Archive for June, 2011
Got this in an e-mail from another animal person today, and thought I’d share:
Prayer From a Stray
Please send me somebody who’ll care!
I’m tired of running, I’m sick with despair
My body is aching; it’s so racked with pain
And dear God, I pray as I run in the rain
That someone will love me and give me a home
A warm cozy bed and a big juicy bone
My last owner tied me all day in the yard
Sometimes with no water and God, that was hard!
So I chewed my leash God and I ran away
To rummage in garbage and lie as a stray
But now God, I’m tired and hungry and cold
And I’m so afraid that I’ll never grow old
They’ve chased me with sticks, hit me with stones
While I run the streets just looking for bones!
I’m not really bad God, please help if you can
For I have become just a “victim of man!”
I’m wormy dear God and I’m ridden with fleas
And all that I want is an owner to please!
If you find one for me God, I’ll try to be good
I won’t chew their shoes and I’ll do as I should.
I’ll love them, protect them and try to obey
When they tell me to sit, to lie down or to stay!
I don’t think I’ll make it too long on my own
Cause I’m getting so weak and I’m, Oh so alone
Each night as I sleep in the bushes I cry
Cause I’m so afraid God, that I’m gonna die!
I’ve got so much love and devotion to give
That I should be given a new chance to live.
So dear God please, please answer my prayer
And send me somebody who will really care.
I’m going to withhold most comment on this matter, at least for now, but the latest complaint is online.
If you’re interested, I am mentioned in paragraphs 59, 60, and 182. There’s not much I can say about this that hasn’t already been said by greater bloggers than me. The case, dubbed Rakofsky v. the Internet, has spawned quite the internet storm (which I have to assume was not Mr. Rakofsky’s intention–171,000 Google search results as of June 29, 2011.) Mark Bennett has been keeping a compendium of posts about the case and its intriguing twists and turns. Eric Turkewitz, who is representing a group of defendants with First Amendment lawyer Marc Randazza, is providing ongoing updates at his blog (and they are often hilarious).
I therefore offer no commentary nor any further opinions on this matter at this time. All I can say is that I was quite surprised when I learned of this case and my involvement in it. I will say that this should be a fascinating foray into the intersection of the internet, the first amendment, and theories of defamation law. Keep watching, dear reader(s).
- Lawyer Responds to Kids’ Video Dissing His Daughter with Cease-and-Desist Letters, Lawsuit
- Tripadvisor Review Complaining of Bedbugs Results in a Lawsuit
- ‘Twittersquatter’ Sued by Company Targeted in Sarcastic Tweets (technically this is an infringement claim, but I suspect questions of defamation will intrude).
It will be interesting to see where this all goes. For those unfamiliar with the concept, defamation is generally defined as follows:
Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander (for transitory statements), and libel (for written, broadcast, or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image. It is usually a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).
I think I am much more partial to the term calumny. To each their own, I suppose.
Almost nine years ago, I embarked on an adventure. Starting my own law practice straight out of law school, knowing very little substantive law, knowing almost nothing about running a business, armed only with good credit and “fire in the belly,” it has been quite a ride. This was 2002, before most people had heard the word “blog,” when “dot-com” was still a dirty word, when the country was still clawing its way out of the post-9/11 recession, and when Democrats still held a few statewide offices in Texas.
A lot has changed since then. Technology has certainly advanced, but going solo is no longer quite the crazy move it once was. With the bad economy and the rather ridiculous surplus of new lawyers entering the stage every year, it’s getting awful crowded in my sky (h/t Malcolm Reynolds).
Quite frankly, the thrill of the law is not what it once was. The thrill of blogging about the law, or tweeting about it, is still there, but my heart and my passion seems to have moved on. So I’ve decided to leave the practice of law, at least for a while.
This is, of course, not the end for me and law. I’m keeping this website, and this blog. In fact, I intend to keep writing and hopefully entertaining my reader(s), but I have not had the particular drive to write informative, search-engine-optimized posts about collaborative law. I prefer to write about animal welfare, dogs, and my own peculiar theories on the business of law. Writing about my passions, and not writing the interesting-but-not-at-all controversial blog posts common to many law blogs, is what inspires me, so I look forward to feeling perhaps less constrained by industry convention. I was recently mentioned by a complete stranger as one of the few Austin lawyers making good use of social media for my practice. I enjoy the social media, but not so much the practice. It’s time for a new adventure.
I hope, in making this confession, that I do not lose the trust or respect of my reader(s). I have met many amazing people through my work over the past nine years, and none of you have heard the last of me.