Joseph Farah says he may sue Esquire for 'parody' story on Jerome Corsi book

[Newsjock]

Source: Daily Caller

An article on Esquire magazine’s website, claiming that the publisher of Jerome Corsi’s new book about President Obama’s birth certificate is pulling it from bookstores, may have been written as a parody, but not everyone is laughing.

The Esquire story, written by Mark Warren, spread across the Internet moments after being posted on the magazine’s website Wednesday morning. Esquire has said it was a joke and Warren told TheDC he has no regrets about posting it.

... Farah said he is considering “legal options” against the magazine for posting the story .

“Let me say this very clearly: There is not a single word of that report that is true. I assume it is a very poorly executed parody. In any case, I have begun exploring our legal options, since this report has all the earmarkings of a deliberate attempt at restraint of trade, not to mention libel.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/18/joseph-farah-says-he-may-sue-esquire-for-parody-story-on-jerome-corsi-book/

[sinkingfeeling]

1. I asked about it being true in a post, but the whole thread was 'disappeared'.

[Newsjock]

2. Not disappeared; I fell for it, too

I deleted my own LBN after realizing my error.

[sharp_stick]

3. One thing about the Joes (Farrah and Corsi)

they would know if something wasn't true. Neither one of these assholes has published anything with an ounce of truth in it for decades.

Fuck them and fuck their sad little book.

[AlbertCat]

4. Well, this certainly brings things to everyone's attention

PR stunt, anyone?

[cstanleytech]

5. "I assume it is a very poorly executed parody." I am going to go out on limb and

say because of that statement from him that any real attempt by him as far as a lawsuit will end in failure since even he admits it was parody regardless if it was executed poorly or not.

[Jim Lane]

6. I'm not so sure that he has no case.

If a parody is executed so poorly that many people think it's literal truth, and therefore form a false opinion about Corsi in a way that injures his business interests, he might have a case. You can't just publish any old piece of crap about someone and escape liability by saying it was a parody.

The trouble with Esquire's supposed parody was that it wasn't so completely ridiculous that any reasonable person would recognize it as parody. Some respectable publishers would pull a book under these circumstances. Thus, I find it plausible that at least some birthers had planned to go down to the local bookstore and buy the book, but changed their plans when they read or heard about the Esquire story.

If I were Corsi's lawyer, I'd argue that it was reasonably foreseeable that this story would be believed by some and that it would therefore cost Corsi some sales.

Corsi's bigger problem, as I see it, is that his damages wouldn't be great. My hypothetical deterred purchaser would have soon learned the truth and, presumably, gone ahead with his plan to buy the book. The whole flap arguably increased sales by publicizing the book. His net loss, and hence his recoverable damages, would be small at best.