Eric Goldman

@ericgoldman.bsky.social

6881 Followers 49 Following

Associate Dean for Research & Professor, Santa Clara Law. Internet Law, IP, Advertising Law. He/him. Website: http://www.ericgoldman.org. Email: egoldman@gmail.com

Moose and beaver mascot statues
Text message transcript with emoji outlines
¶10 These problems are consistent with a rising wave of briefs in our court demonstrating lawyer and litigant misuse of generative AI. The use of fake quotations, if tolerated, breaks law. Put another way, law won't work if we let lawyers and pro se litigants make things up without penalty. If lawyers and pro se litigants made these things up from their imaginations, we would punish them firmly and not consider their lie-based arguments. We can't afford to treat the same lies more lightly because they come from generative AI programs, as if that makes it okay, or less punishable. It's not okay, and we shouldn't punish it less.
Jacaranda tree and purple flowers in front of Charney Hall
Auburn Faculty Feared the University Wouldn't Support Them Survey results released this year by the university's AAUP chapter captured full-time professors' sentiments in late 2025, at a time of widespread concern about the course-compliance form. Table with 2 columns and 5 rows. (column headers with buttons are sortable) 71% Said they saw less commitment to academic freedom from university-level administrators over the last three years. 54% Said they feared retaliation to a great extent at the university level if they engage in teaching involving controversial matters. 33% Said they voluntarily eliminated coverage of certain topics in a course. 25% Said they were on the job market because of recent legislative and policy changes, including SB 129.
Hammond also testified that Gardner has a signature emoji. Hammond said that “the golf emoji is on everything that she writes.” The golfer emoji is present in the messages Lisa Lee sent.
The court is deeply troubled by Attorney Harp’s apparent contempt and utter lack of respect for the court and the judicial process that it represents. He has obfuscated the truth at every turn. He has pleaded ignorance as to any wrongdoing, then turned around and destroyed the evidence that likely would have exposed him. He has consumed substantial judicial resources as the court has had to sift through an ever-evolving series of distortions, evasions, and half-explanations designed to obscure rather than illuminate the truth. The court never imagined that it would be faced with such atrocious conduct from an officer of the court, and it will not tolerate it
HHJ Trial Attorneys. No injury firm hits harder
Judge adds "he/him" to his signature block
Flyer featuring Eric Goldman and Jess Miers
AI Spotted There once was a litigant pro se, Who let an AI lead the way. It briefed every claim, Cited cases—by name, That vanished by morning’s next day. Limerick on Pro Se Parties Using Artificial Intelligence (on file with the Fourth District Court of Appeal) (generated by ChatGPT 5.2).
Brandon Carr lighting the First Amendment on fire
OWENS, Circuit Judge, joined by FORREST, Circuit Judge, respecting the denial of rehearing en banc: Regarding the dissenting opinion of Judge VanDyke: We are better than this.
However, the preservation of that profession requires ever increasing levels of diligence and vigilance from each and every attorney and judge involved in the process. Absent that, someday clients may well be better off accepting advice from a machine as opposed to a careless and inattentive attorney. That is a day the profession of law must not allow to come to pass.
(3)The placement of large harassing and “posted” signs facing the Joneses’ property. On May 20, 2023, Jesse erected three large signs each four feet by sixteen feet and mounted on eight-foot poles just ten feet from the northern boundary line facing the Joneses’ property. Two fluorescent orange signs displayed “NO TRESPASSING FROM NEIGHBORS” with poop-emoji symbols meant to depict the Joneses as “shitty neighbors,” while a third sign announced “J-ONE HOG FARM Coming Soon.” Jesse claimed the signs were prompted by a “nasty letter” from Brad dated April 14, 2023. The trial court reviewed the letter and found it simply requested a truce between the parties. (4)The shining of high-intensity lights onto the Jones property, including into their backyard, and the operation of loud power generators during the dusk hours. On May 23, 2023, Jesse installed lights to illuminate the signs, powering them with a generator that Brad testified caused his whole house to vibrate. Jesse admitted he illuminated the signs specifically to send a message to Brad to leave him alone.
Stranger Thing Eleven meme "but friends don't lie" captioned "but friends don't invade their friends"
The post stated verbatim (including its typographical errors): Demtard convention opens and the only facts spoken were the names. Lie after lie. The fact checkers could retire on Michelle Obama’s rant alone. What s hatefull racists bitch. If you need to lie to try and win you are just shit. If you believe them you are even worse. Wake the fuck up America. You are being played by a fake media, athleats and performers (who are really clueless and flyers with pedophile man) and the former DNC, now just the little bitch of Marxist BLM, Antifa, and Soroas socialist. You are missing out on a great country and the rest of us are sick and tired of your act and going to take you to the woodshed for a proper education. May God help you to pull your heads out of your asses so we will not have too. Time for the red tide. Lets see how long until the FB liberal defenders take this one down.
Lighted Menorah at the Mountain View Chanukah Celebration (at sunset)
Dear Professor Goldman, The Northwestern University Law Review is pleased to inform you that your blog post, Bonkers Opinion Repeals Section 230 in the Third Circuit Anderson v. TikTok, was cited in the third issue of Volume 120 of our journal and/or our online blog. You can find a digital version of the piece that cites your work at the following link: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/nulr/vol120/iss3/6/ .
1. An eggplant emoji is an icon sometimes used suggestively during texting conversations to represent a penis. C.K. v. W. Carroll Special School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120015, *14 (W.D. Tenn. June 2, 2025) (finding a Snapchat photo of the plaintiff with an eggplant emoji, a "symbol typically representing a penis," imposed over his lips, among other evidence, raised a jury question regarding harassment); Mothersbaugh v. State, 2022 Ind. App. LEXIS 1183, *18 (October 7, 2022) (noting text message including eggplant emoji as supporting "disturbing" and sexual nature of adult's communications with 14-year-old child).
"Restricted Access. Please place your government ID on your desk in front of you for my inspection"
Turning to the instant case, the Court finds Mr. Cho’s conduct plainly violated Rule 11. Mr. Cho—admittedly—failed to make a diligent inquiry into the veracity of the cases submitted to the Court within the Reply and still inexplicably signed and certified the submission. ECF No. 44 at 1-2. In particular, Mr. Cho advised that one case citation could not be verified at all, while another case citation addressed a topic irrelevant to the subject of the motion. See id. at 3 ¶ 4. It is axiomatic that attorneys’ certifications reflect that any cited authorities are correct and verified to the best of their ability. Indeed, to certify a submission without conducting an adequate citation check is the negligent conduct that Rule 11 was intended to prevent. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(2); see Napier, 855 F.2d at 1091. Proper verification did not occur here. Thus, the Court is satisfied that Mr. Cho violated Rule 11 due to his negligent certification and submission of unverified case law due in part to “overreliance on generative [AI] prompts during early-stage research.” ECF No. 44 at 1-2.
We conclude by noting that “hallucination” is a particularly apt word to describe the darker consequences of AI. AI hallucinates facts and law to an attorney, who takes them as real and repeats them to a court. This court detected (and rejected) these particular hallucinations. But there are many instances— hopefully not in a judicial setting—where hallucinations are circulated, believed, and become “fact” and “law” in some minds. We all must guard against those instances. As a federal district court recently noted: “There is no room in our court system for the submission of fake, hallucinated case citations, facts, or law. And it is entirely preventable by competent counsel who do their jobs properly and competently.” (Versant, supra, 2025 WL 1440351, at *7.)
After reviewing carefully all of the evidence presented, the Court agrees, and on that basis issues a modified version of the requested preliminary injunction. Specifically, the Court concludes that federal agents’ indiscriminate use of force—targeting journalists standing far from any protest activity, launching scorching-hot tear gas canisters directly at people, and shooting projectiles at protestors attempting to comply with dispersal orders—will undoubtedly chill the media’s efforts to cover these public events and protestors seeking to express peacefully their views on national policies. To be clear, the Court expresses no sympathy for those private individuals who engaged in violence during this period. Indeed, this Order does not prevent any appropriate enforcement of the law against these individuals. But the actions of a relative few does not give DHS carte blanche to unleash near-lethal force on crowds of third parties in the vicinity. Indeed, under the guise of protecting the public, federal agents have endangered large numbers of peaceful protestors, legal observers, and journalists—as well as the public that relies on them to hold their government accountable. The First Amendment demands better.
Dr. Suess: One click? Two click! Underline. Blue text.
Thanos conversation with young Gamora. "Did you do a deal with Trump?" "Yes." "What did it cost?" "Everything."
Land acknowledgements are considered statements on behalf of an issue or cause and cannot be issued on behalf of a unit, college, department, etc., used at university-sponsored events (virtual or in person) or placed on any university channel or resource such as websites, social media, signage, meeting or event agendas, event programs, etc. Land acknowledgements should not be used in written class materials or stated verbally unless there is a direct tie to the subject of the course. Ohio State respects the history of the state and university and will continue to engage in research, academic scholarship, conversations and opportunities to honor this history, but will not issue statements taking a position on, endorsing, opposing or engaging in advocacy or calls to action around this. This prohibition does not restrict the freedom of faculty to teach, conduct research and publish research findings or to discuss in classrooms, in their own manner, any material that is relevant to the subject matter within an academic discipline as defined in the course syllabus. See Faculty Rule 3335-5-01.
1. The pro hac vice status of Counsel shall be revoked and Counsel will be removed from this case; 2. Plaintiff’s Opening Brief shall be stricken; 3. Counsel will be ordered to promptly serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff, who will in turn be afforded time to engage new counsel or proceed as a selfrepresented litigant; 4. Counsel will be ordered to write a letter to the three Judges to whom she attributed fictitious cases, Hon. Douglas L. Rayes, Hon. Michael T. Liburdi, and Hon. John Z. Boyle, notifying them of her use of fake cases with their respective names attached; 5. Counsel will be ordered to transmit a copy of this Order to every Judge who presides over any case in which Counsel is attorney of record; and 6. The Clerk of Court’s Office will be directed to serve a copy of this Order on the Washington State Bar Association, of which Counsel is a member.7 If Counsel is a member of any other state’s bar, she shall serve a copy of this Order on that state’s bar office.
meme of a smiling young man flashing a victory hand gesture over a grave. The headstone says "SAD Scheme 2010(?)-2025" and the man is labeled "SAD Scheme critics"
“I came to the United States because those are things that I wasn’t comfortable doing in my country,” the sophomore said. “I wasn’t comfortable speaking out. It was like a dictatorship, and that’s why I came to America, which is, like, where the freedom is supposed to be. And then I got met with this. It’s really, really disappointing.”
Reverend Will Dexter: You know, before I got married, Emily used to come by sometimes and help me clean out my apartment. Well, I asked her, "How come you're so eager to help clean up my place when your place is just as bad?" She said, "Because cleaning up your place helps me to forget what a mess I've made of mine, and - when I sweep my floor, all I've done is sweep my floor. But, when I help you clean up your place, I am helping you."
A screenshot of a section from Eric Goldman’s Segregate and Suppress article: "There are no easy paths to protecting minors online, and no single policy intervention will magically make children safe online. Making real progress on child safety online will require multiple overlapping and coordinated policy efforts. Similarly, **no single player in the ecosystem can unilaterally solve the problem.** As the expression goes, it takes a village to raise a child. To help minors stay safe—and to help them grow, learn, and self-actualize—online will require cooperation and coordination among many stakeholders, including children, parents, other family members, other community members, teachers and the school system, the publishers, outsourcing vendors, civil society advocates, the government, and others. In contrast, segregate-and-suppress laws try to force online publishers to magically solve a society-wide problem, even though the publishers lack the required expertise, resources, or—" Now
7 The text message included at the end an emoji of a downcast face with a drop of sweat, identifiable as Unicode U+1F613
Defendants assert that they complied with § 12406 because written at the top of the June 7 and June 9 DOD Orders was the label “THROUGH: THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA.” Opp. at 17. True enough. But an interpretation of § 12406 that permits the President to federalize a state’s National Guard by typing the phrase “Through the Governor of [insert state here]” at the top of a document that the President never sends to the governor strains credibility, especially given that Congress specifically amended the statute to add the requirement that orders “shall be issued through the governors.” See Militia Act of 1908 § 3.
Chart showing rise of SAD Scheme cases by year
Calvin describing the rules of Calvinball
If the only named plaintiff you can find is someone whose presence threatens to weaken the claims of the absent class members, don’t bring the lawsuit. And if you’ve already brought the lawsuit, don’t just plow ahead hoping that it won’t become a big deal.
Exhibit from complaint showing similarity of packaging to Oreos, Wheat Thins, Nutter Butter, and Chips Ahoy!
Usually, figuring out whether retaliation would chill a speaker of ordinary firmness—and ascertaining just how much a speaker would have to trim her advocacy to avoid reprisal—requires some guesswork.7 Not here. The serial executive orders targeting law firms have produced something of an organic experiment, control group and all, for how firms react to the orders and how they might escape them. Over the course of that experiment, several firms of (presumably) ordinary firmness have folded rather than face similar executive orders. Indeed, it appears to take extraordinary firmness to resist. And the experiment has shown what folding entails: compromising speech.
Screenshot of Google AdSense's demonetization notice
Attention, Starfleet legal officers and esteemed scholars of cyberspace! Welcome to the 2025 Internet Law Works-in-Progress conference, where we boldly go where no Internet law conference has gone before! The digital frontier is a chaotic Neutral Zone—AI is evolving faster than Data on an espresso binge, tech giants are amassing power like the Borg, and cybersecurity threats are multiplying like tribbles. The legal framework? Let’s just say we’re one bad ruling away from a full-scale temporal paradox. This is a true Kobayashi Maru—no easy answers, just high-stakes dilemmas. Will we regulate or be assimilated? Will digital governance bring balance to the Federation, or are we hurtling toward a Ferengi marketplace of unchecked capitalism? Some of you are Kirks—breaking the rules to get results. Some are Spocks—insisting on logic. And some of you are definitely Q—here to stir up chaos just for fun. But one thing is clear: resistance to this discussion is futile! So, set phasers to engage, prepare for warp-speed discourse, and let’s make this the most illogical conference to miss. Helm, set course for the first panel. Engage!
Tesla with bumper sticker "I regret buying this car"
To illustrate, it offers screenshots of these conversations. In one, an unidentified person—whom Tripscout now identifies an “associate”—messaged Steinars at 7:54 p.m. on an otherwise undated Tuesday that “[w]e love your content” and wondered whether they could “feature it on our account (of course with full credit and tagging).” Id. ¶ 12. Steinars replied: “Hey yeah go ahead .” Id. On a different, also undated occasion, an unidentified Instagram user messaged Steinars “Aw love this! Will deff share ,” and Steinars gushed “ ” in response. Id. ¶ 13. Yet another screenshot depicts Steinars “mentioning” an unidentified account in her story. Id. ¶ 14. And several others show Steinars “heart reacting” to reposts of her content—also by unnamed accounts. See id. By March 2021, however, Tripscout claims Steinars had a change of . Id. ¶ 19.
Doge meme
We again ask parties to stop filing condensed four-panes-per-page deposition transcripts. There is no cost-savings to filing condensed transcripts in the digital era. They violate the rules, they are difficult to read, and they impede this court’s mandate to dispose justly of a high volume of cases. See, e.g., Wanatee v. State, No. 23-0507, 2024 WL 2842258, at *1 n.1 (Iowa Ct. App. June 5, 2024) (citing Iowa R. App. P. 6.803(2)(e)); Curry v. State, No. 23-0533, 2024 WL 1551272, at *2 n.1 (Iowa Ct. App. Apr. 10, 2024); In re Est. of Van Ginkel, No. 18-1923, 2019 WL 5063326, at *5–6 (Iowa Ct. App. Oct. 9, 2019) (Doyle, J., writing separately) (lamenting “those awful condensed transcripts . . . with four pages of testimony crammed onto one page”).
Princess Leia saying "help us, bluesky, avoid platforms run by maga-stan billionaires...you're our only hope"