Cracked Drunkenly Paws At Free Speech Theory Again

I feel both fondness and respect for Cracked. I remember reading the magazine as a kid -- it was number two or three to Mad, but it tried harder. As a web site, it's done good work in the realms of satire, fatuity, and social and political commentary. But like any institution it has a culture, and that culture has its weak spots. One example: the urge to write meandering make-everyone-dumber think pieces about "free speech." I put scare quotes around free speech because Cracked seems to … [Read More...]

Shut Up, He Repeated Incessantly

I've got a new post up at Fault Lines about the latest case of "oops I didn't get convicted of what the FBI was investigating but I got convicted of lying to them about it."

The Facts About A Couple of Pending Lawsuits Against Donald Trump

I think that Donald Trump is the most terrible and dangerous candidate for President of my lifetime, and perhaps much longer than that. I think he and his movement pose a structural risk to the survival of America in several ways. I think that Hillary Clinton is a terrible candidate and would be a terrible […]

Why would I need to "censor" anything?  I can destroy the world by just accrediting another branch of Cooley Law!

No, the ABA Did Not "Censor" a Story About Donald Trump Being a Censorious Asshat

The story about the ABA “censoring” Susan Seager is not what it seems. One Newspaper reported “US lawyers 'too scared' to publish report on Donald Trump baselessly suing people – in case he baselessly sues them.” (source) With everyone falling over themselves to complain about Donald Trump and censorship, the real victim seems to be […]

Part 1

If LawBot Wants To Know About My Anus I'm Sure It Has A Reason

Over at Associate's Mind they had a chat with a hot new LawBot designed to automate dispensing of legal advice. I decided to give it a try in the guise of a typical client: someone complaining that their drug dealer ripped them off.


Popehat Signal: Help Defend A Seuss-Trek Parody Under Fair Use

It's time to light the Popehat Signal to seek pro bono legal help to defend the weak against the strong. The strong party in this case is Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P., which holds the intellectual property of the late Theodor Seuss Geisel, better known as Dr. Seuss. Seuss Enterprises is represented by megafirm DLA Piper, […]


Rejoice: The 9th Circuit Fixed its Octane Fitness Problem

Under the Lanham Act, a prevailing party can get its attorneys' fees from the losing party in "exceptional cases." 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a). While this is interesting enough in the trademark and false advertising litigation context, it also has some application to SLAPP suits — at least when the plaintiff tries to play games with […]

RIP Abe Doe

Abe Doe wasn't afraid to tell me when he thought I was full of shit. You may know lots of people like that, but in a client, it's relatively rare. Clients are often terrified and usually nervous about annoying their lawyers, and it can take years to get one to really open up. Not Abe. […]

Lawsplainer: The Ninth Circuit and Compelled Speech About Abortion

I have a question about that abortion decision out of the Ninth Circuit last week. You can't see me so I'm not here. I can see you fine. You're . . . are you hiding under your desk? Just until mid-November. Come out. You're embarrassing both of us. I want to stay here. It's safe. […]

This is also me when a Cuomo thinks he understands the First Amendment

No, it is not illegal to read Wikileaks

Chris Cuomo seems to be following his big brother's lead when it comes to the First Amendment. On CNN, Cuomo said: "Also interesting is, remember, it’s illegal to possess these stolen documents,” Cuomo says. “It’s different for the media, so everything you’re learning about this, you’re learning from us.” Mr. Cuomo… I don't say this […]

Is Trump Really "Libel Proof?"

Is Trump really a “Libel-proof” Plaintiff? Donald Trump threatened to sue the New York Times for defamation based on a Times story about women accusing him of sexually assaulting them. In responding to this threat, the Times denies that there is anything defamatory about its article and mentions that “[n]othing in our article has had […]