It appears that the Liberal OC guys have thrown down the gauntlet, even though Pedroza has yet to be served. As we related ealier today, their pal Martin Wisckol shilled for them over at the Total Buzz blog. Now our friend Gustavo Arellano has weighed in on this case over at the O.C. Weekly.
Now what?
Well, we suspect the case will be tossed out, but let’s say, for argument’s sake, that the trial proceeds. What will happen?
We asked our legal experts for their opinion and what we came up with, below, is our idea as to how the Liberal OC federal trial just might go…
Scene: O.C. Federal Courthouse
Setting: The lawyers have made their opening arguments. Now Pedroza’s defense lawyer is beginning to call up witnesses to the stand. The first witness is Janet Nguyen, Chairman of the Orange County Board of Supervisors. After she is sworn in, the questions begin.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Chairman Nguyen, does Ryan Trabuco work for you?
Chairman Janet: Uh, no.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: When did he stop working for you?
Todd Gallinger (Lib OC Lawyer): Objection! Leading the witness.
Judge: Overruled. But counsel I would ask you to stop beating around the bush and get to the question.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Sorry your honor. Chairman Nguyen, did Mr. Trabuco work for you?
Chairman Janet: Yes, he did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Why doesn’t he work for you now?
Chairman Janet: That is a private personnel matter.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did Mr. Trabuco engage in political attacks on activists and bloggers unfriendly to you, including my client, Mr. Pedroza, while he worked for you?
Chairman Janet: I would rather not answer that.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: May I remind you Chairman Janet that you are under oath? Now would you please confirm if Mr. Trabuco was working for you when he sold the URL www.artpedroza.com to Mr. Dan Chmielewski?
Chairman Janet: I don’t know.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Your honor (speaking to the judge) I would like to enter this memo, labeled Exhibit A, into evidence. It is from the County of Orange Personnel Department. The memo shows that Mr. Trabuco was in fact working for Chairman Janet when he sold the URL in question. He also was working for her when he bought the URL www.seanmill.com.
Judge: Do you have any further questions for this witness?
Pedroza’s Laywer: Yes sir I do.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Chairman Janet, would you please tell us if you or your husband Tom Bonikowski directed Mr. Trabuco to buy a URL that appeared on a campaign mailer sent out by your past opponent, Dina Nguyen – and then point that URL to an Asian gay porn website?
Chairman Janet: I have no idea about that.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Your honor, I would like to submit this packet of text messages, and email messages, labeled Exhibit B, into evidence. The messages are from Chairman Janet and her husband, as well as from Mr. Trabuco, to Mr. Pedroza.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Chairman Janet, these messages indicate that you and your husband knew about what Trabuco did. Did you ask him to do it?
Chairman Janet: I am not answering that as I might incriminate myself.
Chairman Janet: Didn’t Mr. Pedroza break the story that you voted against proposed Orange County restaurant letter grade ratings – but didn’t tell anyone that your husband and your chief of staff, Andrew Do, owned a restaurant that had received multiple serious health violations?
Chairman Janet: Well, I guess he did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And didn’t Mr. Pedroza also break the story that you had received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from other restaurants that received major serious health violations, from the Orange County Health Department?
Chairman Janet: Yeah, I guess he did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: No further questions your honor.
Scene: After Gallinger has his turn with Chairman Janet, the next witness takes the stand. The witness is Mr. Trabuco’s grandmother, from Texas.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Good morning Ma’am and thank you for traveling here to California to participate in this trial. I would like to know who visited your grandson when he was in the hospital a couple years ago, here in Garden Grove, after he had emergency surgery to remove his ruptured appendix.
Grandma Williams: Well, it has been a long time, but it was that fellow right there, with the glasses. (Points at Mr. Pedroza).
Pedroza’s Lawyer: No one else?
Grandma Williams: Oh sure, a nice little fellow named Paul was there too.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: (Points to Paul Lucas, who is seated in the back row of the courtroom). Is that him Ma’am?
Grandma Williams: Oh yes! Hello Paul! (waves).
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Your grandson bought a website for Mr. Pedroza. Did you know that?
Grandma Williams: Oh no, I don’t know everything he does. But I know he does do that web stuff.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you know that Mr. Trabuco sold that website, www.artpedroza.com, to Mr. Pedroza’s bitter enemy, Mr. Dan Chmielewski?
Grandma Trabuco: Oh no! Goodness. Why did he do that?
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Good question Ma’am!
Gallinger: Objection your honor!
Judge: C’mon counsel, you know better.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Sorry your honor, please strike that last comment. (Turns back to the witness). Mrs. Trabuco, did Mr. Trabuco participate in his high school’s musical club? Specifically, did he participate in production of musicals?
Grandma Williams: Oh yes he did! He was so cute in Grease! And in Annie get your Gun!
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Is it true, Mrs. Trabuco, that your grandson Ryan’s mother came out of the closet, so to speak, at Mr. Trabuco’s 16th Birthday Party?
Gallinger: Objection your honor! What does this have to do with the case?
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Your honor, Mr. Trabuco is suing my client in part because some anonymous commenter wondered if he might be gay. I am merely determining that there are a number of reasons why someone might suspect that he was gay.
Judge: Well, I don’t like it but I will allow it as it speaks to the case.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Is it true Mrs. Trabuco that your grandson had gay roommates when he lived in Santa Ana and in San Diego and that he lived in the gay quarter of San Diego, and worked for a gay Republican politician?
Grandma Williams: Oh, I don’t know. You will have to ask him. I just know I send him money to help him pay his bills.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: I have no further questions for this witness your honor.
Setting: The next witness has been sworn in and is taking the stand. The witness is Claudio Gallegos.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Mr. Gallegos did you not come to Mr. Pedroza’s house late one evening a couple of years ago and tell him that your mother in law was in the hospital and that you had no money to pay the bill?
Gallegos: I can’t remember.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: May I remind you that you are under oath? Do you remember now?
Gallegos: Well, yes I did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And is it not true that after you borrowed the sum of $1,000 dollars from Mr. Pedroza that you eventually told him that you had lied and that in fact you had a drinking problem?
Gallegos: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And is it not true that despite all that Mr. Pedroza remained your friend and even gave you a Razor cell phone?
Gallegos: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: When did you pay back Mr. Pedroza?
Gallegos: Well, I don’t recall the date exactly.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Was it not after Mr. Chmeilewski bought your defunct blog, the Sunny D?
Gallegos: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And did you not once tell Mr. Pedroza that when you blogged for him people would recognize you from all over Orange County?
Gallegos: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And why did you quit the Orange Juice blog?
Gallegos: I was too busy at the time.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Is it not true that your friends in the Democratic Party, including Jordan Brandman, told you to quit because Pedroza habitually attacks Democratic politicians on his blog?
Gallegos: Well, he does!
Pedroza’s Lawyer: No further questions your honor.
Setting: Another witness has been sworn in. This time Dan Chmielewski is taking the stand.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Mr. Chmielewski, is it not true that you were angry when Mr. Pedroza broke the story about how Noah Krom died?
Chmielewski: Of course I was mad. It was a very low class thing to do.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: But wasn’t it all true? Didn’t Krom fall off a cliff, and didn’t witnesses say that he might have been drunk and that he might have fallen off the cliff while trying to evade paying a cab fare?
Chmielewski: We don’t know that!
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Didn’t TV news stations in Santa Barbara report the same witness accounts?
Chmielewski: So what?
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Why do you suppose that the Santa Barbara County Sheriff never released the Krom toxicology report?
Chmielewski: How do I know? That report shouldn’t be public anyway.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you not join the editor of Red County, Matt Cunningham, in producing a campaign mailer that attacked my client when he ran for the Santa Ana City Council? And did that mailer assert that he was “nuts?”
Chmielewski: You bet I did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Why did you buy the URL www.artpedroza.com?
Chmielewski: Because Mr. Trabuco needed the money.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: But didn’t Mr. Pedroza offer to buy it as well?
Chmielewski: You will have to ask Mr. Trabuco that question.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Don’t worry, I will. Now Mr. Chmielewski, did you not point that URL to your blog, the Liberal OC?
Chmielewski: Sure. I own it and can do as I please with it.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Do you own a trademark for the phrase “The Liberal OC?”
Chmielewski: Yes I do.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: But you don’t own the trademark for the exact phrase “Liberal OC blog?”
Chmielewski: Um, yeah I guess not.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And are the phrases “Madison Alexander PR” or Madison Alexander Public Relations” trademarked?
Chmielewski: No.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Mr. Chmeilewski, did your blog name Mr. Pedroza the “Scariest blogger in Orange County,” back in 2008?
Chmielewski: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Do you think it was a good idea, in hindsight, to provoke the scariest blogger in Orange County?
Chmielewski: I did not do anything wrong.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: No further questions for this witness your honor.
Setting: The last witness for the day is sworn in. Todd Gallinger takes the stand.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Mr. Gallinger, did you not run for the Irvine City Council?
Gallinger: Yes, I did so in 2008.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And what happened?
Gallinger: I don’t understand the question.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you lose to Mr. Steven Choi?
Gallinger: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did Beth Krom endorse you when you ran for the Irvine City Council?
Gallinger: Yes she did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And did Mr. Chmielewski endorse you as well?
Gallinger: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you know that Mr. Pedroza has endorsed Choi for the State Assembly?
Gallinger: I only found out about that recently.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: But you knew this when you filed the lawsuit on behalf of your clients, against Mr. Pedroza?
Gallinger: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Do you feel you have a conflict of interest in this case?
Gallinger: No.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Didn’t Mr. Pedroza offer to trade the URLs in question for the ones that are held by Mr. Chmielewski and Mr. Trabuco?
Gallinger: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: But your clients rejected that deal?
Gallinger: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you and your clients also demand that Pedroza apologize to them on his blog and pay you $5,000 in legal fees?
Gallinger: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: No further questions for this witness your honor.
Setting: Ryan Trabuco is sworn in and takes the stand.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Mr. Trabuco, did you not buy the URL www.artpedroza.com as a favor to your one time friend, Mr. Pedroza?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And did he not at a later date ask you to sell it to him?
Trabuco: Yes he did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: But you sold it to Mr. Chmielewski instead?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Why did you sell it to Mr. Chmielewski instead?
Trabuco: He made me a great offer. I figured Pedroza could not afford to match it. He has four kids and is always broke.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did Chairman Janet Nguyen or her husband direct you to do this?
Trabuco: Um, I don’t want to incriminate myself.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Really? You are under oath. Are you refusing to answer this question?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you buy the url www.seanmill.com?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And who directed you to do that?
Trabuco: Um, I don’t recall.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you buy a URL that was misspelled on a campaign mailer for Dina Nguyen?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And did you point it to an Asian gay porn site?
Trabuco: Um, yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did Chairman Janet or her husband Tom know about this?
Trabuco: Um, yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you not show up to a bar in Santa Ana one night called the Quill and meet several of your friends, as well as a lady friend?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And your lady friend showed up with another guy?
Trabuco: Um, yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Is that normal for a girl to bring another guy on a date?
Trabuco: I don’t know!
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did you work for a gay Republican politician while you were in San Diego?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And did you live in the gay quarter and have a gay roomate?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: In your lawsuit you claim that someone on the Orange Juice blog wondered if you were gay. Given the answers you just gave us, do you think that it might be reasonable for some people to think you might indeed be gay?
Trabuco: No!
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Would it really matter if you were? Or would it pose a difficulty for you as a Republican operative?
Trabuco: Um, I don’t know. I don’t like the question.
Gallinger: Objection your honor, he is badgering the witness.
Judge: Counsel, can you get to the point?
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Sorry your honor. Mr. Trabuco, did you also design and manage the websites for Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido and Santa Ana School Board candidate Irene Ibarra last year?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And who referred you to Ms. Ibarra?
Trabuco: Mr. Pedroza did.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Were you working for Chairman Janet when you sold Pedroza’s URL and acquired Mill’s URL?
Trabuco: Yes, I was.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Your honor, I would like to enter this picture, labeled Exhibit C, into evidence. Mr. Trabuco, is this you in the Sponge Bob hat?
Trabuco: Um, yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And what are you holding in your hand, in the picture?
Trabuco: Um, an alcoholic drink.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: Did Chairman Janet appoint you to the Orange County Alcohol and Drug Advisory Board?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: How many times did you have drinks with Chairman Janet at the Azteca Restaurant in Garden Grove, in the past five years?
Trabuco: Geez, I don’t know. Probably about 100 times. Maybe more.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: And did you serve on a similar commission in San Diego?
Trabuco: Yes.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: How many times did Mr. Pedroza have you over for dinner?
Trabuco: Um, quite a few times.
Pedroza’s Lawyer: No further questions your honor.
That’s it for now. Stay tuned for another chapter of the Liberal OC Federal Lawsuit…
The Lib OC lawyers can bark all they want. I have dealt with these issues going all the way back to 2000, when squatters bought derivations of Pat Buchanan domain names.
There isn’t any Commercial concern, since there was no business attempted on any of the URL’s. No Trademark infringement.
And no matter how important these guys think they are, they are not likely to get through the “famousness” requirements.
Also, Fair Use is in play. Many of these URLs went to “You Suck” commentary pages.
Section 3002(b) creates a new right of action against anyone who registers a domain name the “same as, or confusingly similar to,” a person’s name and who does so “with the intent to sell” the domain name to the named person or to any third party. The court may order the domain name forfeited, canceled or transferred and may award attorney fees to the prevailing plaintiff.
It would be very hard to PROVE that Pedroza bought these with the intent to SELL them, since he no longer owns them, AND did it in retaliation for actions by the plaintiffs.
At worst, attorney fees may be an issue. But it appears the plaintiffs did very little in the way of FIRST SEEKING administrative remedies, such as asking register.com or GoDaddy to recognize their rights to the URLs first. They simply jumped in with both feet.
Now you’ve turned a “relatively” Progressive OC Blog into an anti-Left machine.
Nice.