Haven't seen the etoy vs. eToys controversy mentioned on the list so I
pass this on. Even MoMA has gotten involved.

Robbin Murphy
[log in to unmask]
http://artnetweb.com/iola/

---------- Forwarded message ----------


The following are statements by Suzanne Meszoly
and Douglas Rushkoff, etoy.ADVISORY-BOARD members, 
read at today's press conference.


SUZANNE MESZOLY AT ETOY PRESS CONFERENCE
NYC, Museum of Modern Art, December 20, 1999

FREEDOM ON THE INTERNET
AN AMERICAN HORROR STORY

THE FACTS:
etoy an international art group  has been sued by EToys, 
an American multi billion dollar internet toy company for
trademark infringement claiming that the art group?s name 
is too close to its own. Etoys the toy company has defamed 
the international art group etoy by calling them
criminal, hackers, pornographers and terrorists.

On November 29, 1999 a Los Angeles Superior Court judge 
responded to eToys' lawsuit by issuing a preliminary 
injunction, preventing the award-winning Internet artists, 
etoy, from using their www.etoy.com Web site. and preventing 
them from offering and selling etoy.SHARES in the United 
States of America.  Both etoys and etoy do business on line.
As far as I understand  and as mentioned in the  Morning 
Edition on National Public Radio on December 13 by Megan 
Gray an expert in internet and intellectual property law, 
trademark infringement  requires companies to have 
substantially similar names and for those companies to
have substantially similar goods and services. I fail to 
see that etoy sells toys online.  Regarding the question 
of first come first served and domain names, etoy.com have 
been on the net since 1995 and were founded in 1994. Etoys,
the world's  leading online toy retailer, was founded in 
1996 and registered the name etoys.com in 1997 and 
owns the trademark.

Etoys the toy company decided that the similar web 
address of the international art group was confusing 
their customers and took legal action leading to the 
preliminary decision made in the California court,
which in turn has lead to the loss of the artists 
domain name, restrictions placed on their etoy.share 
art project  and subsequently the loss of their email 
addresses as well.  (Network Solutions, the company that 
maintains the master list of internet addresses (domains) 
has blocked email service to etoy.com, though this was 
not mandated by the injunction.) Apparently Network
Solutions does this when domain names are under investigation.
Etoy has been isolated by this action from the supportive 
internet community: restricting the etoy.email addreses 
was not a part of the official court decision and 
compromises the fundamental rights of speech, expression, 
organization and self defense. We fail to see the legality 
of this Network Solutions action. Network Solutions has said
they are "unable" to reach etoy in Zurich.

The preliminary injunction of the California court represents 
a legal precedence: an ebusinesss giant is restricting 
the very existence of an art company. There is no business 
overlap here as I have already stated.

This case merely demonstrates who has the right to conduct 
business, operate, express themselves and exist in cyberspace.
The legalities of this court case are obviously under 
discussion as well, not only because it is yet another 
case of "cash driven justice".

The artists currently run operations from Europe and 
remain there today.

The next decision will be made December 27, 1999, again 
in the California court, where the etoy art group has been 
requested to provide an exhaustive amount of documentation, 
as well as appearing in person.

This court case has obviously received a great deal of 
attention both in America and around the world for it deals 
with freedom on the internet and through this case we can 
see an American State court regulating the wide-open 
international landscape of the internet,  of  art.

Etoy has created a crisis advisory board of international 
experts, of which I am the director, to assist with the 
development of this court case and to help etoy retain its 
intellectual and internet property.  Etoy does not and will 
not be involved in any action which is illegal or
harmful to any person or institution.  Etoy simply wants 
to exist as  before as a meaningful and creative art project.  
Etoy has never  intended to interfere with the business 
of internet toy retailers.

Etoy will not engage with traditional means, etoy will not 
hack or aggress the etoys or other opponents that attempt 
to destroy our territory and intellectual and cultural 
property, however through this current process etoy has 
continued to infect the world with the etoy message: the 
message has broken through the glass doors of the museum,
through the computer monitors and hit the streets, the 
newspapers, CNN, the business news, the television. The 
stocks, the court judges, the activitists, the riots, the 
MOMA, the advisors, the netizens, the world has transformed 
the etoy idealogy into a reality. The surreal has become
real.

Hacking reality????
This is the etoy value

DOUGLAS RUSHKOFF AT ETOY PRESS CONFERENCE
NYC, Museum of Modern Art, December 20, 1999

Back in 1994, the Internet was limited to
non-commercial purposes. Users had to agree not to
conduct commerce online in order to get an account.
When a pair of immigration lawyers sent out the first
"spam" email offering their services, they were booted
off the Internet, altogether. 

How times have changed. When commercial interests
moved online, many of us were concerned they would
change the essential character of this space -- that a
communications infrastructure would be turned into an
electronic strip mall. 

But Wired, cyber-libertarians, and e-commerce
enthusiasts reminded us all of the simple fact that the
Internet has infinite real estate. There's room for
everyone. Not so. 

A group of International artists understood the threat
that consumerism, marketing, and stock market
speculation posed to Internet society and culture at
large. In 1994, they created ETOY -- an art project
designed to take place in the public sphere. It was
meant both as a satire of the corporate value system,
and a barometer of the information space. By selling
symbolic "stock certificates," for example, ETOY was
able to expose the ludicrous speculations and valuations
of the pyramid scheme otherwise known as the NASDAQ
exchange, where billions of dollars are made by people
with the best story or dot-com brand name. The ETOY
brand was created so that art might compete with
commerce. 

Etoys, the e-commerce company, arrived online two
years after ETOY. But because they do "real" business ­
meaning they serve as a story through which
investment dollars may be accumulated ­ the court and
Internic have decided to support their interests. In
1999, commerce takes precedence, and an artist can be
booted offline, illegitimately, illogically, and illegally. 

But in an era when Time magazine's "Man of the Year"
is an E-commerce merchant who made zero from his
business but billions off his brand name's market cap,
this should not surprise us. As the European collective
we are here fighting for predicted, capitalism
accelerated by computers allows fiction to overtake
reality. 

I've often been asked why ETOY did not accept the five
hundred thousand they were offered to change their
name. First, ETOY *is* its name. Would anyone have
asked Warhol to sell the right to use his own name on
his work? ETOY is a real project, and the value of its
name is intrinsic to the value of the whole piece. Over a
dozen artists have worked five years towards its
creation. You do the math. Second, for ETOY to accept
money to surrender art space to commercial space goes
against what these artists have dedicated their lives to.
If Etoys, the e-commerce company, wants to control
ETOY, the Internet agitprop experiment, they can buy
Etoy.shares like anyone else. ETOY will not, and should
not, submit to corporate blackmail. 

ETOY's resistance demonstrates that the Bottom Line in
our civilization must not be the bottom line. ETOY will
not abandon its existing shareholders by taking the
money and running away. Unlike almost everyone else
in the Internet space, they have no "exit strategy"
because they are here to stay. And, unlike ETOYS, ETOY
is more than just a URL. The name is not for sale.
+ Save etoy now!
+ Save Leonardo now!
+
+
+
-> RHIZOME COMMUNICATIONS
-> post: [log in to unmask]
-> questions: [log in to unmask]
-> answers: http://www.rhizome.org
-> unsubscribe: http://www.rhizome.org/unsubscribe/
+
+
+
posts to RHIZOME RAW are subject to the terms
set out in the Subscriber Agreement available online at
<http://www.rhizome.org/subscribe/>.

========================================================Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).