11 ms·
Charles Carreon Drops Bogus Lawsuit Against The Oatmeal Creator
- ecubed 14y agoI'm kind of disappointed this is over, it was actually starting to become entertaining.
- ambler0 14y agoI also felt disappointed because I wanted to see Carreon punished for his abuse of the legal system. But it's probably for the best, since it will free up all of these wonderful people who were providing pro bono counsel to keep fighting the good fights.
- Iscariott 14y agoThat would've been great to see cuz he sure deserves the shxtstorm he was dragging himself into. I just can't imagine being so full of myself as to pursue such a worthless suit.
- kposehn 14y agoI'm quite glad this brouhaha is over - it not only threatened a legitimate fundraiser, but also (should it have gone through) potentially threatened freedom of speech and expression across the web. Enough is enough, and Carreon saw fit to realize this.
- CaptainZapp 14y agoUnfortunately I wouldn't bet on the fact that this is really over. Mr. Carreon sounds, charitably put, like a rather unhinged person with a streak for vendetta. From the Popehat's excellent coverage of this sordid issue: "2. Dismissal is, without court intervention, without prejudice, meaning that Mr. Carreon could re-file if he wanted. Will he? Who knows." The whole post here : http://www.popehat.com/2012/07/03/oatmeal-v-funnyjunk-chapter-ix-charles-carreon-dismisses-his-lawsuit/ http://www.popehat.com/2012/07/03/oatmeal-v-funnyjunk-chapte...
- kposehn 14y agoAhh, interesting. Thanks for posting that link.
- senthilnayagam 14y agoAt last sanity prevailed, it will be one of those real comic legends "once upon a time a lawyer tried bullying an artist and the artist fought back with satire"
- ambler0 14y agoBut as far as we know, he has not (yet) rescinded his threat to sue the person who started the Satirical Charles website, right?
- simcop2387 14y agoThe fun part for him is that even if he does, the Doe in that case has already filed suit against him. It will be difficult/impossible for him to get out of that one without settling.
- chooth 14y agoyoyo
- keithnoizu 14y agoI'll go with the whole thing was a well orchestrated multi party facade to pump money into cancer research.
- alttab 14y agoScandal, controversy, entertainment, and fundraising? All the elements of a juicy story with positive outcomes all around!
- ww520 14y agoWhat is the legal punishment for filing frivolous lawsuit? For every case backed down like Carreon, there must be a lot more people caved to legal backmails.
- dkulchenko 14y agoIf you do it enough, you can get disbarred: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation
- mkr-hn 14y agoLike this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(activist) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(activist)
- SwellJoe 14y agoIt took years for anyone to take responsibility for allowing him to continue to practice and abuse the system, and he was famous for trolling the legal system. That tells me the bar needs some serious reform.
- adaml_623 14y agoThe 'bar' needs competition. It has a monopoly on who is allowed to practice. If there were multiple bars then there would be competitive pressure for them to clean themselves up. The medical associations need this as well. Anywhere there is one accrediting society there should probably be multiple ones. With transparent feedback on how the members of each perform. It's one of those funny things that people never seem to notice. We believe in competition and a marketplace but look past the obvious monopolies!
- SwellJoe 14y agoI talked to some folks recently who oppose the requirement that one be bar-certified in order to represent someone in court...i.e., they believe you should be able to bring your friend, who watches a lot of Law and Order or something, to court with you as a representative. The more I think about it, the less crazy it sounds. You can already represent yourself in court; why shouldn't you be able to bring some help that doesn't cost $500/hour? And, it wasn't always that way in the US; the bar association pulled some strings and made it happen (conveniently, most politicians and judges are also lawyers, so they're possibly the most powerful special interest in the country). I dunno if this is the only way to solve the problem...but, right now, our legal system strongly favors the wealthy (this can be seen in convictions and sentences of rich folks vs. poor folks). Some of the disparity is legislative (i.e. cocaine possession having a vastly shorter sentence than crack), but a lot of it is simply in the difference in quality of representation. Not to mention that when it comes to lawsuits, only rich people have the money to play at those games. Which may be why the worst polluters always seem to end up in the backyards of poor people. Rich people would sue them out of existence. Poor people have no recourse, unless some ambulance chaser sees an opportunity for a class action suit (where he'll make millions and the people affected will get a few measly bucks). I dunno if removing the bar as an impediment to representing someone in court would solve this problem (probably wouldn't; there are lots of things stacked against poor people in our court system, not just the lack of affordable representation), but it might be a start. Whew...I didn't know I had such strong feelings on this issue until I started ranting about it. I guess that's how a lot of folks are...never thinking about the bar (or the medical association), or what unintended consequences it might have.
- TheCowboy 14y agoI think items like this are probably not useful or worthwhile as targets for upmodding on HN. We're basically just clicking up-arrow because we like the outcome and see the post here. We will all hear about this, unless we live under a rock. And for those of us under a rock, it's probably for a good reason. News items like this and a lack of community discipline to disregard them are how I remember reddit beginning its slide in quality. The comments this story will attract on HN will not likely add anything to the discussion that's been going on across the Interwebs.
- billpatrianakos 14y agoBack in the old days your comment would've been in the top spot here (despite what my profile says, I lurked for far longer so I do remember). Now, as of this writing you're at 3. You are totally right and your position in these comments can only support your view.
- mwexler 14y agoI'll just point out that some people rely on the crowd at HN to help them find good and interesting news that gets lost in the crowds. If one does this long enough, one decides not to spend as much time at other sites, finding deep and enjoyable conversation among folks here. For those folks, it's possible they won't hear much about this story elsewhere, and certainly not the interesting opinions of the HN folks. The reddit point is appropriate, but still, I'm actually interested in the spin HN folks put on these types of non-startuppy stories.
- ascendant 14y agoThis case, had it gone to trial, would have had very grave repercussions for anyone who makes a living on the Internet. The fact that it is being dropped is (A) good news for the people that like Oatmeal and (B) good news for anyone who tries to make a dime online. Since I would wager the bulk of the people that frequent Hacker News fall into one or both of those camps, I would think that this story would be relevant.
- balloot 14y agoThe reason I know about this case and its updates is precisely because of HN. You make it sound like this is a mainstream news story. It's not. It belongs here.
- caffeineninja 14y agoCharles Carreon and his wife are almost as bad as Westboro Baptist's Fred Phelps and his cronies. Just doing it because they're too stubborn, ignorant or righteous to see the fallacy of their ways. People like these only fuel my misanthropy.
- CamperBob2 14y agoA better comparison might be made with Jack Thompson, the lawyer who first appeared on the scene as an upstanding moral crusader against the evils of video game violence, and eventually ended up disbarred for abusive and erratic behavior. This isn't the last we'll hear of Mr. Carreon, rest assured. He hasn't hit bottom yet.
- beedogs 14y agoI honestly believe his wife is mentally ill. Have you read her posts on the forum she runs... that only she and Charles are allowed to post on?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- beedogs 14y agoI'm guessing he's about to be disbarred again.
- unreal37 14y agoDoubtful. This is not really "abuse of the legal system". There are people who have filed thousands of frivolous lawsuits over a period of years, and that is abuse of the legal system. One lawsuit that was dropped a few days later is not abuse. He will, however, have trouble being taken seriously as a lawyer.
- Xylakant 14y agoWhile this end is certainly favorable for Inman, I'd have preferred if this was decided in court. This way Carreon can pretend that he had to abandon his just campaign under pressure of the savage hordes of the Internet and try again with a softer target than Inman. If he had been thrown out of court with a clear statement, things would look different.
- scott_w 14y agoA similar situation occurred in the UK, with a legal firm sending out extortion letters threatening to take people to court for copyright infringement. A number replied demanding their day in court and, in the same way, the complainant withdrew the case. However, the judge in the case refused the application and demanded they come to court, so he could enforce judgement, and punish the complainant for filing a frivolous lawsuit. If i remember correctly, the complainant went bankrupt, dispanding his company, in an attempt to avoid going to trial.
- grabeh 14y agoACS:Law was the firm in question which as you say subsequently disbanded although not before getting a verbal hiding from the judge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACS:Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACS:Law).
- scott_w 14y agoThanks for the link. I remember the details were about accusing customers of downloading copyrighted pornography, which I was reluctant to search for from my work machine.
- Xylakant 14y agoIt's a similar tactic to the one often employed by banks and insurances in germany. They pretend that they are not liable, and every time someone sues and things start looking bad, they settle out of court to prevent a lost case. Keeps the stats clean.
- masklinn 14y ago
- acabal 14y agoHow is Carreon going to be punished? It's great that Inman won, but he won not in small part because he's a famous personality that helped gather internet rage--and then the EFF--to his side. But what if he was a nobody? EFF would have very likely told him they were too busy, Carreon would have pressed on, and lots and lots of hard-earned money would have gone down the drain. It makes me so mad that the legal system is so one-sided. Surely Carreon at least must be paying Inman's attorneys' fees!
- masklinn 14y ago> How is Carreon going to be punished? Not, unless Inman decides to sue. > It's great that Inman won Inman did not really "win", he did get intimidated in not withdrawing the money (he took a picture of his own money instead) and Carreon filed a "Notice of Voluntary Dismissal" without prejudice (as the court ended up not being involved) so he could always pick it up again later. And: > Ars called Carreon to comment and found him declaring the lawsuit a success. "Mission Accomplished," Carreon announced on the phone with Ars.
- pooriaazimi 14y agoI wish they would go to court. I'd love nothing more than than the judge saying when he was issuing his ruling: "By the way, I must add I'm ashamed that I'm working in the same legal system as you, Mr. Carreon. I wish I could disqualify you from doing legal stuff from now on". That would make my day.
- vijayr 14y agoThis is sad. It would have been much better if it had gone to court, with carreon losing the case, and made to pay the legal fees to Inman, and probably a fine for wasting court's time. At least, the charities will get the money - for all the drama and time wasted, something good came out of it
- adjwilli 14y agoThis free publicity was the best thing to ever happen to the Oatmeal.