Best Buy Sends Out Nastygram To Blog Reporting On Parody

Best Buy clearly doesn’t like being the butt of a joke. We know this because a group called Improv Everywhere sent about 80 people into one of their New York stores wearing blue polo shirts to stand around. They did not claim to be employees. They just stood around dressed like them. For yucks. Now the lawyer letters are flying.

According to an extensive write up of the escapade, “The reaction from the employees was pretty typical as far as our missions go. The lower level employees laughed and got a kick out of it while the managers and security guards freaked out.”

Then, when the stunt was over, they sold shirts. With a parody of the Best Buy logo, seen here above right. So Best Buy sent their first cease and desist letter.

Then someone else blogged about it, at a site called Laughing Squid. And then they got a cease and desist letter for reporting the story, claiming trademark and copyright infringement, which letter they have conveniently put up at their site. And just for the record, the one they got was much fancier than the one that Avis sent to me for using their logo.

Someone ought to direct those folks to that little thing called the First Amendment.

(And to save the Best Buy legal department some time, let me say that I don’t sell the shirts, I’m just reporting the story for the other attorneys in the blawgosphere that are interested.)

(hat tip: The Consumerist)

Addendum 12/12/07Best Buy has apologized for the cease and desist letter to Laughing Squid.

Tags:

One Response Leave a comment

  • Anonymous 2008.4.11 at 10:19 | Quote

    not germane, but someone tell the girl in the improv everywhere pic that I Love Her

Comments are closed.


The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.