Posts Tagged ‘New York’

Privacy Is A Government Joke And We’re All The Judicial Punchline

December 27, 2013

Image by D. Honig via Daily Kos.

My nominee for the best/worst example of faulty parallelism by a judge in 2013:

ACLU et al. v. Clapper et al.

Reference: American Civil Liberties Union et al v. Clapper et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 13-03994. per Judge William H. Pauley III (link)

(H/T @TyreJim via Twitter)

Revenge Is A Link Best Served Cold

October 15, 2013

Engraving by Gustave Doré illustrating the Erinyes, chthonic deities of vengeance and death (via Wikipedia/Wiki Commons)

I have been remiss in not writing about a recent debate in the Blawgosphere regarding the constitutionality of recent anti-revenge porn legislation, spearheaded by Professor Mary Anne Franks of the University of Miami School of Law. Given the theme of this post, I leave it to the reader to “Google it yourself” to find out the historical background to the criminalization of revenge porn movement and mainstream media coverage.

What I’m more interested in for present purposes, is the developing story concerning the lack of “dissenting opinions” and critiques of the Franks Model of Revenge Porn Criminalization, highlighted over at the Law Prawf Collective known as “Concurring Opinions”. Read an interview of Franks on Revenge Porn over at Concurring Opinions here.

Enter Scott Greenfield, the author of Simple Justice who has painstakingly analyzed and critiqued the legislative model to criminalize revenge porn on a number of levels, specifically, highlighting the criminal law and First Amendment problems inherent in Franks’s model law.  Greenfield writes,

Two Important Ontario Attornment Decisions

September 16, 2013

The first decision is from the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Van Damme v. Gelber2013 ONCA 388  (Ont. C.A.) per  Doherty, J.A. (Cronk and Lauwers JJ.A. concurring). In Van Damme, the plaintiff, a successful businessman and philanthropist obtained judgment in the Supreme Court of New York against the defendant, Nahum Gelber (“Gelber”), relating to Van Damme’s purchase of a painting from Gelber. The painting was being held in Ontario pursuant to an Ontario court order.  Van Damme successfully moved in the Ontario proceeding for an order of recognition and enforcement New York judgment in Ontario and a variation of the earlier Ontario order directing that the painting be released to him, with costs on a substantial indemnity basis. (more…)

Reblogged: Marc Randazza lays the hammer down on scam artist “Take Down Lawyer”

October 31, 2012

English: Head-shot of Marc J. Randazza in Mass... First Amendment attorney Marc Randazza provides a forensic demonstration on how a real “take down lawyer” handles an online scam artist who is impersonating a lawyer and extorting his victims for a fee. See also, Marc’s follow-up posts: responds! , More on operation “involuntary porn” and Still more on


I also highly recommend Ken @ Popehat’s companion post: “The Takedown Lawyer”: Let’s Help Marc Randazza Investigate A Scammer, Shall We?

The Legal Satyricon

When it comes to porn, here are my rules:

Rule #1: The subjects must be adults
Rule #2: The subjects must be consenting adults

If you don’t break either of those rules, I am on your side. I will defend your right to make, watch, display, and sell that content.

Break either rule, and I want to hurt you for the damage you do to others.

I want to hurt I want to hurt them bad. Who’s with me?

Here’s their business plan:

Step one: Register the domain name “”

Step two: Get ahold of nude photos of people who never consented to having their photos published.

Step three: Publish them, along with their names, home towns, and links to their facebook profiles.

So now how do you “profit?”

Well, openly saying “I’ll take down the photo for $250,” would probably create some legal issues for you. So, instead…

View original post 744 more words

UPDATED: Your Privacy Ends Where Your Tweet Begins

September 14, 2012

Twitter image via Inforrm’s Blog.

Oh, Twitter, you used to be cool. You used to be the rebel. You used to be the shining light among social media platforms that fought for privacy and First Amendment rights. Now you’re just part of the “1 Percent”. Well, you were never part of the “99 Percent”, but at least we thought you cared.

Joseph Ax of Thomson Reuters reports that Twitter has folded like a cheap lawn chair under threat of contempt and substantial fines by a New York criminal judge. Malcolm Harris was among 700 people arrested during a peaceful protest march in support of the Occupy Wall Street Movement. He was charged with one count of disorderly conduct for blocking traffic. The prosecutor served three subpoenas on Twitter  for 3 1/2 months’ worth of information from Harris’ Twitter account. (Note: I am unable to verify whether any of Harris’ tweets related to what he ate for breakfast or whether he thinks One Direction is way better than Justin Bieber.)  (more…)

%d bloggers like this: