Hell, while I'm settling some legal grudges today... A few months back a correction was appended to a NYT wedding announcement — interesting historically, as people speculated this was the first correction of its kind. (Though we all know tons of people who wish they could make retroactive corrections to their wedding announcements. When the hell is the "Divorces" section coming to the NYT?)

Anyway, according to the correctee's lawyers, merely quoting the New York Times correction opened us to getting sued — which the 9th Circuit Court would have a good laugh at. In what seems to be a clever bullying tactic, these lawyers said they planned on suing the NYT as well. Oddly enough? Nearly two months later, the correction is still on the NYT website.

Our correspondence, done Mad Libs style:

To: [Gawker]
From: XXX@ftllp.com

On Friday, May 28, 2004, I sent you an e-mail regarding [NAME OF A BRIDE]. When can I expect a response?

***********************
To: XXX@ftllp.com
From: [Gawker]

Dear [NAME OF A LAWYER-TYPE PERSON].

Since Friday, I have sent you two responses to two different emails, the first of which you acknowledged.

In my second email, I asked if you had an intention to pursue a claim against the New York Times, as what I have published is a direct quote of what they have published.

***********************
To: [Gawker]
From: XXX@ftllp.com

You are correct.