Oatmeal v. FunnyJunk, Part VIII: Charles Carreon Gets Sued, Paul Alan Levy of Public Citizen Joins The Fray

You may also like...

323 Responses

  1. Ann says:

    FREEEEEEEEEDDDDOOOOMMMMM!!!!!

    :D

  2. Grifter says:

    Every time you think "Well, that's all the crazy he's got", he's got just a little more.

  3. Marzipan says:

    Apparently, Carreon is intending to tie himself up for quite some time. With the resources that will be necessary to litigate on all these fronts, I'm not sure how he'll find time for paying work in the near future.

    I'd like to believe there's a part of him that knows this is wrong, but that such a part of his psyche is being overruled by pride, a sense of rectitude, and a large dose of reactive aggression.

    Thank you, Ken, for your Pope-signal. I'd imagine that Doe (would this be #2?) is incredibly grateful for the assistance.

    Off to read the latest roadside Carreon.

  4. Orville says:

    Looks like there is even more good entertainment coming to my hometown. I'll have to see about getting some time off to watch the fireworks.

    If I can, I'll order a Hornets jersey to wear.

  5. Hannah says:

    At first this whole thing was funny. Then it was hilarious. Then it was pants-shittingly hilarious. Now it's past the point of being funny, and is just goddamn annoying.

  6. Grifter says:

    There are some pronoun issues in the post…Carreon calls Doe a "she", while you call Doe "Mr." and "he", Ken…while I know you're trying to preserve privacy, it might make sense to make your pronouns agree?

  7. Wow. Carreon threatened to rummage up some rationale that somebody, somewhere was 'profiting' off of the domain name by saying that Inman would be 'ratifying' the domain if Inman didn't ask Charles-Carreon.com to stop linking to the Oatmeal. That's right — Inman is profiting somehow because sites he doesn't control link to his website, and one of those viewers might eventually buy something from Inman.

    So, once again, his target remains Inman, above everything.

  8. Wil says:

    I am now going to ask everyone I email to forward them to Ralph Nader…

  9. Wren says:

    I just…wow. I'm beginning to think that Carreon really does have some serious mental health issues going on that need to be addressed. I'm glad that this seems to be bringing light to some of the processes of law that are less moral than they should be, but I also think the man needs some serious help.

  10. Margaret says:

    "I will be using digital forensics to establish actual trademark damages"

    AhhhahaahahahaHAHAHAHA…. oh, trying to sound smart. S-M-R-T.

    Also, how could the "10 Points" NOT be grounds for disbarrment? He's literally threatening to harrass John Doe.

  11. Mark says:

    The Nader part makes sense. He agreed to keep the communication confidential, so, technically he cannot complain to Nader himself without voiding that promise.

  12. HeatherCat says:

    ZOMG, you can't even blink on this site!

  13. Dan Weber says:

    Mr. Carreon also demanded that Paul Alan Levy convey Mr. Carreon's disquiet about this case, and Public Citizen's involvement in it, to Ralph Nader

    Response: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TozoL_P0804#t=15s

    To be fair, Ralph Nader founded Public Citizen, so it's not entirely out of left field.

    Carreon says "thank you for your proffer to keep things confidential" but I don't see any such offer being made. Was it referenced elsewhere, or is he making things up?

    Every time I think it's time to leave Chas alone, he starts being a bully again. The previous thing was the "why are you hitting yourself?" of accusing Inman of slowing down the transfer of funds by refusing to consent to Chas's demands. Now it's blatant legal threats.

  14. Connie says:

    Oh lordy. He's threatening them with eventual lawsuit and litigation which never ends? Sounds about par the course…

  15. Michael K. says:

    Ten points? TEN?! Any villain worth his third-act monologue knows you never go past three. Now I'm gonna have to report him to the Guild.

  16. V says:

    @Grifter
    At some point, before Register.com (temporarily) disclosed the domain info, CC and his wife thought it was a woman that ran the parody site.
    CCs email that Ken talks about is dated June 23rd, while Register disclosed information around the 26th.

  17. Nicholas weaver says:

    It's exponential, not logarithmic

    ObMathPedantry

  18. V says:

    @Dan Weber
    The offer to keep things confidential is referenced on a blog post by Paul Alan Levy. See the link above with the words "Read Paul's post about it here"

  19. AlphaCentauri says:

    The name on the domain registration during the fleeting interval when it was public is a male name.

  20. Yar Kramer says:

    I've never posted here before, and I've been kind of just sitting back and watching this, but:

    … the law offers a remedy to the bold.

    You lawyer up, and you take it to him.

    Looks like it's not just the bold, but also the italicized! :D

  21. Noah Callaway says:

    Ken, your point that this should more be about a rally-cry to fix a broken system than "oh look Charles Carreon is a jerk" is well-taken.

    That being said, as someone who has only recently become aware of the extent of the problems: how do we fix the broken system? Raising awareness around this kind of behavior is helpful, certainly. What else needs to be done?

  22. HeatherCat says:

    I agree with Noah Calloway here – what CAN we do to fix a system that will allow endless headaches from the vindictive types who clearly live for this sort of torment?

  23. VPJ says:

    I saw PAL arguing with another first amendment badass (whom we all know) on M Doe's website. Not surprised he took the case and ran with it. *waves pompoms* I know which horse I'm backing.

  24. Seerak says:

    Looks like it's not just the bold, but also the italicized! :D

    The Bold and the Italicized

    Sounds like something that ought to be available on the Kindle. Or on daytime TV.

    Or a government scandal.

  25. Chris R. says:

    I await Tara's moderate, thoughtful and concise legal analysis of this situation.

  26. Paul Alan Levy weighs in here.

    Not gonna lie — having your blog cited by a guy as admirable as Levy brings me great joy. Sorry, not trying to brag (OK, yes I am), but between Levy and Randazza debating on my blog and Ken giving me props, all I need now is for Eugene Volokh to call me an idiot and I can die a happy man.

  27. Mark says:

    7. [...] I may very well send the process server 'round to her door.

    What an inappropriate, uncivil, thing to say. Same thing he did to Inman, by the way.

  28. Thorne says:

    @Chris R

    Why? It's like a broken record when she goes all "Jay and Silent Bob" on us…

    "You are the ones who are the ball-lickers!!"

    ;)

  29. Chris R. says:

    @Thorne, I like google searching all the relevant claims she makes. It's like learning through insanity. Most the references she makes I wouldn't ever end up finding on my own.

  30. Nicholas Weaver says:

    To Cathy Gellis: A lawyer this kickass deserves free booze… :)

    Drop me an email with your preferred varietal, and I'll have a bottle of wine waiting for you where I work in downtown Berkeley.

    You also can email me with computer questions, me being a certified Ph. D. computer geek. You can reach me at nweaver at icsi dot berkeley dot edu.

  31. Thorne says:

    I dig the "learning through insanity" part.
    It just gets a little dangerous when you try and take the references and try to draw the correlation to each other estimating her 'logic'.

    "Okay, if I'm seeing this right, she's saying '4 + Circle = Parsnip'. Whaaa-?!"

    ;)

  32. V says:

    @Grifter
    and the Doe v Carreon complaint states

    Doe is identified using female pronouns generically, without implying Doe's actual gender.

  33. Hannah says:

    @Dan Weber

    When I read about Carreon, I feel more like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AutYNQYGjpE

  34. Cigars says:

    I watched as Jeff Merkey, pro se, attacked Al Petrofsky in the SCOfacts case when SCO was spewing about Linux. There's also the Jonathan Riches escapades…

    It won't stop, until we see true tort reform. Rule 11 doesn't go far enough, and application of sanctions is rarer than it should be. Losers should have to bear the legal costs of the winners.

  35. Roxy says:

    Just when I don't think that this could possibly get more crazy a whole new can of crazy opens up and joins the party. This is, by far, the most amazing story on all of the internets. More unpredictable than imagechan and far more entertaining.

  36. Nicholas Weaver says:

    Oh, chuckles…

    that a judgement that recites the domain name was obtained by fraud upon the registrar, in the form of a misrepresentation that she did not know of my trademark upon the name, might well be non-dischargeable in bankrupcy.

    Now, Chuckles, you aren't a bankruptcy attorney, but you and Tara have already gone through the process once. Well, you went through the easy version. Its now a fair bit less pleasant [1].

    But you should also know this: The same could very well apply to the anti-SLAPP sanctions, awarded attorneys fees, and Rule 11 sanctions that are now about to charge down you like some enraged elephant strung out on Heisenberg Blue.

    You might, might still be able to walk away with a shred of dignity… But I think the time you have left is measured in hours.

    [1] E.G, you moved to Arizona what, less than 3 years ago? Did you buy your house less than 40 months ago? Ooops, bye bye homestead exemption…

  37. Nicholas Weaver says:

    Oh, and an open offer to all the lawyers working on Ptering Carreon a new one…

    I am a Ph.D. in computer science, specializing in network measurement and network security. If you need an expert to go through log files and reconstruct information, or want suggestions on some information that would be really REALLY nasty to subpoena Charles for, I can either help or point you to those who can. Pro Bono.

  38. raphidae says:

    Truer by every step he takes: http://www.carreon.info/ (where's my cease-and-desist?)

  39. Budgy says:

    Wow…. just wow!

    I've been following this from the beginning when Matt posted the response to the original CC demand and everything I've seen since makes me glad that I'm not subject to the US legal system.

    CC strikes me as a man who has taken leave of what little sense he had when he, to quote The Oatmeal, went "balls in as well"… By my reckoning of anatomy, most of CC's lower body must be in there now.

    The legal back and forth is most enlightening and the assorted blogs and attachments are very educational. Thanks to all for helping to shed a little light on this murky world – here's to seeing Mr CC's ability to litigate in this fashion removed once and for all.

  40. Chris R. says:

    @Thorne, oh I never try to interpret her thought process, just want to see what facts she is trying to distort into her internal narrative.

  41. Adam Raymer says:

    If this happened in Canada, there would be disciplinary hearings, and possible disbarment… Why can't this be Canada?

    -@CCTranslated

  42. Joe says:

    Good lord – I go to work for a few hours – you know at a real job unlike you schlubs :-) and when I come back the entire world is turned upside down. Am beginning to think my Avatar is appropriate and not just because the missus thinks I'm a clueless moose.

    Hat's off to Satirical Charles for standing up and dishing it right back out. Only thing missing was a "snort my taint" line.

  43. Mike K says:

    I'm impressed that he didn't take the warning letter sent to him the same way he expects people to take his threat letters. This is just, incredible.

  44. Shannon Lynch says:

    I almost want Tara to be sued for what she writes on Nader Library. Just for the pure fact I can see him defend his wife highlighting the pure hypocracy with the John Doe and Inman debacle he is in now.

  45. Valerie says:

    Ok, so I bunked off to enjoy dinner and an argument with my significant other for a couple of hours, and Charlie manages to find yet another way to double-quintuple-sextuple-down again? Like Chris R., I eagerly await Tara's reasoned opinion.

    To an extent, I agree with Ken – the whole Carreon clan is far from the most noxious group on the internet. They are crazy, sometimes crass, but certainly not even in the top 10% of internet refuse.

    That said, Charles IS the freak of the week, but he also is highlighting an important internet / free speech issue. Let's be honest, the web won't watch and engage unless the subject is freaky (or a cat video).

    I actually hope he comes out of this ok (not that he wins from a legal perspective, merely that he doesn't self destruct in an utterly life-destroying way) – his asshattery is doing the web & legal system a service and, honestly, looking at his raps / his wife's ranting, I think the degree of mental illness involved mitigates the asshattedness to an extent.

    Agent URANA$HT signing off…
    IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

  46. Matthew Cline says:

    Could you upload the memorandum to the complaint which lists the relevant laws?

  47. Grifter says:

    @Adam Rayner: If this was Canada, couldn't he have whined to the "human rights commission" and gotten all these mean things taken down?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Human_Rights_Commission_free_speech_controversy

  48. Nick says:

    Grrr…still can't post comments

  49. Nick says:

    There is a sick part of me that would love to see this go to trial, just to see how much the crazy gets cranked up.

  50. Swindapa says:

    The Carreons LOVE Nadar. Nadar's staffers smelled the crazy over the Internet well in advance of this case, and banned Tara from the Nadar Facebook page. Her letter to Nadar is well worth the read. It's hilarious and pitiful and full of pathos and everything, especially if you go back a page and see what she was banned FOR.

    http://www.naderlibrary.com/bulletin_board/viewtopic.php?t=701&start=10

    It's pretty clear that Public Citizens stepped into a land mine of old history here – and it's clear that PC's involvement has solidified the previously held belief that Nadar's staffers are part of some conspiracy. One wonders when they'll accuse the man himself. Ultimately, PC's envolvement will only serve to lash the Carreons to greater douchebaggery.

  1. July 2, 2012

    [...] There are good, decent, people in this world. People who go day by day working jobs they don't like to support people they love. There are billionaire philanthropist who recognize other people's plights and choose to take action. There are unintended heroes who by chance save someones life. I believe the good outweighs the bad on any given day. I also believe that if we don't fight what we see as injustice, the bad goes on in the shadows happily unacknowledged. I am fortunate that good, decent and brilliant people have taken my defense so that I can shine a light on you. Thank you Paul Alan Levy, Cathy Gellis, and Kenneth P. White. Those people and anyone who stands up against censorship are my heroes. [...]

  2. July 2, 2012

    [...] his use of the domain name is not trademark infringement.  The Complaint (courtesy, again, of Popehat) includes correspondence with Carreon in which Carreon makes some astounding threats.  To me, [...]

  3. July 2, 2012

    [...] interesting turn arounds I've seen in a while. Read the update from Popehat on their site: http://www.popehat.com/2012/07/02/oatmeal-v-funnyjunk-part-viii-charles-carreon-gets-sued/comment-pa… Comment (0) – 07/2/12 by [...]

  4. July 3, 2012

    [...] actions did not violate trademark law.  Ars has its take here.  A good rundown of everything is here (via Popehat).  This who bizarre set of circumstances is leaving some to wonder whether Carreon [...]

  5. July 3, 2012

    [...] Oatmeal v. FunnyJunk, Part VIII: Charles Carreon Gets Sued, Paul Alan Levy of Public Citizen Joins T… Everyone knows what you do when someone like Charlie the Censor sues you. You lawyer up. If you're very lucky, you have funds to hire a good lawyer, or you can get the backing of extraordinary advocates like those at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. [...]

  6. July 4, 2012

    [...] Monday, Ken at Popehat reminded readers that, while Charles Carreon's behaviour is indeed outrageous and ridiculous at once, [...]

  7. July 11, 2012

    [...] Charles Carreon Threatens to sue “some time” Original Source: Pope Hat Additionally: BoingBoing [...]