Comments on: Sexpert Uncovers Shades of Dahl in Piracy Witch-Hunt

By: Davenport Lyons Will Be My Bitch!

Davenport Lyons Will Be My Bitch! — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 06:13:24 +0000

@14

Truer words were never spoken.

It’s called justice. And I won’t shed any tears when it happens either.

By: jerusalem spider

jerusalem spider — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:55:45 +0000

I call Godwin’s law.

By: sakonkak

sakonkak — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:27:03 +0000

money money money……

By: Roger

Roger — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:27:48 +0000

Good Article but needs to link to Violet Blue blog/article.

Citations pls!

By: Aiue

Aiue — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:56:35 +0000

@29: Wait, what?

By: Frank E White

Frank E White — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:24:09 +0000

This is hilarious.

Yes, it’s true: it’s almost impossible to write something that others can understand, which is one reason why Steve King makes so much money.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:12:56 +0000

I demand more dispute over this not-yet-fully-interpreted reply, from the otherwise insignificant article!

By: @24

@24 — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:40:10 +0000

@24 thats what I said numbnuts. The post was sarcastic.
*shvroooom.* Over your head.

By: -_-

-_- — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 04:54:40 +0000

blind man is in the novel idiots

By: LOL

LOL — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 04:17:23 +0000

Insert Peter Griffin laugh here. Ehehehehehehe

By: omg

omg — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:22:31 +0000

you people are serious idiots, i know the blind person is in a STORY. I was commenting on a the comment of the story.

Guy was saying it doesnt matter if the “blind” guy was blind or not, they still have evidence so they should prosecute anyway.

thats complete bs. Perhaps im interpreting this all wrong, and the guy commenting is being sarcastic..

By: Rekrul

Rekrul — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:14:57 +0000

Don’t bother trying to explain the “blind man” part. 90% of the people reading this article are too dim-witted to understand the concept of an analogy.

By: please learn to read

please learn to read — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:37:18 +0000

im amazed at how many people here cannot read the article correctly…

the BLIND person was in the novel by Dahl, and the “letter” was someone modifying it as if the blind, deceased husband was being sued by DL

By: iiZNZNZNZ!!

iiZNZNZNZ!! — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:52:15 +0000

@1: You must be blind …. pls to read the article again.

By the way #1 …. only joking about the blind comment … couldn’t resist the playful remark :)

By: Jacob

Jacob — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:49:37 +0000

Lol fail. What a fail law firm. They sued a DEAD, BLIND MAN!, on dodgey, circumstantial and easily forgeable evidence from a dodgey company.

By: lol

lol — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:48:40 +0000

@ #18 Hacked lines?!? Seems more like you can’t even find your own caps-lock key. :p

By: ruinyourlife

ruinyourlife — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:04:38 +0000

Jesus, can’t you people read a simple article. There is no blind man being accused of anything. Take you head out of you ass, and re-read the article.

By: the.dwarfer

the.dwarfer — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:52:35 +0000

those pensioners should file a counter-suit for deformation, mental anguish loss of earnings and what ever else they can think of. take DL to court. whos gonna win, loveable doddery pensioners or evil gay-porn peddling copyright nazis?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:24:26 +0000

@13 lol

By: aquariumfish

aquariumfish — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:44:46 +0000

Davenport Lyons, are getting a really bad rep for themselves of late.

http://www.aquariumfish.me