Comments:Glenn Beck loses domain name case over parody website
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
What a load of crapEdit
What is the First Amendment to Switzerland, or indeed any country other than the USA? To cite any American law as a world precedent is more than a joke, which is pretty much how the rest of the world sees America. Why hasn't anybody else seen this?
- They see it as a using an international body to circumvent a U.S. citizen's U.S. rights. Using these bodies as opposed to U.S. law bodies goes against what Beck has said about the death of the Constitution in this article. I though he was all for U.S. sovereignty.--184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:35, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if the first amendment was cited - I have yet to fully read the article. However, you could argue that a local nation's laws also had jurisdiction in a case before an international court. Regardless, there is the additional fact that that freedom of speech is an internationally recognised right. That could either be used as a reason why the US First Amendment should be considered or - more likely - be used itself, with reference to the European Convention on and/or Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At least, that is how I would expect it to go; to disclaim, while I have some legal connections I am not qualified in this area and would apreciate a qualified opinion on how such laws would interelate. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 15:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- The reason people haven't seen it this way, is because its NOT that way. The WIPO is NOT a LEGAL court, it is an international advisory committee that Glenn Beck is trying to use by his "one-up-manship" (sub)-standards, which only confuse the situation. Glenn Beck should have gone to US Federal court. HOWEVER!!, his attorneys probably advised him against it, as it would get shot down in an instant and immediately thrown out. SO DON'T GO BLAMING AMERICANS, just blame poor little Glenn Beck! 220.127.116.11 (talk) 14:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)