I agree. This isn't a space-saving brief. It's an attempt to inflame. But...
I think it's pretty cool that a new medium for legal discourse has been actually used. Several years after absorbing Scott McCloud's phenomenal book Understanding Comics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Understanding_Comics), I set out to argue for a very technical (programming) project at work through a goofy comic. It was surprisingly effective, and got more eyes on it than the more traditional internal wiki plea. I assume that the novelty and incongruence of the medium brings the audience out of whatever comfort zone they routinely occupy.
Reminds me of "Why's Poignant Guid to Ruby" [1]. I can't say how efficient this medium is for transferring information/knowledge, but it's certainly captivating -- sometimes what's needed to get a point across is not efficiency, but captivation.
