Shared publicly  - 
A French apparel manufacturer is attempting to trademark Anonymous's logo and slogan. 

Unsurprisingly, Anonymous has declared war.

“There [sic] arrogance and ignorance of what they have done will not go un punished,” reads a statement posted on a well-known public Anonymous site announcing Operation AnonTrademark. “Anonymous will take down any business they have going on the internet and the ninety nine percent will not stop until the registration has been revoked and a public apology has been made.”

This may not end well. -
Jason Bugra's profile photoTomasz Rakowski's profile photokenneth engelhard's profile photoOliver Gilbert's profile photo
"Let's copyright the logo of an international group of hackers!"
That's one genuine idiot...
Wow, what a douchebag move on the part of this french company, trying to appropriate someone else's property for their own benefit.  These idiots deserve everything Anonymous decides to dish out.
How did they think they were going to enforce the copyright? :)
Even if they succeed, the design would be copied within hours and out in Asian markets within the day. Then, people in third-world countries all over would be wearing these 'cool' T-shirts without even understanding what's written on.
(The French company would have no sale at all and drop the line eventually.)
+Dan Engle - If you are referring to Anonymous, the article states that their logos and by-line are already registered under creative commons, which means that this company can't register it for themselves.
So its fashionable to copy hackers now?
If anyone ever tries to copyright  +Philosoraptor, quote me on this....

I"m going straight for their jugular.    
I wasn't clear.  I was musing about the French company. :)
+Philosoraptor how can you do it? I thought you were extinct! xD

P.S.: Don't worry, I'll warn you! And help if need with law issues, I'm a jurist... really, I am! :p
It is not like they Anonymous can copyright commonly used word...This store is pretty much allowed to do what it wants, even if Anonymous claims the opposite. 
This is as ironic as buying a "anarchy" or "che guevara" shirt
Didn't say that Anonymous is malicious +Donald Legion .
Its a play on words, a pun really. And yes I do know the meaning of hacker, I looked it up
+Darren Krusi they can be malicious, just not all of them...just gotta make them mad, sometimes just getting them to notice you is a bad idea. If you know the definition, then you know that the malicious ones are known as what color hat?
+Gabriel Walsh , true, but my point is that no one is interested in the logo until it's a French design. Then, the underground brand-copiers would get on the feeding frenzy, so the company would lose already.
Yes, black. It's a good idea +Darren Krusi to be educated with this kind of stuff. I ended up on there bad side sucked. No offense meant, but you should never have to look up the meaning of hacker if you wish to stay safe on the internet mate.
+Gabriel Walsh , There are six main licence types in that page alone. Which one more specifically applies?
I see many comments from people in this thread that obviously has no concept of what Anonymous is. It would be a good idea to stay out of this thread if you are these people. I pose no threat, but you may anger the wrong person with your ignorance of Anonymous......
I looked it up more to see what other definitions are out there. I'd look up the urban dictionary definition as well but I need sleep
+Donald Legion  Yeah I know that, it's to be expected. I'm just interested in the specific license type that was applied for by anonymous for the various trademarks. Depending on the license type, it could have interesting ramifications after anonymous have unleashed their wrath.
+Donald Legion I've thought that G+ is a more mature medium for meaningful discussions of differing opinions or viewpoints, without fear of emotional reprisals, aka flame wars.
Besides, I was just pointing out my observation of commercial brand retailing dilemma, separate from the main discussion.
Anyone else knoticed the geniuses of this company? We suddenly all know who the are and if they ride it for a little while to generate publicity and then pull out and say we're sorry avoiding harm and making more publicity they have just one and not only made anonymous and them selves more famous.... They have effectively taken some one else's fame and cloned it for them selves and added some growth hormone for what could be little cost if they play it right...
But I doubt they will play it right. And their shirts are not that great.
+Megan McGrory The term well-played does not come to mind in this instance.  I understand the point you are making - yeah free press - look at Anon's creed.  We Are Anonymous. We Are Legion. We Do Not Forgive. We Do Not Forget. Expect Us. 
Hmm, this seems like a set up.  Sounds like someone is trying to get the Anonymous people to break the law by attacking a company set up just to be attacked by Anonymous in an attempt to catch them.
Pissing off anonymous is essentially the equivalent of shoving your d&$# in a wasps nest. This should be fun to watch.
+Alex Bynum With the advent of so many botnets these dayz I seriously think they are NOT EVEN remotely worried about that.
A man who dresses like a woman and is somewhat feminine in appearance. Could almost be mistaken for a woman until you are in the bedroom with one. Watch out for these types, they are usually afraid to get intimate because you might discover their little 'secret', but sooner or later you find out the truth!
+John Linder  Bot Net does not equal untraceable.

Btw, does your company produce 1 off circuit boards for amateurs?
Anonymous is a collective, I don't know if they would want to © this stuff, there is not one who could.  This whole thing prolly should have never happened.
+Alex Bynum Combined with TOR and other methods (which I will not mention here) it is quite effective.
I am a senior network Cisco engineer, not an Anon, but the methods that have been deployed in the past, and the lessons learned from those exploits have made them quite the powerhouse.
+Alex Bynum your assuming that because "DDoS/Bot-Net = traceable" is true, "anonymous = care" must also be true
Blah blah blah legion blah blah blah we do not blah blah blah

Anonymous is like the annoying kid in school that constantly seeks attention in the most inappropriate ways.

Perhaps when their mothers un-ground them they can finally contribute to society, rather than playing their childish games.

Enjoy the jail time, morons.
+Nathan Weaver No, I never assumed or implied that anyone would care.  I was just arguing the point that it "could" very well be a set up.

It is what I would do if I wanted to catch them.  Make them angry, encourage them to break the law on systems you have control over.  Use their access to your systems to find them, then put them in jail, or, preferably, recruit them to work for you to make a better Stuxnet.
+Brad McClaren im gonna go ahead and assume you have no idea why anonymous does what they do...

Honestly, you sound like an idiot...on the internet, bashing a group that fights against the censorship of the internet. 
+Nathan Weaver shutting down the PSN over a program 3 people used is not censorship, it's retarded. Anonymous does what they do for lolz. Any agenda of theirs is only an excuse for their electronic vandalism.
I'm buying one just to support the company. I'm sure the local homeless would appreciate the new shirt.
The french just don't know when to stop fucking with people. Hairy pitt faggots haven't won a war on their own in over a hundred years, not sense the days of Napoleon. I think we can all guess who will win THIS war.

I'll give you a hint: they aren't french.
+Brad McClaren No, anonymous shut down the PSN because SONY violated the CPA (Consumer Protection Act) by taking away the "Other OS" feature, which was an advertising point of the console. Hence opening a "golden door" (setting a legal prescedent) for future violations of the CPA, thus allowing companies to sell you something via software features which they can then (legally) take away whether you like it or not.
+Nathan Weaver courts set legal precedent, not gaming companies or hackers. Sony was never convicted of any violations.
+Nathan Weaver to elaborate on your argument. A user had managed to install a LINUX based OS on the PS3. Sony locked out his console preventing him from further getting online with his system.

granted the Linux OS did technically jailbreak the PS3 allowing it to download anything and everything for free. but that was an error on Sony's part. they should have fixed the problem rather then banning the user and pretending it didn't exist.
+Brad McClaren let's think about who had more money in their pockets to keep the courts on their side?

Sony is a major conglomerate. Such companies have always violated the laws and then bribed judges to agree with their way of thinking. 
+Brad McClaren ya...setting a legal precedent, they got away with it. In the future, when another company gets in hot water over doing the same thing, they will cite the SONY case as a justifiable cause for their actions. The court did set the legal allowing SONY to get away with it.
So stealing my personal info from Sony makes everything okay? Blocking me from playing a game is justified?

The punishment doesn't fit the crime. 
+Brad McClaren 

So stealing my rights as a consumer makes everything okay?
Blocking me from using features I paid for is justified?

I'm sorry, but its called the lesser of two evils. Personal info getting stolen (one time event) is a much smaller problem than a legal precedent destroying consumer rights (long-standing effect).
If anonymous has no regard for the law, what gives them the right to complain about a violation of copyright law?
No rights were stolen, as pointed out in the judgement. Those rights you hold so dear were never yours to begin with, as pointed out in the judgement.
+Nathan Weaver - Vigilantism isn't the answer to anything and that is what Anonymous practice. While I understand some of their motives I feel that now they are revelling in being able to intimidate who they like. They are not so far away from old school protection rackets and it wouldn't take much for it to evolve into that. 
That's silly, cos it's free advertising for the Anonymous. Many people haven't even heard of them, cos they are not excessive internet users. While with the franchise the Anon. will reach farther audience.
+Danny Bogûslavsky its like buying the prison suit before you reach your cell.
I support Anon. I think, for all of their issues, they have proven to be a force for change. "Conflict equals change"~Marx
There may be now or in the future those that join in with them, and lack true altruistic intentions, but for the most part I think that Quinn Norton put it best when she described Anonymous as the immune system for the internet. As long as Anon hacks for "open sourced freedom" I'll defend them publicly.
We don't know which Anon is good or bad.. Not all are good. 
Price of Anonymous attack - $0.00 (they bill nobody; just brain power & know-how); Price to Apparel company for contract IT- $40,000; price of advertising & marketing obtained? Priceless…
+King Benny I guess few guys who claim to be part of this idea, tend to eff up the movement direction sometimes. But your right about our local criminals, they got guns.. What does anonymous have? Just a laptop to do their work. 
Add a comment...