Robert H. Tourtelot: Internet Tough Guy and Sadly Misinformed Attorney

Travis Corcoran, an online acquaintence of ours, runs an interesting business called SmartFlix (nee “Technical Video Rental”; it’s basically NetFlix for geeks, specializing in how-to/technical video). Occasionally, someone unfamiliar with the First Sale Doctrine will contact him and get all up-in-arms about his firm renting their videos. It’s an utterly misguided anxiety — it’s deeply settled law, and foolish to complain about besides; ask Hollywood how much Blockbuster makes for them — but it happens, and so Travis keeps an attorney on retainer to deal with these folks.

Usually, they just don’t understand, and when the situation is explained, they go away. Usually, too, they don’t have lawyers of their own.

That’s what makes this dialog so hilarious: the copyright owner has retained a bloviating bully as an attorney — one Robert H. Tourtelot — who is subsequently wholly outclassed by Travis. It’s great stuff.

  • Part I, wherein the story begins, legal discussions occur, it is made clear that Tourtelot’s client has no leg to stand on, and Travis suggests to the copyright owner that he find a more qualified attorney;
  • Part II, wherein the septuagenarian Tourtelot invites Travis to come to California at his expense for a fistfight, and Travis calls his bluff;
  • Part III, wherein Travis points out that, 5 days later, the promised ticket to California has not arrived;
  • Part IV, wherein Tourtelot begins making vague allegations about “Travis’ history,” whatever that means;
  • Part V, wherein Tourtelot suggests Travis is a “pedifile” (sic), and Travis notes that he’s begun his complaint to the California Bar.

Perhaps the best part of all this is what happens if you Google this legal eagle. Travis’ blog has more googlejuice than the lawyer’s site, and now BoingBoing has picked up the story, so it’s really only going to get worse.

HI-larious.

Update: Travis tells me there will be more updates over the weekend, so stay tuned.

The last bit is funny enough you almost don’t need the rest of the article

Bullz-eye’s roundup of Bands that should Reunite includes Creed:

We’ll just go out and say it: we want Creed to get back together because…we miss having them to kick around.

Music lovers hated Creed. It didn’t matter what color your musical stripes were; if you loved music, you hated Creed. What people overlook is how incredibly rare it is for one band to rub so many people the wrong way. This actually makes them special. Look at the music scene today. Is there anyone that is universally loathed like Creed was? Not even close. Yes, there is a strong anti-emo movement taking shape, but since there are so damn many emo bands, fans are torn between hating Panic! at the Disco more than Fall Out Boy or Taking Back Sunday. Kevin Federline was just a punch line; no one cared enough to hate him. But people did care enough to hate Creed, and their decision to call it quits in 2004, frankly, has thrown the rock & roll universe out of whack. Not only did their breakup create a void at the bottom of the rock food chain, it also created a void at the top. Quick, who’s the biggest band in the world? It’s a trick question: there isn’t one, and that is not a coincidence but merely the result of the rock & roll universe balancing itself out.

Like it or not, the music world needs Creed. They sell millions of records to the people who are least likely to buy music, which is good for the industry. More importantly, their existence makes every other band try a little bit harder, so they won’t be compared to Creed. And Lord, could we use a few musicians that are willing to try a little bit harder. Look at the tossers that pass for rock stars now. Pete Wentz is dating Ashlee Simpson? That’s like Robert Smith dating Taylor Dayne. James Blunt, meanwhile, will sleep with anything with a pulse. Pete Doherty is such a loser that he made the world stop caring about Kate Moss.

These guys are child’s play compared to Scott Stapp.

Stapp will perform songs about God while unapologetically drunk (or, if his recent arrest report is accurate, stoned); shoot sex tapes with Kid Rock; throw glass bottles at his wife; and start bar fights with 311. All the while he’s shirtless, holding his arms in a Christ pose, and meaning every single word of nonsense that comes out of his mouth. That, ladies and gentlemen, is a rock star acting like a rock star, and there are few rock stars who are more fun to hate than Scott Stapp and Creed. Admit it: you sort of miss them, too.

(Via TBogg.)

Fred Clark R00lz

On the Colonel Jessups of the world:

“You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. … You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall.”

The above is from the famous speech by Jack Nicholson’s character in Aaron Sorkin’s A Few Good Men. Nicholson’s Col. Jessep was a “tough” guy in the sense of “tough” conveyed by the current euphemism for torture: “tough interrogation techniques,” which is to say tough in the sense of “brutish, counterproductive and not too bright.”

It’s worth noting that “the wall” that Nicholson’s Col. Jessep was defending was Guantanamo Bay, which means the truth that Jessep can’t handle is this: Nobody needed him on that wall. Controlling that tiny slice of Cuba used to stand as the last line of defense between us and … well, between us and not controlling that tiny slice of Cuba. In any case, after decades of military service on “that wall,” we were ultimately unable to defend Guantanamo from lawlessness and tyranny because we put it there ourselves.

Emphasis added. Read the whole post.

Dept. of Disgusting Hacks

Quite some time ago, we wrote to our Senators regarding the USA scandal.

Today, we got the following from Hutchison:

Dear Mr. Heathen:

Thank you for contacting me regarding Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and the dismissal of eight U.S. Attorneys in 2006. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.

On December 7, 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice dismissed eight of the 93 U.S. Attorneys serving at that time. These federal prosecutors are political appointees, confirmed by the Senate, and serve at the behest of the president. There has been much discussion about the process and reasons behind these dismissals, but ultimately the decision is one of the president and his administration. Former President Bill Clinton demonstrated this decision-making power when he fired all 93 Attorneys in 1993. President Bush has expressed his confidence in Alberto Gonzales’ abilities, and continues to support his service as Attorney General.

I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.

Sincerely Kay Bailey Hutchison

Wow. It’s like she’s not even been paying attention. Sure, Clinton, like nearly every other incoming president, dismissed all 93 upon taking office. What he didn’t do was fire some mid-term to replace them with unqualified party hacks who promised to pursue more political cases, and to chase more cases against Democrats. He certainly did not encourage a vote-suppression program via the USAs, which is precisely what Rove, et. al., have been attempting with there phantom Democratic voter fraud cases.

But keep on circling those wagons, Kay. I’m sure Texas has plenty enough wingnuts to keep you and Cornyn in office for a while. Fortunately, I think your days of being the majority are over; rallying to the most unpopular postwar president is surely going to help, too.

Dept. of Vendor Love

We’ve been fans of Levenger for better than 15 years, so it’s nice to report they’re still cool. Five years ago, we gave Mrs Heathen (who was at that time merely Heathen Girlfriend) a nice briefcase for a college graduation present. She loved, and loves said bag, so she was sad to report last week that the bag had broken. Specifically, one of the metal D-rings on either end of the bag had worn completely through due to abrasion with the strap’s metal clip. (The other side was also warn to nearly the point of failure.)

The leather’s fine. In fact, it’s gotten a great patina over the years; it’s just that someone at Bag Makers For Levenger R Us picked a poor combination of alloys — obviously, the strap hardware is much harder than the bag hardware, and the result is eventual but unavoidable failure. Oops.

Well, we called ’em, and we knew we were going to do well when (a) they picked up after one ring and (b) it was a real person, not an ARU. We described the issue, and also our desired outcome (repair, not replacement — the bag itself is fine, and further has sentimental value). The representative quickly offered to cover any cost of repair; we’re to send them the bill.

Nice.

Bush: Still a douchebag on stem cells

Once again, Bush puts his nutbird base ahead of scientific progress:

WASHINGTON – President Bush has chosen to use his veto pen three times — twice on the stem cell issue where politics, ethics and science collide. Pushing back against the Democratic-led Congress, Bush plans to veto a bill Wednesday that would have eased restraints on federally funded embryonic stem cell research, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.

Too cool to be real?

BoingBoing reports that, back in the 80s, some record labels and bands jumped on the nascent computer bandwagon in a big and very geeky way, by putting the binary audio of a computer game on a flexi-disc record. Sufficiently geeky fans could then dub the record onto a cassette, which they’d then load into their computers (typically, Sinclairs).

Wacky.

Dept. of Odd Synchronicity

We’ve just realized that we have, for some time, enjoyed the professional output of two completely different slightly famous people named “Alex Ross.”

First, there’s the Alex Ross who writes about music for the New Yorker, and on his aforelinked blog.

Second, there’s the Eisner-winning comic book graphic literature artist Alex Ross whose work is unusual for the medium, as its typically painted.

Weird.

Mike Bloomberg Has No Filter, and It’s a Good Thing

Speaking in Mountain View, CA, “Mayor Mike” gave the Republican establishment and the Administration in particular both barrels:

[W]hen [the interviewer] asked him about a hypothetical independent candidate deciding to enter the race, Bloomberg launched into a broad critique of the Bush administration and Congress — without naming names — and a lament on the empty theatrics of the presidential debates to date.

“I think the country is in trouble,” Bloomberg said, listing the war in Iraq and America’s declining standing globally as two principal examples.

“Our reputation has been hurt very badly in the last few years,” he said. “We’ve had a go-it-alone mentality in a world where because of communications and transportation, you should be going exactly in the other direction.”

He also faulted the U.S. government’s failure to halt genocide “and protect freedom elsewhere in the world.”

In a speech later in Los Angeles, Bloomberg revisted the theme, saying partisan gridock in Washington had paralyzed government and left “our future in jeopardy.” He said the nation’s “wrong-headed course” could be changed if there is a commitment to shared values and solving problems without regard to party label.

“It all begins with independence,” he said, opening a University of Southern California conference examining ways to build consensus in a divided government. Progress, he added, “means embracing pragmatism over partisanship, ideas over ideology.”

In Mountain View, Bloomberg seemed to side with President Bush when he decried “an anti-immigration policy that is a disgrace” and called for a more open migration policy. And he dismissed the notion of deporting illegal immigrants as part of immigration reform.

“We need to recognize we’re not going to deport 12 million people already here,” he said. “Let’s get serious, we don’t have an army big enough to do that, it would be devastating to our economy, it would be the biggest mass deportation of people in the world.”

The mayor said there had been too little discussion of health care and education on the campaign trail, and later blamed journalists for not asking hard enough questions of the candidates.

In one of his harshest comments, Bloomberg dismissed creationism — the theory that the universe was created by intelligent design — mistakenly calling it “creationalism.” The remark made plain that Bloomberg has no interest in running in the Republican presidential primary, where outreach to Christian conservatives is critical.

“It’s scary in this country, it’s probably because of our bad educational system, but the percentage of people that believe in Creationalism is really scary for a country that’s going to have to compete in the world where science and medicine require a better understanding,” he said.

This is an interesting example of the bit of political set theory we saw this morning at Tom Tomorrow’s blog: In the GOP, there are sincere conservatives, bright conservatives, and conservatives who support the Administration. It’s possible to find examples of each of these categories, and some persons may belong to any two of them, but there are no conservatives who belong to all three.

More cops being assholes

Surprise, surprise, surprise. A Minnesota cop decided, on his own, that a 140-pound musician wasn’t allowed to ride his bicycle on a public street, and decided to taser him to prove his point. Heathen hope very much that said musician has the attention of several very good, very bloodthirsty personal injury lawyers at this point, because shit like this is just that: shit.

(Via BoingBoing.)

Pakistan announces it would like to remain absurd, backward

Their parliament is insisting Britain withdraw Salman Rushdie’s knighthood:

The award of a knighthood to the author Salman Rushdie justifies suicide attacks, a Pakistani government minister said today.

“This is an occasion for the 1.5 billion Muslims to look at the seriousness of this decision,” Mohammed Ijaz ul-Haq, religious affairs minister, told the Pakistani parliament in Islamabad. “The west is accusing Muslims of extremism and terrorism. If someone exploded a bomb on his body he would be right to do so unless the British government apologises and withdraws the ‘sir’ title.”

Easy math about hard tests

Via Slashdot, we find this excellent deconstruction of the bad math behind many so-called “hard” tests.

As one who took several medical licensure and specialist exams, and the Virginia bar exam, passing all, I might be inclined to pat myself on the back, but my former background as a mathematician won’t let me do that. I do remember, however, some remarks from a noted orthopedic surgeon about his own specialty exam: “It was a hellishly hard test, and went on for hours,” he said, “but I’m really glad I passed the first time I took it. Only about 35 percent who took it passed the exam.”

He was describing, with only the slightest tinge of boastfulness, the qualifying exam for specialists in orthopedic surgery. Passing the exam entitled one to join the “college” of orthopedic surgeons, and list oneself as specialist.

“Was it all multiple choice?” I asked. “And how did they grade it?” I was thinking of my own exams. “Did they count only the right answers.?”

When he said Yes to all the questions questions, I did not have the heart to tell him what I knew as a mathematical certainty–that the exam was, like most graduate medical exams, and large parts of legal licensing bar exams in most states , virtually a complete fraud.

Ouch. What the author is driving at is simple: unless there’s some penalty for guessing, “very hard” tests aren’t good measures of anything. This, as you may recall, was a key difference in scoring between the SAT and the ACT at one time (and may still be).

Life in the future

Today, we got a little amazed when we went to buy a memory card for our new phone, and spent $14.99 for a 1-gig card smaller than our pinkie nail. And then thought nothing of it.

Not that we’re not still bitter out our missing jetpacks and flying cars, though, dammit.

Bruce is, as always, completely correct

His Portrait of a Modern Terrorist as an Idiot is mandatory reading.

The recently publicized terrorist plot to blow up John F. Kennedy International Airport, like so many of the terrorist plots over the past few years, is a study in alarmism and incompetence: on the part of the terrorists, our government and the press.

Terrorism is a real threat, and one that needs to be addressed by appropriate means. But allowing ourselves to be terrorized by wannabe terrorists and unrealistic plots — and worse, allowing our essential freedoms to be lost by using them as an excuse — is wrong.

The alleged plan, to blow up JFK’s fuel tanks and a small segment of the 40-mile petroleum pipeline that supplies the airport, was ridiculous. The fuel tanks are thick-walled, making them hard to damage. The airport tanks are separated from the pipelines by cutoff valves, so even if a fire broke out at the tanks, it would not back up into the pipelines. And the pipeline couldn’t blow up in any case, since there’s no oxygen to aid combustion. Not that the terrorists ever got to the stage — or demonstrated that they could get there — where they actually obtained explosives. Or even a current map of the airport’s infrastructure.

But read what Russell Defreitas, the lead terrorist, had to say: “Anytime you hit Kennedy, it is the most hurtful thing to the United States. To hit John F. Kennedy, wow…. They love JFK — he’s like the man. If you hit that, the whole country will be in mourning. It’s like you can kill the man twice.”

If these are the terrorists we’re fighting, we’ve got a pretty incompetent enemy.

You couldn’t tell that from the press reports, though. “The devastation that would be caused had this plot succeeded is just unthinkable,” U.S. Attorney Roslynn R. Mauskopf said at a news conference, calling it “one of the most chilling plots imaginable.” Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) added, “It had the potential to be another 9/11.”

[…]

This isn’t the first time a bunch of incompetent terrorists with an infeasible plot have been painted by the media as poised to do all sorts of damage to America. In May we learned about a six-man plan to stage an attack on Fort Dix by getting in disguised as pizza deliverymen and shooting as many soldiers and Humvees as they could, then retreating without losses to fight again another day. Their plan, such as it was, went awry when they took a videotape of themselves at weapons practice to a store for duplication and transfer to DVD. The store clerk contacted the police, who in turn contacted the FBI. (Thank you to the video store clerk for not overreacting, and to the FBI agent for infiltrating the group.)

The “Miami 7,” caught last year for plotting — among other things — to blow up the Sears Tower, were another incompetent group: no weapons, no bombs, no expertise, no money and no operational skill. And don’t forget Iyman Faris, the Ohio trucker who was convicted in 2003 for the laughable plot to take out the Brooklyn Bridge with a blowtorch. At least he eventually decided that the plan was unlikely to succeed.

I don’t think these nut jobs, with their movie-plot threats, even deserve the moniker “terrorist.” But in this country, while you have to be competent to pull off a terrorist attack, you don’t have to be competent to cause terror. All you need to do is start plotting an attack and — regardless of whether or not you have a viable plan, weapons or even the faintest clue — the media will aid you in terrorizing the entire population.

[…]

So these people should be locked up … assuming they are actually guilty, that is. Despite the initial press frenzies, the actual details of the cases frequently turn out to be far less damning. Too often it’s unclear whether the defendants are actually guilty, or if the police created a crime where none existed before.

The JFK Airport plotters seem to have been egged on by an informant, a twice-convicted drug dealer. An FBI informant almost certainly pushed the Fort Dix plotters to do things they wouldn’t have ordinarily done. The Miami gang’s Sears Tower plot was suggested by an FBI undercover agent who infiltrated the group. And in 2003, it took an elaborate sting operation involving three countries to arrest an arms dealer for selling a surface-to-air missile to an ostensible Muslim extremist. Entrapment is a very real possibility in all of these cases.

The rest of them stink of exaggeration. Jose Padilla was not actually prepared to detonate a dirty bomb in the United States, despite histrionic administration claims to the contrary. Now that the trial is proceeding, the best the government can charge him with is conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim, and it seems unlikely that the charges will stick. An alleged ringleader of the U.K. liquid bombers, Rashid Rauf, had charges of terrorism dropped for lack of evidence (of the 25 arrested, only 16 were charged). And now it seems like the JFK mastermind was more talk than action, too.

Remember the “Lackawanna Six,” those terrorists from upstate New York who pleaded guilty in 2003 to “providing support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization”? They entered their plea because they were threatened with being removed from the legal system altogether. We have no idea if they were actually guilty, or of what.

[…]

I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t have all the facts in any of these cases. None of us do. So let’s have some healthy skepticism. Skepticism when we read about these terrorist masterminds who were poised to kill thousands of people and do incalculable damage. Skepticism when we’re told that their arrest proves that we need to give away our own freedoms and liberties. And skepticism that those arrested are even guilty in the first place.

There is a real threat of terrorism. And while I’m all in favor of the terrorists’ continuing incompetence, I know that some will prove more capable. We need real security that doesn’t require us to guess the tactic or the target: intelligence and investigation — the very things that caught all these terrorist wannabes — and emergency response. But the “war on terror” rhetoric is more politics than rationality. We shouldn’t let the politics of fear make us less safe.

WORD. Seriously.

More on Transhumanism

Once again, someone asks “how long before prosthetics can exceed original equipment?” It’s a valid question for Jamais Cascio, who’s just been fitted for hearing aids:

These aren’t just dumb amplifiers; they’re little digital signal processors, small enough to fit into the ear canal, and smart enough to know when to boost the input and when to leave it alone. They’re programmable, too (sadly, not by the end-user — programming requires an acoustic enclosure, not just a computer connection). And here’s where therapeutic augmentation starts to fuzz into enhancement: one of the program modes I’m considering would give me far better than normal hearing, allowing me to pick up distant conversations like I was standing right there…

I expect that, over the next decade, hearing aid technologies will have improved enough that most of the drawbacks will have been rectified, and I’ll have access to hearing capabilities better than ever before; over that same time, we may see biomedical advances that can fix deficient hearing, restoring perfectly functional natural hearing. Augmentation for therapy slides inexorably into augmentation for enhancement. Should I give up my better-than-human hearing to go back to a “natural” state?

The TSA continues to establish new, amazing levels of SUCK

How much longer are we going to put up with shit like this?

“I demanded to speak to a TSA [Transportation Security Administration] supervisor who asked me if the water in the sippy cup was ‘nursery water or other bottled water.’ I explained that the sippy cup water was filtered tap water. The sippy cup was seized as my son was pointing and crying for his cup. I asked if I could drink the water to get the cup back, and was advised that I would have to leave security and come back through with an empty cup in order to retain the cup. As I was escorted out of security by TSA and a police officer, I unscrewed the cup to drink the water, which accidentally spilled because I was so upset with the situation.

“At this point, I was detained against my will by the police officer and threatened to be arrested for endangering other passengers with the spilled 3 to 4 ounces of water. I was ordered to clean the water, so I got on my hands and knees while my son sat in his stroller with no shoes on since they were also screened and I had no time to put them back on his feet.

“I was ordered to apologize for the spilled water, and again threatened arrest. I was threatened several times with arrest while detained, and while three other police officers were called to the scene of the mother with the 19 month old. A total of four police officers and three TSA officers reported to the scene where I was being held against my will. I was also told that I should not disrespect the officer and could be arrested for this too. I apologized to the officer and she continued to detain me despite me telling her that I would miss my flight. The officer advised me that I should have thought about this before I ‘intentionally spilled the water!'”

Goatfuckers.

Tony Snow may have cancer, but he’s still a douchebag

From yesterday’s briefing:

Helen Thomas: Are there any members of the Bush family or this administration in this war?

Tony Snow: Yes, the President. The President is in the war every day.

Thomas: Come on. That isn’t my question.

Snow: If you ask any President who is a Commander-in-Chief —

Thomas: On the front lines —

Snow: The President.

What a jackoff. Via TPM.

Dept. of Old Things

Via MSNBC, but widely linked:

BOSTON — A 50-ton bowhead whale caught off the Alaskan coast last month had a weapon fragment embedded in its neck that showed it survived a similar hunt — more than a century ago.

Embedded deep under its blubber was a 3-1/2 inch arrow-shaped projectile that has given researchers insight into the whale’s age, estimated between 115 and 130 years old.

Provisionally Good News

Two years ago, we wrote of Richard Yates, the least well-known of the postwar writers, and the only one who used to be our neighbor 16 years and a lifetime ago in Tuscaloosa. His most famous work, Revolutionary Road, may now find the audience it’s always deserved, as MeFi reports it’s becoming a film helmed by Sam Mendes.

A few years ago — say, before seeing The Departed — we’d have been discouraged by the casting, since it reunites Leo with Kate as the protagonist Wheelers. We’ve mellowed, though, and the once-annoying DiCaprio has matured a bit, so we remain optimistic.

Best. Boombox. EVAR.

This inspires all sorts of awe for the sheer over-the-toppedness at work. Sure, it’s a 92-pound plywood box powered by a car battery, but it’s also got an 8-track deck, a cupholder, dual antennae, an internal FM hookup for your iPod, live cigarette lighters, and two conventional electrical outlets as well. We are not making this up. Don’t miss the video.

(From the makers of Wanky the Safety Cat.)

Curmudgeon-ism, Apple Fanboy Edition

Two bits:

  1. With Safari for Windows now available, you poor folks marooned on Windows no longer have any excuse. Pick Firefox or Safari, but for God’s sake quit using IE.

  2. Webkit development on the iPhone doesn’t mollify us. It sounds like a pretty poor way to do “real” apps, like a hypothetical replacement email client, an SSH tool, etc. We’re still pretty happy we didn’t wait.

  3. We’re really excited about Leopard, but October seems like a long time to wait.

More: Gizmodo has a long writeup on why the iPhone will be crippled by the lack of an SDK. It’s spot on.

WE LIVE

Fear not! We’re fine! The long hiatus is all about “busy” and “travel;” we had to go see some weirdo get married over the weekend, which made it hard to catch up on Saturday. Rest assured we’ve got some posty goodness coming soon. In the meantime, here’s a tiny bit of dialog from a hung-over Saturday brunch:

Mrs. N: “You know, it IS possible for things to be shitty and fantastic at the same time.”

Mr. N: “Especially if you’re a coprophile.”

Later, we’ll also write about the most over-the-top wedding we’ve attended in a long while; perhaps the finest intro to the reception can be found in the fact that, upon entering the museum where said reception was held, we were confronted by the juxtaposition of Jesus, Juleps, and Sushi.

Um, wow.

A Chinese newspaper clerk is in trouble for allowing a reference to the Tiananmen massacre in a classified ad. It wasn’t deliberate; as it happens, the clerk had never heard of the massacre, as state censorship of any reference to the event is profound and total, so the clerk had no idea what was special about “mothers of June 4.”

(Via Mike, who found it here.)