SPAM NOTES:
a law blog covering electronic communications,
email, social networks, privacy, and more
a law blog covering electronic communications,
email, social networks, privacy, and more
Electronic Communications, Privacy, Data Protection, and More
Texting Fountain Lady Mulls Lawsuit
I missed the video when it first came out but apparently a woman was walking while texting in a mall and fell into a fountain. She got up, brushed herself off, and went about her merry way . . . but the video of her texting while walking and falling into a fountain went viral (to the tune of 1.6 million views on Facebook and YouTube).
Mediaite reports that she's mulling her options and considering a lawsuit: "Fountain Lady Wants Revenge." My immediate reaction is: "she wants to bring even more ridicule on herself by suing?" But others pointed out that it may not have been proper for the security guards to release the video.
The only problem with the texting fountain lady is that she can't make up her mind as to what went wrong and why anyone should be held liable. Reading Eagle reports ("1 Step Leads Fountain Girl to Unwanted Fame") that one of her qualms is that the security guards were unprofessional and enjoyed a laugh at her expense, rather than helping her:
As to her claim that the security guards improperly released the video, if you watch the video, you can't recognize her from it. Although the facts aren't clear, she seems to be the one that connected the dots between her and the video, by coming forward. She does state in one of her interviews that after the incident, a friend of her who watched the video called her to ask if she was OK. Apparently, the friend recognized the way she "walks"? (??)
We'll have to wait to see what happens, but her potential for a lawsuit is not looking so good right out of the gate.
Update: "texting fountain lady's problems bigger than YouTube fame."
Related: "Study Suggests There's a 'Texting While Walking' Epidemic"
Mediaite reports that she's mulling her options and considering a lawsuit: "Fountain Lady Wants Revenge." My immediate reaction is: "she wants to bring even more ridicule on herself by suing?" But others pointed out that it may not have been proper for the security guards to release the video.
The only problem with the texting fountain lady is that she can't make up her mind as to what went wrong and why anyone should be held liable. Reading Eagle reports ("1 Step Leads Fountain Girl to Unwanted Fame") that one of her qualms is that the security guards were unprofessional and enjoyed a laugh at her expense, rather than helping her:
'My issue is I don't think security was professional because they didn't send anyone to check on me until 20 minutes later and I had already left,' Cathy said Wednesday in her first interview since the accident.[via dlisted: "The Texting Fountain Lady Comes Out"] They didn't do the right thing, but their conduct hardly seems tortious. The mall/security company is investigating whether the release of the video violated any policy - I'm guessing they'll end up disciplining the security personnel involved.
As to her claim that the security guards improperly released the video, if you watch the video, you can't recognize her from it. Although the facts aren't clear, she seems to be the one that connected the dots between her and the video, by coming forward. She does state in one of her interviews that after the incident, a friend of her who watched the video called her to ask if she was OK. Apparently, the friend recognized the way she "walks"? (??)
We'll have to wait to see what happens, but her potential for a lawsuit is not looking so good right out of the gate.
Update: "texting fountain lady's problems bigger than YouTube fame."
Related: "Study Suggests There's a 'Texting While Walking' Epidemic"
Review: Typography for Lawyers
Jason Wilson was kind enough to send me a review copy of Matthew Butterick's "Typography for Lawyers." Butterick - who runs a website also named Typography for Lawyers - has a visual-arts degree from Harvard and worked as a font designer and later a web-designer. He's now a lawyer who practices civil litigation in Los Angeles. His experience qualifies him to write this book. 
TFL is full of helpful tips, ranging from the selection of appropriate fonts to spacing, sizing, the use of small caps (etc.). What makes the book incredibly useful is that Butterick:
The book is not just useful for lawyers, but for drafters of all kinds of documents. It would make the perfect gift for the legal professional in your life. You can't go wrong if you are buying it for yourself. I highly recommend it. You can buy it at the Jones McClure website here or at Amazon here. At $25.00, it's a steal.
Other reviews: Scott Greenfield; Molly DiBianca; Ernie Svenson; Mark Bennett.
Added: Legal Geekery interviews Butterick in a podcast here: "Episode 21: Typography for Lawyers, CES, Searching Cell Phones, and More."
Related - The two space controversy: Farhad Manjoo in Slate pens a polemic on using two spaces after a period: "Why you should never, ever use two spaces after a period." Butterick of course has weighed in on this topic. Here is his take:
TFL is full of helpful tips, ranging from the selection of appropriate fonts to spacing, sizing, the use of small caps (etc.). What makes the book incredibly useful is that Butterick:
- explains his rules and suggestions;
- talks about rules which are now outdated and why they developed the way they did; and
- includes technical tips on how to implement his rules in various word processing programs.
You could literally open the book to any page, read for five minutes, and come away with some helpful information about typography and how it affects a document. You can then easily implement his rules and suggestions. The short book (216 pages, including the foreword and acknowledgments) covers just about every aspect of typography, and its thoroughness will seem daunting, even to those who are tuned in to typography and formatting. For example, here are the rules for text formatting that he covers:
Reading the book will cause most people to examine their basic formatting and typography practices that they have taken for granted their entire writing lives, and this is a very useful exercise. (Personally, I have focused much more on formatting than typography in the past. It will certainly take some time to implement the helpful suggestions from the book. Of course, typography is not something I pay much attention to when blogging, so don't bust my chops over poor typography practices when I write online.)
Other reviews: Scott Greenfield; Molly DiBianca; Ernie Svenson; Mark Bennett.
Added: Legal Geekery interviews Butterick in a podcast here: "Episode 21: Typography for Lawyers, CES, Searching Cell Phones, and More."
Related - The two space controversy: Farhad Manjoo in Slate pens a polemic on using two spaces after a period: "Why you should never, ever use two spaces after a period." Butterick of course has weighed in on this topic. Here is his take:
Some topics in this book will involve discretionary choices. Not this one.There you have it!
Always put exactly one space between sentences.
Or more generally: put exactly one space after any punctuation.
Parties are not shy about splattering their spleens through cyberspace.
An awesome line from a frustrated judge dealing with a contentious divorce case (footnote 23 in Bruni v. Bruni, 2010 ONSC 6568 (Nov. 29, 2010)) [pdf].
The rest of the footnote rings true as well:
Loosely related: "Ex-BigLaw Partner Disbarred for Bogus Time Entries, Expensed Meals for Internet Dates":
[pdf].
The rest of the footnote rings true as well:
In recent years, the evidence in family trials typically includes reams of text messages between the parties, helpfully laying bare their true characters. Asserting credibility is not nearly as difficult as it was before the use of e-mails and text messages became prolific. Parties are not shy about splattering their spleens through cyberspace.(via Lowering the Bar) (Eric Goldman)
Loosely related: "Ex-BigLaw Partner Disbarred for Bogus Time Entries, Expensed Meals for Internet Dates":
Denti and the divorce client had both denied a sexual relationship, but flirtatious e-mails told a different story, according to the opinion. The document goes through a series of questions presented to Denti during the ethics hearing and his denials, including this question: “Let's talk about your e-mail. What are you talking about with a whole case of raincoats and using them all in one night?”The emails and the explanation are a painful read - even funnier than the language quoted in the ABA Journal story is the fact that when asked about emails discussing soreness and fatigue from the evening before, Denti said it was because he or she had been using a new trampoline. "Three times," the questioner asked .. you used the trampoline "three times?" Oy.
“I think I’m joking,” he replies, and then says it probably refers to the client's husband.
[pdf].
Blog By Date - When is Something too Stale to Blog?
A silly, menial, meta-question, I know, but the first sentence in this post by Ryan Gile brought it to mind.
UK Watchdog to Crack Down on Celebrity Tweets - Will the FTC Follow Suit?
The celebrity Twittersphere is marginally interesting to me personally, but celebs seem to carry a fair amount of clout on Twitter and in the online space in general. It seems like celebrities are among the most followed (if not the most followed group on Twitter). They plug many products and services, and I often wonder whether there's any financial motivation behind these efforts. My instinct is that the answer is yes, and there has been some coverage on how much certain celebrities earn per Tweet. See these articles from Business Insider and SF Gate for some eye-popping figures: "How much celebrities and sport stars make per tweet" and "Startups cash in on Twitter with pay-per-Tweet."
The Daily Mail reports that UK's Office of Fair Trading (which seems like the US equivalent of the FTC) has ordered a crackdown on these celebrity tweets. (See "Stop Tweeting - or we will take you to court! Watchdog's crackdown on celebrities who plug products on Twitter" (via Leanne O'Donnell) and "Twitter endorsements face OFT clampdown".) The article asks around for comment on some of the products or services endorsed by these celebrities, and finds some instances of money (or discounts) changing hands - one involved Henry Holland and Range Rover:
Loosely related: "Khloe Kardashian and Twitter Spam."
Also loosely related: "How 50 Cent Made $9M From One Weekend of Tweeting." I'm not suggesting there was anything improper with that 50 Cent did, but encouraging followers to invest through frequent tweeting and plugging (of a stock that you own) sounds like the type of thing that could raise some agency's eyebrows.
The Daily Mail reports that UK's Office of Fair Trading (which seems like the US equivalent of the FTC) has ordered a crackdown on these celebrity tweets. (See "Stop Tweeting - or we will take you to court! Watchdog's crackdown on celebrities who plug products on Twitter" (via Leanne O'Donnell) and "Twitter endorsements face OFT clampdown".) The article asks around for comment on some of the products or services endorsed by these celebrities, and finds some instances of money (or discounts) changing hands - one involved Henry Holland and Range Rover:
Henry Holland (133,035 followers)Range Rover later told a different story, but its initial comment was interesting. Other celebs/products include:
Range Rover
‘CAN’T WAIT FOR MY NEW RANGE ROVER . . .!!!!’ – November 24
‘It’s the dream! Waiting for me in the car park! – December 2
A Range Rover spokesman said their VIP scheme meant celebrities signed contracts ‘in return for them driving our cars.’ She added: ‘It’s not free...Under the terms of the deal they Tweet . . . ‘They Tweet about the car.’
Elizabeth Hurley (66,603 followers)I wonder if the FTC will eventually crack down on this practice in the US. Obviously, under the FTC regulations promulgated last year, this is the type of thing that should come with a disclosure, and an endorsement without disclosure can subject both the celebrity and the company being endorsed to penalties. The sole crackdown to date under those regulations involved fake reviews for a game posted by a PR company. (See "FTC Dings PR Firm for Fake Reviews -- In re Reverb Communications.") I hadn't heard of either the PR company or the product it endorsed, and it seemed like an odd choice for an FTC poster child. It will be interesting to see what the FTC does with celebrity endorsements in 2011.
Estee Lauder
Peaches Geldof (97,919 followers)
The May Fair Hotel
Lily Allen (2,573,958 followers)
PlayStation and Grey Goose vodka
Loosely related: "Khloe Kardashian and Twitter Spam."
Also loosely related: "How 50 Cent Made $9M From One Weekend of Tweeting." I'm not suggesting there was anything improper with that 50 Cent did, but encouraging followers to invest through frequent tweeting and plugging (of a stock that you own) sounds like the type of thing that could raise some agency's eyebrows.
Portrait of a Lawyer Turned Anti-Spammer
Ryan Burns of the North Coast Journal profiled Asis Internet, a long-time anti-spam crusader who ultimately closed up shop. (Previous post: "The Rise and Fall of a Spam Plaintiff.") The AP takes it turn on this topic, this time profiling Dan Balsam, a lawyer turned anti-spam crusader: "Man quits job, makes living suing e-mail spammers." (Balsam says the scourge of spam inspired him to go to law school.)
The AP's piece mentions the millions of dollars in judgments racked up by Balsam. However, it doesn't answer the critical question of what percentage of those judgments he actually collects on? Nor does the article mention Balsam's recent loss in the 9th Circuit, where he tried to hold a registrar and its privacy protection services liable for a million dollar judgment. (See "Domain Name Privacy Protection Services Not Liable for Failure to Disclose Identity of Alleged Spammer.")
In fact, this is something I've been curious about for a long time. Companies and individuals have been awarded millions in (often default) judgments against spammers. How much of these judgments have actually been realized? Inquiring minds want to know!
(h/t Eric Goldman)
The AP's piece mentions the millions of dollars in judgments racked up by Balsam. However, it doesn't answer the critical question of what percentage of those judgments he actually collects on? Nor does the article mention Balsam's recent loss in the 9th Circuit, where he tried to hold a registrar and its privacy protection services liable for a million dollar judgment. (See "Domain Name Privacy Protection Services Not Liable for Failure to Disclose Identity of Alleged Spammer.")
In fact, this is something I've been curious about for a long time. Companies and individuals have been awarded millions in (often default) judgments against spammers. How much of these judgments have actually been realized? Inquiring minds want to know!
(h/t Eric Goldman)
In the Age of YouTube, there's no need to take my word for it
In the Age of YouTube, there’s no need to take my word for it: There is a video of the incident that I’m “happy to allow . . . to speak for itself.” Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 378 n.5 (2007); see www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOssHWB6WBI (last visited Nov. 16, 2010) [no shortened URL?]. This video (also found in the record) clearly shows that Norse’s sieg heil was momentary and casual, causing no disruption whatsoever.Interesting quote from Judge Kozinski in his 9th Cir. concurring opinion in Norse v. Santa Cruz.
(h/t Eric Goldman; see also Techdirt.)
ABA Journal Blawg 100 2010 - Recommendation No. 2 (Tech & Marketing Law Blog)
My second recommendation for the ABA Journal Blawg 100 2010 - Eric Goldman's Technology & Marketing Law Blog.
Why? Because I guest blog there with some regularity, and Prof. Goldman has promised to double my pay if he wins. I'm kidding, even if he did double my pay, it would still be zero. Seriously, his blog has always been a go-to resource for those who follow tech. and marketing law developments. I was always amazed at his encyclopedic knowledge before I started posting over there, and I'd always exchanged emails with him on cases, but now I do so with some regularity, and I'm in awe of the volume of relevant material that must pass through his gmail and scribd accounts. In fact, one of the downsides of blogging over there is the sheer torrent of material that's available. I don't know how he does it, but he stays totally on top of ongoing cases. No (even loosely relevant) case passes by without him noticing.
How to Vote:
Why? Because I guest blog there with some regularity, and Prof. Goldman has promised to double my pay if he wins. I'm kidding, even if he did double my pay, it would still be zero. Seriously, his blog has always been a go-to resource for those who follow tech. and marketing law developments. I was always amazed at his encyclopedic knowledge before I started posting over there, and I'd always exchanged emails with him on cases, but now I do so with some regularity, and I'm in awe of the volume of relevant material that must pass through his gmail and scribd accounts. In fact, one of the downsides of blogging over there is the sheer torrent of material that's available. I don't know how he does it, but he stays totally on top of ongoing cases. No (even loosely relevant) case passes by without him noticing.
How to Vote:
Register to vote here.Bias alert: See above. Also, thanks to Ron Coleman for the kudos.
Cast your vote in the "Legal Tech." category here.
ABA Journal Blawg 100 2010 - Recommendation No. 1 (The Legal Satyricon)
I wanted to take a moment to offer a vote recommendation for the ABA Journal Blawg 100. My blog-reading habits have changed over the years (like most people's), but one blog I have consistently read is The Legal Satyricon. 
Why TLS? The Satyriconistas tackle a wide range of topics ranging from internet-related legal issues, to free speech, and politics, and my personal favorite - the wisdom of the laws and institutions of the fair state where its founder originally lived. Refreshingly, for a law blog, TLS's opinion is unabashed. (I said "tackle," they actually pummel topics.) Fear of how they will be perceived is not something that is even a remote consideration in their writing process. (This is not surprising, given the personality of its founder Marc Randazza.) Humor is a strong thread that runs through TLS posts. The photos and images are on point. They bash what deserves to be bashed and do it in a funny and unique way. At the end of the day, TLS embodies what blogging should be - opinionated, fearless, and funny.
How to Vote:
Bias Alert: I'm friends with Randazza.
NB: some posts have criticized the process behind (or around) the ABA 100 and they're worth a read in my opinion: "ABA Journal Blawg 100: Where the Hell Are the Womens' Blawgs?" (Niki Black) and "ABA Blawg 100: Death of the Beauty Pageant" (Scott Greenfield). That said, vote TLS!
Why TLS? The Satyriconistas tackle a wide range of topics ranging from internet-related legal issues, to free speech, and politics, and my personal favorite - the wisdom of the laws and institutions of the fair state where its founder originally lived. Refreshingly, for a law blog, TLS's opinion is unabashed. (I said "tackle," they actually pummel topics.) Fear of how they will be perceived is not something that is even a remote consideration in their writing process. (This is not surprising, given the personality of its founder Marc Randazza.) Humor is a strong thread that runs through TLS posts. The photos and images are on point. They bash what deserves to be bashed and do it in a funny and unique way. At the end of the day, TLS embodies what blogging should be - opinionated, fearless, and funny.
How to Vote:
Register to vote here.This was not an easy recommendation to make. I have been a long-time reader of several other blogs on the list, including the always excellent Volokh Conspiracy. Charon QC publishes an excellent blog (and recently scored an interview with Julian Assange's lawyer). There's also Brian Tannebaum's blog (Brian plays a warm friendly lawyer on Twitter).
Vote in the IMHO (what?) category here.
Bias Alert: I'm friends with Randazza.
NB: some posts have criticized the process behind (or around) the ABA 100 and they're worth a read in my opinion: "ABA Journal Blawg 100: Where the Hell Are the Womens' Blawgs?" (Niki Black) and "ABA Blawg 100: Death of the Beauty Pageant" (Scott Greenfield). That said, vote TLS!
David Kazzie Strikes Again - "So You Want to Close Your Facebook Account?"
I'm in awe of David Kazzie. He's the man behind the breakout "So You Want to Go to Law School" video. Regardless of how you feel about his take on t
he practice of law, there's something really funny about the combination of his sarcastic and jaded script and the Xtranormal characters and scenes. (I personally liked the video.) His original video is almost at a million views on YouTube. (Here's a link to his YouTube channel and a link to his blog.)
I recently came across another funny YouTube video titled " So You Want to Write a Novel." After watching the video, I noticed that this was also by Kazzie, and it's also hilarious. This video also received a fair amount of attention. Here is yet another one from him, titled "So You Want to Close Your Facebook Account?":
This one is funny as well, and pokes fun at Facebook (or people's use of Facebook). I wonder if Kazzie plans to explore his Xtranormal writing skills as something more than a hobby? (Here's an interview at The Careerist with Kazzie: "Lawyer Behind the YouTube Hit.")
Either way, his stuff is funny. [I should also note that I'm a fan of Xtranormal, although I lack the talent to put it to good use.]
he practice of law, there's something really funny about the combination of his sarcastic and jaded script and the Xtranormal characters and scenes. (I personally liked the video.) His original video is almost at a million views on YouTube. (Here's a link to his YouTube channel and a link to his blog.)I recently came across another funny YouTube video titled " So You Want to Write a Novel." After watching the video, I noticed that this was also by Kazzie, and it's also hilarious. This video also received a fair amount of attention. Here is yet another one from him, titled "So You Want to Close Your Facebook Account?":
This one is funny as well, and pokes fun at Facebook (or people's use of Facebook). I wonder if Kazzie plans to explore his Xtranormal writing skills as something more than a hobby? (Here's an interview at The Careerist with Kazzie: "Lawyer Behind the YouTube Hit.")
Either way, his stuff is funny. [I should also note that I'm a fan of Xtranormal, although I lack the talent to put it to good use.]
