• Home
  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    • Defamation Law
    • Internet Law
    • Corporate Law
    • Ecommerce Law
    • Advertising Law
    • Social Media Law
  • Internet Law Blog
  • Contact Us

Call Toll Free 1-866-570-8585

Find An Office Near You
Speak With an Internet Lawyer Now
RM Warner Law | Online, Marketing, Internet Business Law FirmRM Warner Law | Online, Marketing, Internet Business Law Firm
RM Warner Law | Online, Marketing, Internet Business Law FirmRM Warner Law | Online, Marketing, Internet Business Law Firm
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    • Defamation Law
    • Internet Law
    • Corporate Law
    • Ecommerce Law
    • Advertising Law
    • Social Media Law
  • Internet Law Blog
  • Contact Us

California Supreme Court Reverses Anti-SLAPP Motion So FilmOn Libel Suit Can Proceed

California Supreme Court Reverses Anti-SLAPP Motion So FilmOn Libel Suit Can Proceed

May 12, 2019 Posted by Daniel Warner Defamation No Comments

In 2014, FilmOn, an internet-based television provider, sued DoubleVerify for libel, alleging that DoubleVerify wrongly classified FilmOn as a copyright infringer and adult content distributor, according to Media Post. DoubleVerify is a company that provides online media verification to advertisers, so when they published the claims against FilmOn, the company alleges that it caused harm to their relationships with advertisers, which is understandably so.

DoubleVerify chose to fight the libel suit with help from the anti-SLAPP law. Anti-SLAPP laws serve to provide a remedy from SLAPP suits. “SLAPP” is an acronym that stands for strategic lawsuits against public participation. SLAPP lawsuits have become a common tool used to silence those who criticize businesses, oftentimes regarding issues of local land development or the environment, according to the Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press.

According to Media Post, DoubleVerify used anti-SLAPP to argue that the statements they made about FilmOn in their report were matters of public interest. FilmOn then clapped back to their Anti-SLAPP claim, arguing that their reports were commercial and confidential and therefore not matters of public interest.

During trial, the judge and appellate court took the side of DoubleVerify, but when the case was taken to the California Supreme Court, FilmOn came out on top. According to Media Post, the Supreme Court ruled that the report was not protected by anti-SLAPP because it is not released to the general public. Instead, the report is distributed privately to paying clients for business purposes, therefore rejecting DoubleVerify’s position in the case.

This ruling could slow down the use of anti-SLAPP to secure companies speedy dismissals in similar cases. Many have argued that anti-SLAPP has been used too broadly but this decision makes it clear that issues of public interest must be taken into account in order to qualify for anti-SLAPP protection.

If you need legal assistance for issues involving libel, slander, or Internet Defamation, Contact the attorneys at RM Warner Law. We know how to help.

Source:

Https://Www.Mediapost.Com/Publications/Article/335477/Filmon-Can-Proceed-With-Libel-Suit-Against-Doublev.Html

Tags: anti-slappanti-slapp lawcalifornia defamation lawdefamationdefamation lawsuitdefamation lawyerfilmon lawsuitlibel lawsuit
No Comments
0
Share

About Daniel Warner

As a partner at RM Warner, Daniel focuses the majority of his practice on litigating cases involving Internet defamation, false and misleading advertising/marketing, unfair competition and cyber harassment. Although based in Arizona, Dan Warner has litigated Internet defamation cases in California, Texas, Nevada, Pennsylvania, New York, Georgia, North Carolina and Florida, as well as numerous cases in Arizona. Mr. Warner also works on various contractual, commercial, business, real estate, Internet and Internet marketing matters.

You also might be interested in

Defamation, Free Speech, & Racism: Oberlin College Lawsuit

Defamation, Free Speech, & Racism: Oberlin College Lawsuit

May 25, 2019

In Ohio, Oberlin College is facing a civil lawsuit for[...]

Sextortion Targets College Students in Idaho

Sextortion Targets College Students in Idaho

May 8, 2019

Have you ever received a friend request or direct message[...]

Evidence of Emojis in Court – Can An Emoji Support a Claim for Defamation or Harassment?

Evidence of Emojis in Court – Can An Emoji Support a Claim for Defamation or Harassment?

Jul 17, 2019

Emojis first appeared in Japanese mobile phones in the late[...]

Leave a Reply

Your email is safe with us.
Cancel Reply

Recent Posts

  • Can I Sue Someone For Leaking My ‘OnlyFans’ Content?
  • Cardi B Tattoo Trademark Trouble
  • Dr. Dre’s Divorce Battle Is Nothing But a “G” Thang: Soon-To-Be Ex-Wife Fights For the Intellectual Property Rights to His Name
  • Section 230 Reform – Why Tech CEO’s Are Against The Trump Administration’s Proposed Changes
  • Going Viral, Gone Bad: What Do You Do If Defamation Goes Viral?

Recent Comments

    Tag Cloud

    ad law advertising law airbnb amazon law amazon lawyer anonymous defamation business law business lawyer celebrity defamation corporate lawyer corporate takeover cyberbullying cyberbullying lawyer defamation defamation lawsuit defamation lawyer ecommerce ecommerce law ecommerce lawyer esports esports law esports lawsuit esports lawyer facebook facebook law facebook lawyer fake news fake reviews faze clan fba first amendment free speech influencer lawyer influencer marketing intellectual property internet law internet lawyer law day 2019 marketing law revenge porn sextortion shareholder dispute social media law social media lawyer twitter lawsuit

    Contact Us

    Send us a message and we'll get back to you, asap.

    Send Message
    Speak With An Internet Lawyer Today Call Now
    • RM Warner Law
    • 1-866-570-8585
    • 866-961-4984
    • admin@rmwarnerlaw.com

    Recent Posts

    • Can I Sue Someone For Leaking My ‘OnlyFans’ Content?
    • Cardi B Tattoo Trademark Trouble
    • Dr. Dre’s Divorce Battle Is Nothing But a “G” Thang: Soon-To-Be Ex-Wife Fights For the Intellectual Property Rights to His Name
    • Section 230 Reform – Why Tech CEO’s Are Against The Trump Administration’s Proposed Changes
    Tweets by RMWarnerLaw1
    • RM Warner Instagram
    • Payments
    • Blog
    • Privacy Policy

    © 2020 — RM Warner Law

    • RM Warner Instagram
    • Payments
    • Blog
    • Privacy Policy
    Prev Next