So there’s a couple of apps out there that’ll predict a guy’s penis size based on his shoe size. Yes, it’s that old (and questionable) wives’ tale now appearing on smartphones everywhere—God knows how many times you’ve been out and about and needed to estimate some guy’s penis size…
But one of the penis size apps involves Chubby Checker, and a lawsuit.
Haven’t heard of that app? But you’ve heard of Chubby Checker, right? Well, the music legend has been battling Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Palm over the use of his stage name—Chubby Checker (real name Ernest Evans)—a name which he just happens to have trademarked—for this app that “converts” shoe size to penis size. Yes, the app is called “The Chubby Checker”.
You can’t fault the real Checker for wanting zero connection to the app—not just because it’s probably one of the stupidest apps that’s ever been created (like, how long do you think anyone would use it? maybe 4-5 times max while slinging back some drinks at happy hour?), and not just because it’s a trademark infringement issue; but take a look at the app description:
FOR ENTERTAINMENT!!! Any of you ladies out there just start seeing someone new and wondering what the size of there member is. Well now you can right now from your phone. All you need to do is find out the man’s shoe size and plug it in and don’t worry where your from because The Chubby Checker supports shoe measurements of different regions and types. Now with The Chubby Checker there is no need for disappointment or surprise…
Who the heck wrote this? Yes, there are people out there that even spell-check cannot help. And here’s a screenshot of what you’ll get you once you “input” your man’s shoe size:
Verdict on the Chubby Checker app: Not So Sweet.
Given that The Chubby Checker app has only had 2,364 downloads—which is like less than the average graduating class size at many US universities—it’s not as though anyone’s really clamoring for ability to estimate penis size. A good thing for Checker.
Unfortunately, though, Checker had already sent a cease and desist letter to both HP and Palm that apparently went unanswered and certainly unheeded. So now he’s suing.
For those wondering about the other penis sizer app of note, it’s called The Predicktor (ha-ha get it?) and, rather than being targeted toward women, this one’s aimed at men—for those insecure moments when a guy wonders how he measures up. At least from a screenshot perspective, The Predicktor measures up better than The Chubby Checker:
Created by Canadian doc, Dr. Chris Culligan, the Predicktor claims to share “scientific journal articles reporting on men’s health and sexuality. This includes the actual distribution of penis size, as found in peer review journals. It also touches on selected literature studying what women really think about men’s genitalia—not the locker room giggles but actual results from surveys.”
Predicktor, which was “on sale” for 99¢ for Valentine’s Day, gauges the size of a man’s erect penis after the user enters his height, sexual orientation and finger length.
Maybe there’ll soon be an Estitmator app for guys wondering how endowed their gals really are…
You are so out of the loop if you don’t know Kevin Butler. But don’t feel bad—we took a completely non-scientific poll over on our Facebook page and found that no one we asked knows who the hell Kevin Butler is. Nor do they apparently care.
But Sony cared.
See, Kevin Butler is the fictitious character played by ad actor Jerry Lambert in Sony’s PlayStation commercials. Going out on a limb here, but guessing you don’t know who Jerry Lambert is either. Both Jerry and Kevin are pretty comical in the Sony commercials—but that’s neither here nor there.
Apparently, Sony thinks you know Jerry—or Kevin—and that you watch and internalize his every move. And so when Jerry went and did a commercial for Bridgestone earlier in 2012 in which a Nintendo Wii was offered as part of a promotion, and in which Jerry (not Kevin) happens to play on a Wii along with a cast of other Bridgestone “employees”, well…
You can imagine how the phones were ringing off the hook over at Sony with pissed-off consumers getting all confused at seeing Jerry play on a Wii when everyone knows his fake character, Kevin, endorses PlayStation. (That would be sarcasm for those who missed it).
In October 2012, Sony sued Jerry (they couldn’t quite sue a fictitious character, so Kevin was off the hook here) for violating the Lanham Act, misappropriation, breach of contract and tortious interference with a contractual relationship. The Lanham Act covers things like trademark infringement and trademark dilution as well as false advertising. Of course, by having a fictitious spokesperson be seen using two different video game systems, well, you can imagine the alleged damage done to PlayStation.
Regardless, Jerry (the real actor) did admit that his appearance in both company’s commercials with two different video game systems might confuse some folks. And so, the two—Jerry and Sony—settled (Bridgestone also took Jerry out of their ad).
According to the terms of the settlement as reported by Joystiq, Jerry Lambert has agreed to not appear in any advertisements that feature or mention “any other video game or computer entertainment system or video game company” for two years. Additionally, for another two years after that, he must notify Sony if he wants to appear in gaming ads so Sony can assess whether his intended performance will infringe on the Kevin Butler character.
So that’s who the heck Kevin Butler is. We’re glad the air’s been cleared as clearly a ton of folks—who didn’t even know who Kevin Butler was—were confused over which video gaming system he really preferred. Phew—disaster averted!
By the way, one astute fan of ours—named Jay (go Jay!)—did actually know that Kevin Butler was a placekicker for the University of Georgia. He went on to play in the NFL for the Bears and the Cardinals. We did not attempt to contact him for this story. Another fan, Sam, suggested that he might have been Rhett’s brother… Thanks to all who participated in our survey!
Gotta say…Lance, Lance, we knew you when, big guy…
When you still thought you had a prayer in you-know-what of beating this whole thing. But we knew you…didn’t.
See, our readers know that if you want to know if something, or someone, is a scam, you come here first.
Not that we take pleasure in having a few back slaps and high-fives by the water cooler at the expense of someone’s demise. Well, actually, in this case we do (though we don’t, actually, have a water cooler).
While many out there were still trying to cut Lance some slack, we knew his ride was pretty much over. And we knew he hadn’t been getting that ‘peak performance’ from a freakin’ bottle of FRS Energy Drink. C’mon Lance…could it have been the performance enhancing drugs? Oh right—Oprah already coaxed that one out of you.
As LawyersandSettlements.com’s senior legal correspondent Jane Mundy—who first reported on the FRS Energy Drink false advertising allegations in September 2010—said at the time:
“It’s hard to believe that Lance Armstrong, FRS poster boy, would be associated with any false advertising. Or is it?”
Uh, no Jane, apparently it’s not!
Jane went on to share with one of Lance’s hoodwinked supporters that not only was Lance lying through his teeth about any performance benefits coming from 19g of sugar, but he was also getting paid for it—hello disclosure—not only as an FRS spokesperson, but also as a member of the FRS board of directors! Make that check out to “Lance Armstrong” please…
Post-script, FRS dropped Lance. Regardless of whatever claims the makers of FRS may make, they’re no fools: bye-bye Lance.
Oh, and speaking of FRS, they’ve got another little post-script—an FRS false advertising class action lawsuit that’s recently been filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court (12/5/12). Only now, as Bevnet reports, it’s FRS Healthy Slim that’s in the cross-hairs. Guess someone wasn’t magically dropping those pounds.
Well, Lance may have been living strong and feeding us all some dope about his performance. But we never bought it.
The latest in the Michael Jackson post-death legal saga is a class action lawsuit filed by his former assistant, Michael Amir Williams. Williams claims that he was hired to attend to MJ during the “This Is It” tour—the one that the gloved one was gearing up for just before his untimely death—and that he and others who were hired to do the same were deprived of $ 7.5 million in pay.
The Michael-Jackson-owes-me lawsuit was filed against concert promoter AEG Live in Los Angeles last week. But there’s a twist to this one.
According to a Reuters report, Williams is targeting AEG Live because the promoter also hired Dr. Conrad Murray. Dr Murray, if you recall, was the man convicted of involuntary manslaughter for supplying and administering propofol to Jackson, ultimately leading to his death.
So Williams and other ‘This Is It’ crew member who’d make up the would-be class are employing some kind of transitivity theory here: AEG Live hired Murray; Murray was convicted in Jackson’s death leading to the “This Is It” tour to be cancelled and Williams et al not getting paid; therefore, AEG Live should be on the hook for Williams et al not getting paid.
Needless to say, the folks at AEG aren’t buying it. Reuters quotes AEG lawyer, Marvin Putnam (O’Melveny & Myers) as calling the class action lawsuit “frivolous”. He goes on to say that “This lawsuit is clearly frivolous; it is literally barred by at least four different legal doctrines. The easiest is that Mr. Williams was a personal employee of Michael Jackson’s, and was never a beneficiary of Mr. Jackson’s contract with AEG Live. As such he has no legal standing to sue on that contract.”
Williams is suing for breach of express terms of contract, breach of implied terms of contract, and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. As far as what he’s seeking for the class, it’s the usual “unspecified damages”–plus court and attorneys’ fees.
And if you’re thinking Michael Jackson is the only dead celebrity who lives on in our court system, he’s got company—Anna Nicole Smith is still visiting the bar as well.
That Skinnygirl class action lawsuit—the one about the much lusted-after ready-to-drink Skinnygirl Margarita—is moving ahead. The class action alleges false and misleading claims over the inclusion of sodium benzoate—a chemical preservative—as an ingredient while Skinnygirl manufacturer, Beam Inc. (which acquired Skinnygirl Cocktails from founder Bethenny Frankel) advertised the cocktail as “all natural”.
According to Skinnygirl class action (Case 1:11-cv-05149-NLH-KMW filed in U.S. District Court, District of NJ) court documents, plaintiffs Maureen Stewart and Kelly Lamicella took umbrage with Skinnygirl’s assertion that it’s a “healthy alternative to other commercial margarita products currently available”.
To some, there would seem to be a bit of incongruency—that someone concerned about “healthy alternatives” would have no issue slinging back what’s essentially a shot of tequila hiding out in some agave nectar, lime juice and triple sec. It does sort of beg the question of what’s worse on the system?—an onslaught of tequila or some sodium benzoate? Ask me in the morning, right?
To be fair, there have been reports indicating that sodium benzoate can become a carcinogen if mixed with some other substances, including vitamin C, which of course would be found in lime juice (and that necessary wedge of lime on the glass rim). And, Whole Foods did drop Skinnygirl Margarita from its stores after finding out sodium benzoate was present in the drink.
But the heart of the issue in the Skinnygirl class action—regardless of health or not—is: does the company falsely advertise its product? Does Skinnygirl Margarita contain all-natural ingredients as advertised, or not?
Beam sought to have the case dismissed based on the the plaintiffs’ allegation of unjust enrichment because the Skinnygirl Margaritas were purchased via a third party—i.e., a liquor store in NJ—not directly from Beam.
A claim of unjust enrichment is typically made when a company allegedly benefits (usually financially) from a false advertising claim. Alleged unjust enrichment is a claim in the current Hebrew National false advertising class action lawsuit—the plaintiffs claim Hebrew National benefitted unjustly by falsely calling their hot dogs “kosher” because the company could then charge a premium price over non-kosher hot dogs.
For the Skinnygirl lawsuit, District Judge Noel Hillman didn’t buy Beam’s motion to dismiss, so the class action’s moving ahead…