Studios at Risk Over Deceptive Trailers

[tripplej]

from variety,

Movie studios can be sued under false advertising laws if they release deceptive movie trailers, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday.

U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson issued a ruling in a case involving “Yesterday,” the 2019 film about a world without the Beatles.

Two Ana de Armas fans filed a lawsuit in January, alleging that they had rented the movie after seeing de Armas in the trailer, only to discover that she was cut out of the final film.

 

[ddude003]

Just imagine if the general public could sue (class action) the government (local, state & federal) for false advertising (breach of code of conduct, censorship, and disinformation)... Oops, now I've said too much... Or not enough...

 

[tripplej]

lol. America is a sue happy country!

 

[ddude003]

Lol... Redress procedures are important for basic fairness... What would you suggest...

 

[tripplej]

For this particular issue, if the studio put an actor in the trailer, I would assume that actor would be in the movie. I would get upset after paying money to buy a ticket and not see that actor!

So this is good news for the end consumer.

Now, of course, the question would be, who would go the extra mile and actually hire a lawyer and go thru the lengthy legal process? That would take money and time and of course, even if you win, the lawyers for the class action lawsuit would take the majority cut of the winnings and you, the end consumer, would get maybe some small gift certificate that expires in a short time window for a small size popcorn. lol.


The biggest problem of course is the overall sue culture for frivolous lawsuits, Frivolous or groundless lawsuits are those that are not based on facts or the law. Maybe the solution is if they lose or the case is dismissed, they have to pay the financial damages.

 

[MediumRare]

It does seem trivial, but it was indisputably false advertising. The damages (if any, in this case) are small on an individual basis, but there was deception in principle. One can imagine a bigger star or other falsehood driving first week traffic before the public realizes the deception and stops buying tickets. The Class Action system, while possible to manipulate, has been a wildly successful means to allow individually weak victims to obtain justice from a vastly more powerful defendant. It’s an essential tool of justice in a capitalist society and helps keep capitalism viable. For that alone we should be grateful.

 

[ddude003]

The biggest problem of course is the overall sue culture for frivolous lawsuits, Frivolous or groundless lawsuits are those that are not based on facts or the law. Maybe the solution is if they lose or the case is dismissed, they have to pay the financial damages.

I am pretty sure this is the way it works now... The looser pays the others court costs and may even be sanctioned...
I understand the idea of Frivolous, do you understand the idea of Lawfare...

 

[tripplej]

I am not familiar with Lawfare..

I guess we have the best system setup. Either way, the lawyers get the majority of the winnings! lol.

 

[ddude003]

Lawfare is the use of the legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter individual's usage of their legal rights... Think warfare thru the legal system...

 

[MediumRare]

I am pretty sure this is the way it works now... The looser pays the others court costs and may even be sanctioned...
I understand the idea of Frivolous, do you understand the idea of Lawfare...

In the US, legal costs may be apportioned by contract or by the court. Often, the winner has their costs covered. In Australia a plaintiff has to post a bond for the defendant’s costs when filing their claim. That is a huge deterrent to filing a valid claim, as a corporate defendant will have costs far beyond what most individuals could ever pay, so even if they have a strong claim the process, let alone the risk, is very onerous. Hence, many valid claims are never made.