Why is Julian Assange trademarking his name?

Why is Julian Assange trademarking his name?

www.guardian.co.uk

The news that Julian Assange is seeking to register his name as a trademark will surprise those who imagine the besieged WikiLeaks founder might have grown weary of his infamy – and of lawyers.

Turning your name into a trademark is an increasingly common legal move for celebrities seeking to protect the commercial use of their name to sell goods and services. Everyone from Lady Gaga to Alan Titchmarsh has done it. The tactic can look more self-aggrandising when deployed by free speech campaigners or politicians, who supposedly move in less nakedly commercial worlds. But that hasn't stopp

(visit the link for the full news article)

The Guardian seem to have turned against JA and published this story today about him trademarking his name.

I would say that with the inevitable movie and book deals it make commercial sense, I cannot imagine for one minute he set out to achieve a level of fame requiring a name trademark or did he?

It seems to have allowed the media to question his credibility and it is certainly not the action of someone wishing to slink into the background after his rape trial....

Also Ian hislop and the Guardian are carrying a story where JA allegedly makes zionist claims:
Ja's Jewish conspiracy claims


I'll eave you with the thoughts of the first commentor on the original article:

Julian Assange may succeed in trademarking his own name, but he is too late to avoid the verb "to assange" entering the language, meaning to advocate the dissemination of information about everyone except oneself.

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

aha maybe this explains it from the same newspaper:
Spielberg lines up Wikileaks film

He is now famous and wants to cash in.

Case closed.

Probably because hes just one of their objects, hes a tool of their design. It's been very clear from the beginning that Assange was nothing more than one of their many calculated crises.

Nothing more than a true pasty there trying to force the ace up his sleeve, so they can kill him, and than frame another pasty, your typically JFK senerio. magic bullets are everywhere.

Have you ever seen someone and for some reason you just did not like or trust the person from the start? It's like a gut feeling. Well that's how I've always felt about Assange.

I can't explain it but I just DO NOT like or trust the guy.

(Thanks for posting this...I was thinking about it but did not.)

SnF

Peace & Respect,

AS

reply to post by CIGGSofWAR


the term is patsy, not pasty. pasties are what strippers in Michigan cover their nips with!
but i agree, J.A. was plucked from the obscure hacker subculture and made to think that wikileaks was his own original idea. Now that they've set him and his website up in the public eye, they can use him to say that truth seekers and whistleblowers are evil, self-involved terrorists. Watch the mid-east revolution craze. these "people's" revolutions will win, the american people will think that democracy reigns. then they will pull the rug out from under these newly adopted governments and show the world that democracy and revolutions are too dangerous to be left in the hands of "the people." J.A. is just a small part of the same theme of brainwashing. They want us to celebrate these anti-establishment, anti-coporate heroes so that they can dash them to bits in front of us and "teach us a lesson" to not question authority and stay in line. J.A. will slowly sell out, disheartening those counter culture followers of his.
p.s. "they" is the illuminati, cabal, shadow council of the world.

Most likely So people don't try to cash in on his name..Smart move, As I don't care to see any Lifetime films about the man.

reply to post by spacedonk


because he is as many have always claimed he was - a spot light seeking nitwit who is willing to lie and distort facts in order to achieve fame and riches.

He's no different than the governments he ridicules in that regard

Regardless of the man's ego, or his alleged aspirations to fame and glory, he is doing it because he would be a fool not to.

In order to protect your identity from the media - and it's endless machinations on ways to monopolize on the inherent lack of protection of sovereignty that governments provide us, it is imperative that you set up the legal groundwork to make certain those wishing to use your name... such as in "The Julian Assange Story: an unauthorized biography"... have to pay or get legal permission to do so. The only real protection you (pejoratively speaking) have is via the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) regarding the use of trademarks.

How on earth do you think so many "unauthorized" biographies can stand without facing endless litigation? because the people of the world (at least according to currently legislated 'civilized' laws) DON'T OWN THEIR OWN NAME....

nor do you for that matter..... nes pa?

Some think it's a gimmick, but part of researching the UCC and personal sovereignty will prove my assertions true.

It was a defensive move against a trademark application from germany. Someone outside the organization tried to do that so they can either profit from WL / JA or perhaps sabotage them. Source.