# Name a Star -- Should This Scam be Outlawed, or is it Buyer Be Smart? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 13, 2003, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660 "2003-06-13T20:36:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660/41 "2003-06-15T03:30:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Smeghead \* > \*\*IMHO, this is a classic case of “caveat emptor”. They’re not promising more than they’re giving. \*\* What’s the purpose of their saying, “The name will be registered in book form in the US Copyright office?” Is it not to deceive people into thinking something that isn’t true? ---
**Author:** ![FairyDust](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ccd318/32.png) [@FairyDust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FairyDust)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660/42 "2003-06-15T05:04:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Futile Gesture \* > \*\*I’m selling SDMB threads. > > This thread, previously called thread 190618, is now “Jackie Pemberton”, as bought by her husband Joe. > > Ms Pemberton’s name joins the thousands of other sucke… _owners_ in my copyrighted register, catalogued and stored under my bed for future generations as a record of Joe’s lack of imag… _love_ for his wife on their 20th anniversary. > > All the G8 governments and the UN have been notified of its existance, and no-one complained, so I guess that makes it about as internationally official as anything can be. > > Show how much you care, name a ‘fighting ignorance’ thread\* after your loved one. On application we will carefully pick a thread from the thousand’s available especially for you. All for the bargain price of $20, includes certificate and instructions how to find it. (BBQ Pit threads on special at $2 each.) > > Don’t care about ignorance? Try our 'Name A Water Molecule" scheme. Internationally recognised by scientist as H2O. Literally millions to choose from, each with their own personality. > > \*All SDMB threads remain copyrighted material of the Chicago Reader, Inc and no-one else knows or cares a toss about our naming scheme. \*\* Comedy gold! Brilliant! ---
**Author:** ![Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dreaming_of_Maria_Callas)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660/43 "2003-06-15T05:29:24Z")
Seeing how state attorney generals have successfully gone after International Library of Poetry and other poetry vanity scams, I see no reason why the name a-star-scam couldn’t be next. It’s probably lack of complaints. Buyers seem more or less satisfied. And FWIW, even some small-town planetariums do name-a-star for fundraising. But they clue the donors in to the fact that it’s just a game of sorts. UnuMondo ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660/44 "2003-06-15T05:33:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Bricker \* > \*\*What’s the purpose of their saying, “The name will be registered in book form in the US Copyright office?” Is it not to deceive people into thinking something that isn’t true? \*\* They may be trying to get you to believe something as long as you don’t think too hard about it but if you have a prblem with this then you have a problem with the vast majority of advertising out there. What does “100% Real Orange Juice” mean to you. If you think it actually has to be 100% juice of the orange fruit in it and nothong else you’d be wrong. I am not even sure it has to have any actual juice of the orange fruit in it at all. Certainly the ISR wants you to think you are getting something at least slightly cool instead of a worthless piece of paper and they spin their rhetoric to enable sales. In the end though they aren’t actually lying about anything and it is the buyer’s fault if they purchase something so useless. ---
**Author:** ![chukhung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e79b87/32.png) [@chukhung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chukhung)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660/45 "2003-06-15T13:28:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by UnuMondo \* > **Seeing how state attorney generals have successfully gone after International Library of Poetry and other poetry vanity scams, I see no reason why the name a-star-scam couldn’t be next.** According to the article in the second of **drewbert** ’s links, at least one state’s attorney general _has_ investigated International Star Registry and cleared them. ISR may have removed any lingering confusion in their fine print since they were cited by the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs in 1998. > [@](#): > > In fact, consumer fraud agencies don’t seem troubled by star-naming. Though the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs cited ISR in 1998 for engaging in deceptive trade practices, the company was cleared of wrongdoing by the Illinois attorney general’s office. ISR is registered with the Better Business Bureau-which said it has received few complaints. Note that the above quote comes from an article written close to three years ago. I don’t know what the current legal situation is. ---
**Author:** ![FairyDust](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ccd318/32.png) [@FairyDust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FairyDust)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660/46 "2003-06-15T14:20:44Z")
It was also discussed [here](http://pub80.ezboard.com/feverythingspacefrm3.showMessage?topicID=179.topic). Scroll down to where **yales** announces he/she will take bids to rename buildings for those willing to pay for it. Funny stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660/47 "2003-06-15T16:09:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Bricker \* > \*\*What’s the purpose of their saying, “The name will be registered in book form in the US Copyright office?” Is it not to deceive people into thinking something that isn’t true? \*\* If that were literally what they represented, I’m with **Bricker**. I don’t think even this weaselly statement is really non-deceptive (and I have the feeling, as others have mentioned, that these same bad actors have in the past made significantly more grandiose claims that more clearly passed the line separating free speech and fraud). Specifically, I don’t know that Granny’s name is a “creative work” such as can be copyrighted – nor that the _name_, per se and in itself, is truly “registered in book form with the Copyright Office.” Rather I think it’s the arbitrary compilation of many names presented by the ISR that is “registered.” So, ISR has a (worthless) copyright registration in a worthless compilation, but I don’t think any individual namer in the compilation (or the respective names therein) has any registration in and of itself (and, if he went to the LOC, would not have any ability to search the card catalogs for “his” registration). Cf. if McDonald’s represented that they had “registered the color golden with the U.S. Trademark Office in design form” as opposed to making clear they’d registered a composite design of specifically-shaped arches including the color gold. N.B. too that mischaracterizing the scope or nature of federal intellectual property registrations or rights potentially opens one up to sanctions for patent/trademark/copyright misuse. In sum, while I do believe caveat emptor and common sense generally ought to prevail, if the FTC or a State A.G. decided to go after ISR, I don’t think it would be more far-fetched as a matter of fraud/deceptive trade practice enforcement than many other busts or consent decrees. Of course, [slight hijack] figuring out what the FTC’s priorities and thought process are isn’t easy. Until recently, supine FTC officials would just shrug their shoulders ruefully about spam complaints and note that there was no law against it – when it seems to me that any first year law student could formulate a fairly good argument that electronic communications containing forged headers and unsubscribe information, and making false medical claims, might just constitute wire fraud, etc.[/slight hijack] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/name-a-star-should-this-scam-be-outlawed-or-is-it-buyer-be-smart/181660.md?page=2)