[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends View]
Saturday, November 19th, 2005
Time
Event
2:35p
GamePolitics got his law degree from the school of hard knocks. So in trying to make sense of yesterday's stunning news out of Fayette County, Alabama, GP turned to an expert.
Ted Frank (left) is an attorney as well as a resident fellow with the American Enterprise Institute. He is also the director of the AEI's Liability Project. GP readers might know him better as one of the legal brains behind tort reform blog Overlawyered.com.
Without going into specifics about Jack Thompson's case, we asked him to comment in general terms about what a pro hac vice revocation might mean for an attorney's career. We also wanted to know how common - or uncommon - this type of action might be. Here's what Ted told GP:
"Pro hac vice status is usually granted on a perfunctory basis, but Alabama and a few other Southern states require attorneys to jump through some additional hoops first (usually as a means of protecting local attorneys from competition from out-of-state attorneys and, some might suggest, to hinder the practice of national defense firms).
Revocation is fairly uncommon, but that's often because the out-of-state attorney is usually on the defense side, and revocation will cause delays that are unfavorable to the plaintiff. Since the admission only applies to a single case, its revocation only affects the attorney's status in that case; however, in the case of a high-profile revocation, opposing attorneys in other cases where the attorney has pro hac vice status will try to bring the revocation to the court's attention to argue for revocation in those other cases if the attorney at all steps out of line.
Thus, pro hac vice revocation is an embarrassing blot on a career, and makes future pro hac vice revocations or denials somewhat more likely, but if the underlying offense is not major, it's not likely to have a substantial effect on an attorney's career."3:06p
Jack Thompson has a new book. Maybe you heard...
Out of Harm's Way is currently available on Amazon.com as well as other booksellers. GP can't comment on the tome's quality, since our copy hasn't yet arrived. It is pretty clear, however, that the book's early days have been plagued by bad Amazon reviews. It's possible - likely? - that many of the "reviewers" are reviewing the author, not his work. Most of the reviews have been of the one-star (out of five) variety, accompanied by negative, even nasty commentary about Thompson himself.
Out of Harm's Way has likewise been plagued with a slew of negative tags on Amazon, as well as linkage with books on gay erotica, presumably caused by mischevous back-and-forth clicking between Thompson's book and various sex manuals offered for sale by Amazon.
GP spoke with the controversial attorney about the book situation earlier in the week. At that time, Thompson blamed the bad write-ups on "pixelantes" (Thompson's term for gamers), and expressed the opinion that the reviews violated Amazon's terms of service. An exchange of e-mails that Thompson shared with GP today indicates how frustrating the situation has become for the outspoken Miami attorney.
First, there's this one from Amazon to Thompson:
"Thank you for writing to Amazon.com to bring these reviews to our attention. Please rest assured that these comments have been removed from our database and will disappear from the web site within 48 hours.
In the future, please report any review that you find inappropriate by clicking on the "report this" link.
We do exert some editorial control over our customer reviews and strive to block these kinds of reviews. Our intention is to make the customer review forum a place for constructive commentary and feedback, so reviews that fall outside these guidelines are either edited for compliance or are removed from the web site. Amazon.com does not tolerate profane or spurious customer reviews.
Again, I apologize for this situation and I'd like to thank you for taking the time to let us know. Feedback from conscientious individuals such as yourself helps us maintain the quality and integrity of our site... "
Thompson replied to Amazon as follows:
"I have found that the offending reviews are still up at your site, but I find, interestingly, that a review by someone calling himself "Bushsupporter" who gave my book, Out of Harm's Way, four stars and a favorable review, has been removed from the site. Curious.
I have just checked at approximately 1:30pm Saturday, November 19, and I find at least 33 negative reviews that violate your own rules. In fact, more of them have been posted AFTER you sent me the below email promising they would be blocked.
If these ALL of these reviews which violate your own "review rules" are not down from your Amazon.com site by 7:16 pm Sunday, November 20, then I shall have to proceed accordingly..."
<<
Previous Day
2005/11/19
[Calendar] Next
Day >>