Monday, December 21, 2020

It's really not that complicated

 Patreon confirms that its lawsuit against the 72 Bears isn't complex.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff Patreon, Inc. does not oppose Defendants’ Motion to Designate Case as Not Complex, filed December 9, 2020.  The parties stipulated on October 7, 2020 that this case should not be designated as complex. 

So as I surmised at the time, the belated designation of the Patreon case as complex litigation was just a mistake by the Clerk of the Court rather than shenanigans on anyone's part. That mistake has been corrected and the only real consequence of this is the delay of what is best understood as a motion to dismiss being heard by Judge Schulman from December 16 to January 20.

The result of that hearing are not seriously in doubt, since as the Legal Legion has explained it to me, Patreon's lawyers have never grasped that California law generally does not permit two simultaneous iterations of the same proceeding in different jurisdictions. Their lawyers appear to have misunderstood the case law that permits questions of arbitrability to be heard by a court BEFORE an arbitration begins in much the same way that an arbitration award can be challenged AFTER an arbitration ends.

But, as Judge Schulman's order on the preliminary injunction has already explained, the courts are not generally permitted to, nor can they reasonably be expected to, interfere with ongoing arbitration proceedings once they have begun. So, the most likely outcome is that Judge Schulman will throw the Patreon case out for being untimely, and tell them to challenge the awards in the future if they don't like the way the arbitrations turn out.

Which they probably won't. The fact that Patreon has recently changed its terms of use to preclude arbitration rather than mandate it, and has removed its illegal forced waivers of jury trials and class actions, would appear to provide a fairly reliable guide to how Patreon thinks the arbitrations are going.



Blogger Unknown December 21, 2020 8:32 AM  

Rip and tear dear SDL, rip and tear.

Blogger FallenImmortal December 21, 2020 8:52 AM  

In case Patreon is wearing too thin to gnaw what's left down, I hear Google has sustenance for the ELoE.

Blogger Mr.Cooper Bear December 21, 2020 9:13 AM  

Rubble bouncing!

Blogger basementhomebrewer December 21, 2020 9:21 AM  

When copying legal boiler plate from one client to the next fails, it fails spectacularly.

Blogger ChewbacaTW December 21, 2020 9:33 AM  

Not sure why they probably won't challenge the arbitrations. They have continually demonstrated a lack of strategic understanding and seem to keep insisting on giving the bears standing to beat them over the head with the lloe.

Blogger VD December 21, 2020 10:08 AM  

Not sure why they probably won't challenge the arbitrations.

The lawyers will want to. It's doubtful that Patreon is going to listen to them much longer, given the way their every move has only succeeded in digging the hole deeper.

Blogger Joeplanet December 21, 2020 10:43 AM  

Patreon cannot go Tango Uniform fast enough.

Blogger Silly but True December 21, 2020 5:22 PM  

#DisneyMustPay is interesting; it will likely go to court:

Since 2012, Disney quit paying royalties on the Star Wars (and Aliens, et. al.) novels it absorbed when Disney bought LFL and 20th Century Fox.

It does include stuff like Star Wars EU novels. But more significantly, also the novellizations of the older films. Disney quit paying Alan Dean Foster for Star Wars (1976), which has sold more than a million copies, as well as Glut’s Empire Strikes Back novellization.

In response, as SFWA President, Mary Robinette Kowel threatened Disney that the SFWA would whine about it. That will teach them.

Blogger Unknown December 22, 2020 12:32 AM  

Very related.
Seems like the Polish regiment of the legal legion can start a barrage of attacks on the cabal big tech now:

Poland threatens hefty fines for social media companies that censor legal speech, users everywhere celebrate.

Social media companies that remove posts whose content is legal can be fined up to €1.8 million under a new Polish bill. Users have welcomed its introduction as an antidote to other countries’ growing censorship demands.
Any social media company that removes content or blocks accounts that do not violate Polish law can be fined under the new legislation, announced in a press conference on Thursday by Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro. The bill also creates a special Court for the Protection of Freedom of Speech within one of the district courts.

Individuals whose posts have been censored will have the right to complain to the platform in question, which has 24 hours to respond. The user then has 48 hours to petition the new court to have their content reinstated, and the court then has seven days to consider the petition.

If the court finds in favor of the user and the social media platform does not restore the content or unblock the account, they will be fined up to €1.8 million by the Office of Electronic Communications. The whole process will happen online, according to Ziobro.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts