×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pro Bono Lawyer Fights C&D With Humor

samzenpus posted about 10 months ago | from the all-it-is-worth dept.

Businesses 144

Zordak writes "When Jake Freivald received a questionable Cease and Desist letter from a big-firm attorney, demanding that he immediately relinquish rights to his website http://westorage.info, his pro-bono lawyer decided to treat the letter like the joke that it was. In a three-page missive, the lawyer points out the legal, constitutional, and ethical problems with the letter that led him to conclude that the letter was a joke. He concludes, in a postscript, with an unsubstantiated demand for $28,000 in overpaid property taxes, and offers to lease the city the domain name 'westorange.gov' in exchange."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

144 comments

Oh my god, get the website right (5, Informative)

Sowelu (713889) | about 10 months ago | (#44068333)

It's westorange.info, not westorage.info. The editing is ridiculous.

Re:Oh my god, get the website right (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068523)

I think that 'C&D' should probably be 'S&D' also - Stand and Deliver.

Re:Oh my god, get the website right (2)

fractoid (1076465) | about 10 months ago | (#44068729)

Your money or your life.

Re:Oh my god, get the website right (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068939)

Or?

Re:Oh my god, get the website right (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 10 months ago | (#44069087)

It's the usual bait-and-switch, as soon as they have the money, why not take the life as well?

Re:Oh my god, get the website right (3, Insightful)

Passman (6129) | about 10 months ago | (#44069787)

It's the usual bait-and-switch, as soon as they have the money, why not take the life as well?

If you kill a man today, he'll be dead tomorrow. But, if you rob a man today, he'll get more money that you can steal from him tomorrow.

Site suffering from the slashdot effect ^_^ (4, Funny)

Camael (1048726) | about 10 months ago | (#44068677)

Hi, all. Welcome to the site.
I’m sorry that it has been hard to use this site over the past few days (the week of June 17, 2013) because the traffic has been so high. If you get a “Resource Limit Is Reached”, just refresh the page and it should load after a try or two.

I believe the traffic is organic: There is no evidence lending credence to the rumor that the Township orchestrated the viral response as a DDOS (distributed denial of service) attack to take me out. (Just for the record, that’s a joke, probably mostly for the CNET visitors.)

I find it ironic curious visitors are doing what the West Orange County failed to do.

Re:Oh my god, get the website right (5, Funny)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about 10 months ago | (#44070255)

It's westorange.info, not westorage.info. The editing is ridiculous.

You have unrealistic expectations. Editing here has long consisted of pressing "submit" and then spending the afternoon climbing under the desk to pick-up the Skittles that fell down there yesterday.

nice! (1)

thephydes (727739) | about 10 months ago | (#44068335)

an appropriate response to an asshat. Not living un the US I have no opinion or idea how this will be received, but a good story nevertheless.

County Lawyer (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068347)

The county lawyer has a typo on his bio page about his latest work

Specifically, Mr. Trenk has recently tried to conclusion bid litigation involving over $100 million.

Doesn't exactly inspire confidence if his underlings can't even spell check.

Re:County Lawyer (5, Funny)

GunR (246697) | about 10 months ago | (#44068381)

Doesn't exactly inspire confidence if his underlings can't even spell check.

It's not a typo. It's written by a lawyer. You're not supposed to be able to read it and understand it.

Re:County Lawyer (2)

deoxyribonucleose (993319) | about 10 months ago | (#44068713)

However, using 'conclusion' as a verb is a shooting offense.

Re:County Lawyer (4, Informative)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 10 months ago | (#44068825)

Specifically, Mr. Trenk has recently tried to conclusion bid litigation involving over $100 million.

Luckily, "tried" is the verb in that sentence. The "to conclusion" is an adjectival phrase.

Re:County Lawyer (1)

Kavafy (1322911) | about 10 months ago | (#44068873)

Luckily, "tried" is the verb in that sentence. The "to conclusion" is an adjectival phrase.

Modifying which noun?

Re:County Lawyer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44069039)

the bid litigation. Tried in this sense refers to taken through the trial process.

Re:County Lawyer (4, Informative)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 10 months ago | (#44068959)

Adverbial, I believe, since it modifies "tried", not "bid litigation".

Re:County Lawyer (2)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | about 10 months ago | (#44069305)

Are you sure you didn't mean "preposition phrase" since it was tried "to conclusion"?

Re:County Lawyer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44069913)

Are you sure there isn't a dick stuck somewhere? Honestly who gives a fuck.

Re:County Lawyer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44070299)

Evidently you do.

Re:County Lawyer (4, Insightful)

ozbon (99708) | about 10 months ago | (#44068547)

I don't think it's a typo - I *think* it's saying "Trenk has recently completed bid litigation over $100 million" (i.e. he's taken it to trial, to conclusion)

All told it's a vile (and very legal) sentence with no punctuation. The proof-reader in me can't find a way of writing it in a better way though (well, not without rewriting the entire sentence)

Re:County Lawyer (0)

Opportunist (166417) | about 10 months ago | (#44069109)

No, it's not saying that. If it did, I could have understood it.

Seriously, language is a medium of communication, not one of obfuscation. If you cannot use it in a way so it would be understood by your addressee, you fail at using it.

Re:County Lawyer (4, Informative)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 10 months ago | (#44069329)

Yes, that's exactly what it's saying.

The term "tried to conclusion" means that the matter was brought to trial, and the trial has completed, as opposed to being stalled in an endless cycle of motions and counter-motions, or settling out of court, or otherwise not finishing.

Considering that some lawsuits last several decades, simply saying that he brought a particular litigation to trial isn't really enough, because it's vague as to whether the trial is still ongoing. Similarly, ozbon's proposed alteration is vague, because it leaves open the question of how the litigation was completed. It could have been laughed out of court during pre-trial.

The language used was specific, concise, and complete. Since the majority of a lawyer's work involves reading and writing legal documents that must be specific, concise, and complete, this is a good thing. Your lack of understanding is due to your assumption regarding the definition of the word "tried". If that's a significant barrier to your understanding of his website, you should probably be looking for a dictionary, not a lawyer.

Re:County Lawyer (2)

mapsjanhere (1130359) | about 10 months ago | (#44069931)

Is "tried to conclusion" lawyer speak for "lost at trail and had his appeals rejected"? Otherwise "won" would have been a much for positive statement.

Re:County Lawyer (2)

Will.Woodhull (1038600) | about 10 months ago | (#44069673)

While language is a medium of communication, jargons are media of highly specific communications between persons trained in the jargon. Jargons are not necessarily understandable by persons without the training, nor should they be. They are artificially constructed languages that say more with fewer words than could be done in the parent natural language.

Lawyer speak is one of the oldest jargons. At a guess, "tried to conclusion bid litigation" means something different to a lawyer than the meaning it suggests to a lay person. Perhaps it means he was the trial lawyer from the first filing on the case until the last appeal was exhausted.

Re:County Lawyer (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 10 months ago | (#44070037)

Yes, but he is Communicating in an area you are clueless in, so it doesn't make sense to you due to your ignorance.
Let's stop lowering the int elect barrier and language does to the lowest stupid denominator.

Re:County Lawyer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44070047)

me only germglish speaker but thinks 'tried till conclusion' could have the same meaning without implied verb to follow. if you lawyer you understands.

Re:County Lawyer (5, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#44068681)

Doesn't exactly inspire confidence if his underlings can't even spell check.

Nowhere in that sentence does the word "check" or anything remotely similar in misspelled form appear.
How you can deduce from that his inability to misspell "check" is beyond me.

Re:County Lawyer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44069291)

I see nothing wrong in that sentence. It is grammatically correct and perfectly understandable.

Re:County Lawyer (0)

splutty (43475) | about 10 months ago | (#44069301)

Mr Trenk has recently tried (as in finished the trial, not 'attempted') COMMA to conclusion COMMA bid litigation involving over $100 million.

Fairly sure that's what meant, and in this case interpunction would've made things a lot clearer, although it can technically be left out.

Leaving it out makes it a very ugly sentence, though.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (5, Funny)

morbingoodkid (562128) | about 10 months ago | (#44068365)

Why bother the appropriate response is:

------------
Re: Cease and Desist Order

No.

Regards
xxxx

Re: Cease and Desist letter (3, Insightful)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about 10 months ago | (#44068395)

They wouldn't feel nearly as stupid without biting sarcasm...biting them.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (1)

Jade_Wayfarer (1741180) | about 10 months ago | (#44068451)

Considering they seriously sent this C&D letter, chances of them understanding sarcasm are slim to none. Simply put, you can't bite coprolite.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (1)

JosKarith (757063) | about 10 months ago | (#44068519)

You can if you're a coprophage, which is most people's opinion of lawyers...

Re: Cease and Desist letter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44069107)

How politically correct of you not to say shit-eating-corpse-screwing-thief-of-orphans-candy-shyster.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (1)

sjames (1099) | about 10 months ago | (#44068951)

I imagine that's why he also sent an 'example' response to a serious letter.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (4, Funny)

Joce640k (829181) | about 10 months ago | (#44068425)

Why bother the appropriate response is:

No.

I would have used two words, but, hey, that's just me.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068447)

"No, sir."?

Re: Cease and Desist letter (2)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 10 months ago | (#44068961)

The second word would be "off"; the first left to the imagination.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (1)

Alioth (221270) | about 10 months ago | (#44069539)

Ah, in which case you're referring him to the answer given in Arkell v. Pressdram.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068465)

I would have used
"I refer you to the reply in arkell vs. pressdram"

Re: Cease and Desist letter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068509)

"Arkell" and "Pressdram".

Re: Cease and Desist letter (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about 10 months ago | (#44068535)

Kind regards?

Junk filter.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 10 months ago | (#44069143)

Do they have to be kind? I'd give them something in kind, but it sure as hell would not be kind. At best, it would be "kindisch". Ahh, the wonders of how German and English often use the same word for very different meanings...

Re: Cease and Desist letter (1)

SeaFox (739806) | about 10 months ago | (#44068541)

Ah, one of those overachieving types putting forward twice the effort, are we?

Re: Cease and Desist letter (2)

jimicus (737525) | about 10 months ago | (#44068751)

Disagree. The correct response is:

With regards to your recent letter, we refer you to the reply given in the case Arkell v. Pressdram.

Re: Cease and Desist letter (4, Funny)

Tokolosh (1256448) | about 10 months ago | (#44069201)

“I'm seated in the smallest room in the house. Your letter is before me. Soon it will be behind me.” — Voltaire

That wouldn't be "pro bono". (2)

Ihlosi (895663) | about 10 months ago | (#44069667)

While legally correct, the short response does not provide anything for the public good, while the long response provided me with a few good laughs, which is definitelty good.

A good joke needs time to play out (1)

gottahavea (867879) | about 10 months ago | (#44068555)

... and fight fire with fire, both legal vs legal and humour vs humour.

A wonderful response. Points to the Pro Bono lawyer Mr Kaplitt.

The world needs more like him.

Re:A good joke needs time to play out (4, Interesting)

aheath (628369) | about 10 months ago | (#44068851)

A tip of the hat to Mr. Kapplitt responding to government overreach with a sense of humor. This is fine example of why lawyers work pro bono publico. I'd love to see this case go to trial so that future first amendment cases can cite Mr. Kaplitt's letter. Intel has a long history of using geographic names as project names because you can't copyright a geographic name. I worked on 'Year 2000 Compliance" at Intel. I thought I was working on Y2K compliance until the legal department sent out a notice that someone had asserted a copyright to Y2K. I once ran a BBS called "The Stack Exchange" which focused on HyperCard. I receive a nasty call from someone who wrote HyperCard applications for a company called the "The Stack Exchange." I changed the name of my BBS to avoid a legal hassle. If the caller hadn't been such an asshole I would have gone out of my way to explain the name change and to promote The Stack Exchange on my renamed BBS. The moral of the story is that it pays to ask nicely before sending out the cease and desist letter. Jack Daniel's took this approach when a book cover had the look of a Jack Daniel's label. Jack Daniel's even offered to cover the costs of designing a new cover for the book.

An how a professional comedian does it: (5, Funny)

Sproggit (18426) | about 10 months ago | (#44068581)

Letter to Warner Brothers: A Night in Casablanca

Groucho Marx
Abstract: While preparing to film a movie entitled A Night in Casablanca, the Marx brothers received a letter from Warner Bros. threatening legal action if they did not change the film’s title. Warner Bros. deemed the film’s title too similar to their own Casablanca, released almost five years earlier in 1942, with Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. In response Groucho Marx dispatched the following letter to the studio’s legal department:

Dear Warner Brothers,
Apparently there is more than one way of conquering a city and holding it as your own. For example, up to the time that we contemplated making this picture, I had no idea that the city of Casablanca belonged exclusively to Warner Brothers. However, it was only a few days after our announcement appeared that we received your long, ominous legal document warning us not to use the name Casablanca.

It seems that in 1471, Ferdinand Balboa Warner, your great-great-grandfather, while looking for a shortcut to the city of Burbank, had stumbled on the shores of Africa and, raising his alpenstock (which he later turned in for a hundred shares of common), named it Casablanca.

I just don’t understand your attitude. Even if you plan on releasing your picture, I am sure that the average movie fan could learn in time to distinguish between Ingrid Bergman and Harpo. I don’t know whether I could, but I certainly would like to try.

You claim that you own Casablanca and that no one else can use that name without permission. What about “Warner Brothers”? Do you own that too? You probably have the right to use the name Warner, but what about the name Brothers? Professionally, we were brothers long before you were. We were touring the sticks as the Marx Brothers when Vitaphone was still a gleam in the inventor’s eye, and even before there had been other brothers—the Smith Brothers; the Brothers Karamazov; Dan Brothers, an outfielder with Detroit; and “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?” (This was originally “Brothers, Can You Spare a Dime?” but this was spreading a dime pretty thin, so they threw out one brother, gave all the money to the other one, and whittled it down to “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?”)

Now Jack, how about you? Do you maintain that yours is an original name? Well it’s not. It was used long before you were born. Offhand, I can think of two Jacks—Jack of “Jack and the Beanstalk,” and Jack the Ripper, who cut quite a figure in his day.

As for you, Harry, you probably sign your checks sure in the belief that you are the first Harry of all time and that all other Harrys are impostors. I can think of two Harrys that preceded you. There was Lighthouse Harry of Revolutionary fame and a Harry Appelbaum who lived on the corner of 93rd Street and Lexington Avenue. Unfortunately, Appelbaum wasn’t too well-known. The last I heard of him, he was selling neckties at Weber and Heilbroner.

Now about the Burbank studio. I believe this is what you brothers call your place. Old man Burbank is gone. Perhaps you remember him. He was a great man in a garden. His wife often said Luther had ten green thumbs. What a witty woman she must have been! Burbank was the wizard who crossed all those fruits and vegetables until he had the poor plants in such confused and jittery condition that they could never decide whether to enter the dining room on the meat platter or the dessert dish.

This is pure conjecture, of course, but who knows—perhaps Burbank’s survivors aren’t too happy with the fact that a plant that grinds out pictures on a quota settled in their town, appropriated Burbank’s name and uses it as a front for their films. It is even possible that the Burbank family is prouder of the potato produced by the old man than they are of the fact that your studio emerged “Casablanca” or even “Gold Diggers of 1931.”

This all seems to add up to a pretty bitter tirade, but I assure you it’s not meant to. I love Warners. Some of my best friends are Warner Brothers. It is even possible that I am doing you an injustice and that you, yourselves, know nothing about this dog-in-the-Wanger attitude. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to discover that the heads of your legal department are unaware of this absurd dispute, for I am acquainted with many of them and they are fine fellows with curly black hair, double-breasted suits and a love of their fellow man that out-Saroyans Saroyan.

I have a hunch that his attempt to prevent us from using the title is the brainchild of some ferret-faced shyster, serving a brief apprenticeship in your legal department. I know the type well—hot out of law school, hungry for success, and too ambitious to follow the natural laws of promotion. This bar sinister probably needled your attorneys, most of whom are fine fellows with curly black hair, double-breasted suits, etc., into attempting to enjoin us. Well, he won’t get away with it! We’ll fight him to the highest court! No pasty-faced legal adventurer is going to cause bad blood between the Warners and the Marxes. We are all brothers under the skin, and we’ll remain friends till the last reel of “A Night in Casablanca” goes tumbling over the spool.

Sincerely,

Groucho Marx

Unamused, Warner Bros. requested that the Marx Brothers at least outline the premise of their film. Groucho responded with an utterly ridiculous storyline, and, sure enough, received another stern letter requesting clarification. He obliged and went on to describe a plot even more preposterous than the first, claiming that he, Groucho, would be playing “Bordello, the sweetheart of Humphrey Bogart.” No doubt exasperated, Warner Bros. did not respond. A Night in Casablanca was released in 1946.

Re:An how a professional comedian does it: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068735)

This was easily the best thing I've read in days. Thank you sir, and have a good day.

Re:An how a professional comedian does it: (2)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 10 months ago | (#44068855)

Heh. I can almost hear his voice:

I am sure that the average movie fan could learn in time to distinguish between Ingrid Bergman and Harpo. <Groucho>I don't know whether I could, but I certainly would like to try.</Groucho>

Re:An how a professional comedian does it: (2, Informative)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 10 months ago | (#44069595)

Unamused, Warner Bros. requested that the Marx Brothers at least outline the premise of their film. Groucho responded with an utterly ridiculous storyline, and, sure enough, received another stern letter requesting clarification. He obliged and went on to describe a plot even more preposterous than the first, claiming that he, Groucho, would be playing “Bordello, the sweetheart of Humphrey Bogart.” No doubt exasperated, Warner Bros. did not respond. A Night in Casablanca was released in 1946.

Entire exchange can be found on 27bslash6.com [27bslash6.com].

Well-known political views (2)

Nutria (679911) | about 10 months ago | (#44068611)

There's more going on here than a city semi-reasonably fighting a domain squatter.

It's political dirty fighting (4, Informative)

Camael (1048726) | about 10 months ago | (#44068725)

Yup, found plenty of dirt [baristanet.com] here, no idea how true all this is but it seems to be some bad blood involved.

Freivald, who also ran for West Orange’s town council (and briefly created another website expressing dissatisfaction with a Weichert realtor a while back), tried to find out why his WestOrange.info website was being targeted by the town. Freivald gave a speech about his website and his surprise at receiving the letter, at a town council meeting on June 11. He expressed concerns about why the town didn’t address the “confustion” they were worried about through other methods, other than sending the cease and desist letter. Then Freivald asked for transparency.

The morning after the meeting, Freivald received this email in response to his questions about the letter from West Orange Mayor Robert Parisi:

        Good morning the Administration authorized the sending of the cease and desist letter at the request of members of the Public Relations Commission that believe the sites and the confusion they arouse, undermines the efforts of the Commission and the work they do in promoting the Township. As the Commission is officially sanctioned and funded by the Township, the Administration respected their concerns and agreed to send the letter.

There’s just one problem. Freivald is a member of the Public Relations Commission (PRC), along with Prakash Khaitan, Chair; Michelle Cadeau; Cynthia Cumming; MaryEllen Morrow; Jonathon Ridley; Josefina Velez, Vice Chair; Patrecia West.

It does seem unusual that the town council is messing around with their own PR committee.

Plus, Freivald is/was pretty active politically [joekrakoviak.com] so that might be where he ruffled some feathers.

Re:It's political dirty fighting (4, Informative)

dywolf (2673597) | about 10 months ago | (#44069545)

It seems that the alternative journalist he ticked off is a volunteer member of hte same Council that he is a volunteer member of. She wrote some inflammatory things about his wife's charity group (dealing with special needs kids), he got ticked, said some things, and the journalist in turn threatened blackmail of the "stop saying bad things about me, or we'll stop covering your wife's charity in the press at all". he of course didnt take that lying down and criticized the hournalist more... ...and so now the journalist, in the name of hte council that they are both volunteer members of, contacted a lawyer and had the C&D sent.

So in the end the C&D Lawyer is a middleman in their dispute.
Now, he sent a very poorly written C&D and deserves all ridicule he has recieved on that (and failed in his own due diligence if he can so easily be trumped by such simple things as facts, as the shown in the response letter). but he was also just being used a pawn in the battle between the two individuals.

this is how it looks frm what ive found.

Re:It's political dirty fighting (1)

dywolf (2673597) | about 10 months ago | (#44069567)

also humourous of course is that the Mayor just issued some boilerplate response in defense of the council, not even aware the the gent is a (volunteer) member of that very same council.

A fine piece of writing (2)

mendax (114116) | about 10 months ago | (#44068617)

This letter is a fine piece of legal writing. The only other bits of legal writing I've seen during my legal research when I went to court "in pro per" (that's Legalese for "I did it by myself") over a trifling First Amendment issue that were as funny were a couple of SCOTUS opinions written by the two acknowledged legal hacks of the court, Scalia and Thomas. The original of Scalia's was written in blood; Thomas' original was written in crayon.

Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068701)

You Mr. Kaplitt, just made my day better :)

Today's MotD is appropriate... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068715)

"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward."

Re:Today's MotD is appropriate... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44068931)

Mine says:
"Remember: Silly is a state of Mind, Stupid is a way of Life."

I hate U2... (2)

JohnnyMindcrime (2487092) | about 10 months ago | (#44068811)

so does that make me "Anti-Bono"?

Legalese (3, Interesting)

ledow (319597) | about 10 months ago | (#44069239)

As someone that's just had to write a long missive to my old car insurance company, I have to wonder why such things are even allowed to get that far without someone stepping in and saying "Hold on, that's just going to cause trouble". In legal cases, there should surely be some penalty for a false representation such as the C&D letter.

My own frustration stemmed from the fact that my insurance company changed something on my policy that I agreed to. Then the next thing I know, they've cancelled the policy because I didn't pay the difference for the change. News to me, given that I actually had two letters that said my next regular payment had been adjusted accordingly for EXACTLY that payment, and that I didn't need to do anything.

It was also quite interesting in that the envelope that the notice of cancellation was received in only arrived on my doorstep the DAY AFTER the insurance was cancelled. Pretty sure that no matter what you do there, I have a came for "untimely service" or some such.

None of that matters, though, as I can prove it all if required. What really annoyed me was the letter demanding the missing payment (the one that you didn't ask for, that you told me would be taken from my regular payments, and that you cancelled the contract - I would assert illegally - before that payment ever came due?) with threat of court action.

Needless to say my reply was significantly less polite, and less humorous than this, but probably contained a lot more legalese. I'm waiting for the 60-day offer I gave them to resolve the situation (which includes £100 payment back to myself because - even if we take that debt as valid - they incurred costs for myself by cancelling the contract illegally and in an untimely manner) before I do anything else. I think that's pretty reasonable, personally, given that I had already assumed the matter was settled without either side paying the other. My next step will be to claim for the lost day at work that it cost me, though, and that's when it gets so expensive I'm hoping they have the brains to not force me to employ the services of a lawyer or the courts to get that from them.

I did once write one of my suppliers a song, though. They'd taken forever to supply the school I worked for with a Microsoft licence, and I was literally seconds away from cancelling the order after much messing about (which, apparently, including Microsoft manually typing in my email address and not being able to spell "administrator", which is worrying in so many ways).

The school were in the middle of being closed because of the snow at the time, which gave me time to write it, and it felt quite Christmassy being in a school in the snow, so it's to the tune of "The Night Before Christmas":

-------
'Twas the week after purchase and all through the school,
Not a computer was stirring, not even a "machine, virtual".

The machines were hung on blue screens in their lair,
In the hopes that new Windows soon would be there,

The children nestled all snug in their homes,
While snow-days were debated and staff manned the phones,

And hoped that everyone were all travelling well,
While wishing that Microsoft had at last learned to spell.

When out in the ICT suite there arose such a clatter,
And all came running to see what was the matter.

'Twas the IT Manager with eyes full of wrath,
Melting down old Windows disks to de-ice the path.

"Don't worry," he cried as he stoked up the flames,
"A Linux disk I have, and some educational games."

Needless to say, my licence was sorted within the hour.

Re:Legalese (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44070115)

I have a Ford truck that was recalled due to bad connectors on the wiring harness to the master brake cylinder. It was a 6 inch wiring harness that probably took a minute to unsnap the old one and maybe 2 minutes to snap in the new one. The dealership was Tim Tidwell Ford.

After the required service, they sent me an email to rate the service. I sent them this...

I had a decent experience with your company, although it appears that I could have changed out the small wiring harness myself and saved the 30 or so minutes that I had to wait. I do my own work on the truck. I would have liked to do it myself.

One of the reasons why I've never liked taking auto work to the dealer is because even if the work only takes 30 minutes, you make us wait 4 hours for the car. We all know why, you don't have to hide it any more.

And lastly why I really don't like taking my vehicle to someone else to have it repaired is that other people get in the vehicle. I know smoking isn't the in thing any more and most companies will only hire non smokers but I have been cursed with a really good nose.

I'm not saying any thing bad but that morning, it smelled like the last technician to drive the vehicle had bacon, egg and cheese farts. I got in my vehicle that morning ready to drive it away. The first thing that I did after I closed the vehicle door was turn on the heat as it was a cold day. I thought to myself, what is that smell?? Turning on the heater made the smell worse. I think the technician could have used some of those 30 minutes to park the vehicle outside and leave the doors open on it.

God knows that I've had my own bacon, egg and cheese farts. Never eat at Wendy's for breakfast. I first wondered if it was something that I did and one of the technicians noticed it. But, knowing that morning I was going to be late to work, I didn't take time to eat anything that morning until after I got to work. So it wasn't me.

I think some kind of warning would have been nice, or maybe a spritz of that new car smell, or even say that the vehicle will take an extra 10 minutes to get the grease off of the steering wheel and leave it parked out on the back lot with all the windows down.

So to sum up, experience with the website to take the survey, very poor experience, it doesn't work at all. My experience with the work that was done, average. I don't think it should have taken that long to snap in that wiring harness. My experience with driving the vehicle away, less than stellar.

I didn't get a response.

Re:Legalese (1)

SecurityGuy (217807) | about 10 months ago | (#44070305)

I fired my last insurance company for erroneously cancelling my homeowner's policy twice. Sort of. The first time, I confess, I erred and forgot to send the payment on my car insurance in a timely manner. They did the irrational thing, and took the money from the paid-in-full homeowner's policy, and paid the auto policy. No, sorry idjits, you don't get to unpay my bills. This would have bothered me less if they hadn't sent me and my mortgage company a cancellation notice when they did it. Before someone jumps in about how it's all my fault, they themselves agreed they screwed up, and they fixed it.

The second time, I called in to cancel my auto insurance, having already procured coverage from another company. I decided not to renew after the first screw up. In true screw up fashion, I got a letter a few days later confirming cancellation of my homeowner's policy. Yes, these morons, when told to cancel my auto policy, cancelled my homeowner's policy AND sent a letter to my mortgage holder to that effect, who promptly sent me an invoice for just shy of $2,000 for replacement coverage. Fine, ya morons. After successfully demanding AGAIN that they fix the mess they made, I bought homeowner's insurance through another company and cancelled coverage. They had the nerve to send me my refund with the reason for my cancellation being "coverage too expensive". No, company too $%&@*^$ stupid to put up with anymore.

Final Paragraph (3, Insightful)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | about 10 months ago | (#44069325)

I wonder if the pro bono lawyer was alluding to something in the final paragraph. Like for example, the hired gun lawyer was representing someone other than the city/municipality?

Risky last paragraph (1, Insightful)

chad_r (79875) | about 10 months ago | (#44069371)

I think he was doing great until the last P.P.S., when he casually suggested that he could buy westorange.gov, and then sell or license it to the city for over $28,000. If the city ever decided to go through ICANN arbitration, the impression of domain squatting specifically for commercial profit with no evidence of personal use isn't looked on favorably. Considering that the rest of the letter was satire, surely this paragraph is too. But it would be easier not to have to convince an arbitration judge of that fact.

Re:Risky last paragraph (2)

mapsjanhere (1130359) | about 10 months ago | (#44070005)

You missed the point that he can only buy the .gov address with permission of the township. The township could hardly use ICANN against its own authorized representative.

Re:Risky last paragraph (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44070111)

The letter isn't written by the guy who owns web site this is about.

When they said the first thing is... (2)

intermodal (534361) | about 10 months ago | (#44069575)

...to kill all the lawyers, I think we should make an exception for Mr, Kaplitt.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...