Jay Wolman’s Techdirt Profile

wolmanj

About Jay Wolman

Jay Marshall Wolman has served as an advocate or neutral in hundreds of contested matters, appearing before state and federal courts and agencies in Connecticut, Massachusetts and throughout the United States. His experience includes commercial disputes, consumer class actions, and personal injury, including products liability. As a civil litigator, a substantial portion of Attorney Wolman's practice has included representation of employers and employees in workplace matters, including discrimination on the bases of race, sex, pregnancy and disability, wage and hour disputes, occupational safety and health, wrongful termination, as well as review and negotiation of severance agreements and covenants not to compete.
Attorney Wolman was appointed to serve as Social Media Vice Chair for the Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Committee, as well as the Chair of the Technology Subcommittee of the Automobile Law Committee, both of the American Bar Association Section on Tort, Trial and Insurance Practice. He served as Technology Chair of the Connecticut Bar Association Young Lawyers Section and Co-Chair of the CBA Litigation Section Communications Committee. He previously served as Vice Chair of the Dispute Resolution Committee of the ABA Young Lawyers' Division and the Vice Chair of the ADR Committee of the DC Bar’s Litigation Section. He is also a member of the ABA Section on Labor & Employment Law.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaywolman


Jay Wolman’s Comments comment rss

  • Feb 23rd, 2017 @ 12:51pm

    Another First Amendment Victory

    on Another Free Speech Win In Libel Lawsuit Disguised As A Trademark Complaint
    This case shows why we have continued to press for the adoption of nationwide Anti-SLAPP legislation. As fun as it is to throw around words like "dépeçage", not every case involves California plaintiffs who claim harm under the law of California. It's nice that California does a good job protecting First Amendment rights; the rest of the country should follow suit so it doesn't require a Marc Randazza or other First Amendment attorney to litigate for years. If we're interested in opening up the libel laws, we should open them up for the limited purpose of enacting a nationwide Anti-SLAPP law.
  • Mar 5th, 2015 @ 11:38am

    (untitled comment)

    on Connecticut Town Takes Down Painting Including Image Of Mother Teresa Over Bogus Copyright Claim
    I have taken only a cursory look at this, but I think you've neglected a second level copyright issue.
    Unless the artist saw Mother Teresa live, he copied her image from some other fixed medium, be it a photograph or video. This is thus akin to the Shepard Fairey "Hope" issue, where Mr. Fairey's work may have infringed on the copyright of an AP photo (http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/shephard-fairey-is-fined-and-sentenced-to-probation-in -hope-poster-case/?_r=0) .
    Here, the artist's depiction is likely a derivative work; the only questions are whether the original work was protected by copyright (and whether those asserting it are the copyright holders) or whether the derivative work is permissible through fair use or another defense.

    People use copyright to restrict undesired content regularly (e.g. DMCA takedown requests for revenge porn posting of nude selfies). This might be an extension of that use.
  • Sep 11th, 2014 @ 9:31am

    (untitled comment)

    on Cop To Cameraman: 'If You're Invoking Your Rights, You Must Be Doing Something Wrong'
    The correct response is: If I invoke my rights, it means you must be doing something wrong.
  • Jul 10th, 2014 @ 8:42pm

    Thank you

    on Ridiculous Lawsuit Filed (And Now Dropped) Against Tor Project Gets Even More Ridiculous: Now Involving Hate Group Leader
    First, thank you for the shout-out.

    I'm not sure on the chronology, but it appears he's trying to explain away the service on Bristow in the ATL article (page 3). He admits he knows it is bogus and seems to be asserting that their joke acts to appoint Bristow as an agent for service of process.

    In the law of agency, that would be apparent authority. However, apparent authority is not a tenet of due process of which proper service is a part. Further, even if it were, actual knowledge of the alleged agent's true status and lack of actual authority would defeat any claim of apparent authority. No reasonable person with that knowledge would rely on the listing of Bristow.

    Plaintiff cannot or should not get a default judgment where the defendant has not been served. It should not survive a motion to dismiss and my bet is Texas does have mechanisms to protect a defendant's anonymity. Nor would a default judgment do any good--if you cannot identify a real or legal person, then you have a worthless piece of paper. The method to enforce an injunction is a contempt proceeding against a person you cannot find. It is a waste of effort.

    You have a revenge porn claim? Call Adam Steinbaugh. He'll put you in touch with a good attorney.
  • Jul 9th, 2014 @ 1:57pm

    Kyle Bristow (as Jay M. Wolman)

    on Clueless Lawyer Sues Tor Project Because Revenge Porn Site Made Use Of Tor
    One additional bit:
    Pinkmeth lists Kyle Bristow, Esq. as the attorney to whom removal requests should be directed.
    Bristow is a friend of Van Dyke and works with him in this type of matter: http://american3rdposition.com/?p=9094
    Pinkmeth obviously used Bristow's name and address for humor. Yet, when reading the complaint, Van Dyke states that Pinkmeth's office is Bristow's. He has to know this is false. Service of process will not be good and it borders on a fraud upon the court.
    Not good. Ends do not justify means.

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it