et al, around the world. They arrest and charge (?) and release and they keep on the merry-go-round of the establishments idiocy. Enjoyed the mattel video. I assume the charges are trespassing, and there must be something illegal about driving the pink thing on the streets I suppose, but the execessive police present is a waste of time and money and shows how dumb they are!
June 11, 2011 at 10:43
To post a comment you need to be signed in.
I blogged about this at http://atlantatmlawyer.com/2011/06/fair-noncommercial-trademark-use/ ... in short, I think the ad got bounced because the copy...
I blogged about this at http://atlantatmlawyer.com/2011/06/fair-noncommercial-trademark-use/ ... in short, I think the ad got bounced because the copy doesn't reference the satirical goal. I mean, on its face, the ad to me looks like it could be from Mattel, and confusion is the issue trademark law purports to address. As I said in the blog, you may have a point as against Mattel for fair use, but Facebook won't, and can't, rely on that.
June 13, 2011 at 5:12
I wanna support you guys but why is Barbie the bad guy here and not Mattel? I would have loved to see a campaign with Barbie and Ken fighting back aga...
I wanna support you guys but why is Barbie the bad guy here and not Mattel? I would have loved to see a campaign with Barbie and Ken fighting back against Mattel. You had a chance to make Barbie, a normally sexualized woman, into an activist.
June 21, 2011 at 21:21
1 - 3 of 3 results.
Are you sure you want to remove this comment?
Are you sure to report this comment as abuse?
[T04B] BLOG ENTRY EXTERNAL
All comments on the Greenpeace blogs are moderated before they appear on the site, and this takes time. We appreciate your patience and ask that you refrain from posting the same comment repeatedly. When posting a blog comment, please be respectful and follow our policy.
© GREENPEACE 2013