trashmonkey@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world · 2 years agoJohnson & Johnson is trying to file for bankruptcy. They are taking it to the Supreme Court for protection against the litigation results of their products potentially causing cancer.www.thestreet.comexternal-linkmessage-square32linkfedilinkarrow-up1455arrow-down18
arrow-up1447arrow-down1external-linkJohnson & Johnson is trying to file for bankruptcy. They are taking it to the Supreme Court for protection against the litigation results of their products potentially causing cancer.www.thestreet.comtrashmonkey@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world · 2 years agomessage-square32linkfedilink
minus-squarespyke@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up31arrow-down1·2 years agoIANAL but I believe there is significant legal precedent against this. Most notably the recent order preventing Purdue Pharma, and the Sackler family from that very protection.
minus-squareytsedude@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up27arrow-down6·2 years agoThere’s gotta be a better way to rephrase that and end up with a different abbreviation than “I ANAL.” 😂
minus-squaremycatiskai@lemmy.onelinkfedilinkarrow-up28arrow-down2·2 years agoDoes I Literally, Obviously, Vociferously, Emphatically Am Not A Lawyer work better?
minus-squareErsatz86@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up18arrow-down1·2 years agoILOVEANAL has a certain catchy thrust to it, yes.
minus-squareÆnima@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up5arrow-down1·2 years agoJust slides right into place with little resistance.
minus-squareEpeeGnome@lemmy.fmhy.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down1·2 years agoYou’d think so, but that’s been a standard abbreviation around the Internet for at least 5 years.
minus-squareares35@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up10·2 years agoit’s a lot older than that. dates back to usenet, so three decades at least.
minus-squaremars296@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 years agoQuestion is when it became “the standard”. We need an internet historian to weigh in.
minus-squareEpeeGnome@lemmy.fmhy.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 years agoI figured it was longer, but I couldn’t be bothered to research it, so I could only speak from my own memory.
minus-squareThe Pantser@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up6·2 years agoINAL would be less ANALy, I’m Not A Lawyer but I love IANAL because I have to stop and think about butts.
minus-squaredohpaz42@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7arrow-down1·2 years agoLet’s be honest: ever met a non-anal lawyer?
minus-squarexkforce@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9arrow-down1·2 years agoPurdue mostly got away with what they did though. Half a million dead and just a relative slap on the wrist by comparison.
IANAL but I believe there is significant legal precedent against this. Most notably the recent order preventing Purdue Pharma, and the Sackler family from that very protection.
There’s gotta be a better way to rephrase that and end up with a different abbreviation than “I ANAL.” 😂
Does I Literally, Obviously, Vociferously, Emphatically Am Not A Lawyer work better?
ILOVEANAL has a certain catchy thrust to it, yes.
Just slides right into place with little resistance.
Just the tip.
You’d think so, but that’s been a standard abbreviation around the Internet for at least 5 years.
Closer to 15
it’s a lot older than that. dates back to usenet, so three decades at least.
Question is when it became “the standard”. We need an internet historian to weigh in.
I figured it was longer, but I couldn’t be bothered to research it, so I could only speak from my own memory.
INAL would be less ANALy, I’m Not A Lawyer but I love IANAL because I have to stop and think about butts.
Let’s be honest: ever met a non-anal lawyer?
Definitely true
Purdue mostly got away with what they did though. Half a million dead and just a relative slap on the wrist by comparison.