e dot dot dot
a mostly about the Internet blog by

August 2020
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
           
         


Another Day, Another Judge Is Wondering Whether Or Not A Richard Liebowitz Client Knows He's A Richard Liebowitz Client

Furnished content.


Richard Liebowitz appears to be in trouble with a judge yet again. Judge Lewis Kaplan has issued quite an order in one of Liebowitz's thousands of cases -- Chosen Figure LLC v. Smiley Miley -- asking for proof that the plaintiff actually knows it's a client of Richard Liebowitz. The judge seems quite aware of Liebowitz's reputation:

Plaintiff's attorney, Richard Liebowitz has become quite well known for his failures to comply with court rules and orders, for having been sanctioned, and in a couple of cases for having lied to judges.
When an order starts that way, you know that it's not going to go well for Liebowitz.Judge Kaplan notes that right as Liebowitz was required to send notices to every docket of the benchslap ruling he had received from Judge Jesse Furman, he dismissed this particular case (as he did with a bunch of others), claiming that a settlement had been reached. But, thanks to Liebowitz's reputation, Judge Kaplan wanted more info. This is... not particularly common. If you tell a judge you have a settlement they usually don't squint questionably at you. But here:
The Court, concerned in light of Mr. Liebowitz's history as to whether he in fact had been retained by the plaintiff and authorized to sue and to settle, entered an order stating in relevant part, the following:
On or before August 6, 2020, Mr. Liebowitz shall file (1) a personal affidavit or declaration (a) stating whether and when the plaintiff in this case specifically authorized him to (i) file this action and (ii) settle it, and (b) attaching any retainer agreement or other documentary evidence as to the foregoing, as well as (2) a personal affidavit or declaration of the plaintiff (a) stating whether and when the plaintiff in this case specifically authorized Mr. Liebowitz to (i) file this action and (ii) settle it, and (b) attaching any documentary evidence as to the foregoing. Failure to comply in all respects may result in the imposition of sanctions."
Judge Kaplan appears well aware of Liebowitz's history of not actually following instructions and felt the need to spell things out rather specifically in the order, rather than leave any chance for vagueness or confusion. Did Richard Liebowitz comply with the order? I'll give you one guess, and I know you'll get it right... because, no, of course Richard Liebowitz did not actually comply with the order. He did submit two declarations -- one from himself, and another from Josiah Kamau, who is a principal for Chosen Figure LLC -- but neither fulfilled the requirements of the order. First, as to Liebowitz's own declaration:
The Liebowitz declaration asserts that "[o]n February 28, 2019, Plaintiff, via itsprincipal Josiah Kamau, signed a retainer agreement with Liebowitz Law Firm, PLLC, ('LLF') inwhich Plaintiff authorized LLF to file copyright infringement lawsuits on his behalf." It goes on tostate that Mr. Liebowitz filed this action on June 23, 2020 (almost 16 months after the allegeddate of the retainer agreement), that he notified plaintiff on June 23, 2020 that he had broughtthis action, and that Mr. Liebowitz had plaintiffs authority to settle the case. It attaches whatMr. Liebowitz claims are copies of the signature page of the retainer agreement and an email toMr. Kamau notifying Kamau that he had brought this action in the name of an entity.Several points are notable about this declaration. First, Mr. Liebowitz did not complywith the Court's direction to submit the retainer agreement. The purported signature page revealsnothing whatsoever about the alleged retainer agreement, and Mr. Liebowitz did not submit anydocumentary evidence as to anything beyond this page and the notification email. Second, Mr.Liebowitz claims that plaintiff (Chosen Figure, LLC) authorized him to file this action, but thepurported signature page of the retainer agreement that he submitted was executed on behalf of Mr.Kamau personally and not on behalf of any corporate or other entity. Third, the purported retaineragreement was signed on February 28, 2019. This is nearly a year before the alleged infringementin this case took place, which the complaint makes clear was February 12, 2020. Whatever theterms of the agreement may be - the Court does not know because Mr. Liebowitz failed to submitit, despite a clear order requiring him to do so under threat of sanctions - the agreement cannotpossibly serve as evidence that "the plaintiff in this case specifically authorized him to (i) file thisaction and (ii) settle it."
That's not good, Richard. Not good at all. For what it's worth, I'll just note that since this is a case from this year, in other cases, Liebowitz has insisted that since having an epic benchslap back in November of last year, he had put in place better case management tools. So, he has no excuse this time around.As for the other declaration, well, that's not going to cut it either:
The Kamau declaration avers that, "[o]n February 28, 2019, [Kamau]personally signed a retainer agreement with Liebowitz Law Firm, PLLC ('LLF') in which[he] authorized LLF to file copyright infringement lawsuits on [his] behalf"; that Mr. Liebowitz"had [his] authority to file the present copyright infringement lawsuit as of March 17,2020"; that Mr. Liebowitz notified him of the filing of this action on June 23, 2020 byemail; and that Mr. Liebowitz had authority to settle the case. The declaration contains twoexhibits, which are the same signature page and notification email attached to Mr. Liebowitz'sdeclaration. It does not include any evidence supporting Kamau' s claim that he gave Mr.Liebowitz permission to file this lawsuit on March 17, 2020 or to settle it at a later time.This declaration raises additional questions. Mr. Liebowitz claims that he hadauthority to bring this action by virtue of the purported February 28, 2019 retainer agreement. Mr.Kamau, however, declares that Mr. Liebowitz "had authority to file the present ... lawsuit as ofMarch 17, 2020," thus implying that the retainer agreement of February 28, 2019 did not authorizethe filing of this action. And Mr. Kamau, like Mr. Liebowitz, has submitted no documentation apartfrom the purported signature page and the June 23, 2020 email.
Given Liebowitz's history, which this judge is well acquainted with, let's just say Judge Kaplan is not happy:
This Court's order of July 30 required - and still requires - production of the fullretainer agreement or agreements and all documentary evidence with respect to Mr. Liebowitz'sauthority to bring and settle this case. That includes all emails, letters, notes and other writings orelectronically stored information bearing on the retention, the scope of the engagement (includingas it may have changed from time to time), and the settlement.All of this material shall be filed by Messrs. Liebowitz and Kamau no later thanAugust 18, 2020.
Get your popcorn ready...

Read more here

posted at: 12:00am on 14-Aug-2020
path: /Policy | permalink | edit (requires password)

0 comments, click here to add the first



Boston University Applies For Trademark On Offensive COVID-19 Awareness Slogan For Some Reason

Furnished content.


Anyone who knows anything about me knows how much I both love and rely on profanity. Love, because profane language is precisely the sort of color the world needs more of. Rely on, because I use certain profane words the way most people use commas. So, when the courts decided that even the most profane words could be used in trademarks, I applauded. Fucks were literally given.But not every piece of profanity deserves a trademark. And, while I again applaud Boston University's decision to create a profane slogan around COVID-19 safety awareness for its student body, why in the actual fuck did the slogan have to be trademarked?First, the context:

Boston University asked a group of communications students for help encouraging their peers to follow the school’s strict COVID-19 safety guidelines when they return to campus for the upcoming semester.What it got back was a slogan that did not mince words.Last week, BU officials filed a trademark application for the slogan “F*ck It Won’t Cut It” in order to promote “public awareness of safe and smart actions and behaviors for college and university students in a COVID-19 environment.” The filing first garnered attention after a trademark lawyer flagged it Tuesday morning on Twitter.
On the slogan, fuck yeah! In fact, pretty good for a Methodist school! But on the trademark application, what the fuck? I have serious questions as to whether the application even meets the criteria for a valid mark to begin with. How, precisely, is this being used in commerce? What good or service is this trademark supposed to identify a source for? Schooling? Not really. Healthcare? Nah. What precisely are we doing here?
“Our slogan is a powerful phrase that sparks a reminder for students to make safe choices at decision points each day, because saying ‘F-it’ to responsible protocols won’t keep us on campus,” Hailey McKee, a BU graduate student and public relations manager for the campaign, told the Boston Business Journal.
Well, sure, but why hell does this need to be siloed to Boston U via trademark? The school really doesn't want its sister universities to be able to raise effective awareness using the slogan as well? Why not?This feels ultimately like another long-tail outcome of permission culture and expansive IP enforcement, where an entity just defaults to wanting to claim IP on all the things. But the world would be better if leading institutions like BU... you know... did better.

Read more here

posted at: 12:00am on 14-Aug-2020
path: /Policy | permalink | edit (requires password)

0 comments, click here to add the first



August 2020
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
           
         







RSS (site)  RSS (path)

ATOM (site)  ATOM (path)

Categories
 - blog home

 - Announcements  (0)
 - Annoyances  (0)
 - Career_Advice  (0)
 - Domains  (0)
 - Downloads  (3)
 - Ecommerce  (0)
 - Fitness  (0)
 - Home_and_Garden  (0)
     - Cooking  (0)
     - Tools  (0)
 - Humor  (0)
 - Notices  (0)
 - Observations  (1)
 - Oddities  (2)
 - Online_Marketing  (0)
     - Affiliates  (1)
     - Merchants  (1)
 - Policy  (3743)
 - Programming  (0)
     - Bookmarklets  (1)
     - Browsers  (1)
     - DHTML  (0)
     - Javascript  (3)
     - PHP  (0)
     - PayPal  (1)
     - Perl  (37)
          - blosxom  (0)
     - Unidata_Universe  (22)
 - Random_Advice  (1)
 - Reading  (0)
     - Books  (0)
     - Ebooks  (0)
     - Magazines  (0)
     - Online_Articles  (5)
 - Resume_or_CV  (1)
 - Reviews  (2)
 - Rhode_Island_USA  (0)
     - Providence  (1)
 - Shop  (0)
 - Sports  (0)
     - Football  (0)
          - Cowboys  (0)
          - Patriots  (0)
     - Futbol  (0)
          - The_Rest  (0)
          - USA  (0)
 - Technology  (1049)
 - Windows  (1)
 - Woodworking  (0)


Archives
 -2024  March  (164)
 -2024  February  (168)
 -2024  January  (146)
 -2023  December  (140)
 -2023  November  (174)
 -2023  October  (156)
 -2023  September  (161)
 -2023  August  (49)
 -2023  July  (40)
 -2023  June  (44)
 -2023  May  (45)
 -2023  April  (45)
 -2023  March  (53)
 -2023  February  (40)


My Sites

 - Millennium3Publishing.com

 - SponsorWorks.net

 - ListBug.com

 - TextEx.net

 - FindAdsHere.com

 - VisitLater.com