|
« Putting the "Fan" in "Profanity" • The Rants • Skeptics' Circle #54 »
Beating Sylvia Browne About the Head and Neck With the Tack Hammer of Reality
2007.02.08 (Thu) 20:25
It seems that self-proclaimed psychic, genuinely poor guesser, and predatory cunt Sylvia Browne has been taking some blows to the head and neck lately, and it looks like it's just going to get worse.
You may have seen us linking to StopSylviaBrowne.com, a site run by the proprietor of StopKaz.com, Robert Lancaster. After thoroughly thrashing Kaz (the alleged miracle 9/11 survivor and White House "spiritual advisor" who got a rock — yes, a rock — from Jesus — yes, Jesus — during a near-death experience), Robert has more recently turned his attention to Sylvia Browne, in an attempt to show the world what a pathetic carny act she really is. One of the more visible incidents concerning Sylvia Browne lately has been her botched predictions about the Shawn Hornbeck case. In 2003, Sylvia publicly stated that the boy was dead. However — and luckily for his parents — Shawn was found, very much alive, in January of this year. Yet another strike against Sylvia's wondrous powers of prognostication (or "gnostication," in this case). Of course, this is far from the first well-documented failure by Sylvia. We ourselves have previously mentioned two such incidents on our site — her failed predictions concerning the fate of the victims of a mining accident, and her botched reading in regard to the whereabouts of a fireman killed on 9/11. But when it comes to taking Sylvia Browne down a peg or two, we're rank amateurs compared to Robert, who has constructed a site filled with documented facts that showcase Sylvia's poor guesswork, her abject failures, and her heartless, money-grubbing attitude. Frankly, we love it!
But there's always somebody who doesn't appreciate rational efforts to expose assholes like Sylvia Browne for what they really are; and in the latest developments, that somebody turns out to be Sylvia herself. Her lawyer, Cheryl L. Hodgson of the Hodgson Law Group, sent Robert a threatening letter trying to get him to take down his site. A quick perusal of the letter shows, however, that either Cheryl is a moron who is wholly ignorant of the branch of law she claims to practice, or — more likely — she is misrepresenting the law to try to scare Robert into removing his content. Basically, the argument that Cheryl has made is that using the domain name "StopSylviaBrowne.com" equates to an infringement of her client's trademark on her own name. This is utter nonsense, as anyone who has even glanced at the relevant case law knows. Here's a tidbit from the EFF that clearly shows that this complaint is crap:
While trademark law prevents you from using someone else's trademark to sell your competing products (you can't make and sell your own "Rolex" watches or name your blog "Newsweek"), it doesn't stop you from using the trademark to refer to the trademark owner or its products (offering repair services for Rolex watches or criticizing Newsweek's editorial decisions). That kind of use, known as "nominative fair use," is permitted if using the trademark is necessary to identify the products, services, or company you're talking about, and you don't use the mark to suggest the company endorses you. In general, this means you can use the company name in your review so people know which company or product you're complaining about. You can even use the trademark in a domain name (like walmartsucks.com), so long as it's clear that you're not claiming to be or speak for the company.
[Our emphasis]
Since all of the remaining complaints stem from this completely baseless and, in fact, nonsensical argument, that pretty much renders the entire letter moot. The reply from Robert's attorney sums it all up quite nicely. One of our favorite bits:
You are also referred to the recent case Fox News Network, LLC v. Penguin Group, Inc. and Franken. You will recall that not only did Fox News lose that case, but they endured some very unflattering publicity in the process.
[Our emphasis]
Yeah! Hit the bitch where it hurts — the PR machine that intravenously nourishes her bank account.
Robert's attorney also included a warning to Ms. Hodgson of the danger that she, as a lawyer, faces for pursuing a groundless case like this one.
You are also put on notice that it may be a breach of ethics for a lawyer to prosecute a case knowing that it has no footing in law and knowing that it is being used to harass the defendant. This office has in the past notified appropriate agents of the bar when a firm pressed a matter such as this.
Having participated in several smackdowns of idiot lawyers with outlandish cases before, we're big fans of letting them know what the fucking score is. The letter from Robert's attorney was a work of art, and gave us warm tinglies inside. Kudos to Robert for standing firm (we never expected anything else), and for publishing the letters. We always like a good laugh (and cheer!), especially at the expense of vile hucksters like Sylvia Browne.
In other related news, and as many of you are no doubt aware, James Randi has announced that he is altering the format of his Million Dollar Challenge (we'd already read about it, but thanks to PoolGuy and Jason for the helpful reminders). From his SWIFT announcement of January 12th:
There are two main revisions we are now making with the challenge: first, we are changing the qualifications of those who will be eligible to become applicants, and second, we are actively pursuing the prominent figures in the field, rather than simply allowing them to come to us.
REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS
As of April 1, 2007, we will require two major qualifications of all those who will be eligible. First, any applicant will be required to have a media profile. By that, we mean that there must be some media recognition — a television interview, a newspaper account, some press writeup, or a reference in a book, that provides details of the claimed abilities of the applicant.
Outstanding! It's an excellent move: no more wasting time and resources on every (Safari) Tom, Dick and Harry who makes a lame stab at claiming some fictitious abilities. But what does all this have to do with Sylvia Browne?
Rather than merely waiting for applicants to present themselves, we will regularly and officially highlight well-known persons in the field and challenge them directly by name. Those challenged will then have a six-month period during which they may respond; during that period the JREF will heavily publicize the fact that such a challenge has been issued, we will issue press releases on the matter, and we will be frequently asking that those challenged make a response. Tentatively, we will begin by formally challenging Uri Geller, James Van Praagh, Sylvia Browne, and John Edward, on April 1st.
[Our emphasis]
Awesome! Yes, we know that Randi issued a public challenge to Sylvia some five-and-a-half years ago, and although she accepted, she has yet to take the test. But now Randi will be getting more aggressive about her utter failure to submit to testing, and we think that's a wonderful idea.
But wait, there's more! Randi will also be actively pursuing the possibility of legal action when these hucksters break the law. We have confidence that the JREF won't engage in any frivolous lawsuits, so we love this idea, and we can't wait to see the tables turned on the con artists and bullshitters who regularly use legal threats to quash their critics (weren't we just talking about something like that?). The difference, of course, will be that when Randi files suit, or assists others in doing so, the legal threats will be grounded in the law. Perhaps Cheryl Hodgson should start studying up. (We really recommend a few refresher courses, Cheryl. Or you could shore up your ethics and drop Sylvia Browne as a client.)
Randi is also going to be upping his media presence:
We will henceforth be pursuing the media from a different angle, pointing out to them that we have items of general public interest and importance to offer them. We will emphasize that education should include equipping students to use critical thinking. We will make the media aware that we are also prepared to go after religious claims — if and when they can be actually examined. And, religious claims will be treated exactly as any other paranormal claims.
Again, we are fully in support of these steps, and we look forward to seeing how they play out. The bullshit artists of the world have been milking the publicity goliath for all it's worth for years — millennia, in some cases (like certain religions). Randi's got it absolutely right: it's time to fight fire with fire. Get the information out there. The public is unavoidably aware of the "psychics" and religious nutjobs, because they're everywhere, and currently, the material debunking them isn't quite as ubiquitous or accessible (to the average Cheryl). Getting Randi's direct challenges into the public eye will be a great step toward, at the very least making people wonder why their favorite sideshow freak isn't willing to take him on. Add to that some frequent press releases and the injection of some much-needed critical thought and education into the mainstream media, and the public may actually react, and start seeing these paranormal pricks for what they are.
All in all, it's been a rough time for Sylvia lately, and we have to say that it couldn't happen to a more vile bitch. We look forward to her continued humiliation, and possibly — oh, hopefully, blissfully! — to her upcoming legal woes. People like her deserve to be run out of town on a rail, and we'll be watching closely to see if she gets what she deserves.
Because honestly, Schadenfreude is so much sweeter when the bastard really, really deserves it.
[This Rant was edited to correct the Stop Sylvia Browne site links, after fuckhole vulture Boris Kreiman stole the original domain from Robert Lancaster. — The Management.]
— • —
[ Filed under: % Bullshit ]
Comments (38)
Skeptico, 2007.02.08 (Thu) 21:20 [Link] »
Phony Montana, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 06:37 [Link] »
agentx, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 07:14 [Link] »
agentx, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 07:16 [Link] »
Rockstar Ryan, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 10:05 [Link] »
SpnKick540, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 11:28 [Link] »
SpnKick540, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 11:31 [Link] »
PoolGuy, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 12:41 [Link] »
Thomas Green, 2007.02.09 (Fri) 22:49 [Link] »
TimmyAnn, 2007.02.10 (Sat) 00:05 [Link] »
The Two Percent Company, 2007.02.12 (Mon) 19:06 [Link] »
GOD777, 2007.02.13 (Tue) 21:54 [Link] »
The Two Percent Company, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 00:03 [Link] »
GOD777, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 08:21 [Link] »
xiangtao, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 15:03 [Link] »
SpnKick540, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 18:04 [Link] »
SpnKick540, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 18:06 [Link] »
Jeff from the Two Percent Company, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 18:34 [Link] »
SpnKick540, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 18:57 [Link] »
TimmyAnn, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 20:01 [Link] »
Jeff from the Two Percent Company, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 20:06 [Link] »
TimmyAnn, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 20:07 [Link] »
Jeff from the Two Percent Company, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 20:15 [Link] »
Jason Spicer, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 20:45 [Link] »
xiangtao, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 23:22 [Link] »
Jeff from the Two Percent Company, 2007.02.14 (Wed) 23:54 [Link] »
Akusai, 2007.02.15 (Thu) 03:25 [Link] »
Rockstar Ryan, 2007.02.15 (Thu) 09:46 [Link] »
xiangtao, 2007.02.15 (Thu) 13:13 [Link] »
SpnKick540, 2007.02.15 (Thu) 14:04 [Link] »
PoolGuy, 2007.02.15 (Thu) 14:20 [Link] »
John Morales, 2007.02.16 (Fri) 03:45 [Link] »
Inquisitive Raven, 2007.02.16 (Fri) 09:30 [Link] »
Bronze Dog, 2007.02.16 (Fri) 09:53 [Link] »
SpnKick540, 2007.02.16 (Fri) 10:43 [Link] »
John Morales, 2007.02.17 (Sat) 00:04 [Link] »
Fan-man, 2007.02.17 (Sat) 13:52 [Link] »
ArseBiter, 2007.11.12 (Mon) 15:03 [Link] »
— • —
|
|