Earlier this week supporters of the online hacktivist and trolling community Anonymous were up in arms after it emerged that a small French company called Early Flicker had trademarked their logo and ominous catchphrase, "We are Anonymous, We are Legion, We do not forgive, We do not forget, Expect us."
Now, though, French patent office INPI, or Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle, has admitted that Early Flicker's trademark filing might not be legally valid if it is in conflict with prior rights -- which it may well be.
The logo is already licensed under Creative Commons, according to a tweet from one of Anonymous's most popular Twitter feeds, which means anyone should be free to share the design, adapt it and make money from it too. Trademarking a design or phrase helps ensure that when anyone uses it, they are doing so to represent a particular company or product. Legally though, Early Flicker's filing might be moot because of the logo's Creative Commons license.
In June 2012, INPI granted Early Flicker trademark rights to stamp the logo on everything from immitation leather to walking sticks, according to its filing with the French patent office. The firm, whose manager is listed in its filing as Apollinaire Auffret, already sells geek-themed t-shirts and mugs, some with the Anonymous catchphrase, though none with the United Nations-style logo above. You can read the filings by running a search on "Anonymous" here.
INPI said that anytime someone sought to register a trademark with INPI, the patent office had "no legal obligation to check its availability." It only had to asses whether or not a logo or phrasing was "distinctive."
"The INPI competence is limited to the realm of trademark law," INPI said by email. "Therefore, INPI cannot assess the validity of a trademark against other signs (e.g., logos) which are not governed by trademark law."
"The fact that the the above-mentioned trademarks were registered by INPI does not necessarily mean that they are valid (as they might be in conflict with prior rights)," INPI added. "This is a matter for courts of law to resolve." In other words, Anonymous could dispute the validity of Early Flicker's trademark by hiring a lawyer and taking the Frenchman to court. If you're familiar with Anonymous, that's unlikely to happen, and Anonymous supporters have already taken matters into their own hands.
Some in France have released at least one YouTube video promising retaliation against Early Flicker for trying to commercialize their immagery, while others have published identifying details about Auffret and his company online, and claimed to have identified security vulnerabilities in the firm's website.
The supporters have dubbed their response, OpAnonTrademark, or "Operation Anon Trademark," though some more skeptical supporters believe the trademark row is an elaborate troll against Anonymous. Auffret has been unusually difficult to track down, having been unresponsive to emails and phone calls over the last two days.
All in all Anonymous seems to have less reason to get riled up -- though that might not make much difference.
Follow me on Twitter: @Parmy
Or check out my book: "We Are Anonymous: Inside The Hacker World of LulzSec, Anonymous and the Global Cyber Insurgency," (Little Brown / 2012)
