Slashdot Mirror
Man Who Tangled With The Oatmeal Ordered To Pay $46k
Last summer we followed the odd case of lawyer Charles Carreon, as he went after Matthew Inman, creator of The Oatmeal webcomic, with legal threats. Carreon had been hired by FunnyJunk, a website Inman accused of stealing his comics. Carreon demanded $20,000 in compensation for Inman's "false accusations." Inman declined, and then used the publicity to solicit over $200,000 in donations, which he gave to charity after sending Carreon photographs. Carreon dropped the suit against Inman, but the saga continued. A satirical website was set up about Carreon, which caused him to invoke the legal system again. The article documents the absurdities, which included further legal action and a song. Now, however, Carreon is reaping what he has sown; a judge has ordered him to pay over $46,000 for his role in the legal circus.
Now we can call it a "Justice System" again.
There's a spot in User Info for World of Warcraft account names? Really?
Now stop the carry on Carreon
So, would those who destroyed him (though it's more like, helped him destroy himself) be Carreon Eaters?
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
More like "Charles Carrion", am I right? *runs*
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
....Hollywood could come up with.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
and point him to the Wikipedia page on the Streisand Effect ... oh, wait, here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
Litigious lawyers are a scum of the earth profession, the maggots of civilized society. It's a white collar world today, but in earlier times they would have been cutthroats and pickpockets. Any sense of social responsibility is completely absent in their world.
Unfortunately, judges are lawyers too and so it's very rare to see them admonish bad faith litigation, and even when they do, the lawyers responsible are almost never penalized sufficiently to discourage further abuses in their professional life. Even this $46k fine is undoubtedly petty cash for the person concerned.
The legal system is an operational mess, with no internal negative feedback to keep its systems under control.
Lawyer, Ever. If he was a criminal attorney his client, up for shoplifting charges, would end up in the electric chair.
douchebag n. fr. "douche", fr. French, fr. Italian "doccia"
1. An object used for vaginal hygeine.
2. Charles Carreon.
It actually specifically disclaims any interest in dispensing justice.
Ask not for justice, lest you too be judged!
Good, inexpensive web hosting
They are largely reviled by society, but fulfill a vital role in the ecosystem by disposing of carreon.
I'm not a lawyer, so don't take legal advise from me, however, I have been following this story from the beginning and there are two things I get from all of this is: don't piss off the Internet and Charles Carreon is possibly a really bad lawyer.
He and his wife (To a lessor extent), have taken a blog posting by person with a serious and legitimate issue with someone stealing his hard work and managed to fold it into a substantially career damaging blunder. Every time Charles Carreon speaks, I just dislike him more and more and would advise him to hire him as a lawyer. How he continues to get any more cases is really beyond me. Two seconds with Google would demonstrate that this guy is possible off his rocker or a really bad lawyer.
Linux O Muerte!
Oh sure, and while you're at it let's ask for a pony
Be careful what you ask for, or you might end up with the periphery fandom of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic.
and cold fusion
Be CFML what you ask for here too.
One of those rare times when I laugh (kk, may be chuckle ) at slashdot XD
There's a reason his last name is In-man. He's a fruitcake.
Citation? Sure, the 'not funny' bit is subjective, 'piece of shit' is an ad-hominem, but why bully?
Well seeing as that a core part of his complaint was that his comics were routinely posted without attribution and with the all reference to The Oatmeal removed, he wasn't really getting the kind of publicity you are describing.
What do you know I wrote a novel
Charles Carreon sued 'The Oatmeal' on the grounds that he knew exactly what would happen in the wake of his 'satirical' response to Mr. Carreon's allegations. It has been my experience, based on commenting on the early days of 'The Oatmeals' web comic series that he needed to only show disfavor for any commentary on his work and legions of his supporters would 'bury' whoever crossed him. While I find very little, if any at all, legal merit in Mr Carreon's suit I do feel as the if 'The Oatmeal' is every bit as monomaniacal as he is accused of being.
GP poster should indeed have started by reading the actual complaints.
That said, it's still not 'stealing' as the summary alleges, and Matthew partially asserted. That and other claims are usually railed against when it's the RIAA, MPAA, etc. based purely on the technical facts. It should be no different when it's 'the little guy' - be it Matthew Inman or Katie Woodger.
That sure is some funny junk.
Funny junk indeed.
So says another Apple user.
What's amazing about this statement is that the word Justice as handed down to us from Latin meant nothing more than accurate application of the law.
"Jus" is Latin for "law".
Only recently has "justice" been taken to mean "social justice", or simply "righteousness".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy
The etymological fallacy is a genetic fallacy that holds, erroneously, that the present-day meaning of a word or phrase should necessarily be similar to its historical meaning. This is a linguistic misconception.[1] An argument constitutes an etymological fallacy if it makes a claim about the present meaning of a word based exclusively on its etymology.[2] This does not, however, show that etymology is irrelevant in any way, nor does it attempt to prove such.
A variant of the etymological fallacy involves looking for the "true" meaning of words by delving into their etymologies,[3] or claiming that a word should be used in a particular way because it has a particular etymology. A similar concept is that of false friends.
Also, while those blog posts MAY seem relevant to your train of thinking, they are UTTERLY unrelated to the topic at hand or to your comment as such.
One is pseudointellectual rambling about non-existence of chaotic good based on principles of misunderstanding of D&D and other is a rant against... I don't know... John Rawls?
Well, Slashdot readership is not some unanimous blob of group think, despite what others may claim from time to time. Some people do (and are here) complain about those things consistently. Others think that arguing over the whole using the word "stealing" is a pointless waste of time and move on to actual complaints about the tactics of groups like RIAA and others, or complain about what is wrong with the laws. This includes people interested in a middle ground that think copyright is horribly broken, but should not be abolished completely.
That word doesn't mean what you think it does:
That word doesn't mean what you think it does.
"Sensibility refers to an acute perception of or responsiveness toward something, such as the emotions of another. This concept emerged in eighteenth-century Britain, and was closely associated with studies of sense perception as the means through which knowledge is gathered. It also became associated with sentimental moral philosophy." - Wikipedia.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.