The BBC link is titled “model behaviour”.

Valiant Enterprises were told their model soldier of an IRA volunteer from 1921 had been removed from the eBay site because the figure “violated its hateful or discriminatory policy”.

The eBay policy states: “Sellers may not list items that promote or glorify hatred, violence, racial or religious intolerance, or items that promote organisations with such views.”

The article makes the obvious comparison to other icons who fought the British empire, such as the American “revolutionaries”. And then it transitions to discussing the issue with modern Irish leaders.

Sinn Fein’s Alex Maskey said the decision to ban the item was unjustified.

He said: “To ban important historical facts like the Irish War of Independence is just bizarre. Especially when that time is history has been recognised and commemorated by the Irish government”.

Perhaps it would help if the figurine wasn’t holding a gun and ammo belts, but instead carrying a flag or in a striking pose that indicated national pride. It would be one thing if eBay tried to ban symbols of the IRA, such as the flags or name, but something about the militant garb makes it a more troubling and questionable icon. Likewise, I have no real issue with the Union Jack as it represents so much more than the militancy of the UK, but I don’t think I’d feel great about sales of a figurine of the British army with a Rapparee’s head dangling from his pike…then again, I bet there is no ban on British army figurines at all.

I find this story highly amusing.

Nevada has become the latest US state to make it illegal for musicians to falsely claim they are connected to well-known groups.

Perhaps that’s to be expected, but here’s the funny part:

Maxine Porter, manager for original Drifter Bill Pinkney, said: “In a town like [Las Vegas], where you have a constant flow of tourists, this is a place where people expect to have authenticity.

Eh? Vegas is a place where people expect authenticity? Elvis, for example, is a complex case:

The darling of Vegas, the real Elvis himself, was arguably just a tribute act, if not an outright impostor. Prejudice helped facilitate denial of any connection to the well-known (black) groups and artists that he emulated, so it raises interesting questions of how we come to terms with authenticity of an act.

While Elvis rocketed to stardom, resentment grew among talented musicians whose similar-sounding records weren’t getting the same play. The hip swiveling that merely disgusted conservative whites amounted to theft for blacks. More than one player laid claim to Elvis’ gimmicks.

Blues shouter Wynonie ‘Mr. Blues’ Harris told Sepia: “I originated that style 10 years ago. The current crop of shouters are rank impostors. They have no right to call themselves the kings of rock and roll. I am the king of rock and roll.”

In the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, guitarist Calvin New born said Elvis hung out in a black bar outside Memphis where he played. “He would sit there and watch me every Wednesday and Friday night,” he said. “I’d wiggle my legs and swivel my hips and make love to the guitar.”

In 1956, the Amsterdam News said Elvis had “copied Bo Diddley’s style to the letter.”

[…]

“The Elvis that died wasn’t the same Elvis that was coming up”, Chuck D said. “They said he was king. Based on who and what? Based on the quality of the people judging or the quality of his music? What does ‘King of Rock and Roll’ mean growing up in a black household? My Chuck Berry records are still in my house. Little Richard is still in the house. Otis Redding and James Brown. The King of what?”

Certainly not the King of authenticity, but perhaps the King of Vegas.