Court upholds Atlanta man in tussle with Wal-Mart


By BILL RANKIN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 03/25/08

An Atlanta man can continue criticizing Wal-Mart with parodies that compare the retail giant to the Holocaust and al-Qaida terrorists, a federal judge has ruled.

Rejecting Wal-Mart's claim of trademark infringement, U.S. District Judge Timothy Batten in Atlanta ruled that Charles Smith may maintain his Web sites, www.walocaust.com and www.walqaeda.com, Smith can continue to sell novelty, satirical merchandise that criticizes the company, the judge said.

Smith invented the term "Walocaust" to encapsulate his feelings about Wal-Mart and created "Walocaust" designs to call attention to his beliefs, Batten wrote in an 87-page ruling signed last week.

Batten's ruling said Smith is an avid and vocal critic of Wal-Mart and believes the company has a destructive effect on communities, treats workers badly and has a damaging influence on the country as a whole.

With the goals of stimulating discussions about Wal-Mart and getting others to join his cause, Smith created various designs and slogans incorporating the word "Walocaust," the ruling said.

"He never expected to have any exclusive rights to the word," Batten wrote. "He created the term 'Wal-Qaeda' and designs incorporating it with similar expressive intent. The court has found those designs to be successful parodies."

It's kind of the same situation with these websites dedicated to him. People come to voice their opinion about him, be it good or bad. I ,personally, am not offended by what he's done. I didn't join the site until after the war started. I do admit that I don't know what I would do if I couldn't chat with some of the people here during the week. (Work is slow, would be bored to death)
No matter what, I will always love Prince and there is nothing that can change that. Unless, he denied that he was Black. Now that I couldn't deal with. Please don't lock me!!!!

Prince is an individual creating his exclusive product and is the mastermind beyond his inventive ideas, music, and tours.

Walmart is a HUGE corporation that sells a multitude of products, and employs many people for very low wages.

I don't know if it is the same issue really.

i posted this because when i read that article, i immediately thought about the org. i know there are some differences, but it seems almost the same. i respect your thoughts though.

mayebelle81 said:

Thanks and I do agree that in some respects it is a similar legal question. But I think Prince would win because he's the originator of his product and should be awarded exclusive control over it, how it's released and referenced.

colorblu said:

Of course, it's the same issue. If that's what you want to base it on, Prince (reportedly) hasn't always been the best about paying people, either.

At least the people at Wal-Mart agreed to work for the amount they received.

One issue might be a red apple

The other might be a green apple

But they are both apples.....copyright/copyright infringement

Nothinbutjoy said:

This issue might be a purple apple

I couldn't begin to put a price on the opportunity to work with Prince or certain other artists. The exposure it'd bring and the chance to work with musical and creative geniuses would be invaluable.
If there was a contract signed, like employees who work for Walmart, it'd surely be held up in court. Verbal contracts are not the same as written contracts. Maybe as the human race evolves there is need for pioneers who will set a standard for intellectual property of the future.
Wouldn't it better to take a risk, possibly obtain priceless insight, than to receive money that promotes a corporate giant while stuck in a dead end job bound a contract? I'd guess yes, but that's just me.
[Edited 3/25/08 16:17pm]

If Prince doesn't sue and nobody sues Prince we will never know who'll win.

It is a challenge

I have a Wal-Fart shirt.

GiGi319 said:

ethical issue not legal issue. no one unethical wins.