this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
132 points (97.8% liked)

Not The Onion

16102 readers
1173 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The dragon in question:

Here it is on a page:

Other links:
New York Times
Ars Technica

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kemsat@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Proof that a degrees don’t determine intelligence.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I don't see the problem. It's from a company called "Dragon Lawyers". If it was idk "Flower Lawyers" they could put a flower with a tie or something. What is it with those snowflakes not being able to handle a decent watermark. It's not like it's somehow offensive.

[–] Eggyhead@lemmings.world 34 points 1 day ago (1 children)

NGL, I think it looks really unprofessional. Imagine “flower lawyers” putting a tulip in a cartoon suit and giving it a menacing expression, it would look just as dumb. Likewise, a dragon could make for a much classier design if approached in a different way.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Exactly. This isn't some little iconic flourish in the corner, footer, or the header. There's also some general rule of thumb with watermarks being flagrantly disregarded (keep it simple and monochromatic so it doesn't impact content legibility).

And even if I personally didn't have a problem with it, I would seriously question the competency of any law firm that mis-read their audience so dramatically. I can't imagine many courts looking at that and not having at least an immediate knee jerk reaction of "The hell is this? Are they fucking with us? Is this a joke?" which is an absurdly poor opener to your case as a lawyer.

If some firm got a headshot of the lawyer handling the case scowling and used that as the background of every page in their document they'd be laughed out of court. Just because "dragons are cool" or something doesn't make this any less silly.

Edit: The dragon icon in the footer is perfect if they wanted some visual flair to set them apart, and it's a relatively simple monochromatic design. It just makes it even more absurd that they didn't just use that and instead went for this detailed and visually busy picture.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm going to take a flying leap and assume you've never come close to court proceedings.

No serious law firm is doing full page multicolored graphics as watermarks. Flower Lawyers doing what you've described would get a similar response. If this was a picture of the lawyer for the case scowling instead they'd get laughed out of court.

[–] MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago

I assume you would only do that on like a sample document for a client or a draft, specifically so it won't be used in an actual court.

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 16 points 1 day ago

What you didn't see was, on the reverse side of these documents, the dragon lawyer has no pants on. He's full ass-out. Just straight-up Donald Duck'ing it.

[–] seathru@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It has to be easily printable* for judges/lawyers that want a hard copy.

*Easily printable (and still legible) on 30 year old government printers.

[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 day ago

After it's been photocopied fifty times.

[–] Zahille7@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I saw tons of billboards in southwest Tennessee for a law firm called "Lion Law" and all their billboards had pictures of animals and some kind of play on words, like a picture of a snake and the caption was something like "divorce that snake in the grass today!"

And I was just like "damn, that's kinda clever."

[–] sundray@lemmus.org 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"Federal Judge Strikes Down Rule of Cool."

[–] kemsat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

It’s not even cool. It’s cringe af.

[–] brax@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

Judge should be fired. Does the dragon somehow change the words on the page? If the watermarks affects the ability for screen readers, then fine. Otherwise, the judge is clearly unable to form an unbiased opinion and is willing to allow something irrelevant like appearance bias their cases.

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago

Pretending this country has any professionalism whatsoever. Considering who is president and the shitty behavior of most politicians ... get fucked.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My only issue here is that it makes the text hard to read

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

My only issue with my new car is that it doesn't start.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the judge: "Bad Dragon!"

(the dragons all laughed.)

[–] DeltaWingDragon@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 hours ago

how original, never heard that one before

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

makes the text hard to read but otherwise I think it's fine

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To be fair, making text hard to read somewhat defeats the entire purpose of text.

[–] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

Yeah, but its only to the point of requiring an increase in transparency, not complete removal.

[–] TassieTosser@aussie.zone 3 points 1 day ago

And this is in colour, imagine it in grey scale when copies are made for court.

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

Honestly pretty sick dragon. Great PR. But yeah definitely they should use some sort of cryptographic signature, not (on its own at least) an image watermark like this haha