David S.

Gingras
Jaburg
& Witk,P.c. dsg@jaburgwilk.com
Direct Line 602/248-1000
ATToRNEYS AT LAw
Direct Fax 6021297 -5049

May 28,2008

VIA FACSIMILE:
EMAIL:
3200 N. CentralAvc.,
Suite2000
& U.S.Merl
Ph o e n i x,A Z 8 5 0 1 2

Tel 602/248-| 000

Adam F. Streisand,
Esq.
Fax 602/248-0522 LOEB & LOEB, LLP
ww jaburgwilk.com 10100SantaMonicaBlvd.,Suite2200
Los Angeles,CA 90067

Re: KobeBryant
www.TheDir4,.corn/
Gary J. Jaburg
Lawrence E. Wilk DearMr. Streisand:
Rogcr L. Cohen
RandyNussbaum
Mitchcll Rcichman
Bcth S. Cohn
Kraig J. Manon
As you know, this firm is intellectualpropertyand litigation counselto the
ScottJ. Richardson operatorsof the websitewww.TiicDirty.corn("The Dirfy"). This letteris in response
RonaldM. Horuitz
Kathi M. Sandwciss
to a letter from you datedMay 23, 2008 regardingyour client Kobe Bryant ("Mr.
Mcrvlm T. Braudc Bryant").
Laurcn L. Camcr
Maria Crimi Spcth
M i c hcl l cC . L o mb i n o First,on a technicalpoint,your lettercontainsa reference
to a websitecalled
Ncal H. Bookspan
GrcgoryP. Gillis
www.AZSportsllub.com. Pleasenote that The Dirty doesnot operatethis website
PctcrM. Gcnnrich andhasno relationshipof anykind with it. For thatreason,all otherissuesaside,The
JaDcssa E. Koenig
Mark D. Bogard
Dirty could not complywith your demandto removeany materialfrom that site even
.lonathanlbscn if it believedit wasobligatedto do so,whichit doesnot.
David N. Fancn
Valcrie L. Marciano
D a v i d L . A l l cn Turning to the merits of your letter, The Dirty and its founderNik Richie
Kclly Brown
Kcvin J. Rattay
understandthat Mr. Bryant disputesthe accurac'yof the story first reportedon
David S. Cingras www.TheDirly.comconcerningan affair betweenMr. Bryantand a formerLakerGirl
Adam S. Kunz
Danicl L. Hulsizcr
namedVanessaCurry. Nevertheless, Mr. Richieis informedthat the storyis accurate
J i l l M. H u l si zcr andhe thereforerespectfullydeclinesMr. Bryant'srequestfor removalof the report.
LaurenceB. Hirsch
Laum A. Rogal
ScottT. Ashby I understandfrom your letter that without addressingspecifics,Mr. Bryant
deniesthe allegationsand intendsto "seek all relief availableunder the laws of the
United Statesand the Stateof California ... ." Pleasenote that The Dirty and Mr.
Richie are well-awareof the laws of defamationgenerally,as well as other celeb-
specificstatutessuchas CaliforniaCivil Code $ 33aa(a). Of course,Civil Code $
3344(d) expresslyexcludesmattersof news, sporls,and "public affairs" from the
consentrequirementof$ 3344(a). All threeof thesecategoriesapply to the newsat
issuehereandthereforeMr. Bryanthasno claim whatsoeverunderthis section.

www.jaburgwilk.com
Officesalso in Scottsdale
14500N. NorthsightBlvd.,SuiteI 16 . Scottsdale. I . Fax480/609-0016
A285260. Tel 480i609-001

l/DSG/DSG1657
I 3788- 633_vl

Jaburg
^*XtlLis;
Phoenix Office:
3200 N. CentralAve.,
Suite 2000
P h o e ni x,A Z 8 5 0 1 2
Tcl 602/248-1000
Fax 602/248-0522
Scottsdale Office:
I 4500 N. NorthsightBlvd.,
Su i t e I l 6
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
Tcl 480/609-001|
Fax 480/609-0016
6f3 vl
13788-l/DSG/DSG/657
AdamF. Streisand,
Esq.
May 28,2008
Paee2
With regard to other claims such as defamation,becauseyou have only
expressedMr. Bryant's position in broad generalterms, I am unableto provide a
more specificresponseat this time exceptfor the following points:
L) The Dirty believesthe story concerningthe allegedaffair betweenMr.
Bryant and Ms, Curry is true and thereforeany reporting on this matter is non-
actionableas a matter of law as an exerciseof the First Amendmentrishts of Mr.
RichieandThe Dirty.
2.) Even if the story was subsequentlyproven to be untrue, becauseMr.
Bryant has previouslypublicly admittedto similar acts of infidelity (in the Katelyn
Faber incident,for example)and becauseMr. Richie had (and has) no reasonto
questionthe veracity of his source,it seemsexceptionallyunlikely that any jury
would find "actual malice" as requiredin casesinvolving public figures like Mr.
Bryant.See,e.g.,New York Timesv. Sullivan,376U.S. 254 (1964)(finding"actual
malice" is a constitutionalrequirementin defamatiorlcasesrelatingto public figures).
3.) Even if the storywas untrue,and even if actualmalicecould be shown,
thereis no reasonto believethat any "incrementalharm" has beencausedto Mr.
Bryant'salready-mixed reputation.Seehttp://www.kobesucks.org. AlthoughI am
aware that California has not yet warmed to the incrementalharm doctrine,see
Massonv. New Yorker Magazine,Inc., 960 F.2d 896 19'hCir. lgg}), it is only a
matter of time before this common-sense rule is acceptedin California as it is
elsewhere. See Kevin L. Kite, Incremental ldentities: Libel-Proof Plaintffi,
Substantial Truth, And The Future Of The Incremental Harm Doctrine, 73
N.Y.U.L.RIv. 529(1998)(settingforth compellingjustificationwhy all statesshould
adoptthe incrementalharm rule). Justas the sayinggoesthat "bad facts make bad
law", the oppositeis true-good facts provide opporfunitiesto expandthe law as
needed.With this in mind, this casewould presentan idealoccasionfor Californiato
adoptthe incrementalharmdoctrine.
4.) As you are no doubt aware,in the eventthat Mr. Bryant were to pursue
litigation againstThe Dirty, the matter would be immediatelysubjectto an Anti-
SLAPPmotionunderC.C.P.$ 425.16.Facedwith sucha motion,Mr. Bryantwould
be requiredto establisha likelihoodof successon the merits. Again, due to his prior
historyof similarconduct,this may representan impossiblehurdle.
In closing,it shouldbe notedthat thereis no small irony in the fact that Mr.
Bryant's efforts to pursue claims againstwi,vw.TheDirU.comonly increasesthe
likelihood that this story will receive more attentionthan it already has. This
situationimplicatesthe "Streisandeffect" which shouldcertainlybe familiar to you:
"The Streisandeffect is a phenomenon on the Internetwherean attemptto censoror
removea pieceof informationbackfires,causingthe informationto be [more]widely
effect(visitedMay 28,2008). As
publicized."http://en.w.ikipedia.org/wikiiStreisand
you know, this phenomenon is namedfor your cousin,Barbra,basedon her famously
unsuccessfu I attackuponthe websitewww.califbrniacoastline.org.
 Adam F. Streisand,
Esq.
Jaburg May 28, 2008
& Wilk, p.c. Pase3

For each of thesereasonsand with all due respectto Mr. Bryant, I cannot
adviseThe Dirfy to comply with your client's demands.As you may havenoticed,
www.The.Dirfy.com allows viewersto post commentsin responseto storiessuch as
this one,as severalfolks havealreadydone. If he would like to do so, Mr. Bryant is
welcome to post a commentin this sectionexplainingthat he is not pleasedwith the
Phoenix Office: story and he is welcometo expresshis opinion that The Dirty is not a websitehe finds
3200N. CentmlAve.,
Suite2000 worthy of his endorsement.
Phoenix,
AZ 85012

Tel 6021248-1000 If you have any questions,pleasefeel free to contactme at (602) 248-1000or
Fax 602/248-0522
via email a'

Very truly yours,

JABURG & WILK, P.C.

Scoffsdale Office:
14500N. NonhsightBlvd.,
Suite I I 6
Scottsdale,Ariana 85260

Tel 480/609-001I
Fax 480/609-0016

David S. Gingras

DSG:jas

www.TlieDi4v.com& Nik Richie(via email)

13788-l/DSG/DSG/657633
vl