Twitter believes Tom Mars used material from mgoblog
November 10th, 2023 at 12:53 PM ^
Did you even TRY to embed?
November 10th, 2023 at 12:56 PM ^
Not today, I’ve failed miserable a dozen times
November 10th, 2023 at 12:58 PM ^
Confession: I’ve been here 15 years and can’t post a gif.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:01 PM ^
I’m 46 and I can’t properly pronounce gif
November 10th, 2023 at 1:03 PM ^
I'm 52, what is a GIF?
November 10th, 2023 at 1:11 PM ^
You are one of those Progressive Insurance becoming your parents people. LOL.
Wait, what is LOL?
November 10th, 2023 at 1:15 PM ^
Love you lots
November 10th, 2023 at 3:10 PM ^
Lick old ladies
November 10th, 2023 at 1:22 PM ^
Lots Of Love
November 10th, 2023 at 1:36 PM ^
little old lady
</silent generation'd>
November 10th, 2023 at 1:11 PM ^
I think it's some kind of peanut butter.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:28 PM ^
I'm 61 and I purposely pronounce GIF wrong. I then ask my wife "is that how you say GIF?" And she corrects me in a stern tone. I enjoy this interaction more than she.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:45 PM ^
Married over 30 years?
This is how long married couples express their love for each other, I do shit like this to my wife all the time.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:45 PM ^
I'm also 61, worked in IT all my life, and I'm LOL about everybody posting about GIF...
November 10th, 2023 at 2:00 PM ^
Gif is pronounced like the word "gift" minus the t.
I will hear no opposing arguments.
November 10th, 2023 at 2:16 PM ^
I’m 55 and I don’t GIF a f#ck.
November 10th, 2023 at 7:11 PM ^
Then act like it and just spell out the word fuck ;)
November 10th, 2023 at 2:58 PM ^
Peanut butter.
November 10th, 2023 at 3:38 PM ^
I'm dyslexic, what is a fig?
Fig(thing) Irish? :)
November 10th, 2023 at 2:16 PM ^
Is it "gif" or "giff"?
November 10th, 2023 at 1:09 PM ^
I used to be able to post Gifs, now they never work. But I am retired from pretending to be smart and am (mostly) happier for it
November 10th, 2023 at 1:45 PM ^
Drag and drop in the comment box. That seems to work...most of the time.
November 10th, 2023 at 2:09 PM ^
Just click Source and type
<img src="gif URL">
replacing gif URL inside double quotes with the actual URL of your gif. Works every time. I'm 64 and have been called an idiot numerous times in my life.
November 10th, 2023 at 3:03 PM ^
thank you!
Edit: guh. looked good on preview, then not so good when published
November 10th, 2023 at 1:14 PM ^
To be fair, even if you were able to post a gif, if it was in a thread with more than 9 replies, you would never be able to find your post again to see if anyone liked it.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:47 PM ^
I just more or less look at my total pts at the top of the home page. If they go up I figure someone liked what I posted. I do not have the time to search around looking for which one.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:20 PM ^
My wife complains every time I fail miserably embed.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:03 PM ^
I'm 40, I'm a MAN!
i'm actually much older than forty.... but i'm still a man.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:06 PM ^
You don’t have to be a man. They have surgeries that can change that for you.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:15 PM ^
Don't sweat it. This is a place of refuge. We'll talk you through it.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:16 PM ^
But are you a grown ass man?
November 10th, 2023 at 1:31 PM ^
If over 40, I submit you're more than a man.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:42 PM ^
Super man?
November 10th, 2023 at 1:40 PM ^
I'm weirdly looking forward to yelling "I'm a man, I'm 40!"
far too many times, on my 40th birthday
November 10th, 2023 at 12:53 PM ^
There was a Reddit post about this.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:22 PM ^
It looks to me like the MGOBlogger lifted it from a B1G document and the lawyer did the same - sending the B1G words right back at 'em.
November 10th, 2023 at 12:54 PM ^
RCMB, this ain't.
November 10th, 2023 at 12:55 PM ^
I mean, it's historically been a pretty damn reputable source. As an MGoLawyer, I cannot recommend cribbing one's briefs from anywhere. But, the post was damn good.
November 10th, 2023 at 12:58 PM ^
Idk, as a lawyer I feel like quite a bit is cribbed from elsewhere. Not as much for litigation, but for contract language, I wouldn't be surprised if it's >90%. I mean, it's called "boilerplate" for a reason...
November 10th, 2023 at 1:07 PM ^
Corporate lawyer here. Not only is it not frowned upon, it can lead to malpractice not to use the exact same series of words across contracts because a deviation therefrom may impute an intended difference when none was in fact intended (i.e., trying to reach the same result but with different words). (I'm being intentionally shorthanded about this.) In transactional practice, if another law firm lifts your language, in a practical sense, it's a badge of honor more so than anything else (although attorneys will fight about who really crafted it first).
November 10th, 2023 at 1:57 PM ^
In-house contracts lawyer here. I love seeing language I know we penned show up in edits from one of the outside firms who frequently represent our customers. (Although sometimes it's because they're using language that was a concession on our part to close another deal, and we'd really rather not see it duplicated!)
November 10th, 2023 at 1:12 PM ^
Academic here. In my world, that's plagiarism. Is that not a thing in the legal profession?
November 10th, 2023 at 1:16 PM ^
Why would it be? The implications of having something like a copyright on legal work in a common law society would be terrifying.
It would basically prevent you from effectively using precedent.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:19 PM ^
The 6th Circuit did sanction a lawyer for using large chunks of a brief filed by another lawyer in an earlier case.
Ergo, I give attribution when I do that, always, after permission from the author.
The larger point remains; I can use something from another lawyer's letters or forms.
And they can use mine,
November 10th, 2023 at 1:24 PM ^
Yeah, this was my thinking--the need the properly cite if you're pulling a quote.
November 10th, 2023 at 2:36 PM ^
I am unfamiliar with the case, but this might be the distinction: A lawyer has an ethical obligation to ensure the accuracy of everything submitted to a court. Block-copying someone else's brief, including case sites, without reading them to verify the citations will get you in trouble. (Like the lawyer who had ChatGPT write his brief... he never bothered to check that AI was literally making up case citations that didn't exist. Yes, that's a real story from this year.) But, if you block-copy a brief, and verify everything in it, I see no reason you can't use it. I've been a lawyer 30 years, filed thousands of papers and briefs. If something is directly useful and says it perfectly, use it. Just... check it all first.
The lawyer's signature on the bottom of the brief isn't saying the lawyer wrote it. It's saying the lawyer is representing to the Court that the brief states the party's position and the lawyer attests to the accuracy of what's in the brief. Who knows who wrote the brief-- could be junior associates, co-counsel, etc.
November 10th, 2023 at 3:44 PM ^
That was both unbelievable because of the shocking dereliction of the ethical responsibility to, at a bare minimum, check that the citations are to real cases and verify that they say what you're representing to the court that they say—and yet very believable given the unfamiliarity that some old-school lawyers have with computer technology. He seems to have assumed it was some fancy AI version of Westlaw and not just a predictive-language model.
https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-chatgpt-courts-e1502…
November 10th, 2023 at 1:20 PM ^
No. If its a contract, the words are not expressive of the author's work or ideas -- the words are creating the terms of a going-forward relationship (or resolving a past relationship). The words are thus not just words, but are the exact terms of the relationship. If you intend the same relationship between contracts, you use the same words.
Briefs are not subject to copyright protection (I believe there is caselaw on that)--when you submit a brief publicly, it becomes public. And a brief is not meant to be the product of a lawyer's personal skills, like a professor's article; it's meant to advocate the client's position but is written by a lawyer. So a lawyer has no basis to claim plagiarism if her brief is copied in another.
November 10th, 2023 at 1:22 PM ^
LOL. Lawyers copy shit all the time.
It would be irresponsible just to take someone else’s work product and use it without checking the material to verify that it’s correct and up to date. But plagiarism isn’t really a serious concern.