Don't watermark your legal PDFs with purple dragons in suits

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/05/dont-watermark-your-legal-pdfs-with-purple-dragons-in-suits/

by Tomte • 1 year ago

282 276 1 year ago

Also, sometimes we (developers) like to use wacky data for testing purposes. For example, I like to put Batman as a dummy user, and my QA likes to upload cat pictures when testing uploads/images.

We do it so it's obvious it's test data, and also we're lazy to think of more "real" data.

Just say some users expect real(ish) data for testing. I had a client who was totally not happy when he saw Batman and Superman in the test data.

ghssds• 1 year ago

Your client needs to remove the broom stucks in their ass. Your story reminds me of the uptight people angry about the Anubis' catgirl.

DoctorOW• 1 year ago

I give Abubis a special pass, because they sell a business oriented version without the character. The true cost of using FOSS is you don't have any say in what the developer does.

ranger_danger2• 1 year ago

Would you say the same to the judge in Dragon Lawyer's case?

cperciva• 1 year ago

For example, I like to put Batman as a dummy user

I can't remember the details, but I've heard a story multiple times about a fake-sounding name being used in testing -- I think US military payroll? -- and causing problems when a real person had that name. Can anyone here remember this?

In any case, "batman" is just about plausible enough that it could be real. I tend to use names like "Mr. Testy Testalicious" which (a) contain the string "test", and (b) are so wildly absurd that I'm confident nobody will ever collide with it.

jbverschoor2• 1 year ago

lol I read something else right there

eesmith• 1 year ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_(surname) - 'Batman is a surname of English origin. It originates from Saint Bartholomew and means "a friend or servant of Bart."'

It lists a few people, like "Daniel Batman (20 March 1981 – 26 June 2012) was an Australian sprinter." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Batman

A few DDG searches finds others with the surname Batman who are not famous enough to be on Wikipedia.

userbinator2• 1 year ago

Batman is definitely a real name... https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24911186

spiffytech• 1 year ago

I used to use Test T. Testerton until coworkers critiqued that "Test T" reminded them of male genitals.

cratermoon• 1 year ago

I have this one baked into my dummy data:

Ralf Kramden 1060 W. Addision Chicago IL 60613 United States

jszymborski• 1 year ago

I usually use Adele Dazeem as in [0]

[0] https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/adele-dazeem-idina-menz...

pluies• 1 year ago

Caterina Fake, co-founder of Flickr, famously had issues with IT systems:

  Tim: There’re so many places we could start, but in the process of doing homework for this, I found mentioned, and I wanted to do a fact check on this, of you having plane tickets automatically cancelled, and other issues related to your last name. Is that accurate? Did those things actually happen?

  Caterina Fake: This has happened to me many times, in fact. And I discovered that it was actually the systems at KLM and Northwest that would throw my ticket out, my last name being “Fake.” And I have missed flights and have spent way too many hours with customer service trying to fix this problem. Here’s another thing too, is that I was unable for the first two years of Facebook to make an account there also. And probably  all of my relatives.

https://tim.blog/2019/02/21/the-tim-ferriss-show-transcripts...

rzzzt• 1 year ago

Major Major Major from Catch-22?

lapetitejort• 1 year ago

DOGE is going to delete Jon Tester [0] from the list of historical senators

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Tester

eeiaeaa• 1 year ago

I used to use Testy Tester until one of my coworkers commented that she was acquainted with the Tester family, and there were quite a few of them in the area. These days I usually have completely separate systems for testing, but even there I use something like Zzzperson for test data.

sokoloff• 1 year ago

There was a bank that wasn’t happy with “Rich Bastard” being used as dummy data but not being replaced in the mail merge, resulting in a couple thousand of their wealthiest customers getting a mailing with the salutation “Dear Rich Bastard,”

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dear-rich-bastard/

daveslash2• 1 year ago

I learned a long time ago to be very careful with mock, dummy, or test data.... because some people will just push anything to prod, take screenshots during your demo and paste it into the official documentation... you name it.

I was giving a demo on how to set up multiple computers in a federated setup using Active Directory, ADFS, etc... I had about 5 VMs named things like Hank, Peggy, Bobby, Boomhauer, Bill, and a test user HHill, 123 Rainy Street, Arlen, TX -- someone screenshotted and took notes during the demo and now that's in some formal training somewhere material. Thankfully, it's all internal.

When I and doing dev work and I need an available port, just any port, I use 666 -- because it's never used by anything and also DOOM. I gave a sprint demo and I used 660 instead of 666 to demo that the customer can specify the port number of screen X. Someone put that in the internal and also customer facing documentation... so now my company's product is default setup on 660, even thought it's completely user-configurable. Thank God I didn't demo with 666...

mattkevan• 1 year ago

When designing, the standard practice is to use Lorem Ipsum - sort of mangled Latin that works like normal text but is very recognisable. This backfired once when I did a website for the Jesuits - the feedback they gave was that the design looks good but they were all baffled by the text and could I do something about it please.

I’d not considered that they might be the only client where everyone was fluent in Latin.

Ichthypresbyter• 1 year ago

Reminds me of the Catholic friend who once told me that he had done IT support for every Catholic religious order with a presence in the city where he lived, except two.

The Carthusians didn't use computers, and the Jesuits didn't need his help.

Cthulhu_• 1 year ago

I've seen too many stories of placeholder text ending up in production... so I better make it worthwhile and include some Lovecraft quotes [0] because everyone needs more gibbering, cyclopean, eldritch adjectives in their lives.

[0] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/H._P._Lovecraft

kevinmgranger• 1 year ago

Rust had something similar: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13871

RajT88• 1 year ago

A friend of mine uses a scraped list of heavy metal band names for QA testing how well systems deal with weird characters.

He is, himself, a weird character.

WorldMaker• 1 year ago

I'm a big fan of using Emoji for names of test/dummy users. It helps test your application and dev stack's end-to-end Unicode compliance. It is less likely to conflict with real data (so far as I'm aware we haven't yet seen children born named with emoji, though that is likely a matter of time). It is often very visibly test data that stands out. But also and maybe more important, you can have fun with it.

registeredcorn2• 1 year ago

We had a Dev environment that showed a doge meme on the auth page that had been there for like...7 years or something? "So auth. Much secure. Wow." etc.

Every other environment had standard boiler plate corporate logo + whatever product name. We kept the meme stuff in Dev just so you could be visually reminded, "Oh right, this is the crazy broken one."

Queue 7 years later, an emergency where we just had to impress a new client with a demo of how the product would work. And of course, the only thing that was really in a semi-ready state...was Dev. We couldn't move it over to a different one for some stupid reason or another.

Number one comment after the demo? "This looks very unprofessional. We do not want a dog logo on the login page. Is your team taking this seriously?"

astura2• 1 year ago

Cue, not queue.

chiph• 1 year ago

We ran into the same thing back in the dot-com era. The development group had a sample customer set up as "Master Bait & Tackle", which had an outdoor outfitter theme. With items like fishing reels, lures, backpacks, etc. Entirely innocent (apart from the name).

Sales & Marketing got wind of how consistent the data was in it and wanted a copy they could use in presentations and for trade-show exhibits. We all said absolutely not. But they went around us and got a copy anyway.

It did not go well when a potential customer made a comment about the name during a demo.

Lesson learned. Always use the word "Test" in your test data. Always.

cynicalsecurity• 1 year ago

It actually distracts from reading. It feels as if the person producing these papers hasn't even tried reading them themselves, it's painful for the eyes. And what is this watermark even supposed to protect from?

Llamamoe• 1 year ago

Printing and photocopying? Because this could get really unreadable really quick.

rootsudo2• 1 year ago

I get why furries are called that — they’re into human-animal caricatures with fur.

What do you call someone who likes dragons? Scalies?

nicman23• 1 year ago

yep that is what they are calling themselves

senectus1• 1 year ago

They're not InDrag? :-D sorry, this is a silly subject

rootsudo2• 1 year ago

TIL and I didn't want to, sigh, Internet.

cess113• 1 year ago

People who are into dragons are furries, it's not a literal term. Their furry subgroup is usually called scalies, which besides dragons and snakes include people who are into things like salamanders and other amphibians.

I'm under the impression that such taxonomies are less important to these in-groups than whether you're just into the aesthetic or get off on it sexually as well.

JCattheATM4• 1 year ago

Disney movies and 80s cartoons with talking animals really created a whole new subculture.

colpabar• 1 year ago

Fun fact: there are also "therians", which are people who truly believe they are part/all animal.

vegadw• 1 year ago

I'm a furry (Been for ~10 years, actually going to a big con in a week) but not a Therian. I too sometimes find some of the Therians a bit, uh, eccentric. But I think it's worth clarifying that most (I think) don't literally believe themselves to be part animal or werewolves or whatever, I think it's usually a spiritual thing, where they so strongly identify with the animal that it's part of how they act and see themselves.

I, personally, find that actually more understandable (as someone that isn't in the group) than I do, say, most religions and their belief in a higher power. That's not to in an attempt to offend or belittle either group (or the overlap, religious Therians), just a view from my particular perspective where it's really no more strange than anything else people do. If it makes them happy, lets them connect with others, etc. who am I to judge?

There are, of course, outliers that literally believe themselves to be shapeshifters or whatever, but, okay? As long as its not impacting their day-to-day too much, many of them are still probably mentally more healthy than a lot of other people.

RiverCrochet• 1 year ago

My cousin is a furry, and she has the following the say about it:

'You still use the term furry, really. "Furry" has become an wide umbrella term used for artwork featuring fictional anthropomorphized animals and tends to cover any species - so this would include fur-less animals such as reptiles, amphibians, birds, and even insects.

"Scalie" is used to describe art/characters featuring anthropomorphized reptilies and dragons. Fans of them would still be furries tho.'

demarq3• 1 year ago

The whole point of a judicial process is to make judgments on the merit of a case not personal prejudice.

What if someone comes to court wearing tattoos are they more guilty?

speerer2• 1 year ago

I want to make two observations here.

First, the order being reported is made against the lawyer, not against the lawyer's client - And it is in order not to do this in future. So, while your observation is good I think the conclusion you draw from it doesn't follow.

Secondly, one aspect of your good point is that arguments are filed in a very plain format. The point being that the format does not detract from the message. In this case, the format heavily detracts from the message. Have you seen the PDF? It's absolutely nuts. I hope he doesn't turn up to court wearing a dragon mask.

ceejayoz• 1 year ago

First, the order being reported is made against the lawyer, not against the lawyer's client…

I suspect the client will be billed for the revisions, though.

gambiting• 1 year ago

And as the court pointed out, it's hard to judge the merit of the case when you're distracted by a huge purple dragon when reading the legal document.

It's the same reason why you can't send documents written in yellow font on a blue background - technically not against the rules, but no judge will suffer through reading it.

>What if someone comes to court wearing tattoos are they more guilty?

Obviously you can just choose not to watermark the document, tattoos cannot be removed that easily. And yes, there are various situations where you'd be asked to cover your tattoo if it was inappropriate for the situation too.

toast03• 1 year ago

It's the same reason why you can't send documents written in yellow font on a blue background - technically not against the rules, but no judge will suffer through reading it.

Using those particular color choices might not actually be suffering. It used to be a desirable color combination for word processing. I don't know if judges tend to review pleadings on screen or on paper though. On paper, black on white would be preferred, of course (unless the court had blue legal paper to print on)

_bin_4• 1 year ago

Lawyers are held to different standards of professional conduct than defendants. This also makes it much harder to read.

demarq3• 1 year ago

I see what you are saying about there being different standards.

I would follow up with, if the shoe was on the other foot, do you believe that a lawyer with tattoos and or purple hair should be allowed to practice?

We may never agree? But I think that we should be more tolerant of individuality than prejudice.

orbital-decay• 1 year ago

I don't see how the order is making anyone more or less guilty.

Judicial process historically has a certain seriousness flair and a code of conduct based on it. Making fun of the judge or the court of law is a quick way go get removed from the process or fined, or even jailed. As well as performing marketing stunts like this.

bmacho• 1 year ago

The whole point of a judicial process is to make judgments on the merit of a case not personal prejudice.

And specifying the style of something that they are able to change easily helps that.

throwawaycities• 1 year ago

All courts have local rules or even standing orders governing filings and pleadings - from case styling formatting, font/size, spacing, max pages, ect… Federal district courts are not places to flaunt rules of the court or court orders.

Beyond that lawyers are governed by state bars and rules of professional conduct — as an example the Florida bar has taken action against an attorney that used to advertise himself as a “pitbull.”

Regarding tattoos courts have rules of decorum, which generally cover appropriate dress/attire in the courtroom. As far as tattoos, I’ve been to thousands of hearings and can give a single anecdote. It was a drug possession case and the defendant was allowed to transfer their case from circuit felony to drug court - basically allowing completion of drug classes while on kind of pretrial probation in exchange for either a nolle pros (dismissal) or withhold of adjudication. The drug court judge gave the defendant a hard time at this initial hearing over having a drug molecule tattooed on their neck - questioning if drug court was a good fit for someone the seemingly was pretty committed to drugs (based on the neck tat). The drug court judge can see a hundred or more defendants a day, they’ve seen it all and aren’t passing judgement, its just that their experience allows them to read people extremely well and they had legitimate concerns because getting in trouble in drug court can result in automatic conviction of the original charge + having to deal with any new charge.

A rule of thumb professionalism and decorum go a long way in court - this attorney could be decent, but as a potential client any lawyer using a gimmicky dragon in a suit in their paperwork should probably raise some red flags for you.

DocTomoe• 1 year ago

In fact, in many societies, tattoos are considered a sign of low status, affiliation with lower class (which tends to get harsher sentences) and/or criminal activity, and may - consciously or subconsciously - lead to worse outcomes in trials.[1]

Just tattoo 'cop killer' on your forehead and see if they give you parole.

[1] https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/voices.uchicago.edu/dist/f/305...

StefanBatory• 1 year ago

What if someone comes to court wearing tattoos are they more guilty?

Unfortunately, it's true - that's how it will be seen. :(

bluGill3• 1 year ago

What if someone comes to court wearing tattoos are they more guilty?

That question is for the jury to decide for better and worse. There are lots of good points to a jury trial which is why free societies usually (always?) have them in some form. However one downside is you will once in a while get someone on the jury who judges you not on the facts of the case but on things that shouldn't matter.

Overall it is still better than the alternatives in my opinion, but it does mean you need to figure out what your local cultures are and avoid offending them (note cultures is plural - figure out them all).

userbinator2• 1 year ago

The hosting company iFastNet uses a green and yellow dragon, which is what came to mind when I read the title, despite it being nearly 2 decades since I had anything to do with them, so I think this is definitely a marketing stunt of some sort.

zahrc• 1 year ago

Any image in this position would be distracting.

However, I have never understood notions like this: “it is juvenile and impertinent. The Court is not a cartoon”

Is like my great grandpa scolding us at the dinner table for laughing and talking.

speerer2• 1 year ago

If he laughed and talked in court over the judge, he would also be scolded.

cess113• 1 year ago

The court is not a homely dinner between citizens, it's the pinnacle of state power and a place where people are judged by it. Even if the court would always be just and fair it would still be a place of tragedy and suffering for many of the participants.

globular-toast• 1 year ago

A judge has the power to (effectively or actually) end someone's life. I am very glad this responsibility is taken seriously. As an adult I'm sick of memes and childish "stickers" etc everywhere as it is. It certainly doesn't belong in a court.

Sharlin• 1 year ago

It’s just as terrible as a lawyer submitting a document written in a totally inappropriate register, like street slang littered with vulgar phrases. There’s a time and a place for cartoon dragons. A court of law is neither. If you don’t understand why, maybe it’s time for you to learn a thing or two about human communication.

thinkingemote• 1 year ago

Is like my great grandpa scolding us at the dinner table for laughing and talking

It's more like a non-familial, formal dinner setting. Think about a job interview where the CEO and interviewer take you and another interviewee to dinner in a fancy restaurant. You turn up in jeans and sneakers with your buddy and you laugh and crack jokes together, the other interviewee turns up in smart clothes and talks soberly. In a few cases (and perhaps only seen in Holywood movies about the American Dream) the CEO may love the irreverence and impertinence and see it as a strength and sign of strong individuality, in almost all cases the bosses will not appreciate it and you will not get a job. Great grandpa loves you, the boss at your place of work doesn't.

saagarjha3• 1 year ago

Surely you are aware that a lot of the people on this site interview in their jeans

watwut• 1 year ago

I would say that job interview in the fancy restaurant is the first "unprofessional" step in this chain. The place to conduct serious interviews is called the office.

gonzus• 1 year ago

In all honesty, would you hire this dude as YOUR lawyer?

prepend2• 1 year ago

He’s not experienced in this court to know what the judge likes and dislikes.

I’ve found it helpful to use lawyers who know the courts and people of the courts where my case is going to take place.

bityard• 1 year ago

Courts deal with serious life-changing issues and everyone involved in a court case is expected behave seriously. In fact, that is literally the primary role of the judge. And why judges are famously strict on procedure, demeanor, and the overall decorum of the courtroom. This is the only thing that prevents your average court case from turning into an episode of Jerry Springer.

advisedwang• 1 year ago

The legal system relies on an sense of awe. Gavels, neo-classical buildings, wigs, elevated benches, latin and yes formality in documents are all just ways to build and maintain that awe.

jeroenhd• 1 year ago

If this was a small claims court over a $100 garden fence post being broken, maybe. An annoying distraction, for sure, and unprofessional for someone who's supposed to take your case seriously, but little harm done.

This is about a woman whose entire life hangs in the balance. A higher standard of care and professionalism is expected.

Plus, depending on where you live, judges may decide to hand out punishments for whatever power-tripping reasons they see fit. There have been plenty of videos online of judges handing out sentences to (black) people for not responding in whatever the American version of the Queen's English is. It's an absolutely fucked up system, but when you're operating in such a system, an appropriate amount of fear and respect for the judge is necessary.

You can play games with the court in your own time, but don't risk your clients' lives because you feel compelled to add your stupid mascot to official documents.

low_tech_love3• 1 year ago

The judge is right, but unfortunately there is no easy way to handle it. Right now, effectively, what he did was give JAKELAW the free advertisement that he wanted to get when he submitted the document in the first place. Hell even I have memorised his phone number. That was not a watermark, that is intentionally put there to annoy and distress the reader so it becomes news. He knows his audience and played all his cards right. Gaslit the judge, put the judge in a situation where he has to be the “bad” guy (even though he’s right), and has even earned some leverage to criticize the system as being frivolous.

And to be honest we can waste our time indefinitely trying to argue the meta here that “maybe Jake is not that bad”, and let him catch us on his gaslighting trap, but the truth is that yes, he is the asshole playing with people’s lives, not the judge.

arh68• 1 year ago

It does sound like something Mr. Milchick would say. You must abandon childish things, and all that [defiant] jazz

dheera• 1 year ago

Reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGOofzZOyl8

brumar• 1 year ago

that plaintiff shall not file any other documents with the cartoon dragon or other inappropriate content

Formal answers to goofiness (voluntary or not) will always amuse me.

perihelions4• 1 year ago

- "The whole story would be far more humorous were it not from a case in which Perrone represented a woman who claims that she nearly died after being incarcerated and not given proper medical care. Perrone must now refile his complaint in that case—without the cartoon dragon."

That should be more offensive than cartoons. In a just world.

It's not as if the victim had the luxury of many choices of law firms, or any capacity to oversee their work. Their access to legal services is presumably similar to their access to medical care. There's nothing amusing about this outcome. It's seriously depressing that "the coked-up cartoon-dragoon attorney" is the best representation that person, in their helpless situation, was able to navigate to.

jbverschoor2• 1 year ago

The world has gone from substance to optics. You see it in every industry or field.

lores• 1 year ago

Heh, optics have been important since the dawn of man, and probably even before. Ziggurats are all about optics, and so are mating displays. A cynic might say "more important", but that's hard to ascertain.

potato37328422• 1 year ago

And somehow along the way every institution seems to have forgotten the meaning of the phrase "even the appearance of impropriety".

vkou2• 1 year ago

The legal system, for millienia, has always been a hodgepodge of very peculiar and esoteric rules about both substance and optics.

That's why lawyers exist, by the way. Outside of small claims court, laymen aren't equipped to navigate it without stepping on every possible rake imaginable.

eadmund• 1 year ago

That should be more offensive than cartoons. In a just world.

If the complaint is true, then yes it is offensive and the results will be more serious than being required to refile the complaint without the watermark. The process of determining if the complaint is true or not is the justice system.

jerf• 1 year ago

Yes. Now probably a couple dozen people are going to collectively spend thousands of hours going over the complaint. The watermark issue is indeed just a sideshow by comparison.

The posts on this HN story demonstrate exactly the point the judge is trying to make. This sort of optics issue looms so large in human brains that it is indeed generating accusations that the court case is not being taken seriously because the court must obviously be spending all of its attention on this visually appealing story, even though in the grand scheme of things it is a tiny fraction of just the effort that will be spent on this case overall. Justice must not just be just, it must be seen to be just, and this sort of behavior is an impossibly attractive nuisance for people. Even those defending the picture are still being sucked into a sideshow.

timewizard• 1 year ago

The court does not deal in "truth." It deals in civil cases with "more likely than not" or in criminal cases "beyond a reasonable doubt."

It's also why the court prefers that people settle with each other outside of court processes. The court is a brutal cudgel. It has exceptional power to change outcomes but this use is almost never the ideal outcome for anyone involved.

potato37328422• 1 year ago

To a normal person, sure. But the legal system ruins lives and deals in ruined lives every day. They don't blink twice at that stuff. A cartoon dragon on the other hand...

lupusreal3• 1 year ago

The formality of the process helps them keep their conscious clear. Attacking the formality of the process therefore threatens them.

perihelions4• 1 year ago

I remember reading a couple years back, when some judges in Louisiana were exposed systematically discarding legal petitions from incarcerated plaintiffs into trash cans, without reading them. Totally nulled out any access to courts, any possibility of justice, for thousands of people.

https://www.propublica.org/article/louisiana-judges-ignored-... ("Louisiana Judges Systematically Ignored Prisoners’ Petitions Without Review" (2023))

It's the type of story that sensitizes you to awareness of the pattern.

That the victim in the OP story got access to an attorney of any color—even dragon-purple—actually puts them above the median.

mark2122• 1 year ago

the victim did have a choice of lawyers, far beyond a "luxury." Don't know if you live in the US or not, but it's hard to avoid personal injury attorney advertising in virtually every forum. More specifically, there are 426 PI lawyers listed in the Superlawyers directory for the Detroit area, and they claim to only list the top 5% of practicing attorneys. The plaintiff here could easily dump this guy and get someone else, for free, especially this early in the lawsuit when the complaint has just been filed.

dogmayor• 1 year ago

This isn't a PI case and she couldn't "easily" get someone else for free. Maybe you're thinking she could get an attorney to take the case on a contingency basis, but that's not "free."

pdabbadabba5• 1 year ago

The "outcome" is simply that the judge simply directed the attorney to stop using the dragon watermark. Whats the problem?

And, by the way, I'd recommend a bit less credulity about this kind of lawsuit. While there is no doubt that a lot of terrible things happen in America's prisons, it is also extremely common for inmates and former inmates to file exaggerated or even frivolous claims about the conditions of their confinement. It's understandable. Prisoners have a lot of time on their hands and being incarcerated sucks even if your rights are not actually being violated. Not saying which this is -- I have no way of knowing. I'm just pointing out that it's a mistake to take the allegations in a legal complaint at face value.

lupusreal3• 1 year ago

If a prisoner in America says they are being deprived of adaquate medical care, it's safe (for people generally, not the legal system) to assume it's true until proven otherwise.

Maybe they're healthy and are complaining about nothing, but if they aren't healthy then it is almost certainly the case that their medical care is substandard if it exists at all.

freejazz4• 1 year ago

The "outcome" is simply that the judge simply directed the attorney to stop using the dragon watermark. Whats the problem?

I think the poster was trying to make the point that in a "just" society, the story would be about how this individual is in this position and only has the choice of this attorney, and not instead about the purple dragon.

piker• 1 year ago

Absolutely. Federal courts are filled with nonsense habeas petitions by pro se plaintiffs claiming this exact kind of stuff. The fact that this person managed to get representation adds some credibility, but then we’re also here discussing how ridiculous that particular representation has behaved.

bccdee• 1 year ago

Why would they spend money on a frivolous case they have no chance of winning? Lawyers, dragon or no, are expensive, and people in prison don't exactly make money. Conversely, abuse of prisoners is endemic in America. I find this all extremely plausible.

opello2• 1 year ago

it is also extremely common for inmates and former inmates to file exaggerated or even frivolous claims about the conditions of their confinement.

It seems pernicious to suggest distrust of claims. Like Blackstone's ratio[1], presuming good faith and investigating, then addressing abuses of the system, seems like the ideal process. The ideal likely ending up unsustainable due to staffing constraints.

[1] "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

perihelions4• 1 year ago

The corollary is also true: it's extremely common for courts to be prejudiced against inmate lawsuits. In extreme cases they don't even read their filings,

https://www.propublica.org/article/louisiana-judges-ignored-... ("Louisiana Judges Systematically Ignored Prisoners’ Petitions Without Review" (2023))

mvdtnz• 1 year ago

That should be more offensive than cartoons. In a just world.

Has anyone at any point expressed otherwise? You're tilting at windmills.

egypturnash• 1 year ago

The coked-up AI cartoon dragon attorney.

His website, which also features the purple dragon and a bunch of busted links in the footer, says that the firm "integrates AI to lower the cost of legal services."

Hopefully this lawyer is making sure this AI isn't making up the cases it's citing, which is a continuing problem: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ai+make+up+legal+cases

neilv2• 1 year ago

I used to put a diagonal light gray huge "DRAFT" across pages of certain documents for which it was important that a working draft not be interpreted as final.

What would've been a great use for the lawyer's dragon documents would be to clearly mark incomplete/unapproved drafts, for internal review only.

Because, obviously, there was no way that you would accidentally submit a filing to the court with a huge purple cartoon dragon on every page.

Depending on the lawyer's personality, a big purple dragon might also double as lighthearted stress relief, when billing 12+ hours a day, of high-stakes work.

kevin_thibedeau• 1 year ago

Text watermarks can be a PITA when they cover the page and the PDF reader prioritizes them for text selection rather than the top layer text.

zzo38computer5• 1 year ago

Perhaps the watermark could be made as a picture even if it contains text, so that it cannot be used with text selection.

generationP2• 1 year ago

What about a header/footer saying "DRAFT" (ideally with the date and other things that would perhaps not fit on a watermark)?

low_tech_love3• 1 year ago

His business is called “Dragon Lawyers”, his phone number is JAKELAW, his main reason for using is because “people like dragons” and his firm’s goal is to “integrate AI to lower the cost of legal services”. I’m pretty sure this is not the guy pulling his hair off for 12+ hours a day to make sure he is doing it right.

crvdgc• 1 year ago

Could be both, like Better Call Saul.

istjohn2• 1 year ago

Don't stop there: 80% of the links on his website don't work and he has fake reviews from "Johnathan Smith," "Michael Brown," "Emily Johnson," and "Sarah Davis."

zzo38computer5• 1 year ago

I also think the dragon could be used for such drafts like you describe, although that should not substitute for writing DRAFT on the document, but instead the dragon would be in addition to writing DRAFT on the document (perhaps in the header and/or footer, since the dragon means not room for that in the middle of the document). Both the DRAFT label and the dragon (or other pictures in the watermarks) would only be used in drafts and both omitted for the final version.

neilv2• 1 year ago

The Draft Dragon is impossible to ignore.

jillyboel• 1 year ago

At least it wasn't a bad dragon.

morkalork• 1 year ago

Well the judge thought it was a bad dragon!

arealaccount• 1 year ago

Does purchased for $20 online imply the dragon is an NFT?

I bet the lawyer could flip it now if yes.

awkwardpotato• 1 year ago

No? The concept of purchasing images online has existed long before NFTs

cookingmyserver• 1 year ago

Question - is watermarking legal filings even common? How about the law firm logos in the footer?

duskwuff• 1 year ago

No; this filing is very unusual. Typical practice is for legal filings to be submitted in a standardized and very plain format.

kccqzy2• 1 year ago

And that standardized and plain format is simply typographically ugly.

The legal profession has done better. Just look at the opinions from the Supreme Court. Single spaced, nice typeface, good margin. Hallmarks of elegant typesetting and optimized for readability. Why aren't legal filings standardized based on this format?

impossiblefork4• 1 year ago

I think it's a mistake to have rules about filings. Maybe it's distracting, but if the filing has been done, there should be no reason for the court not to read it and make a decision based on the text.

Procedure or order can't be more important than deciding cases.

voidfunc• 1 year ago

Nah this is not the place to let folks get cutesy. If anything the standards should be strict and uniform.

impossiblefork4• 1 year ago

Yes, the dragon is terrible and it's very inappropriate, but someone can't behave sensibly may still be someone whose case the courts must hear.

striking2• 1 year ago

If you allow one person to get away with this, others may see it as an invitation to do worse. Filings are often a matter of immutable public record and it makes sense that there should be rules as to what goes into them.

What is the act of deciding cases if not a carefully constructed procedure meant to keep order? What is the harm of telling a lawyer to try again, this time following the rules?

impossiblefork4• 1 year ago

You hear the case, however it's presented, and then you decide.

In Swedish courts the court evaluates evidence as it likes. If the judges and sort-of-half-judge-half-jury-Nämdemän agree that something can be concluded, then they're allowed to conclude that.

Obviously procedure is useful, but hearing the complaint is more important.

smelendez• 1 year ago

But it's simple enough to regenerate it without the watermark. Also, if it's actively annoying the judge, it's in the lawyer and client's best interest to fix it once and give the judge time to clear his head instead of repeating the issue.

tjohns• 1 year ago

All the court is asking the lawyer to do is to re-file without the distracting formatting. It's not like they're throwing the entire case out. It'll still get read.

It's also worth noting that the local rules for just about every court prescribe document formatting - so it's not like any of this should come as a surprise to the attorney.

Putting this another way: If a professor tells you to submit an essay in 12 pt Times New Roman, and you turn it in using 16 pt Comic Sans - it's entirely within the professor's right to say the formatting is so distracting that it makes their job difficult and ask you to print out a revised version before they'll grade it.

istjohn2• 1 year ago

By my reading, the judge isn't even making him refile. They just said to not do it again.

toast03• 1 year ago

Uniform formatting makes it easier to evaluate a case on the text and not the formatting, though.

generationP2• 1 year ago

One day, someone will discover a use for across-the-page watermarks that is not better handled by marginalia and makes up for the loss in readability, copyability and compatibility with graphics.

Until then, we'll be seeing this...

TechSquidTV• 1 year ago

I find it disturbing that a judge has blocked the legal system because they don't like a lawyer's logo.

ianferrel• 1 year ago

They didn't, though. No one has lost access to the legal system. They just said they had to resubmit without the watermark on every page.

kebokyo• 1 year ago

Gamers may be the most oppressed group of people… but I think furries are a close second.

hluska• 1 year ago

My dad said something a few years ago - we’re all more interested in being ‘funny’ and ‘edgy’ than acting like adults and getting on with each other. The world has gotten very embarrassing.

F3nd0• 1 year ago

Did he ever specify what he meant by ‘acting like adults’? I can imagine a number of changes in attitude one might associate with growing up, and I find a good part of them regrettable at best.

jihadjihad• 1 year ago

From the PDF linked in TFA:

Respectfully submitted,

  DRAGON LAWYERS PC

I don't think the judge thought it was submitted all that respectfully.

lowbloodsugar2• 1 year ago

If watermarks are thing, and the judge just doesn’t like this one because he finds it disrespectful, that sounds like a first amendment issue.

rexpop2• 1 year ago

Contempt findings are subject to the 1st amendment, but criminal speech acts are not protected by the 1st amendment.

Arguably, the dragon exhibits a trespass against the dignity of the court itself.

lowbloodsugar2• 1 year ago

“Dignity” is just racism in disguise.

firefoxd• 1 year ago

I don't know what the big deal is. Lady Justice also has scales.

This comment had me spitting my coffee. How do they even come up with this.

goku12• 1 year ago

Wow! I thought the judge was overreacting. But that's one extremely annoying watermark. I would demand the same, no matter what I do for a living.

daveslash2• 1 year ago

It might be appropriate if you're a children's cartoonist/artist and you're sending out proofs? But yeah, I get your point and agree.

sbarre2• 1 year ago

There's a point in everyone's career where they think their work is under constant threat of being stolen, copied, repurposed or otherwise used in a manner that will "steal your livelihood" or some thing..

Eventually you realize that a) no one cares, your work isn't _that_ unique and valuable and b) if someone wants to use your stuff, they will find a way..

The idea of a giant watermark behind text that can just be scanned and OCR'ed anyways is this kind of silly.

kccqzy2• 1 year ago

I don't think that's true for the generation of people who grew up with the internet. "Information ought to be free" was ingrained into their systems. You either put something on the internet and expect that people will want it for free, or you don't put it on the internet and it's private.

fuzzer3712• 1 year ago

Oh no! How dare someone have some fun

leptons• 1 year ago

Courtrooms are not a place designed for "fun". If you're in serious legal trouble you better hope your lawyer isn't there to have "fun" and make it difficult for the judge to read about your case.

mjgoeke• 1 year ago

That's not a "watermark", keep it to 5% opacity. This is around 13% and very distracting.

indrora2• 1 year ago

There's a color, gray95, that is the recommended black and white color for watermarks in a few books I've read on the topic. Honestly the best way to do it right is to ask the court (politely) what their stated requirements for watermarking are and if you get shrugs, you go for the bare minimum.

mark2122• 1 year ago

there is no court where I have ever practiced that would accept a watermark of any kind at whatever percentage or color. And he didn't need to ask, it's right there in the rules (state and local). Every court has extremely detailed requirements for font, size, line spacing, line numbering, color of cover for printed "chambers copies," size of margins, how the name of the court should be set out and where, and so on. Literally no excuse for this, he's lucky he didn't get sanctioned

astura2• 1 year ago

You don't watermark legal documents that you are submitting to a court.

apparent• 1 year ago

Courts have all sorts of detailed requirements for briefs. They specify font, size, spacing, etc. It is crazy that a lawyer thought that this would pass muster.

OJFord2• 1 year ago

Is there a term for this (bad) style of writing or linguistic device where you mention the thing ('purple dragon') in the title/first paragraph and then really force a synonym in the second?

Federal Magistrate Judge Ray Kent of the Western District of Michigan was unamused by a recent complaint (PDF) that prominently featured the aubergine wyrm.

(Emphasis mine.)

Wingy• 1 year ago

You could call it Elegant Variation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elegant_variation

OJFord2• 1 year ago

Exactly that, thank you!

lilyball3• 1 year ago

In the case where it's rather forced, you could call it Inelegant Variation instead.

prepend2• 1 year ago

Some people want to be artists but are journalists instead.

default-kramer• 1 year ago

I realize no one is claiming otherwise, but this writer almost certainly did it intentionally for humorous effect. ("Aubergine wyrm" is just too good to be accidental.) It's like "the lick" in jazz.

Izkata• 1 year ago

Using modern terminology, I think it's actually a drake, not a wyrm. Wyrm and dragon were only a synonyms centuries ago, nowadays dragon is an umbrella term for those and more.

mmmlinux• 1 year ago

These documents should all be processed through a computer to sanitize anything that could be considered unique or specific enough to identify anyone involved with the creation. some kind of linter for court documents.

tedmcory77• 1 year ago

What if that is part of my religion?

crazygringo• 1 year ago

The problem doesn't even seem to be the dragon.

The problem is you don't "watermark" court filings in the first place.

That's generally not a thing. Court filings have strict requirements around formatting. This isn't any different from trying to file in Comic Sans or a 48-pt font.

Unfortunately this stunt is functioning as free publicity for this firm, because it's getting written about...

bandrami• 1 year ago

I used to sysadmin for a law firm that used watermarks for draft filings as they went through the internal workflow on the theory that nobody would be stupid enough to actually file something with a translucent toucan on it, so it would make accidentally filing a draft less likely.

zzo38computer5• 1 year ago

Writing "DRAFT" on it might also help.

andrelaszlo• 1 year ago

Translucent Toucan... my highschool nickname.

hsbauauvhabzb• 1 year ago

What’s the purpose of the format requirement? To enable ocr or to just prevent silly games like this one?

bitwize• 1 year ago

Both to prevent silly games and for similar reasons as the "no brown M&Ms" rider in Van Halen's venue contracts: if you read and followed the instructions in detail for small things like formatting, you read and followed the instructions for the things that actually matter as well.

mminer237• 1 year ago

Consistency mainly. Judges want to be able to easily understand what they're looking at and for it to look professional. Double-spacing gives room to write in changes or notes. Line numbers let you reference stuff easily.

y33t• 1 year ago

Unfortunately this stunt is functioning as free publicity for this firm, because it's getting written about...

Yeah I suspect a lot of their cases going forward will be on contingency.

bonyt• 1 year ago

Court filings have strict requirements around formatting. This isn't any different from trying to file in Comic Sans or a 48-pt font.

For example, the Northern District of California rules require a 12-point standard proportional-width font, with no more than 28 lines per page 8½ inch by 11 inch white paper with numbered lines. This is their way of requiring double-spacing and enforcing the page limits[1].

BUT - The rules don't say anything about requiring the paper to be portrait rather than landscape. 28 lines on a landscape page would allow for a lot more text.

Alas, I'm not daring enough to try it, as the intent of the rule is clear, and I'm sure no judge would take kindly to it.

Some courts have moved to word count limits, requiring a certification of word count at the end with a lawyer's signature.

[1] https://cand.uscourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/CAND_Civil_Loca... (Civ. L.R. 3-4(c)).

happyopossum2• 1 year ago

Common paper size definitions would indicate that 8 1/2x11 is portrait, while 11x8 1/2 is landscape, so they could reasonably reject a landscape filing on that basis.

kylehotchkiss• 1 year ago

This was a good example of a case to assign the plaintiff a new lawyer at the old ones expense

fennecbutt2• 1 year ago

Headline umderstates the issue. The logo in the corner is fine, but this watermark covers the entire page, behind all the text. I wouldn't even call it a watermark by this point, it's a fucking background. Now it just needs to be tiled.

IG_Semmelweiss• 1 year ago

Read thru hundreds of comments, and yet your comment is the only one that comes close to actually rendering an opinion on the design of the watermark.

Someone did comment about the appropriate color to be used (grey63?) but i haven't really heard from experts on what would be good outcome, if this was any other forum and watermarking was still acceptable.

Would love to hear such thoughts!

fennecbutt2• 1 year ago

Imo there's no point watermarking legal text like that. Just a logo in footer or header is enough. Even for something that does need to be protected, watermarking is defunct and garish. Like qr codes.

And as a furry I appreciate their logo in general.

sans_souse• 1 year ago

I wish that same judge were handling consumer rights right about now, because someone needs to put a proverbial foot down and curb what advertising has become.

Stop Purple Dragon Cartoons from popping up while I'm reading an article.

Stop the 15 second Purple Dragon commercial that plays every G D time I watch an online video.

Stop screaming at me to buy Purple Dinos while I'm pumping gas that already I'm paying out the A on to fill my tank.

(I'd be curious to know if anyone lives next door to one of these gas stations; it must be obnoxious being subjected to that 24/7.)

It's not professional - It's a bad look. Liberty Mutual - I'm talking to you. Et al. Y'all have gone off the rails.

Don't watermark your legal PDFs with purple dragons in suits

Related Stories