Slashdot Mirror
LSU Law School Sues Student Over Website
hij writes: "The NY Times has an article that gives details about how the LSU Law School is suing one of its own students for a web site he maintains. The web site contains information about the Law School and also includes articles that are critical of the Law School."
Now maybe we can do what the school wants to do and take down the site with a good slashdotting.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
The Simpsons will be the only legal method of criticizing anything.
your = it belongs to you. you're = a contraction of you and are. Got it now?
From the article
The site's home page bears a disclaimer saying it is not affiliated with the law school.
Mr. Dorhauer has studied the law of domain names and said he was confident he would prevail. Legal experts who have inspected his Web site said he had a good case.
Ms. Esman said the school had made a mistake in asserting that Mr. Dorhauer aims to make money from the site. "They do seem to be focusing their complaint incorrectly on commercial uses," she said. "He's not offering any services whatsoever
Well it looks like the school should have talked more to the young man before suing him outright - after all he wasn't making pennies and he did have a disclaimer that his site has nothing to do with the law school
The site doesn't pop right out as a criticism site. If he named the site lsulawsucks.com and put his criticisms on the front page, I'd say that LSU was being a bully. But, the front page of his site has all sorts of helpful links to admissions, grading scale conversions, etc. that one would EXPECT to find on an official university page. He doesn't even have a disclaimer on the front page. Based on that, I'd say that his site could definitely be confused with an official LSU site.
He should change his site to make it completely obvious that it's not an LSU site. If it's a criticism site, then he should drop the helpful links to various university departments.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
They value the first amendment so long as what you say does not confuse anybody. Lawyers and lawyers to be are easily confused.
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
does to good people.
The school does not have a case using copyright infringement for commercial gain. As someone who has studied copyright law and the internet, I can say that they have no case. They are trying to contend that his site was confusing partially b/c it used school colors...ridiculous. Most judges would throw this out.
The professors at the school are taking themselves and their "academic reputation" way to seriously. The only thing this lawsuit will do is get alot of good press for the student.
Anyone (myself included) who has been blackballed by faculty in a University setting knows that some professors really do buy into the "Ivory Tower" idea. It's sad but true.
[off topic...the nytimes article mentions a suit against pensacolachristianschool.com. You should check it out if you want to know more about schools suing regarding web content.]
Thank you Dave Raggett
Claiming that they are not getting the same value for their tuition dollars.
This guy , due only to the fact that he has put up a website, is getting a free crash course in internet domain disputes and copywrite law. If the opinions in the article are correct, then he is also getting an easy one tossed across the plate so that he can win. The school is basically handing him free on hands training in how a real case works coupled with a high profile case he can win before he graduates. This means he is getting more value from his time at LSU. If I was a student at LSU I would be demanding that the school sue me also!
Papa Legba come and open the gate
I'm actually planning on going to law school next year, and this was one of the places that my radar picked up. I'm really glad they did this now, so I, and everyone else who ever thought of applying here, won't have to waste time, money, and energy figuring out that this is not the kind of legal education I want.
I wish more institutes of higher learning would identify themselves as being on the "never go here under any circumstances ever" list by attacking their own students like this.
Lawyers are the biggest abusers of the law, I've noticed.
The NYT article is in error, I believe, when it quotes a lawyer as saying the use of the school's colors is relevant to the outcome of this case. It is not. What is relevant is whether the use is commercial or non-commercial. The test for "commercial" is perhaps more hair-trigger than it ought to be: some cases have found asking for donations, selling a t-shirt, or running banner ads to be 'commercial' although it's unlikely we'd treat at least the donations as 'commercial' activity in any other context.
I have a blog.
When lawyers sue lawyers, no one wins.
No, wait. That makes them too busy to sue any of us. So I guess all of us win!
------
Today's Top Deals
He hurt our feelings! Hit a little too close to the truth these days and people get all bent out of shape. Apparently these folks have yet to realize that the negative publicity generated by taking action against their guy gives them 10 times more of a black eye than if they'd just ignored him. Most of the people considering the school would never have heard of this guy's site, but now the whole thing's been plastered all over the New York Times. And who wouldn't look at that and think twice, really?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
It's part of their educational programs
This is an outrage!
You have posted a link to a NYT article without saying (free registration blah, blah, blah). This is near criminal negligence. How many will suffer this morning, hungering for their daily dose of corporate/institutional war on our rights, when they click on the link innocently, thinking they will soon be in righteous indignation heaven, only to be confronted by, by, by...... a LOGIN?
Oh the humanity! For shame.
Copy and Pasted from the "Their Sueing Me" Page:
----------
They Did It.
The Law School filed its lawsuit against me, their student, conveniently making sure I received notice thereof less than 48 hours before exams started. I barely had time to scan in the lawsuit and post it, but I did, and you can find a link to it below.
Many thanks to my wife, Jennifer, for putting up with me. Also, thanks to all my friends and acquaintances at the Law Center who have offered their support to me in this battle. Thanks also to all hundreds of visitors to this site who have written me in the last few weeks. It's great to have so many people--including many former LSU Law School grads--offer their assistance to me in this battle.
Now it's official: Louisiana State University HAS sued me....
My name is Douglas Dorhauer, and I am a student at the LSU Law Center. This site is my personal creation, built by me for my own use. In the event you find its contents of use, then consider it my gift to you.
Because of the similarity between this site's name and that of a local law school (of which I am a student), this site has recently been under attack. Specifically, in a letter dated November 30, 2001, Marc S. Whitfield of Taylor, Porter, Brooks & Phillips, L.L.P., legal counsel to Louisiana State University asked me to give up the domain name "lsulaw.com."
After researching the points in Mr. Whitfield's letter, I responded with a point-by-point rebuttal of each issue he raised. That response went unacknowledged for nearly two months before I requested Mr. Whitfield update me on his client's position concerning this matter.
Immediately, Mr. Whitfield responded with a threat of a lawsuit. I replied with a request to attempt an amicable resolution.
Mr. Whitfield's response to my request to amicably resolve the matter came in the form of a lawsuit naming me as defendant. Currently, I have just finished final exams. After regaining consciousness early next week, I will respond to the lawsuit, file cross-claims, etc. As always, I will post all correspondence here.
The premise of my argument is simple: all the laws Mr. Whitfield cites in his initial letter require a showing of "commerciality." I earnestly contend that this site is emphatically noncommercial, and, therefore, not susceptible of the trademark violations alleged by Mr. Whitfield.
www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
Had they talked to him before filing suit, they wouldn't have been setting an appropriate example for all of their students. Sue first. Ask questions later.
Yes, I'm being facetious (mostly) but kneejerk internet domain lawsuits seem to be the rule, not the exception. Why talk about it when you can probably bully the domain owner into a settlement?
That seems to be the rule for most corporate lawsuits anyway.
Slashdot comments... splitting hairs since 1997.
He's a law student, in the middle of exams-- surely LSU have just set him a practical? :-)
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
This Cease and Desist Letter was sent to him 30 November 2001. He responded within a few days, and seven weeks later he was threatened with a lawsuit on 11 February 2002. He responded to that on 04 March 2002, and they finally served him on 20 April 2002.
The new york times article indicates he recieved the cease and desist letter and the trademark infringement suit "last month, two days before his second-year final exams." Poppycock. He's had six months to work this out.
"[T]he single essential element on which all discoveries will be dependent is human freedom." -- Barry Goldwater
OK, let's do a quick comparison.
lsulaw.com- Clear layout, loads fast
- Consistent navigation
- Clearly labelled links to all major departments of the School
- Clearly labelled links to information about the school
- Clear links to other Web resources of use to law students
- Works well in all browsers including text browsers
law.lsu.comIn other words, his is a reasonably competent, reasonably professional Web site, accurately describing the school, and theirs is an incompetent, unusable pile of dross.
I think that's what the quarrel is about, actually.
It's worth pointing out that because of the poor provision for disabled access, http://www.law.lsu.edu/ would be illegal in most of Europe.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Dilbert: Why does your simulation only count law students as half a person?
Dogbert: They don't drop to zero until they pass the bar.
Sorry, couldn't pass this one up.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
"...a law school is not an island unto itself but the hub of a network of relationships with an array of audiences beyond its walls."
Just don't deep link deep link to their hub of a network.
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX