Ruling Issued on IMDb.com Challenge to CA Actor-Age Law

A federal judge in San Francisco issued a preliminary injunction on February 22 halting a California state law that requires online entertainment database IMDb.com to remove actors' ages on request. IMDb.com v. Kenealy, 3:16-cv-06535. Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California had made clear at a hearing earlier in February that he thought the law violated the First Amendment, although he held off ruling from the bench at that time.

California Civil Code §1798.83.5, which took effect on Jan. 1, is backed by the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists union (see, http://bit.ly/2lLjDyj), and was billed as a tool to fight age discrimination in the entertainment industry. But in November, IMDb, an Amazon.com Inc. subsidiary, sued to block the law, claiming that it runs afoul of the First Amendment and the broad protections provided to websites by the Communications Decency Act (CDA).

Anthony Hakl, the deputy attorney general charged with defending the law on behalf of the state, figured out pretty quickly at a recent hearing where he stood with District Judge Chhabria. The judge, who worked for the city attorney's office in San Francisco before taking the bench, said he had defended “a number of laws that were very challenging to defend” in his prior work. But, he added, he couldn't remember defending “a law that is as challenging to defend as you are trying to defend now.”

Hakl contended the legislation was not a broad constraint on speech because it applies to users of subscription services such as IMDb Pro, a service separate from the IMDb site where entertainment professionals pay a fee for job placement services. The state, Hakl said, had an interest in cutting down on instances of age discrimination in the entertainment industry and at IMDb.

But Judge Chhabria indicated both at the hearing and in his preliminary injunction ruling that he saw serious First Amendment issues with holding back facts that IMDb's public website can publish based on its contractual relationship with customers in a separate venture. The district judge also questioned whether the law could possibly achieve its underlying goal of reducing discrimination.

“How does preventing one website of the millions of websites out there publishing people's age … even remotely help prevent age discrimination from happening?” Chhabria asked at the hearing.

Douglas Mirrell, a lawyer representing the Screen Actors Guild, said IMDb is the go-to source for the industry. “They rely upon what IMDb says as the gospel,” Mirrell said at the hearing.

To that, Judge Chhabria quipped, “This is the best advertisement IMDb has ever had.”

Judge Chhabria didn't ask to hear from IMDb's lawyers, John Hueston and Moez Kaba, of the Southern California firm Hueston Hennigan.

*****
Ross Todd writes for The Recorder, the San Francisco-based ALM sibling of Entertainment Law & Finance. He can be reached at [email protected]. On Twitter: @Ross_Todd.

A federal judge in San Francisco issued a preliminary injunction on February 22 halting a California state law that requires online entertainment database IMDb.com to remove actors' ages on request. IMDb.com v. Kenealy, 3:16-cv-06535. Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California had made clear at a hearing earlier in February that he thought the law violated the First Amendment, although he held off ruling from the bench at that time.

California Civil Code §1798.83.5, which took effect on Jan. 1, is backed by the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists union (see, http://bit.ly/2lLjDyj), and was billed as a tool to fight age discrimination in the entertainment industry. But in November, IMDb, an Amazon.com Inc. subsidiary, sued to block the law, claiming that it runs afoul of the First Amendment and the broad protections provided to websites by the Communications Decency Act (CDA).

Anthony Hakl, the deputy attorney general charged with defending the law on behalf of the state, figured out pretty quickly at a recent hearing where he stood with District Judge Chhabria. The judge, who worked for the city attorney's office in San Francisco before taking the bench, said he had defended “a number of laws that were very challenging to defend” in his prior work. But, he added, he couldn't remember defending “a law that is as challenging to defend as you are trying to defend now.”

Hakl contended the legislation was not a broad constraint on speech because it applies to users of subscription services such as IMDb Pro, a service separate from the IMDb site where entertainment professionals pay a fee for job placement services. The state, Hakl said, had an interest in cutting down on instances of age discrimination in the entertainment industry and at IMDb.

But Judge Chhabria indicated both at the hearing and in his preliminary injunction ruling that he saw serious First Amendment issues with holding back facts that IMDb's public website can publish based on its contractual relationship with customers in a separate venture. The district judge also questioned whether the law could possibly achieve its underlying goal of reducing discrimination.

“How does preventing one website of the millions of websites out there publishing people's age … even remotely help prevent age discrimination from happening?” Chhabria asked at the hearing.

Douglas Mirrell, a lawyer representing the Screen Actors Guild, said IMDb is the go-to source for the industry. “They rely upon what IMDb says as the gospel,” Mirrell said at the hearing.

To that, Judge Chhabria quipped, “This is the best advertisement IMDb has ever had.”

Judge Chhabria didn't ask to hear from IMDb's lawyers, John Hueston and Moez Kaba, of the Southern California firm Hueston Hennigan.

*****
Ross Todd writes for The Recorder, the San Francisco-based ALM sibling of Entertainment Law & Finance. He can be reached at [email protected]. On Twitter: @Ross_Todd.