Would it be an effective form of corporate sabotage to make a video that you were fairly certain would go viral and blatantly infringes on a third parties copyrighted material with content you were certain that they would find significantly objectionable, and then make it into a target companies product advertisement? the hope would be, i guess, that the third party (who would suffer as collateral damage...) would litigate the target forcing it to expend resources, and perhaps suffer some PR points with a key consumer target...
I recommend Godzilla. The trademark owner loses it over that.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on November 20, 2009, 04:34:35 AM
I recommend Godzilla. The trademark owner loses it over that.
really? they have precedent of bringing the wrath of many expensive lawyers on other large companies? :eek:
who owns Godzilla?
Some Japanese company, they went after Subway a couple years back for using Godzilla (or something that looked like it) in a commercial.
I wonder about Nintendo. immediate google results don't show much in the way of Nintendo copyright litigation...
I was thinking a live action spot depicting a car/motorcycle race that is subtly, but definitely a spoof on mariocart that ends in a bloody pileup wreck when one throws a turtle at another on a motorcycle, hits him in the face, causing 13 vehicle carnage. then abrupt tie in to a target company like mountain dew, or something...
do you think you could get Nintendo to sue PepsiCo with something like that?
i had to cover one eye to read this, lol.
try a bank.
Well, Nintendo and Pepsi are both pretty big, and I know Nintendo has different sections for different parts of the world. But that's all I know.
Fuck Nintendo.
I love their games and I love my Wii, but those cheap fucks absolutely refuse to spend enough money to give the Mariners a chance to contend for the World Series.
Quote from: Iptuous on November 20, 2009, 04:28:41 AM
Would it be an effective form of corporate sabotage to make a video that you were fairly certain would go viral and blatantly infringes on a third parties copyrighted material with content you were certain that they would find significantly objectionable, and then make it into a target companies product advertisement? the hope would be, i guess, that the third party (who would suffer as collateral damage...) would litigate the target forcing it to expend resources, and perhaps suffer some PR points with a key consumer target...
I'm not a lawyer (and I didn't go to
law school), but I imagine it would depend on whose copyright was infringed on. They might decide to do nothing, offer the infringing company the right to use the material for whatever purpose they want, sue for money, sue for an injunction, sue for both or just settle out of court. It would also probably depend on what company the holder of the copyright was based in and where the company that violated the copyright was based in.
How does one go about destroying a corporation anyway? They're like cancer-cockroaches.
I guess you could dress up as an undead alien and try to scare the major shareholders into disbanding. If any detective hippies try to out you, you're screwed though.
I believe Merryl Lynch was destroyed by selling a bunch of their stock short then spreading rumors they were going to declare bankruptcy.
You can also try to trash the value of an investment a corporation is heavy into. One company lost everything because they sold oil short right before speculators started driving the price up.
Then of course there's bribing major retailers or manufacturers to not carry/not market the parts of your competitor (see, Intel vs AMD).