Join CFIF Corporate Counsel and Senior Vice President Renee Giachino today from 4:00 p.m. CDT to 6:00…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
This Week's "Your Turn" Radio Lineup

Join CFIF Corporate Counsel and Senior Vice President Renee Giachino today from 4:00 p.m. CDT to 6:00 p.m. CDT (that’s 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. EDT) on Northwest Florida’s 1330 AM/99.1FM WEBY, as she hosts her radio show, “Your Turn: Meeting Nonsense with Commonsense.” Today’s guest lineup includes:

 

4:00 CDT/5:00 pm EDT:  Kay S. Hymowitz, William E. Simon Fellow at the Manhattan Institute - An Epidemic of Loneliness;

4:15 CDT/5:15 pm EDT:  Ross Marchand, Director of Policy for Taxpayers Protection Alliance - Unwarranted Carcinogenic Classifications and How the US Government is About to Drive Up the Cost of Videogames;

4:30 CDT/5:30 pm EDT:  Tom Schatz, President of Citizens Against Government Waste - 2019 Congressional Pig Book;

4:45 CDT/5:45 pm EDT:  Marlo Lewis…[more]

June 17, 2019 • 12:48 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Jester’s Courtroom
From One Figure to Nine Figures
Wednesday, February 13 2019

An app developer is suing Kim Kardashian, seeking a nine figure resolution, after claiming the reality star pushed him out of a deal for animated emojis and GIFs of the Kardsashian clan.

David Liebensohn is suing Kardashian for at least $100 million for breach of contract and fraud. According to news reports, Liebensohn and his business partners were contacted by Kardashian to develop animated emojis of Kardashian, called "Kimojis." Liebensohn claims Kardashian agreed to give him and his partners a 60 percent cut, but that she insisted on filing the trademark paperwork for "Kimoji." Shortly after filing for the trademark, Kardashian backed out of the deal, claiming one of Liebensohn's partners had shared some of her personal information. Liebensohn says Kardashian knew about the alleged sharing of the personal information before they struck the deal and that she later simply used it as an excuse to back out.

Kardashian's lawyer, Marty Singer, told news organizations that the "lawsuit filed against Kim Kardashian is ridiculous and absurd. The parties entered into a binding settlement agreement in 2014 in which Kim gave up multi-million dollar claims against Mr. Liebensohn and his partners. Mr. Liebensohn waited more than 4 years to claim the agreement wasn't binding on him. Kim commenced arbitration in December 2018, and after Mr. Liebensohn was unsuccessful in stopping the arbitration he filed this meritless lawsuit. We feel confident we will get the case dismissed."

Source: tmz.com

May I Have This Dance?
Thursday, February 07 2019

The mother of a boy affectionately known as "orange shirt kid" is suing Epic Games, the makers of the popular video game "Fortnite," for including her son’s awkward "orange justice" dance in the game.

According to news reports, the orange shirt kid submitted the dance to Epic Games as part of a dance contest called BoogieDown. After he did not win, Fortnite players convinced Epic Games to include the dance. Now, his mom is suing, even though the rules for the dance contest made it clear that all submissions could be used and that no one would be paid for use of a selected dance. Epic further contends the dance was also never sold, but instead given away as part of the free battle pass.

In the lawsuit, the boy’s mother, Rachel McCumbers, says that orange shirt kid exploded in popularity in or around early 2018 after he made a video of himself performing his dance called "the Random." The lawsuit further claims the dance is no longer called "the Random," but "Orange Justice." McCumbers is seeking unspecified damages.

Source: Variety.com

Louis Pooey
Wednesday, January 30 2019

There’s a fight going on over purses.

Toy maker MGA Entertainment Inc. is suing Louis Vuitton, challenging the luxury brand’s claim of trademark infringement.

MGA is the maker of Poopsie Pooey Puitton, a slime-kit housed in a poop-shaped carrying case decorated with pastel-colored symbols that are reminiscent of the monogram pattern on some Louis Vuitton bags. According to news reports, MGA says its product is protected as a parody "designed to mock, criticize, and make fun of that wealth and celebrity" associated with Louis Vuitton products.

"The use of the Pooey name and Pooey product in association with a product line of 'magical unicorn poop' is intended to criticize or comment upon the rich and famous, the Louis Vuitton name, the LV marks, and on their conspicuous consumption," the lawsuit said.

The company said it filed the lawsuit to “preemptively shut down any potential claims of trademark infringement that Louis Vuitton might lodge against it and/or any of the retailers stocking its popular toy,” adding that “no reasonable consumer” would mistake Pooey Puitton, which is made of plastic and retails for about $59.99, for Louis Vuitton’s handbags.

MGA is seeking a court declaration that Pooey Puitton does not infringe Louis Vuitton's intellectual property rights and is protected parody and fair use.

Source: bizjournals.com

Not So Instant Replay
Wednesday, January 23 2019

An attorney has filed a lawsuit against the NFL on behalf of New Orleans Saints' season-ticket holders following a missed call in last week's NFC title game.

Attorney Frank D'Amico, Jr., is demanding that the NFL invoke Rule 17, Section 2, Article 1 in the NFL Rule Rulebook that he says "could, in the right circumstances, allow the commissioner to take extreme action in the face of a grossly unfair result." The complaint stems from what many are calling an obvious missed pass interference call in the final minutes of the fourth quarter. The Saints had to settle for a field goal, resulting in a tie and overtime; ultimately, the Saints lost the game 26-23.

According to the lawsuit, D'Amico claims NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has the power to reverse the outcome of the game and have the teams replay the finish of the contest from the point of the blatant missed pass inference call. "The petition filed by our office was not a petition for damages, but rather a petition for a Writ of Mandamus which seeks equitable relief and NOT monetary damages," D'Amico's firm's Facebook page notes.

Source: cbssports.com

An Open Book
Thursday, January 17 2019

A judge has thrown out a lawsuit filed by Christian activists who claimed Houston Library’s Drag Queen Story Hour violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause.

Drag Queen Story Hour, a non-profit program that started in San Francisco several years ago and has grown to other cities, invites drag queens to visit libraries and bookstores to read to children whose parents bring them there to participate. The group Christ Followers that is opposed to the story hour filed the federal lawsuit last October, alleging that Houston’s hosting of the event promotes an “ideology [that] is immoral, obscene and subversive to human flourishing and that the LGBTQ ideology is inseparably linked to the religion of Secular Humanism.” The group further argued that Drag Queen Story Hour should not be hosted at Houston libraries if Christian events are not allowed to be hosted there.

Recently, U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal dismissed the case on the grounds the plaintiffs failed to state a viable claim. In her decision, Rosenthal rejected the idea that secular humanism is a religion and noted that drag queens had not discussed it at any events. Moreover, she said the plaintiffs could not prove they had been in any way damaged by the events because “they purposefully avoided ‘Drag Queen Storytime’ because of its alleged immorality and potential to harm their children. Instead of witnessing the event, the plaintiffs ‘researched [it] online.’”

According to news reports, one of the plaintiffs, Chris Sevier, has filed a lawsuit in Louisiana for the same reason, and previously filed lawsuits in several states trying to marry his laptop, in misguided protest against the legalization of gay marriage. The plaintiffs have indicated they plan to appeal this decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Source: pride.com



Question of the Week   
Prior to 2016, what was the last Presidential election year in which the candidate who won had never before held elected public office?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"President Trump's detractors are trying to play down the significance of the US-Mexico immigration deal, saying it is largely comprised of actions that Mexico had already agreed to many months ago.Nice try. If Mexico had truly agreed to implement many of these measures in December, then why had they not been implemented six months later? As even Mexican officials acknowledge, it was Trump's threat…[more]
 
 
—Marc Thiessen, American Enterprise Institute Fellow
— Marc Thiessen, American Enterprise Institute Fellow
 
Liberty Poll   

Should the 2020 U.S. Census add a multi-part question regarding U.S. citizenship, including specifically whether the respondent is or is not a U.S. citizen?