Hey Tim, really enjoy the channel. Thanks for making good content. Can you add subtitles to your videos? Sometimes like in this video the audio quality isn’t the best and is sometimes hard to hear. Thanks for being Awesome!
@@SniperNator305 eh, they’re still enjoyable! I’m sure the editor has a lot on their plate too, and it seems like they’re doing an okay job. Might not have all the bells and whistles of a usual attorney Tom vid, but I just appreciate the content
I can’t be the only one who’s getting a dramatic difference in audio volume between the deposition and AT’s commentary/reactions it’s like someone just went crazy with the volume dial lmao
He is still probably finding a groove with his editor. Audio level are often a issue with people who don't have a dedicated team to edit. I see it all the time on smaller YT channels.
The tshirt design could've been sitting on press, ready to print, any amount of time prior to the texts. The instruction to "make" the shirt could be interpreted as giving the printer approval to run the job. Not sure if it would have made any difference to the judge's decision, but I was disappointed the lawyer didn't go down that road.
@@johnspence8141 not for barstool … they are known to design, print, and distribute new shirt ideas in very quick fashion… they have limited run/topical shirts developed in days
The depositions from this suit are brilliant. Smitty explaining a tweet where he says I’m always gonna be here “like the herp” is classic. Deadpan, straight face, great legal jargon. Owning a man who’s not even in the room
What would the difference between a question phrased; Isn't it true... vs Is it true...? One way seems to imply the asker has knowledge of the fact, the other is looking for confirmation. Do lawyers phrase their questions to seem as though they know the expected answer, even when they are looking for facts and dont know the answer?
@@mikeyboy1234567 cross-examination limitation? Maybe? I'm sure you can normally ask leading questions, but not to ask leading questions of the opposition. (by then, you're supposed to know every point of defense they have already) Though my memory is nil so I'm probably wrong.
Funny how crapaport can dish out and be smug and condescending but the moment someone bites back, he goes full on waaahhh.... running for mommy lawyer/court. What a pathetic little man
5:35 I'm confused... aside from an assault, when has anyone been fired by someone who hadn't been considering it beforehand? Isn't that part of a boss' job? Honestly, I don't know anything about this situation and may be completely off base here.
I am thinking the same thing. Not sure how most others have handled the situation but I have always thought about it before I end up letting someone go. It is usually not a spontaneous event. You know when you will have to fire somebody eventually. Especially if a person is a jerk. Not sure how these fellas act but I know that Rappaport guy from some movies. He is a background D list actor, unless I am mistaken?
@@Ozhull given you didn’t answer the question asked and just decided to make a useless snide comment, I think you’re the one who doesn’t understand the concept.
@@jaspriest1997 Well said man. The OP asked a question politely..gobshite up above doesn't comprehend said question and tries to be snarky to make up for his own stupidity. 🙄🤷♂️.
that isn't what the disposition was about. Rap's Lawyer was trying to prove that Dave had already created t shirts depicting him as someone with Herpes prior to firing him which would mean he had decided to fire him for no reason as apposed to why he said he fired him (Rap's comments on his podcast)
Tom, I really like your content. I noticed your audio is much louder than the other audio you play, It makes me second guess clicking your videos depending on the time of day I am watching them. That is all, thank you very much
Hey Tom, considering you pay someone to edit your videos, the audio being balanced should be a given. Not trying to shit on your editors but it’s pretty basic stuff.
Michael rapaport's attorney is just not very good I think. This guy obviously had the shirt ready beforehand he said it over and over again. Rappaports attorney is just not good enough to make the narrative fit the timeline.
It takes all of an hour to design that shirt. Barstool uses clowns for most of their shirts. With his money, that shirt could be designed and produced within 24 hours.
I think i've seen Rapaport on some things, but aside from that I've no notion of who either of these people are. It sounds like just the nice working environment everyone wants to be at.
Rapaport got kicked out of Howard Stern because he wouldn't pay up a bet. The reason Rapaport was fired is because he lost and didn't pay a bet for a fighter and went on a insult to barstool fans which was the last straw.
@@JohnDabs420 I think he got mildly popular doing a voiceover to a video of a cat. I think the cat was named Wilfred Warrior and it had a funny face. He yelled "Ma there's a freaky cat on the lawn!" or something.
@@drdabsmore945 I watched all the way through, but it was a significant volume difference. I had to basically keep my finger on the volume button the whole time because to keep one at a reasonable volume, the other would either be blasting loud or too quiet to hear at all.
@@john-paulsilke893 The problem is that there are different forms of herpes, and that pretty much 100% of the adult population in the world has had at least 1 of the 8 in the herpesviridae family. As a matter of fact VZV a.k.a. chickenpox/shingles is a part that family, as well as, the Epstein-Barr Virus which is primarily responsible for causing infectious mononucleosis.
@@john-paulsilke893 And I wasn't criticizing you either, I was simply helping you reiterate and emphasize the problem in proving defamation about herpes considering there 2 typically thought of variants HSV 1 and 2, and 6 more uncommon and less thought of variants as well.
There is a subreddit which was made because this one guy kept spamming different subreddits with his grievances regarding how horribly bad his life, and specifically his love-life, had gone. He kept getting banned but making new accounts to do the same thing over and over. The subreddit is r/Bennerwatch and the only reason I mention it here is that he is a massive fan of Bar Stool Sports. The subreddit actually turned into a helpful therapeutic subreddit for him and he was told that immersing himself in Bar Stool Sports wasn't helpful because of the attitude shown towards women there.
"attitude shown towards women there". Not picking on you bro (I know you're just the messenger), but that's exactly why people immersing themselves in Reddit isn't helpful.
@@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 I mean i only know portonoys name from him trying to "clear" the air on him not handling his domination fetishes properly with women not in the BDSM community and the women feeling taken advantage after cause he apparently took it too far. So too say they treat women bad doesnt sound far off to me but the dude sketches me out so I just avoid most content on him Just so happened youtubes recommended playlist mix brought this up while watching other attorney tom videos.
So as a lawyer, why is it asked “Isn’t it true that blah blah blah” when they could ask “Is it true that blah blah blah” or “Is it false that blah blah blah”? They are asking “Is not it true” so to answer in the affirmative you would reply “no”, or is that deliberately confusing as to have a loophole later on?
I'm not sure why you're confused. If someone asked you "isn't it true your username is Astronopolis" you would reply "yes" and there's nothing complicated about that. Whether it's a leading question is a separate issue, but it's not confusing and I've never seen anyone struggle to understand that wording except you. Not throwing shade, that's just a fact.
Agree. Is not it true is a very weird way of asking a question, and one would say “is the ball red?” Verses “isn’t the ball red” because one is a question, and one is a remark about the agreed ball color between two parties, looking for agreement.
What the hell is he suing him for, defamation/slander/libel? The man is a public figure and so is being ridiculed also the odds of someone having herpes are 1 in 6? So defamation is out..
Whoever edits your videos should look at the volume meter when they are editing this. The youtuber's voice is incredibly loud and if you turn it down to a reasonable level you cannot hear anything Portnoy is saying.
You'd think lawyers would avoid using "isn't it true that..." because someone could answer either yes or no and claim they were trying to give an honest answer("you clearly just wanted to know if it was true" or "you asked is not it true... So clearly a negative". A true/false question with an ambiguous construction for no reason just makes it harder to get a straight answer.
@@tommyinge81 what if I looked exactly like Homer Simpson IRL, including outlines and perfectly flat textures? They sue you for using a picture of me? My real name is also Ronald McDonald. Seriously, identity theft me and you'll never see the outside of a courtroom again!
In some countries, there is image rights or personality rights, publicity rights, which allow you to control commercial use of your face, I’m genuinely don’t know how this works in US. But fair use argument will be very weak if you’re selling for money
Even if he was like “yeah it is herpes” it still wouldn’t be defamation. The imagine depicted the dude as a clown. Any reasonable person is going to understand that this is not intended as a statement of fact and is an insult. Being the same image, a reasonable person isn’t going to then see the herpes and think that that part is intended as a statement of fact. The shirt does not claim the dude to have herpes, it merely depicts it and goes “lawl”
In my experience, many attorneys are narcissists and go into interviews with a bias mindset that minimizes their chances of obtaining the answers they’re seeking. When you start your questions with phrases like “Isn’t it true…” all you’re doing is putting the person on the defensive and taking words out of their mouths. It’s a very poor technique. He should be asking open-ended style questions that do not box in the person. What your wanting to learn about the individual is more likely to reveal itself over the course of more conversation. Start broad and then narrow in on what you’ve learned.
Rapaport might've had a chance at a case if his lawyer wasn't conspiracatorial and trying to force the evidence say what he wanted it to say. But to be honest, he was probably listening to rapaport to much.
@@jerubaal101 smart people are by definition better than mediocre people at most intellectual exercises, including appealing to mediocre people. So i disagree with you.
But doesn't this read as shirt idea -> fire dude, wrong dude -> fire right dude (which meant shirt planned for him) -> tell dude to have shirts ready -> release shirts later even tho the design was step 1?. Am I reading it right?
I feel like the questioning would have been better dialed in on that text, and how it he knew the design and logistics of the shirt; if they hadn’t previously made/discussed the design.
So let me get that clear. If i work in the USA and i get fired and leave in bad terms with my employer, this employer can then print a shirt of my face without consent and sell it for profit ? Or did Rappaport's lawyer did not sue for the right things ?
@@bravediomedes217 no. As long as it is covered under fair use they can. They cannot make straight up defamatory statements on a t-shirt because defamation is not protected but the first amendment which is why it is cause of action
@@GinEric84 no. Fair use applies to the use of copyrighted material. Defamation is when a lie is passed off as truth. Satire is not meant to be taken seriously, therefore is protected under the first amendment and not considered defamatory.
@@bravediomedes217 you're amazingly confused. If you were accused of defamation your defense is generally going to fall into one of three areas: 1.) The statements I made were factually correct. 2.) The statements I made were matters of opinion and we're not statements of material fact. 3.) The statements I made were clearly not meant to be getting seriously and we're there for not statements of fact. Crying about your first amendment is not how you defend against a defamation suit
@@GinEric84 I’m done arguing with dumb fucks on the internet. Look up Hustler v Jerry Falwell. It’s the same exact thing as this, and it was ruled to be protected expression under the first amendment. A person’s appearance isn’t copyrighted material.
Seems to me they established that he had something ready to go at the T-shirt makers before he fired him. He said he sent a message immediately to the makers. They must have had a design before he was fired.
I think what Dave's trying to explain is when he fired dude he told the t-shirt guy to make the shirt (as in design it) because he knew the dude was going to start talking shit and wanted it ready. The lawyer thought he meant make as in print the shirt which would imply it was previously designed, but what he's saying he meant was make as in make the design.
@@hopelessromantic3786 Could be either, and the way he answered did not really clarify it. He could be obfuscating, making it sound like it was not already designed. If it was actually designed, that would be damning in a trial to impeach him as a witness. We don't know what the lawyers already know and what they are trying to elicit from the witness.
"The video You just played, proves that." Lmfao 🤣🤣 whose the big brain who decided that was a good piece of evidence for the opposition. Lmao over before it started
The first 1,000 people to use this link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/attorneytom10211
Hey Tim, really enjoy the channel. Thanks for making good content.
Can you add subtitles to your videos? Sometimes like in this video the audio quality isn’t the best and is sometimes hard to hear.
Thanks for being Awesome!
Claimed mine :0
Am I the only one seeing those octagon change from blue to yellow after every frame?
You could do schmitty’s deposition from this same lawsuit. Shorter but just as hilarious
The deposition summarized: don’t start none if you don’t want none
Loving the amount of content you are churning out lately, Tom.
I agree! I just think, "Ooo, I fancy watching an Attorney Tom video" and boom! - Tom's uploaded another one!
I agree. Been depressed lately and I just like his videos. They have been helping.
Well the editor hasn’t been putting in too much effort and has just been churning them out quick without looking at quality
@@SniperNator305 eh, they’re still enjoyable! I’m sure the editor has a lot on their plate too, and it seems like they’re doing an okay job. Might not have all the bells and whistles of a usual attorney Tom vid, but I just appreciate the content
@@egalitarian2207 agreed! It doesn’t need to be super flashy, after all I am here to watch Tom and listen to what he has to say.
If I was a juror on this case i'd walk out of the courtroom. This isn't a case. It's two kids having a playground fight.
Ya but rapaport is a karen. glad dave won the case.
@@thesportsguy126 He's not just a karen, he's an extraordinarily deranged karen. A superkaren, if you will.
I love how both of them were filming themselves laying in bed shirtless to talk shit back and forth
“That went well” gets me every time lmao
The only crime here is that I haven't seen anyone actually wearing that shirt.
Who wants to look at Michael Rappaport's face even as a clown?
I can’t be the only one who’s getting a dramatic difference in audio volume between the deposition and AT’s commentary/reactions it’s like someone just went crazy with the volume dial lmao
Yes I hope more people see this! It's annyoing
He is still probably finding a groove with his editor. Audio level are often a issue with people who don't have a dedicated team to edit. I see it all the time on smaller YT channels.
@@EricHamm He has an editor? It has never seemed like it. I always thought it was just him with like one other person with no spare time as well.
Lawyers and technology do not mesh well
Is the lawyer dumb and seriously could not understand what he was saying or was he hoping he would mess up and say the wrong thing.
I think he was just hoping. He definitely could have formulated the question better though.
legit seemed like a deliberate misunderstanding to me
2nd one. It’s police and lawyer questioning 101 to have people repeat themselves until they say it the way you want to hear it.
The fact Portnoy keeps a straight face during certain parts of this is miraculous 🤣
The tshirt design could've been sitting on press, ready to print, any amount of time prior to the texts. The instruction to "make" the shirt could be interpreted as giving the printer approval to run the job. Not sure if it would have made any difference to the judge's decision, but I was disappointed the lawyer didn't go down that road.
especially since design, print and distribution would take quite a while
If the shirt had been designed then it would potentially show that portnoy wrongfully terminated his employee.
@@johnspence8141 not for barstool … they are known to design, print, and distribute new shirt ideas in very quick fashion… they have limited run/topical shirts developed in days
@@tswarner If you watch the behind the scenes they've listed printed and shipped shirts that were designed a 9am before lunch.
@@davidwarford3087 They fired him because Rappaport went on a social media rant that Barstool fans were losers.
The depositions from this suit are brilliant. Smitty explaining a tweet where he says I’m always gonna be here “like the herp” is classic. Deadpan, straight face, great legal jargon. Owning a man who’s not even in the room
What would the difference between a question phrased; Isn't it true... vs Is it true...? One way seems to imply the asker has knowledge of the fact, the other is looking for confirmation.
Do lawyers phrase their questions to seem as though they know the expected answer, even when they are looking for facts and dont know the answer?
@Mickey Holmes lol I was hoping to make a question that doesnt have a dependency
A good rule of thumb amongst attorneys is never ask a question you don't have the answer to.
Colloquialism.
If your defense is holding to that, you're in a world of trouble.
@@tommyinge81 I think that only applies to a witness on the stand in court.
@@mikeyboy1234567 cross-examination limitation? Maybe? I'm sure you can normally ask leading questions, but not to ask leading questions of the opposition. (by then, you're supposed to know every point of defense they have already) Though my memory is nil so I'm probably wrong.
Rappaport: "You're a loser"
Portnoy: "No, you're a loser"
Let the court show, they are both losers.
6:12 your editor needs a bonk with the knowledge hammer
16:02 as well lol
Funny how crapaport can dish out and be smug and condescending but the moment someone bites back, he goes full on waaahhh.... running for mommy lawyer/court.
What a pathetic little man
That's what I was thinking, all his content is just cussing people out with no real context so I don't blame Dave for firing him
You should add a sort of white "border" around the logo of SkillShare so visibility is better
This is the video that made me start watching Attorney Tom and I couldn't be happier... Smart to put Portnoy and the Stool in the thumbnail.
I wish I knew about that shirt. Lol. I would have bought one.
5:35
I'm confused... aside from an assault, when has anyone been fired by someone who hadn't been considering it beforehand?
Isn't that part of a boss' job?
Honestly, I don't know anything about this situation and may be completely off base here.
I am thinking the same thing. Not sure how most others have handled the situation but I have always thought about it before I end up letting someone go. It is usually not a spontaneous event.
You know when you will have to fire somebody eventually. Especially if a person is a jerk. Not sure how these fellas act but I know that Rappaport guy from some movies. He is a background D list actor, unless I am mistaken?
Because there's a thing called wrongful termination??? He says it in the video. Are you having trouble understanding that concept?
@@Ozhull given you didn’t answer the question asked and just decided to make a useless snide comment, I think you’re the one who doesn’t understand the concept.
@@jaspriest1997 Well said man. The OP asked a question politely..gobshite up above doesn't comprehend said question and tries to be snarky to make up for his own stupidity. 🙄🤷♂️.
that isn't what the disposition was about. Rap's Lawyer was trying to prove that Dave had already created t shirts depicting him as someone with Herpes prior to firing him which would mean he had decided to fire him for no reason as apposed to why he said he fired him (Rap's comments on his podcast)
Tom, I really like your content.
I noticed your audio is much louder than the other audio you play, It makes me second guess clicking your videos depending on the time of day I am watching them.
That is all, thank you very much
Hey Tom, considering you pay someone to edit your videos, the audio being balanced should be a given. Not trying to shit on your editors but it’s pretty basic stuff.
I just now realized this guy isn't Tony Hinchcliffe.
Wow it's like Rappaport's lawyer didn't even watch the video before bringing it up.
Michael rapaport's attorney is just not very good I think. This guy obviously had the shirt ready beforehand he said it over and over again. Rappaports attorney is just not good enough to make the narrative fit the timeline.
Yeah I definitely agree. He could have formulated better questions
You could say he has the Michael Rappaport of attorneys.
Maybe not?, if he didn’t already have similar shirt design ready(Goodell) then I would agree
It takes all of an hour to design that shirt. Barstool uses clowns for most of their shirts. With his money, that shirt could be designed and produced within 24 hours.
Please more funny deposition reactions even serious ones. Just more depositions.
Herpes should sue Barstool Sports for saying it had Michael Rapaport. That guy is just plain nasty, and a terrible human being.
THIS is the kind of intellectual chess match I watch this channel for!
11:50 Dave puts the attorney in a body bag 😂
I think i've seen Rapaport on some things, but aside from that I've no notion of who either of these people are. It sounds like just the nice working environment everyone wants to be at.
Same
Rapport was on the show My Name Is Earl where he basically just played himself. I haven't noticed him in anything else
Rapaport got kicked out of Howard Stern because he wouldn't pay up a bet.
The reason Rapaport was fired is because he lost and didn't pay a bet for a fighter and went on a insult to barstool fans which was the last straw.
@@JohnDabs420 I think he got mildly popular doing a voiceover to a video of a cat. I think the cat was named Wilfred Warrior and it had a funny face.
He yelled "Ma there's a freaky cat on the lawn!" or something.
11:08 ah yes. The "he started it" defense. Can't wait to learn all about this in law school. 🙌
El prez conducts all his best business without a shirt. Barstool stan for life
The volume differences are so out of sync, I cant get into this one.
That's how little it takes for you to not be able to pay attention? A slight volume difference?
@@drdabsmore945 I watched all the way through, but it was a significant volume difference. I had to basically keep my finger on the volume button the whole time because to keep one at a reasonable volume, the other would either be blasting loud or too quiet to hear at all.
Editor getting sued
RUclips: *puts two ads before video
RUclips Content Creators: *before we get into the video, a word from our sponsors
Look I know I wasn’t the only one…but…I did recommend this video. Very excited.
Same, I love the ineptitude of Rapaports lawyers. Especially when he is the self proclaimed "King of Talking Shit".
I would really like a “I’m the Wrong Rappaport” t-shirt
The complaint alleges that the image was photoshopped...from an actual photo that shows the exact blemish in the exact same place
Got the Godell clown shirt for Christmas a few years ago. Wear it every pats game since.
Audio mixing really needs work. Tom is way too loud compared to the deposition
Could depicting someone with herpes actually constitute defamation?
More then 95% of Americans have herpes. Pretty hard to prove defamation when everyone has it.
@@john-paulsilke893 The problem is that there are different forms of herpes, and that pretty much 100% of the adult population in the world has had at least 1 of the 8 in the herpesviridae family. As a matter of fact VZV a.k.a. chickenpox/shingles is a part that family, as well as, the Epstein-Barr Virus which is primarily responsible for causing infectious mononucleosis.
@@nerofl89 I didn’t say it wasn’t a terrible and childish thing to have printed, but he’s got a difficult job of proving defamation.
@@john-paulsilke893 And I wasn't criticizing you either, I was simply helping you reiterate and emphasize the problem in proving defamation about herpes considering there 2 typically thought of variants HSV 1 and 2, and 6 more uncommon and less thought of variants as well.
@@nerofl89 that’s okay. It’s RUclips so savage personal attacks are common. I’m definitely not offended. Besides I have lots of Valtrax.
Do you know where you can watch the full deposition? I do not believe a full deposit is 8 minutes.
It probably is when the subject matter is very straight forward and there is only a limited amount of information to discover.
That guy was very cool, I've never seen him before in my life but I respect it.
Michael Rapaport is a cupcake…in my opinion
I’d say he’s more like a chicken pesto pizza.
I'd say more like a jar of mayonnaise that's been left out in the sun for too long
Cupcake with rat posin inside it.
There is a subreddit which was made because this one guy kept spamming different subreddits with his grievances regarding how horribly bad his life, and specifically his love-life, had gone. He kept getting banned but making new accounts to do the same thing over and over. The subreddit is r/Bennerwatch and the only reason I mention it here is that he is a massive fan of Bar Stool Sports. The subreddit actually turned into a helpful therapeutic subreddit for him and he was told that immersing himself in Bar Stool Sports wasn't helpful because of the attitude shown towards women there.
"attitude shown towards women there". Not picking on you bro (I know you're just the messenger), but that's exactly why people immersing themselves in Reddit isn't helpful.
@@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 Idk anything about it, I've never listened to Bar Stool Sports. It was the opinion of the other Redditors on the sub.
@@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 I mean i only know portonoys name from him trying to "clear" the air on him not handling his domination fetishes properly with women not in the BDSM community and the women feeling taken advantage after cause he apparently took it too far.
So too say they treat women bad doesnt sound far off to me but the dude sketches me out so I just avoid most content on him
Just so happened youtubes recommended playlist mix brought this up while watching other attorney tom videos.
So as a lawyer, why is it asked “Isn’t it true that blah blah blah” when they could ask “Is it true that blah blah blah” or “Is it false that blah blah blah”? They are asking “Is not it true” so to answer in the affirmative you would reply “no”, or is that deliberately confusing as to have a loophole later on?
I'm not sure why you're confused. If someone asked you "isn't it true your username is Astronopolis" you would reply "yes" and there's nothing complicated about that.
Whether it's a leading question is a separate issue, but it's not confusing and I've never seen anyone struggle to understand that wording except you. Not throwing shade, that's just a fact.
Agree. Is not it true is a very weird way of asking a question, and one would say “is the ball red?” Verses “isn’t the ball red” because one is a question, and one is a remark about the agreed ball color between two parties, looking for agreement.
Love this content
What the hell is he suing him for, defamation/slander/libel? The man is a public figure and so is being ridiculed also the odds of someone having herpes are 1 in 6? So defamation is out..
Love the videos! However the audio balance between your commentary and the deposition on this video is jarring
Love the content!!
Love these depositions
Whoever edits your videos should look at the volume meter when they are editing this. The youtuber's voice is incredibly loud and if you turn it down to a reasonable level you cannot hear anything Portnoy is saying.
You'd think lawyers would avoid using "isn't it true that..." because someone could answer either yes or no and claim they were trying to give an honest answer("you clearly just wanted to know if it was true" or "you asked is not it true... So clearly a negative".
A true/false question with an ambiguous construction for no reason just makes it harder to get a straight answer.
El prez is a one of kind talent !
Defamation case was dropped, Viva La Stool!
depositions seem more like anthills than rabbit holes
Can you print & sell someone’s face on a T-shirt without consent?
It's parody. It's allowed under fair use.
As long as the image itself isn't copyright, yes.
Yes. You couldn't put a picture of Homer Simpson because his image is trademarked but I could use a picture of you I found on the internet.
@@tommyinge81 what if I looked exactly like Homer Simpson IRL, including outlines and perfectly flat textures? They sue you for using a picture of me?
My real name is also Ronald McDonald. Seriously, identity theft me and you'll never see the outside of a courtroom again!
In some countries, there is image rights or personality rights, publicity rights, which allow you to control commercial use of your face, I’m genuinely don’t know how this works in US. But fair use argument will be very weak if you’re selling for money
Even if he was like “yeah it is herpes” it still wouldn’t be defamation. The imagine depicted the dude as a clown. Any reasonable person is going to understand that this is not intended as a statement of fact and is an insult. Being the same image, a reasonable person isn’t going to then see the herpes and think that that part is intended as a statement of fact. The shirt does not claim the dude to have herpes, it merely depicts it and goes “lawl”
I’m on the side of whoever wears a shirt in their Snapchats abt it… oh wait fuck
I got an add for STD medication while watching this. Comedy.
In my experience, many attorneys are narcissists and go into interviews with a bias mindset that minimizes their chances of obtaining the answers they’re seeking. When you start your questions with phrases like “Isn’t it true…” all you’re doing is putting the person on the defensive and taking words out of their mouths. It’s a very poor technique. He should be asking open-ended style questions that do not box in the person. What your wanting to learn about the individual is more likely to reveal itself over the course of more conversation. Start broad and then narrow in on what you’ve learned.
Dave's a gem
Oh boy this should be good
Am I the only one who see these octagon changing color from blue to yellow after every frame? And a different one everytime?
"The allure of Barstool Sports" LOL I almost spit Coke through my nose...both of these guys are clown shoes.
15:09 Talent is a bit of a stretch
He was good in... Um... He... Believably portrayed a bad actor in True Romance?
Rapaport might've had a chance at a case if his lawyer wasn't conspiracatorial and trying to force the evidence say what he wanted it to say. But to be honest, he was probably listening to rapaport to much.
If I was on a jury I would look at who made the did what first. Whatever the other did in retaliation I wouldn't look at.
Been waiting for this. El prez destroyed him.
Clowns should sue M Rappawhatever for impersonating a clown
The fact that this man is successful makes me lose hope for the human race.
This shows he is a smart man, case dropped and make millions off of a shirt. He is a ahole but a smart ahole
@@MrDeserteagle411 Mediocre people know how to appeal to other mediocre people.
@@jerubaal101 And smart people know how to market bs to mediocre people.
@@jerubaal101 smart people are by definition better than mediocre people at most intellectual exercises, including appealing to mediocre people. So i disagree with you.
@@luizcastro5246 Your definition of 'smart' though is just 'whoever' is successful'. It's a circular definition.
12:04 - Mic Drop moment if I ever saw one
Can you comment on Michael Scott’s infamous deposition?
Edit* spelling 😀
Deposition?
@@operator8014 thank you! I would blame auto correct but I think that was all me.
I really enjoy your show but can you fix the audio somehow? I can hear you but not the video clips you review.
This is one of those cases where I hope it were possible that everyone loses
But doesn't this read as shirt idea -> fire dude, wrong dude -> fire right dude (which meant shirt planned for him) -> tell dude to have shirts ready -> release shirts later even tho the design was step 1?. Am I reading it right?
I feel like the questioning would have been better dialed in on that text, and how it he knew the design and logistics of the shirt; if they hadn’t previously made/discussed the design.
Please Tom, do the deposition for Vic Mignogna. Its full of drama and is an intense deposition.
So let me get that clear. If i work in the USA and i get fired and leave in bad terms with my employer, this employer can then print a shirt of my face without consent and sell it for profit ? Or did Rappaport's lawyer did not sue for the right things ?
As long as it can be considered satire it’s covered by the 1st amendment.
@@bravediomedes217 no. As long as it is covered under fair use they can.
They cannot make straight up defamatory statements on a t-shirt because defamation is not protected but the first amendment which is why it is cause of action
@@GinEric84 no. Fair use applies to the use of copyrighted material. Defamation is when a lie is passed off as truth. Satire is not meant to be taken seriously, therefore is protected under the first amendment and not considered defamatory.
@@bravediomedes217 you're amazingly confused.
If you were accused of defamation your defense is generally going to fall into one of three areas:
1.) The statements I made were factually correct.
2.) The statements I made were matters of opinion and we're not statements of material fact.
3.) The statements I made were clearly not meant to be getting seriously and we're there for not statements of fact.
Crying about your first amendment is not how you defend against a defamation suit
@@GinEric84 I’m done arguing with dumb fucks on the internet. Look up Hustler v Jerry Falwell. It’s the same exact thing as this, and it was ruled to be protected expression under the first amendment. A person’s appearance isn’t copyrighted material.
Man's got a sponsorship 🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳
For a while Ive had a dream of buying 20-30 of those light panels, now i know that if you can afford 20-30 i def cant
Seems to me they established that he had something ready to go at the T-shirt makers before he fired him. He said he sent a message immediately to the makers. They must have had a design before he was fired.
I think what Dave's trying to explain is when he fired dude he told the t-shirt guy to make the shirt (as in design it) because he knew the dude was going to start talking shit and wanted it ready. The lawyer thought he meant make as in print the shirt which would imply it was previously designed, but what he's saying he meant was make as in make the design.
@@hopelessromantic3786 Could be either, and the way he answered did not really clarify it. He could be obfuscating, making it sound like it was not already designed. If it was actually designed, that would be damning in a trial to impeach him as a witness. We don't know what the lawyers already know and what they are trying to elicit from the witness.
Col. Tom, can you please work on balancing the sound on your videos?
"skill share" 🔨🔨🔨
Is the guy with herpes the same guy who played the cop on Friends who shot a bird?
I personally have a lot of issues with dave. In this case, I am with him totally, the opposing lawyer was grasping hard. The evidence wasnt there.
Is it true that earlier in the deposition your statement was false in that before firing him you made the shirt to make up an excuse?
"The video You just played, proves that." Lmfao 🤣🤣 whose the big brain who decided that was a good piece of evidence for the opposition. Lmao over before it started
If rapaport ever had any fans (which i doubt he did), he lost them all by being such a fragile baby that sued for getting his feelings hurt.
It is funny how poor of quality the deposition video is, you would think a law firm would have a better camera than 240p 🤣
Good ol paper hand Portnoy lol
This is like a normie version of internet bloodsports.
"Internet bloodsports" are autistic and normie themselves. Go outside.
Isn't that guy a actor? 0:30 wasn't he a dad in some Netflix show?
@Mickey Holmes I remember him mostly from Boston Public
These comments ought to be fun.
MORE USCSB!!!!
This is a classic
Hes a damn legend.
This was pretty interesting….until I realized I don’t care about either of those guys.
I knew I didn't like Rapaport. I didn't know he had herpes. Thanks!
Seems like he was perfectly casted in Atypical. Did he forgot to stop acting?
Not a fan of barstool or that Dave guy but he totally won that specific exchange w/ the lawyer in an entertaining fashion.