• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

BearLove Good. Cancer Bad.

A response to the lawsuit being filed is up on The Oatmeal: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/carreon
A couple highlights"
The Oatmeal said:
So when did this transform from Oatmeal VS FunnyJunk to Carreon VS the internet? I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark here and guess that it's when you announced to a journalist at MSNBC that you were trying to shut down a charity fundraiser which would benefit cancer victims and endangered wildlife.
Click to expand...

The Oatmeal said:
Write an apology to whomever you feel is appropriate, or just don't write anything ever again.

Maybe start your own charity fundraiser as way of apology. I'd donate.

Hugs and sexy bear kisses,

-The Oatmeal
Click to expand...
 
Something I've learned from reading articles on this is that Matthew Inman is a seriously good looking guy and I'd like to extend a formal invitation on behalf of Teh International Gay Conspiracy to join the team, if he has not already.
 
I don't know if my question is about legal matters or human nature, but I'll ask it anyway.

How does one arrive at the point where one says to oneself, things will turn out well for me if I sue someone who has several competent lawyers available to work pro bono and sue the American Cancer Society as well?

The ACS is almost a billion dollar organization and must have a team of lawyers who would love to take such an absurdly easy case. No one being targeted in this suit is going to say, "I'll settle out of court to avoid legal costs and embarrassing publicity." Does this guy think he can tap dance in front of a jury fast enough to win the case?

The suit's defendants constantly refer to the Streisand Effect (which has its own webpage (which is kind of meta)).

Is this guy's perspective so distorted that he thinks additional publicity will do something other than hurt him?
 
Last edited:
Alareth said:
Also, he donated to the fundraiser specifically so that he could claim standing to sue:
Click to expand...
yeah, I read the complaint and made that deduction.

Alareth said:
I've finished reading the full filing and see that he has requested a jury trial for all this.
Click to expand...

I don't see how it can fly in front of a jury:

<lawyer>Why did you donate to operation bearlove?
<carreon>I wanted to contribute to the wildlife fund and the cancer fund.
<lawyer>Why didn't you just contribute directly to those charities then? The whole point of operation bearlove is to ridicule Funny Junk and their lawyer. Which happens to be you.
<carreon>I was concerned that operation bearlove was operating outside of the statutes.
<lawyer>So why didn't you just inform Matt of this?
<carreon>I feared he wouldn't listen to me unless I sued him.
<lawyer>So you intentionally donated to a cause whose goal is to ridicule you, so you could sue Matt?
<carreon>Yes

*jury*: <takei voice>Oh my</takei>
 
Ladewig said:
Is this guy's perspective so distorted that he thinks additional publicity will do something other than hurt him?
Click to expand...

Well one thing's for sure. He's not the hot shot internet lawyer he claims to be. I found it from LTB, now I know that theoatmeal is funny, popehat has a good commentry and Carreon is a douchebag.
 
I hope this is affecting funnyjunk's total views. I'm on my iPad now or I'd go to Alexa to grab a screenshot.
 
Orphia Nay said:
I hope this is affecting funnyjunk's total views. I'm on my iPad now or I'd go to Alexa to grab a screenshot.
Click to expand...

It made an incredible spike of about 4 times the traffic it usually receive.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/funnyjunk.com#

But immediately went down so far as I can see back to normal or nearly normal level

Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit funnyjunk.com:
Reach % Change
Yesterday 0.035% -26% Change in Reach % over the trailing 1 day period
7 day 0.0374% -28% Change in Reach % over the trailing 7 day period
1 month 0.0366% +23% Change in Reach % over the trailing 1 month period
3 month 0.0328% +11% Change in Reach % over the trailing 3 month period
Click to expand...
 
Dave Rogers said:
Jesus Christ, Fenton. I just looked up recent developments, and according to Ars Technica, Carreon is now sueing the California State Attorney. No idea why, the article doesn't say. Can anybody look up the latest filing?

Dave
Click to expand...

That's not my understanding. From LTB (http://www.loweringthebar.net/2012/06/carreon-complaint-amended-still-odd.html) I understand he's trying to join the AG because only the AG has standing to enforce the fake charity collector law he's trying to invoke. Or something. I.e. he's not suing the AG, but trying to get the AG to prosecute Matt Inman. Or something.
 
nathan said:
That's not my understanding. From LTB (http://www.loweringthebar.net/2012/06/carreon-complaint-amended-still-odd.html) I understand he's trying to join the AG because only the AG has standing to enforce the fake charity collector law he's trying to invoke. Or something. I.e. he's not suing the AG, but trying to get the AG to prosecute Matt Inman. Or something.
Click to expand...

I see. I think. Well, I'd be embarrassed at the mistake, but at the moment I think not being able to fathom Carreon's actions or motives should be more a source of pride.

I presume this is a purely unilateral move on Carreon's part, and that the AG may or may not choose to become involved in the suit - is that right?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
I presume this is a purely unilateral move on Carreon's part, and that the AG may or may not choose to become involved in the suit - is that right
Click to expand...

That is my understanding from LTB. I'm sure the AG is pleased as punch to be named.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom