When I received the email from Dan Hull at What About Clients/Paris? it wasn’t hard to imagine the look of exasperation on his face. There are few people in the blawgosphere who have had their content ripped off more consistently than Dan, and unlike the rest of us whose posts ended up on some scammer’s website, Dan’s was different. The thief always seemed to be a lawyer. Lawyers just wanted what Dan wrote.
This time it was a young Dallas/Fort Worth criminal defense lawyer named , who had lifted wholesale one of Hull’s best known and most appreciated posts, his 12 Rules of Client Service. This was first posted in 2006 and may be the post for which Hull is best known.
And there it was, on 2007 Houston law grad Carl David Ceder’s website, in all its glory. No permission. Not even credit. Just as if this kid came up with it all by himself, instead of stealing it from Dan Hull.
So I asked Dan if he sent the kid an email, and he told me he sent the kid a question, whether Ceder wrote the 12 Rules himself? But Hull heard nothing back and was off to Hanover, New Hampshire to conduct a Sensitivity training Seminar for the Dartmouth College rugby team. Again.
Not being particularly inclined to let things go so easily, I sent Ceder an email as well:
Carl,
I’m a criminal defense lawyer in New York and have a blog called Simple Justice. It’s pretty well regarded and widely read. Even in Texas. It’s come to my attention that you have posted a page on your website about the “12 Rules for Client Service.”
These were written by a buddy of mine, Dan Hull, for his blog. I note that you have neither permission to take his content or have even given Hull credit for the content.
This is a matter of some concern. Stealing content is frowned upon.
I plan to write about what you’ve done tomorrow. The question is what to write about. I ask two things of you: tell me how it came to happen that this content appears on your website as if it was yours, and tell me what you plan to do about it. Your answers to these questions will dictate what I write about, and likely what others will have to say about you. If I don’t hear from you, I will assume the worst.
If you have made a mistake, I would hope you would acknowledge it and correct it. If someone put your website together for you, and they stole the content without your realizing it, that would also be worth knowing. I await your response today. Either way, you should anticipate a post about this tomorrow.
Scott Greenfield
No word back from Carl. There are many possibilities, that he was away for the holiday weekend. That he really doesn’t exist. That he doesn’t check his email during the winter months.
If you can’t trust this face, who can you trust?
Or that this young lawyer, an Avvo 10 “Pro” despite his youth and inexperience, never thought he would get caught stealing from more experienced lawyers in order to market himself.
Curiously, Ceder’s Avvo profile oozes with sincerity, spelling issues notwithstanding:
I can tell you with absolute and complete honesty that all of my client and peer endorsement reviews on this AVVO account are completelely [sic] and 100% authentic. My office takes great pride in our work, and it brings us great joy when our former clients or a professional colleague endorses the work of my law practice. I fully realize that there will come a time when someone may write a bad, negative, or even a “so-so review.”
So what exactly does “absolute and complete honesty” mean when coming from a kid lawyer busy marketing the crap out of himself on the interwebz who steals the content of another lawyer and tries to pass it off as his own? Redundancy aside, it means nothing. You just destroyed the one thing that no lawyer can afford to lose, integrity. Falsus in uno. falsus in omnibus, kid.
It takes hard work and experience to come up with something of the quality of the 12 Rules of Client Service. It takes nothing more than a mouse to steal it. And if you think creating the 12 Rules is hard, it’s nothing compared to training the Dartmouth Rugby Team to be sensitive. On the other hand, writing a blawg post about another kid lawyer who steals content and lacks integrity takes no effort at all.
Without the supporting posts that explain and amplify each of the 12 rules, the list is much weaker.
Yes, that’s the issue.
Agreed, please see my comments below. This is so trivial, I cannot believe Mr. whoever keeps this blog found it necessary to impugn my integrity. I would think whoever made these Rules would be flattered. And to be precise, I did not post it to my website. I thought the Rules were rather weak, my staff just knows I value the Rule on always keeping the client informed of their case, regardless of what the information is. Period.
You’re responsible for what “your staff” does, but then, who are you kidding? Didn’t anybody explain ethics or copyright to a big time trial lawyer like you?
If my work was copied word for word without credit or history, I would not be flattered. Not giving credit where it is due is lying by omission. The worst aspect about this is that forget about illegal it is unethical, and that is the worst descriptor that can be attributed to an attorney.
Ceder’s post on Bench/Jury trials appears to be a straight copy/paste from a lawyer named Robert Guest in Texas. The only differences between the postings are the title, Guest used better formatting, and Ceder seems to have failed to highlight the first “I” in this alleged copy/paste job. I only picked one article at random, but I wouldn’t be surprised if other authors have been victimized as well.
Sources (and rule breaking)
http://www.dallascriminaldefenselawyerblog.com/2009/05/bench-trials-101.html
http://www.carlcederlaw.com/judge-or-jury-trial
[Ed. Note: links permitted this time despite rules. Don’t be a hater on me.]
So it gets uglier. Robert Guest is an old friend, and I am very sorry to hear that he’s also a victim. And indeed, it’s beginning to appear that this is deliberate on Ceder’s part.
He also posts a copy of Brian Tannebaum’s ebook, though he includes a link and credits Tannebaum.
Thanks Pete for pointing this out. I appreciate it.
Amusingly enough, yet another lawyer – a “James D. Saint” copied part of his website and didn’t bother to change Carl’s name to his name.
Jeez, it just doesn’t stop.
Probably the truth. But instead of being offended. I am flattered he wanted to use my content. I take it as a sign of respect. Perhaps I’m not a true “blogger” and realize practicing law involves more than sitting hunched over a computer nitpicking other lawyers I know nothing about.
You have a fascinating view of copyright and plagiarism that is, I think, somewhat unique among content creators.
I just found this and take major offense. I will respond more later. Your response is not only juvenile, but completely out of line. You don’t even know about me, or my practice. My paralegal found this, and to be honest, I did not think any of the content was worthwhile, except for the Rule of inundating clients with correspondence. I don’t know how you Yankees practice here up North, but I spend my time actually practicing law IN THE COURTROOM. It seems you practice mostly white collar law. My advice is stick to that and keep yourself as the self-proclaimed monitor of content on the Internet. I have zero clue what e-mails you refer too, but you can be sure this content will be modified. My content supervisor presented it to me. And as far as my youth and inexperience, I’ve tried over 50 Felony and Misdemeanor cases to either or Judge or Jury, and ONLY as a defense attorney. And this so with a very high success rate, that without even knowing you or how Yankees practice up North, I would put my record and success up against anyone’s. And as far as Mr. Tannenbaum is, I did personally find his e-book and thought it was fantastic. That’s why I posted it and I do give him credit. I give it to other attorney and clients to read. Word for word it is spot on point. I suggest you read it yourself. Especially the part about hiring an attorney around 5-7 out of law school, and not some burnout who has spent 20-30 years practicing, and who, in my estimation, spends more time in front of the computer than representing clients or spending time in the courtroom. And as far as my AVVO account, I would swear on the life of all dear to me that every rule is from an actual client or colleague. Can you say the same for yourself? I would think it would be hard, considering the overwhelming amount of material you blog about. Then again, maybe things are done different with Yankees from up North. Here in Texas, we don’t hide behind computers. If you want to meet in person to discuss this in person, I’d be happy to oblige. But I can assure you that you won’t like the results. I don’t hide behind a computer, scrunching over a desk all day critiquing others I know nothing about. To me, that says something about the way you practice. I don’t even know who Dan Hull is. I would think if anything he would be flattered, like I do hope Mr. Tannenbaum is in Florida. Again, every portion of his e-book I think is amazing, and well thought out material. Especially the portion as well as those who have only done defense work, as opposed to his view on those who leave the DA’s office to then practice defense. I am a trial lawyer. My record speaks for itself. I can send you an entire book full of acquittals and dismissals. I get these these results by actually practicing, and not pretending to be a lawyer by “blogging” about the law. Perhaps I take the most offense I take to the most is you impugning my integrity. I’ve spent 7 years as am attorney, and the last 13 years of my career building that to what it now is. Having some Yankee who doesn’t know me maybe typical up there, but it’s not down there. Texas is bigger than everyone else for a reason. If you want to step outside and speak out this in person, again, wherever you want, I’d be happy to oblige. But I can guarantee you it won’t involve blogging or talks about content. Like I said. I’m a trial lawyer. I consider myself the same as those I represent, no better and no worse. That’s why I defend them so rigorously. If you agree to not being a coward and hiding behind your computer all day, I can promise you that you may want to bring a first aid kit. Impugning someone’s integrity, without having a clue of who they are, is not how we do things down here. So if we ever meet, you may want to bring a first aid kit. I have no problem defending what I take the most pride in, my reputation. To me, you are a coward and a typical nerd who loves writing about the law, and not actually practicing it. You are way out of line. And to make my point certain, I didn’t rip content. And yes. I do have a content editor. And it’s precisely why I don’t have time to do it myself. Because I work in the courtroom trying cases and fighting as an advocate. With you, I have no problem meeting in person to discuss this. A lawyer’s reputation and integrity is the most vital and precious an advocate can have. And without knowing the facts, and by virtue of you being the self-proclaimed Internet content monitor, it speaks volumes about you as an attorney. No real trial lawyer has this much time on their hands. You do. Again, if you want to meet, be sure to bring a first aid kit. In Texas some of us settle things the old fashion way. Similar to in a courtroom, but in a slightly different fashion I’m sure you can surmise. As a trial lawyer your job is to fight, whether in the courtroom, or outside of it. Just like those I represent. I wouldn’t consider myself a true advocate if I thought different. Again maybe Yankee lawyers practice differently. But perhaps I’m wrong. What you have done is childish and immature. And one last suggestion, if we ever meet in person, I wouldn’t only bring a first-aid kit, I’d bring other people other than yourself. Because I can imagine you yourself would rather hide behind a computer, than settle a dispute in person. So if you ever plan to meet me in person, I’d bring more than just yourself. What you have done, in my opinion, is libel. Because everything you have written about this is untrue. I can’t fathom whoever Dan Hull being flattered. But again, I think all the rules were redundant and unoriginal. I just like the portion about always communicating with our clients. My firm knows this is my biggest rule, so I can only imagine that’s why it was posted. And whoever wrote it, and whether or not you contacted me, I can truly say I never received anything from you. In fact, ever heard of a spam folder? With as much you post, I would imagine the internet probably has put a permanent ban on your e-mails and it being sent straight to spam folders. Not to mention which, I have client e-mails which take precedent over something as juvenile as this. Again, remember to bring a first aid kit. And to bring more than one. Anyone that actually practices law can realize you have done exactly what you have accused me of. You have lost the one thing a lawyer should cherish. Integrity. You have impugned someone you have never met, never had contact with, and posted something you know nothing about: namely me or how I conduct my practice. If there are typos, I apologize to those reading this. It was written from my iPhone as soon as I saw this on the Internet when brought to my attention by one of my staff employees.
Derp. So what about stealing Hull’s content and trying to pass it off as your own? For all your self-serving bullshit, you still don’t apologize for stealing Hull’s post. Big hat you have there.
Are we sure this is actually Carl David Ceder or simply some piece of outrageous, win the internets performance art?
If so, it wins.
Yes, we can be pretty sure it is him. It oozes pure real Texas. Observe the distinction between Texas “Justice” and what the civilized world expects. Pay attention to the method of dispute resolution he advocates, outside and with people to carry away the wounded.
As we say in Texas, “All hat, no cattle.”
That, indeed, was the reference.
Wow. That was the “short” response.
And, isn’t it spelled “Tannebaum”?
Yes.
Are all the first aid kits to soothe your butthurt at being revealed as a lowlife thief?
Don’t bother lugging a whole first aid kit just for that. I’m pretty sure Malshandir makes a cream for that ailment…
Malshandir reference FTW!
Man, Carl, you don’t know when to quit.
“I’ve spent 7 years as an attorney,”
January 2014 – May 2008 = 5 years 8 months. You’re hoping nobody will read your comment for 16 months?
I didn’t actually finish the long post (too long, too few paragraph breaks, seemed to get repetitive about 1/3 of the way through), but I am left with one question: is it proper to capitalize the word “yankee” when used in this context? It was distracting to see it always capitalized, like he was complaining about baseball players.
…But no one has ever acused English of making a lot of sense.
Darn, I must come from the same stock as Ken White, because my people obviously have no tradition of proofreading.
Yes, “Yankee” is a proper noun and, therefore, is always capitalized, whether it’s the team, or those damned Yankees!
Should we email this guy’s office that some yahoo on the internet is physically threatening people in his name?
Dear Carl:
“I’ve tried over 50 Felony and Misdemeanor cases to either or Judge or Jury”
Uh, hahahahahahaha. In 5+ years as a big trial lawyer?
You are not in trial court all that much then big guy. You picked the wrong place to try to bigfoot pal. Most of the lawyers that play here do that kind of volume in a year, and with a high percentage of them being jury trials. In closing, Hahahahahahahaha.
I wonder if Carl David Cedar has ever used this incompetent defence in court for a client?
“Why yes, your honor, my client did defraud the insurance company – but he thought they’d be flattered that he took their money off them! And it wasn’t very good money anyway, there’s anther insurance company he’s defrauded of some really really good money and he tells everybody about who they are and how great their money is, and we’re pretty sure they’re flattered bit (though, of course, we haven’t bothered to ask them – but we’d be very surprised if they weren’t delighted to be defrauded by my client!). So we’re all good right? Case dismissed?”
Dear Carl, could you please fill this form? It will facilitate an informed discussion.
Carl,
No one is going to read your juvenile BS until you learn how to use paragraphs.
And I love how you put “Carl David Ceder Learns The 12 Rules of The Blawgosphere” – in Texas, we put very little value how well someone can blog. You are a criminal defense attorney? We put more value in being a good Trial Attorney. I spend my time trying to perfect that art. And I would put my record, work ethic, and success rate against anyone, including yours. Spend time in the courtroom, and not being a self-proclaimed “Blog” Expert. And I love how you said you wrote me this:
“I’m a criminal defense lawyer in New York and have a blog called Simple Justice. It’s pretty well regarded and widely read. Even in Texas.”
Did you ever think about picking up the phone and calling me to discuss this? Or that I don’t even regularly check the e-mail you sent it to? Or that I ignored e-mails in the spam folder? It is clear from your above statement your biggest source of pride is your precious blog. This, to me, should be an offense that should be tantamount to being reprimanded by the State Bar. If it’s well regarded in Texas, I’ve never heard of it, never heard of anyone mention it, and most importantly of all, I doubt anyone here cares about what you blog about in NYC. We do things differently in Texas. For one, those who take this job seriously, try to be good Trial Lawyers, a la Racehorse Haynes and Percy Foreman. I would surmise they didn’t even know what a blog was, nor did they spend 1/1000th of the time you have spent taking so much pride in yours. Your blog actually is the exact opposite of how a real attorney should practice. Again, spend less time hunched over your computer, and get in a courtroom. Trust me, you won’t have time to monitor the entire United States over web content. Never impugn my integrity again. Or trust me. I will either fly to NYC to discuss with you, in person, outside, or I will invite you to come here. And again, my advice to this is to A) Bring a first-aid kid; and B) Bring more than just yourself. You will need more than just one person to discuss this matter. You disgust me. Try being a real lawyer.
I asked some of my Texas trial lawyer friends about you. They said, “who?”
Carl,
I’m not flattered that you stole my ebook. I’m embarrassed for you. But not as embarrassed as I am by your comments here. You sound like a blithering idiot. Don’t believe me? Take your comments and email them to your friends. I trust at least one of them will ask you if you need professional help. Hopefully not the one that is a “Yankee.”
Mr. Tannebaum – I apologize for the outburst earlier today directed towards whoever is the author of whatever blog this is. I do not spend much time on the internet, and do have someone who maintains my website content. My only rule has been never to embellish or boast of cases where we have experienced success, when in actuality we have not. I am not going to directly address whoever posts this blog with this comment, because I think nothing more needs to be said about him. I am of the opinion that he things a little too highly of himself, and I find it humorous how he had to boast to me, in his e-mail to me (that I never received) how his blog is well regarded by some in Texas.
I only wanted to address you, specifically. I was not trying to “steal” your content – only trying to emphasize a top priority for my firm is to emphasize client communication for all of those who work with/for me. I also apologize to all those reading the previous comments for any grammatical errors. I wrote everything previously from my I-phone, and not at a computer, and it was obviously difficult to do so. I was immediately extremely frustrated at the person who wrote this about me, while doing so without even consulting, calling, or contacting me once before writing what he did. I put my entire life into my practice, quite literally. I love being a criminal defense attorney, and I do not brag or boast of accomplishments that I have not achieved. If anything I said came off that way, I apologize. I am just passionate about my work. And I am the first to admit that I am not perfect, in any way, shape, form, or fashion.
As for your E-Book, I will gladly take it down from my website. However, I would like you to know that I do think it is the best material that I have ever seen written about the reality of criminal defense work. I was not trying to “steal” your content. I have never once tried to do so, ever. It is not important enough for me to do so. I was merely trying to direct people to what I thought was an excellent article, most specifically regarding how clients should think about who they should hire when are faced with a criminal accusation. I encourage all potential clients I meet to also interview with other attorneys. I never ask a client to hire me on an initial consultation. I do this because I want them to make an informed decision. And I strongly felt what you wrote was incredibly accurate as to how they should think about the process.
There is another article I read, I remember, forgive me for forgetting the exact title, but it was in regards to comparing the work of a criminal defense attorney to the thought process utilized in Moneyball (the book and movie). I believe the article is written by Ronald Wright and Ralph Peeples, and is titled: “Criminal Defense Lawyer Moneyball: A Demonstration Project.” The main point of the article (at least that I took from it) being that of all people, potential clients have the least amount of information readily available to them when searching for whom they should hire and trust with the representation of their criminal case. In that respect, I thought you have done the best job I have ever seen, or read, in helping these people analyze this aspect. I have never taken credit for what you wrote, nor would I ever think to do so. In my mindset, why would I? What do I have to gain? I am not a blogger, and obviously do not claim to be an authority on the subject. I am passionate about criminal defense, and when I come across material as well written as yours, I try to analyze and utilize it. I think your E-Book is absolutely fantastic, and I am sorry you feel the way you do about me, as you have explained above in a comment. I do not know you, I have never met you, but I do have the utmost respect for you because of what you wrote. I have only tried to utilize the E-Book to inform those in need of an Attorney on how they should think when considering on whom to hire for representation with their criminal case. I admire you greatly for having such forethought in writing something that, to me, was incredibly creative, original, and 100% accurate.
Again, I have never taken credit for the E-Book you have written. I will tell the person in charge of managing my website to take it down from my website (I apologize, I do not have the knowledge on such matters as dealing with HTML, content editing, etc.). I only instructed to put it there to try and help those in need for what the content is, and also, honestly, so I could remember that it existed if I ever forgot. I do apologize if you are not flattered for me admiring your work in such a way, because that was not my intention. It was stated above that James Saint, who I know practices in Fort Worth, evidently stole some content from my website. In fact, I know many others have done the same with most of the DWI content I have written. To me, I have always taken that as a sign of respect. Imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, I have never felt threatened when someone wants to learn from things I have written and utilize it to perhaps make themselves a better Attorney. The fact being I have always felt that being a good, effective, and passionate advocate lies in how you practice law, deal with clients, analyze the facts of a case pertaining to the law germane to the situation, et. – and not the content of what is written on any given website. Again, I do apologize for this, but know that it was not my intention to try and take credit for your work. I do think it is brilliant. It do have remorse in your comments above about me, in that in the same fashion as the person who maintains the blog, you have made assumptions about me without knowing anything about me, my practice, or how I approach ethics with my practice with the clients I am privileged to represent. I take major offense to anyone who has called me a “thief.” This is a ridiculous notion. I take ethical rules incredibly seriously. Your reputation, and your ability and sincere desire to be a passionate advocate, I firmly believe, are the cornerstones of what it takes to be a good, honest, and successful criminal defense attorney.
I do not know the man who posted what he did about me, but I was immediately enraged when I read it on my I-phone what he accused me of, in that he made very pointed assumptions about me as a person, and as a lawyer, without even so much as contacting me in person to find out the situation before making such bold claims. What I find the most ridiculous is that it was written over some web content relating to some rules on were 12 Rules of Client Service. If trying to achieve maximum client satisfaction is wrong in this job, then I think whoever thinks differently has a different mindset than my own. I truly do not know Dan Hull, or the person who made these assertions about me, but I found it incredibly presumptuous to write something so blatant, without first assessing and gathering the necessary facts. I believe the first comment to his blog post was something that was contradictory to what he was purporting.
I am a firm believer that criminal defense attorneys should not be at odds with each other, or partake in action in an overly competitive fashion. I think that is counterproductive. In that fashion, I would think having other attorneys trying their best to promote ethics and morality into their practice, and firm, would all be good things. This particular page was posted entirely by a 3rd party trying to incorporate Rules that they know I would agree with. I had no idea it even came from another website, or where it came from. I just knew I liked the part about inundating our clients with communication. I stress that very much with all those I work with, because I think it is of the utmost importance. In actually, I don’t really agree or have an opinion on any of the other rules mentioned among the twelve listed. I have never given much thought to actually putting something like this on paper. My main goal is to achieve maximum client satisfaction and success, period. It is not to spend all of my time worrying over what content is on my web pages. Honestly, things like this to me, are trivial, and should be a non-issue and are an utter, and complete waste of time. Impugning the integrity of an attorney over something like this, without giving them the opportunity to respond, is ridiculous. At any rate, I could care less what anyone else here has posted about me, or about any of my aforementioned comments. They obviously do not know me, or the cornerstones of what I believe make up the foundation of a man, and his role as an advocate and an attorney. I do care about how you think about how I viewed your E-Book. I want to emphasize once again, in no way was I trying to take credit for your work. I was merely trying to promote all of your viewpoints, because I found them so insightful and helpful to those we should be considering and caring for the most: our clients.
Again, I apologize for flying off the handle earlier today. I just felt I was unnecessarily attacked by some unknown blogger in NYC, who presumably tried to write one e-mail to me about this post. I can honestly say that A) I did not receive the e-mail if it was indeed sent; B) I did not even know and/or remember these 12 rules and that they were even on my website; C) as of right now, I do not possess the knowledge to take it down myself even if I wanted to, I will have to get my content manager to do so; and D) if it was indeed sent, it either went into my Spam Folder, or he is not actually being truthful in sending it to me. In actually, it baffles me that he has nothing better to do than to write about something like this at all. I do have multiple e-mail addresses, however, so I do not know the answer to this and whether or not he did send the purported e-mail he claims he sent. I do know that before writing such an impugning blog post, he could have just picked up the phone and made a call and asked whatever questions he was seeking directly to me. He didn’t even wait for an answer before writing this dubious attack on me and my credibility as an attorney. I was not trying to be boastful of any accomplishments, and in no way was I trying to utilize this to gain some advantage to obtain more business. On the contrary, if anything, I was trying to encourage my own firm as to how we should approach our representation. Quite honestly, I don’t think I have updated my website in well over a year. And I apologize to Mr. Hull if he did take offense to this, I was not trying to take credit for his 12 rules (which I believe were only one sentence each, so it was not like he wrote a novel on the subject). If anything, it seems after reviewing where this came from, it seems he is encouraging other criminal defense attorneys to have the same mindset as motivation, which if that was his goal in coming up with it, I applaud him for doing so. I did not think, nor did it even pass into my mindset, ever, that someone would write a blog post accusing me of being a “thief” – losing my integrity as an attorney, or that I was attempting to surreptitiously act in a way akin to plagiarism.
And most of all, I apologize to you if you feel the same way the author of this blog felt when first writing his post about me. I do think your E-Book is fantastic, regardless of how you, he, or how I feel about the situation and all of the comments made. If I had written something so insightful, I would want every potential client in America to read it if they were faced with a criminal accusation. In that fashion, you are, in effect, an innovator in helping those who are in desperate need of assistance in trying to make an informed decision. And for that, you have my utmost respect. I do think anyone who has to go through the criminal justice system, regardless of what county/jurisdiction they are in, would benefit from reading it and analyzing what you wrote. It is truly a very creative and wonderfully written article. If this post gets deleted, as I assume it will by whoever the guy is who moderates this blog, I will e-mail you this directly, if I can find your e-mail somehow. To all other people who seem to enjoy blogging so much and reading other people’s posts, my suggestion and standpoint is the same as before. Spend less time hunched over a computer ridiculing other lawyers whom you have never met or seen in a courtroom, and more time trying to help and assist clients, other attorneys, and your own practice and ability to practice law. I am always trying to constantly improve myself. I do not see how spending countless hours blogging about different legal situations helps improve upon building yourself to be a better attorney and advocate for the people. That is just my viewpoint, and I would not be so opinionated, and am only asserting this notion because something very unscrupulous was written about me, with absolutely no foundation. In the criminal defense world, to me, success and building a foundation for a practice occurs in a the courtroom, and not hunched over a computer – and it’s certainly not built and/or productive to post incessant blogs about everything under the sun, especially when you disparage someone you have never even met before. I do apologize for the tone of my original comments. I consider myself a tenacious fighter and defender of those I represent in court and do my absolute best to vigorously protect their rights. When I originally saw that my own reputation and integrity were being impugned by someone I have never even met before, my mindset could not help but go into full aggressive trial mode, as I would, and do, for those whom I represent.
At least you used paragraph breaks this time…
1 – I did’t steal it
2 – Even if I did steal it, I didn’t know I was stealing it
3 – If I know I was stealing it, it’s really my content writer who stole it
This style of argument makes perfect sense in the courtroom, where it isn’t a matter of whether your client committed the crime, but whether the arguments and evidence are sufficient for a conviction. When you use this sort of argument man-to-man, however, you come off as a weasel in a trap, just trying to say anything that will get you out of trouble.
You know, now, that your blog has at least three stolen works on it. Two of these are published under your name as if you wrote it. One cites the original author, but still hands out their copyrighted content without their permission.
Here is how a responsible (and innocent) adult responds when he finds out about this,
“Wow, thank you for bringing that to my attention. I was unaware my content writer was stealing intellectual property, and especially so they were re-publishing it in my name. Its entirely understandable you see me as a thief, as I authorized a thief to publish work under my name. Rest assured, this matter will be corrected by Monday.”
But it is too late. This post is #4 in Google search results for “Carl David Ceder.”
Carl, meet Barbara.
Correction: “Carl, meet Barbra” 🙂
*popcorn*
Mr. Cedar,
I’m delighted to have read your comments. If this Yankee is ever unfortunate enough to find himself in that shithole of a state called Texas, and in need of defense from the authorities there, I now know at least one lawyer whose name I will skip over when perusing the yellow pages.
Anyone who has been victimized by plagiarism in the USA has recourse through the DMCA. It’s a powerful, if often abused, tool that allows copyright holders, in this case the people whose content was copied without their consent, to force the hosting provider to remove infringing content.
Since carlcederlaw.com doesn’t appear to list a DMCA enforcement contact, it’s reasonable to go through the ISP hosting the web site.
A quick “Whois” lookup of carlcederlaw.com reveals the site’s DNS is provided by hostgator.com. They, in turn, have a web form for submitting DMCA requests: http://www.hostgator.com/dmca
The DMCA has some reasonable anti-SLAAP aspects. Filing a DMCA complaint without being the copyright holder or their legal representative, especially against a lawyer, is stupid. Just ask Youtube’s VenomFangX about his efforts to abuse the DMCA when attacking Thunderf00t.
If any of the copyright holders want to pursue this matter, something they may HAVE to do to protect their copyright, a DMCA complaint would be a reasonable response.
You do realize this is a law blog and we’re all lawyers, even Tannebaum, right?
But of course I know it’s a legal blog full of lawyers! My comment was more for the benefit of Mr. Ceder. He brags about not being a blogger and appears to think plagiarism should be grounds for feeling flattered, so I suspected things like the DMCA might be foreign to him. His reply reminds me of Judith Griggs and the Cooks Source Plagiarism Scandal.
Of course, that debacle was catastrophic for Judith Griggs, as being caught red-handed plagiarizing content and then being mean about it to her victim is a major no-no in publishing. I doubt this will be as career ending for Mr. Ceder.
I thought you might be “advising” Tannebaum. A lot of people feel the need to advise Tannebaum too, but for an entirely different reason than Carl David.
(*snerk*) Oh look, another Internet Tough Guy.
Okay Ceder, let’s sum this up. You ripped somebody off. Then when you got caught out, instead of taking a breath, manning up, and apologizing, you go to the guy’s site who caught you ganking (Greenfield) and start throwing a fit. Insults, snotty comments, name-calling, and — this is the funny part — offering to throw down on people. “Bring a first aid kit,” riiiight.
I hate to be the one breaking the bad news, but I’ve seen you in that promo video of yours and… Dude, you’re a fuckin’ pipsqueak. You’re giving away too much weight. (Oh, that’s right, you’re from that Land of Manly Men, Texas. Lah-ti-fucking-dah. Me, I’m from Oakland; go ahead and bring it. But I digress…)
What it comes down to is that you’re sticking on stupid, and for no good reason. Step away from the computer for a while — the monitor is starting to feel embarrassed for you — take a few breaths, and apologize to Hull and Greenfield. The only thing it’ll hurt is your pride, and a bit of humility is healthy.
Oh, and quit stealing other people’s shit. That too.
He doesn’t really get sarcasm, does he? And why does he keep threatening bodily injury? I thought he was a criminal attorney…do they not have laws about that there? So many questions and only the first of all the blog posts. Which leads me to: those two attorneys he mentioned? I don’t think they know about blogging because it didn’t exist when they practiced (actively seeing as one is still kickin’).
Anywho…pay no attention to intellectual property law (do they even have that in Texas, or is it a “Yankee” thing?). It’s just there for funsies. I mean clearly, Gucci and Louis Vuitton, and Disney, etc. should be flattered that they’re being knocked off and pirated. Forget the fact that they own that property and it is part of their livelihood. Flattery definitely pays the bills!
I also just noticed your disclaimer. Again, I put very little value in worthless blogs. I’m sure you will subject my writing in response to your remarks and either edit and/or delete them. It would be typical of a New York Yankee thinking being a “King Blogger” is more important than being a real Trial Lawyer.
On the contrary, there’s nothing I enjoy better than some guy who steals other people’s content trying to pretend he’s a tough guy. Us New York Yankees are so impressed by puny Texas guys with big hats.
I have noticed that he has already erased one of my comments it seems. Typical.
Up to now, none of your comments posted because comments are moderated (you probably don’t know what that means, cause you’re such an important trial lawyer, you big tough guy, who has no time for the internet except to steal someone else’s content because you’re so busy trying cases). Now you just come off like a blithering idiot again. They’re all here, in all their brilliance. You can’t seriously be as big a dumbass as well as an unethical thief. All you had to do was apologize for being a thief and scumbag, but some guys just can’t stop lying.
And now that I’ve posted your flurry of asinine comments and given you your say, you’re done.
Gentlemen, I am entirely confused by this reply stream. Allow me to post my queries, seeking nothing more than a small sense of resolution surrounding Carl David Ceder.
1. My first question surrounds Mr. Ceder’s rather unreasonable request that Mr. Greenfield bring a first aid kit to their eventual meeting. The practicality of this confounds me and allow me to apologize in advance for my naivete when it comes pre-arranged duels. My understanding (admittedly that of a duel novice) would be that Crazy Carl would be the party to bring the First Aid Kit, since, implicitly, he requests Mr. Greenfield to come to his turf to conduct said discussion and/or duel. It would seem completely unreasonable to request that one would be required to bring their own medical kit and accoutrements (Carl-no worries- link here for definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accoutrement) if they have been INVITED to duel. Rather, I think it would be the clear responsibility of the DuelOR (not a word, Carl David) to bring said kit, if he has already informed the relevant victim of the very necessity of having said kit. Carl, the South is known for it’s charm, so it would, at least to me, be somewhat rude or unbecoming to request Mr. Greenfield labor along to his certain doom while also worrying about whether said kit could be carried on the plane, or whether he would have to check in the kit (thereby, again, forcing him to pay $ for bringing a kit to you). Please expound at your convenience.
2. Mr. Carl David Cedar (CDC)- Is your paralegal also your content editor? If your paralegal is NOT your content editor, do you employ, in a law firm, a SEPARATE content editor? If you do, how do you have the time to interview content editors, given the obvious success of your firm? You seem to discuss, almost (ALMOST!) ad nauseum how successful you are and how little time you have to deal with such trivialities as Mr. Greenfield’s blog (you were so busy, in fact, that you hadn’t the time to punctuate your post above, or so much as grammatically differentiate yourself in your writing from that of an overexcited, middle-of-the-road 10th grader, who had just discovered the ability to stream porn on his Android while also realizing he had a social studies paper due in one hour). I submit to you, sir, that if you do have a content editor, then perhaps he should edit said content. You may, however, have inadvertently employed a content taker (essentially the same except one creates and edits while the other…takes). Of course, my opinion only….
3. I wonder, Carl, what the Texas Disciplinary Committee thinks of attorneys threatening (no matter how grammatically challenged) to harm other attorneys. I took a quick gander (I am a nerd!) and see no section discussing duels, physical threats, bodily harm, or even distinctions amongst Yankee law and Texas law. Perhaps, if you have a moment when you’re not going through your binders and binders of courtroom victories, you could point me to said section.
4. Carl David Cedar- What, for my own understanding, would classify, geographically speaking, as a Yankee? I submit that it should be those that live north of the Mason-Dixon line, but I wouldn’t presume to put words in your mouth or take an idea that you had and submit it as my own, however flattering that may be.
5. Brian- I am still waiting for a copy of my Ebook. For some reason, I have yet to receive it in the post. Have you not received my money order? I will resend.
6, Carl David- I’ve been to the nerd blogger’s house (and was quite late, may I add — of course tardiness is frowned upon in the South). His “blogging” seems to have afforded him quite a lifestyle over a career that spans longer than you or I have had the pleasure of being breathing, dueling, humans. I reckon (lol) that he would be able to teach us a thing or two about practicing law and growing a successful practice. One may wonder why someone could have just soooo much time to blog and protect the integrity of a profession filled with lawyers flattering other lawyers be taking content and not attributing; by employing “content editors” and books of courtroom victories and first aid kits. Might it, my dear Carl David, be because that blogger has been so successful over the course of a career, that he has the ample time required to blog, teach and create, rather than the lack thereof, which necessitates such “online flattery” as you seem to be a zealous advocate of?
7-Lastly, Mr. Cedar, before you’ve so much as an inclination to challenge me to bring various kits or surgeons, friends or bikers to meet and discuss online content, allow me to state a quite relevant fact that perhaps may dissuade you from espousing such a tired position; I, good sir, am from Brooklyn. Over here, we don’t do first aid kits…
C’mon, I bet Brooklyn has the same first aid kits that Oakland does: fast food napkins and duct tape.
Maybe Carl just likes to huff the little alcohol swabs…
Oooh! Almost forgot. Regarding your third question and courtesy of Ken White at Popehat…18 U.S. CODE § 875 – INTERSTATE COMMUNICATIONS
So it’s the Feds he’d be dealing with; they don’t care if your Texan, Yankee, Okie, Yooper, Cali, or Zoner. According to section (c), you can’t threaten people across state lines with physical harm, and if you do, the Feds will be right up your ass with a fine and prison time.
I swear, the more I read about this Ceder dude, the more I wonder how he ties his shoes in the morning without strangling himself.
You realize Daniel’s comment was for Carl’s benefit, not yours, right? You kinda stepped on Daniel’s joke there. And you weren’t funny enough to make it worthwhile.
And all the lawyers here really appreciate your letting us know that you learned a statute from Ken. It means a lot.
Sorry. No offense meant.
No offense taken.
Carl Ceder writes: “I just found this and take major offense.”
What, that somebody discovered that you took somebody else’s writing, stripped out their name and posted it on your website like you wrote it…right under a huge picture of your head?
Yay, Scott, for exposing this.
And Carl, if you decide to look for integrity, try to find carriage returns while you’re on your journey.
Seems he’s a trial lawyer. From Texas. Who spends all his time trying cases. In Texas. Not like you Yankees. Who he’s going to beat up.
Carl Ceder: “We do things differently in Texas.”
Who’s “we”? I know a bunch of Texans — a few of whom are my nearest neighbors and a bunch of whom are still in Texas — and not one of them is a plagiarizing blowhard.
Amy, get your first aid kit ready.
Jeez-I take a break from trial to find this? Perhaps Dan should bring that Yankee rugby team on a field trip to visit Mr. Ceder? They have Yankee first aid kits, I think. I’m not sure Mr. Ceder is acquainted with the Texas phrase, “All hat and no cattle.” It’s what we used to say back in the day in South Texas. Pathetic.
Is this for real? No way this guy is THAT much of a dumbass.
There is no one who can make a guy look like more of dumbass than himself.
This is what I don’t get. “12 Rules for (sic) Client Service” are still up on that blog without permission, attribution, apology or justification as of 9:08 pm ET. See, http://www.carlcederlaw.com/12-rules-for-client-service He’s been on notice about the problem since December 2 (i.e., my note to his blog and Scott’s piece). More to come. In the meantime, as always, I appreciate Scott’s moxie and work. I am especially touched by the efforts of all you other pansy non-trial lawyer writer types to take up the cause. 🙂 Seriously, thanks everyone. JDH
Awwww, don’t cut off Carl David Cedar, Esq. Give him all the rope he wants. Provided he promises to learn what the [Enter] key is for.
What a dumbass. Upper left on his homepage he used the UK verb form “practise” as the object of a preposition. All that aside, he is a fairly accomplished young man. I wish he would address the plagiarism issue. With his ambition he almost seems more oriented to be a prosecutor, and we know how seldom they admit to being wrong.
I take offense to this crooked guy having my first name.
But don’t give him a hard time for his angry and rambling comments here. This is his first time ever writing things on the Internet, so he doesn’t know all of the rules for how not to look like a fool.
Let it be known, that Mr. Greenfield, refuses for me to respond to the comments on his blog. This seems to be directly in contradiction of why he has a blog. It seems typical of him, he likes to bash people, while not giving them to respond to accusations that he makes against others, while not letting them respond. Know that I plan to respond to this in a major way in all blogs that I can think of with your comments of me being a “kid” lawyer; me losing my integrity, etc. I take it you take offense to my comments on you spending a ridiculousl amount of time at your computer blogging, as opposed to lawyering. I would feel bad if I were you too. Only those who feel the need to disparage others are unhappy people. What you did is wrong, it lacks, integrity, and it is unprofessional. I did nothing to you. You made NO ATTEMPT TO CONTACT ME. NONE. You claim you wrote one e-mail. I find this as untruthful now that I did before, given your refusal to post my response to the E-Book portion. Again, I plan to write comments about you blog on every blog I can find. When someone googles your name, what I write regarding how you like to attack insults at attorneys trying to do their job, without merit or any investigation, that is all people will find. Please know that.
Thanks for the warning. I will govern myself accordingly.
Oh noes!! Another idiot carping at you, what will you possibly do.
Same idiot. New day.
For a guy who is supposedly too busy too blog, nice to know he’ll have time to write about you in the comments on “every blog he comes across”.
I imagine he’ll assume they’re trying to censor him too, since he still hasn’t figured out moderated comments means things don’t go up instantly, not that people are trying to suppress his speech.
Carl,
Did you see the button below that says: Did this post hurt your feelings?
Perhaps you should click it…
I was really enjoying this entire thread until this sentence:
“When someone googles your name, what I write regarding how you like to attack insults at attorneys trying to do their job, without merit or any investigation, that is all people will find.”
Now my brain seems to be broken. Wish I could find my first aid kit.
Carl do me a favor. Write nasty comments about me too across the Internet, if it is your inclination. I’d be honored to say some lawyer from Texas sued me too when he sued Scott Greenfield. I am essentially anti-fragile to your attacks, like a box that says “please fold, spindle or mutilate.” (Credit Nassim N. Taleb.)
I just respectfully request that you to spell my name right if you do. Godfrey, not Godbaum, Godberg or Godfried.
Having a name that begins with God raises some curious choices. Green, not so much.
And should Carl David decide to sue me, I would be honored to be sued along with you as well.
Carl, this isn’t worth your time.
You should definitely have your content manager do it for you.
Well, duh. Carl is much too busy trying cases, unlike us New York Yankee lawyers who do nothing but blog on the computer. Granted, I still have no clue what he means by how I “like to attack insults at attorneys trying to do their job” of stealing content from other people, but maybe that’s a Dallas thing.
It’s not a Dallas thing, I’m from the Dallas area and his responses embarrass me as a Texan.
I find his writing to be difficult to read and it definitely doesn’t make much sense. It sure does not reflect favorably on the U of H law school.
BTW, if you decide to meet him for a duel, with the recommended first aid kit, I would be more than happy to act as your second.
Very kind of you to offer. While I expect to be in Houston in March, I don’t have any plans for Dallas. Of course, Carl David is welcome to duel me in Houston at his leisure.
This braggart didn’t even go to UT Law? So where does his colossal ego come from?
fight yankee blogger
big paragraph bad grammar
get first aid kit now
Have you considered a future in the military?
The internet is a tricky place. I know I would get emails and snarky notices when I wouldn’t link or give proper credit and it is annoying. But I wanted to write and so I followed the rules as I learned them. Plagiarism never occurred to me. I suppose I just wasn’t busy enough to steal content. I just didn’t write when I am too busy to do it.
The part that bothers me, though, and what I don’t understand is the whole Texas is better than the North part. Sadly I live in Virginia now, but NORTHERN Virginia and I will never claim to be anything but a Yankee. And well, does Mexico even want Texas back? I don’t get how him being from Texas makes him more entitled to plagiarism. Is that like a special law they passed?
I feel like this guy is like a trapped animal right now. He needs to find a way out of this and it probably should begin by not responding to any more of these posts and maybe apologizing or I don’t know, not acting like being from Texas gives he some license to act like a douche.
Mirriam – notice that Mexico always lays claim to California, but never Texas…I think they’re avoiding having to take Carl David in that (bad) bargain.
Carl David Ceder, you plagiarized — posted others’ writing under that big huge picture of your head sans attribution. Guess what: There’s no rule of notification when another person notices this and writes about it. (Do I really have to instruct a bigtime, important lawyer like you of this?)
Regarding comments here, it wouldn’t be out of line if Scott never let you post because he buys the bandwidth. But Scott is bigger than that and knows better than that and allowed you to come here and make yourself look like an ass in addition to being a plagiarist. Amusingly, bluster boy, you seem utterly clueless — still — about how moderated comments work.
As Hull points out above, the items are still up on your website.
“Only those who feel the need to disparage others are unhappy people,” you, Carl David Ceder, write.
Or, perhaps, people who catch assholes who take others’ written work and pass it off as their own.
Yes, amazingly, are people out there who find it worthwhile to go after the unethical and shine a light on them. Scott is one of them, and I really appreciate that about him, as, I’m sure, do those whose work you published on your site as if it were your own. This is theft — stealing the fruits of somebody’s labor — same as it would be if you stole the TV they’d bought with money that they earned at their 9 to 5 job.
How come a bigtime lawyer like you doesn’t understand that?
I’ve had a few posts stolen over the years. I find it incredibly irritating to say the least that someone takes my words and puts their name on the post. Isn’t there a copyright law being violated with some serious fine levels involved? IANAL and can’t afford one but boy, howdy do I wish I could go after some of these a-holes
Yo, Carl, still curious about your claim of non-stop trial experience. And I am STILL calling bullshit on your “over 50 Felony and Misdemeanor cases to either or Judge or Jury” line….since it is in over five years (though seven+ looks ill stated).
Can you elaborate for the unwashed masses here? Por favor to put it in your precious Texan, not “Yankee”, lingo?
How many of those were actual jury trials, and how many misdemeanor trials to the court? Are you SURE none of those were civil traffic violations and not even misdemeanors?
Eh, he might have reached 50 with misdemeanor bench trials (especially since he seems adept at holding himself out to potential clients as way more than he is), but I’m betting actual felony jury trials are in the single digits. But, I better shut up, because he may come here to NC and beat me up.
Yeah, sorry wasn’t really clear, that was my point. If you include criminal traffic and bench misdemeanors, I bet I had fifty trials in first year and a half or so. Now if it were 50 jury trials, then that is something different. But I’m going to go out on a limb and think there is a reason he put the “trial to a judge” language in there, and the reason is that is most of the 50. Just a guess.
In many of the comments, people were questioning if these insane belligerent rants were really from Carl Ceder. If he had not previously been my attorney, I would not have believed it either! Yes, I personally had the misfortune of being represented by Carl Cedar! The man has no clue what he is doing! I feared he was a drug or alcohol abuser due to his incompetence! My favorite part of this is his blatant lie of how important it is to him to keep his clients informed… He never returned e-mails and always gave a lengthy excuse! Every time I talked to him I had to refresh his memory- it was like we were speaking for the first time! He told me a bunch of BS to put my mind at ease, yet they were lies! No follow through! At one point I stood up to him and called him on the carpet regarding his lies- big mistake! He went crazy on me sending me emails that made no sense! I’ll be honest they frightened me. I thought any person who would send me such rants can not possibly be mentally stable! So yes, believe it- it is him!
As we say here in the South, Bless his heart, he just doesn’t have a lick of sense or honesty!
In Texas, traffic tickets are criminal; a guilt plea is technically a trial. That said, 8–10 DWI jury trials a year is not unheard-of in Collin County, where Ceder’s office address is.
If you google the name ‘Carl David Ceder’, this blog post is now #3 in the results. What a fine way to make a name for oneself. I wish you good luck, Mr. Ceder, although I don’t expect it. Your carefully professed ignorance of all things ‘internet’ is not serving you well.
He’ll probably have his content manager and staff deal with it. He has no time for this as he’s too busy trying cases like a real lawyer.
Earlier today, in a clear but non-threatening way, I asked Carl David Ceder in an email–which I am 100% certain he has received–to remove The 12 Rules from his blog and from any other sites he maintains. Greenfield has a copy of it.
I also invited Carl to telephone me in case he wants to chat or ask questions.
Let’s see what Carl does.
In a fashion far kinder than I would advise, because Ceder is young, clearly foolish and apparently suffering serious intellectual challenges, Hull has given Ceder an opportunity to clean up that part of his mess that gave rise to this post. While it wouldn’t be my way to offer a kid a fifth chance to do the right thing, Hull is far nicer to the youth of Texas than I am.
As of this writing, he has failed to remove the stolen content, call Hull on the telephone or invite him to step outside for a duel. My expectations of Ceder are low.
Pingback: Texas Attorney Carl David Ceder Makes Bogus Libel Threat Against Scott Greenfield of Simple Justice | Popehat
As a fellow Texan, I would like to apologize to the world for the actions and horrible writing of Carl David Ceder. While I am sure you can find many more examples of egregious behavior from other Texans, I can assure you that most of us are decent, hard-working folk that are above stealing content from other sites and publishing it as if it were our own. Most of us are also smart enough to stop digging when the hole has become the size of a grave that could hold our career.
I just checked Mr. Ceder’s web site and it appears he has revised his mis-appropriated 12 rules content with some of his own. Unfortunately, he has replaced it with a bunch of junk comparable to his comments on this blog post. It is worth noting that a good portion of the new content is direct quotes of Vince Lombardi but with attribution. Apparently, he has not been practicing long enough to have his own thoughts on the subject.
Perhaps you’ve taught the boy a lesson. Now if he could just man up and apologize. What a knucklehead.
I have a great many friends in Texas. He is not like them.
Pingback: What Is The First Rule Of Holes? Bueller…Bueller? | That Mr. G Guy's Blog
Not to make too light of a serious subject . . . but this is the funniest comment thread I’ve read in a while.
The Texas trial lawyer too busy to blog “contributed” 4620 words to this blog in ~24 hours.
I take it you haven’t yet counted words on the balance of Carl’s written thoughts. That was just the start of it.
Not a lawyer. I follow several law blogs as I am a big reader. Been on the Web since it began and usenet before that.
This stuff is funny. Some of you should be submitting jokes to late night comedians.
That said, Carl David Ceder is, in my humble opinion, a chrome plated asshole. I know I can say this because I have been reading popehat.com and Ken White is a hero of mine. That’s how I got here. (Carl, I can provide the cites if you need them, even though I am not a big time lawyer from the great state of Texas. However, most of them will be Federal so I don’t know if your county and/or city recognizes them or not.)
I have bookmarked this site and will be back again. Although, I seriously doubt I will be witness to this kind of asshattery again. The skill of the takedown due to moderation and, dare I say it, experience (poor Carl), is truly priceless.
Ken is deservedly the hero of the great unwashed. He does, however, wash himself. Just to avoid any confusion.
But ViaAngus may not.
I refuse to comment on Angus’ hygiene. But he is a handsome devil, I’m sure.
This comment thread made my morning, so I couldn’t resist piling on the plagiarism bus.
I was taking a look at Mr. Ceder’s website and noticed that his front page has a scrolling display with some lovely stock-art-ey looking photography … I couldn’t help but wonder where Mr. Ceder might have gotten it.
Banner #2 is a computer-rendered Texas flag against a cloudy blue sky. (Evidently there were no actual photographs of Texas flags available).
Mr. Ceder’s banner is at http://bit.ly/1jql5Pi
The same image is available for licensing here: http://bit.ly/LZdr0U (the site isn’t in English).
Banner 4 (http://bit.ly/1l1MCbL) is a photo of the Lincoln Memorial. Couldn’t find the original source, but I did find another use of the same photo at: http://bit.ly/1f9rStq
Banner 5 is a closeup on the arms of a handcuffed man in a suit and tie.
Mr. Ceder’s version: http://bit.ly/1mLAnym It (or a very similar picture of the same man with his hands clenched) pops up on half a dozen attorney websites (See a Google Image Search at http://bit.ly/1g4ylbY ). From the look of it, I have no doubt it’s from someone’s stock art collection.
So I’m curious, Mr. Ceder … did you pay to license the pictures for your website? Does your content manager handle that? Do you have a separate website photo manager to take care of that for you?
(And before you ask, yes, of course I have better things to do than nitpick another lawyer’s website for copyright violations. I’m procrastinating, and this seemed more productive than a round of Candy Crush).
… and then I saw the Youtube ad ([Ed. Note: Link deleted per rules.])
We open on a vertical blind-wipe to a photo of a courtroom–turns out that’s the Kentucky Supreme Court chambers. I know because the State of Kentucky helpfully posted a familiar-looking photo of it here:
[Ed. Note: Link deleted per rules.]
Star-wipe (dude … you don’t have to push every button just because it’s there) to a picture of the bench in a different courtroom. Turns out this one’s in Minnesota, although it pops up on lawyers’ websites nationwide.
[Ed. Note: Links deleted per rules.]
… etc, etc.
The background music, btw, is called SoundSpark, by an artist named Dano ([Ed. Note: Link deleted per rules.]). He’s nice enough to license his music for use in videos like this one royalty-free as long as he’s given attribution (before you look, no … he wasn’t).
AK
I cut you a little slack, and you post every link on the internets? No.
My bad … didn’t see the note about hyperlinks in comments.
So your alternative was Candy Crush? Dude, seriously?
That or getting back to work.
Adam, I commend your work. Do you know TinEye? It reveals, for example, that the handcuffed hands are from F1Online.
I didn’t, actually. Used Google Image search and vanilla sleuthing (i.e. the Kentucky state flag is in the far corner of the courtroom picture)
Wow. Totally awesome comments from Carl David Ceder. Right out of the Jack Marshall School of Commenting.
And Carl, don’t worry about Scott deleting your comments. He would never be dumb enough to take the rope out of the hand of an adversary who was hellbent on hanging himself.
Jack! I forgot all about Jack.
How could you forget about ol’ Jack?
I’m sure he is working on a list about this gentleman as we speak.
This is absolutely beautiful. Esp the part where our friend Carl David Ceder promises to roam the internet posting mean comments about you. Merci beaucoup for the lunch hour entertainment!
Come back for the dinner theater.
Pingback: Fake Carl Ceder » Defending People
Pingback: Bring a First Aid Kit: Online Damage Control for Lawyers » Defending People
Oh. My. God. I would write more if I were not slow-clapping the greatest interweb thread I have read in a long time. Surely this was a staged piece of performance art? It had to be scripted. It is impossible for there to be someone as douchey as Mr. Ceder. It simply can’t be. If it’s true. And he is real. I get on my knees and thank the interweb gods for creating him and giving him to us to enjoy. His clients? They may feel differently. Although, given his heavy trial schedule, I doubt he has time to find clients, so he probably just hangs out at court trying cases of the lawyers he’s beaten in duels. Is that considered appropriate in Texas? Or is that a Yankee thing? Bravo counselor. Bravo.
Almost every comment on here is prideful and unkind. These things should be talked about in person and not in writing.
And why in the world should this be talked about in person and not in writing?
And I suppose the comments are prideful, but that can’t be helped given what Carl has done to himself. Don’t you agree?
I believe, Greenmoyal, that she is saying that we have committed the sin of pride and are not behaving like good Christians, which would constrain us to be kind to Carl no matter how big a douche he is.
First, you spelled GreenmoyEl wrong. And second, we probably haven’t behaved like good Christians.
Having been raised on a steady diet of Pat Robertson and the 700 Club, I’d say the “God Christian” thing to do IS be judgmental and condescending, so the bulk of the posts here, even those of Carl David Cedar, have been perfectly and reasonably Christian.
Well, Carl’s apparent attempt to call out a critic for a duel or a fight is a bit unchristian, until you take into account the Crusades, the Inquisition and The Christian Dominion movement. Once you do that, his behavior slots back into being very Christian indeed.
I defer on the good Christian thing, not being, you know, good or Christian.
You clearly have no idea what I was saying. And I don’t believe I defended Carl in my comment. However, I think you’re all deceived if you think you’re any better.
Deceived? Not likely.
Carl had more than a month to respond to all of this. To place a call. To apologize. To remove the plagiarism without comment.
Instead, he doubled down on the cray-cray. Went on the offensive. The response here was far tamer than he deserved.
You do realize that Jennifer is a bit on the cray-cray side too. I was hoping she would be more fun, but she’s the boring kind of crazy. She adds nothing.
Give it time. Another 6 days will pass between responses and she will come out with the good stuff. The stuff that makes commenting the stuff dreams are made of.
Or else be really boring again.
I really wish someone had downloaded the homesplice video. That was destined to be a classic.
Jennifer’s IP address doesn’t resolve to, oh I dunno, the same city that Carl’s did, does it?
I am honor bound not to reveal any information about a commenter’s IP address, even if it is from Texas. Oh damn.
Just wondering g why someone might defend him…
Makes sense, though.
Whenever it seems like it’s one guy against the world, it happens. Hell, I feel a little bad for him, not that he didn’t cause his own problems.
I think you should have some background from at least a phone conversation before you start posting personal things.
There was nothing “personal” posted. Everything came from either Carl’s public website, his public Youtube videos or emails he sent out publicly. He was sent an email before anything was posted, and he didn’t respond. So no, he’s not entitled to a phone conversation, a certified letter, sky-writing or anything else.
And you can always ‘help’ the way you choose to respond to something you think is wrong or unjust. You can take a more dignified approach than the one taken by many on your blog.
Also, you obviously think that Carl was wrong to ‘cheat’ or ‘steal,’ I think those were the words you used. You clearly see that as bad behavior, but then you go on to say that you are ‘neither Christian nor good.’ I realize it was probably sarcasm, but all the same it’s ironic. If you say you’re not good, then why spend so much time writing about someone else’s bad behavior?
So you’re suggesting that it’s good to steal other people’s content? You’re comments are making less sense as you go along. Unfortunately, whether an approach meets your vision of “dignified” is irrelevant. Nobody asked you. And, as might be readily obvious, nobody agrees with your vision of dignity.
So is stealing dignified? You see, your position is morally bankrupt. Sorry, Jennifer, but you have nothing.
Jennifer makes total sense to me. She believes that when you think someone has cheated or stolen, you call them. Something like “Hi Carl, can we discuss your cheating and theft?” Jennifer believes you should just reach out and touch someone.
Well, since you put it that way, that changes everything.
Look guys, if you want to talk bad about Jennifer, you owe it to her to call her up and discuss how hilarious her cray-cray is first before you share the love with us here. I tell you, some people…
It’s like I never learn.
What about getting Jennifer and Carl on a conference call? Just throwing out ideas.
Or maybe they could meet up at a Starbucks and call me on speaker?
Are you making fun? Because I am totally dead serious here. I have a conference number, with a pass code and everything.
Whoa. I said Starbucks. Is anything more serious than Starbucks?
Starbucks?
Oh, you mean “the office”.
On the contrary, behaviors like this should be exposed far and wide so others who would engage in them would feel less free to engage in them.
Ruining my troll here. At least you didn’t use the reply button, so your comment is just floating in the ether and makes no sense at all. Maybe she won’t notice.
A favorite part of Mr. Ceder’s website as I reviewed his bio: The fact that with all his experience as a “Trial Lawyer” he feels the need to tell us he graduated 2nd in his high school class. Bravo sir. I know in my experience as an attorney, my clients always want to know how I did in high school. I wonder if he shares the same bio information when he takes out a fine Texas flower for at date?
By the way, GreenUnit, I still have not received the phone call from Carl he promised last week. In his long email to me of January 22 included in your post that day, Carl confirmed that he “took down” the 12 Rules. Near the end of the letter, he also said:
“Again, I hope this clarifies anything you were concerned with. You can be expecting a call from me this week, as can the owner of blog.simplejustice.us.”
Carl has yet to deliver on that promise.
Greenmoyel didn’t get a call either. I sat there, hunched over the phone, just in case.
Pingback: Not For Attribution | Simple Justice
I always thought the purpose of having professional certifications was to maintain a cetain standard level of intelligence and competence for said profession. Can we truly believe he actually passed the bar exam?
This is hard to believe and too good to be true. The only thing I can think of to explain it is excessive alcohol consumption. Throw in a sloppy drunk and it makes sense, anything else, forget it. Mental illness might, but he’d be too crazy to hold down a practice and stay in business. Maybe, maybe he’s bi-polar and that could explain some of it, but I’m going with booze, lots of it.
I have got to interject- Carl Ceder represented me in court years ago. He was terrible! I considered reporting him but who would be believed a hot shot attorney or a criminal? (Incase you are wondering, it was my first arrest and I drank one too many.) He told me what I wanted to hear then denied saying it. He never returned my calls then acted like I was over reacting. He called me on a weekend and I suspected he had been drinking. It was confirmed in my mind when he forgot entirely that he called me. Mentally ill- absolutely!
The man in not playing with a full deck!