TPMMuckraker
Yes Man: Chamber Lawsuit Is "A Comedy And A Travesty"
Zachary Roth | October 29, 2009, 3:57PM
Share
Send to a friend!
The Chamber of Commerce's lawsuit against the Yes Men is "a comedy and a travesty," according to one member of the prankster group and a target of the suit.
"All they care about is taking money out of ordinary people's pockets and putting it in the pockets of the super rich," Mike Bonanno told TPMmuckraker in an interview this afternoon.
"They really only care about whether the banks and the insurance companies have rights," Bonanno continued. "And them suing us is evidence of that."
Last week, the Yes Men teamed up with a group of political activists to hold a fake press conference at which they impersonated Chamber execs and announced that the business lobby was shifting its opposition to serious efforts to address climate change, fooling some news outlets. In response, the Chamber sued the Yes Men for trademark infringement.
In its complaint, the Chamber charged, in part, that the hoax was designed to help promote the Yes Men's new movie, which was released earlier this month. In response, Bonanno acknowledged the movie, but denied that this was the fake press conference was designed to promote it. "Obviously, we're attacking the chamber of commerce because they're doing horrible things," he said.
Bonanno -- whose real name is Igor Vamos -- said the stunt had a serious purpose. "We certainly hope that it brings more people's attention to the role of lobbyists like the Chamber who are undermining and attacking public health."
He said that he and Yes Men partner Andy Bichlbaum wouldn't back down easily -- but didn't make any promises about going up against the might of the business lobby.
"Me and Andy are willing to fight this," Bonanno said. "But we're willing to see what makes the most sense in the long run."
Other Stories Featured at TPMMuckraker
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
- Top 10 Things You Didn't Know Before Reading Plouffe's 'Audacity To Win'
- The Biggest Dem Scandal You've Never Heard Of
- From Dollars To Death Panels: How Republicans Distorted Debates On Capitol Hill
- Friends In High Places: The Salahis And The Famous People They Take Pictures With
- Party Crashers: Who Are Michaele And Tareq Salahi?
- Secret Service Director: We Are 'Deeply Concerned And Embarrassed' Over Party Crashers
- The Salahi-Obama Meeting
- New Statement Out from Secret Service
- Another BCBS Insurer Getting Customers To Fight Health-Care Reform
- TPM Reader Challenge: The Sex-Scandal Haiku!
- From Dollars To Death Panels: How Republicans Distorted Debates On Capitol Hill
- CT Report: Green Party 'Picketing' Ralph Nader In Hopes He'll Run For Senate
- TPM Reader Challenge: The Sex-Scandal Haiku!
- Why is Healthcare Reform Too Expensive, While the Sky is the Limit For War?
- The REAL Patriots were the Republicans who voted for Obama.
- The Biggest Dem Scandal You've Never Heard Of
- FUN REPORTERS: Where the Hell IS Sam Kinison When We Need Him?
- Secret Service Investigates State Dinner Party Crashers
- Hey Prez! Do you feel lucky? (Army Study: Pashtun men's blood testosterone levels 3X U.S. Norm! Tom Ricks: "Afghans are Clint Eastwood with a turban..." )
- Top 10 Things You Didn't Know Before Reading Plouffe's 'Audacity To Win'
- Big Deal or No?
- New Statement Out from Secret Service
- Watch Out
- Does It All Fit Together?
- Why is Healthcare Reform Too Expensive, While the Sky is the Limit For War?
- Let The Scrubbing Begin!
- FUN REPORTERS: Where the Hell IS Sam Kinison When We Need Him?
- Democratic Party: Get Your Dumb War On
- Haiku Contest?
- Bumps
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Clavis
October 29, 2009 4:46 PM
Thank goodness the Chamber of Commerce is standing up for the little guy. (And by "little guy", I mean the billionaires who already have far too much influence on our government.)
How the hell did it get such a pretentious name, anyhow? Must have been a Frank Luntz creation. It should be called the Rich Guy's Lobby. (Of course, there are tens of thousands of those now...)
It's also funny now right-wingers are in favor of "tort reform", yet are always quick to initiate a lawsuit when it suits their purposes. (Did I say "funny"? I mean "infuriating".)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wyt
October 29, 2009 5:16 PM
Are there ways to craft their defense that would seriously damage the reputation and viability of the Chamber? Are there deep pockets among America's businesses that would benefit from taking the Chamber down? They're the obvious commercial enemy, for instance, of all green businesses, especially green energy producers. With business as powerful as it is today, the obvious road to freedom and progress is to split the businesses, so that the honorable ones work on the side of the people against the dishonorable ones - precisely what the Chamber is designed to prevent.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
richard f
October 29, 2009 6:26 PM
These guys are on legally shaky ground in holding a press conference where they purported to be someone they weren't and they don't have the resources to defend a big lawsuit. Their comment that they are willing to do what makes the most sense in the long run acknowledges the legal trouble they are in and that they are going toncede, apologize and agree not to do it again.
With respect to the previous post, there are no businesses that have a grudge against the Chamber such that they would be willing to fund a defense to this lawsuit. Maybe some non-profit could fund the defense but it would be hard to imagine that since the defense would have to be that the Chamber is so bad that we are entitled to use fraud to show them up, a pretty absurd proposition.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rdeaver
October 29, 2009 6:46 PM in reply to richard f
Stuff and nonsense.
1) The EFF is defending them.
2) The courts have ruled for more than a century that trademark cannot be used to stifle free speech.
3) Merely pretending to be someone you are not does not constitute fraud.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hallam
October 30, 2009 8:12 AM in reply to rdeaver
The chamber might well have a legal case, but what would the damages be?
More importantly, the Yes Men would get discovery for the Chamber's dealings with the coal industry. Now that would be more than worth the cost of any legal proceedings and then some.
The real problem for the chamber is that there is no link whatsoever between the policies they promote and their membership. They didn't ask the membership for input on the climate change policy, they just claimed to be speaking on their behalf.
Which was of course the point of the satire - a point that court discovery will prove beyond any contradiction.
We should hope the case goes forward, it will be the end of the Chamber.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
richard f
October 30, 2009 6:58 PM in reply to rdeaver
3) Merely pretending to be someone you are not does not constitute fraud.
I think you're wrong about that. There are several federal statutes that arguably encompass this.
2) The courts have ruled for more than a century that trademark cannot be used to stifle free speech.
I think you're misreading the cases. An arguable trademark violation is protected under free speech doctrines if there is little or no chance of consumer confusion (I can have a web site saying Don't Buy McDonalds that uses the golden arches as part of the design) but I'm not aware of any case allowing you to claim to be the trademark owner (a web site holding itself out as a McDonald site and then spreading anti-McDonald propaganda is going to be guilty of trademark violation)
The problem with the free speech and satire defense is that these specifically said they were the Chamber. There were any number of ways they could have achieved their satirical goal without claiming to be the Chamber.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Democracy Boy
October 29, 2009 11:44 PM
Recall as well that satire -- which this clearly was, in a form made more hilarious by the Chamber dude handing out his business card -- has about as much protection under the law as you can get. Kill a guy and say you did it satirically and you might just get off.
(Okay, that may be an exaggeration. But because it's for comedy effect, it's permitted.)
That said, Richard F. may be right, and they may back down. That would be a shame, but it's possible. The key will be the terms of any agreement; hard to imagine they'd agree to never impersonate some Big Business jackass again, though perhaps that's what the Chamber will demand.
Sigh. If/when the law protects the entrenched interests that are destroying the planet, the law probably needs to be changed. C'mon, who's with me?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
paulw
October 30, 2009 1:06 PM
Not that I disagree with yez, but is it too much to ask that a quote from one of the parties to a lawsuit not be the headline for the story? You know we tend to get annoyed when other news outlets do stenography.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?