<![CDATA[Gawker: defamer, legal]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: defamer, legal]]> http://gawker.com/tag/defamer/legal http://gawker.com/tag/defamer/legal <![CDATA[Exclusive: Kirstie Alley's Lawyers Demand That 'US Weekly' Fire Writer Who Cracked A Scientology Joke]]> Defamer just managed to get our grubby mitts on a secret copy of a strongly-worded letter that "Actress" Kirstie Alley's legal team over at Goldman & Kagon recently sent to US Weekly. In it, the firm asks that United States Weekly sever their relationship with fashionista/comedienne Danica Lo because of an innocuous Scientology joke she made at the expense of billion-year contract escape clause benifitee Nicole Kidman. The joke in question ran in the "Fashion Police" section of the mag and referred to an outfit Kidman wore to the Australian premiere of The Golden Compass, which the tony Miss Lo described as being "specifically designed [to repel] Scientologists." Um, zing? The legal letter and offending picture follow after the jump.

Yes, by now we've all heard and seen that Kirstie Alley "would be dead" without Scientology. We're not here to cast aspersions in her general direction because, hey, whatever floats her boat is fine by us, ya know? But with billable hours being the way they are these days, we're wondering if it was a good use of her legal eagles' (apparently unlimited) time to crank out a toothless missive for what amounted to be a throwaway one-sentence joke buried on page 87 of a glossy mag. We're going with a strongly-worded yet equally toothless response of "Not so much!"

uswkly_goldmankagon.jpg
uswkly_kidman_big.jpg

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=351242&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Pete Doherty Only Has Two Bits to Pay Off Harassing Scum]]> Finally brought to book on charges that he kicked a reporter on the way out of court the last time he was brought to book on charges, Kate Moss cocaine-impregnatron and Babyshambler Pete Doherty was ordered to pay $2,255 in various fines. The aspiring fashionistard

appeared in court wearing a black coat and clutching a black trilby hat. He told the court he could not pay the fine Wednesday because he had only 50 cents with him.

He apologized for the incident, but called [kick recipient and BBC journalist Trudi] Barber part of the 'harassing scum of press.'

Please blame the AP for currency conversion problems, but 50 cents? How does he keep himself in blow and trilby hats without carrying a fattie cash roll?

Doherty Fined for Assaulting Journalist [AP]
[Photo: Getty Images]

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=213580&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Cheerleader-Mangling Disposal Makers Vs. 'Heroes': Now With Pictures!]]>

Late yesterday, when we noted corporate garbage disposal behemoth Emerson Electric Co. lawsuit against NBC over Heroes' unauthorized, potentially defaming depiction of one their fine waste-elimination products, we weren't able to hunt down pictures of the disputed scene. But we've finally obtained screen captures of the grisly, brand-besmirching images, which we've helpfully assembled into a collage demonstrating the network's clear attempt to portray the featured InSinkErator™ device as a looming, cheerleader-mangling black hole from which no teenage extremity could possibly escape unflayed. NBC still maintains that Emerson's claims are without merit, but in the interest of insulating themselves from further frivolous lawsuits, plan to remove a controversial scene from the show's fourth episode, where the rapid-healing character further demonstrates her invulnerability to kitchen appliance injuries by placing her bare foot in a whirring Sunbeam blender.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=205559&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[NBC Sued For Not Spotighting Garbage Disposal Non-Extremity-Mangling Features]]> insinkerator.jpgNBC is currently living every legal clearance department's nightmare, as a perfectly innocuous scene from the pilot episode of new drama Heroes, in which the series' indestructible cheerleader character demonstrates her rapid-healing abilities by jamming her hand into an InSinkErator™ brand garbage disposal, has resulted in a lawsuit by the manufacturer seeking to prevent the network from re-airing that show:

The filing comes complete with color printouts that show a re-creation of a woman putting her hand in the disposal and pulling it out mangled and bloody. The suit says the scene suggests that the Emerson In-Sink-Erator "will cause debilitating and severe injuries, including the loss of fingers, in the event consumers were to accidentally insert their hand into one."

The suit also says the scene "casts the disposer in an unsavory light, irreparably tarnishing the product."

"It's a trademark thing," said Dan Callahan, a spokesman for Emerson, adding that the issue is not the damage that a disposal might do.

Today's NY Post reported that NBC has already altered the disputed scene (just because they felt like it, not because they're admitting any wrongdoing), but it's unclear how they changed the footage. We imagine it would be small matter to tailor any additional edits to appease the complaintant; today's digital editing technology should make it easy for the network to delete the frames in which the cheerleaders' fingers magically restore themselves to their uninjured state and insert a promotional voiceover stating, "When an InSinkErator™ disposal's stainless-steel, triple-blade mechanism mangles your fingers, they stay mangled."

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=205369&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Redstone Vs. Cruise: Tom's Scary Hollywood Lawyer Will Not Sue!]]> Moments after grumpy, 168-year-old Viacom mogul Sumner Redstone fired his now-infamous "That Tom Cruise Character Is Far Too Nuts To Ever Work For My Company" Shot Heard 'Round The World across the pages of the Wall Street Journal, chatter almost instantaneously commenced that the notoriously thin-skinned Cruise would dispatch his legal strongman, Scary Hollywood Lawyer Bertram "Bert" Fields, to devour Redstone's children. But rather than paralyze his quarry with a quick dose of poison, unhinge his jaw, and slowly swallow his retaliatory prey down until the clearly discernible shape of Shari Redstone bulged from his grotesquely distended belly, Fields instead announced that Cruise has "no intent" to call in a hit, telling The Hollywood Reporter, ESQ:

"We have no intent to sue Sumner Redstone over his pompous and inane statements about Tom Cruise's conduct as a reason for not re-signing him," Fields said by phone from his vacation home in France when asked whether a claim for defamation or other causes of action was in the works. "This is not something that will be solved in some court proceeding." [...]
"What's he talking about?" Fields said of Redstone. "Tom jumped up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch because he's wildly in love with Katie Holmes. He spoke out that people, especially children, shouldn't use mind-altering drugs. To say that's conduct that's unacceptable to Mr. Redstone? In the history of the film business, this will be remembered as the self-destruction of a movie mogul — he's either lost it all or he's getting very bad advice."

Fields, of course, is nothing if not a pragmatist willing to work both sides of an issue, and we imagine that now his trip to France has become a working vacation, he's drafting an ever-so-slightly altered version of his statement, just in case Redstone wants to retain him: "Tom jumped up and down on Oprah Winfrey's couch because he's wildly pretending to be in love with Katie Holmes. He spoke out that sick people, especially children, shouldn't use mind-altering quality-of-life-improving drugs. To say that's Such conduct that's is unacceptable to Mr. Redstone?. In the history of the film business, this will be remembered as the self-destruction of a movie mogul star — he's either lost it all or he's getting very bad advice from his Scientology handlers."

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=196418&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Trade Round-Up: Hugh Jackman Takes His Relationship To The Next Level]]> · Please don't read anything untoward into the phrase "expand their relationship" or jump to conclusions about what kind of "modestly budgeted films with local talent" that Hugh Jackman and his partner might make. You're better than that, we know you are. [Variety]
· Bacon Plots His Revenge: You either want to read about that, or you don't. [THR]
· An upfront standoff ends as ABC drops its demand that advertisers pay for viewers who watch their shows on DVRs, but the net reserves the right to later extort ad buyers over potential viewers who intend to watch a show but never get around to it. [Variety]
· Cybill Shepherd will dabble in some girl-girl action as a member of the cast of The L Word, playing a married mother who begins to question her sexuality when surrounded by incredibly hot lesbians. [THR]
· THR launches The Hollywood Reporter ESQ, a trade paper for the people in the industry who write the contracts and lovingly sign cease and desist letters. Don't miss the first issue's centerfold spread, featuring entertainment law legend Bert Fields splayed on a bearskin rug before a cozy fire, his natural state covered by nothing but one of his books on Shakespeare. A small book. [THR]

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=178798&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Lindsay Lohan's Innermost Thoughts May Hit Black Market]]> Other Scary Hollywood Lawyer (and recent Defamer penpal) Marty Singer has fired a warning shot across the bow of The Smoking Gun, trying to head off a potentially embarrassing situation for an unnamed client who was a little careless with her diary. An excerpt from the legal letter:

Our firm represents a celebrity whose date planner/diary/personal journal was stolen. A police report has been filed and the police are currently investigating this matter. I am putting you on notice that if you publish any information from this stolen date planner/diary/personal journal, you will be exposed to substantial liability for copyright infringement and violation of right of privacy, Furthermore, if any monies are paid for the purchase of information that is contained in this date planner/diary/personal journal, you will be engaged in the purchase of stolen property.

As TSG helpfully points out, the tragic heroine of the Curious Case of the Purloined DayRunner is likely Lindsay Lohan; according to the NY Daily News' Ben Widdicombe (who's cruelly withholding his copy of the pages), Lohan scribbled song ideas as well as notes about Jared Leto and Hollywood man-whore-about-town Adam Levine in the diary (imagined sample entry: 1/23/06: Dear Hello Kitty: Jared is such a hottie!!! but I think I want to hook up with Adam to make him sooo jealous! Possible song title: What Jared Does 2 Me I Will Do 2 Adam 4ever), which was returned to her with pages missing. Perhaps everyone would have been better served if the lawyers hadn't made so much noise about the journal's existence, which probably would've been indistinguishable from that of any boy-crazy 11-year-old obsessed with reruns of My So-Called Life and Maroon 5's power ballads.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=151604&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Tom Cruise Threatens To Sue England Over South Park Episode]]> southparkcruise.jpgPillar of British tabloid journalistic integrity The Sun reports that the infamous "Trapped in the Closet" episode of South Park, in which Tom Cruise is not so subtly outed as being gay (the entire episode is available courtesy Scientomogy, but just to give those who missed it some reference point, a subtler maneuver would have been to write the word "HOMO" on Cruise's forehead in pink spray paint, accompanied by a giant, downward pointing arrow running down his face and torso), has been pulled from its UK airing schedule, with whispers that it was Cruise himself who's to blame:

NERVOUS TV bosses have axed an episode of South Park which OUTS a fictional Tom Cruise character as gay because they are scared the real actor will SUE.


The wacky cartoon shows Hollywood star Cruise refusing to come out of a closet in a reference to rumours about his sexuality

It was shown in America last year but Cruise, 43, is believed to have threatened legal action if it is shown again.

So it will not be screened on the Paramount channel on Friday as planned. An insider said: Tom is famously very litigious and will go to great lengths to protect his reputation.

It would be an impressive maneuver if Cruise's ferocious legal team were capable of censoring the episode in looser lipped though litigation friendly England, when they couldn't manage to accomplish the same on our shores. Should UK broadcasters choose to air it, however, rest assured that scary Cruise lawyer Bert Fields is up to the challenge. We imagine his legal interns are frantically powdering his horse-hair poofy wigs as we speak.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=149782&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Should Tom Cruise Sue 'South Park'?]]> cruise-sprayed-s.jpgFindLaw columnist Julie Hilden asks the Tom Cruise Legal Question That Dares Not Speak Its Name, using the occasion of the recent South Park episode in which an animated, fictional Cruise quite literally finds himself "Trapped in the Closet" to wonder if the actor could (or even should) sue over the show's thinly veiled (OK, completely transparent) questions about his sexuality. Hilden raises this fascinating parallel argument about whether being accused of being gay should even be considered defamatory:

Imagine a white person in the Jim Crow South suing to counter rumors that he was hiding African-American ancestry, and the problem with such a claim becomes plain: The purpose of the claim is to restore the plaintiff to a prior, undeserved position of societal privilege, so he can avoid the maltreatment, racism — and if he is a racist himself, the shame — that he would otherwise suffer. The claim itself, then, rests on a malicious societal hierarchy.


The same is arguably true of a claim by a straight person that he has been falsely labeled as gay: Such a claim takes advantage of the courts so that one person can escape bias that others unfairly suffer.

It also caters to societal bias by saying, in effect, "Stop thinking less of me; I'm not really gay." But imagine, again, the parallel claim: "Stop thinking less of me, I'm not really African-American."

Even if someone decided to take this argument beyond the theoretical and accused Cruise of being African-American just to see if he'd sue (hey, South Park, want more free publicity?), we doubt they'd ever see a legal threat. After all, Cruise pals Will Smith and Jamie Foxx are doing pretty well for themselves, but the idea that he could wind up playing "Hotel Desk Clerk" like Eyes Wide Shut co-star Alan Cumming instead of the butch protagonist of the Mission:Impossible franchise keeps Scary Hollywood Lawyer Bert Fields number one on his speed dial.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=141687&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Defamer Legal Dept. Brittany Murphy's Lawyer Speaks]]> brittany-ashton.jpgWhen we wrote about Brittany Murphy's surprise separation from ICM and Brillstein-Grey last week, we noted that her "people" had been reduced to a publicist. As it turns out, Murphy's legal team, headed by Hollywood's Other Scary Lawyer, Martin Singer, was loyal to the end. We've received a very long, none-too-pleased letter (funny how that works when you bill by the hour) denying that Murphy is "Jordache Junky," the star of a Ted Casablanca blind item and our readers' most-guessed actress in our Blind Item Guessing Game, and that Murphy was dumped by ICM and Brillstein-Grey.

To our knowledge, we've never stated that Murphy either used heroin or had sexual relations at a Hollywood party, which would be illegal and tacky, respectively, but we apologize for any confusion on this count. Let the record stand corrected: Murphy's reps state unequivocally that she's not Jordache Junky, does not use heroin, and did not have sex at a bar mitzvah. (They meant "Hollywood bash," as per the Casablanca item, but we're uniters, not dividers.)

As to the dumper/dumpee situation, these things are almost intrinsically he-said/she-said affairs. Can anyone but the parties involved know the "true facts" about who threw the first piece of dinnerware, or who locked whom out of the house? (We're speaking metaphorically, of course, and not implying any actual damage to china and/or drama with deadbolts.) However, Team Murphy's position is clear and unwavering: the actress cut loose both her agency and management company. There you have it.

Also, while we're correcting the record, we have to admit that we really liked Uptown Girls, in which Murphy more than held her own with the hammy, scene-stealing Dakota Fanning.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=138686&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Jude's Lawyers Not Interested In Penis Debate]]> law-package-s.jpgThe Gawker Media Legal Department (comprised entirely of an intern who bought an LSAT prep book but never took the exam) informs us that Jude Law's lawyers are not interested in fostering the scintillating debate about the actor's endowment. We've removed the offending images and replaced them with the one you see in this post, harkening us all back to a time when we were debating whether or not his member was perhaps too impressive, not a possible disappointment. God, it looked like he could fit two nannies onto that thing! Sigh. Those were the days.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=118262&view=rss&microfeed=true