Raistlin

This is an introductory post on the Streisand effect. The Streisand effect occurs when an attempt to censor or otherwise hide information leads only to that information being spread more effectively. This is otherwise known as “the internet.”

Once upon a time, many moons ago, the website comic The Oatmeal noted that another website, FunnyJunk, was hosting a crapload of its content. The Oatmeal then asked FunnyJunk to delete that content, and FJ responded by deleting a small percentage of it. The Oatmeal gave up, and thought that was the end of it.

Just recently, FJ, represented by attorney Charles Carreon, sent a letter to The Oatmeal demanding $20,000 in “damages” or it would file suit for defamation. The alleged defamation was apparently The Oatmeal accurately noting that FJ was stealing its content for hits. The Oatmeal responded with this brilliant post that involved The Oatmeal promising to raise $20,000 only to donate it to a couple of charities, and included this depiction of FJ’s mother trying to have sex with a bear. It also included a number of insults to FJ’s lawyer, Carreon. The Oatmeal went on to raise about $200,000 (a number which is still rising, as far as I know), not one cent of which has gone to FJ.

That’s when things got really interesting. Because, you see, Charles Carreon, having up until this point been merely a mildly humorous stool pigeon of FJ, decided to sue everyone involved. Including the charities.

Carreon makes three claims:
- 1) violations of California’s charity fundraising regulations by The Oatmeal and the charities involved;
- 2) that The Oatmeal violated Carreon’s copyright of his own name because some random person who read about Carreon made a parody Twitter account; and
- 3) that The Oatmeal incited “cybervandalism” because some random person allegedly hacked Carreon’s website after The Oatmeal publicly commented on Carreon’s stupidity.

For a full breakdown of how laughably ridiculous each of these claims are, read Ken White’s breakdown of the complaint. And you really should, because Ken is an amazing legal blogger. Here is just one choice quote from his analysis:

Originally Posted by Popehat

Mr. Carreon goes on to complain that the fake @charles_carreon tweets were "abrasive and provoking" and "engendered negative responses" to him, which is upsetting because he "makes it a habit to engage in tempered speech even on matters of heated debate." Yes, it's totally true, as anyone who has read about this story or met Charles Carreon could attest: interacting with him is clearly a memorable joy, akin to being farted upon by a unicorn, and his actions normally inspire only adulation and the occasional rapturous fainting incident.

For here, it is enough to simply say here that the US First Amendment, which is the best free speech protection in the world, makes his lawsuit absurdly simple.

Let me just add this:

Congratulations to Carreon. Had he just dropped the issue after The Oatmeal laughed at the threatening letter he sent on behalf of FJ, he would have been forgotten in a week. Instead, as Ken pointed out, he “passed from mundane short-term internet notoriety into a sort of legal cartoon-supervillainy.” How ridiculously self-absorbed and douchebaggy does someone have to be in order for him to try to stop money from going to cancer research in retaliation for being publicly (and justifiably) mocked? He has thus made himself a national laughingstock and opened himself up to potential financial liability for a frivolous lawsuit, all because he could not stand that someone had made fun of him on the internet. He now joins the likes of Roy Pearson in learning about the Streisand effect the hard way.

Good riddance.