[–] NiggerRifleCoffeeCo 11 points 381 points (+392|-11) ago  (edited ago)

DMCA from Black Rifle Coffee Company®

Hi, Daniel Hollaway - VP of Marketing at Black Rifle Coffee Company here!

I'm deeply sorry about the confusion we've put you through with this ill-communicated DMCA request. It never was our intention to upset our loyal coffee drinking fans or to put any stress on Voat's administrators.

We're working on executing a brand re-alignment strategy to more closely reflect our core values as a organization and a family. In keeping with that, we're changing our official Voat account to @NiggerRifleCoffeeCo. Please, direct any questions, comments or concerns you may have to our offical Voat account, and keep enjoying our products!

Black Rifle Coffee Company is a SOF veteran owned, small batch, roast to order coffee company. BRCC delivers the finest coffee on the planet to our customers. coffee for niggers.

[–] blumen4alles 2 points 113 points (+115|-2) ago 

Bless you nigger, bless you.

[–] TendiesHitTheFloor 2 points 62 points (+64|-2) ago 

Best nigger ever that guy.

[–] FuckBlackRifleCoffee 2 points 86 points (+88|-2) ago 

Lets not get our jimmies rustled, a careful reading of the DMCA clearly shows that it was directed to voat.com, this is voat.co which has no affiliation with voat.com

I'm sure a company like NiggerRifleCoffeeCo understands that voat wouldn't want to be associated with some other entity that happens to share the same name.

[–] AmericanJew2 0 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago 

But hur dur, Voat is innnnnnfffffringing! REEEEEE!!!!!

Fucking faggot company, boycotting that nigger garbage. Buy from a local roaster that you can go meet and lives in your community.

[–] BlkRifleCoffeeCancer 2 points 42 points (+44|-2) ago 

Gods work being done here.

[–] BixTriflingCupOJewCo 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I concur.

[–] InyourfaceNancyGrace 1 points 35 points (+36|-1) ago 

Right? What I don't get is - since the inception of the WWW, people have been masquerading with screen names like "TomSeleksLeftNut" and "RealBillGates" saying stupid shit like "Black Rifle coffee is the best and totally not overpriced garbage!" with abandon. But now somebody on Voat posing as BRCC says something, and VOAT is responsible for taking it down? Voat is at fault? If I posted an editorial in the news saying "gas the kikes" or whatever and signed as the CEO of Apple - Apple wouldn't sue the paper and demand a redaction - they'd have to come after me. The paper could issue an apology or whatever, but they couldn't pull copies of their paper and rip out what had already been printed.

Rant over. TLDR this is bullshit that Voat shouldn't have to deal with. Voat is just a platform - the user is responsible for the content they post.

[–] belphegorsprime 0 points 21 points (+21|-0) ago 

Tell that to the faggot niggers that voted for slick willy, and applauded the DMCA. Fucking morons have no concept of constitution, or that copyright is not a natural right, but rather infringes on the natural right of speech and expression.

[–] kestrel9 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Tom Selek isn't selling his nuts and Bill Gates isn't real.

[–] Landsberg15 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Well put.

[–] sakuramboo 6 points 278 points (+284|-6) ago 

Looks like I'll be buying my coffee from someone else from now on.

[–] BordelonLoop 1 points 145 points (+146|-1) ago 

freshroastedcoffee.com better coffee, better price, free shipping. fuck black rifle. bunch of fags.

[–] Empress 1 points 47 points (+48|-1) ago 

Bookmarked. Thank you. I'll use them in the future.

[–] dawnbandit1 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Foster-Hobbs is great, too. They're a microroaster that only roasts specialty grade coffee. Shipping is pretty cheap, as well.

[–] Iamthelightning 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Nice. Thanks for the recommendation.

[–] WilsonJones-LV17A 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Thanks for the link. Used to buy from BRCC but the outrageous pricing (on both the product AND shipping) got to be too much. The last time I ordered they shipped me the wrong product.

But doing this kind of shit? That's the straw that broke the goat's back.

[–] Phantom42 25 points 71 points (+96|-25) ago 

I mean, no disrespect but you really should've seen this coming. Not this specific situation, but Black Rifle pulling shit.

Their entire marketing strategy plays to "HURR AMURICA FUCK YEA! GUNS! FUCK YEAH! TITS! FUCK YEAH!" conservative idiot who votes straight Republican "cuz them libtard DEMONRATS RUININ MAH CUNTRY!"... Basically your average r/The_Donald user. It's just marketing. The company is still that... A company. They want to make money and they'll do anything to do it.

[–] BordelonLoop 2 points 61 points (+63|-2) ago 

notice they threw in a couple of fat niggers on their videos because virtue signal?

[–] ScrewdriverOo 0 points 26 points (+26|-0) ago 

I always find the more people talk shit up, the more fake their talk is.

[–] elitch2 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

If they want to make money, they shouldn't have put themselves on Voat's banned list.

[–] Armpit_and_Ass 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

They should put more energy into making coffee, honestly. Because, for the price point they're charging (fifteen bucks a pound when you buy in bulk, closer to $20 if you buy the 3/4lb bags) that coffee is overrated trash. I've pulled better tasting coffee off the shelf at Meijers.

[–] BlkRifleCoffeeCancer 1 points 25 points (+26|-1) ago 

should I be banned??

[–] Blehblehbleh73 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

No, you're just cancer. You're fine.

[–] hels 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Obv Blk is shortform for nigger

[–] toobaditworks 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

haha post some memes

[–] BixTriflingCupOJewCo 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Nah, brother. I got your back.

[–] Rotteuxx 0 points 25 points (+25|-0) ago 

Tell them on twatter

[–] ChiComs 5 points 200 points (+205|-5) ago  (edited ago)

BWAaaaaahhhh ha hah ! WRONG !

its TRADEMARK law not copyright law and NOT DMCA its a TRADEMARK claim that you are making m oney using a trademark on CLASS OF PRODUCTS (specific exact products) of the trademark :


Any other spelling , lacking spaces, is historically NOT INFRINGING unless they also own that. The sole exemption is a domain name created AFTER a trademark and lacking spaces.

VOAT IN THIS CASE does not have to do ANYTHING other than ask WHICH PRODUCT is using their trademark and how voat is making money by the mostly hidden use of such trademark ?

YOu need to barbara streisand this on torrentfreak ASAP

YOu need to get breitbart involved!

They need to learn a lesson in overrreach!

Trademark law is VERY SPECIFIC. especially for word marks (not images) that use solely english words !!!!

And the filing can be verified on USPTO to see what categories they claim. I DOUBT they claim 'electronic services and web sitesw"

I bet they claim weapons, food stuffs such as beverages, and possibly a t shirt filing, and a bar coaster filing

THIS IS A JOKE ! Its not DMCA at all.



four domains filed and approved. The four USPTO categories in that link are :

  1. Beverageware, namely, insulated coffee and beverage cups, mugs; thermal insulated container for food and beverages

  2. Coffee; ground and whole bean coffee; expresso beverages; coffee beans; ground coffee beans

  3. Coffee roasting and processing

  4. Online retail store services featuring coffees and beverageware; wholesale distributorships and wholesale ordering services all in the field of coffee; on-line ordering services and on-line retail store services all in the field of coffee and beverageware

VOAT DOES NONE OF THOSE FOUR, and could legally even rebrand its web site that word mark and file in another category such as medical supplies for example. TRADEMARKS have limited definitions and word marks have more limited definitions than graphic trademarks, and trademarks have to be PROVABLY used across a state line in a particular enterpise to defend a use that is filed.

IF DMCA : REFUSE AND OBJECT! Make them PROVE YOU ARE MAKING MONEY via stolen COPYRIGHTED materials and tradedress,


They will NOT WIN!

Also... get the hell off of CloudFlare so that you can have real properly encrypted https streams!

I wouls just respond that your counsel has verified that your web site DOES NOT do business in their 4 claimed USPTO domains , let alone under their approved trademark (with spaces)

[–] NiklausTheNaked 0 points 38 points (+38|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Really interested in a response from @puttitout regarding this. If they won't even give you the time of day to speak with them, then doing no more than what the law requires seems just.

[–] Richard_Kranium 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Agreed. This seems to be interesting timing, especially since voat just received some outside investor money. I don't know the particulars of that arrangement, but if @puttitout does not make a stand where he is legally able, this could set a precedent for other companies to request account removal if a username paints a company in a bad light. I hope legal advice is sought here, and the response is thought through to consider any downstream ramifications.

[–] [deleted] 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago  (edited ago)


[–] 475677 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

@Puttitout This is what you need to do. The second you bend the knee any account with a company name like google or reddit in their username will be seen by their lawyers as a way to make a shekel or to shut you down and it's probably going to be both knowing the vermin you're up against.

That said if you want to bitch out and throw them a bone just change the account's name to something generic like SHOAH_01 and each time it happens just count up. As a free speech platform it goes against the principles that this site was founded on to remove the posts but changing the name finds a middle ground.

[–] Glock-N-Roll 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Not to mention the fact that every libtard out there is gonna make a shitload of accounts with trademarked names and start posting everywhere in order to bring the place down because “free speech bad”.

[–] Locked_Account 1 points 19 points (+20|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I detect some Jedi level wisdom here.

[–] OIAO 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

God I fucking hate Star Wars references, but (+) 1 to you!

[–] BlkRifleCoffeeCancer 2 points 8 points (+10|-2) ago 

Translate: My name is legit.

[–] Omnidempotent 3 points 171 points (+174|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Have all content from ghosted accounts reassigned to an admin acct. For example, you could create an acct called DMCA_GHOST and have all of BRCC's posts transferred to this acct instead. This way you can delete the infringing acct while preserving the content of their posts. This amounts to just renaming the infringing acct, but maybe it will be enough to satisfy the lawyers.

[–] PuttItOut [S] 2 points 92 points (+94|-2) ago 

This is interesting.

[–] FuckYesJefferson 2 points 94 points (+96|-2) ago 

It could be named BRCC_belongs_in_the_harbor

[–] AR47 0 points 38 points (+38|-0) ago 

Do it boss. Fuckem in the ass with that one.

[–] SpottyMatt 1 points 25 points (+26|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Do not forget a log of DMCA actions taken, along with a copy of the original complaint, similar to https://lumendatabase.org/ (formerly chillingeffect.org ).

[–] MadWorld 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Can you also include snapshots of the DMCA requests, just so we would still know the usernames involved, after wiping that data? If possible, generate a unique number, and attach it to the DMCA take-down post submitted to a dedicated subverse. I think the renaming part could just be user's id number from your database, in the same way you assigned that id as the username to an anon submission.

[–] FullyAwakened 0 points 77 points (+77|-0) ago 

I like the idea, but instead reserve the username ranges DMCA_GHOST##### and use DMCA_GHOST1 for this example. Then you can have a page where the DMCA ghosts are cross referenced to the DMCA takedown notices, so there is more transparency on where the comments came from originally.

[–] theNakedNecromancer 0 points 37 points (+37|-0) ago  (edited ago)

This is it, @PuttItOut! This is exactly how you do transparency, and conform to DMCA requests. Make their "about" section a link to the DMCA request, and it becomes easy to track down, accountable, and conforms.

[–] markrod420 0 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago 

this would likely satisfy my desire to still be able to discover what the original username was.

[–] SIayfire122 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

I like it. You can simply add a /dcma on top of the banned users/domain pages we already have.

I've made a mockup for you


[–] dontmindthemess 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Motherfucker. You are some out the box thinkers.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 48 points (+49|-1) ago 


[–] Le_Squish 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

I like this.

[–] Artofchoke 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

This is an excellent idea.

[–] TimberWolfAlpha 0 points 81 points (+81|-0) ago 

Attention Black Rifle Coffee Company: I will never buy your products now. Go suck-start a shotgun you fucks. Nice social media suicide strategy.

[–] Dismal_Swamp 0 points 46 points (+46|-0) ago 

“Go suck-start a shotgun you fucks.”©️

This comment has been copyrighted. Please erase any and all uses of the above copyrighted quote within 24hrs. or you will be sued into oblivion by lawyer Jews. Lawyer Jews is a registered trademark.™️

[–] CatsControlTheEU 0 points 38 points (+38|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Aaaaand...I need to cancel my latest order....a shame, it was pretty good coffee.

[–] TimberWolfAlpha 0 points 41 points (+41|-0) ago 

Make sure they know why

[–] 4n0n3m0u5e 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I've always wondered why people just don't roast their own beans at this point. I've always been a light-medium roast fan for flavor and higher caffeine content.

[–] Inaminit 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Is there such a thing as 'Based' coffee? The Old Folks swore by Maxwell House, I use it myself.

[–] BlkRifleCoffeeCancer 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

It's like Starbucks?

[–] Inaminit 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

fuck that stuff, it's swill.

[–] tendiesonfloor 1 points 69 points (+70|-1) ago 

Guess it's time to cancel my monthly coffee subscription.

[–] CatsControlTheEU 0 points 57 points (+57|-0) ago 

Tell them why too.

[–] KILLtheRATS 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Post pics

[–] dontdoxxmefaggots 1 points 68 points (+69|-1) ago 

edit all his comments to say "Forced to censor by Black Rifle Coffee Co"

[–] Tyranny-News-Network 1 points 26 points (+27|-1) ago 

I actually think you've got the right idea. Maybe, "Altered by request of: Insert Complainant Here" would be better.

In this way, the DMCA offender content and context remains and the complainant is "acknowledged" for their kind request.

[–] Bastionof_freespeech 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

I like this the best, we still know who did the dmca and all the original info

[–] SpottyMatt 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Probably plastering the complainant's name in more places across the website would be counterproductive. Above suggestions of using a numerical identifier that in one DMCA specific portion of the website links to the complainants actual complaint, would be less problematic.

[–] Chempergrill 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Good idea.

[–] thewebofslime 0 points 63 points (+63|-0) ago  (edited ago)


Object, always. Every single time. (In this case, also mention that the account already voluntarily removed material in question.) I hope that fellow users, here, also take to social media to let them know we don't appreciate frivolous DMCA abuse.

Have a standard template for objection.

Check out Facebook's policy:

Usernames are generally claimed on a first-come, first-served basis. This means that you may see a Facebook Page or profile that includes your trademark in its username. While there may be cases where this type of use can be reported for trademark infringement based on the context of its use, please note that not every use of your trademark in a username is necessarily a trademark infringement. The same word used in a different context may not violate your trademark.

Someone else may use a copyrighted mark on any social media platform as a username if there is no attempt to confuse consumers. If an account has had no updates, no profile image, and there is no intent to mislead, it typically means there’s no name-squatting or impersonation.

Affirmative Defense #1: They did not "consider" Fair Use applicability before sending the notice. Black Rifle Coffee Company failed to actually consider whether this qualified as fair use or not and, instead, had a knee jerk reaction at seeing a close facsimile, but not exact replication, of their company name. Instead, they had a "knee jerk" reaction.

Affirmative Defense #2: The account was not a misrepresentation, but merely a similar username and usernames are not copyrighted.

Affirmative Defense #3: The account did not post any infringing material.

Affirmative Defense#4: Since Black Rifle Coffee Company did not take into consideration legally required issues before sending the DMCA, the DMCA notice they initiated was, ITSELF, A MISREPRESENTATION, and therefore, Voat is entitled to tany legal fees that arise from their misrepresentation of the issue.

Affirmative Defense #5: Doctrine of Laches applies here, since they already had a reddit username of the same spelling, BUT DELETED IT because of the bad publicity the account gave. This happened OVER A YEAR AGO.

Affirmative Defense #6: Since they ALREADY ABANDONED THE SAME USERNAME on another social media platform over a year ago, they explicitly communicated intent to abandon on an almost identical platform.

Affirmative Defense #7: Black Rifle Coffee is selectively applying their poor interpretation of the law to target Voat, specifically, and has failed to achieve any results of a similar request ON ANY OTHER PLATFORM.

A copyright holder who pays lip service to the consideration of fair use by claiming it formed a good faith belief when there is evidence to the contrary is still subject to Section 512(f) liability.

Here is what youtube says:

"It is our position that in general use of a string of characters or group of words in a username that happens to be used as a trademark in some market by another party is not infringement. In almost all cases the use is not a commercial use in the meaning of trademark law, and does not cause confusion. Further, to the extent that most trademark claimants have not used their marks in a market or for services overlapping YouTube, the YouTube user has priority regarding that name within our market.

[–] psymin 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

They didn't issue a DMCA notice. OP (putt) is wrong, or at least the DMCA letter linked is not a DMCA letter.

[–] totes_magotes 4 points 4 points (+8|-4) ago 

One of the things of owning IP, trademarks, copyrights is that you do not have the luxury of considering fair use before you issue a takedown request. Otherwise some joe will (rightfully) point out that one case where you were wrong or failed to notice and your property rights are gone.

The correct approach is to file the request and get a paper trail for lawyers and courts should it come down to it. It is then up to the site operator and the other party to defend against that accusation.

Otherwise, your name goes the way of band-aid, q-tip, and (nearly there) velcro. Once your name is infringed enough and you don't do anything about it, you can no longer defend it from fraudulent use and the courts will reject your claims.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you (to a point). I hold a few pieces of IP and whatnot myself and if I caught someone abusing it, I'd issue a takedown immediately with all speed possible. If that failed, I'd send in the clowns lawyers. But those who work hard have the legal right to protect what they've created. If this is not something that is liked, petition the government to change it. Don't just ignore it. There's no difference between "abandon a law you don't like" and "selective anarchy." None.

[–] thewebofslime 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

Every single social media platform on the Internet has already set the precedent that usernames are not part of trademarks or copyright.

Federal law requires that you take into consideration fair use, because if you do not, then you can be liable for attorney's fees from the party you are harassing while they are participating in fair use. The answer here is to be aggressive so that this does not happen again to Voat and the userbase can help that by letting Black Rifle Coffee Company know that this type of behavior is totally unacceptable.

[–] TheBuddha 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

Slight correction...

Trademark must be defended to avoid it going to generic status. Copyright needs no such defense. You can choose not to defend copyright on a case by case basis. Trademark is not the same.

[–] SearchVoatBot 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

This comment was linked from this v/QRV comment by @15998119.

Posted automatically (#18144) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.

load more comments ▼ (243 remaining)