4 ms·

If that were true then the suit will be dismissed in court. But from literally the first google search of 'is fiction exempt from libel'. > Even if the work co

by rkk3 5y ago

If that were true then the suit will be dismissed in court. But from literally the first google search of 'is fiction exempt from libel'. > Even if the work contains a disclaimer stating that it’s fictional, a libel claim can still arise. However, plaintiffs must clear certain hurdles. In order to state an actionable claim for defamation, a plaintiff must show: publication, defamatory meaning, false statement, identification and damages. In libel suits arising out of fiction, arguably the toughest hurdle for plaintiffs to clear is the identification, or “it’s me” requirement. https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center/topics/freedom-of-speech-2/arts-first-amendment-overview/libel-in-fiction/#:~:text=In%20libel%20suits%20arising%20out,%E2%80%9Cof%20and%20concerning%E2%80%9D%20requirement https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center.... Do you think Netflix is going to claim they were referring to a different female chess world champion with the same name?

rsj_hn 5y ago
I am glad that you finally understand -- or at least its beginning to dawn on you -- that this is a transparent attempt at a shakedown with no legal merit. Netflix will not lose this case. But the purpose of the case is to threaten Netflix with bad publicity not with legal damages -- after all a woman was offended! She was exploited by Big Bad Netflix! And already there are lots of people cheering her on as some kind of victim and all that's happened so far was that the paperwork for the suit has been filed and of course an immediate press release was sent out and ant-netflix reporters were recruited to begin writing hitpieces on Netflix. The case may well be dismissed, and if it's not dismissed, it has virtually no chance of succeeding. But that may be a while from now, and in the meantime Netflix is suffering bad PR. I'm sure it can all go away for the right payment, though.
- rkk3 5y ago
  > I am glad that you finally understand -- or at least its beginning to dawn on you -- that this is a transparent attempt at a shakedown with no legal merit. She & her legacy as the first female grandmaster were defamed to hundreds of millions of people for a throw-away line. That is real damages. The studio should have known better when they made that change to the script and they should have settled before it went to the media. I'm surprised they didn't given Reed's politics.

by rkk3 5y ago

rsj_hn 5y ago

I am glad that you finally understand -- or at least its beginning to dawn on you -- that this is a transparent attempt at a shakedown with no legal merit. Netflix will not lose this case. But the purpose of the case is to threaten Netflix with bad publicity not with legal damages -- after all a woman was offended! She was exploited by Big Bad Netflix! And already there are lots of people cheering her on as some kind of victim and all that's happened so far was that the paperwork for the suit has been filed and of course an immediate press release was sent out and ant-netflix reporters were recruited to begin writing hitpieces on Netflix. The case may well be dismissed, and if it's not dismissed, it has virtually no chance of succeeding. But that may be a while from now, and in the meantime Netflix is suffering bad PR. I'm sure it can all go away for the right payment, though.

rkk3 5y ago
> I am glad that you finally understand -- or at least its beginning to dawn on you -- that this is a transparent attempt at a shakedown with no legal merit. She & her legacy as the first female grandmaster were defamed to hundreds of millions of people for a throw-away line. That is real damages. The studio should have known better when they made that change to the script and they should have settled before it went to the media. I'm surprised they didn't given Reed's politics.