Posts Tagged ‘defamation’

Freeway vs. Highway – Libel vs. Slander – Shotgun vs. Rifle – Accident vs. Collision – Blog vs. Post – Jumbo Jet vs. Regular – Gas vs. Fuel

Monday, August 7th, 2017

We’re in Cali, right? So you know what a freeway is. So don’t call a freeway a “highway.” In California, a highway is any old street. For example:

CVC 21201 (d) A bicycle operated during darkness upon a highway…”

This use of highway in this context means any public street. I guarantee it. (But you can ride your bike on many sections of California freeway – see below.) So you can’t say that Frisco only has two highways (but if you do, people will know you mean freeway through context, I guess.)

What I’m saying is that you use highways to get to a freeway, how’s that?

Libel and slander don’t necessarily mean what you think they mean 100%, sry. Your rule of thumb will keep you out of trouble almost all of the time, but things can get tricky when you get down into the weeds. So yes, you’ve got the dictionary definition right, but there can be exceptions, the same way the duck-billed platypus is an egg-laying species but also a mammal. The solution is defamation and defamatory. 

Let’s try it out. “Dear Sir, your words are defamatory. I shall contact my solicitor to begin an action for defamation.” That works, baby. (Or, you can call yourself an “editor” of an online entity what’s called “Beyond Chron” and then threaten to sue the real Chronicle. Like you’ll say “I’ll consider my options” of suing the real Chronicle for defamation, something like that. And then people will chuckle because they know you’ve already decided not to sue our local paper of record.)

And really, this difference doesn’t really matter. It’s like what’s a fruit and what’s a vegetable. There’s no reason to get into the distinction most of the time.

(But feel free to mock those who confuse these terms, or use the term “liable,” – I won’t take that away from you.



Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference betwixt a shotgun and a rifle, especially from far away. So the term you use is long gun. Easy peasy. I saw the use of this term exactly once in our local Paper of Record, and I thought, wow, that’s how you do it. But then the hed was changed an hour later, presumably because readers were confused. Or maybe the issue had been cleared up by then, IDK.

Another thing is that a rifle can kill you from 500+ yards away and a shotgun can’t.

An accident is something what occurs not on purpose and a collision is when two or more things hit each other, more or less. (And let’s not get into allision.) But you see, they’re not really substitutes for each other. Sometimes collisions are accidental and sometimes accidents involve collisions. Most accidents involving cars are the result of negligence and some are the result of recklessness. Most bike accidents are the result of pilot error, you know, just falling down, but some involve hitting or getting hit by a car and that may or may not be the bicycle rider’s error. You need to look at each case to find fault.

Now if a tennis pro who’s into crystals starts running people over on purpose in the Mission, well, that’s not an accident, but later on you might say that you have a trick knee now due to a traffic accident even though this guy targeted you, that’d be OK. If you have reason to believe that some car crash was committed on purpose, you can say, “That was no accident.” And then it could be attempted homicide or vehicular manslaughter or battery – it could be a lot of things, but not an accident. Anyway, if a collision was the result of negligence or recklessness, then it quite rightly can be called an accident. (And of course, I’m more of a San Francisco bike rider and more of a San Francisco pedestrian, measured any way you would like, by miles, hours, years, decades on these streets of San Francisco, than anybody who harps on you about the difference between accident and collision. Think on that.)

A blog is a weB LOG – it’s the whole enchilada. A single entry into a blog is called a post. I am astounded at the number of people who don’t get this, even after a quick mansplaining. So, the post is the tree and the blog is the forest that the tree is in.

Now one time some lady who got rich off the Chron, through marriage I guess, paid some lawyer to send me a long-winded letter about how I was going to get sued for slander libel, ah defamation, that’s that ticket. Now he was only writing me concerning one post, but his demand was for me to take down my blog, you know, which at that time was made up of thousands and thousands of posts. You see, he was confused. (And then he said I wasn’t allowed to tell anybody about this matter, so of course I posted his letter on my blog the next day. (In poker terms, this is called going over the top.) Good times. And I kept the offending post up, ’cause it was all good. And of course I never got sued IRL. You gotta know how to handle Trump-like individuals, know how to call their bluffs.)

A jumbo jet is a Boeing 747, mostly. You can also throw in the Airbus A380 – now some call it a superjumbo, but you can also call it a jumbo. Both of those aircraft are also widebodies, with twin aisles. And narrowbodies have just one aisle, typically with five or six seats per row. Moving down, you’ve got your regional jets and your corporate jets and then your general aviation jets. That’s it.

Oh, there are some widebodies that aren’t jumbos, like the Boeing 777, that can carry more passengers than a smaller jumbo, like the comical-looking 747SP. Certainly this stubby jet is huge, it’s just so short that it went obsolete pretty quickly. So then along came larger and larger twinjets with only a single deck, but they end up having more capacity than a “jumbo.” Oh well. I didn’t make the rules, I just ‘splain them on my blog.

And if you aren’t sure, never say gas, say fuel. This will keep you out of trouble.

So a military tank might run on gas, but most likely not. The same thing with vessels. And some cars run on diesel of course, Usually, there’s no reason to be specific.

FIN

And here are some of your bikes operating legally on freeway areas, one in San Mateo County and the other in Marin:

7J7C6620-copy

go8f1555-copy

The Case For and Against the Arrest of Donald Dewsnup for Voting Fraud

Wednesday, April 6th, 2016

Today from the SFDA:

“MAN CHARGED WITH REGISTERING TO VOTE USING FALSE ADDRESSES

SAN FRANCISCO— Today, San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón announced that Donald Dewsnup, age 49, of San Francisco, was arraigned on charges of registering to vote using a false address. Dewsnup’s fraudulent voter registration enabled him to vote in a supervisorial district in which he did not reside.

“San Francisco’s supervisorial races can be decided by a small number of voters,” said District Attorney George Gascón. “A healthy democracy benefits from zealous debate, but can be undermined by fraud and deceit.”

To ensure the integrity of the electoral process, California law requires voters to put their true residential addresses on their voter registration forms. Dewsnup, a licensed realtor, is also accused of providing a false address to the California Bureau of Real Estate. He is charged with three felony counts of filing a false document with a government agency, two felony counts of perjury, and two felony counts of false voter registration. According to court documents, Dewsnup used these false addresses in order to infiltrate a neighborhood association on Telegraph Hill, where he did not reside, with the purpose of advancing his personal political agenda.

Dewsnup was arrested by San Francisco District Attorney Investigators yesterday. He was arraigned on the felony charges today, and was released on his own recognizance. He will appear in court again on April 19th for a prehearing conference.”

Well, here’s the news, from Jonah Owen Lamb.

And here’s the story from last year, from Kevin Montgomery.

And here’s the full-throated defense, from SFBARF.

(And then there’s this document, from I don’t know where.)

Leave us begin:

“Pro-Development Activist Suffers Politically Motivated Arrest in SF

1. CAREFUL NOW – GETTING CLOSE TO DEFAMATION.

He registered at an address he thought approximated a location where he was sleeping at the time.

2. MAYBE. THIS IS EASY TO ALLEGE, BUT TOUGH TO PROVE. OF COURSE, THERE ARE OTHER VERSIONS OF THIS STORY. AND IT LOOKS LIKE HE USED LOTS OF ADDRESSES.

This arrest is without question politically motivated. There’s no other explanation for why the District Attorney of a major city would investigate and charge one person for registering at an inaccurate address.

3. WAS D4 SUPERVISOR ED JEW’S PROSECUTION POLITICALLY MOTIVATED TOO?

I am looking forward to discovering who made the complaint to the DA, and how the DA was convinced to spend precious public resources on this issue.

4. SOMEBODY MADE A COMPLAINT, REALLY? DO WE KNOW THIS? DIDN’T DONALD DEWSNUP POST A PHOTO OF PART OF HIS BALLOT (ARGUABLY ILLEGAL IN ITSELF, IN CA, BUT NEVER PROSECUTED AFAIK) WHAT SHOWED HIM VOTING FOR PRO-DEVELOPMENT, APPOINTED SUPERVISOR JULIE CHRISTENSEN?

In doing this activism, Donald apparently antagonized anti-growth incumbents.

5. IS SUPPORTING LONGTIME REPUBLICAN RON CONWAY’S CHOICE CONSIDERED “ACTIVISM” THESE DAYS? IDK. IDTS

I knew that a policy change as radical as the one we’re calling for would not be won easily, however I am shocked the DA would harass a housing advocate, who happens to be homeless, for trying to vote.

6. OF COURSE, THE HOUSING STATUS WHAT MATTERS HAS TO DO WITH RESIDENCY TO QUALIFY FOR VOTING FOR JULIE CHRISTENSEN LAST YEAR, RIGHT?

“Voter fraud is serious…”

7. WELL, NOW YOU’RE ON THE TROLLEY. (WHAT YOU DO IS SAY, OH, I GOT CARRIED AWAY AND THEN I DID SOMETHING I SHOULDN’T HAVE. YOU SHOW CONTRITION. YOU SAY YOU’LL NEVER EVER DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS EVER AGAIN. THEN YOU CAN JOIN THE LIST OF PEOPLE IN TOWN WHO DO BAD THINGS BUT DON’T GET JAIL TIME.) ALL RIGHT, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU ALL WERE GETTING A LITTLE CRAZY THERE, BUT, OH WHAT’S THAT, THERE’S MORE?

“…but more serious still is living in a city where a vindictive Supervisor can order people arrested at will.”

8. OH. OK. ENTERING LIBELTOWN, POPULATION: YOU

Sonja Trauss
Founder, SF Bay Area Renters’ Federation
(215) 900 1457″

9. NOW THAT’S A NICE LOCAL PHONE NUMBER! TORTURE ME AND I WOULDN’T KNOW WHERE TO BEGIN. I’D BE YELLING OUT SASKATCHEWAN! SASKATCHEWAN?

END OF LINE

Norman Schwartzkoff
Something tells me you want to go home
Champagne, bibles
Custom clothes you own
Calling up from special area codes

Wow, the Uptown Tenderloin Housing Clinic’s Randy Shaw is Hopping Mad at the SF Chronicle – Let’s Take a Look

Friday, January 10th, 2014

All right, here we go:, with excerpts:

“Chronicle Gets No Stars for Falsehoods About All Star Hotel
by Randy Shaw‚ Jan. 10‚ 2014

The heart of the story—-and title of the sfgate.com version, “Slanted Floors Hotel”—blamed THC for hotel’s floors “slanted so badly that people were falling down. “ But the article does not reveal that the All Star has never been cited by the city for “slanted floors.”

ALL RIGHT, BUT JUST BECAUSE THE ALL-STAR HAS NEVER BEEN CITED BY THE CITY, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE ALL-STAR DOESN’T HAVE SLANTED FLOORS? THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE FLOORS ARE SLANTED. SO, ARE THEY IRL? ALSO, WHO ARE YOU, RANDY SHAW, TO DETERMINE WHAT THE “HEART OF THE STORY” IS? _I_ DON’T THINK IT’S THE HEART OF THE STORY. AND I THINK THAT STATEMENT WAS ID’ED AS A STATEMENT IN THE RECORDS OF SFGOV. WELL, IS IT REALLY A STATEMENT IN THE RECORDS OF SFGOV?  THAT’S WHAT YOUR DEFAMATION ATTORNEY (HEH!) WILL ASK ABOUT, RANDY SHAW

“San Francisco has many buildings with outstanding code violations impacting tenants lives, but the only news hook for writing about the All Star— which does not have such violations—was to attack a nonprofit operator.”

NOW WHAT KIND OF NONPROFIT OPERATOR IS THE TENDERLOIN HOUSING CLINIC – A GOOD ONE? I DON’T THINK SO. HERE’S SOME BACKGROUND, FROM A LONG TIME AGO: Randy Shaw’s Power Plays.

“I’ve seen a lot of bad reporting in my time, but the Chronicle’s attack on the THC (publisher of Beyond Chron) is among the worst.”

 IS THIS HOW YOU ARGUE, RANDY SHAW?

“A reporter with no concern with facts, and a city editor unwilling to promptly correct admitted falsehoods, resulted in a prominent article defaming the hard working janitors, desk clerks, maintenance workers, case managers and management staff at the All Star Hotel.”

WELL, THAT’S LIKE YOUR CONCLUSION, MAN. TAKE IT TO COURT RANDY! BUT YOU’LL LOSE.

“The Chronicle’s core problem was that there are no outstanding code violations impacting tenants at the All Star Hotel.”

RANDY, I THINK _YOUR_ THE ONE WITH _THE PROBLEM_, RIGHT? AND ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE HOTEL IN QUESTION DOESN’T HAVE ANY CODE VIOLATIONS ANY MORE? WHY DON’T WE SEND AN INSPECTION TEAM TO LOOK FOR SOME? OH, WHAT’S THAT, RANDY SHAW SAYS THAT ALL THAT MATTERS ARE CODE VIOLATIONS CURRENTLY “IMPACTING” TENANTS? WHO MAKES THAT CALL? IS IT YOU, RANDY SHAW? HOW DOES THAT WORK?

“Chronicle reporters all have my email address and most my cell phone number yet this reporter failed to contact the person at THC who deals with media inquiries.”

RANDY, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT _ALL_ REPORTERS AT THE CHRONICLE HAVE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS? THE REPORTER CONTACTED YOUR ORG AND HE DIDN’T GET A RESPONSE, RIGHT? WELL, THAT’S WE HE WROTE, RIGHT?

“Nothing in the story refutes the statement by THC’s manager that all violations were addressed.”

THE HEART OF THE STORY IS ABOUT _PAST_ VIOLATIONS THOUGH, RIGHT? AND HOW LONG DID THAT PROCESS TAKE?

But then the Chronicle allows Eldon Brown, who has no technical expertise and has likely filed more DBI complaints than all of THC’s over 1700 tenants combined (32 alone in 2012-13), to raise fears of tenant safety by making baseless claims about an unstable building.

DOES ONE NEED TO HAVE “TECHNICAL EXPERTISE” TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITH DBI? THAT DOESN’T SOUND RIGHT. AND THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE BUILDING IS UNSTABLE. WELL, IS IT? AND YOU ONLY HAVE 1700 TENANTS? AREN’T YOU THE LARGEST NONPROFIT IN SF? MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST STOP GIVING YOU MONEY, HUH RANDY SHAW?

“THC is reviewing its legal options.”

YOU’RE NOT GOING TO SUE ANYBODY, YOU BIG BLOWHARD.

HEY, RANDY SHAW. WHY DON’T YOU DO A BETTER JOB WITH THE MONEY WE GIVE YOUR ORG – HOW ABOUT THAT?

OMFG: Ivory Madison is STILL Holding Herself Out as an Attorney? Check Out Her LinkedIn: “Non-Practicing Lawyer”

Thursday, January 24th, 2013

She hasn’t changed this yet?

Ivory Madison

OK, by the numbers:

1. “Non-Practicing”

Fine.

2. “Lawyer”

Not fine.

Am I missing something here? Is she licensed in Botswana or someplace?

In closing, OMFG.

Will “Ivory Madison” “Win” Her Defamation Suit Against Ross Mirkarimi? Hell No – So Why is She Doing It?

Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013

I don’t know.

IMO, she be better off suing the person who advised her about stuff like this.

Now hey, how is that Red Room website/business doing? It’s not exactly setting the world on fire these days, now is it?

So will it be involved with the Ross Mirkarimi defamation lawsuit? I mean, the damages there could add up to millions, huh?

I’ll tell you, if somebody gave me $10,000 to invest in a website that furthered my own glory and then I didn’t make as much money as I thought I was going to, it sure would be nice to displace blame, huh?

All right, I’m off to apply to Stanford Law. I’ll crib from this, so I’m a lock to get accepted! (Or I’ll get a colledge degree before applying, either way.)

Uhhhh:

You know, IM, with all the energy you exert, you could apply yourself to taking and passing the California Bar Exam. I’m srsly, you could do it. And then you could make big bucks advocating. You know, the way Angela Alioto does it. Nobody thinks she’s the brightest candle on the menorah but she gets it done, consistently and thoroughly.

And she makes far, far, far more moolah than you can ever hope to realize from a defamation endeavor.

This suit isn’t a good thing for you, IM.

JMO.

Apocalypto! Hey, What Happened to that Bay Area Mayan Prophecy “Film?” – Plus, Examiner Publisher Todd Vogt Cowardice

Thursday, December 20th, 2012

Well if the world ends tomorrow, 12-21-2012, the joke’s on me.

But otherwise…

So, earlier this year some rich whacko up in Marin started making a video* in Latin America what was supposed to be all about the so-called Mayan Prophecy.

But things headed south with the production, so that got written up in a blog down south, down in Los Angeles.

And then the same basic info was posted in the San Francisco Examiner. (It used to be right here.)

And then the rich Marin whacko actually went and sued that film-industry blog earlier this year.

And then the rich Marin whacko lost her lawsuit, big time.

So then I made a post about this affair, you know, because nobody else up here had done so.

Then I got a threatening letter from the same attorney who lost the case in L.A. Read that letter here.

But apparently, that threat was all lies and jest.

Oh well.

Hey, do you like sports analogies ‘n stuff?

This is rich Marin County whacko Elisabeth Theriot’s inchoate SLAPP lawsuit against TheWrap blog, IMO:

See? Kicker Garo Yepremien tried to score a few points but then opposing counsel filed a special motion to strike that was so special that discovery was immediately halted. Then he lost the hearing and that was the end of the suit, it looks like. I’m saying Elisabeth Theriot got pwned in court.

With a quickness.

Which, you know, this kind of thing doesn’t happen every day so that’s why I made a post about it.

But now the world is supposed to end tomorrow ‘n stuff and there’s no Mayan Prophecy “film” to see.

Oh well.

Now, what about San Francisco Examiner President and Publisher Todd Vogt? Do you think he got some sort of request or demand or something from rich Marin County whacko Elisabeth Theriot or the wire service or somebody to take down the wire story on these topics, you know, that used to be posted right here?

Why would the ‘Xam have a page dedicated to rich Marin County whacko Elisabeth Theriot (just look at the URL bar) with nothing to say about her? It’s because the story about her that used to be there is no longer there.
Is there cowardice here?

I’ll tell you, TheWrap.com stood up to rich Marin County whacko Elisabeth Theriot and was/will be rewarded with mandatory attorney fees as a kind of reward.

Why couldn’t/can’t the ‘Xam stand up to rich Marin County whacko Elisabeth Theriot too?

I don’t know.

Now I’ll tell you, when an actual newspaper (improperly, IMO) caves to some rich lady, that just might have the effect of emboldening her. Then she just might start going after poor, defenseless WordPress bloggers.

But maybe I’m way off on this one.

If so, please somebody disabuse me.

* I call it a video because it was (mostly?) recorded on digicams – no film required. The current title of this still-troubled production is Mayan Revelations & Hollywood Lies. It’s delayed. It’s nonsense. Oh what’s that, we’re going to see just how important that Long Count calendar is tout de suite? No we won’t. Sorry. Oh, over the coming decades? No we won’t. Sorry.

So This Blog is Getting Sued by a Former Chronicle Publisher Wife? Read the Lawyer Letter – Why is the ‘Xam Afraid?

Friday, October 5th, 2012

[UPDATE 2013: My grandmother, who’s on the wrong side of fifty but the good side of 100, is still driving her new Hyundai around and, bonus, she doesn’t spend any of her hard-earned on SoCal lawyers. And her recent stomach surgery went well, so that’s nice.]

Hey look what’s sitting in my Spam folder right now – it’s a scary letter from a Los Angeles attorney demanding that this blog be retracted.

Immediately.

Can you imagine?

Here’s what caused the trouble:

“Pwned! Area Socialite Elisabeth Thieriot Loses Her “SLAPP” Lawsuit against Journalists in L.A. – Mayan Prophecy”

And here’s the vast bulk of the resulting lawyer letter:

Click to expand, if you dare.

Now I can understand why the San Francisco Chronicle might not want to get involved with all the allegations surrounding the making of some movie project about the Mayan calendar deal. You know, relationships ‘n stuff. And plus, it’s not like a whole bunch of people are going to watch this flick.

So that’s one thing, but the San Francisco Examiner, did it get a similar letter earlier this year? You make the call. See? Earlier this year it used to have something to say about Elisabeth Thieriot and the Mayan Prophecy and Mexico and whatnot, but not now. Mmmm. Did the San Francisco Examiner take down a Reuters news story on this topic because it was afraid of getting sued? Sure looks that way.

Of course that online trade journal TheWrap did get sued. For one million dollars to be exact. But then it responded with a Motion to Strike and that took care of that. And then TheWrap wrote about how it won, big-time. Then I linked to its story (and the entire decision itself) and now it sure looks like I’m the next to get sued.

Comments:

Uh, do I know that this lawyer represented/s that lady? No, not all. I mean, I assume that’s the case, but what’s this “as you know” stuff?

Does the lawyer really want/expect me to retract the entire blog, all 6000 posts? (Does the lawyer actually know what a blog is? Apparently not.)

Does the lawyer want to write my blog posts for me, you know, using his point of view? Sure looks that way. Is that his right? And how can I retract something that’s not wrong?

And I’m supposed to rely on CA law about retractions that apply to the MSM, but not really? So what’s the point of bringing that up? 

And I’m “not authorized” by the lawyer to disclose the contents of the lawyer letter so I can’t do it? Really? Well, similarly, I’m not authorized by that lawyer to have a delicious Taco Bell Doritos Locos taco for lunch, so does that mean I can’t have that for lunch IRL? And I can’t show the letter to anybody, even to get help with how to respond? Is that fair dinkum? I think not.

So who else in the bay area has gotten these kinds of communications from Down South? I don’t know.

Anyway, I guess I’ll take that email chain* out of the Spam folder and put it into the Archive folder and await further developments.

But I’ll think to myself, “Man, don’t you realize you just lost, in a big way, on the very same topic in the very same state?” 

KTHXBYE.

*Apparently, Elisabeth Thieriot herself sent me an email last month as well, on purpose, or by mistake, or something in betwixt. I’ll tell her what I told my grandmother,** about how Reply All is kind of an advanced email technique best left to the younger generation, you know, so you don’t email people by mistake.

** I still can’t believe she got a Hyundai, after all those decades of her having large RWD Ford products such as the Mercury Grand Marquis.  She says her new ride is a “good  snow car.”

Pwned! Area Socialite Elisabeth Thieriot Loses Her “SLAPP” Lawsuit against Journalists in L.A. – Mayan Prophecy

Monday, September 17th, 2012

Here’s the news:

A Los Angeles judge threw out a lawsuit against TheWrap News on Wednesday, ruling that an article about movie financier Elisabeth Thieriot was both accurate and “took pains” in reporting on a production dispute with her co-producer. Judge Barbara M. Scheper of Los Angeles Superior Court sided with the news organization in granting an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss Thieriot’s complaint on the grounds that it had no probability of success on its merits.”

And you journos should check out the ruling – it’s very accessible.

Background:

Area Whacko Elisabeth Thieriot Hosted a Mayan Spiritual Leader in Tiburon and She Wants You To Know ALL About It

The Second-Best Bay Area-Related Press Release of 2012: Elisabeth Thieriot Manages to “Survive” “False Accusations”

Now, is she going to pay the attorney fees for both sides of this fiasco? Only Time Will Tell.

Now let’s see what the San Francisco Examiner has to say about all this. Uh oh, you’re still afraid, huh ‘Xam? So that’s why you took down all what you said about ET, huh? Fair ‘nough.

ET and Mr. Bigglesworth, Marin County, USA: 

And remember to KYAG by December 21, 2012, you know, when the World ends.

Will the world end in the night time?
(I really don’t know)
Or will the world end in the day time?
(I really don’t know)

PS: Fur is murder

Know Your San Francisco Gay Pride Weekend Shootings and Then You Won’t Get Sued by SF Pride Attorneys

Thursday, June 30th, 2011

Sometimes things happen in town and sometimes people die. That’s the way it is.

Anyway, check out “PRIDE OFFICIALS THREATEN YOUTUBE VIDEOGRAPHERSand

SF Pride bullies individuals who post videos of violence near its events

and then review the current hit results here…

…and then check out the threatening letter below.

Obviously, not every shooting that occurs in the 415 during the last weekend in June is a “Pride Shooting.” Obviously.

Anyway, take a look at both sides of this issue and decide which one you’re on.

Now, do I think that the San Francisco Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Pride Celebration Committee, Inc. has  been run poorly?

Yep.

Does it benefit in me in any way shape or form to say that?

Nope.

Do I think that the people behind Pride should be looking within instead of lashing out?

Mmmm…

“Dear Mr. Wilton:

I am General Counsel for the San Francisco Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Pride Celebration Committee, Inc. (“SF Pride”), the producer of San Francisco Pride and the owner of the trademark “SF Pride, among other valuable marks.

The YouTube video that you filmed and display athttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOfz0zxDdNc falsely states that there was a “shooting at Pride 2011”. The police and the media have all confirmed and made affirmative public statements that the shooting that happened on Saturday evening, June 25th WAS NOT AT SF PRIDE and was not connected the Pride Festival.

For example, see: http://www.sf-police.org/index.aspx?page=3763&recordid=52 which quite clearly leaves out any reference to SF Pride or the Pride festival. And http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/san_francisco&id=8214747 which notes that the shooting was “blocks from the Pride festivities.”

Your YouTube posting falsely claims in the title and in the introductory splash page at 0:010:06. In fact, the shooting was NOT on the SF Pride festival grounds and was not related to SF Pride, or the Pride Festival, or any LGBT issue or concern.

You did not, for example, title your video “shooting in front of Apple iPad advertisement.” Nothing in the video has any connection with SF Pride or the Pride festivities. You simply chose to sensationalize your posting by wrongly associating a violent tragedy with the safe and peaceful, SF Pride. Your advertising harms SF Pride by that false association. It harms SF Pride’s ability to attract attendees and sponsors for future events by creating the false impression that the event and festival were the site of a violent shooting.

Your video constitutes false advertising from an attorney, trade libel, and constitutes tortious interference with SF Pride’s prospective economic advantage by associated its safe event with this tragic and entirely unrelated incident.

According to YouTube, over 3,200 have viewed this outrageous misrepresentation already. Specifically:

San Francisco / Civic Center Shooting at Pride 2011 – Sat 6-25-2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOfz0zxDdNc

The end of the video at about 2:27 in states:

Filmed by David Wilton
Law Offices of David Wilton
http://www.davidwilton.com/
(415) 669-4059

SF Pride demands that you at once do the following or we will take all other necessary and appropriate legal action:

1. Take down the above referenced video.

2. Replace it with an affirmative public apology to SF Pride for wrongly associating it with violence, and clarifying that the shooting on Market Street had nothing to do with the SF Pride festival, and was blocks away from it;

3. Pay SF Pride $10,000 in damages and costs. Any delay will certainly see this amount increase.

Very Sincerely,
Brooke Oliver
Outside General Counsel, San Francisco Pride”

 

Oh Marin, You So Crazy (OMYSC)! Plastic Surgeon’s $2 Million Lawsuit Against Yelp Reviewer Gets Reverse Pwned

Friday, June 24th, 2011

(Gentle Readers, you know that I love you, all 14 of you, no matter what. But others, well, they only care about cosmetic-type things – they’ll like you better if you pay somebody to shoot protein into your face, oh well.)

Can you imagine making a post on the Yelp about your plastic surgeon and then getting hit with a multi-million dollar defamation (plus invasion of privacy plus interference with prospective economic advantage, you know, the whole megillah) lawsuit?

Well, check out the Marin IJ for the sad story of Dr. Kimberly Henry‘s pwnage from Judge Roy Chernus. Wow.

Oh, and surprise, they’re talking about this case on the Yelp.

A little of this, and now you’re beautiful!

Via Y_tambe

Forty reviews are no longer standing for Dr. Kimberly A Henry,  but three are still there.

Anyway, Only in Marin, as they say…