Here are today's , along with the answers provided by the blogosphere.
1) Question: I am an eleventh-grade high school student. Let's face it, I stink at math. How much would I need to pay the teacher to get a good grade?
Answer: It looks like $40 will get it done. Just staple or paper clip two $20 bills to your test when you turn it in. (WINK News,
2) Question: Can I still be charged with "hit-and-run" if I get into an accident and flee the scene on foot, but leave my 2-month-old and 2 year-old daughters behind in the car?Answer: Yes. (The Detroit News, Dad crashes car in Detroit and flees, leaving young daughters behind)
3) Question: I am trying to run for president, but one of my harshest critics has created a website that (falsely!!) defines my last name as a noun meaning, "The frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex." Even worse, through some kind of Google black magic, he has managed to make this website and definition be the !! Can I force Google to change this?Answer: No. Google doesn't give one single hoot about your misdefined name. (CNN, Santorum asks Google to clean up search results for his name)
November 17, 2011
November 18th, 2011
Farewell and Thanks to Ben Popken, Managing Editor of The Consumerist
Farewell and Thanks to Ben Popken, Managing Editor of The Consumerist
I started reading The Consumerist about two years ago, and it has since become one of my "must-read" blogs every day. In fact, in December 2010 I named The Consumerist as one of my
A huge part of the success of The Consumerist was due to its managing editor, Ben Popken. Popken's byline seemed to regularly be at the top of many of the Consumerist articles that I found particularly interesting (like , , that after six years at The Consumerist, he will be leaving the publication at the end of this week.
Popken added in his farewell post that:
Here's the part in these things where I'm supposed to tell you about the ground-exploding Web5.0 transdimensional hyperrealistic consumer empowerment matrix I'm starting. Except there isn't one. I'm working on a few different ways to exploit my brain for profit. In the meantime, please stay in touch. I'm writing at benpopkenwrites.com, making funny stuff at benpopkenisjustkidding.com, and my personal landing page and catchall for my endeavors and adventures is iambenpopken.com.
Popken's farewell post went online at 10:50 a.m. today and within one hour there were already 84 comments wishing him well and thanking him for his great work on the site. To that quickly growing list, I would like to add my own thanks to Popken for his terrific work on The Consumerist. Ben, good luck to you on whatever venture comes next!
November 17th, 2011
Thursday's Three Burning Legal Questions
Thursday's Three Burning Legal Questions
Here are today's three burning legal questions, along with the answers provided by the blogosphere.
1) Question: I am the president of a country. I can't say which country I am president of but let's just say it is a superpower located in North America. I am about to travel to Darwin, Australia. Can I obtain insurance for my family in case I am attacked by a crocodile during my visit?
Answer: Yes, but don't bother. Upon your arrival, the local authorities will likely present you with the gift of an insurance policy that will pay your family $50,000 if you get attacked by a crocodile in Darwin. You're covered! (ABC News, NT insures Obama against croc attack)
2) Question: I'm representing myself as the defendant in a robbery prosecution. Are there any questions I should not ask the robbery victim when he is on the witness stand?Answer: Do not ask the question, "What did the robber's voice sound like?" unless you are prepared for the response of "It sounded exactly like you." (The Morning Call,
3) Question: Why is there a very sad and dirty-looking man stuck in my chimney?Answer: Sometimes would-be burglars try to break into people's houses through the chimney and get stuck for 10 hours. (WSBTC, Teen rescued from chimney, arrested)
November 16, 2011
November 17th, 2011
.XXX Domains Selling Like Hotcakes to Companies That Don't Even Want to Use Them
.XXX Domains Selling Like Hotcakes to Companies That Don't Even Want to Use Them
In case you haven't been keeping up with it, the ".XXX" domain is getting closer and closer. ICM Registry, the company that administers the .XXX domains, created a "Sunrise" period (Sept. 7, 2011-Oct. 31, 2011) that allowed trademark holders -- both those looking to use a .XXX address and those seeking to prevent others from using their trademark on a .XXX website -- to register in advance of the rest of the world. ICM recently announced that it received more than 80,000 applications in the Sunrise period, and that "the applications have been well balanced between brand owners inside the adult industry and those non-adult brands that want to protect their trademarks."
Between Nov. 8 and Nov. 25, the "" phase is underway, during which only members of the "adult Sponsored Community" (but not trademark holders) can apply for .XXX domain names. Finally, beginning on Dec. 6, 2011, the "General Availability" phase will begin, and all remaining .XXX domain names will be allocated to applicants on a first-come, first-served basis.
In a press release, ICM that "We couldn't be happier about the success of the Sunrise period. There is always a risk with a new TLD that you may build it and nobody will come. We are thrilled that over 80,000 applications came!" ICM's break-even point was reportedly 10,000 applications, so I'm sure it is thrilled to have received 80,000 applications, but let's think about this. I don't know how many of the 80,000 applicants in the Sunrise phase were non-"adult" companies that just want to protect their good name from ending up on a .XXX website, but ICM said it was "well balanced" between adult and non-adult applicants so let's assume 40,000 "non-adult brands." That means ICM had roughly 40,000 paying customers that had zero interest in actually using this product but bought it anyway as a form of reputation insurance. Brilliant! And that does not even take into account the recurring revenues ICM will take in down the road when these customers must renew the registrations on these domain names.
I am feeling motivated by ICM's success in getting tens of thousands of companies to buy something they don't want, and I think I may be able to replicate it by becoming the domain registry for a different new domain: ".SUX" Who won't sign up to get their company or personal ".SUX" domain name before their competitor or enemy gets it? Nobody!! Everyone will be in!! Bwahhhh haaa haaaa!!!
Promise of Free Beer Nets 19 Suspects Who Had Been Evading Arrest
Promise of Free Beer Nets 19 Suspects Who Had Been Evading Arrest
What would it take for people who are trying hard to evade arrest for offenses including burglary, robbery and serious sexual assault to actually schedule a specific time and place to meet the police? A crate of free beer!
In an operation reminiscent of the "deadbeat dad sting" I (that used the irresistible bait of two free tickets to the 2011 Alabama-Auburn football game to lure fathers with outstanding child-support warrants into the police's trap), the Derbyshire (U.K.) police were able to arrest 19 suspects with the promise of a crate of beer.
Sky News reports that Derbyshire police sent letters to dozens of people who had been evading arrest for months. The letters asked the suspects to call a "marketing company" if they wanted to receive a free crate of beer, but the phone number provided secretly went straight to the Chesterfield Police Station.
Ultimately, 19 suspects called the phone number and arranged a specific date and time for their free crate of beer to be delivered to them. Instead of bringing free beer, however, undercover police disguised as beer delivery men (see below) placed the waiting suspects under arrest. D'oh!!
November 15th, 2011
Tuesday's Three Burning Legal Questions
Tuesday's Three Burning Legal Questions
Here are today's
1) Question: I'm planning a robbery. We have the blueprints of the building, the guards' work schedules, pretty much everything. Are there any lesser-known things we should prepare for?
Answer: Make sure you know where all the shrubs are located. They can interfere significantly with your getaway. (AZ Central,
2) Question: Yes, I drove a school bus while drunk. But why am I facing 25 counts of driving under the influence with a minor and 25 counts of endangering the welfare of a child? Answer: 25 kids on the bus, 25 counts. (Courier Post Online, Police: South Jersey woman drove school bus of kids while drunk)
3) Question: I was just pulled over by a police officer and issued a ticket for having bad breath. Is this even a real offense? Answer: Yes. And welcome to Kuwait City! (Legal Juice, Perhaps The Strangest Ticket Ever Issued)
November 14, 2011
November 15th, 2011
The Debut of Matt Ritter's 'The Bottom Rung
The Debut of Matt Ritter's 'The Bottom Rung'
Today on Bitter Lawyer, Matt Ritter released Episode 1 of his new video series, "The Bottom Rung." As discussed in this interview with Ritter last week, Ritter is a lawyer (U.Penn., Class of 2005) who, after a stint in BigLaw in New York, moved to Los Angeles to pursue a career as an actor and stand-up comedian.
Ritter describes "Bottom Rung" as being "about a group of people who are stuck doing document review but desperately want to get out and chase their real dreams. It's sort of Party Down meets the Office." It is loosely based on his own experience doing document reviews where he says he realized there was "so much ridiculousness and so many untold stories" that he felt he had to capture it somehow. 'Bottom Rung tries' to highlight some of the absurdity of the worst document reviews: hardass bosses who treat the reviewers like prisoners; horrible working conditions; "no windows, no ventilation, no personal space, weird smells, sick people;" and much more.
One of the surprises I had when watching Episode 1 was that I actually recognized one of the actors in the video -- a comedian named Eddie Pepitone that I remember from the movie "Old School" and from some TV shows. Pepitone's character, "Locker," does not have much involvement in Episode 1 but Ritter says that Locker, the "King of the Lifers," will be the .
Check out "The Bottom Rung - Episode 1" below.
November 14th, 2011
Monday's Three Burning Legal Questions
Monday's Three Burning Legal Questions
Here are today's , along with the answers provided by the blogosphere.
1) Question: I'm being chased by the police. It is dark and I think I see the perfect hiding place under a piles of leaves. That will work, right?
Answer: Yes, unless the police are equipped with thermal imaging. (UPI,
2) Question: I'm at a convenience store and some dude just ran naked through the parking lot, tried to steal a police car, beat a police officer and police dog and then got "Tased" three times before the police were able to subdue him. What is going on?!Answer: Sometimes people get very upset when they get kicked off of the school basketball team. (The Fresno Bee, Fresno Pacific athlete is held in naked rampage) (via Legal Juice)
3) Question: A girl I dated for a couple weeks impregnated herself -- without my knowledge--using sperm from a used condom that I discarded after sex. Now the child has been born and I just got a letter from the U.K.'s Child Support Agency asking me to contribute money for the child's upbringing. Do I need to pay?Answer: It looks like the U.K. courts may believe that if you are the biological father, then you must take responsibility. (Daily Mail,
November 11, 2011
November 14th, 2011
From the Blawgosphere: 4 Thought-Provoking Takes on the Penn State Scandal
From the Blawgosphere: 4 Thought-Provoking Takes on the Penn State Scandal
The blawgosphere has had plenty of commentary on the still-unfolding events at Penn State involving the sex crimes against children allegedly committed by former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky. Here are some of the takes on this matter that I have found particularly interesting:
1. Scott Greenfield, Simple Justice: "Mike McQueary's Choices"
There must be a protocol, a path, that is clear and known to anyone claiming membership in this race. You do not turn your head away from a child being raped. Not even if you're Joe Paterno. And not even if you're Mike McQueary. No, it's not a violation of the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It is a violation of our obligation as human beings. That's a damn good reason to lose a job. Immediately.
In response to Scott's post, a commenter on the Simple Justice blog that "Mike McQueary was a graduate student back then. Had he done anything more, his entire career would have been over before it even started, and the coverup probably would have still happened. I do not think it is fair to have expected Mike to destroy himself like that."
Scott's
2. Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger at JonathanTurley.com: "
Esposito explores Sandusky's sudden retirement in 1999, just one year after local authorities investigated Sandusky in 1998 for "inappropriate" conduct with a minor but the DA declined to prosecute him. Joe Paterno has claimed ignorance of the 1998 investigation but Esposito asks whether that is really plausible:
Is State College immune from the marriage that all authority figures have for one another in most every other small town. You know like when the police chief and the high school football coach meet over coffee to discuss who's handling security for Friday's game and whether that trouble-making Jones kid will be there. ...
Put those little facts together with the fact that Paterno did not attend Sandusky’s retirement party, and was rarely seen outside of the football facility with Sandusky, and you might wonder what happened to the relationship after 1998. You might wonder why Sandusky quit applying for head coaching jobs. You might even conclude that Coach Paterno nudged his former right-hand man out of his position at age 55, and refused to recommend him for any job at the head of another football program. ...
3. Michael P. Maslanka, Work Matters: "Penn State lessons: investigations into alleged employee misconduct"
Maslanka, a labor and employment lawyer, says the Penn State matter offers several lessons on how to handle investigations into alleged employee misconduct, including:
"Train managers who receive complaints of misconduct to actually listen to the employee's concern. Too often a manager will argue with the employee. For example, 'I have known Pete for 20 years and go to church with him. He would not sexually harrass anyone.' The manager needs to declare a mental time-out: Do not dispute the information, but receive it. ..."
"... Engage in a technique called 'prospective hindsight.' This technique uses the power of a question, where the decision-makers ask themselves: 'Let's pretend it is two years from now. Our decision to do XYZ comes to light. How will we respond to arguments that we should have done ABC instead?'"
"A lawyer or counselor needs to look around the room of execs and say, 'From this point forward we will be judged by what we do now.'"
4. John Scalzi, Whatever: "Omelas State University"
This is not from a legal blog (Scalzi is a science fiction writer) but it is too good to leave out. Scalzi writes:
You know, there’s a part of me who looks at the actions of each of non-raping grown men in the "Pennsylvania State University small-child-allegedly-being-raped-by-a-grown-man-who-is-part-of-the-football-hierarchy" scandal and can understand why those men could rationalize a) not immediately acting in the interests of a small child being raped, b) not immediately going to the police, c) doing only the minimum legal requirements in the situation, d) acting to keep from exposing their organization to a scandal. But here's the thing: that part of me? The part that understands these actions? That part of me is a f*cking coward. And so by their actions -- and by their inactions -- were these men.
He also adds an interesting observation from his world of science fiction:
I'm a science fiction writer, and one of the great stories of science fiction is "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas," which was written by Ursula K. Le Guin. The story posits a fantastic utopian city, where everything is beautiful, with one catch: In order for all this comfort and beauty to exist, one child must be kept in filth and misery. Every citizen of Omelas, when they come of age, is told about that one blameless child being put through hell. And they have a choice: Accept that is the price for their perfect lives in Omelas, or walk away from that paradise, into uncertainty and possibly chaos.
At Pennsylvania State University, a grown man found a blameless child being put through hell. Other grown men learned of it. Each of them had to make their choice, and decide, fundamentally, whether the continuation of their utopia -- or at very least the illusion of their utopia -- was worth the pain and suffering of that one child. Through their actions, and their inactions, we know the choice they made.
Latest comments
