I actually think 4chaners might react against Christopher/moot. Anon stands very specifically for complete and total freedom of speech. Saying "whatever the fuck you want" is more important to anon than protecting some imaginary trademark moot thinks he has.

It's difficult to say what Anonymous stands for, because it's not a single organisation or group. Anyone can take the label of Anonymous when advocating a cause, and "become part of it".

Before Anonymous got "good guy" publicity for supporting Wikileaks, people calling themselves anonymous were mostly known for trolling: finding emotionally sensitive people and communities, and harassing them both online and offline for their own amusement.

The userbase has always been about schadenfreudic justice and retribution from a perceived slight of the day. moot - or rather, his attorney - fits the bill to a t.

The first things that came to my mind was they would likely try to destroy the brand by buying every moot.* domain and associating it with unsavory things, flooding sites that use moot.it with horrendous crap, and DDoS attacks.

Entirely possible, although Moot.it has far more to lose than moot himself. I get the impression that Moot.it is playing with fire in order to stir up some free publicity. I personally don't think it's worth the risk.

That's wrong; "Anon" didn't liked at all when a company tried to trademark elements related to the Anonymous branding.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/31/anonymous_french_fir...

I don't know what has happened after these threats.