Don't watermark your legal PDFs with purple dragons in suits
132 comments
·May 2, 2025perihelions
- "The whole story would be far more humorous were it not from a case in which Perrone represented a woman who claims that she nearly died after being incarcerated and not given proper medical care. Perrone must now refile his complaint in that case—without the cartoon dragon."
That should be more offensive than cartoons. In a just world.
It's not as if the victim had the luxury of many choices of law firms, or any capacity to oversee their work. Their access to legal services is presumably similar to their access to medical care. There's nothing amusing about this outcome. It's seriously depressing that "the coked-up cartoon-dragoon attorney" is the best representation that person, in their helpless situation, was able to navigate to.
eadmund
> That should be more offensive than cartoons. In a just world.
If the complaint is true, then yes it is offensive and the results will be more serious than being required to refile the complaint without the watermark. The process of determining if the complaint is true or not is the justice system.
jerf
Yes. Now probably a couple dozen people are going to collectively spend thousands of hours going over the complaint. The watermark issue is indeed just a sideshow by comparison.
The posts on this HN story demonstrate exactly the point the judge is trying to make. This sort of optics issue looms so large in human brains that it is indeed generating accusations that the court case is not being taken seriously because the court must obviously be spending all of its attention on this visually appealing story, even though in the grand scheme of things it is a tiny fraction of just the effort that will be spent on this case overall. Justice must not just be just, it must be seen to be just, and this sort of behavior is an impossibly attractive nuisance for people. Even those defending the picture are still being sucked into a sideshow.
potato3732842
To a normal person, sure. But the legal system ruins lives and deals in ruined lives every day. They don't blink twice at that stuff. A cartoon dragon on the other hand...
lupusreal
The formality of the process helps them keep their conscious clear. Attacking the formality of the process therefore threatens them.
jbverschoor
The world has gone from substance to optics. You see it in every industry or field.
lores
Heh, optics have been important since the dawn of man, and probably even before. Ziggurats are all about optics, and so are mating displays. A cynic might say "more important", but that's hard to ascertain.
cornhole
people say you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, but first impressions are everything
potato3732842
And somehow along the way every institution seems to have forgotten the meaning of the phrase "even the appearance of impropriety".
vkou
The legal system, for millienia, has always been a hodgepodge of very peculiar and esoteric rules about both substance and optics.
That's why lawyers exist, by the way. Outside of small claims court, laymen aren't equipped to navigate it without stepping on every possible rake imaginable.
firefoxd
> I don't know what the big deal is. Lady Justice also has scales.
This comment had me spitting my coffee. How do they even come up with this.
wiradikusuma
Also, sometimes we (developers) like to use wacky data for testing purposes. For example, I like to put Batman as a dummy user, and my QA likes to upload cat pictures when testing uploads/images.
We do it so it's obvious it's test data, and also we're lazy to think of more "real" data.
Just say some users expect real(ish) data for testing. I had a client who was totally not happy when he saw Batman and Superman in the test data.
Cthulhu_
I've seen too many stories of placeholder text ending up in production... so I better make it worthwhile and include some Lovecraft quotes [0] because everyone needs more gibbering, cyclopean, eldritch adjectives in their lives.
kevinmgranger
Rust had something similar: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13871
cperciva
For example, I like to put Batman as a dummy user
I can't remember the details, but I've heard a story multiple times about a fake-sounding name being used in testing -- I think US military payroll? -- and causing problems when a real person had that name. Can anyone here remember this?
In any case, "batman" is just about plausible enough that it could be real. I tend to use names like "Mr. Testy Testalicious" which (a) contain the string "test", and (b) are so wildly absurd that I'm confident nobody will ever collide with it.
pluies
Caterina Fake, co-founder of Flickr, famously had issues with IT systems:
Tim: There’re so many places we could start, but in the process of doing homework for this, I found mentioned, and I wanted to do a fact check on this, of you having plane tickets automatically cancelled, and other issues related to your last name. Is that accurate? Did those things actually happen?
Caterina Fake: This has happened to me many times, in fact. And I discovered that it was actually the systems at KLM and Northwest that would throw my ticket out, my last name being “Fake.” And I have missed flights and have spent way too many hours with customer service trying to fix this problem. Here’s another thing too, is that I was unable for the first two years of Facebook to make an account there also. And probably all of my relatives.
BurningFrog
People named Null are also having struggles in the modern world:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160325-the-names-that-b...
adolph
This seems like a good spot for the link to @patio11's "Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names"
So, as a public service, I’m going to list assumptions your systems probably
make about names. All of these assumptions are wrong. Try to make less of
them next time you write a system which touches names.
spiffytech
I used to use Test T. Testerton until coworkers critiqued that "Test T" reminded them of male genitals.
kstrauser
Our first user at one company was Richard Test. He had user ID 1001. Well-meaning people deactivated his account several times over the years because it looked fake to them.
Sorry, Richard. I hope you were more amused than annoyed.
lapetitejort
DOGE is going to delete Jon Tester [0] from the list of historical senators
null
jszymborski
I usually use Adele Dazeem as in [0]
[0] https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/adele-dazeem-idina-menz...
rzzzt
Major Major Major from Catch-22?
userbinator
Batman is definitely a real name... https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24911186
eesmith
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_(surname) - 'Batman is a surname of English origin. It originates from Saint Bartholomew and means "a friend or servant of Bart."'
It lists a few people, like "Daniel Batman (20 March 1981 – 26 June 2012) was an Australian sprinter." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Batman
A few DDG searches finds others with the surname Batman who are not famous enough to be on Wikipedia.
cam_l
Aside: Batman (John) is also a well known name in Melbourne, au.
He was a kind of founding father. He negotiated a fake treaty to steal the land from the local Kulin nation. He wanted to call it Batmania.
Also responsible for organising hunting parties for bushrangers and multiple massacres and genocide of aboriginal people in NSW, VIC, and TAS.
Total fucking cunt.
sokoloff
There was a bank that wasn’t happy with “Rich Bastard” being used as dummy data but not being replaced in the mail merge, resulting in a couple thousand of their wealthiest customers getting a mailing with the salutation “Dear Rich Bastard,”
RajT88
A friend of mine uses a scraped list of heavy metal band names for QA testing how well systems deal with weird characters.
He is, himself, a weird character.
ghssds
Your client needs to remove the broom stucks in their ass. Your story reminds me of the uptight people angry about the Anubis' catgirl.
DoctorOW
I give Abubis a special pass, because they sell a business oriented version without the character. The true cost of using FOSS is you don't have any say in what the developer does.
johnmaguire
Au contraire, FOSS allows you to fork and make modifications.
mattkevan
When designing, the standard practice is to use Lorem Ipsum - sort of mangled Latin that works like normal text but is very recognisable. This backfired once when I did a website for the Jesuits - the feedback they gave was that the design looks good but they were all baffled by the text and could I do something about it please.
I’d not considered that they might be the only client where everyone was fluent in Latin.
null
null
goku12
Wow! I thought the judge was overreacting. But that's one extremely annoying watermark. I would demand the same, no matter what I do for a living.
kebokyo
Gamers may be the most oppressed group of people… but I think furries are a close second.
neilv
I used to put a diagonal light gray huge "DRAFT" across pages of certain documents for which it was important that a working draft not be interpreted as final.
What would've been a great use for the lawyer's dragon documents would be to clearly mark incomplete/unapproved drafts, for internal review only.
Because, obviously, there was no way that you would accidentally submit a filing to the court with a huge purple cartoon dragon on every page.
Depending on the lawyer's personality, a big purple dragon might also double as lighthearted stress relief, when billing 12+ hours a day, of high-stakes work.
generationP
What about a header/footer saying "DRAFT" (ideally with the date and other things that would perhaps not fit on a watermark)?
kevin_thibedeau
Text watermarks can be a PITA when they cover the page and the PDF reader prioritizes them for text selection rather than the top layer text.
brumar
> that plaintiff shall not file any other documents with the cartoon dragon or other inappropriate content
Formal answers to goofiness (voluntary or not) will always amuse me.
zahrc
Any image in this position would be distracting.
However, I have never understood notions like this: “it is juvenile and impertinent. The Court is not a cartoon”
Is like my great grandpa scolding us at the dinner table for laughing and talking.
thinkingemote
> Is like my great grandpa scolding us at the dinner table for laughing and talking
It's more like a non-familial, formal dinner setting. Think about a job interview where the CEO and interviewer take you and another interviewee to dinner in a fancy restaurant. You turn up in jeans and sneakers with your buddy and you laugh and crack jokes together, the other interviewee turns up in smart clothes and talks soberly. In a few cases (and perhaps only seen in Holywood movies about the American Dream) the CEO may love the irreverence and impertinence and see it as a strength and sign of strong individuality, in almost all cases the bosses will not appreciate it and you will not get a job. Great grandpa loves you, the boss at your place of work doesn't.
saagarjha
Surely you are aware that a lot of the people on this site interview in their jeans
fc417fc802
If the CEO invites you to dinner at a high end restaurant hopefully you change into something a bit nicer.
watwut
I would say that job interview in the fancy restaurant is the first "unprofessional" step in this chain. The place to conduct serious interviews is called the office.
bluGill
At my company when we bring you onsite for an interview takes you to lunch. The person who takes you to lunch is not allowed to talk to the people making the hiring decisions. You can thus talk about whatever you want. It is a relaxing situation where you can safely press about what work is like. If you talk about something that in an interview is illegal (likely family) it doesn't matter because that person doesn't have a say on if you are hired.
(I encourage anyone who does interviewing to have a similar policy - if someone flys in to talk to you that means you are buying them meals anyway. Ensuring there is time to talk about things that might or might not matter is important)
For engineers we wouldn't go to a fancy restaurant. However I'd expect executives probably would.
kstrauser
For higher tier jobs, the setting can be wherever looks good. I've met and been hired by CTOs at a local coffee shop and an Indian buffet. Nothing about a meeting room in an office is more conducive to an interview than a shaded patio with a nice chai.
bityard
Courts deal with serious life-changing issues and everyone involved in a court case is expected behave seriously. In fact, that is literally the primary role of the judge. And why judges are famously strict on procedure, demeanor, and the overall decorum of the courtroom. This is the only thing that prevents your average court case from turning into an episode of Jerry Springer.
gonzus
In all honesty, would you hire this dude as YOUR lawyer?
speerer
If he laughed and talked in court over the judge, he would also be scolded.
cess11
The court is not a homely dinner between citizens, it's the pinnacle of state power and a place where people are judged by it. Even if the court would always be just and fair it would still be a place of tragedy and suffering for many of the participants.
globular-toast
A judge has the power to (effectively or actually) end someone's life. I am very glad this responsibility is taken seriously. As an adult I'm sick of memes and childish "stickers" etc everywhere as it is. It certainly doesn't belong in a court.
Sharlin
It’s just as terrible as a lawyer submitting a document written in a totally inappropriate register, like street slang littered with vulgar phrases. There’s a time and a place for cartoon dragons. A court of law is neither. If you don’t understand why, maybe it’s time for you to learn a thing or two about human communication.
generationP
One day, someone will discover a use for across-the-page watermarks that is not better handled by marginalia and makes up for the loss in readability, copyability and compatibility with graphics.
Until then, we'll be seeing this...
demarq
The whole point of a judicial process is to make judgments on the merit of a case not personal prejudice.
What if someone comes to court wearing tattoos are they more guilty?
speerer
I want to make two observations here.
First, the order being reported is made against the lawyer, not against the lawyer's client - And it is in order not to do this in future. So, while your observation is good I think the conclusion you draw from it doesn't follow.
Secondly, one aspect of your good point is that arguments are filed in a very plain format. The point being that the format does not detract from the message. In this case, the format heavily detracts from the message. Have you seen the PDF? It's absolutely nuts. I hope he doesn't turn up to court wearing a dragon mask.
ceejayoz
> First, the order being reported is made against the lawyer, not against the lawyer's client…
I suspect the client will be billed for the revisions, though.
bluGill
> What if someone comes to court wearing tattoos are they more guilty?
That question is for the jury to decide for better and worse. There are lots of good points to a jury trial which is why free societies usually (always?) have them in some form. However one downside is you will once in a while get someone on the jury who judges you not on the facts of the case but on things that shouldn't matter.
Overall it is still better than the alternatives in my opinion, but it does mean you need to figure out what your local cultures are and avoid offending them (note cultures is plural - figure out them all).
orbital-decay
I don't see how the order is making anyone more or less guilty.
Judicial process historically has a certain seriousness flair and a code of conduct based on it. Making fun of the judge or the court of law is a quick way go get removed from the process or fined, or even jailed. As well as performing marketing stunts like this.
throwawaycities
All courts have local rules or even standing orders governing filings and pleadings - from case styling formatting, font/size, spacing, max pages, ect… Federal district courts are not places to flaunt rules of the court or court orders.
Beyond that lawyers are governed by state bars and rules of professional conduct — as an example the Florida bar has taken action against an attorney that used to advertise himself as a “pitbull.”
Regarding tattoos courts have rules of decorum, which generally cover appropriate dress/attire in the courtroom. As far as tattoos, I’ve been to thousands of hearings and can give a single anecdote. It was a drug possession case and the defendant was allowed to transfer their case from circuit felony to drug court - basically allowing completion of drug classes while on kind of pretrial probation in exchange for either a nolle pros (dismissal) or withhold of adjudication. The drug court judge gave the defendant a hard time at this initial hearing over having a drug molecule tattooed on their neck - questioning if drug court was a good fit for someone the seemingly was pretty committed to drugs (based on the neck tat). The drug court judge can see a hundred or more defendants a day, they’ve seen it all and aren’t passing judgement, its just that their experience allows them to read people extremely well and they had legitimate concerns because getting in trouble in drug court can result in automatic conviction of the original charge + having to deal with any new charge.
A rule of thumb professionalism and decorum go a long way in court - this attorney could be decent, but as a potential client any lawyer using a gimmicky dragon in a suit in their paperwork should probably raise some red flags for you.
_bin_
Lawyers are held to different standards of professional conduct than defendants. This also makes it much harder to read.
demarq
I see what you are saying about there being different standards.
I would follow up with, if the shoe was on the other foot, do you believe that a lawyer with tattoos and or purple hair should be allowed to practice?
We may never agree? But I think that we should be more tolerant of individuality than prejudice.
filoleg
> I would follow up with, if the shoe was on the other foot, do you believe that a lawyer with tattoos and or purple hair should be allowed to practice?
Yes, they should be allowed to practice, because a lawyer’s tattoos and purple hair do not have anything to do with court documents and readability of those. Exceptions obviously apply, as not all tattoos are created equal, and having a visible gang-affiliation tattoo or a tattoo saying “cop killer” (which actually happened, but to a defendant) might be problematic as a lawyer.
Here is an analogy that might help: my employer might not care if someone communicates in offtopic employee chats using gifs and emojis, but I can easily see an employee getting fired for doing the same thing either to an external customer or in cross-org sev 0 incident threads.
demarq
I change my mind. A tattoo is individuality, a purple dragon on a client document is not an appropriate place to express that.
Zetaphor
You're comparing a person's appearance to the formatting of a legal document. Nobody is talking about the physical appearance of the attorney.
There is procedure and standards in document filing for a reason, this is more difficult to read than a white background.
_bin_
I disagree with the way the bar associations are currently constructed as state-sanctioned monopolies. Since they're technically the ones who determine who is "allowed to practice", that's a hard question to answer.
I'd be comfortable establishing a stronger dress code for courtrooms - wear business casual or some such - but dyed hair and tattoos aren't easily fixable mistakes if you get called to court, so they have to be permitted for at least the defendant. For attorneys, it's probably fine to say that those with purple hair and tattoos can practice but not appear in a courtroom to represent a client. They can prep and file a patent but not represent you in a trial. That is, of course, if most people would hire an attorney with purple hair and tattoos. I would not do that unless I wanted to somehow get the death penalty for a speeding ticket.
bmacho
> The whole point of a judicial process is to make judgments on the merit of a case not personal prejudice.
And specifying the style of something that they are able to change easily helps that.
DocTomoe
In fact, in many societies, tattoos are considered a sign of low status, affiliation with lower class (which tends to get harsher sentences) and/or criminal activity, and may - consciously or subconsciously - lead to worse outcomes in trials.[1]
Just tattoo 'cop killer' on your forehead and see if they give you parole.
[1] https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/voices.uchicago.edu/dist/f/305...
StefanBatory
> What if someone comes to court wearing tattoos are they more guilty?
Unfortunately, it's true - that's how it will be seen. :(
jihadjihad
From the PDF linked in TFA:
> Respectfully submitted,
DRAGON LAWYERS PC
That's not a "watermark", keep it to 5% opacity. This is around 13% and very distracting.