Parody for Dummies

I recently ran across this item on Amazon.com: a book entitled Ventriloquism for Dummies (Black Moss Press, 2002). It doesn't appear to be approved or licensed by Wiley, but it does look a lot like Wiley's Dummies books.

(A few bloggers have previously made note of this book, including The Honest Hypocrite and J-Walk. Other bloggers have suggested the title, apparently without realizing it already exists -- see Jonathan's Wacky World and HappySinner's Greenehouse.)

Blogging for dummies

OK, I admit I've been delinquent in posting to this blog; it's just not particularly high on my priority list at the moment. But I couldn't resist posting about this item (via Marty Schwimmer's Trademark Blog):

Jason McCabe Calacanis writes in his blog today that he has received a couple of nastygrams from Wiley Publishing after a member of his blogging network used "for dummies" in the title of a blog post ("Super Bowl guide for dummies"). Seems that Wiley wants some kind of trademark attribution statement every time someone uses the phrase "for dummies," even in a blog item headline.

They won't find it here.

Blogs as lawyer advertising

The Kentucky Attorneys' Advertising Commission apparently has taken the position that every post on a lawyer's blog constitutes an advertisement, requiring the lawyer to submit a copy of the post to the Commission along with a $50 filing fee. See Ben Cowgill's Legal Ethics Blog, Evan Schaeffer's Legal Underground, Dennis Kennedy in Between Lawyers, and David Giacalone in f/k/a. Eugene Volokh says it's "surely unconstitutional."

Wining across state lines

The Supreme Court today handed down Granholm v. Heald, striking down (by a 5-4 majority) state laws that ban direct sales to consumers by out-of-state wineries while permitting direct sales by in-state wineries, on the ground that such laws violate the dormant Commerce Clause.

Watch what you blog

If you're planning to commit a crime, don't brag about it in your blog. (State v. Velardi (N.C. App. Apr. 5, 2005), via InternetCases.com)

ICANN do whatever I want

The Ninth Circuit held last week (in McNeil v. Verisign, Inc.) that ICANN isn't a state actor and therefore isn't required to respect free speech or due process rights under the U.S. Constitution. (For general background, see these law review symposium issues: 6 J. Small & Emerging Bus. L. no. 1 (Spring 2002) and 15 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. no. 3 (Spring 1997).)

UPDATE: Eric Goldman lists previous decisions declining to find state action by private Internet entities here.

The King v. The King of Pop?

(Via Kings & Things)  Elvis tribute artist Matthew Tuttle last week won a seat in the public lottery to watch a day of Michael Jackson's child molestation trial. The Sonora (Cal.) Union Democrat reports that Tuttle was a criminal defense lawyer before giving up the law to live life as Elvis.

MGM v. Grokster

Oral arguments in MGM v. Grokster are scheduled for March 29. The briefs of the parties along with numerous amicus briefs are available from EFF. (I signed onto the brief submitted by 60 Technology Law Professors and USACM.)

eBay accused of Shill Bidding

A class action suit filed in California last week alleges fraud and unconscionability in eBay's bidding system. The suit focuses on the manner in which eBay handles proxy bids, and characterizes eBay's actions as tantamount to "shill bidding." The plaintiffs' firm has issued a press release; Reuters [alternate link] and InternetNews.com have more.

The plaintiffs may have a point, but the impact of eBay's practices isn't particularly significant (less than one bid increment) except on an aggregate level. I'm guessing this one will settle for substantial attorney's fees for the named plaintiff's firm, a thousand dollars or so for the lead plaintiff, worthless coupons for all of the other class members, and a promise by eBay to do a better job of explaining how proxy bids work.

EBay's bidding system is inherently broken -- a timed auction makes sense only where bids are sealed until the auction closes (hence the existence of eSnipe and similar services that exploit this design flaw) -- but that problem has little to do with this case.

UPDATES: Commentary on the case from Eric Goldman and Slashdot. And a printable copy of the complaint.

No Spam for Cows?

Karl Auerbach notes that cows infected with mad cow disease enjoy greater privacy protection than people who register domain names.

I told you we were on the wrong side of the cow.