Charles Carreon: "Mission accomplished"

Hours ago, Rob brought you the news that Charles Carreon had voluntarily dismissed his dumbass lawsuit against webcomic The Oatmeal, its creator Matthew Inman, and the charities he'd nominated to receive more than $220,000 sent by people who thought that Carreon (and his client, FunnyJunk) were full of lima beans, the American Cancer Society and the National Wildlife Federation.

At the time, Rob asked, "What will the new dawn bring?"

The answer is here: Charles Carreon has told Ars Technica that he was the victor in the lawsuit, using the phrase "Mission accomplished" (seemingly without irony).

Ken at Popehat notes that Carreon's withdrawal is not binding -- he could drag Inman and co back into court at any time and that he might still sue for "fees" (that is, the money he charged himself for acting as his own lawyer) Ken clarifies: Inman could sue Carreon for fees. Ken thinks that Carreon will be back. There's also a weird, possibly (almost certainly) bogus lawsuit filed against Carreon by Inman, or someone pretending to be him. Wow.

Back to Carreon, who told Ars's Megan Geuss,

But if the defendants pursued attorney's fees, the attention might be worth it for Charles Carreon. After asking for comment on his voluntary dismissal of charges, Carreon lilted over the phone, "I'm famous, I'm notorious." Which, from the looks of it, is exactly what he wants.

Carreon claims victory, drops his lawsuit against The Oatmeal et al.


  1. “he might still sue for “fees” (that is, the money he charged himself for acting as his own lawyer).”
    Is this uhhhhh, is this real? If it is I plan on suing myself tomorrow. I will take myself to court, beat myself, and then sue myself for the fees that I charged myself while suing myself. After that I will then sue myself for the fees that I incurred while suing myself for suing myself. Get the idea? Good. I have been looking for stable income for years. “Find a way to get paid for doing what you love,” they said. 

  2. Cory:  Just two quick notes.  First, I was talking about Inman seeking fees.  Carreon couldn’t seek fees unless he re-files and wins.  Second, I’m 99.999% sure that suit isn’t filed by Inman.   Sorry if I was unclear on either.

  3. Hey, a thought to ponder in all of this: How many of the people siding with Inman in his original complaint against FunnyJunk have a bunch of illegally downloaded songs and/or films on their computer/other device – right now?

    I’d bet it’s a really, really high number. And that’s funny.

    1. difference would be that I’m not making money off of those things, Funnyjunk could have via increased traffic flow and ad revenue.

        1. Copyright infringement is NOT theft.  Theft is specifically defined in US law in such a way that it can only be claimed if the “thief” deprives the “victim” of access to what was theirs.  Copyright infringement leaves the original intact, and doesn’t deprive the creator of their works.  Therefore it’s not theft.  Quit calling it that.  It’s like calling a moose a horse.  Not the same, no matter how many times you repeat it.

          update to Little Australia:
          I agree with the latter half of your point, also I’m sure I have internet asperger’s or something. I don’t tend to be a nitpicking asshole in real life… As far as I can tell.

          1. Could you be more obtuse?

            It’s really never a good idea to offer challenges like that online.

        2.  Actually Little Australia, ldobe’s point has EVERYTHING to do with it.

          Copyright Infringement is not theft or stealing and never has been.  It also has something called a Fair Use clause in many countries.  Maybe you’ve heard of it?

          IMHO there is nothing obtuse about understanding what is being discussed and making a valid point that is obviously being missed altogether.

        3. If you knew anything about copyright law then you’d know that redistribution and sale is everything.

          Duplicating something only carries a potential for loss of income to the righs holder, reselling something literally steals a sale.

          Also I’m not entirely sure why this is relevant, unless those people are also taking the rights holders to court…

    2.  its not the theft, its the lack of citation that irritates me. if you wanna download someone elses work cool have at it, if you wanna put it on your site fine but credit the author, if you wanna put it on your site, make money off of it, and not even credit the author you are a dick.

        1. Are you unaware that a large number of other people – many musicians, for example – disagree with you completely

        2. only the shills that have bought the RIAA’s BS while being ripped off by the RIAA.  Most artists understand that the system is broken, make their money off of live shows, and appreciate their fans.  They also realize the 1:1 relation between their biggest purchasers and downloaders.  Of course that is only the educated musicians, there are shills and gullible people in all walks of life, even some musicians, *gasp*

    3. Illegal? You make it sound like downloading kiddie porn or something.

      Oh, and I would take that bet, as a huge number of “illegal” copies of songs are actually copies of legally bought media, or copies acquired by legal means. I have a huge number of free MP3 files, but for the record I got them either from the artist’s website or from websites that specialised in free music. In fact, more of  my media is purchased now than in my misspent youth with its cassette tapes.

      And like austinhamman wrote, the main complaint against Funnyjunk was the slow speed and byzantine methods the site owner had set up, making it almost impossible for Matt to say “hey, I drew that and whoever posted that picture stripped out all citation!”, and if Carreon hadn’t pulled such a boneheaded move on FunnyJunk’s behalf, that would have been the end of it.

      Finally, you’re off topic so much I have a sneaking suspicion that you are James Carreon or one of the FunnyJunk owners. You smell of fnords, my friend.

  4. eff and inman should just counter sue and litigate carreon into an impact crater so deep he can’t ever climb out.  just go scorched earth on him, salt his fields and don’t rest until he’s just extirpated from human discourse.

  5. I have read that any publicity is good publicity, but this is stretching it.

    I’ve also read that it’s best to keep one’s mouth shut when one’s competence is doubted, as opening it removes the doubt.

    1. “Any publicity is good publicity” is only true if they spell your name right.  Like Canter and Siegel, we’ll probably remember Carreon for a while, but not in any good way.

      Also, don’t trolls turn to stone if they’re out in the daylight?  Carreon could be really close to solidifying, if he doesn’t liquidate first…

    1. Anyone who has a batshit case, lots of money, and doesn’t mind looking like an a-hat for their 15min of fame…unfortunately they do exist.  i know right?  *sighs*  sad but true.

  6. A bright spot for Matthew Inman is that he is now known by millions upon millions more people. He will, I’m sure, do more than the $500,000 worth of business he did last year in the upcoming. 

  7. Dammit, this is the same thing as the Kony 2012 guy. It’s no fun if the guys you’re going after turn out to be nuttier than a motherfucking nut cake

    1. Variation on the Turing test: given an NTAMNC, determine whether they’re bonafide or bullshitting.

  8. I know it’s wrong on every level, but part of me wants to put Carreon on retainer, just so I can be like, “Don’t fuck with me, man — my lawyer is fucking INSANE.” Hah!

  9. I’m going to assume that he isn’t crazy and that he’s just trying to spin an awful situation the best he can so that he looks like a kooky wildcard and not just a prick and a bad lawyer, because people don’t pay bad lawyers.

    1. A surprising number do. I was a jury foreperson for a DUI case once wherein the defendant became the victim in the end. A lawyer he met (at a bar) convinced him he could get him off despite a failed breathalyzer at the scene and admissions he had been driving home from a bar where he had a shot and 6 beers to chase it.

      He was stone cold guilty, we found him so and the judge went full monty in sentencing for wasting the courts time for 2 1/2 days of bullshit testimony.

      So he got jail time followed by probation with community service and a fine. AND I learned later, was on the hook for $2000 to the crappy lawyer.

      Even bad lawyers know there’s one born every minute. Being able to get through law school proves you’ve the ability to at least harvest those.

      1. Sure people will hire bad lawyers not knowing that they’re bad.  The problem here is that Carreon is hoping to capitalize on his internet infamy, which means anyone who is now aware of him that wasn’t previously is also aware that he’s incompetent.  Doesn’t seem like a winning strategy to me.

        1. I agree, his prospects for clients now resemble that poor schmuck in the story, and poor schmucks have less ability to pay or have no credible reasons to sue someone else for pay.

  10. The Paul Christoforo School of PR expresses profound respect for their most recent graduate.

    I go back to my original idea about Carreon… he saw his wikipedia page flagged for deletion and decided to fix that….

  11. So that’s two strikes for the phrase”mission accomplished” then.

    Anyone want to offer a third. Syria, I’m looking at you….

  12. There are probably easier ways of letting the whole world know you’re a dickhead, but this certainly got the job done.

  13. “”I’m famous, I’m notorious.” 

    This is the mating call of the North American Yellow-Bellied Narcissist. They’re a common breed noted for their plumage. They communicate by bragging and screeching. They’re found in great numbers in their natural habitats: jails, corporate/finance, courtrooms, politics and gutters. Their only known predators are themselves and each other. 

    It’s best to avoid this species as they won’t ever shut the hell up.

      1. If you ask a Buddhist, they might tell you that the “Three Poisons” are Anger, Greed, and Ignorance, and that all suffering results from them.

        They might further go on to explain that the root cause of all of this is “Ignorance of The Way Things Really Exist.”

        Need I say more?

        (I’m using subjunctive mood because I’m paraphrasing/simplifying vast concepts to make them fit in a sentence or four.)

  14. To paraphrase the top comment over at the Ars article:

    It looks like Charles Carreon went to the internet crazy guy school of victory definition:

    1. Become aware of thing.
    3. OH GOD IM ON FIRE!!!!
    4. Retreat.
    4.5. Declare victory.

  15. The image that flashed through my mind when I saw his “mission accomplished” quote was…

  16. I guess it is a victory in a way. I mean of course that no one will ever (hopefully) hire him again.

Comments are closed.