Comments on: Future sexually-frustrated-fan celebrity class actions

By: Rick

Rick — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:29:10 +0000

Did you guys ever hear of Fan Wars? They can get pretty ugly. A few years back, a group of nutty fans of Christina Aquilera filed an FTC complaint against Britney Spears claiming to be ex-fans who were disappointed that she lied about saving her virginity till marriage and claimed that it irreparably damaged her teen fans. This is the same thing. Some really psycho fans of Kelly Clarkson sent out a “press release” to the inboxes of a few hundred entertainment outlets and a few fell for it. Even some radio and TV stations reported on the fake complaint. There is no lawsuit and never will be. It’s just a vicious hoax by rival fans to keep the tabloid story about Clay in the headlines. Pathetic, isn’t it?

By: LAN3

LAN3 — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 20:59:45 +0000

Ted, I came to the same conclusion when I saw Alba on the cover (barely shielded by a partially-opaque cover at my local 7-Eleven), but considering my internet usage, specifically IRC, I was completely and unreservedly certain that if Jessica Alba had genuinely posed nude, I’d’ve heard about it already. Despite that, I’m ready to sue if you are!

By: Court TV Junkie

Court TV Junkie — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 20:14:21 +0000

It is equally disturbing to learn that the frivilous complaint is based on nothing more than a tabloid rumor. It isn’t as if the entertainer made a public statement to the contrary, but continues to claim he is heterosexual.

By: yellojkt

yellojkt — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:17:12 +0000

Shh. Don't let Hank Stuever over at the Washington Post know Clay is gay. He might out him like he did to Johnny Weir. I don't know if and how Clay has ever unambiguously declared his heterosexuality. No one says, "Buy my records because I'm straight." If they win, do I get my money back on "Listen Without Prejudice, Part 1"?

By: Ted

Ted — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 09:43:14 +0000

Well, yes, Case A is as at least as ridiculous as Case B when it requires a court to adopt a legal theory that permits Case B to go forward when Case B wouldn’t otherwise.

If you find the concepts distinguishable, so be it, but we have a system of law and precedent, rather than a Solomonic system of arbitrary case-by-case adjudication, and cases should be evaluated by the precedent they seek to set.

By: david giacalone

david giacalone — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 23:31:14 +0000

Ted, Thank you for explaining that when you say “no less ridiculous,” you mean “no less legally valid.”

By: Defamer

Defamer — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:46:03 +0000

Short Ends: ‘The Island’ Finally Wins An Award

· Brandchannel.com hands out its Product Placement Awards (yes, it’s really come to this), with the Charlie Kaufman Meta Award for Self-Reflexive Product Placement going to Calvin Klein and The…

By: Tom T.

Tom T. — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 21:14:23 +0000

Your blog is now going to reach a large new audience, as those who Google for “Jessica Alba naked” get tempted to stop by. You know, if you don’t put up at least some suggestive pictures, you may find yourself named as a defendant in one of these cases.

By: Schmitty

Schmitty — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 20:09:31 +0000

Your prediction regarding a lawsuit against Playboy is quite likely. Amusingly, the Smoking Gun already covered a story about a lawsuit filed against Penthouse in December of 2000 by an inmate named David Joyner (a.k.a. "Minister of Law of the Mandingo Warriors"). The good minister filed suit over the pictorial spread of Paula Jones, claiming that the pictures were not explicit enough to live up to the magazine cover, which stated that Jones "shows all." Perhaps even more amusing than the suit itself was the Judge's poetic dismissal of the suit.

By: Ted

Ted — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 19:01:16 +0000

There are dozens of ridiculous consumer-fraud class actions of the category "Defendant D said hypothetically false statement F about good G, and I hereby claim on behalf of a class that every plaintiff who bought G suffered damages because of that statement, even though the vast majority of those consumers bought for reasons other than F and are satisfied with the product." The Aiken suit, while seemingly silly, is no less legally valid than any of these: it's based on the same cockamamie legal theory that far too many courts have refused to reject out of hand. I recommend Michael Greve's Harm-Less Lawsuits?, available on the Liability Project website, which documents numerous such actions, including a multi-billion-dollar settlement of a lawsuit against Toshiba.