Oil giant sues Greenpeace

Guardian UK ^ | June 25, 2002 | Claire Cozens

[Prodigal Son]

Claire Cozens
Tuesday June 25, 2002

The oil giant Exxon Mobil is suing Greenpeace for misusing its corporate logo after the environmental pressure group replaced the two "S" letters in Esso with dollar signs.

Exxon, the oil giant that owns the Esso brand, is claiming Greenpeace's "Stop E$$o" campaign is illegal and harmful to the company's reputation.

It has applied for an injunction in the French courts that would force Greenpeace to remove the doctored logo from its campaign website.

Esso France, which launched the suit, has also claimed Greenpeace is attempting to draw a connection between Esso and "the infamous SS", saying the doctored image looks like the well-known symbol of the elite Nazi army.

The company said it was not trying to stifle free speech but it argued the distortion of the trademark was illegal.

A hearing date has been set for Monday July 1, when the company will seek an injunction forcing the charity to stop using the doctored logo.

If Greenpeace refuses to comply, Exxon is demanding £52,000 a day in compensation for the damage to its reputation.

But Greenpeace has insisted it will not back down over the campaign and has pledged to fight Exxon in the courts.

"This is just ridiculous. Esso knows it can't win a debate about climate change and it won't discuss the content of the website. Instead Esso is trying to gag us with legal threats," said Gerd Leipold, the executive director of Greenpeace.

Stop E$$o is a global campaign run by several charities, including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.

The charities argue Exxon helped scupper the Kyoto agreement on climate change. They want to persuade consumers to boycott the oil company.

The campaign has been running in France since May and there have been protests in the UK, the US and Canada.

[uglybiker]

I have trouble taking seriously any argument put forth by anyone named 'Gerd'.

[Winston Smith]

This is more of Greenpeace BS. They can use anything that they can dream up in their campain against Esso, but can't be touched by "mortal rules." Normal law again cannot be used against the Greencommies.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Hate to say it, but this lawsuit has no class. A few years ago, McDonald's tried to sue the whatsis out of a chap who had the gall to stand around their restaurants (in Britain) and hand out leaflets criticizing their menu for encouraging unhealthy diets and for using beef raised in former rainforest areas.

This is no worse than some of the freeping that happens right here on this website.

In America such a thing could not happen. Thank God for the freedom of speech guaranteed in our Constitution.

[Kermit]

I think the Federal Reserve should join the lawsuit against Greenpeace for misuse of its logo: $$

[1rudeboy]

What part about "Esso" being a registered trademark don't you get?

[Dog Gone]

[biblewonk]

I think E$$O will lose.

[CecilRhodesGhost]

This lawsuit is a great step for the coming battle against these activists. Across the world, hard-working companies and corporate ventures are being attacked by radicals, Anti-globalization nutballs, etc. Exxon should use their legal department to tie up Greenpeace for decades. Then if a few other corporations can spare a few legal departments, most other dissenting voices raging against capitalism can be silenced as well. I don't think these radicals understand anything less. Corporations need to be protected from these groups, who are spreading anti-capitalism and anti-growth messages. These hippy people are also preaching against globalization, which is in essence a slap in the face of Wall Street. I support this lawsuit as a means to an end. The free traders need to purge these people from the stage so that the world can continue to develop and prosper.

[Prodigal Son]

This lawsuit is a great step for the coming battle against these activists.

I agree- don't wait for them to come and chain themselves to your drilling platform- take the fight to them. Greenpeace will have to spend money fighting this and I consider that a good waste of their resources. Let them taste their own medicine. And that's just if they go to court and come out on top. If Exxon/Esso wins and gets the court to award that big daily fine, each day they don't comply with the court's order cancels many missions for the Rainbow Warrior.

In a war of attrition against a titan like Exxon, Greenpeace don't stand a chance- there's no way they can match resources with them. I hope Exxon wins.

[lavaroise]

Socialist hypocrisy: your bedroom, not theirs.

[HiTech RedNeck]

What part about parody being fair use (in the USA at least) don't you get?

[Hacksaw]

(Stamping foot) How dare these polluters condradict us!

Sue them to hell Exxon. I have had enough of the greenie-weenies trying to dominate the American lifestyle.

[Dog Gone]

This is in France, for one thing, and even if it were the USA where the lawsuit had been filed, I don't think it would fall under a parody exception. There is nothing humorous intended by the misappropriation of this trademark.

It's defacing it as part of a continuing campaign to cause economic harm to the company.

I don't know how Exxon will do under French law, but in America they would likely prevail.

[Zathras]

Actually this is a very valid lawsuit.
A company Logo is a trademark and you can't use it even in satire.

[tcostell]

Not such a terrible tactic. If I were on that board, I'd make sure greenpeace never left the courtroom. Let them spend their entire budget on legal expenses.

[1rudeboy]

Go ahead, make your parody (in the U.S.), and have the lawyers descend on you like locusts.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Exxon can certainly sue for malicious slander. But show me the Supreme Court ruling saying that a trademark is too sacred to be parodied in the name of criticism.

[HiTech RedNeck]

http://www.ballysucks.net/

[dixiechick2000]

Bump and ping!