Archive for category Twitter

La Russa v. Twitter – Update on the Update – Not Settled!

One of the big stories on Friday was that Twitter had settled with La Russa over his trademark lawsuit.  This was surprising news considering lots of blogs had carried the inital story and the consensus was that La Russa had no basis for his suit.  Thankfully there is another update.  Twitter is reporting that they did not settle with La Russa and that the AP story is untrue.

La Russa said Friday that Twitter has agreed to pay legal fees and make a donation to his Animal Rescue Foundation.

As opposed to:

Reports this week that Twitter has settled a law suit and officially agreed to pay legal fees for an impersonation complaint that was taken care of by our support staff in accordance with our Terms are erroneous. Twitter has not settled, nor do we plan to settle or pay.

It is good to see that Twitter did not establish dangerous precedent by giving credence to the claims made by La Russa and his attorneys. Conversely it is sad to see that the AP and/or La Russa misreported the facts.

Makes me wonder who is going to want to pay for AP content

View Comments

Tony La Russa sues Twitter — but why?!?!

As I am sure you have already heard Tony La Russa, the coach of the St Louis Cardinals, has sued Twitter over an unauthorized account using his name. The question I want to know is why? After reading the complaint I am none the wiser. In fact, I am more convinced that this lawsuit should not have been filed and Mr. La Russa ought to fire whomever advised him to file this suit.

For starters, lets assume that the account is likely to cause confusion and did cause mental anguish and distress. The screenshot of the damaging twitter account shows that it had 4 followers. Compare that to the thousands of tweets now detailing the lawsuit. By filing the lawsuit La Russa and his attorneys have brought considerably more attention to posts allegedly damaging La Russa’s reputation. One would assume this was not the intent of the lawsuit (although it was a easily foreseeable result.)

Furthermore, reports indicate that Twitter has been responsive to celebrity requests to remove fake pages. Thus a simple request to Twitter is likely to have resulted in the removal of the page with much less fanfare. While one report indicates that La Russa did ask for the page to be taken down, the complaint makes no such allegation. In my opinion given the detailed nature of the complaint it is unlikely that such a key fact would have been omitted.

Even worse, the screenshot attached to the complaint also reveals that the page was clearly labeled a parody. This weighs heavily against a finding of likelihood of confusion, raises serious fair use issues, and in my opinion raises issues of fraud in the complaint. The complaint alleges that the statements “are impliedly written by Plaintiff himself.” I don’t understand how they could be impliedly written by La Russa when the page explicitly indicates they aren’t.

Additionally, the complaint also argues agency theory with respect to the creator of the page and Twitter. While I only have one semester of Business Organization under my belt, I am hard pressed to believe that an agency theory between the account creator and twitter will hold up in court.

Finally, I am confused why the complaint was filed in San Francisco Superior Court rather than federal court given it was filed on the basis of federal trademark statutes. Perhaps it was to try an avoid Judge Kozinski . (See Mattel Inc. v. Universal Music International for Kozinski’s take on trademark’s and parodies.)

In my opinion, this is another example of a poorly thought out, poorly drafted complaint which will likely cause more damage to the attorney’s client than the alleged cause of action.

View Comments

Itunes for news?

I stumbled across a great article on twitter (thanks to @copyrightlaw) about how 3 media execs are trying to start an RIAA/Itunes for news. The writer Mike Masnick hits the nail directly on the head as far as I am concerned:

The news is important, but people want to be able to share the news, spread the news and discuss the news — and you can’t do that when it’s behind a paywall. The very act of putting up a paywall diminishes the value of the cont

This seems to be a concept the RIAA and more recently the AP keep missing. Intellectual Property derives its value from being shared. It is the basis for all U.S. IP law; creators are granted limited duration monopolies in exchange for sharing the information with the public. The whole point is

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Art

In this social media age, the value of information is directly tied to your ability to instantly share it and your opinion about it.

View Comments
Improve the web with Nofollow Reciprocity.