Youtube lawsuit of the week: A&P vs. rappers

The only thing growing faster than the number of videos being shown on Youtube is the number of lawsuits arising from videos being shown on Youtube. The company itself has been sued by every media company in the known universe — led by Viacom — over copyright infringement by users of the website. And when Youtube isn’t being sued, the people who post the offending or infringing clips are.

A few weeks ago, a couple of college students posted a juvenile rap video about their work in a supermarket produce department. They filmed the video in the A&P supermarket where they were employed stocking shelves, but they never mentioned or displayed the A&P name. No matter; someone figured it out, and they were fired.

That could have been the end of that… except that A&P got the brilliant idea to file a $1,000,000 lawsuit against the two, for defamation. (Just a guess, but unless A&P pays a lot better than I suspect, they may not be good for the money.) And, shockingly, the video, which had just 2,500 hits earlier this week before the lawsuit, now has been viewed 60,000 times. Wonder who thought that this lawsuit was a good idea.

Filed under: copyright, libel slander and defamation

One reason European healthcare is cheaper than the American version

“A German court has awarded 3,000 euros ($4,100) in damages to a man who had to have the top of his skull replaced with plastic because of a faulty hospital fridge.” The plaintiff had sought 20,000 euros. [Reuters/MSNBC]

Filed under: Europe, Germany, hospitals, medical

Lawyers’ license to defame adversaries

The Tennessee Supreme Court confirms that lawyers in that state may publish potentially defamatory material outside the courtroom provided they are acting in quest of an “identifiable prospective client”. The case was filed by a screw maker against a law firm whose client-trolling website had asserted that the company’s deck screws were “defectively manufactured”. Without determining whether the phrase was defamatory, the court ruled that even if it was, the manufacturer would be afforded no legal remedy. (Day on Torts, Aug. 21; Simpson Strong-Tie Company v. Stewart, Estes, & Donnell, Aug. 20 (PDF)).

Filed under: chasing clients, libel slander and defamation, Tennessee

Painting blue waves across town

Litigation or its threat really does seem to wind up as the ultimate deciding weapon in all sorts of controversies, including whether the city of Santa Barbara can install a temporary public art project aimed at raising alarm about global warming. (Instapundit, quoting James Q. Wilson, Aug. 28; Steve Chawkins, “Property value worries sink Santa Barbara art project”, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 26).

Filed under: environment, global warming

Lerach’s retirement speech

A commenter on Peter Lattman’s blog catches Lerach using the line “This is the business we have chosen”—which, in an oddly appropriate swipe, is a line of the mobster Hyman Roth in The Godfather II. A shanda fur die goyim.

Filed under: Bill Lerach, scandals

Great moments in attorney advertising

David Lat, er, profiles the marketing efforts of attorney and reggae musician Peter “P’Ta Mon” John, who calls himself “The Thugs [sic] Lawyer,” and has a toll-free number with the five-letter combo “NOT ME.”

Filed under: chasing clients

Lerach retires; nearing a plea deal?

Law.com reports in its summary:

Renowned plaintiffs attorney William Lerach, lead partner at Lerach Coughlin, announced Tuesday he’s stepping down from the firm he started when he split off the West Coast offices of what is now Milberg Weiss. Lerach said he’s planning to take some time off. That could include going to prison, or at least the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Lerach is said to be nearing a deal with federal prosecutors related to legally questionable payments Milberg Weiss made to its lead plaintiffs and a former expert witness.

The WSJ Law Blog similarly reports that “Lerach has not been charged, but he is in advanced talks with prosecutors on a plea deal that could be announced in September and involve serving prison time, according to two people familiar with the investigation.” It also has Lerach’s departure memo to colleagues at the law firm that will now be known as Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins (cross-posted from Point of Law).

Filed under: Bill Lerach, class actions, Coughlin Stoia, Milberg Weiss, scandals

Fieger’s Arizona censure

Yet another ethical run-in for bad boy Michigan lawyer Geoffrey Fieger, aside from all the ones we’ve told you about already including his recent campaign finance indictment: the Arizona Supreme Court has censured Fieger for holding himself out on letterhead as a member of the Arizona bar, and undertaking a matter to be tried in an Arizona court, even though he was under suspension at the time. The September issue of Arizona Attorney carries the following in its “Lawyer Regulation: Sanctioned Attorneys” column:

Read On…

Filed under: Arizona, ethics, Geoffrey Fieger, Michigan

Gordon Ramsay on U.S. litigation

“We were issued a writ because, God bless America, if the toilet paper is not thick enough and you come out with a rash on your ass [you’ll get sued].” — Scottish celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay, who is being sued over his upcoming reality-TV show “Kitchen Nightmares”. Martin Hyde sued Ramsay and the show’s producers after being fired during the filming of a “Nightmares” episode which depicted unsafe and unsanitary conditions at the Manhattan restaurant Hyde managed (which was closed by the city health board shortly after the taping); Hyde claims aspects of the show were staged, which Ramsay denies. (James Hibberd, “Ramsay Blasts ‘Kitchen Nightmares’ Lawsuit”, TV Week, Aug. 28).

Filed under: broadcasters, libel slander and defamation, restaurants, United Kingdom

When lawyers fight

At least we can be sure that lawyers don’t treat each other any better than they treat other parties in litigation. Texas Lawyer provides us with a story of how two plaintiffs lawyers, who started out on the same side of a class action suit, managed to turn a dispute amongst themselves over $28,000 in fees into an eleven year fight with an ultimate award of over $250,000.