Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Baron Cohen Lawyers on Winning Ruling In Judge Moore's Defamation Suit
Comedic actor Sacha Baron Cohen made former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore the butt of a joke, playing off media reports that plagued Judge Moore during his campaign for the U.S. Senate, about allegations of sexual misconduct involving young women. During the segment from the satirical Showtime series Who is America? segment at the center of a defamation suit from Judge Moore and his wife, Baron Cohen, posing as an Israeli anti-terrorism expert, claimed to have a device that identified pedophiles — and that device went off when he waived it in front of Moore.
Federal District Judge John Cronan of the Southern District of New York recently ruled that a release Judge Moore signed prior to his appearance on the program barred precisely the sorts of claims he was bringing. Southern District Judge Cronan further found the First Amendment applied to claims brought by Moore's wife Kayla, who was not party to the release, on the ground that the bit "was clearly a joke and no reasonable viewer would have seen it otherwise" and that it "was commentary on matters of public concern." Moore v. Cohen, 19 Civ. 4977.
[The consent agreement Judge Moore signed stated he "specifically, but without limitation, waives, and agrees not to bring at any time in the future, any claims against the Producer, or against any of its assignees or licensees or anyone associated with the Program, which are related to the Program or its production, or this agreement, including, but not limited to, claims involving assertions of … (h) infliction of emotional distress (whether allegedly intentional or negligent), … (m) defamation (such as any allegedly false statements made in the Program), … (p) fraud (such as any alleged deception about the Program or this consent agreement)…." Judge Moore had struck from the release's "(f) intrusion or invasion of privacy" waiver language the words "such as any allegedly sexual-oriented or offensive behavior or questioning," but District Judge Cronan noted that was "an entirely different potential cause of action" and that "Judge Moore has not brought such a claim" in the litigation.]
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.