News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:FunnyJunk lawyer to subpoena Twitter, Ars Technica by lmkg on Wednesday June 20, 2012 @04:10PM (#4138872)
Should/can Funny Junk fire Carreon at this point for his foolish behavior? If they do so, how much does Carreon's own cases depend on his relationship with Funny Junk, and what are the consequences? If I were FJ I would be pretty pissed, because Carreon is using FJ's case for his own personal benefit, and in so doing is dragging his client's name into a potential second shitstorm above and beyond the first one they already signed up for. I'm curious how that relationship will pan out, and what alternatives are available to each party.
Re:FunnyJunk lawyer to subpoena Twitter, Ars Technica by JackC on Wednesday June 20, 2012 @06:07PM (#4139366)
Yeah, you can (just about) always fire your lawyer. The right to have the lawyer of your choosing -- or not -- is pretty fundamental. If they're working on a contingency ("I get X% of anything we recover"), you'll have to pay them a fair hourly rate for the work they've already done.

(Incidentally, this makes it pretty tough to hold lawyers to non-compete agreements, because their clients have a right to keep working with them even if they switch firms.)

Now, whether FunnyJunk likes or doesn't like the publicity this is bringing them is a separate question. You got me on that one.

Re:FunnyJunk lawyer to subpoena Twitter, Ars Technica by alttab on Wednesday June 20, 2012 @05:41PM (#4139261)
And even more hilarious if FunkyJunk sues him for tarnishing their site's reputation by acting like an idiot on their behalf.
Re:FunnyJunk lawyer to subpoena Twitter, Ars Technica by chris_wot on Wednesday June 20, 2012 @08:42PM (#4139942)
Funny Junk has already exhibited foolish behaviour. What makes you think they aren't egging him on?