The Crossed Pond

There’s a really awesome legal battle going on presently that you probably haven’t heard about.

Glenn Beck has mastered the art of the talking head rhetoric style. Namely, make a lot of implicit suggestions and run a lot of things up the flag pole, but don’t actually say anything you could be held responsible for. Example: “A lot of people are saying that Barack Obama is trying to institute a youth education program, and those people are making comparisons to similar youth education programs under the Third Reich.” “What, that’s ridiculous.” “Oh hey, I know that, I’m just saying a lot of people are asking…is Barack Obama trying to institute a Nazi indoctrination program in our nation’s schools?”

Or, from Beck himself, interviewing Keith Ellison, the only muslim in Congress:

“No offense and I know Muslims, I like Muslims, I’ve been to mosques, I really don’t think Islam is a religion of evil. I think it’s being hijacked, quite frankly. With that being said, you are a Democrat. You are saying let’s cut and run. And I have to tell you, I have been nervous about this interview because what I feel like saying is, sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies. And I know you’re not. I’m not accusing you of being an enemy. But that’s the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way.”

So, some farkers started discussing the allegation that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. You know, they’re not saying he did. They’re just saying…did he?

And thus, http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/ was born.

This site exists to try and help examine the vicious rumour that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. We don’t claim to know the truth — only that the rumour floating around saying that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990 should be discussed. So we’re going to do our part to try and help get to the bottom of this.

Why won’t Glenn Beck deny these allegations? We’re not accusing Glenn Beck of raping and murdering a young girl in 1990 – in fact, we think he didn’t! But we can’t help but wonder, since he has failed to deny these horrible allegations. Why won’t he deny that he raped and killed a young girl in 1990?

That, in itself, is pretty awesome. But then Glenn Beck decided that this wasn’t very funny. Now, Beck knew he couldn’t shut down the website through a libel suit or the like, because the site would fall pretty cleanly under 1st Amendment protections as political satire of a public figure. So instead, he decided to make an appeal to an international body, the World Intellectual Property Organization, asking that the domain name is taken away and given to him. The WIPO is the body of appeal for public figures or companies who are trying to fight cyber-squatters who happened to have the foresight to register, say, www.playboy.net back in 1996. The key is, to get the domain name back, the plaintiff usually has to prove that there will be legitimate confusion arising from the domain name that justified, on the grounds of protecting intellectual property. I.e. if you had a porn site at Coke.com, Coke would probably win that case on the grounds that you’re fooling people by using their brand name. Or, Sean Penn would say that he has a right to www.SeanPenn.com, and the court is likely to agree with him.

Now, that Beck is going this route is funny for two reasons, one serious the other less so. On a serious note, pretty clearly nobody is going to confuse GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990.com for Glenn Beck’s website, so essentially what he’s doing is trying to do an end run around the first amendment and appeal to an international body to really stretch their purpose and declare this an international trade issue. If that works, of course, that’d be a pretty massive jurisdiction-grab on the part of that governing body, wherein it stretches its purpose from protecting trade to mediating 1st amendment disputes while not being beholden to the 1st amendment. That’s pretty sleazy.

The reason that’s funny, of course, is the idea of using a body of international law to bypass our constitution is not one that one would expect someone like Glenn Beck to embrace. But of course that only applies, I guess, in cases where Glenn Beck’s feelings are not being hurt.

Where it gets even better: the guy that runs GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990.com retained himself a lawyer, and between him and his lawyer, are having an absolute field day in their legal briefs. I’ve never seen legal briefs A. as blatantly insulting to the plaintiff as these, or B. as hilarious.

E.g.:

There is no indication that the Respondent has intentionally attempted to confuse anyone searching for Mr. Beck’s own website, nor that anyone was unintentionally confused – even initially. Only an abject imbecile could believe that the domain name would have any connection to the Complainant.

We are not here because the domain name could cause confusion. We do not have a declaration from the president of the international association of imbeciles that his members are blankly staring at the Respondent’s website wondering “where did all the race baiting content go?” We are here because Mr. Beck wants Respondent’s website shut down. He wants it shut down because Respondent’s website makes a poignant and accurate satirical critique of Mr. Beck by parodying Beck’s very rhetorical style. Beck’s skin is too thin to take the criticism, so he wants the site down. Beck is represented by a learned and respected legal team. Accordingly, it is beyond doubt that his counsel advised him that under the First Amendment to the United States’ Constitution, no action in a U.S. Court would be successful. Accordingly, Beck is attempting to use this transnational body to circumvent and subvert the Respondent’s constitutional rights.

Another brief from the lawyer (PDF) (whose name is Mark Randazza), begins by quoting Glenn Beck criticizing liberals for trying to institute a one-world government that will subjugate the American constitution.

“Let me tell you something. When you can’t win with the people, you bump it up to the courts. When you can’t win with the courts, you bump it up to the international level. [...] Once we sign our rights over to international law, the Constitution is officially dead.”

So, Randazza gives Beck a proposal, that the standard for judgment in the case under the UDRP should be the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

I hate to presume anything about anyone, but I presume that Mr. Beck will agree to this stipulation. It would be an interesting day indeed if Mr. Beck preferred to risk that a panelist would apply French law to a case between two Americans over a matter of public discourse…

I am certain that neither party wishes to see First Amendment rights subordinated to international trademark principles, thus unwittingly proving Mr. Beck’s point. Lest this case become an example of international law causing damage to the constitutional rights that both of our clients hold dear, I respectfully request that your client agree to stipulate to the application of American constitutional law to this case.

And so on and so forth.

Anyway, let me highly recommended checking out http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/ and reading through the legal briefs, which are works of art. Hat tip to Ed Brayton for cluing me in.