home / subscribe / about us / books / archives / search / links / feedback

 

New Print Edition of CounterPunch Available Exclusively to Subscribers: Patrick Cockburn's Iraq Diary: The Bush Mosiac; Inside the Looting of the Iraq National History Museum; the Rise of the Guerrilla War; Jeffrey St. Clair on The Anatomy of a Swindle: How the Bush Administration is Giving Away Public Lands to Its Political Cronies; Scott Handleman on the Return of the Aliens: Why the CIA Was Paranoid About UFOs. Remember, the CounterPunch website is supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide web audience is soaring, with more than 60,000 visitors a day. This is inspiring news, but the work involved also compels us to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe Now!

Or Call Toll Free 1-800-840 3683 or write CounterPunch, PO BOX 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Coming Soon!
From Common Courage Press

Recent Stories

August 1, 2003

Joanne Mariner
Stopping Prison Rape

Alex Coolman
Who Moved My Soap: Trivializing Prison Rape

Steve J.B.
Prison Bitch

Stan Goff
Injury and Decorum: The Missing Wounded in Iraq

Wayne Madsen
Europe Unplugs from the Matrix

Robert Fisk
Wolfowitz the Censor

Elaine Cassel
Ashcroft Loses Big in Puerto Rico

Website of the Day
Stop Prisoner Rape

 

July 31, 2003

Ray McGovern
The Prostitution of Intelligence

Brian Cloughley
Wolfowitz's Operative Statement

Sheldon Hull
The RIAA's Jihad:
The Devil's Music (Industry)

Elaine Cassel
The Next Time You Crack a Lawyer Joke, Think of These Attorneys

Sheldon Rampton
and John Stauber
True Lies: Propaganda and Bush's Wars

Hammond Guthrie
Speculation Blues

Website of the Day
Army of One?

 

July 30, 2003

David Lindorff
Poindexter the Terror Bookie

Marjorie Cohn
Why Iraq and Afghanistan? It's About the Oil

Elaine Cassel
How Ashcroft Coerces Guilty Pleas in Terror Cases

Zvi Bar'el
The Hidden Costs of the Iraq War

Lisa Walsh Thomas
Killing Mustafa Hussein: Death of a Child, Birth of a Legend?

Sean Carter
Pat Robertson's Prayer Jihad: God, Sodomy and the Supremes

ND Jayaprakash
India and Ariel Sharon

Steve Perry
Bush's Top 40 Lies

Standard Schaefer
Correction about Bloomberg and Outscourcing

Website of the Day
Bring Them Home Now!

Congratulations to CounterPuncher Gilad Atzmon! BBC Names EXILE Top Jazz CD

July 29, 2003

Jeffrey St. Clair
"Journalist Spotted! Journalist Dead!" Guatemala Bleeds; US Press Yawns

Thomas J. Nagy
The Belligerent Dr. Pipes

Kurt Nimmo
Tom Delay Goes to Jerusalem

Chris Floyd
Dead Reckoning: Bush Warriors Sign Off on War Crimes

Robert Fisk
Another Botched Raid; Another Massacre

Jason Leopold
Did Chalabi Help Write Bush's State of the Union Address?

Conn Hallinan
Food Bully: Bush's Biotech Shock and Awe Campaign

Dan Bacher
Sacramento's War on Free Speech

Ray McGovern
Cheney Chicanery

Website of the Day
Julie Hilden Caught on Tape

 

Hot Stories

Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber
True Lies: the Use of Propaganda in the Iraq War

Stan Goff
Bring 'Em On Home, Now!

Wendell Berry
Small Destructions Add Up

Gary Leupp
Faith-Based Intelligence

CounterPunch Wire
WMD: Who Said What When

Cindy Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter I Can't Hear From

Elaine Cassel
Civil Liberties Watch

Michel Guerrin
Embedded Photographer Says: "I Saw Marines Kill Civilians"

Uzma Aslam Khan
The Unbearably Grim Aftermath of War: What America Says Does Not Go

Paul de Rooij
Arrogant Propaganda

Gore Vidal
The Erosion of the American Dream

Francis Boyle
Impeach Bush: A Draft Resolution

Click Here for More Stories.

 

 

Subscribe Online


Search CounterPunch

 

August 2, 2003

Nike's Full Court Press Breaks Down

Sweatshops, Lies, the Supremes and Kasky

By TAMARA R. PIETY

The Supreme Court capped off a week of surprises and milestones with what looked like one big "Never mind" when it dismissed the Nike v. Kasky "commercial speech" case. But appearances can be deceiving. In fact, the Court's decision signaled the defeat of Nike's bid to take Marc Kasky--and any more like him--out of the game altogether.

Kasky, a resident of California, had sued Nike under California's decades-old consumer protection laws regulating, among other things, false advertising, claiming that statements made by Nike to defend its labor practices were lies. Kasky claimed Nike made false statements about its labor practices and factory conditions because consumers care about these issues and indeed anchor their purchasing decisions on such information. Nike made these statements in letters to the editor of various papers, press releases, paid advertisements (not unlike the one Martha Stewart recently ran), on its Web site and other venues. Such false statements, made for a commercial purpose, Kasky claimed, violated California law.

In order to appreciate the significance of what the Supreme Court did, understand that Nike's response to Kasky's claim was, in effect, "So what? Even if everything you say is true, under the First Amendment we're entitled to lie." Now that is what you call an "in your face" defense.

This move of Nike's is what is known in the legal biz as a demurrer, or a motion to dismiss. In order to grant a demurrer, a court must find that, even if everything the plaintiff says is true, the law provides no recourse.

Here Nike wanted a ruling that the First Amendment offered it absolute immunity for any misstatements it may have made, knowingly or unknowingly. The trial court and the intermediate appellate courts in California agreed with Nike. But the California Supreme Court, relying on precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court, disagreed, finding that these statements were made with a commercial purpose and thus were "commercial speech." Since the late 1970s the Supreme Court has held that "commercial speech", as long as it was truthful, could enjoy a limited First Amendment protection. Put another way, in the commercial speech area the government could regulate content for its truth --precisely what it cannot do with other protected speech. However, before the Supreme Court created this category no one thought commercial speech was "speech" at all for purposes of the First Amendment.

The California Supreme Court's decision was bad news for Nike since a failure to win at the motion-to-dismiss stage meant entering into the dreaded realm of discovery. (And who knows what might emerge there? Just ask the tobacco industry.) So, hungry for a win, needing a win, Nike went for the big one, the U.S. Supreme Court. And they had good reasons to believe that they might win.

For several years various corporate interests, particularly those in the advertising, media and image businesses, have urged the high Court to do away with the commercial speech doctrine altogether and to treat commercial speech like political speech. They argued that commercial speech should not be treated as some sort of second-class citizen of speech. And they've found at least one ally in Justice Thomas.

Although the Court has (so far) resisted or rebuffed these entreaties, it has nevertheless struck down some attempts to regulate commercial speech (such as Massachusetts's effort to severely restrict tobacco advertising in the Lorillard case). But the Nike case presented another such opportunity, so its petition was soon joined by a blizzard of briefs--representing not only the usual suspects (advertising and chamber of commerce interests), but garnering support from some undreamed of allies such as the AFL-CIO. Nike might be forgiven for thinking they could rush the play, take control and slam dunk their way to victory, given a line-up like this--especially after the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, which resulted in another daunting array of amici (friends of the court) briefs, this time balanced by some for Kasky.

Their high hopes, however, were dashed when the Supreme Court dismissed. Dismissal means that the fondest wish of Nike and its amici--that its legal arguments represented the endgame--is over. Now Kasky gets the chance to prove his case with evidence. Whether he can do it is another story. But at least he gets to try.

Tamara R. Piety, assistant professor of law at The University of Tulsa College of Law, wrote an amicus (friend of the court) brief against Nike on behalf of The Sierra Club, an environmental organization concerned about "greenwashing," a form of commercial speech where corporations take an environmentally friendly tone in their advertising, labeling and other public image materials, whether or not those claims are true. She can be reached at: tamara-piety@utulsa.edu

© copyright Tamara R. Piety 2003


Weekend Edition Features for July 26 / 28, 2003

Alexander Cockburn
NYT's Screws Up Again; Uday and Qusay Deaths Bad for Bush; Gen. Hitchens at the Front

Gary Leupp
Faith-Based Intelligence

Saul Landau
A Report from Syria

Stan Goff
Bring 'Em On Home, Now!

Jeffrey St. Clair
Book Cooking at Boeing

Andrew Cockburn
The Sons Are Dead; Now the Blood Feud Begins

Jason Leopold
CIA Points the Finger at the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans

Robert Fisk
The Power of Death

Joanne Mariner
Monsieur Moussaoui

M. Shahid Alam
The Global Economy Since 1800: a Short History

Harry Browne
Northern Ireland: the Other Faltering Peace Process

Fidel Castro
Moncada, 50 Years Later

Lula
Democracy Requires Social Justice

Edward S. Herman
Refuting Brad DeLong's Smear Job on Noam Chomsky

Ron Jacobs
Guided by a Great Feeling of Love: a Review of Gordon's The Company You Keep

Julie Hilden
A Photographer, an Offer and Cameron Diaz's Topless Photos

Adam Engel
Man Talk

Poets' Basement
Keeney, Witherup, Short, Nimba, Guthrie and Albert

 

 

Keep CounterPunch Alive:
Make a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!

home / subscribe / about us / books / archives / search / links /