Nastygram: don’t you dare post this nastygram on the web

Ted has briefly mentioned (Oct. 8) the recent doings of an outfit called Dozier Internet Law, whose cease and desist letter to a consumer-complaint site not only demanded that the site take down certain statements about Dozier’s client, DirectBuy, but also asserted that the cease and desist letter was itself the subject of copyright and could not be posted in part or full on the web. Eric Turkewitz, having called this approach “chuckleheaded” in an initial post (Oct. 5 — scroll), is now all over the story (Oct. 9 and Oct. 11), especially after attorney John Dozier of the firm in question submitted a comment whose clueless snippiness really must be seen to be believed.

More: from Consumer Law & Policy, Patry Copyright Blog, Legal Ethics Forum, and TechDirt, as well as extensive coverage at TDAXP.


  • Wow, that’s rich.

    I like how Dozier has chosen to respond in a blog comment rather than do what Public Citizen invited him to do: sue them.

  • I agree with E-Bell. The whole point here is that disputes like this ought to be played out in the marketplace of ideas and not in the courtroom.

  • Dozier v. Turkewitz:

    I got my money on Turkewitz. He’s a plaintiff but I think he’d put up a good defense.

  • […] when he asserted in a cease and desist letter that it would violate copyright law for his target to post the text of that cease and desist letter in part or in full on the web, and shortly thereafter when one of the clients of his Dozier Internet Law firm, an outfit known as […]