Siouxsie thought she would contribute here.

Siouxsie and the Bad Peeps. In order to see the Peeps in their full glory, click on the picture to enlarge the photograph.

This diorama is a hyper-realistic depiction of Siouxise’s lair. Note the GMAU on the desk, her Gareth Pugh leggings, and over-the-knee boots.  A bat, which Siouxsie saved from white-nose syndrome, flies above.   Outside the door lurk some of Siouxsie’s favorite subjects to blawg about:

• Dahms v. Cognex,  Corp. —   photograph of plaintiff in a sexy Halloween costume admissible in a sexual harassment case to show whether she had been offended by the harassing behavior
• Doe v. Starbucks — teenage barista sues Starbucks for statutory rape by shift supervisor
• United States v. Handley — man sentenced to six months in prison for possessing manga
• Comins v. VanVoorhis — a dog shooter who is being prosecuted for felony animal-abuse charges sued a blogger for writing about the shooting
• McDonald’s v. McFest — McDonalds tries to prevent a 19-year-old girl, who has a Mc surname herself, from trademarking and using the prefix Mc for her charity, which she named “McFest.”

These are edgy, wearable, stain-resistant garments.  Siouxsie’s personal favorite is the “red” outfit at 5:39 on the first video.

And it looks like Uncle Karl is jumping on the xx bandwagon. Excellent choice.

Video credit:  Luciano Burgos

Siouxsie likes to imagine that this is what Christopher Comins looks like relaxing in his garage.

Because Siouxsie has always been a dog lover (not like that, eww), and a lover of the First Amendment, she was inspired to write this post.

This is the tale of Comins v. VanVoorhis.

The defendant, Mr. VanVoorhis, publishes a WordPress.com blog called Public Intellectual.  He is being sued by Christopher Comins because of a blog post.

For those who do not know, Mr. Comins is a well-to-do Orlando developer who was caught on video acting like a douchebag — Mr. Comins shot two Siberian huskies at point-blank range, multiple times, and for no good reason.

Unbeknownst to Mr. Comins, an Irish tourist videotaped the entire incident.  The video went viral.  And the media had a field day with it.

According to reports, Mr. Comins believed the dogs were a pair of wolves poised to attack nearby cattle.  [source]  This excuse is bullshit.  For one, the woman videotaping the shooting (and standing farther away) knew that the animals were dogs (she says so at .37 on the video).  But even worse, wolves are a protected, endangered species; you can’t just shoot them whenever you feel like it.  In any event, when the shooting was done, Mr. Comins had shot the dogs a total of seven times.  Raley took four hits; Hoochie took three.  Both dogs were severely injured.  Hoochie lost an eye.  But both miraculously survived.  [source]

Below is the video that sparked worldwide outrage.  It is difficult to watch.  You can hear the videographer express her horror at what she is witnessing.

The video and the possibility that Mr. Comins might escape being charged led to intense media coverage and public outcry.  After watching the video, Mr. VanVoorhis apparently felt compelled to join in the fray.  He wrote a highly-critical and disapproving blog post, and embedded the video of incident.  The post also noted what other news reports had  — that Mr. Comins had pled “no contest” two years earlier for pointing a gun’s laser site at a twelve-year-old boy.  [source][source]

Mr. Comins is now facing two counts of third-degree felony animal-cruelty charges for his conduct.  [source]  Mr. Comins, for whatever reason, blames everyone else for his current predicament.  He is suing Chris Butler, the owner of the dogs.  And instead of accepting responsibility, he is also bullying suing Mr. VanVoorhis for defamation.

Even though mainstream media reported negatively on the shooting, and even though thousands of people organized to sign a petition to ensure that Mr. Comins would be prosecuted, Mr. Comins singled out Mr. VanVoorhis to sue for defamation.  As noted at Simple Justice, “[g]iven the scope and breadth of the attacks on Comins for his dog-shooting, only one rational explanation surfaces to explain why he picked VanVoorhis to sue for defamation.  He’s the easiest target.”  This is just how Mr. Comins rolls.  He likes to pick on children, defenseless animals, and now innocent bloggers.

The lawsuit against Mr. VanVoorhis has no merit; it was brought only to muzzle others from speaking out about the merciless dog-shooting and to punish Mr. VanVoorhis for his critical post.

And that is it why the lawsuit is a SLAPP suit of the worst kind.  For those not familiar with a SLAPP suit (or Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation):

[It] is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

The plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff’s goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate.  [source]

SLAPP suits are bad for everyone.  As the Public Participation Project states,  “[t]hese meritless lawsuits clog the courts, waste resources and contribute to a general culture of litigousness. Instead of answering speech with speech, SLAPP filers answer speech with subpoenas and spurious claims.”  [source]  And most scary, they are one of most dangerous threats to First Amendment rights:  “SLAPPs chip away at the will and ability to speak out, person by person, group by group, issue by issue.”  [source]

The lawsuit against VanVoorhis illustrates why it is so important that federal anti-SLAPP legislation be enacted.  Such legislation would help to prevent lawsuits like this and possibly provide people who are wrongfully sued with a means to recover their damages.

Conveniently, there is a federal anti-SLAPP bill currently sitting in committee in Congress.  Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) introduced this bill three months ago.  This bill, HR 4364, the “Citizen Participation Act of 2009,” would provide protection for bloggers and others against SLAPP suits.  As law professor Eric Goldman explains on his Technology & Marketing Law Blog:

[D]efendants can turn the tables on the plaintiffs, file an anti-SLAPP motion to strike the litigation, and thereby ask the court to end the lawsuit much more quickly than under traditional rules. Second, anti-SLAPP laws allow successful defendants to be awarded their legal defense costs.

Everyone should want this legislation to pass — tort reformers, bloggers, readers of blogs, democrats, republicans.  No one likes being SLAPPed.

So if you read blogs, or have a blog, let Congressman Cohen know you support his bill.  You can email him at this link.  And write your representative in Congress and tell them that this law is needed.

The federal legislation won’t be enacted in time to help Mr. VanVoorhis, but as noted at Simple Justice, “. . . the news isn’t all bad for VanVoorhis.  He’s defended by one of the most vigorous and brilliant free speech on the internet lawyers around, Marc Randazza.  And Randazza isn’t satisfied to just defend a blogger’s right to free speech and fair use.  He’s going after the dog-shooter as well.”

Stay tuned.

Bonus (and less disturbing video):  Red Hot Chili Peppers –  True Men Don’t Kill Coyotes

Photo Credit:

Aww.

Siouxsie loves rabbits.

But it looks like the Obama administration does not share this love.

The Western Watersheds Project has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for waiting too long to decide whether to grant endangered-species protection to the super-cute rare pygmy rabbit in eight Western states.

Pygmy rabbits, which weigh up to one pound and can fit in a man’s palm, have been decreasing in numbers for years in the West because of habitat loss, which reduces their ability to escape predators.

“They are the smallest rabbits in the western hemisphere,” John Marvel of Western Watersheds Project said.  ”They are the cutest small rabbit in the world.”  [Source]

Aww.

In 2007, the federal court in Boise, Idaho reversed the Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to not protect the cute bunny.

[And] [i]n January 2008, the agency concluded that protecting the rabbit “may be warranted.”

But since then, the agency has missed a 12-month deadline for making a final decision.  [Source]

Meanwhile, the world’s cutest and tiniest rabbit is getting devoured wiped out.

Endangered species protection probably is not likely for the little adorable pygmy rabbit.

And in other rabbit news, “the Obama administration has determined that the American pika, a small rabbit-like mammal, is not threatened by climate change.” [Source]  (Siouxsie understands that pikas are rodents, not lagomorphs like rabbits, but Siouxsie is taking artistic license with this one.)

Double Awww.

Environmentally-friendly scientists consider the pika to be the animal most susceptible to changes in climate; it is believed that the pika cannot handle even the smallest increases in temperature.

In an initial finding issued last April, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said that protecting the pika under the Endangered Species Act “may be warranted because of the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range as a result of effects related to global climate change.”  [Source]

But after a full study, the Fish and Wildlife Service decided that the pika is probably tough enough to deal with global warming.

Siouxsie hopes so, but is not too optimistic after reading the not-so-certain statements of John Isanhart, a biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service:

while lower-elevation pikas might disappear as the West warms, enough pikas at higher elevations across the West should survive to keep the species from going extinct.

***

“It’s pretty difficult to look into a crystal ball to look where a species is going to be in the next 40 years[.]“

Good luck to the little pika and pygmy rabbit!  Sounds like you will need it.

ohn Isanhart, a biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service, said Friday that while lower-elevation pikas might disappear as the West warms, enough pikas at higher elevations across the West should survive to keep the species from going extinct.Officials said they expect most pikas in the Rocky Mountains and along the West Coast will survive in warmer conditions, while in the Great Basin around Nevada, which has already seen some the disappearance of some local populations, pikas face a tougher struggle.

// &lt;a href=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/click%3Bh=v8/393c/3/0/%2a/s%3B220929279%3B0-0%3B0%3B33245946%3B4307-300/250%3B34868568/34886423/1%3Bu%3Do_2a_5bCS_5dv1_7c259BBDE70514B764_2d40000157E0316A1D_5bCE_5d%3B%7Eokv%3D%3Bdir%3Dwiresnode%3Bdir%3Dnation%3Bdir%3Dwires%3Bheavy%3Dy%3Borbit%3Dy%3Bpos%3Dinline_bb%3Bdel%3Diframe%3Brs%3Dj10057%3Brs%3Dj10128%3Brs%3Dj10275%3B%7Eaopt%3D6/1/ff/1%3B%7Esscs%3D%3fhttp://clk.atdmt.com/INV/go/193803914/direct/01/3258442″ target=”_blank”><img src=”http://view.atdmt.com/INV/view/193803914/direct/01/3258442″/><img border=”0″ src=”http://view.atdmt.com/INV/view/193803914/direct/01/3258442″ /> //
if ( show_doubleclick_ad && ( adTemplate & INLINE_ARTICLE_AD ) == INLINE_ARTICLE_AD && inlineAdGraf )
{
document.write(‘

‘) ;
}
// ]]>

zombies in jail.  The very same subject

matter as the 8th Circuit’s opinion.

Siouxsie has a warm place in her heart for the undead.  Apparently, the Eighth Circuit feels the same way.

Earlier this week, the Eighth Circuit ruled in favor of seven zombies whom cops had arrested in Minneapolis for protesting “mindless consumerism” during the 2006 Aquatennial.  (Technically, the undead in this case were just people wearing white powder and fake blood on their faces and dark makeup around their eyes.)  [source]

The zombies’ protest included carrying bags of sound equipment and playing music from an iPod, speakers and radios.  “They also broadcasted announcements such as ‘get your brains here’ and ‘[b]rain cleanup in Aisle 5′ by speaking into the wireless phone handset.”  [source]

The police also cooked-up some charges that the zombies (by carrying radio equipment and speakers) were displaying simulated weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

The zombies were held in jail for two days.

The Court held that the actions of the police violated the zombies’ Fourth Amendment rights because the police had no probable cause to arrest the undead for disorderly conduct.  The Court reasoned that the Minnesota statute, which defines disorderly conduct, did not reach expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment.  And the Court concluded that the zombies’ conduct was a peaceful anti-consumerism protest that amounted to expressive conduct:

The plaintiffs intended to protest mindless consumerism when they dressed in zombie costumes, walked erratically, and broadcasted anti-consumerism statements over a makeshift, portable sound system. Moreover, under the surrounding circumstances, the likelihood was great that the plaintiffs’ artistic and symbolic message would be understood by those who viewed the protest.  [source]

The Eighth Circuit further held that the police did not have qualified immunity to protect them from civil damages arising out of their unconstitutional actions. The Court explained that the police should have known that there was no probable cause to arrest the zombies.  The Court noted that this was especially so because the Supreme Court of Minnesota previously had held that constitutionally protected speech includes “[someone] . . . protesting homosexuality by riding his horse through a crowd gathered to celebrate National Coming Out Day, shouting anti-homosexual statements, swinging a rope, and knocking over signs advertising the event.”  [source]

Siouxsie can empathize with the police officers reaction to the zombies.  In most zombie movies, police officers are quickly overpowered and devoured by zombies because they fail to comprehend the threat posed by the zombies.  The Eighth Circuit got it right though.  Fear of zombies does not give law enforcement officers probable cause to arrest.

Minneapolis cops would enjoy this game a lot.

Siouxsie has a proposed solution — For all the cops  and others that fear zombies and are looking for vengeance  – install the newly released iPhone application of Plants versus Zombies.

The Eighth Circuit opinion is at this link.

Source:  How Appealing

As of yesterday, Maryland will now recognize same-sex marriages.  As reported by the Washington Post:

Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler (D) said Wednesday that effective immediately, and until challenged in court, the state recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere and that Maryland agencies should begin affording out-of-state gay couples all the rights they have been awarded in other places.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause is ALIVE!  This is a great day for marriage equality in Maryland.

You can read the forty-five page opinion of Maryland’s Attorney General here.

The half-moon mani, also called a “reverse-French,” is where the moon of the nail, rather than the tip, is painted a different color. This was the style worn by actresses in the 1920’s. And it became mainstream in the 1930’s and 1940’s.

It has been back in style for quite some time.  Dita Von Teese is rarely spotted without it. It is supposed to be a “burlesque” look for your nails. Whatever that means.

Of course, Siouxsie decided to give it a try.

Siouxie knows her limitations though. So she went to a salon.  To her dismay, the manicurists had no clue as to what a half-moon mani was.  They thought Siouxsie was nuts.  Luckily, the salon owner’s 90-year-old grandmother was at the salon getting her hair styled (set?).  This golden girl totally knew what Siouxsie was talking about.  It turns out she was formerly credentialed as a beautician in the 1940s.  And to get her license, she had to learn how to do a half-moon mani.

So this story has a happy ending.  Siouxise got her half-moon mani (albeit probably not Dita Von Teese quality).

Siouxsie chose silver as the base and dark blue as the top color.

In an attempt to set herself apart from the crowd, Siouxsie decided to mattify her moon mani. She applied one coat of ManGlaze’s Matte-Astrophe, which ManGlaze was kind enough to send to her, to the dark blue part only.

Here is a DIY tutorial:

If you can’t get the song from the tutorial out of your head, just go with it:

Lady GaGa:  Eh, Eh (Nothing Else I Can Say)

Siouxsie thinks you should check out ThreeAsFour’s Fall 2010 collection.  It is chock full of creepy cyborg goodness.

The pieces aren’t overly conceptual; they can be worn, but they aren’t for everyone. Indeed, they are for the future…or anyone who dares wear a bodysuit that makes an American Apparel one look like some shapeless, ill-made rag only fit to be used as a squeegee for washing the car.  [Source]

The ThreeAsFour label consists of three designers, Gabriel (Gabi) Asfour, Adi Gil, and Angela (Ange) Donhauser, who come from Lebanon, Israel and Tajikistan, respectively.

photo credit fall 2010 collection: style.com; hautemacabre.com

photo credit nails:  http://www.thefrisky.com

Siouxsie blogged about this case here.

Last week, the Court dismissed the case.  As reported at this link,

Andrew Stern does not have a claim against Sony under the Americans With Disabilities Act because he failed to allege the required “nexus” between its online role-playing games and “an actual physical place,” U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson said in his opinion.

The Court also noted (as did Siouxise) that the plaintiff did not allege sufficient facts to indicate that he was an individual with a “disability” as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).

As for Sony, it is time they get some pointers on how to improve their games as well as consumer relations. There are games out there that are both massively popular and accessible.   Just look at Bioware’s Dragon Age.

Ars Technica reports that Dragon Age is the most accessible game of the year:

The main strength of the game is the number of options you have regarding your controls. This is crucial, [Mark] Barlet [the Editor in Chief of Ablegamers] says. “It is all about options. The more options you have, like re-mappable keys, mouse-only play, even mouse sensitivity settings—all of these options, along with some solid design principals like subtitles, means more gamers can play the game. Not all gamers will use them, but for those that need to use them it is good that they are there.”

“The industry is . . . becoming more open to the idea of accessible games”;  it is time for Sony to do so too.

Photo Credit:

This is a picture of a girl and her beloved hamster. If you think there may be more to their relationship, you may have just committed a thought crime.

Last week, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa imposed a six-month prison sentence on a comic book collector who pled guilty to possessing seven manga-style comics imported from Japan that contained illustrations of child sex and bestiality.

This case is a victory for cartoon images of Japanese children everywhere. But don’t be fooled; this result does absolutely nothing to protect actual children.  The only thing this prosecution accomplished was to limit our First Amendment rights.

By way of background, David Kravets reports in Wired’s Threat Level:

Christopher Handley was sentenced in Iowa on Thursday, (.pdf) almost a year after pleading guilty to charges of possessing “obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children.”

The 40-year-old was charged under the 2003 [PROTECT] Act, which outlaws cartoons, drawings, sculptures or paintings depicting minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct, and which lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” Handley was the nation’s first to be convicted under that law for possessing cartoon art, without any evidence that he also collected or viewed genuine child pornography.

Siouxsie thinks that the prosecution of Mr. Handley was unnecessary and wrongheaded, and that the underlying law is seriously flawed.

There is no dispute that the majority of Mr. Handley’s collection (which consisted of more than 1,200 manga books; hundreds of DVDs, VHS tapes, laser disks; and seven computers) did not violate any laws.  Nor is there any dispute that Mr. Handley had absolutely no child pornography in his possession.  [source]  There was no evidence that he had ever approached children or had any intent to do so, or that he had even viewed child pornography on his computer.

At issue were a few manga publications, albeit ones with very disturbing drawings depicting young manga characters being sexually abused by adult characters and engaging in bestiality.  [source]  Ick.

And had the case gone to trial, Mr. Handley could have been convicted if a jury found that the sexually explicit drawings were legally obscene.  Under the Miller test, material is legally obscene when the following criteria are met:

• Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
• Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law,
• Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. [source]

It is probably safe to assume that your average jury member in Iowa does not read manga or comics regularly (or have much familiarity with them).   And if convicted, Mr. Handley faced up to 15 years in prison.  So, it is difficult to find fault with Mr. Handley’s decision to plead guilty.

Mr. Handley’s case demonstrates why the provisions of the 2003 PROTECT Act, which outlaw “obscene” cartoons, drawings, sculptures or paintings depicting minors engaging in sex,  don’t make a lot of sense.  The prosecution of Mr. Handley for possessing nothing other than drawings of fictional characters is wrong.  It is the criminalization of a victimless thought crime.

Criminalizing the possession of drawings is absurd, especially here.  Manga characters are not actual kids.  They are cartoons for heathen’s sake.  No one would mistake these images for actual kids.   And many characters do not even have ages associated with them:

“There is explicit sex in yaoi comics,” Handley’s lawyer Eric Chase told MTV. “And the men are drawn in a very androgynous style, which has the effect of making them look really young. There’s a real taboo in Japan about showing pubic hair, so they’re all drawn without it, which also makes them look young.  [source]

For those that think that prosecutions like this one are necessary to protect actual kids, you are wrong.  This is utterly distinct from prosecuting individuals for possessing child pornography (which uses and harms actual children) or even simulated child pornography (which uses images so closely resembling actual children that it is difficult to tell the difference).

Not only does the prosecution of Mr. Handley make little sense in terms of protecting actual children, his prosecution is a worrisome attack on the First Amendment.  If you can be prosecuted for drawings because they depict sex crimes against minors (and are perceived by a prosecutor and/or jury as lacking any artistic value) then many comics, books, and films are susceptible to attack.  Though the prosecution in Mr. Handley’s case suggests that Nabokov’s Lolita would probably not be subject to prosecution under the statute, [source], it is not difficult to imagine that someone could be sentenced to prison for possessing an especially graphic and naughty manga version of the story.

Neil Gaiman in discussing Mr. Handley’s case sums up why it is so important to sometimes defend speech that you yourself might despise:

Freedom to write, freedom to read, freedom to own material that you believe is worth defending means you’re going to have to stand up for stuff you don’t believe is worth defending, even stuff you find actively distasteful, because laws are big blunt instruments that do not differentiate between what you like and what you don’t, because prosecutors are humans and bear grudges and fight for re-election[*], because one person’s obscenity is another person’s art.  [source]

This law needs to be challenged.  Siouxsie thinks a little civil disobedience might do the trick.  And so Siouxsie hopes that a group of well-known artists and writers will band together (like a group of super heroes) and craft the most filthy and dirty graphic-novel adaptations of Lolita, Romeo and Juliet,  American Beauty, and others, with the intent of violating the PROTECT Act and daring the government to go after them collectively.  Proceeds could be donated to the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund.

*Siouxsie understands that U.S. Attorneys are political appointees and not elected officials.  But his point is still valid.  Mr. Gaiman is a genius and from England.