It’s actually in Vancouver, right where Fred Mason says it is in his
comment; I’m the photographer and I’m afraid I’ve never been to Austin.

Looking closer I can see that is not, as I initially thought, the Frost tower in the background. Thanks for the heads up.

Austin’s a great place to visit, especially for SXSW. I do not recommend visiting in this weather, though. Vancouver sounds nice and cool about now.

The local chapter here is holed up in a gorgeous looking (what I believe
to be) ex-Masonic Temple, and I’ve been tempted to wander in just to
see it from the inside. But I’m afraid.

They do have nice buildings (they do say “new cult” stands out…or is that money). I pass the one here nearly every day on my way to work, but I too have yet to wonder in.

Saw a licensed Guy Fawkes mask at a seasonal shop this past weekend, priced at $11.99. Very thin plastic, a small step above an old school Ben Cooper mask. Seeing a very nice, thick solid plastic venetian raven mask for $8.99 made me a bit sad.

Nick Bilton: You kids don’t even know what you’re doing! You think you’re making a counter-culture statement, but really you’re just advertising for Warner Brothers. Back in my day we dropped acid on the National Mall and lifted the White House with our minds.

Anonymous members: You’re such an old man, Nick Bilton. Who cares about Warner Bros making money? They’re not our enemy. Plus, we think the mask looks cool.

Anonymous is not a highly principled, focused movement. They’re guys who hang out in forums and enjoy sticking it to the man in their free time. Judging by some of the comments in this thread, Anonymous members are not so much anti-establishment as they are pro-self-empowerment. So I don’t see the use of the mask as hypocritical, which is what I think Nick’s point was.

The whole article feels kind of petty. Like some technical detail is going to discredit what is clearly a legitimate subculture. However, reading it did inspire me to go looking for a more in-depth article about Anonymous and I found one here: http://forums.whyweprotest.net/threads/wired-article-about-anonymous.46803/

Wow, no. Not at all.

When Anonymous has any kind of discernible goal, it’s far closer to pro-civil-liberties than anti-capitalist. The only way you could classify them as anti-capitalist is by pretending that a good three quarters of their raids never happened.

And even what I just said isn’t true at all. Don’t think of Anonymous as having one single, identifiable ideology. Think of Anonymous as being against whatever happens to annoy a critical mass of its free-flowing userbase.

Rather, it’s a case in point. If you think finding a trace of hypocrisy is genuine grounds for disregarding an argument, everybody is reduced to the status of fish in a barrel.

Costumes on Haight has been around since I’ve been in SF, so that’s at least 20 years. And they’re good people based on my experience. They rented my design company a Chicken Suit for a really, really affordable price when we enacted an internet parody of the silver-swoosh Nike Shoe cult hullaballoo. They thought it was a funny idea, so they cut us a deal. We were a very small company, just starting out, and the discount and their flexible rental terms meant a lot to us. So we gave them business in the future. 

I mention this experience because I believe it’s a good example of how local businesses can engage in capitalism in a humanist, mutually-beneficial way. When I thought of the other places one could purchase a Guy Fawkes mask, I could think of only a couple more independent shops.

OK, so Warner Brothers makes a penny off every mask purchased. But these independent shops make some change too. And I’m happy about that. 

We live in a capitalist society. Sure, there are choices to be made about consumption, but it’s impossible to escape the fact that we usually exchange money for goods when we’re not, say, bartering goats for them.

Were I to purchase a mask, I would do so at a locally-owned business and I wouldn’t have an ethical qualm about it. In fact, I’d be glad that I was helping them stay in business. I like local businesses. They add flavor to neighborhoods, they keep the social fabric of a neighborhood coherent and vibrant, and they often keep my friends housed and clothed through the money they earn running their small business or working there. So, I say forget WB, and buy, don’t steal, the mask from a cool independent shop.

If the penny WB makes off the purchase really bothers you, I’m sure you could figure out a way to take that penny back.

Look at this guy assigning intention and motives not currently present in Anonymous

Really?

So its members shouldn’t buy… well, almost anything, really.  Right?

I’m not privy to Warners’ licensing terms for this particular item, but it’s fairly likely that whether or not you buy a licensed V For Vendetta Guy Fawkes mask makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to Warner Brothers’ bottom line.

A paper mask is what was worn in the original graphic novel, anyway. The backstory is that “V” is donning a disposible mask that is commonly sold and used as a face on the straw man dummys that english children used to burn in effigy on Guy Fawkes day, to celebrate the execution. Adds a few layers to the whole thing, doesn’t it.

I’m with others here, though, in wondering what the point of this post is.  

When you buy a licensed product based on a film prop, the licensing company gets a cut.  

Well, yeah. And…what?  What’s your point?

It’s actually in Vancouver, right where Fred Mason says it is in his comment; I’m the photographer and I’m afraid I’ve never been to Austin.