Real Lawyer Reacts to The Simpsons (Itchy & Scratchy Trial)

Real Lawyer Reacts to The Simpsons (Itchy & Scratchy Trial)

Articles, Blog , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 100 Comments


– [Narrator] Thanks to Dashlane for keeping Legal Eagle in the air. – So you don’t work on
a contingency basis? – No, money down. Oops shouldn’t have this Bar
Association logo here either. (tearing)
(chewing) – Yeah, he’s just the best
worst lawyer of all time. (playful music) Hey Legal Eagles, it’s time
to think like a lawyer, and today we are covering
one of my favorite episodes of one of my favorite series of all time, it’s The Simpsons and it’s
episode where Itchy and Scratchy get taken to court for
copyright infringement. It’s called The Day the Violence Died, and while I will be reacting to it, I think I could probably quote
this episode line for line, it’s really that good,
it’s one of my favorites, it involves Lionel Hutz. – [Lionel] No, money down. – It’s just, it’s just, it’s fantastic. So as always, be sure to comment
in the form of an objection which I will either sustain or overrule, and stick around until
the end of the episode where I give The Simpsons,
The Day the Violence Died a grade for legal realism. So without further ado, let’s dig in to The Simpsons, The
Day the Violence Died. (playful music) So the background of this episode is that it is the 75th anniversary
of Itchy & Scratchy, which is a clear stand-in for Disney, a much more violent version of
the Walt Disney Corporation, and the town of Springfield
is throwing a parade for the creators of Itchy & Scratchy, which includes Roger Meyers Senior, who is the guy who claims to
have invented Itchy & Scratchy. The parade goes into Bumtown, where we find Bart about to meet a bum who claims to have invented
Itchy & Scratchy himself. (upbeat music) – Hey, wait up! (tomatoes splattering) (blows raspberries) – Get out of Bumtown, you no talent bum. – Bums.
– Show some respect, man, that no talent created Itchy & Scratchy. – He didn’t create Itchy, I did. – Huh? – He stole the character from me in 1928. When I complained, his thugs
kicked me out of his office and dropped an anvil on me. (laughs) – So this is interesting, this
is a normal copyright issue, great issues going on already. Here you have the theft
of intellectual property, and purportedly, the theft of a character. Now a character as a part
from a normal literary or audiovisual work can actually
receive copyright protection. So for example we’ve seen
many times in litigation that James Bond has copyright
protection as a character apart from all of the 30
or 40 James Bond movies that that character has appeared in. So it is possible to quote
unquote steal a character from a copyright
perspective, but remember, you cannot steal ideas. Ideas are not copyrightable,
it’s only the expression itself and I think that’s going to be a big theme throughout this episode. – You invented Itchy, the
Itchy & Scratchy Itchy? – Sure, in fact, I
invented the whole concept of cartoon violence. Before I came along,
all cartoon animals did was play the ukulele, I changed all that. – Well, I’m not calling you a liar but, but I can’t think of a way
to finish that sentence. (laughs) – Here we have another argument, which is that he invented
the idea of cartoon violence. Now that almost certainly
he would not be able to have copyright protection over. The idea of cartoon
violence or the idea of a romantic comedy or the
idea of a sci-fi space opera, these are what we call scenes a faire, which are not protectable. They are stock scenes that
we see over and over and over again in many different industries and different types of IP, so he would not be able to have claim for intellectual property over
the idea of cartoon violence, even if cartoon characters were only just playing the ukulele
before he came along. – Itchy the Lucky Mouse
in Manhattan Madness. – That’s the first
Itchy cartoon ever made, and it was made by me,
Chester J. Lampwick. Find me a 90-year-old projector
and I’ll prove it to you. (playful music) – (laughs) They go to the school. (light piano music) Okay so right off the
bat, this film canister contains the film of the original
Itchy & Scratchy cartoon. The thing is, that is something that lends itself to a valid copyright. The thing about copyright is that you can’t have to petition
the government to get it. There are reasons why you
would want to do that, but as soon as you put your
expression into a tangible form that’s supposed to be
semi-permanent or permanent, that is when you get the
copyright in the expression, and this film reel is
going to be something that could lend itself
to creating a copyright in this film itself and in the character of Itchy and/or Scratchy. (kids laugh) The concept of cartoon violence invented. – [Bart] All right Chester! (cheering) – [Millhouse] Way to go! – Oh, so this is a great
little tidbit here. It says copyright, that
little C in the circle, 1919. In 1919, you actually had
to put a copyright notice on any work that you had. If you didn’t put a copyright notice on your tangible expression, then you would not get a copyright. So back in the day, it was
really, really important to have that little symbol
to let everyone know that this was a copyrighted work. So if Chester J. Lampwick
had not put that notice on his film, he would not have a copyright and he wouldn’t have any claim to the Itchy & Scratchy fortune. United States did away
with that requirement in 1976 in the 1976 Copyright Act, which really wasn’t necessary at all. It was a trap for the
unwary to not include a copyright notice in
your actual expression, so now you still get a copyright regardless of whether you put the little C with the date that says
that there’s a copyright on your particular work. – That was Itchy all
right, you did invent him. When people see this,
you’ll be rich and famous! (tape crinkles) (laughs) (dramatic music) D’oh. – Yeah, as an evidentiary issue, that makes it much, much
harder to prove your case. – Well, that brought
back a lot of memories. – I Can’t Believe It’s
a Law Firm. (laughs) Okay, there are actual regulations that prescribe what
lawyers are allowed to put in terms of a name of their firms, and that name absolutely
does not comply with that, and it sort of implies that
it’s not actually a law firm. Although a query whether Lionel
Hutz is actually an attorney in The Simpsons, given
his run-ins with the Bar. Oh, Lionel Hutz is my
favorite character ever, he’s so good. – All right gentlemen,
I’ll take your case, but I’m going to have to
ask for a $1,000 retainer. – A thousand dollars? But your ad says no money down. – Oh, they got this all screwed up. (pen squeaking) (laughs) – As I’ve covered already on this channel, this is one of my favorite
lawyer jokes of all time, and it so plays into Lionel Hutz as being the most ridiculous,
terrible lawyer of all time. This is such a clear
violation of legal ethics, where you can’t put out an
ad like that to the public and then completely redline it right in front of your potential client and claim that you only work
with a retainer and money down, but the way that it works is
just so perfect, it’s so good. – So you don’t work on
a contingency basis? – No, money down. Oops, shouldn’t have this Bar
Association logo here either. (tearing)
(chewing) – Yeah, he’s just the best
worst lawyer of all time. – I thought I recognized you. I gave you a plate of
corn muffins back in 1947 to paint my chicken coop,
and you never did it. – Those corn muffins were lousy. – Paint my chicken coop. – Make me. (fists thudding) – Yeah, that would be a
totally enforceable contract, corn muffins for painting
the chicken coop, and Chester J. Lampwick
would be in violation of that contract for not
actually providing his labor. I think the statute of
limitations has probably run there now that it’s 80
years in the future, but it would have been
an enforceable contract. – Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, there’s an easy way to get rid of Chester without the guilt of sending
him back to the gutter. And all it will cost you
is a thousand dollars. (playful music) (laughs) – Got legal fees from some family. Okay, quick note, it
is possible to bankroll someone else’s lawsuit. Now traditionally, historically
that has been illegal, it’s been what’s called champerty, and that’s been a
violation of legal ethics. Those rules have largely been removed, and it is possible to bankroll
someone else’s lawsuit. This actually happened very recently when Peter Thiel, the tech billionaire, financed Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit
against Gawker the website for publishing Hulk Hogan’s sex tape. This is a part of a great
book by Ryan Holiday called Conspiracy, that
talks about Peter Thiel wanting to get revenge against Gawker, so he bankrolled this
lawsuit that eventually bankrupted the Gawker media enterprise. So it is possible to do, it is legal, might not be the nicest thing to do, but you are allowed to do it. (tense music) – Exhibit A, Stable Itchy, dated 1928, the very first Itchy & Scratchy cartoon, and the credits clearly state written, directed, and
created by Roger Myers. Music by Roger Myers and George Gershwin, produced by Roger Myers
and Joseph P. Kennedy, copyright 1928 by Roger Myers. – So we’ve already talked
about how important that copyright notice was. I don’t know why they are jumping right to closing argument here,
there would normally be years of discovery and motions on paper. This is the sort of thing
that would be dealt with on summary judgment because
there is no evidence on behalf of Chester J. Lampwick, but as with most fictional
portrayals of legal proceedings, they’re just getting
right to the juicy parts. – You will also notice Mr. Myers’s name and copyright notice on
the original drawings of the other members of the
Itchy & Scratchy family, Brown-Nose Bear, Disgruntled Goat, Flatulent Fox, Rich Uncle
Skeleton, and Dinner Dog. – My client’s film predates all
of those things, your Honor. – You can’t argue in the
middle of a statement. – Oh yes, I’ve forgotten, your famous film, the one you
destroyed before the trial and haven’t been able to
able to find another copy of. Oh yes, that film. – Yes, you don’t have a copy, do you? (laughing) – Now that sounds ridiculous,
and it is ridiculous in the middle of trial like that, but in real life, Lionel Hutz
would have been able to ask if the owners of Itchy & Scratchy have old copies of the 1919 film that is the basis for his claim. And if they did, they would be
obligated to turn that over. Now you might think that’s crazy, why would you turn over negative
evidence against yourself? Well the rules of civil
discovery require you to turn it over because we
don’t want trial by ambush, we want everyone to put all
of their cards on the table, and if there’s evidence that you have that’s bad for your case, you have a duty to turn that over to the other side if you get to that part
of the discovery process. So Lionel Hutz, you know,
he’s a terrible lawyer, but even a blind squirrel
finds a nut sometimes. – [Nelson] Ha ha! – So uh, good job for him. – Roger Myers didn’t create
any of his characters, he stole them all. (dramatic music)
(crowd murmurs) The only characters Myers
could ever come up with were pathetic stick figures with the words Sarcastic Horse and Manic
Mailman printed on them. And they stank. – So who is the voice
of Chester J. Lampwick? That sounds really, hold on a second, I need to look this up because that guy sounds really familiar. (dinging) (gasps) It’s Kirk Douglas. Oh, I didn’t know that, that’s fantastic. – Mr. Hutz, we’ve been
in here for four hours. Do you have any evidence at all? – Well your Honor, we’ve
got plenty of hearsay and conjecture, those
are kinds of evidence. (laughs) That’s actually true,
hearsay and conjecture are kinds of evidence. They’re not good forms of evidence, but technically they
are types of evidence. Many of the lawyers that
I know use that line all the time, it’s a staple
among lawyers, it’s fantastic. (dramatic music) – I knew I had seen this
exact scene somewhere else. It was in the movie
Mr. Lampwick showed me. Ladies and gentlemen, this
drawing was made in 1919, nine years before Roger
Myers made his first Itchy & Scratchy cartoon. – Hmm, yeah, but how do we
know that that’s authentic? There’s a whole authentication process that you have to go through to prove that the evidence that you are putting forward is what it purports to be. I don’t think this evidence would be admissible at this point. – Okay, maybe my dad did
steal Itchy, but so what? Animation is built on plagiarism. If it weren’t for someone
plagiarizing the Honeymooners, we wouldn’t have the Flintstones. If someone hadn’t ripped
off Sergeant Bilco, there’d be no Tomcat. Huckleberry Hound,
Chief Wiggum, Yogi Bear, ha, Andy Griffith. – One of the all-time great
side gags of the Simpsons is to break the fourth
wall and say that the idea of Chief Wiggum is stolen
from somewhere else. Just, just A+, and there’s some truth
to what he’s saying, that these characters are often homages and frankly, stolen from other places. So whether you get copyright protection over a specific character
itself is up for grabs, and not all taking is illegal,
not all copying is illegal. – Well Itchy & Scratchy are gone, but here’s a cartoon that
tries to make learning fun. (giggles) (groans) Sorry about this, kids. – Oh I know what this is. This is one of the most
brilliantly-written parodies of all time, I can sing this entire song. – Hey, who left all this garbage
on the steps of Congress? – I’m not garbage. ♪ I’m an amendment to be ♪ ♪ Yes an amendment to be ♪ ♪ And I’m hoping that they’ll ratify me ♪ ♪ There’s a lot of flag burners ♪ ♪ Who have got too much freedom ♪ ♪ I want to make it ♪ – First Amendment violation. ♪ Make it legal for
policemen to beat them ♪ ♪ Because there’s limits
to our liberties ♪ ♪ At least I hope and
pray that there are ♪ ♪ Because those liberal
freaks go too far ♪ (laughing) – Dad, can we have $183,000? – What for? – Lisa and I want to finance
a series of animated cartoons. – Oh, forget it. – Animation Legal Precedents. Copyright Law 1918 to 1923. That is such a great little detail there because there actually was an amendment to the Copyright Act in 1923
that changed copyright law, and in fact, because of the
change in copyright law, all works before 1923
are out of copyright, so ironically although the
litigation over this case of a copyright from 1919
is raging in this episode, now looking back, all of this
would be out of copyright. The copyright in Itchy & Scratchy would be null and void and all of that stuff would have entered into the public domain. So it’s a great little detail
that they are looking at the correct copyright law for the time, and since the work was created in 1919, you’d have to look at the law that existed before the Copyright Act of 1923, because that’s how you sort of
retroactively apply the law. Just, just from top to bottom, one of the best Simpsons
episodes of all time. – When no one could think of a plan to resurrect Itchy &
Scratchy, a young boy, a wonderful, irrepressible young boy took it on his own to solve the problem. He discovered that the
postal service’s Mr. Zip was just a rip-off of my father’s stick figure character Manic Mailman. (laughs) So the government gave me
a huge cash settlement. – So that sounds totally ridiculous and there are still the
questions of whether you can even have a copyright in
a not really thought-out character like that, but
a situation almost exactly like that actually did
happen in a famous case involving the US Postal Service. The US Postal Service created a stamp where they took a photo
of the Korean War Memorial in Washington DC, which
is a series of statues with soldiers who were
wading through the snow, and they put it on a stamp. The thing is, the artist
who created the statues still had a copyright in the statues. You can have a copyright in statues just look you can have a
copyright in paintings or a novel, so when they created this
stamp without his permission, they committed copyright infringement in the same way that the US
Postal Service supposedly created copyright infringement
in this particular case. So things like that actually do happen and you can sometimes get
a big cash settlement from the government when they
involve copyright infringement. – And Itchy & Scratchy
Studios is back in business. (triumphant music)
(electricity buzzing) Thanks to you, Lester. (gasping) – What the hell is going on? – And they end the episode
poking fun at the fact that their own characters are derivative, just so good. (playful music) But now it’s time to give
this episode of the Simpsons a grade for legal realism. (gavel bangs) So on the one hand, you
have a brilliant story involving some really detailed aspects of copyright law that you
really don’t see all that often, and for the most part it
gets the copyright stuff exactly right, right down
to the dates involved where the copyright law changed. You have probably one
of the best depictions of a Schoolhouse Rock
parody that is not only, I think hilarious but exactly
right on First Amendment law. But on the other hand,
you have a trial that is abbreviated to be the
shortest trial known to man, without any of the boring parts, and the worst lawyer known to man in the form of Lionel Hutz, but in some sense, the writers must know what they’re doing because
there’s no way to write a lawyer that bad without
knowing what a lawyer should do. So all in all, I will give this episode of the Simpsons an A-. Maybe I’m giving them a
high grade just because I love this episode so, so much, but it’s my show and I
can do whatever I want. – There’s something unsettling about that. – The ideas for Itchy &
Scratchy may have been stolen, but your passwords and payment
information should never be, and Dashlane gives you an all-in-one tool to protect yourself online. Dashlane syncs all of your
passwords and payment details between all of your devices without ever knowing those passwords. When you sign up for Dashlane,
you choose a master password that is never transmitted
over the internet, not even Dashlane to their
servers has your password. You enter your password
once on each of your devices and then you never have
to think about it again. Dashlane protects your
identity across the internet by providing a tool that
generates strong passwords, stores them, and autofills them securely everywhere on the internet,
all completely seamlessly, even across laptops and phones running different operating systems. So even Roger Myers can’t
steal your passwords. And for extra security, Dashlane Premium also includes dark web
monitoring and a VPN which acts as an intermediary
to make sure that all of your internet traffic is encrypted, even when you’re on public wifi. Dashlane does all of this in one product for one low price instead of requiring you to buy multiple solutions. With Dashlane, you’re
getting a password manager, a VPN, and dark web monitoring for less than just one of those
services would usually cost. So try Dashlane free for 30 days in a link down below in the dublidoo, and if you like it, you can
get 10% off Dashlane Premium by using the promo code
LegalEagle at checkout. So do you agree with my grade? Leave your objections in the comments, and check out my other real
lawyer reactions over here where I’ll see you in court.

100 thoughts on “Real Lawyer Reacts to The Simpsons (Itchy & Scratchy Trial)

  • LegalEagle Post author

    Try out Dashlane and help out the channel! https://www.dashlane.com/legaleagle

  • Hal Wakka Post author

    The Simpsons is what happens when you have a crew of writers from Harvard… well, up 'til season 7 or 8.

  • Ginjer Russell Post author

    You should cover one of the season 2 episodes of 13 Reasons Why, they have court proceedings that stretch through the entire season in which a mother is suing the high school her daughter attended before taking her own life. The case she attempts to establish is that the school is liable because the staff didn’t do enough to help prevent sexual assault and verbal abuse from the students.

    After watching a bunch of legal eagle I find myself making objections, but I’m not always sure if I’m right or wrong. E.g. in season 2 episode 2 a witness (student) is asked about a kiss she shared with the daughter and defense on cross asks,” how can you say that kiss was meaningless if there were more than one?” Which seems speculative. There’s also a leading question I can’t recall off the top of my head.

    Anyways, long story short it would be super cool to see the pro tackle it and see how unrealistic it actually is. Guaranteed there’s a few people that would get tackled by the bailiff 😂

  • Pat Hutchison Post author

    What if the famous “chicken coup, corn muffin” case had involved payment of “a plate full of tasty corn muffins”? And when said muffins were received, they were not up to the standard of taste that the receiver expected. How would a contract work if there was a sebjective component like hat in it?

  • Chaddons Chaddons Post author

    Another recent famous case that was champertied (sp) or bankrolled was Christine Blasey Ford against Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh.

  • shikishinobi Post author

    Like many other commenters (I’m guessing), I’m going to ask if you can do the episode where the Simpsons take Mr. Burns to court for running Bart down. There is also the Treehouse of Horror episode where Homer sold his soul for a doughnut. The former has more detail though.
    That was fun! I do enjoy your tv/movie overviews.

  • Tech&Music Fan Post author

    What season and what episode is that ?

  • Dread Khan Post author

    I find it very, very hard to not sing along with the amendment parody song every time I hear it.

  • GigaGom Post author

    you really dont know that it's supposed to be tom and jerry? and not disney?

  • Mike Hamelin Post author

    Mr. Simpson don't you worry. I watched Matlock at a bar last night. the volume was down but I think I got the jist of it.

  • CVWP 21 Post author

    Do the episode where Marge is convinced as a shop lifter. That one is one of my favorites.

  • Shaybert Rob Post author

    Love how Lionel Hutz doesn't even have photo frames for his probably fake law degrees 😂😂 RIP Phil Hartman

  • Goldenpants 123 Post author

    Objection!
    This video was excellent, but it wasn’t a video about your thoughts on how Disney has changed and abused the copyright law, which I feel would also be an excellent video!

  • blkrhino79 Post author

    12:41 I love the idea of real lawyers quoting Lionel Hutz.

  • Rachel S Post author

    I thought that the Ollie North bit from American Dad was a spot on School House Rock parody too

  • Dozenspeed Post author

    At this rate, this channel WILL hit 10 mil….top notch content that ticks all the boxes…mark my words

    This non-edited comment posted 8/30/2019 at 547k subs 😉

  • Dozenspeed Post author

    When did Ed Bolin become a lawyer?

  • Jeff Hall Post author

    OBJECTION: Itchy and Scratchy is clearly a Tom and Jerry knock off. The comic violence is a hallmark of Tom and Jerry (also a cat and a mouse) much more than Disney ever was. While the company behind Itchy and Scratchy has morphed over the years to be a bit of a Disney stand-in, you have to remember that Disney wasn't quite the monolith it is today when Simpson's first aired and Itchy and Scratchy is far more similar to Tom and Jerry.

  • Dozenspeed Post author

    OBJECTION!! Now you gotta do Bart vs Burns AND Homer vs The Frying Dutchman!!

  • Time Helper Post author

    Please do the Billy and Mandy episode "Keeper of the Reaper"! Its an amazing and hilarious episode!!

  • Dozenspeed Post author

    OBJECTION! 1947 was only 72 years ago, not 80

  • Shona - SoF Post author

    there is an even more meta court battle in the episode of The Simpsons that crosses over with Family Guy! In the episode they're talking about the respective beer brands were ripoffs of each other, but the subtext of it all was about Family guy being a Simpsons ripoff.

  • Daniel Schein Post author

    I know that putting excerpts from The Simpsons and other shows your review is fair use and legal. However I've always wondered if you ever had issues because YouTube's algorithm might flag it.

  • Cesar Turcios Post author

    Can you make a reaction video on episodes " Who Shot Mr. Burns? "

  • Cheshire Kat Post author

    Is it just me, or does Mr. Eagle bear a striking resemblance to Chris Stuckmann?

  • Canis Cerulean Post author

    OBJECTION! (14:45 "1st Amendment Violation")That is EXACTLY why the song was about an amendment instead of a bill. An amendment can only be modified or repealed by another amendment.(Thus why the 1st Amendment overrules the US Flag Code) Therefore the amendment in the cartoon was seeking to restrict flag burning so it is no longer protected by the 1st Amendment's freedom of expression clause.
    (Not agreeing with the proposed amendment myself, but they did get it right from a constitutional perspective, and you seemed to have missed the point completely.)

  • Dom the Bomb Post author

    What's better? Schoolhouse rock parody, or worker and parasite?

  • troy betsen Post author

    11:45 what If you didn’t hand over that evidence against you? What would happen?

  • TheSpicyPotato Post author

    i dnt plan to be a lawyer or anything. I just like watching these

  • CrummyMonk Post author

    Good episode, but you left a key part out. You asked about the authentication of the cell, and then cut out the part where Bart does just that. Bart (roughly) breaks the frame on the cell and shows the letter written from Chester to Roger that proves Chester's case. The judge verifies it and that is what leads to the "Cartoons are built on plagiarism" rant. You could vouch for how that would work in real court (surprise evidence for one thing), but the issue is addressed.

  • Chelsea Jones Post author

    Objection!!! Sci-fi space opera is oddly specific. I need clarity because I think you have a specific one in mind

  • Devin Connors Post author

    There is a good Fresh Prince episode where Will gets sued by his sister's boyfriend for bumping into his car as he was backing out of the driveway. He didn't have insurance so he refused to pay him and got sued. The Boyfriend was being trained as a lawyer ironically enough by Uncle Phil. It would be a good episode worth covering. Season 2 episode 9

  • Brandon Lee Post author

    OBJECTION! If the amendment does get signed into law and the supreme court overturns Texas vs. Johnson (Supreme is much different now) then police can beat and imprison flag burners. The flag protection amendment could classify flag burners as enemy combatants.

  • Aliandrin Post author

    9:29 "[Bankrolling someone else's law suit] is possible to do; you are allowed to do it."
    Objection: How in the world would someone not be allowed to do this? How was that ever enforced? If I give a gift to Chester Lampwick of $1000, how are you going to prove I wanted to hurt Rodger Meyers? In the episode, it actually seemed like Homer didn't know what the $1000 was for.

  • catfish83 Post author

    Can you do a Matlock episode?

  • dacypher22 Post author

    Probably the most famous scenario where failure to add a copyright notice made a work public domain was with the original Night of the Living Dead, which was released in 1968 without a copyright notice (so well before the 1976 law change). This was a huge disaster for George A. Romero and the crew considering it wasn't even their fault, as the distributor erroneously removed the copyright notice when they changed out a title card. The law changing in 1976 did nothing for Romero and to this day Night of the Living Dead is in the public domain. If you search for it on Amazon, you will see Blu-Rays and DVDs are published by dozens of companies all paying nothing for the rights and putting it out in the hopes that someone will buy their release. There have also been numerous unauthorized sequels. Mostly low-to-no-budget films hoping to get a little bit of notice through the title. So yeah, this was definitely a real thing and it did happen at least to one major movie.

  • Giovanni Post author

    The business of law firms is basically stupid people paying smart people to argue for them

  • JayBee0212 Post author

    “He dropped an anvil on me”. This is a normal copyright issue

  • Daniel Carroll Post author

    Objection! I think you could do an entire series just on Lionel Hutz, you should do the case of Marge Simpson v The Kwik e Mart next. "I call for a bad… court…thing"

  • Phil Donaldson Post author

    I always thought that Itchy & Scratchy were over-the-top versions of Tom & Jerry (from the MGM theatrical shorts).

  • Leo122188 Post author

    OBJECTION!

    In regards to the School House Rock parody you called the proposed amendment a first amendment violation. If anthropomorphic scroll was representing a bill hoping to become a law this would be true. However this character is a proposed amendment, and as such would be able to nullify in whole or in part the previous amendment to the constitution legally. If it were passed in accordance with the constitutional process that is, if I remember correctly it's not and get a flamethrower instead.

  • BrianGuy1023 Post author

    How about Real Lawyer reacts to Krabs Vs. Plankton (It’s a Spongebob episode where Plankton sues Mr. Krabs just so he can get the secret formula.)

  • Neil Blumengarten Post author

    Objection…

    Legal Eagle reviewing a piece of media he isn't familiar with: "This is just ridiculous, you'd never see this in real life. It's just legal malpractice. I can't believe they put this in here, it's just bad."

    Legal Eagle reviewing the Simpsons: "This would never happen, but they're obviously just doing this to get to the good parts."

  • Law Office of Zain W. Mohammad Post author

    Your videos are funny as hell! I love it! 🙂

  • Race Nicolia Post author

    “Objection” do trial of the monarch, venture bros.

  • Hacim 42 Post author

    LIVER AND ONIONS LIP SMACKING

  • Nathan Mills Post author

    Fun fact – Night of the Living Dead is in the public domain because when it was realised the Walter Reade Organization neglected to place a copyright indication on the film

  • pokepress Post author

    Ever considered covering the Weird Al song “I’ll Sue Ya”?

  • Andy Stitt Post author

    "An Amendment to Be" oversimplified the amendment process.

  • B W Post author

    John Schwatrzwelder was the best simpsons writer. All of his episodes are genius

  • fireintheshadows 465 Post author

    I actually help finance a cartoon series using kickstart.

  • Carrie Cheaung Post author

    Zootopia please

  • Shadowswillm Post author

    Objection! Itchy and Scratchy are the spoofs of Tom and Jerry owned by Warner Bros(originally owned by MGM). Not Disney.

  • Shinge42 Post author

    Liver and onions. (licks lips)

  • Brian Post author

    If I uploaded a video showing snippets of a tv show for analysis, I'd get the video removed… This guy does it and he's all good. Youtube really knows who they can push around.
    Maybe Mr. LegalEgale should start representing some youtube channels…

    Just an observation, but I love the channel!!! Keep up the GREAT work 😀

  • Alex Pollock Post author

    I guess you could say Disney but they’re really Tom and Jerry parody’s

  • libraryham Post author

    Objection! How does Mr. Lampwick come up with a value of $800 billion for his lawsuit?

  • Mad Max And Madi Post author

    Can you do more Better Call Saul?

  • audrey mishca Post author

    Please do big little lies season 2 (last two episodes have a big trial)

  • F F Post author

    Has there ever been a Lawyer as bad as Lionel Hutz in real life? Although I'd think it would be impossible for them to even graduate from law school if they were

  • audrey mishca Post author

    Please do Community Season 3 Episode 17 🙂

  • MsJubjubbird Post author

    If Grandpa no longer owns a chicken coop (he lives in a retirement home now) then is Chester under obligation to do something else or buy grandpa some new muffins? Or does Grandpa just dip out

  • bemasaberwyn55 Post author

    Lionel Hutz no longer exists. SAY HELLO TO MIGUEL SANCHEZ

  • Minalia Post author

    itchy and scratchy is a parody of tom and jerry <.< Hanna-Barbera!!!

  • Peter Parker Post author

    I miss the Simpsons being excellent. Lionel Hutz was voiced by Phil Hartman who tragically died years ago.

  • Jennifer Peterson Post author

    There is a courtroom episode of Ugly Betty called Odor in the Court. Season 2 ep 12. Would love to see you react to that.

  • Devine-dragon7 Post author

    Hi sir. I have a ( jury summons enclosed) on 9-16-2019 and the city I live and now . I’m moving to(let say back to Chicago) on September 5. What should I do about it. ( this is my first time get it)and I get it and mail one week ago

  • J.R. Millstone Post author

    I bet YouTube hits you with a copyright strike. lol

  • wetlazer Post author

    Back when The Simpson was STILL good and STILL relevant. They should let it die, already. Should have let it die decades ago.

  • AJSSPACEPLACE Post author

    Considering that the opposing lawyer was competent, it’s likely his client really didn’t have a copy of that film

  • David Soto Post author

    Deadpool was a rip off Spidey. Except Spidey sucks. #petertinkledeeznuts

  • joesomenumbers Post author

    Next on the docket: The United Council of Churches v Lionel Hutz

  • N.i.B. Post author

    Itchy and scratchy was based on Tom and jerry, the itchy and scratchy corporation is based off disney.

  • Robert Bergeron Post author

    I object that you have never done an episode of Night Court

  • Frank Da Tank Post author

    I'd like to see Mad Men get lawyered at some point

  • Icy Wolf Post author

    Classic Simpsons… How i miss it. Now it's a rotting zombie.

  • Bonzo Villegas Post author

    I don't know what you're talking about, but you're extremely handsome.

  • Wild Side Post author

    I really wish these YouTube videos were around when I was in law school.

  • Autumn Muse Post author

    OBJECTION! Itchy and Scratchy are clearly based on Tom and Jerry, not Disney.

  • Michael Gonzalez Post author

    @LegalEagle you got my thumbs up for singing (if that's what you call it 🤣). Not sure of your age or that of the episode. Did this show inspire you to become lawyer?

  • Left Right Post author

    Can I copyright my password?

  • Rubashow Post author

    You don't just take the corn muffins of a Hellfish and get away with it!

  • Oppai Man Post author

    That is funny they regulate what you can have as a law firm name, there is one here called Dewey, Cheetum, and Howe.

  • Ethan Hayden Post author

    OBJECTION! I can't possibly make an objection to be over ruled, because I don't know anything about law

  • Charles DeLiberis Post author

    do the one were homer sells his soul for a donut

  • rlywtfdude Post author

    What about forever stamps? That statue of liberty face is of the Las Vegas statue, which was copyrighted too, if I remember correctly

  • Ginny Jolly Post author

    Objection! Evaluator is biased There should be an independent, uninterested evaluator doing the evaluation.

  • kasra khatir Post author

    Objection !!! 40 James bond Movies ?
    there's only been 24+1 official movies and 3 Unofficial ones
    would you like a Bond collection for Father's day Legal Eagle ?

  • Matthew Laws Post author

    Just watched My Sisters Keeper, looked like they paid a lot of attention to detail, would love to see you make an episode on that

  • Dethneko Post author

    OBJECTION! Disney? I always thought of Itchy and Scratchy as a more violent Tom and Jerry, which is already pretty violent in it's own right.

  • fAppIicationof SeIf Post author

    …and dinna duwawg!

  • Jim Dot Beep Post author

    Why does he say "invented" instead of created.

  • NATIVESUNSETS65 Post author

    LegalEagle Is there a chance you are going to do a reaction video to the biggest trial in Maycomb, Alabama history?
    The Case of Tom Robinson vs the state of Alabama ~ In To Kill a MockingBird . Atticus Finch deserves his just due.

  • flowerwave Post author

    Objection! Ya skipped over Bart revealing what was under the frame of the picture of Itchy! Would that be good evidence?

  • Koi Iezuma Post author

    I wanna see how you react to the Judgement court case cutscene near the end

  • Brenton McCoullough Post author

    An actual lawyer has a youtube series.
    Good luck Youtube, if any company tries to give a copyright strike, this guy is ready.

  • BMFPoochie Post author

    Objection! They end the episode poking fun at the fact their copyrights were being infringed by literal boat loads of bootleg merchandising that often did color swaps.

  • Matt Knight Post author

    You should do the Corporal Punishment episode of Blackadder Goes Forth

  • Banter In The Fast Lane Post author

    What About The South Park Episode where they sue The Inventor of The Toilet after Clydes Mom dies?

  • Oh No Post author

    Objection! They know outlawing flag burning is a first amendment violation, that's why they have to amend the constitution instead of just passing a law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *