Archive for October, 2006

“Bully” update

Updating our Oct. 14 and Aug. 17 posts, Florida Judge Ronald Friedman, after viewing the game, chose not to censor it—this time. Whether that free-speech decision should be made by judges at all and whether Jack Thompson should be permitted to misuse public nuisance law in this way are, of course, the real issues. Needless to say, Thompson is dissatisfied with the ruling, protesting that the game was played by a Take Two executive in the one- or two-hour closed-door session with the judge, and that a longer session with a different player might have had a different result. (Bridget Carey, “Judge doesn’t object to video game ‘Bully'”, Miami Herald, Oct. 14) (via Bashman).

October 16 round-up

  • “‘I’ve never felt so ill,’ says one reporter about the NY Times’s coverage of the Duke lacrosse-team case.” [New York Magazine]
  • Double-standards for judicial seminars. [Point of Law; Volokh]
  • 14-year-old British student arrested for not wanting to do class project with non-English speakers? [Volokh]
  • Our October 13 entry on the pros and cons of complusory licensing in copyright provoked one of our longest comment threads ever.
  • Will regulators shut down an aversive-stimuli special-education school? Should they? [Village Voice via Cowen]
  • Cheap crime deterrent: wearing pink. [Prettier than Napoleon] Meanwhile, professors debate shaming in general. [Markel on PrawfsBlawg and SSRN; Berman; Markel reply; Kerr on Volokh; Markel reply]
  • Trent Lott about to implement bad public policy out of spite. [RiskProf]
  • Greg Beck has good analysis of the Emerson v. NBC garbage disposal suit. Always glad to see Public Citizen support liability reform. [CL&P]
  • Is “erroneous removal” a problem? [Point of Law; TortsProf Blog]

Election watch: Sue Bell Cobb in Alabama

Sue Bell Cobb in Alabama is the trial lawyers’ choice in the upcoming election for Supreme Court Justice. Jere Beasley (a regular on Overlawyered) has used 22 different PACs to ship nearly half a million dollars her way. (See also Apr. 28, 2005 for similar machinations.) Skip Tucker of Alabama Voters Against Lawsuit Abuse has more details in today’s Anniston Star. (“Voters should consider history in court race”, Oct. 15). Trial lawyers previously supported Tom Parker in his unsuccessful campaign for the Republican nomination against current Chief Justice Drayton Nabers (POL Jun. 7), leaving Nabers with half as much to spend on television advertising as Cobb—but, of course, the only complaints about money in this election come from groups opposed to the money the Chamber of Commerce is spending in the hopes of having honest candidates on the bench. (E.g., this press release).

“Crook”, “con artist”, “fraud”

Bloggers and blog-commenters might want to think very carefully before employing those epithets. Sue Scheff of Weston, Fla. obtained an $11 million default verdict in her defamation lawsuit against Carey Bock of Mandeville, La., who’d used the expressions in denouncing Scheff. (Laura Parker, “Jury awards $11.3M over defamatory Internet posts”, USA Today, Oct. 11). David Lat writes, “Eleven million dollars? You can call us whatever you like for that kind of money. … Most wrongful-death awards that are smaller than that.” (Oct. 11).

“The End Result of a Lawsuit”

From House of Caduceus, a disturbing story if true:

The court case lasted a couple years, he was humiliated in court b/c that is what a good lawyer will do, spent thousands of his own money, and eventually won the case. You would think that this win would boost his confidence, but instead, he felt betrayed by the patient and the patient’s family, abused by the court system, and worried about a another possible future lawsuit. This doctor then quit the practice of medicine and refused to keep his job, despite the begging of his employer.

My congrats to those patients and lawyers out there destroying American medicine. You’re doing a fine job of wasting our time and talent.

Update: “Bully” gets bullied

Following up on our Aug. 17 post: “Game publisher Take-Two Interactive Software Inc. was ordered to demonstrate an upcoming video game titled “Bully” for a judge to determine whether it violates Florida’s public nuisance laws. Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Ronald Friedman issued the order yesterday. The move is a major coup for conservative Miami attorney Jack Thompson, known for his crusades against pornography and obscene rap music, and now the video game industry.” (Mike Musgrove, “Florida Judge Wants To See ‘Bully’ in Court”, Washington Post, Oct. 12; Jeremy Reimer, ArsTechnica, Oct. 13).

Why there aren’t DVDs of some of your favorite old TV series

The reason, Mark Evanier notes on his blog, we don’t see DVDs of shows like “SCTV” and “WKRP in Cincinnati” is the difficulty and expense of rights clearances for music used during the show, even if it’s just a character humming. More on the difficulty and problem of rights clearances: Oct. 17, 2005 and links therein.

Warner Home Video better hope that a class action attorney with time on his hands doesn’t read the post’s last sentence about a DVD advertised as uncensored that isn’t uncensored; maybe it can be averaged out with the suit over Wal-Mart’s CDs.

Update: A commenter raises an important point:

Read On…

Birthday cards actionable?

Perhaps not, but a UK insurance firm isn’t taking any chances. With new laws in place prohibiting age discrimination and age harassment, Alan & Thomas insurance brokers has barred the circulation of birthday cards signed by the entire staff, who occasionally write jokey statements about the perils of aging.

Julian Boughton, the firm’s managing director, said: “The new rules outlawing age discrimination are a potential minefield for both employers and employees. Every business should be taking action. Often employees don’t realise the implications of what they are writing.”

A member of staff said: “I think it’s stupid really. People like to joke about other people getting older, and it’s only a bit of fun.”

The Employment Equality (Age) regulations 2006 came into force on Oct 1, prohibiting direct or indirect harassment or victimisation on the grounds of age.

Neil Gouldson, an employment law specialist at the Manchester-based firm Rowe Cohen, said: “Gags in birthday cards about people being ‘over the hill’ will need to be curbed.”

(Richard Savill, “Firm halts office cards for fear of ‘ageist’ comments”, Telegraph (UK), Oct. 12) (h/t F.R.).

Novel idea: don’t sue without actual harm

“A federal judge in Arkansas has thrown out a class action lawsuit against Acxiom, which exposed massive amounts of Americans’ personal information in a high-profile Internet security snafu three years ago. … Because the class action attorneys could not prove that anyone’s information had actually been misused, [U.S. District Judge William] Wilson dismissed the case and the request for damages on the grounds that any harm would be entirely speculative.” (Declan McCullagh, “Class action suit over ID theft tossed out”, CNet, Oct. 12).