“When the lawyers at EFF [Electronic Frontier Foundation] first sat down and asked ‘Whom could we sue under the Induce Act [the Inducing Infringements of Copyright Act (PDF), proposed by Sens. Hatch, Daschle, Leahy, Boxer and others] if we were an abusive copyright holder?’ the answer was clear: pretty much everybody. Playing the devil’s advocates, we knew we could draft a legal complaint against any number of the major computer or electronics manufacturers for selling everyday devices we all know and love — CD burners, MP3 players, cell phones — and that with that complaint, we could file a lawsuit that would survive any attempt to dismiss it before trial, costing the targeted company up to $1,000,000 per month in legal fees alone. The Induce Act is a nasty, brutish stick in the hands of the wrong plaintiff.” (“Prelude to a Fake Complaint”, EFF website, Jun. 24). See Bryan Chaffin, “EFF Demonstrates How To Use New Law Against Apple, iPod”, Mac Observer, Jun. 25. For more on the bill, see Legal Reader, Jun. 10.
Author Archive
Staggered sports schedules again found to violate Title IX
“Separate soccer seasons for girls’ teams in two Westchester, N.Y., school districts violate civil rights laws banning gender discrimination in athletics, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled [last month].” The Mamaroneck and Pelham school districts had unsuccessfully argued that logistical concerns — notably a shortage of soccer fields to play on — justified the practice of having boys play soccer in the fall and girls in the spring. (Mark Hamblett, “Separate Soccer Found to Violate Civil Rights”, New York Law Journal, Jun. 8). For a similar ruling in Michigan, see Dec. 24-27, 2001; letter to the editor, Feb. 28, 2002. More: May 7, 2005.
Fox News Channel, Neil Cavuto show
I’m slated to appear on the Fox News Channel’s “Your World” today between 4 and 5 pm, to discuss Martha Stewart, Ken Lay, class action reform, the Edwards pick, and other legal topics. Guest host will be Stuart Varney, in Neil Cavuto’s absence.
Punditry about the Edwards pick
…summarized with links on Point Of Law this morning.
Morse Mehrban hits Fresno
The self-described “bounty hunter” lawyer, whose exploits around L.A. have been previously detailed in this space Nov. 4-5, 2002 and Mar. 12 of this year, has turned his talents to disabled-rights enforcement and swooped down on the city of Fresno, filing more than 130 lawsuits against local businesses over such alleged infractions as a too-high bathroom mirror and a hard-to-reach soda dispenser. Businesses usually pay between $5,000 and $12,000 to settle, says San Diego defense attorney James Reynolds. (Robert Rodriguez, “Fresno Businesses Are Sued Over Act”, Fresno Bee, Jul. 4) (via Southern California Law Blog). For more on ADA filing mills, see Mar. 9 and links from there and my City Journal article, “The ADA Shakedown Racket“.
Microsoft’s Minnesota settlement
The software company will pay as much as $59 million in attorneys’ fees and a face value of $174.5 million in vouchers for purchasers, although many or most will apparently never get redeemed. A Microsoft spokesman said the company believed it had a solid defense but “settled to avoid the potential of a jury verdict that favored the plaintiffs, and to avoid disruption at the company. ‘How much is a week’s worth of Bill Gates’ time to shareholders? A lot,’ he said,” referring to the expected appearance of the company chief at trial. (Gregg Aamot, “Microsoft to Pay Up to $241 Million in Minnesota Class Action”, AP/Law.com, Jul. 2). More on MS settlements: Mar. 31 and links from there.
The incomparable James Lileks (Jul. 7) describes the settlement much more entertainingly than we have done above (“Microsoft once again promised to hand over its wallet if the kicking stopped, and agreed to remain rolled in a fetal position until the money is counted. …. When it came to distribute the organs of the corpse the lawyers got the liver, spleen, lungs and most of the brain; the consumers got some regulatory glands, some teeth and a selection of minor toes.”). Then he goes on to notice that it contains a remarkable provision:
they need higher participation rates, since it looks bad when you advocate on behalf of an Inflamed Public that turns out to be utterly indifferent to the supposed offense. So the state has come up with a novel means of informing citizens that Microsoft owes them money. It was buried at the end of the story in the local paper last week.
The state will subpoena local computer resellers to learn who bought PCs.
Maybe it?s just me, but: imagine the outcry if the Justice Department decided it wanted a database of computer ownership in America. Who had what. Oh no you don?t would be the general reaction, even if people couldn?t quite explain why they didn’t like the idea. It smacks of typewriter-registration laws in totalitarian states, even though we all know no one will kick down the door and demand to know where you put that 386 you bought in ’92. But this is the mindset of the well-intentioned government lawyer: gee, people might not claim their rebates. How about we use the power of the state to force private businesses to turn over customer lists so we can mail informational material to computer owners? It?s for their own good.
Call it a settlement practice
Glimpses of the world of shareholder litigation: “Shareholder suits are a big part of the practice at [Colchester, Ct.-based] Scott & Scott, but in the firm’s seven years of existence, none has gone to trial, [firm attorney Neil R.] Rothstein said.” (“Commerce Bancorp sued over indictments”, Philadelphia Inquirer, Jul. 7).
Welcome National Review readers
David Frum says very kind things about me and this site (and interesting things about lawyers, politics, and Sen. Edwards) in his column today for National Review (Jun. 8). Last night on NRO’s “The Corner” NR contributor John Derbyshire was generous about my latest literary production, The Rule of Lawyers (“Walter Olson’s book is a great source on the social harm done by the trial lawyer culture”, Jun. 7). And Jim Copland of the Manhattan Institute, managing editor of our related site Point of Law, has an NRO commentary on the Edwards affair, with a link to us (“Kerry-Edwards & Co.”, Jul. 8).
“Injured While Drunk, Man Wants Cruise Line Suit Reinstated”
Tipple your way to court, latest: “A drunken passenger who fell two decks from a staircase while aboard Royal Caribbean’s Monarch of the Seas asked Florida’s 3rd District Court of Appeal on Monday to reinstate his personal injury lawsuit against the cruise line.” In oral argument, the appellate court’s chief judge appeared inclined to reinstate the suit, rejecting the cruise line’s argument that it is covered by a state law protecting sellers of liquor from being sued. (Kelly Cramer, Miami Daily Business Review, Jun. 29). More tipple-your-way-to-court cases: Apr. 19, Apr. 7, Apr. 3, 2004; Dec. 21, Dec. 17, Oct. 13, Aug. 16, Aug. 8, Jul. 21, 2003, and earlier cases.
TV this afternoon and tonight
I’m scheduled to appear tonight on two shows to discuss John Edwards’ selection for the Democratic ticket: Catherine Crier Live on Court TV at 5 pm, and News Night with Aaron Brown on CNN at 10 pm.