Blogroll

Weekend Edition 2-13

It must be the mid-February, I’m sick of winter effect. A very abbreviated edition this week.

Bulletin Board

  • I modified my post Monday on the “blogger bills” for an op-ed piece that ran Wednesday in my hometown newspaper, the Watertown Public Opinion.

Nonbookish Linkage

Friday Follies 2.3

When any state legislature meets, there’s some daft bills always appear. This week’s winner comes from Iowa, where first-term Rep. Jason Schultz has introduce legislation to make it an impeachable offense for a judge to use “judicial precedent, case law, penumbras, or international law as a basis for rulings.”

Canadian Supreme Court agrees that man who killed his in-laws was properly acquitted of murder on grounds of sleepwalking or, more technically, “non?insane automatism.” (Via.)

Should have known it. East Coaster metro areas not used to serious snowfall prompt the term “snow law.”

From jury duty to jail: a Texas juror was arrested after he “put a small bag of marijuana in the change tray before going through the metal detector at the entrance of the courthouse.” (Via.)

Some countries are seeing people shot and stabbed over bad karaoke. Personally, if karaoke is involved, I think it’s probably justifiable homicide.


Wouldn’t it be the best damn day
If we all took time to breathe

O.A.R., “Risen,” In Between Now and Then

Book Review: Me, the Mob, and the Music by Tommy James

For whatever reason, celebrity memoirs seem to sell better when they are tell-all tales. In fact, it seems the more salacious, the better. If that’s what intrigues you about such works, Me, the Mob, and the Music: One Helluva Ride with Tommy James & The Shondells won’t fit the bill. If, though, you’re interested in the then-nascent pop music industry of the 1960s as experienced by a still teenaged star who ends up signed with the “Godfather” of that business, Tommy James’s memoir may be worth your time.

To a certain extent, the story of Tommy James encapsulates the story of rock music in the 1960s. James, born Thomas Jackson, details how he began playing in bands at age 12, the years spent forming bands and playing local and regional venues, and how he ended up married and a father just shy of age 18. While still 16, James and the Shondells, all local Michigan guys, recorded and released a regional single, “Hanky Panky.” Somehow, although the song would soon disappear regionally, two years later it became a huge hit in Pittsburgh, launching James and the song to national success.

Even that success reflects a young industry. By the time “Hanky Panky” broke out in Pittsburgh, the Shondells had long since disbanded. As the singer, it was James and James alone who was recruited and marketed to the New York music industry. He signed with Roulette Records, owned by Morris Levy, who was reportedly “connected” and known as the “Godfather” of the record industry. It was common at the time to record albums after a single or two had already been released. Once “Hanky Panky” got national release and shot to number one, it was clear there needed to be an album — which also meant James needed to find new Shondells. He did so in a Pittsburgh band called the Raconoeturs, who quickly discarded that name and ended up in a New York City recording studio and on national tours with James and would rocket to more anonymous fame with him. The only common denominator between the Shondells’ first single and first album was James himself.

Much of the book discusses the relationship and dealings between James and Levy. Levy had moved from nightclubs, including the famous Birdland, into the record industry. He founded and bought a number of record labels, including the K-Tel label that would be near ubiquitous in the 1970s. The descriptions by James give the impression the Roulette offices were a cross between corporate and wise guy America, with secretaries and accountants crossing paths with well-dressed guys with baseball bats who dealt with record bootleggers. One of Levy’s keys was to obtain the rights to songs, occasionally even having his or his young son’s name added as a writer. That happened with James, whose income came largely from the concert circuit. Although Levy would give James a check here and there, royalty accountings and payments bordered on nonexistent.

In large part thanks to Levy and Roulette, though, James and the Shondells were a popular part of the developing sound of the late 1960s. “Hanky Panky” had a basic, almost primitive, rock and roll type feel. In 1967, “I Think We’re Alone Now,” which reached number four on the charts, would be credited by some as inventing “bubblegum” music, a claim to fame James acknowledges yet still tries to distance himself from. Then, in 1968, “Crimson and Clover” would reach number one with a psychedelic rock approach. James relates the stories behind both the writing and recording of many of these hits, including confirming that the tune “Mony Mony” got its name when, taking a break from writing the song, he saw a neon sign on the Mutual of New York building that kept spelling out “MONY”.

Me, the Mob, and the Music seems to almost take a sense of pride in Levy’s background and reputation. James does not hesitate to describe incidents that suggest organized crime ties or seeing in meeting such individuals in Levy’s office. He recalls one time when, after leaving Levy’s office, “all I could think of was how many murders, crimes and God knows what else I had just shaken hands with.” Levy going missing when a battle broke out for control of . At the same time, it is clear that despite being among the artists whose money Levy kept, James had a great deal of respect and gratitude for Levy, developing almost a familial relationship with him.

Often, though, it feels like James is merely skimming the surface or picking out highlights here and there. In fact, the extent to which the book stays away from the tell-all style is reflected in the fact that at times it seems to actually ignore aspects of his life. For example, although we James talks about his first wife and their son and the guilt he felt as he achieved stardom while they remained in Michigan, he never discusses what type of relationship, if any, he had with the boy as he grew up. Rather, both wife and son fade from the story once James mentions they got divorced. Likewise, James spends little time on his career after the Shondells broke up in 1970 and gives no glimpse of how someone who suddenly achieved worldwide fame and success in his teens and early twenties copes once he is out of the spotlight. More notably, while James mentions that Levy owed him some $40 million in royalties, there is no discussion of when and how that was ever resolved.

As a result, James is not always a thorough historian. Still, he tells enough of the story and his experiences to not only give us a look inside the rock music world of the late 1960s but to leave little doubt he did get “one helluva ride” like Levy promised when he signed him.


It took me years to realize that In the Court of the Crimson King didn’t come with marijuana seeds enclosed in the cover.

Tommy James, Me, the Mob, and the Music

The problem with the “blogger bills”

As I indicated Friday, I saw too many years of the legislative sausage-making process to really want to weigh in on the so-called “blogger bills” in the state House, particularly at this early stage. But the blogospheric lines seem so sharply drawn (with attendant personality conflicts) when it seems somewhat unnecessary. There’s no sense arguing over First Amendment issues when the bills are defective from a practical standpoint.

Let’s start with this indisputable proposition: no one has a legal right to defame another person and while the First Amendment imposes some limits on defamation law, actions for libel or slander do not alone violate the First Amendment. At the same time, this debate doesn’t need to be one surrounding any First Amendment rights to remain anonymous while speaking. Common sense alone suffices.

As introduced, House Bill 1277 would allow someone to name “the online content provider” in a defamation lawsuit “for the limited purpose of obtaining information” about another person who posted something. The online content provider then has 30 days to provide any information that is “reasonably available and kept in the normal course of business” that may identify that other person and is entitled to be dismissed from the lawsuit once it has done so. The provider is not liable solely by virtue of being a online content provider.

While I don’t like “online content provider” not being defined, the major problem here is the law isn’t necessary. South Dakota already allows someone to bring what is commonly known as a “John Doe lawsuit” if you don’t know the true identity of the intended defendant. Thus, in an action based on some anonymous internet posting, the defamed person can file their lawsuit, naming John or Jane Doe as the defendant and then subpoena the information that would be sought via HB 1277. This is commonly used in the federal system, including actions by the RIAA against downloaders. Any First Amendment issues can be addressed in responding to the subpoena.

Creating a new statutory procedure does not eliminate any First Amendment issues or eliminate the cost of litigating them if someone doesn’t want to turn over the information. So why create a new and separate procedure just for online content? Why name a blogger as a defendant in a defamation lawsuit — a matter of public record — when a method already exists to do what HB 1277 claims to accomplish? Let’s go back to the adage heard over and over and over and over in the halls of the state Capitol during session — “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Unless and until someone can show John Doe lawsuits won’t work in this context, there is no reason for HB 1277.

From one standpoint, HB 1278 could be more beneficial to bloggers than the “John Doe” provisions — but it goes beyond impractical to the impossible. As introduced, the bill says: “Any person who allows internet posts shall keep a record of the internet-protocol logs adequate to provide identification and location of otherwise unknown, anonymous, or pseudonymous persons who leave or upload content.” (Emphasis added.) Notably, that information is to be provided only upon a court order meeting specified standards. Bloggers should find solace in the bill to the extent it elevates what someone who seeks the information must show. But it is virtually impossible for bloggers to comply.

To begin with, as far as I know certain blogging platforms, such as Blogger, don’t provide IP logs for the blogger. Bloggers can get IP address information from services like Sitemeter but that will simply tell you to which internet service provider the IP address is allocated, whether Midco in Sioux Falls, SBC Internet Services in Los Angeles or or StarHub Cable Vision in Singapore. Only the ISP knows who had that IP address at any particular time. The same is true of comment features on blogs. Many, if not all, allow the blog owner to see a commenter’s IP address. Again, though, the most you can tell is what ISP was being used, not who was using it.

Thus, the bill asks the impossible. To the best of my knowledge, no blog will have IP information that will identify a specific individual or even street address. Despite that, HB 1278 says a blogger (and others) “shall” keep IP logs adequate to identify a commenter. Where should a blogger buy the nonexistent software or services to comply with the law? Even if such software existed, would bloggers then be required to neutralize anonymizer products and services? If no bloggers can avoid violating the law, then the fear that the law will mean shutting down commenting all together isn’t an imaginary one?

Courts avoid constitutional issues unless necessary to decide a case. The same concept should be used here. There’s no sense in fighting these bills, at least in their present form, on First Amendment grounds because their true fatal flaws are in creating new procedures or standards that are unnecessary or impossible.


We live in a stage of politics, where legislators seem to regard the passage of laws as much more important than the results of their enforcement.

William Howard Taft, Our Chief Magistrate and His Powers

Weekend Edition: 2-6

Bulletin Board

  • I said yesterday I wasn’t going to speak up on the so-called “blogger bills” but, so far, the debate seems to lose the forest for the trees. I’ll have a post Monday on why these bills shouldn’t pass.
  • I was pleased to see that Five Peace Band Live, my album of the year, won the Grammy for Best Jazz Instrumental Album.

Blog Headline of the Week

Best Line on the Interweb This Week

Interesting Reading in the Interweb Tubes

Bookish Linkage

Nonbookish Linkage


I’ve got a mental toothache and the sooner it’s pulled the better

Mary Roberts Rinehart, The Man in Lower Ten