Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Recent Developments in Anti-SLAPP Cases for Determining Protected Activities
In the last three years, there have been a number of decisions issued by California courts on anti-SLAPP motions filed in response to lawsuits arising out of the publication and/or distribution of entertainment works. Indeed, since July 2009 alone there have been decisions in lawsuits regarding works in virtually every medium, including television, film, radio, magazines, books, video games and Internet sites. In each one of these cases, the court was tasked with deciding whether the statements or conduct at issue in the lawsuit arose out of activity protected by California's anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (anti-SLAPP statute). In light of the burgeoning number of states that have adopted anti-SLAPP statutes since Washington state enacted the first modern anti-SLAPP statute in 1989, it is important to review the recent developments in this area.
The basics of anti-SLAPP procedure are well-known to most entertainment and media practitioners at this point. In California, a defendant carries the initial burden to prove that its conduct is covered by the anti-SLAPP statute by showing that the plaintiff's claim arises from “any act of [defendant] in furtherance of [its] right of petition or free speech under the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue.” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code '425.16(b)(1). If so, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on his or her claims. Id. In order to do so, “the plaintiff must show that the complaint is legally sufficient and must present a prima facie showing of facts that, if believed by the trier of fact, would support a judgment in the plaintiff's favor.” Hall v. Time Warner, Inc., 153 Cal. App. 4th 1337, 1346 (2007) (emphasis added). If the plaintiff meets this burden, “the moving defendant can defeat the plaintiff's evidentiary showing only if the defendant's evidence establishes as a matter of law that the plaintiff cannot prevail.” Id.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.