Steve Javors from Xbiz writes: Gene – Just a heads up. The Mary Carey story you posted from adultbizlaw is completely false. We spoke to Mary’s lawyer and they have 40 days to protest Mariah’s filing, which she filed Dec. 27. So no judge has ruled on anything.

The site where that story originated from has been taken down.”

Meanwhile on www.lukeisback.com, this is written: Mary calls me Jan. 5. “I did not lose the case. I have 40 days from the 27th of December to respond. I am meeting with my lawyer today.”

“I’m sober and going to business meetings. I hung out with Harold [Mary’s ex-boyfriend] for two days. He’s not doing too well. A little too strung out for my liking.”

“The biggest thing that people feel is that I’m irresponsible. I’m meeting with someone today from a really big company today about changing my image.”

Mary Carey’s attorney David Beitchman emails me:

“This is in response to your article posted January 4, 2007 regarding the same subject identified above. We are attorneys for Mary Carey.

“Please note that your article is factually incorrect and grossly misstates the nature of the proceedings referenced therein. Mariah Carey’s Opposition was filed before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board on December 27, 2006. By statute, Mary Carey has forty (40) days from that date to respond to the Opposition. Thus, no Judge has heard this matter yet, a response has not yet been filed, and no decisions have been rendered. Mary Carey is fully entitled to the continued use of her name, contrary to what your article states.

“If you maintain your position as indicated in the article, we are curious to know what action you are referring to and what Judge handed down the decision upon which your article relies. Kindly forward that information to us at your earliest opportunity. Otherwise, we would appreciate you updating your website to reflect the truth of the matter, thereby not misleading your readers.”