Misc

Twitter’s Lawyers Are Not Fucking Around

74 Comments
Joseph C. Gratz, Lead Attorney for Twitter (is not fucking around here).

Twitter’s lawyers have responded to TWiT’s claim of trademark infringement and breach of contract, and while I’m not a lawyer it seems that the gist of their response was “what crappy law school did you graduate from because you dumbfucks don’t know shit about trademark law and contracts”.

Karin P. Beam, TWiT lawyer (black and white photo only because color would have cost her extra)

It should surprise no one that Leo Laporte allegedly sought out the most incompetent but cost-effective lawyer in Sonoma County to argue this case. We’re trying to find out how this relationship began — but we strongly believe some sort of “discount” was involved.

The PDF summary of the Motion To Dismiss is embedded below should you want to read what a “evidence-based” legal argument consists of.

What is clearly apparent is that this law firm did their fucking research. “They are even better at digging up past stuff than we are” remarked TotalDrama’s editor-in-chief during our 5-hour production meeting. Honestly we haven’t seen this much research and attention to detail since TotalDrama published the story of Leo showing his dick on the livestream.

Law offices of Durie Tangri, San Francisco, CA

We would like to acknowledge and salute the dozens of interns who were forced to consume every disgusting morsel of Leo Laporte’s horrid history, in order to gather enough evidence to bring down the greedy son of a bitch and defend this ridiculous legal claim. We have included a fictional re-enactment above. Thank you for your service.

Also thank you to the anonymous chatter in our chat room for providing the inspiration for this article. If you have any ideas for an article we encourage you to leave an anonymous comment below or submit a tip.

74 thoughts on “Twitter’s Lawyers Are Not Fucking Around”

  1. This line in the conclusion pretty much sums it up:

    “Plaintiffs’ claims fall apart under scrutiny, and no amount of alternative and inconsistent pleading can rescue the allegations.”

      » Quote comment

    Reply

    2. Also don’t forget about the part where it says they want to dismiss the case with prejudice. They want to make it abundantly clear that the door will slam in Leo’s face and that’s it, game over. 😛

        » Quote comment

      Reply

  5. Wow. Contracts is usually the first class you take as a 1L, and Leo’s attorney just got taken to school. Holy fuck. How incompetent must s/he be if they think anything presented there constitutes a contract. Any first year legal INTERN would have turned that case away. Even a pre-law undergrad would have enough sense to recognize that there was no contract there… heck, even an unemployed slob sitting on the sofa, eating cheez-its, and watching The People’s Court would know that…

    Either Leo’s lawyer is extremely incompetent or is milking TWiT for a bunch of billable hours on a case they know is impossible to win.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  7. Leo didn’t use an attorney he had the CEhO copy a filing and build it herself using help from Legalzoom, the same source that they used to trademark their company.

    After all part of his advertising deal is unlimited use of goods and services at no personal cost.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  8. Why is iOS Today the only show where Leo keeps his hands in his pockets while giving an air of showing off to a friend who’s off camera but is in on a mutual private joke… bringing Megan down most of the time despite her attempts at researching apps and making an effort. He scoffs at her as if he’s a University scholar witnessing a kindergarten soft-play session. Odd as he does this on no other shows.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

    1. Another metaphor would be that Leo does this show like he’s 6yrs old, been told to go to his cousin’s house who he dislikes, and reluctantly goes there but makes everyone know he’s unhappy about doing so and shows off a bit. So the parent in this scenario is his wife Lisa who makes him do a show that he evidently doesn’t wish to do, probably with someone he has no respect for. He seems to be able to cover up this disdain during other shows, however. Odd.

        » Quote comment

      Reply

  9. Wow, not only a “fuck you, how do you like that” response from Twitter, but also an offer of $0 settlement.

    How’s Leo going to open his golden parachute with all these tangled cords of tragedy in his canopy?

      » Quote comment

    Reply

      1. It doesn’t feel that long ago since Leo had New year’s parties where they seemed to enjoy themselves as a family.

        How sad it is to see what the new CEO did to the company and team spirit.

          » Quote comment

        Reply

          1. Creating an incredible office culture is incredibly easy!

            What a total piece of shit. It’s hilarious how idiots are often the most deluded. Why shine the spotlight on something you obviously are so INCREDIBLY bad at? She’s the worst kind of human, luckily so is Leo. Sleazy, self-centered narcissistic messes.

              » Quote comment

        2. From her website: Having joined the company in back in 2008, Lisa has greatly impacted every sector of the business. Kind of like an asteroid impacts everything.

            » Quote comment

          Reply

          1. Abby Laporte:
            From her website: Having joined the company in back in 2008, Lisa has greatly impacted every sector of the business.Kind of like an asteroid impacts everything.

            …or cancer

              » Quote comment

  10. OK, now I get why Leo is hawking those boner pills. He’s all distracted by this legal shit-storm he fucked up. Well at least his lack of getting a stiffy is just a mental thing and not a physiological problem.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  13. Leo’s much discussed Facebook account deletion for moral reasons has been reversed according to him on this week’s This Week In Tech episode 659 because Lisa Laporte didn’t like “being married to nobody” on her Facebook account.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  14. My favorite part about Lisa’s medium post is “The author has chosen not to show responses on this story.” Even on a system that’s built to facilitate thoughtful communication among people using real names and profiles, feedback/discussion is prohibited.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

    1. She just wanted to feel special, that’s the only reason she posted on Medium. No feedback necessary, she reached her goal asking soon as she strung a few meaningless words together and pressed submit.

        » Quote comment

      Reply

  15. I’m shocked at the brazenness of Laporte’s original complaint, and it’s not surprising how easy it has been for Twitter to demolish it.

    Given that the only two pieces of evidence from Twit are 1) a podcast interview and 2) a brief response by email, it is beyond belief that they are claiming they have a contract.

    As the Twitter response says, the key statement made by Williams wasn’t even made to Laporte, it was made to a listener. How can anyone expect this to be taken as a “contract”?

    This doesn’t mean they’ll win the motion to dismiss – courts sometimes like to give the little guy more leeway but that often depends upon the little guy showing that they’re acting in good faith.

    To me, there are two reasons Twitter’s case is so strong: 1) Twitter has not gone into video production – there are no “twitter shows” and 2) Laporte used Vine in 2013, 5 years ago. As the response says, point 2) means Laporte’s claim is a year beyond the limiration date, and the fact that he used the product in 2013 means he cannot claim “late discovery” of it to allow his claim to be accepted beyond the cut-off date of 4 years.

    I think Laporte’s claim shows such bad faith. But I won’t assume it’s over just yet – I just saw a court case where there was no way the plaintiff was gonna get past a preliminary hearing, but the judge allowed it on the basis that the plaintiff hadn’t expressed the original claim very well and the respondent had hammered him into the ground, not allowing him a fair chance at making his case.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  19. brought to you by TWiT llc verses Twitter:

    > Plaintiffs’ Complaint may be dismissed based on
    either the lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient facts ….

    “[t]hreadbare _recitals_ of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere _conclusory_ statements, do
    not suffice.”

    ^^that’s ever damn TWiT podcast ever made.

    Another twit in the can.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  21. How can we access documents like the one posted here? I’d love to read everything that’s been submitted.

    The motion to dismiss comes before the judge on 26 April at 09:00.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

    1. Abby Laporte:
      First that magnificent bore Andy Inhatko gets shitcanned from the Chicago Sun Times, now this.

      Captain Kangaroo goes on bullshitting so long, they end up tuning out and forgetting there’s still a show to produce. King shit at times cuts him off.

        » Quote comment

      Reply

  25. Does TWiT pay for the live stream bandwidth anymore? I know they’ve always used the free Ustreams of the world, but they also used to have their own streams, which this site always encouraged us to use because it actually cost them money. I can’t find any evidence of that on the twit site anymore.

    Also, if you go to Lisa’s twitter, you’ll see that a few people have complained about them closing the roku app and she’s just complaining that it’s too expensive.

    These people are such moochers.

    Also, Padre is on the live stream in studio… I thought he was at the vatican or something?

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  26. So much for the Twitter lawsuit.

    I suppose next up is YouTube. They do video, started around the same time and have live streaming. Leo used to love twitter, even sang its praises.

    Now he uses YouTube like a sledgehammer against anyone with a channel that he doesn’t like. Until YouTube wises up that is. Then he’ll sue them too.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  29. This is disgusting and juvenile. Why would anyone take an image of their genitals? I’ve discussed with with dozens of friends and family members and everyone without exception though it was a really dumb thing to do and not the slightest bit humorous. Is Leo and Lisa mentally ill?

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  32. Just looked at Leo’s Twitter account. He really doesn’t engage anyone on social media anymore does he. His entire timeline is auto-posts about upcoming shows.

    I’m sure he’s claimed that he’s leaving social media before, then come back, then left again. But I can’t help but feel he’s not engaging cos no one wants to talk to him.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  33. Leo Laporte
    THIS WEEK IN GOOGLE 451
    “Our thoughts and prayers” laughs ?!? “and hearts and minds, go out to our ‘friends’ at YouTube at St Bruno….”

    Is he serious?

      » Quote comment

    Reply

    1. Incredulous:
      Leo Laporte
      THIS WEEK IN GOOGLE 451
      “Our thoughts and prayers” laughs ?!? “and hearts and minds, go out to our ‘friends’ at YouTube at St Bruno….”

      Is he serious?

      Gotta make yourself relevant by inserting yourself in every event. Is that the episode he made Jeff Jarvis pee pee his pants by saying bad things about Google?

        » Quote comment

      Reply

  37. Jeeze, all booked with Trump, but we should look into these bozos Leo & Lisa!

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  40. I didn’t pay to read the full findings (although might be interesting, as there is an indication that audio is available.) but what I got out of it is: Plaintiff’s (TWIT) motion to file “under seal” is denied. Plaintiff (TWIT) motion to disqualify Twitter’s layers is denied. Defendant’s (Twitter) motion to dismiss was granted “in part with leave to amend. Not sure if any legal fight is ever over, but looks kind of wrapped up to me. I got this at the following link: https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/23493256/TWIT,_LLC_et_al_v_Twitter_Inc

      » Quote comment

    Reply

  41. Thank you for your comment. We’ve been following this case very closely, and yes, most of the claims have been thrown out. But we have held off on posting any story because the Judge has given them 20 days to re-submit their argument showing they have lost business to Twitter due to the “confusion in the marketplace” claim. The standard of proof is very high and we don’t see TWiT prevailing.

    We should have a new story posted in about 3 weeks once this formally wraps up.

      » Quote comment

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *