+ The spat over the Watchmen film, about which we previously wrote, has been resolved. Not at all surprising, considering the judge’s Christmas Eve ruling, in which he basically told Warner Bros. that Fox would likely be able to get an injunction against the film’s release and the parties should start talking settlement. Warner Bros. will pay Fox 8.5% of gross receipts plus $1.5 million. Based on film-industry math, Fox will probably get $37.18. (HT: WSJ Law Blog)
+ The bidding on a woman’s virginity is holding steady at $3.7 million. According to Fox News, “It’s a First Amendment issue. You can advertise goods or services that are illegal where they’re advertised but legal where they’re performed,” said Marc Randazza, an attorney specializing in first amendment law. “What’s she’s advertising is as legal as toast with the crust cut off where she is.” Stupid analogy. Randazza’s bio is here (scroll down). Too cheesy for words.
+ ABA Journal picked up on our piece last week and identified two other firms with operations in Mexico: Adorno & Yoss, and Snell & Wilmer.
Related posts:
{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }
Went to law school with Marco Randazza (his real name) – he often wore Zubazz purple tiger striped pants and appeared headed for a career of defending women who use e-commerce to sell their virginity. Somehow it all worked out for him.
Went to law school with Marco Randazza (his real name) – he often wore Zubazz purple tiger striped pants and appeared headed for a career of defending women who use e-commerce to sell their virginity. Somehow it all worked out for him.
Hey! I have NEVER worn a pair of Zubaz pants, purple or otherwise!
I guess the rest of it is true though.
Hey! I have NEVER worn a pair of Zubaz pants, purple or otherwise!
I guess the rest of it is true though.
And, for his Bio, it should be updated to read "Partner." Yes, it all worked out beautifully!
And, for his Bio, it should be updated to read "Partner." Yes, it all worked out beautifully!
Cannot affirm or deny the Zubazz pants – but he definitely had spiked hair, hung out in the cafeteria a lot and may or may not have been an elected school leader. I think that needs to be confirmed.
I don’t even know what Zubazz pants are.
Guilty on all counts except the Zubazz pants thing (again!).
Cannot affirm or deny the Zubazz pants – but he definitely had spiked hair, hung out in the cafeteria a lot and may or may not have been an elected school leader. I think that needs to be confirmed.
I don’t even know what Zubazz pants are.
Guilty on all counts except the Zubazz pants thing (again!).
In the interests of full disclosure, I should preface this by telling you that I also went to law school with Marco, and he remains a dear, dear friend. That said, I'll agree that Marco's law school fashion choices for sure won't land him on the cover of GQ.
What's interesting, though, is that rather than commenting on the social, political or legal issues raised by this woman who's selling her virginity on the internet, the focus here (in the comments and the blog) are about Marco. The effort seems to be to ridicule the person "defending" the virgin-capitalist by making fun of his pants. Hooray for enlightened debate!
Silly pants notwithstanding… it seems noteworthy that nothing in the article from Fox News indicates that Marco is representing this woman. I think he would represent her, but there's no indication that he is in fact defending her. What he actually said — all he actually said — is that the advertising she's doing is protected commercial speech under the First Amendment. He didn't advocate selling one's virginity on the internet.
As a ranking First Amendment lawyer, I think Marco would be the first to say that just because you can – legally – do or say something doesn't mean you should do it or say it. But, I'm gonna guess that Fox News didn't ask him if he thought it was a good idea. They asked about the constitutionality of what she's doing.
In case you're wondering ladies, comments like yours are the reason that people dismiss so much feminist dialog as being the sophomoric rantings of "emotional women."
"That said, I'll agree that Marco's law school fashion choices for sure won't land him on the cover of GQ. "
JUST YOU WAIT!!!!
Easy…easy. You've gotten new pants since then.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should preface this by telling you that I also went to law school with Marco, and he remains a dear, dear friend. That said, I'll agree that Marco's law school fashion choices for sure won't land him on the cover of GQ.
What's interesting, though, is that rather than commenting on the social, political or legal issues raised by this woman who's selling her virginity on the internet, the focus here (in the comments and the blog) are about Marco. The effort seems to be to ridicule the person "defending" the virgin-capitalist by making fun of his pants. Hooray for enlightened debate!
Silly pants notwithstanding… it seems noteworthy that nothing in the article from Fox News indicates that Marco is representing this woman. I think he would represent her, but there's no indication that he is in fact defending her. What he actually said — all he actually said — is that the advertising she's doing is protected commercial speech under the First Amendment. He didn't advocate selling one's virginity on the internet.
As a ranking First Amendment lawyer, I think Marco would be the first to say that just because you can – legally – do or say something doesn't mean you should do it or say it. But, I'm gonna guess that Fox News didn't ask him if he thought it was a good idea. They asked about the constitutionality of what she's doing.
In case you're wondering ladies, comments like yours are the reason that people dismiss so much feminist dialog as being the sophomoric rantings of "emotional women."
"That said, I'll agree that Marco's law school fashion choices for sure won't land him on the cover of GQ. "
JUST YOU WAIT!!!!
Easy…easy. You've gotten new pants since then.
AN INSIDE LOOK AT THE COOLEY PONZI SCHEME!!!
Cooley is the anti-christ of law schools! First, they decide who is going to be a dean or whatever of
that school based on the amount money that person donates to Cooley. If you look at their bios they were all only attorneys for a couple of years. This is because they each made some sort of major mistake while practicing. Therefore they had no choice but to leave the practice of law and go work at Cooley. This is true for a few of the professors as well!
Second, they COMMIT SERIOUS FRAUD that needs to be reported! Do you know why Cooley has the highest minority enrollment? Do you know why they let everyone in? Well, because they get extra money from the federal government for both of course!!!! They are a private institution therefore off rip they do not receive federal funds…. However, the federal government DOES give them money for each minority student and each student with a disability.
So, they herd in minority and students with below average LSAT scores. Once they are in the school they try to convince both groups to get tested for a learning disability from 'their doctors!' Ironically, these are psychiatrist on a list handed out by the school, these are the only 'psychiatrist' they will accept a learning disability diagnosis from, and they only accept cash……$900 – $2000. The doctors then give the student a note and the school a referral fee. The student brings the note to the school and is given extra time while the school gets extra money!
For every student that does not play this game the school flunks them out……..This is why the attrition rate is so high and this is the blatant ponzi scheme they have been getting away with for years!
So, please do not make the mistake of thinking that this school genuinely likes minorities….they don't! They are actually pretty racist! However what they do like about minorities is they get money for them…..
They need to be seriously investigated.
AN INSIDE LOOK AT THE COOLEY PONZI SCHEME!!!
Cooley is the anti-christ of law schools! First, they decide who is going to be a dean or whatever of
that school based on the amount money that person donates to Cooley. If you look at their bios they were all only attorneys for a couple of years. This is because they each made some sort of major mistake while practicing. Therefore they had no choice but to leave the practice of law and go work at Cooley. This is true for a few of the professors as well!
Second, they COMMIT SERIOUS FRAUD that needs to be reported! Do you know why Cooley has the highest minority enrollment? Do you know why they let everyone in? Well, because they get extra money from the federal government for both of course!!!! They are a private institution therefore off rip they do not receive federal funds…. However, the federal government DOES give them money for each minority student and each student with a disability.
So, they herd in minority and students with below average LSAT scores. Once they are in the school they try to convince both groups to get tested for a learning disability from 'their doctors!' Ironically, these are psychiatrist on a list handed out by the school, these are the only 'psychiatrist' they will accept a learning disability diagnosis from, and they only accept cash……$900 – $2000. The doctors then give the student a note and the school a referral fee. The student brings the note to the school and is given extra time while the school gets extra money!
For every student that does not play this game the school flunks them out……..This is why the attrition rate is so high and this is the blatant ponzi scheme they have been getting away with for years!
So, please do not make the mistake of thinking that this school genuinely likes minorities….they don't! They are actually pretty racist! However what they do like about minorities is they get money for them…..
They need to be seriously investigated.
I too wen to law school with Marco, and still consider him a close friend. But, I think we really need to resolve the "Zubazz purble tiger striped pants" issue. Technically, Marco is correct. I'm fairly certain his wardrobe never included a pair of purple tiger striped Zubazz pants–not exactly. What I can say, however, with full certainty, is that Marco's wardrobe might as well have included purple tiger-striped Zubazz pants, because they sure as heck would have felt at home there. As I recall, Marco did have one particulary bright dayglo-orange button-down shirt that stood out like a sore thumb. It stood out so much, in fact, that (perhaps he forgets) his campaign for student representative centered around plastering the hallowed halls of Georgetown Law with colored flyers of him wearing the article blazoned with the slogan "Succumb to the Orange Shirt" over a photoshopped picture of Monica Lewinski smoking a cigar on his lap. (Don't make me whip out a copy, Marco, because you know I've still got one.) That said, he's easily the most successful classmate any of us probably have. Well done, dude!
I too wen to law school with Marco, and still consider him a close friend. But, I think we really need to resolve the "Zubazz purble tiger striped pants" issue. Technically, Marco is correct. I'm fairly certain his wardrobe never included a pair of purple tiger striped Zubazz pants–not exactly. What I can say, however, with full certainty, is that Marco's wardrobe might as well have included purple tiger-striped Zubazz pants, because they sure as heck would have felt at home there. As I recall, Marco did have one particulary bright dayglo-orange button-down shirt that stood out like a sore thumb. It stood out so much, in fact, that (perhaps he forgets) his campaign for student representative centered around plastering the hallowed halls of Georgetown Law with colored flyers of him wearing the article blazoned with the slogan "Succumb to the Orange Shirt" over a photoshopped picture of Monica Lewinski smoking a cigar on his lap. (Don't make me whip out a copy, Marco, because you know I've still got one.) That said, he's easily the most successful classmate any of us probably have. Well done, dude!