Law is too often about what went wrong, who was injured or how to distribute loss.  It usually isn't funny.  But sometimes a little gem turns up that brightens your day.  And I share because I care.

Just based on various laws of probability and related principles, you've either opined, or been in the vacinity of one opining, that it's impossible to figure out what it is that Paris Hilton has accomplished to merit fame.  Thanks to the Ninth Circuit, you now have published precedent at your disposal to answer that question.  According to the Ninth Circuit, in Hilton v. Hallmark Cards (August 31, 2009), Paris Hilton is a "flamboyant heiress" that "is 'famous for being famous.'"  Slip op., at 12115.  And that's from the first page of the actual opinion.  Henceforth, it's not just your opinion that she's done nothing to justify her fame; it's the law.

The balance of the opinion concerns other pressing issues, like the application of California's anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16.