MARC J.

RANDAZZA
Licensed to practice in
Massachusetts
California
Nevada
Arizona
Florida

RONALD D. GREEN
Licensed to practice in
Nevada

JASON A. FISCHER
Licensed to practice in
Florida
California
U.S. Patent Office

J. MALCOLM DEVOY
Licensed to practice in
Nevada

CHRISTOPHER A. HARVEY
Licensed to practice in
California

A. JORDAN RUSHIE
Licensed to practice in
Pennsylvania
New Jersey

D. GILL SPERLEIN
Licensed to practice in
California

ALEX J. SHEPARD
Licensed to practice in
California






www.randazza.com

Philadelphia
2424 East York Street
Suite 316
Philadelphia, PA 19125
Tel: 215.385.5291
Fax: 215.525.0909

Las Vegas
3625 S. Town Center Dr.
Suite 150
Las Vegas, NV 89135
Tel: 702.420.2001
Fax: 305.437.7662

Miami
2 S. Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 2600
Miami, FL 33131
Tel: 888.667.1113
Fax: 305.397.2772

San Francisco
345 Grove Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
Tele: 415.404.6615
Fax: 415.404.6616

Correspondence from:
Marc J. Randazza, Esq.
mjr@randazza.com

Reply to Las Vegas Office
via Email or Fax





April 28, 2014

Via Email and U.S. Mail
skeaveney@pasenate.com

Senator Lawrence Farnese, Jr.
Pennsylvania State Senate
1802 S. Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19145

Re: Senate Bill 1095

Dear Senator Farnese:

I was recently able to attend the Pennsylvania Legislatures meeting in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on April 24, 2014, and provide testimony regarding
your proposed anti-SLAPP law, SB 1095. SLAPPs, or Strategic Lawsuits Against
Public Participation, are a problem I have seen not only in Pennsylvania, but
throughout the nation. I practice First Amendment law nationally, and my firm
and I have been active in defending SLAPP suits filed in Pennsylvania,
California, New York, Florida, Arizona, and Nevada. We use anti-SLAPP
statutes when they are available, and found them to be to the decisive benefit of
defendants in spurious defamation actions.

I have attached my curriculum vitae to expand upon my qualifications for
discussing Pennsylvanias proposed anti-SLAPP law. In the course of my firms
work, we have seen numerous anti-SLAPP statutes that work exceptionally well
and should be models for other states. Among them are the anti-SLAPP laws of
California, Washington, Oregon, and Nevada. In contrast, there are anti-SLAPP
laws that are so narrow and rigid in application that they may as well not exist at
all. Illinois anti-SLAPP law is an unfortunate example of this. Until October 1,
2013, so too was Nevadas. I was able to assist Nevada in adopting a new anti-
SLAPP law that incorporated the best elements of California and Washingtons
laws, and hope to assist Pennsylvania in doing the same.

1. Immunity From Suit, Rather Than Mere Immunity From Liability

While SB 1095 grants immunity to successful movants, the bill appears to
provide immunity from liability, instead of immunity to suit. This issue was
addressed in Englert v. MacDonnell, 551 F.3d 1099, 1106-07 (9th Cir. 2009),
Ltr. Re SB 1095
April 28, 2014
Page 2 of 5

where the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded that Oregons anti-SLAPP
statute provided immunity from liability, but not immunity from being sued as a result, an
unsuccessful anti-SLAPP motion could not be appealed until the end of trial. (Oregon has since
amended its anti-SLAPP statute, Oregon Revised Statutes 31.150, to remedy this problem.)

Requiring a case to proceed to the end of trial before a defendant can obtain appellate review is
contrary to the purpose of any anti-SLAPP statute. Other states anti-SLAPP statutes, including
California, Oregon, and Nevada, allow for an immediate appeal of any order denying an anti-SLAPP
motion. This ensures that a movant will have appellate review of a trial courts decision denying
their anti-SLAPP motion before being subjected to the expenses of litigation. Adding language to SB
1095 that allows for an expedited interlocutory appeal of any order denying an anti-SLAPP motion
will ensure that the law fulfills its true purpose and protects defendants from dubious lawsuits brought
in retaliation to exercising their First Amendment rights.

2. Protection For All Speech About Matters of Public Concern Not Just Petitioning the
Government

SB 1095 protects speech on issues of public interest in connection with enforcement or
implementation of government action related to an issue of public interest. The anti-SLAPP statutes
for California, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Texas, and the District of Columbia have all embraced
broader definitions of the speech covered by the statute, with beneficial results. Restricting the
application of SB 1095 to speech in connection with government action severely limits the reach of
the proposed anti-SLAPP law, and prevents it from being used in the consumer realm where it is most
needed. As written, SB 1095 would not protect an individual sued for posting a true but critical
review of a restaurant that gave food poisoning to dozens of people on Yelp.
1


Broadening the scope of protected speech will allow the anti-SLAPP law to reach its potential and
offer protections where they are needed most. Providing protection to speech made to the
government is important, but fails to encompass the full range of scope that needs protection from
retaliatory and baseless litigation. Adopting a broad interpretation of what speech constitutes a matter
of public concern, without limiting it to speech made to petition the government, will ensure that this
proposed statute fulfills its intended purpose.

3. Avoid Making the Statute So Strict That it Becomes Unusable

Illinois current anti-SLAPP statute, the Citizen Participation Act (CPA) has been in effect since
2007, and is confoundingly useless. Like the proposed law in SB 1095, Illinois CPA is limited to
speech made in connection with advocating to or petitioning the government. Among the CPAs
many shortcomings are its requirements that the speech at issue must be only genuinely aimed at
procuring favorable government action, and the Illinois Supreme Courts interpretation of the law to
not even apply absent evidence that plaintiff brought the suit with an improper intent. Sandholm v.
Keuker, 962 N.E. 418 (Ill. 2012). The result of Illinois precedent in interpreting the CPA has been to

1
A similar situation recently arose in Las Vegas, where a popular restaurant served tainted meat to dozens of people. If
Nevada lacked a robust anti-SLAPP statute, it is likely that the restaurant may have sued its critics without fear of legal
consequence a tactic I have seen used by other large companies and professionals, such as dentists and doctors.
Ltr. Re SB 1095
April 28, 2014
Page 3 of 5

make the statute useless. The Illinois Supreme Courts standards for applying the statute are
impossible to meet and, worse, unsupported by the statute. The people of Illinois would be better off
without any anti-SLAPP statute at least then, they could lobby to have one created, rather than be
saddled with the useless one they have.

SB 1095 seems to be on the right track in this regard. As mentioned elsewhere in this letter, it is
important to make the standard for granting an anti-SLAPP motion as easy as possible, without any
inquiry into the plaintiff or defendants intent. As seen in Illinois, any such inquiry can be used to
render the anti-SLAPP statute completely useless. To ensure that the statute is useful, the inquiry
should be kept as simple as possible: If the underlying conduct is a valid exercise of First Amendment
freedoms, and the plaintiff cannot show a reasonable likelihood of prevailing in the action, the anti-
SLAPP motion is granted. This test is found in the anti-SLAPP statutes for California, Washington,
Oregon, Nevada, and Texas. Such a standard dispenses with any subjective inquiries that can be used
to significantly change and undermine the anti-SLAPP statutes application. While SB 1095 comes
close to this goal, an effective anti-SLAPP statute is dependent on simplicity and ease of
implementation.

4. SB 1095 Should Include Mandatory Fee-Shifting and Statutory Minimum Damages

As written, SB 1095 provides trial courts with the discretion, but not the obligation, to award
damages, costs, and attorneys fees to a prevailing party. This is inconsistent with other anti-SLAPP
statutes and does not go far enough. California, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Texas, and the District
of Columbia all require an award of attorneys fees and costs in favor of a successful movant. Some
states go above and beyond mere fee-shifting: Washington requires an award of $10,000 in favor of
a successful anti-SLAPP movant, R.C.W. 4.24.525(6)(a)(ii), while Nevada allows a court to award up
to $10,000 in damages in favor of a successful movant under NRS 41.670(1)(b).

The reason for making these damages mandatory is twofold. First, requiring a plaintiff who files
meritless litigation in order to suppress First Amendment-protected expression will discourage such
undesirable lawsuits. By having an effective anti-SLAPP statute, the problem of abusive litigation in
retaliation against public participation will cure itself potential plaintiffs will fear the financial cost
of having their own action dismissed. (To say nothing of the obloquy.) Second, requiring a plaintiff
to pay the costs and fees for a successful motion will incentivize defendants to bring these motions,
and incentivize attorneys to represent these defendants. In states such as California, where an award
of costs and fees is mandatory, skilled attorneys compete to represent defendants in SLAPP suits.
Such a result is a boon for the public, the courts, and the legal profession.

In contrast, refusing to require courts to award costs and attorneys fees to a successful anti-SLAPP
movant is a double disincentive. Plaintiffs who would file SLAPP suits will face no consequences for
their action. Defendants with limited resources would have no chance of a meaningful victory in
their case, and no chance of recovering the substantial costs and fees necessary to defend themselves.
A lack of any expected remuneration certainly would dissuade counsel from making a significant
time commitment to represent SLAPP defendants.

In short, an anti-SLAPP statute without mandatory fee shifting merely reinforces the status quo. SB
1095 requires only a small modification to make the shifting of costs and fees mandatory. By
Ltr. Re SB 1095
April 28, 2014
Page 4 of 5

requiring the plaintiff to pay the costs and fees to a successful movant and potentially other
damages as well, as Washington and Nevada have allowed Pennsylvania can pass an anti-SLAPP
law with teeth.

5. SLAPP-Back Provisions Are Needed to Ensure the Anti-SLAPP Statute is Not Abused

Like the judicial system itself, anti-SLAPP statutes have a potential to be abused. States with robust
anti-SLAPP statutes have protected against this potentiality by enacting SLAPP-back statutes that
require an award of attorneys fees and costs against movants who bring frivolous or vexatious anti-
SLAPP motions. The purpose of these SLAPP-back statutes is to prevent the abuse of anti-SLAPP
statutes a problem that, if ever realized, could lead to a states repeal of these indispensable laws.

States that have adopted SLAPP-back statutes have not had reason to repeal or amend their anti-
SLAPP statutes. These states include California, Cal. Civ. P. Code 425.17, Washington, R.C.W.
4.525(6)(b), and Nevada, NRS 41.670(2). Each SLAPP-back statute is particular to that states anti-
SLAPP statute. However, the common factor among all of them is a mandatory award of attorneys
fees and costs to a plaintiff that must oppose a frivolous or vexatious anti-SLAPP motion. The fact
that an anti-SLAPP motion fails is not enough to trigger a SLAPP-back provision. Instead, SLAPP-
back statutes exist, and have been an effective check against, the abusive and unsupportable use of
anti-SLAPP statutes simply to disrupt litigation. By setting forth a penalty for the laws misuse,
Pennsylvania can ensure its anti-SLAPP statute will be available, unabridged, when the public needs
it.

6. Making the Statute Retroactively Effective Will Clear Court Dockets of Unsupportable Lawsuits

The passage of SB 1095 and adoption into law will not, on its own, remedy the number of SLAPP
suits pending in Pennsylvania. However, adding language making the statute retroactively effective
may allow for defendants to quickly dismiss SLAPP suits against them that were pending before SB
1095 went into effect. While the passage of SB 1095 as written will affect lawsuits filed after its
passage, the bill will not address SLAPP suits currently on dockets throughout Pennsylvania. Making
the law retroactive, however, will allow defendants to file anti-SLAPP motions in their cases
regardless of their current stage. Because of the laws requirements for speedy decisions on such
motions, pending SLAPP suits would be quickly dismissed. Like most states where I am involved in
litigation, Pennsylvanias courts likely would breathe a collective sigh of relief upon being relieved of
any portion of their caseload.

7. The Law and Its Legislative History Should Call for Courts to Examine the Case Law of
California, Washington, and Oregon in Interpreting the Statute

Throughout this letter, I have made numerous references to the anti-SLAPP laws of California,
Washington, Oregon, Texas, and Nevada. These states have some of the oldest (Washington,
California) and most effective (Oregon, Texas, Nevada) anti-SLAPP statutes in the nation. There is
no federal anti-SLAPP statute. Thus, the states must act as incubators for democratic ideals for their
own citizens, which other states may adopt as they see fit.

Ltr. Re SB 1095
April 28, 2014
Page 5 of 5

In enacting an anti-SLAPP statute, Pennsylvania need not reinvent the wheel. While SB 1095 is not a
carbon copy of any other states anti-SLAPP statute and nor should it be Pennsylvanias courts
may derive their interpretation of the statute by looking to other states that have successfully
implemented robust anti-SLAPP statutes. The clearest way to guide Pennsylvanias courts is to
include language in SB 1095 that the law is enacted in the spirit of anti-SLAPP laws passed in these
other states, and should be interpreted in the same manner those states courts have viewed their own
anti-SLAPP statutes.

At minimum, the legislative history for SB 1095 should be clear that this law is intended to provide
Pennsylvanians First Amendment rights with protections analogous to those available to
Californians, Nevadans, Washingtonians and Oregonians. A clear expression of this intent would be
useful in instructing Pennsylvanias courts as to the anti-SLAPP statutes purpose, and the proper lens
for interpreting it. Without expressing this intent, Pennsylvanias anti-SLAPP statute may end up of
little value to those whom it was intended to protect, as is the case in Illinois.

This letter sets forth many suggestions for SB 1095. I believe that the bill, as written, would be of
significant benefit to Pennsylvanians. Based on my experience, though, I believe that small,
thoughtful changes can bring SB 1095 into line with the small minority of states with meaningful
anti-SLAPP statutes. I believe it is not coincidental that states with strong anti-SLAPP statutes have
strong and burgeoning technology and information economies. While such a law is not sufficient to
grow an Internet-based economy, it is an indispensable part of protecting companies like Facebook,
Twitter, Yelp, Avvo, and innumerable other start-ups from litigation designed to punish First
Amendment-protected speech.

I would be happy to assist you in any way I can regarding SB 1095. Please contact me or my
colleague, A. Jordan Rushie, if you have any questions. I would look forward to hearing from you.


Best regards,

Marc J. Randazza

cc: Sen. Stewart Greenleaf
711 York Road
Willow Grove, PA 19090
azappia@pasen.gov

Encl. Text of Nevada Senate Bill 286 as enrolled
Curriculum Vitae


-
Senate Bill No. 286Senators Jones,
Segerblom, Kihuen; and Ford

CHAPTER..........

AN ACT relating to civil actions; providing immunity Irom civil
action Ior certain claims based on the right to petition and the
right to Iree speech under certain circumstances; establishing
the burden oI prooI Ior a special motion to dismiss; providing
Ior the interlocutory appeal Irom an order denying a special
motion to dismiss; and providing other matters properly
relating thereto.

Legislative Counsel`s Digest:
Existing law establishes certain provisions to deter Irivolous or vexatious
lawsuits (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, commonly known as
'SLAPP lawsuits). (Chapter 387, Statutes oI Nevada 1997, p. 1363; NRS 41.635-
41.670) A SLAPP lawsuit is characterized as a meritless suit Iiled primarily to
discourage the named deIendant`s exercise oI First Amendment rights. 'The
hallmark oI a SLAPP lawsuit is that it is Iiled to obtain a Iinancial advantage over
one`s adversary by increasing litigation costs until the adversary`s case is weakened
or abandoned. (Metabolic Research, Inc. v. Ferrell, 693 F.3d 795, 796 n.1 (9th
Cir. 2012))
The Ninth Circuit Court oI Appeals recently held that the provisions oI NRS
concerning such lawsuits only protect communications made directly to a
governmental agency. The Ninth Circuit also held that, as written, these provisions
oI NRS provide protection Irom liability but not Irom trial. That distinction, when
coupled with the lack oI an express statutory right to an interlocutory appeal, led
the court to conclude that these provisions oI NRS do not provide Ior an immediate
appeal oI an order denying a special motion to dismiss a SLAPP lawsuit.
(Metabolic, at 802)
Existing law provides that a person who engages in good Iaith communication
in Iurtherance oI the right to petition is immune Irom civil liability Ior claims based
upon that communication. (NRS 41.650) Section 2 oI this bill expands the scope oI
that immunity by providing that a person who exercises the right to Iree speech in
direct connection with an issue oI public concern is also immune Irom any civil
action Ior claims based upon that communication.
Existing law deIines certain communications, Ior purposes oI statutory
provisions concerning SLAPP lawsuits, as communications made by a person in
connection with certain governmental actions, oIIicers, employees or entities. (NRS
41.637) Section 1 oI this bill includes within the meaning oI such communications
those that are made in direct connection with an issue oI public interest in a place
open to the public or in a public Iorum. Section 3 oI this bill establishes the burden
oI prooI Ior a dismissal by special motion oI a SLAPP lawsuit. Section 3 reduces
Irom 30 days to 7 judicial days the time within which a court must rule on a special
motion to dismiss.
Existing law requires, under certain circumstances, an award oI reasonable
costs and attorney`s Iees to the person against whom a SLAPP lawsuit was brought
iI a court grants a special motion to dismiss. (NRS 41.670) Section 4 oI this bill
authorizes, in addition to an award oI costs and attorney`s Iees, an award oI up to
$10,000 iI a special motion to dismiss is granted. Section 4 also provides that iI a
court Iinds that a special motion to dismiss was Irivolous or vexatious, the court
shall award the prevailing party reasonable costs and attorney`s Iees and may award

2


-
an amount oI up to $10,000 and any such additional relieI as the court deems
proper to punish and deter the Iiling oI Irivolous or vexatious motions.

EXPLANATION Matter in !"#$%$ '()#'*+ is new; matter between brackets !omitted material" is material to be omitted.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, REPRESENTED IN
SENATE AND ASSEMBLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

$%&'()* +, NRS 41.637 is hereby amended to read as Iollows:
41.637 'Good Iaith communication in Iurtherance oI the right
to petition !" ", (-% ,'.-( (" /,%% +0%%*- '1 $',%*( *"11%*('"1 2'(-
)1 '++3% "/ 03!#'* *"1*%,14 means any:
1. Communication that is aimed at procuring any governmental
or electoral action, result or outcome;
2. Communication oI inIormation or a complaint to a
Legislator, oIIicer or employee oI the Federal Government, this state
or a political subdivision oI this state, regarding a matter reasonably
oI concern to the respective governmental entity; !or"
3. Written or oral statement made in direct connection with an
issue under consideration by a legislative, executive or judicial
body, or any other oIIicial proceeding authorized by law !," 5 ",
67 8"9931'*)('"1 9)$% '1 $',%*( *"11%*('"1 2'(- )1 '++3% "/
03!#'* '1(%,%+( '1 ) 0#)*% "0%1 (" (-% 03!#'* ", '1 ) 03!#'* /",39:
which is truthIul or is made without knowledge oI its Ialsehood.
$%&, -, NRS 41.650 is hereby amended to read as Iollows:
41.650 A person who engages in a good Iaith communication
in Iurtherance oI the right to petition ", (-% ,'.-( (" /,%% +0%%*- '1
$',%*( *"11%*('"1 2'(- )1 '++3% "/ 03!#'* *"1*%,1 is immune Irom
)1; civil !liability" )*('"1 Ior claims based upon the
communication.
$%&, ., NRS 41.660 is hereby amended to read as Iollows:
41.660 1. II an action is brought against a person based upon
a good Iaith communication in Iurtherance oI the right to petition !:"
", (-% ,'.-( (" /,%% +0%%*- '1 $',%*( *"11%*('"1 2'(- )1 '++3% "/
03!#'* *"1*%,1<
(a) The person against whom the action is brought may Iile a
special motion to dismiss; and
(b) The Attorney General or the chieI legal oIIicer or attorney oI
a political subdivision oI this State may deIend or otherwise support
the person against whom the action is brought. II the Attorney
General or the chieI legal oIIicer or attorney oI a political
subdivision has a conIlict oI interest in, or is otherwise disqualiIied
Irom, deIending or otherwise supporting the person, the Attorney
General or the chieI legal oIIicer or attorney oI a political

3


-
subdivision may employ special counsel to deIend or otherwise
support the person.
2. A special motion to dismiss must be Iiled within 60 days
aIter service oI the complaint, which period may be extended by the
court Ior good cause shown.
3. II a special motion to dismiss is Iiled pursuant to subsection
2, the court shall:
(a) !Treat the motion as a motion Ior summary judgment;"
"#$#%&'(# )*#$*#% $*# &+,'(- ./%$0 */1 #1$/23'1*#45 20 /
.%#.+(4#%/(6# +7 $*# #,'4#(6#5 $*/$ $*# 63/'& '1 2/1#4 8.+( /
-++4 7/'$* 6+&&8('6/$'+( '( 78%$*#%/(6# +7 $*# %'-*$ $+ .#$'$'+( +%
$*# %'-*$ $+ 7%## 1.##6* '( 4'%#6$ 6+((#6$'+( )'$* /( '118# +7 .823'6
6+(6#%(9
(b) :7 $*# 6+8%$ 4#$#%&'(#1 $*/$ $*# &+,'(- ./%$0 */1 &#$ $*#
28%4#( .8%18/($ $+ ./%/-%/.* ;/<5 4#$#%&'(# )*#$*#% $*# .3/'($'77
*/1 #1$/23'1*#4 20 63#/% /(4 6+(,'(6'(- #,'4#(6# / .%+2/2'3'$0 +7
.%#,/'3'(- +( $*# 63/'&9
;6< :7 $*# 6+8%$ 4#$#%&'(#1 $*/$ $*# .3/'($'77 */1 #1$/23'1*#4 /
.%+2/2'3'$0 +7 .%#,/'3'(- +( $*# 63/'& .8%18/($ $+ ./%/-%/.* ;2<5
#(18%# $*/$ 186* 4#$#%&'(/$'+( )'33 (+$=
;>< ?# /4&'$$#4 '($+ #,'4#(6# /$ /(0 3/$#% 1$/-# +7 $*#
8(4#%30'(- /6$'+( +% 1821#@8#($ .%+6##4'(-9 +%
;A< B77#6$ $*# 28%4#( +7 .%++7 $*/$ '1 /..3'#4 '( $*#
8(4#%30'(- /6$'+( +% 1821#@8#($ .%+6##4'(-9
;4< C+(1'4#% 186* #,'4#(6#5 )%'$$#( +% +%/35 20 )'$(#11#1 +%
/77'4/,'$15 /1 &/0 2# &/$#%'/3 '( &/D'(- / 4#$#%&'(/$'+( .8%18/($
$+ ./%/-%/.*1 ;/< /(4 ;2<9
;#< Stay discovery pending:
(1) A ruling by the court on the motion; and
(2) The disposition oI any appeal Irom the ruling on the
motion; and
!(c)" ;7< Rule on the motion within !30" E F84'6'/3 days aIter the
motion is !Iiled." 1#%,#4 8.+( $*# .3/'($'77G
4. II the court dismisses the action pursuant to a special motion
to dismiss Iiled pursuant to subsection 2, the dismissal operates as
an adjudication upon the merits.
$%&' (' NRS 41.670 is hereby amended to read as Iollows:
41.670 >G II the court grants a special motion to dismiss Iiled
pursuant to NRS 41.660:
!1." ;/< The court shall award reasonable costs and attorney`s
Iees to the person against whom the action was brought, except that
the court shall award reasonable costs and attorney`s Iees to this
State or to the appropriate political subdivision oI this State iI the

4


-
Attorney General, the chieI legal oIIicer or attorney oI the political
subdivision or special counsel provided the deIense Ior the person
pursuant to NRS 41.660.
!2." !"# $%& ()*+, -./ .0.+12 34 .113,3)4 ,) +&.5)4."6& ()5,5
.41 .,,)+4&/75 8&&5 .0.+1&1 9*+5*.4, ,) 9.+.:+.9% !.#2 .4 .-)*4,
)8 *9 ,) ;<=2=== ,) ,%& 9&+5)4 .:.345, 0%)- ,%& .(,3)4 0.5
"+)*:%,>
!(# The person against whom the action is brought may bring a
separate action to recover:
!(a)" !<# Compensatory damages;
!(b)" !?# Punitive damages; and
!(c)" !@# Attorney`s Iees and costs oI bringing the separate
action.
?> A8 ,%& ()*+, 1&43&5 . 59&(3.6 -),3)4 ,) 135-355 836&1
9*+5*.4, ,) BCD E<>FF= .41 83415 ,%., ,%& -),3)4 0.5 8+3G)6)*5 )+
G&H.,3)*52 ,%& ()*+, 5%.66 .0.+1 ,) ,%& 9+&G.3634: 9.+,/ +&.5)4."6&
()5,5 .41 .,,)+4&/75 8&&5 34(*++&1 34 +&59)4134: ,) ,%& -),3)4>
@> A4 .113,3)4 ,) +&.5)4."6& ()5,5 .41 .,,)+4&/75 8&&5 .0.+1&1
9*+5*.4, ,) 5*"5&(,3)4 ?2 ,%& ()*+, -./ .0.+1I
!.# J4 .-)*4, )8 *9 ,) ;<=2===K .41
!"# J4/ 5*(% .113,3)4.6 +&63&8 .5 ,%& ()*+, 1&&-5 9+)9&+ ,)
9*435% .41 1&,&+ ,%& 83634: )8 8+3G)6)*5 )+ G&H.,3)*5 -),3)45>
E> A8 ,%& ()*+, 1&43&5 ,%& 59&(3.6 -),3)4 ,) 135-355 836&1
9*+5*.4, ,) BCD E<>FF=2 .4 34,&+6)(*,)+/ .99&.6 63&5 ,) ,%&
D*9+&-& L)*+,>

!"
~~~~~
#$


MARC JOHN RANDAZZA
CURRICULUM VITAE
3625 South Town Center Drive, Las Vegas, NV 89135
888.667.1113
mjr@randazza.com

Education
















Legal Practice
Experience

























LEGUM MAGISTER (LLM)
UNIVERSIT DI TORINO FACOLT DI GIURISPRUDENZA 2014
International Intellectual Property Law

MASTER OF ARTS IN MASS COMMUNICATION (MAMC)
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA - 2003
Focus on research in media studies, branding, public relations, and advertising
as well as publication and teaching in First Amendment studies

JURIS DOCTOR (JD)
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER - 2000
Focus on First Amendment and media law

BACHELOR OF ARTS IN JOURNALISM (BA)
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS - 1994 with honors
Focus on media law studies

RANDAZZA LEGAL GROUP, Managing Partner
July 2009 to Present
Litigation and Appellate Responsibilities
o First Amendment litigation in federal and state courts
o Trademark and copyright infringement litigation in federal court
o Defamation litigation in federal and state courts
o Appellate practice in state and federal appellate courts
o Domain name disputes under the UDRP
Transactional Responsibilities
o Providing advice to clients on First Amendment, copyright, trademark,
domain name law, internet law, and entertainment law
o Trademark registration practice
o Negotiating and drafting intellectual property agreements including right of
publicity transactions, non-competition agreements, and
trade secret protection agreements
o Drafting online affiliate agreements, terms & conditions, and privacy policies
o Providing advice on state and federal regulatory matters

WESTON, GARROU, WALTERS & MOONEY, Partner
July 2004 to July 2009
Litigation and Appellate Responsibilities
o First Amendment litigation in federal and state courts
o Trademark and copyright infringement litigation in federal court
o Defamation litigation in federal and state courts
o Appellate practice in state and federal appellate courts
o Domain name disputes under the UDRP
o Domain name disputes before international bodies outside of the UDRP


MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 2








Transactional Responsibilities
o Trademark registration practice
o Negotiating and drafting intellectual property agreements including right of
publicity transactions, non-competition agreements, and
trade secret protection agreements
o Drafting online affiliate agreements, terms & conditions, and privacy policies
o Drafting website reviews for clients to assist in intellectual property protection,
litigation avoidance, and compliance with federal law

BECKER & POLIAKOFF, P.A., Associate
January 2003 June 2004
Media/First Amendment practice
o Provided pre-publication review, and libel defense counsel to publications
o Handled zoning and First Amendment issues
o Advised clients on FCC regulations
o Advised clients on copyright issues
Real estate/corporate/community association practice
o Corporate counsel to condominium, cooperative, and homeowners
associations as well as country clubs and timeshare developments
o Assisted clients with resolution of construction defect, maintenance, and
covenant enforcement disputes

Clerkships RYDIN & CARLSTEN AVOKATBYR AB, Summer Associate
Stockholm, Sweden, Summer 1999
Researched and wrote memoranda for the firms intellectual property law practice
Second-chaired a case in the International Court of Arbitration resulting in a $2.8
million verdict in a commercial dispute

SUPREME COURT OF VERMONT, Judicial Law Clerk
Montpelier, Vermont, Summer 1998
Wrote memoranda of law for Justice Denise Johnson
Wrote two draft opinions that were later adopted and published by the Supreme Court
Attended weekly meetings to discuss cases with the justices of the Supreme Court

Teaching Experience BARRY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW, Adjunct Professor of Law
Orlando, Florida, August 2006 to May 2009

Courses Taught:
Trademark Law, 2006 2009
Entertainment Law, 2007 2009
First Amendment Law, 2007 2009
Copyright Law, 2006 2007
Sports Law, Summer 2007

Additional activities and Responsibilities:
Served as a supervised research advisor to multiple students for First Amendment
and intellectual property research
Assisted with First Amendment moot court competition
MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 3


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, Research and Teaching Fellowship
Gainesville, Florida, August 2000 - May 2002
Taught classes on media law, including coverage of copyright, trademark, obscenity,
libel, campaign finance, and constitutional law
Assisted in the production of a media law case book
Conducted legal research and writing for publication in various law journals

Admitted To Practice States
Massachusetts (2002)
Florida (2003)
California (2010)
Arizona (2010)
Nevada (2012)

Federal Courts
United States Supreme Court
1
st
Circuit Court of Appeals
6
th
Circuit Court of Appeals
7
th
Circuit Court of Appeals
9
th
Circuit Court of Appeals
10
th
Circuit Court of Appeals
11
th
Circuit Court of Appeals
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court - District of Arizona
U.S. District Court - Northern District of California
U.S. District Court - Eastern District of California
U.S. District Court - Central District of California
U.S. District Court - Southern District of California
U.S. District Court - District of Colorado
U.S. District Court - Middle District of Florida
U.S. District Court - Northern District of Florida
U.S. District Court - Southern District of Florida
U.S. District Court - Northern District of Ohio
U.S. District Court - District of Massachusetts
U.S. District Court - Eastern District of Michigan
U.S. District Court - District of Nevada
U.S. District Court - Northern District of Texas
U.S. District Court - Eastern District of Wisconsin



MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 4

Law Review & Bar
Journal Publications




Freedom of Expression and Morality-Based Impediments to the Enforcement of
Intellectual Property Rights,
PENDING PUBLICATION (2014)
Nevadas New Anti-SLAPP Law: The Silver State Sets the Gold Standard,
NEVADA LAWYER (OCT. 2013)
The Need for a Unified and Cohesive National Anti-SLAPP Law,
OREGON LAW REVIEW, 91 OR. L. REV. 627 (2013)
Gambling in Americas Senior Communities,
8 MARQUETTE ELDER LAW ADVISOR 343 (2007) (co-authored with Daniel Russell)
The Florida Supreme Court Dulls the Edge of Rule 1.420(e), 80 FLA. BAR J. 39 (2006)
Condo Casino! Gambling in Florida Community Associations, 79 FLA. BAR J. 8 (2005)
The Other Election Controversy of Y2K: Core First Amendment Values and High-Tech
Political Coalitions, 82 WASH. U. L. Q. 143 (2004)
Getting to Yes With Terrorists,2002 L. Rev. M.S.U.-D.C.L. 823. (Mich. State L. Rev)
Breaking Duverger's Law is not Illegal: Strategic Voting, the Internet and the 2000
Presidential Election, 2001 UCLA J. L. TECH. 6. (2001)
The Constitutionality of Online Vote Swapping, 34 Loyola L.A. L. Rev. 1297 (2001)

Other Legal
Publications



Copyright Ruling May have Implications for Adult Industry, XBiz, March 1, 2014
Reversal of Fortune in Taiwan for Porn Producers, XBiz, February 25, 2014
The Case for Relocating Porn Production to Las Vegas, XBiz, August 6, 2012
Chick-fil-A and Free Speech, CNN, July 31, 2012
Its Un-American to Silence Rush Limbaugh, CNN, March 12, 2012
Malign Neglect, Adult Video News, January 2012
Challenging the Copyrightability of Porn, XBiz, January 2012
Are You Guilty If Pirates Use Your Internet? Lawyer says YES, TorrentFreak, Aug. 6,
2011
XXX Revenue Reporting?, XBIZ WORLD, June 2010
Standard Deviation: Whats Obscene in an Online World?,
ADULT VIDEO NEWS, Feb. 2010
A Domain by Any Other Name, ADULT VIDEO NEWS, Dec. 2008
2257 Regs a Boon to Patriotic Adult Film Producers, ADULT VIDEO NEWS, Jun 2005
Foreign Content and Section 2257, XBIZ, Jun. 2005
Republicans Save US Jobs (unwittingly), XBIZ, May 2005
Commentary for Congress, ADULT VIDEO NEWS, March 2005
Kiffmeyer Too Partisan for the Job? MINN. LAW & POLITICS, Summer 2004
Copyright and the Clubhouse, CONDO MANAGEMENT, Nov. 2003
Character Counts: Defamation Law for Community Associations, COMMUNITY
UPDATE, Jan 2003
Copyright Issues for Free Fall Photographers, SKYDIVING MAGAZINE, Oct. 2003
Neither is a Fish or a Bird (the Prisco Decision), 25 ACTIONLINE 4 (2003)
Satellite Dishes and Community Associations, CONDO MANAGEMENT (2003)
The Forgotten Electoral Controversy, INTERMEDIA, April 2001

Television & Radio
Guest Appearances
Democracy Now!, Discussing the Steubenville Rape Case, February 2013
CNN, Discussing the Steubenville Rape Case, February 2013
Reason TV, Discussing Steubenville Rape Case, February 2013
MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 5

MSNBC, Crime, Inc, Discussing Copyright Law, Aug. 29, 2012
KSNV, NBC Las Vegas, Internet providers turn to attorneys to protect content, July
25, 2012
NBC Bay Area, Porn Copyright Trolls, July 3, 2012
National Public Radio, On the Media, Combating Bad Speech with More Speech,
April 6, 2012
KLAS-TV, Economic Diversity By Legalizing Marijuana, March 26, 2012
Nevada Public Radio, State of Nevada, The End of Righthaven, March 22, 2012
Michael Savage, First Amendment Attorney Speaks About Freedom of Speech, March
14, 2012
Cyber Law and Business Report, Randazza, Righthaven and Roger Williams, Dec. 21,
2011
National Public Radio, Congress Weighs Law Against Some Lawsuits, April 2, 2010
National Public Radio, Cyber Harassment and the Law, March 3, 2009
Fox 35 Orlando, Kids Cant Play Outside Condos, March 3, 2009
Fox 35 Orlando, New Years Festivities and the Law, Dec. 30, 2008
Fox 35 Orlando, Teacher to Blame Hormones, Nov. 19, 2008
Fox 35 Orlando, Target Mis-prices Car Seats, Nov. 18, 2008
Lisa Maccis The Justice Hour: Discussing new Sex Laws and the theory of Intentional
Sex Torts, Jul. 14, 2008
The Curtis Sliwa Show, WABC, New York, discussing the Bauer v. Wikipedia
defamation case, and Section 230. Jul. 1, 2008
Lisa Maccis The Justice Hour: Discussing the Connection Distribution case and
Section 2257, May 5, 2008
Fox News, Fox and Friends: The First Amendment and the Lyrical Terrorist,
Nov. 10, 2007
Fox News, Fox and Friends: Discussing Bradenton High School Body Painting
Issue, Oct. 18, 2007
Lisa Maccis The Justice Hour: SLAPP suits and attorney ethics, Jul. 2, 2007
Fox News, Fox and Friends: Discussing Don Imus Comments about the Rutgers
Basketball Team, Apr. 10, 2007
Lisa Maccis The Justice Hour: Restrictions on attorney speech, Jan. 22, 2007
CNBC: On the Money, Discussing online gambling and prosecutions, Jan. 16, 2007
Domain Masters: Discussing domain law, gaming law, and First Amendment law with
Monte Cahn. Dec. 22, 2006
Bess Kargman, Blogsuits What Effect will Libel Threat Have on the Blogosphere?,
Oct. 23, 2006
Fox News, The Lineup: Video Games and the First Amendment, Sept. 30, 2006
Fox News, The Lineup: First Amendment and Prisons, Sept. 9, 2006
Fox News, Heartland with John Kasich: First Amendment Issues and Public Schools,
Dec. 30, 2005
Fox News, Dayside: Commentary on Church-State Issues, Nov. 9,
Fox News, Heartland with John Kasich: Commentary on Separation of Church and
State, Oct. 15, 2005
Fox News, Live: Commentary and Debate on Online Vote Pairing, Oct. 17, 2004
Bob Frantz Show: News/Talk 1370: Discussing Election Law Issues. Oct. 10, 2004

MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 6



Quotes and
Interviews in
Newspapers,
Magazines, and other
Publications


Revenge Porn Site Operators Ordered To Pay Woman $385k, C|Net, March 19, 2014
UGotPosted Operators Ordered to Pay $385k, XBiz Newswire, March 18, 2014
9th Circuit May Stay Youtube Takedown Decision, XBiz Newswire, March 10, 2014
Bloggers Get 1st Amendment Protections in Defamation Suits, XBiz Newswire,
January 17, 2014
Randazza Completes IP Law Masters Program in Italy, XBiz Newswire, December 31,
2013
BangBros Subpoenas Over Online Ad, XBiz Newswire, October 18, 2013
UGotPosted Operators Hit With Another Lawsuit, XBiz Newswire July 30, 2013
Craig Brittain Says He Is Retiring From Revenge Porn, Shutters 2 Sites, XBiz
Newswire, June 10, 2013
Revenge Porn Site UGotPosted.com Accused of Violating 2257, XBiz Newswire, May
31, 2013
Copyright Troll Righthaven Finally, Completely Dead, Ars Technica, May 9, 2013
$40M Suit Alleges BadBoyReport Scraped Content, XBiz Newswire, May 7, 2013
FSC Panel Discussion Saturday in Las Vegas, XBiz Newswire, April 26, 2013
AdultWoot.com Ordered Transferred to Amazons Woot.com Dvision, April 18, 2013
Phoenix Forum Hums with Activity on Day 2, XBiz Newswire, April 5, 2013
Revenge Porn Site Founder Loses $250k Defamation Suite, Ars Technica, March 10,
2013
Remember Righthaven? On Appeal, Copyright Troll Looks Just As Bad, Ars
Technica, February 6, 2013
Corbin Fisher Sues Oron.com Cloud Storage Service, AVN Media Network, June 21,
2012
The Righthaven Experiment: A Journalist Wonders If A Copyright Troll Was Right to
Sue Him, ABA Journal, April 23, 2012
Poll: Porn Industry Split Over Government Anti-Piracy Role, XBiz, March 15, 2012
U.S. Judge Strips Interests From Copyright Enforcer, The Wausau Daily Herald,
March 15, 2012
R-J Copyrights to be Auctioned Following Righthavens Collapse, Vegas Inc., March
14, 2012
Hushing Rush Isnt a Good Idea, The Worcester Telegram and Gazette, March 13,
2012
Call Off the Attacks, The Augusta Chronicle, March 13, 2012
Industry Attorney Marc Randazza Defends Rush Limbaugh in CNN Op-Ed, XBiz,
March 12, 2012
Righthaven Criticized for Missing Hearing and Briefing Deadline, Vegas Inc., March
6, 2012
Judge Strips Righthaven of Rights to 278 Copyrights and Its Trademark, Vegas Inc.,
March 5, 2012
UMass Amherst: Alumni Spotlight, Feb. 19, 2012
Yes! Yes! Yes! Could an LA Condom Ordinance Push Pornsters Out of SoCal and
Drive Some Naughty Business Our Way?, Las Vegas City Life, Jan. 27, 2012
Marc Randazza: First Amendment Attorney, Las Vegas City Life, Jan. 27, 2012
Megaupload Shut Down, Operators Changed, XBiz, Jan. 20, 2012
MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 7

Condoms in Porn: Moving Industry Out of State Could Be Difficult, LA Times, Jan.
19, 2012
Righthaven Actually Shows up to Court, Whines About Scorched Earth Tactics
Against It, TechDirt, Jan. 13, 2012
XBiz LAs Day 1 Delivers Daily Seminar, Robust Speed Networking, XBiz, Jan. 11,
2012
Hit By Defendant Judgment, Copyright Troll Righthaven Decries Scorched Earth
Effort to Collect, ABA Journal, Jan. 10, 2012
Righthaven Complains about Scorched Earth Efforts to Enforce Judgment, Vegas
Inc., Jan. 9, 2012
Gay Fetish Filmmaker Found Not Guilty of Obscenity in UK, XBiz, Jan. 6, 2012
Righthaven Defendant Frustrated Again in Debt Collection, Vegas Inc., Jan. 6, 2012
PIPA is the New SOPA, San Diego City Beat, Jan. 4, 2012
The Watch List, San Diego City Beat, Jan. 4, 2012
Tube Site Operator Must Pay $990K, Judge Says, XBiz, Dec. 28, 2011
Auction of Righthaven Domain Underway, Vegas Inc., Dec. 26, 2011
Dismantling of Righthaven Seems Underway with Loss of Website, Vegas Inc., Dec.
22, 2011
Twitter Stalker is Free to Tweet, Federal Judge Rules, Dec. 20, 2011
XBiz Top 50 Industry Newsmakers of 2011, XBiz World Magazine, Dec. 20, 2011
Court Asked to Step in after Righthaven Refuses to Comply with Auction, Vegas Inc.,
Dec. 20, 2011
Online Criticism Sparks Real World Defamation Lawsuit, The Sarasota Herald-
Tribune, Dec. 18, 2011
Can Righthaven Survive Latest Legal Blow?, Las Vegas Sun, Dec. 13, 2011
Music, Book Industries May Back Righthaven, Vegas Inc., Dec. 4, 2011
Copyright Infringement Defendants Turn the Table on Righthaven, PBS MediaShift,
Dec. 1, 2011
Attorneys Seek to Auction Righthaven Copyrights, Vegas Inc., Nov. 14, 2011
Attorneys Seek to Examine Righthaven CEO about Company Finances, Vegas Inc.,
Nov. 7, 2011
Marshals Ordered to Seize Righthaven Assets, Vegas Inc., Nov. 1, 2011
Defense Attorneys Hit Righthaven with Sanctions Motion, Vegas Inc., Oct. 26, 2011
Invasion of the Body Searchers, The New Zealand Herald, Sept. 30, 2011
Copyright Trolls Assets Targeted for Seizure, Wired, Sept. 19, 2011
Copyright Troll Righthaven Goes on Life Support, Wired, Sept. 7, 2011
Miami Heat Minority Owner Ranaan Katz Sues an Anonymous Blogger, Miami
NewTimes News, Aug. 25, 2011
Corbin Fisher Awarded Porn BitTorrent Judgment, June 15, 2011
Bloggers Mull Legal Action Against Righthaven, Wired, June 15, 2011
Legal Blog Sues Publisher to Invalidate Trademarks on BigLaw and SmallLaw,
ABA Journal, March 22, 2011
Corbin Fisher Identifies PornILove Pirate, XBiz, March 16, 2011
Busting Campus Myths, The Massachusetts Daily Collegian, March 10, 2011
National Bloggers Group Intervenes in Copyright Lawsuit Campaign, Las Vegas Sun,
February 23, 2011
Lampoontang Appeals Trademark Rejection, XBiz, February 16, 2011
MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 8

Righthaven Files First Judgment Motion, Demands Cash and Domain Name, Las
Vegas Sun, February 12, 2011
Congressmen Call for Aggressive Porn Prosecutions, XBiz, February 11, 2011
The Geek Kings of Smut, New York Magazine, February 7, 2011
Top Attorneys Focus on Legal Landscape at XBIZ LA, XBiz, February 7, 2011
Corbin Fisher Sues Hotfile, John Does for Copyright Infringement, AVN, January 18,
2011
Is Suing End Users a Good Idea?, AVN, January 10, 2011
Record $250K Porn File-Sharing Settlement Reached, XBiz, January 5, 2011
Legal Attack Dog Sicked on Websites Accused of Violating R-J Copyrights, Las
Vegas Sun, August 4, 2010
Some targets of Righthaven lawsuits fighting back, Las Vegas Sun, August 4, 2010
Corbin Fisher receives $1.75 Million Judgment in eBay Piracy Case, AVN, June 10,
2010
NORML Settles Copyright Case With Righthaven After Rare Strategic Maneuver,
Online Media Daily, June 8, 2010
Reposting Stories Is Like Grand Theft Auto? Really?, The Daily Online Examiner,
June 3, 2010
More and More Lawsuits Over Rants on the Web That Blast Businesses, ABA Law
Journal, June 1, 2010
Venting Online, Consumers Can Find Themselves in Court, The New York Times,
May 31, 2010
These Go To 11: Righthaven Files Yet More Copyright Lawsuits, Online Media Daily,
May 7, 2010
$29M Infringement Suit Waged by 3 Gay Adult Studios, XBiz, March 29, 2010
Web Site Barred From Quick Release of New Ratings, Wall Street Journal, March 18,
2010
SOB Stories, Business TN, Jan/Feb 2010
Corbin Fisher wins $990,000 Judgment Against eBay Pirate, AVN, February 10, 2010
Corbin Fisher Wins $990,000 Judgment Against Alleged Pirate, XBiz, February 9,
2010
Ohio Scores Limited Victory In Attempts to Halt Web Porn, AVN, Jan. 28, 2010
Fly, Meet Sledgehammer, San Diego CityBeat, Jan. 26, 2010
DudeVu Disappears from Web After Piracy Suit Is Filed, XBiz, Jan. 8, 2010
Attorney Representing Disgruntled Customer Fires Back in Twitter, Facebook Dispute,
TC Palm, Dec. 28, 2009
Corbin Fisher Takes a Stand with the FCC, AVN, Dec. 15, 2009
Corbin Fisher Calls Out Religious Group Over Lambert Complaint, XBiz, Dec. 14,
2009
Corbin Fisher Sues eBay Sellers for Content Piracy, AVN, Dec. 14, 2009
Corbin Fisher Sues Alleged Pirates Who Sold DVDs on eBay, XBiz, Dec. 10, 2009
Marc Randazza: his Profane, Pornographic, Anti-Glenn Beck World, Bitter Lawyer,
December 7, 2009
Corbin Fishers Steamy Offer to Levi Johnston Gets Close Look, XBiz, Dec. 4, 2009
Lawyer Earns Fan Club For Exposing Glenn Beck as The Idiot He Is, The
Hollywood Reporter Esq., Nov. 11, 2009
WIPO Sides With Glenn Beck and Murdered a Girl Site, AVN, November 10, 2009
MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 9

Breaking: Jones v. Minkin Dismissed!!!, Above The Law, November 4, 2009
Law graduates settle suit, Yale Daily News, October 23, 2009
Corbin Fisher, Hunkfest Settle Copyright-Infringement Lawsuit, AVN, October 9,
2009
Corbin Fisher Settles Infringement Suit With Hunkfest, XBiz, October 9, 2009
Corbin Fisher Taps Marc Randazza to Lead Anti-Piracy Efforts, AVN, July 23, 2009
Critics say bill denies some sexual freedom, Boston Globe, April 26, 2009
Slimed Online, Conde Nast Portfolio, March 2009
22-Year-Old Sells Virginity Online and Feds Cant Do a Thing to Stop Her, Fox
News Online, January 15, 2009
Absurd Links Lawsuit Could Unravel Web, Daily Online Examiner, October 7, 2008
Whos to Blame for Bill OReilly Hack?, Datamation, Sept. 24, 2008
California seeks compensation for posting laws online, Washington Times,
Sept. 15, 2008
Experts: SIUE shooting threat case will test First Amendment, St. Clair County
Journal, Sep. 10, 2008
Juicy Campus Web site faces opposition from UF officials, Florida Alligator,
Aug. 7, 2008
Lawyers to name defendants in AutoAdmit case, Yale Daily News, Jul. 31, 2008
Yale Students Lawsuit Unmasks Anonymous Trolls, Opens Pandoras Box, WIRED,
Jul. 30, 2008
Oregon claims state law copyrighted, The Washington Times, Apr. 19, 2008
Lawyers, artists the world over are captivated by case, Fort Myers News-Press, Apr.
12, 2008
Operation MBI Shame, Orlando Weekly, Oct. 18, 2007
Classic hustler caught in net scam, Las Vegas Sun, Sept. 12, 2007
SLAPP Happy, Orlando Weekly, Aug. 9, 2007
Towering Rage, Luxury condo developers up the ante with critics, Broward New
Times, Jul. 26, 2007
Case Dismissed, Bay Windows, Jul. 12, 2007
Kink.com Appeals URL Deemed Obscene, XBiz World, Jul. 2007 at 16.
The F-Bomb, Orlando Weekly, Jun. 7, 2007
Dredging opponent claims developer sent him intimidation letter, Naples News,
Apr. 20, 2007
Resident turns tables on developer with countersuit, Orlando Sentinel, Apr. 7, 2007
Lawsuit Seeks to Block Blogger: Orlando Sentinel, Sep. 5, 2006
Morality Battle Carries On: Tampa Tribune, Aug. 17, 2006
Intelligent design case to undergo 2-pronged test: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette,
Oct. 2, 2005
Plan for Adult Store Draws Residents Fire: Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville)
Jan. 8, 2005
Swap the Vote: Orlando Weekly, Oct. 24, 2004
Ill Vote Nader If You Vote Kerry: East Bay Express (California), Sep. 29, 2004
BACK NEWS: Network World, Sep. 27, 2004
Kerry backers seek Nader vote exchange: Chattanooga Times Free Press (Tennessee),
Sep. 22, 2004

MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 10

Online Only Sources
Miami Heat Owner Sues Blogger and Google Over Unflattering Photo, TechDirt,
June 25, 2012
What Gives Them the Right to Frisk Henry Kissinger?, Huffington Post, May 21, 2012
The Practice: A Lawyer to Emulate, Marc Randazza, Above the Law, March 19, 2012
Can You Be Sued for Simply Watching and Illegal Video Stream?, TorrentFreak,
March 17, 2012
Marc Randazza Driving the White Caddy, Unwashed Advocate, March 16, 2012
Rick Santorum vs. Marc Randazza: A Dichotomy of Zealotry, Nobodys Business,
March 15, 2012
The Time I Unleashed Marc Randazza on the ABA, Corporate Tool, March 15, 2012
Marc Randazza, Hero, Simple Justice, March 15, 2012
Marc Randazza: Why I Went to Law School, Philly Law Blog, March 15, 2012
Marc Randazza: The Mark of Excellence, Declarations and Exclusions, March 15,
2012
Marc Randazza: Its UnAmerican to Silence Rush Limbaugh, MensNewsDaily.com,
March 15, 2012
Righthaven is No More! It has Gone to Its Maker!, Citizen Media Law Project, March
15, 2012
Marc Randazza: 1st Amendment Lawyer Exemplar, Associates Mind, March 15, 2012
Marc Randazzas Fun, Effective, Entertaining Legal Writing, Lawyerist.com, March
15, 2012
Marc Randazza: First Amendment Bad Ass, Popehat, March 15, 2012
Marc Randazza: Super Lawyer, Super Blogger?, New York Personal Injury Blog,
March 15, 2012
Marc Randazza Would Support Me, Right?, Defrosting Cold Cases, March 15, 2012
Rush Limbaugh: Gaining Support After Libs Go Too Far, Gather.com, March 13, 2012
Judge Orders Failed Copyright Troll to Forfeit All Copyrights, Wired, March 13, 2012
Should Sandra Fluke Sue Rush Limbaugh?, Huffington Post, March 5, 2012
Copyright Lawsuit Targets Owners of Non-Secure Wireless Networks,
ComputerWorld, Feb. 6, 2012
Righthaven Now Pays Tribute to Content Creators, WebProNews, Jan. 26, 2012
New Righthaven to Offer Hosting with a Backbone, TechDirt, Jan. 26, 2012
New Righthaven Offer Hosting with a Spine, BoingBoing, Jan. 23, 2012
Righthaven Actually Shows up to Court, Whines About Scorched Earth Tactics
Against It, TechDirt, Jan. 13, 2012
Righthaven Fails to Show Up as Ordered, TechDirt, Jan. 6, 2012
Randazza Files for Contempt of Court Against Righthaven, TechDirt, Jan. 3, 2012
Righthaven Files Emergency Motion to Keep Its Assets, TechDirt, Dec. 30, 2011
Copyright Trolls Domain Name Auction to Pay Legal Fees, Wired.com, Dec. 27,
2011
Private Actors are Biggest Threat to Free Speech, Crime & Federalism, Dec. 26, 2011
Who Want to Own Righthaven.com?, TechDirt, Dec. 22, 2011
Righthaven Tries New Strategy: Maybe If It Just Ignores Marc Randazza, Hell Go
Away, TechDirt, Dec. 22, 2011
Standing Up for Eroding Civil Liberties, Pravada, Dec. 21, 2011
Defendant Asks U.S. Marshal to Drag Defeated Righthaven to Court, Ars Technica,
MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 11

Dec. 20, 2011
Its Official: RIAA Trying to Join Righthaven Lawsuit, TechDirt, Dec. 5, 2011
Fail: RIAA Plans to Join Righthaven Copyright Trolls, TorrentFreak, Dec. 5, 2011
If At First You Fail In Suing A Blogger For Defamation Over His Description Of You
Shooting Two Dogs, Try, Try Again, TechDirt, Nov. 21, 2011
Randazza seeking sanctions against Righthaven lawyer for going through charade yet
again, TechDirt, Nov. 16, 2011
District Court Permits Reverse Domain Name Hijacking Claim to Proceed Despite
National Arbitration Decision Ordering Transfer of Domain to Defendant, Pattishall
IP Blog, Nov. 3, 2011
District Court Denies Motion to Dismiss on Reverse Hijacking Claim, The Technology
& Marketing Blog, Oct. 31, 2011
Judge Administers Another Beatdown to P2P Lawyer, Severs Cases, Ars Technica,
April 4, 2011
Porn Producer Fights Biased Trademark Rejection, YNOT, February 18, 2011
Gay Porn Studio Takes a Pounding From Pirates, Offers Second Amnesty Deal,
South Florida Gay News, February 15, 2011
Pirates Accepting Corbin Fischers Amnesty Offer, YNOT, January 28, 2011
Gay Porns P2P Amnesty: Cough Up $1,000 And You Wont Be Sued, Ars
Technica, January 2011
The Good War: Porn v. Piracy, YNOT, December 7, 2010
A Domain by Any Other Name, AVN Online, December 1, 2008
Absurd Links Lawsuit Could Unravel Web, Daily Online Examiner, Oct. 7, 2008
Woman Sentenced for Web Site With obscene Stories, PC World, Aug. 7, 2008
3rd Circuit wont create new category of unprotected speech, Freedom Forum First
Amendment Center, Aug. 1, 2008
Supremes Nod to Guns Could be a Boon to Free Speech, XBiz, Jul. 1, 2008
US Law Aims to Catch Up With Tech - and Misses, eCommerce Times, Jun. 23, 2008
Kink.com Appeals URL Deemed Obscene, XBiz, Jun. 11, 2007
Patent Office Refuses Porn Site Trademark Due To Obscenity, AVNOnline,
Jun. 11, 2007
Microsoft Sues Cybersquatters, Raises Awareness, Xbiz, Mar. 14, 2007
Legal Experts Look Closely at New 2257 Regs, Xbiz, May 25, 2005

Speaking
Engagements

Above The Law Attorney@Blog Conference. Lectured on copyright, trademark,
defamation, and general Internet issues to numerous attorneys and members, March
2014, New York, NY.
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on updates in defamation law and
related litigation in prominent cases across the country, July 2013, Philadelphia, PA.
Nevada Legislative Session 2013. Drafted, lobbied, and successfully argued for the
passage of a revised anti-SLAPP statute in Nevada and revision to proposed human
trafficking law with potential First Amendment implications for production of adult
entertainment, May 2013, Carson City, NV.
Libertarian Party of Nevada Convention. Lectured on freedom of expression and
First Amendment matters, including the rights of the adult entertainment industry,
April 2013, Las Vegas, NV.
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on updates, development, and
MARC JOHN RANDAZZA 12

application on Anti-SLAPP statutes and defamation cases across the country,
February 2013, New Orleans, LA.
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on updates, development, and
application on Anti-SLAPP statutes across the country, July 2012, Chicago, IL.
CineKink Film Festival. Lectured on First Amendment and intellectual property
issues in the adult entertainment industry, June 2012, Las Vegas, NV.
American Intellectual Property Law Association. Lectured on updates,
development, and application on Anti-SLAPP statutes across the country, Spring
Meeting 2012, Austin, TX.
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on updates, development, and
application on Anti-SLAPP statutes across the country, February 2012, San Diego,
CA.
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on issues in BitTorrent litigation,
July 2011, Minneapolis, MN.
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on copyright litigation and the
errors present in current anti-piracy litigation models, February 2011, Washington,
D.C.
XBIZ LA Conference. Lectured on intellectual property law and piracy litigation
issues, February 2011, Los Angeles, CA
InterNext Conference. Participated in panel discussion concerning online adult
entertainment issues, focusing on antipiracy litigation trends and strategies, January
2011, Las Vegas, NV
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on the intersection of intellectual
property law and free speech, February 2010, San Antonio, TX
International Trademark Association. Table topics leader, May 2010, Boston, MA
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on the intersection of intellectual
property law and free speech, July 2009, Vancouver, BC
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on the intersection of intellectual
property law and free speech, February 2009, New Orleans, LA
Adult Entertainment Expo. Lectured on intellectual property, brand management,
free speech issues and section 2257, January 2009, Las Vegas, NV
First Amendment Lawyers Association. Lectured on U.S. trademark law and
domain name disputes, July 2008, San Francisco, CA
Seminole County Inns of Court. Lectured judges and lawyers on defamation law
issues, February 10, 2008, Orlando, FL
The International Institute of Communications Annual Meeting. Lectured on US
media law to an audience of international businesspeople, government officials, and
academics. October 1-4, 2001, Singapore
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung and Nanyang Technological University Conference on
Media, Civil Society and Good Governance in Southeast Asia. Lectured on
media law in the post-September 11th United States. November 7-9, 2001, Singapore
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC)
southeast colloquium. Lectured on Internet law. March 8-10, 2001, Columbia, SC

Professional
Organizations
First Amendment Lawyers Association
International Trademark Association