A reader asks, in response to my post defending a person's right to use the word UCLA in the address of a site that's critical of UCLA,
Should I be able to set up a Web site called againstvolokhconspiracyblog.com without being challenged?
Of course you should, at least if the content of the site likewise makes clear that it's criticism of the Volokh Conspiracy rather than something endorsed by the Volokh Conspiracy. Why shouldn't you? What readers would be confused? How would we be hurt in any way that the law should recognize as an actionable harm? (Of course we could be hurt by your criticism, even if it's entirely apt, but you should be free to hurt us this way.)
I like my name (though it's one I happen to share with other people). I like the name of our blog. I feel some emotional attachment to both. I can't say I'd be wild about your using it in criticizing me. But so what? If you want to criticize me or our blog, it seems to me hard to see why you should be denied the right to use my name or our blog's name in doing so.
Related Posts (on one page):
- UCLA Drops Demand That Online Critic Stop Using "UCLA" in His Web Site: