The court implies that the blacklist’s virality (it was liked and reblogged many times) might also indicate public interest, but the decision doesn’t turn on that.Ģ) Thus, the burden shifted to Brenner to demonstrate his case.
This issue has emerged as one of the top headlines of 2017. The appeals court affirms because:ġ) The blacklist relates to a matter of public interest–specifically “sexual harassment in the workplace (broadly construed to include the workplaces of independent contractors as well as employees).” Indeed, the blacklist is a microcosm of the recent widespread disclosures about dozens of men in power positions engaging in sexual harassment and abuse.
MODELMAYHEM EBONY TRIAL
The trial court granted the defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion. CA.” Defendant Prescott “reblogged” Hill’s Tumblr post, including the Brenner listing.īrenner sued both Hill and Prescott for defamation, IIED and conspiracy. The blacklist included the entry “GPS Studios | Allan Brenner. In partial response to the risks, defendant Hill posted a “blacklist” of potential ModelMaybem employers to her Tumblr account.
I’m amazed ModelMayhem has survived despite such disquieting news about safety on its site. We’ve blogged before about the risk that putative ModelMayhem employers are sexual predators, which led to a key 9th Circuit ruling that Section 230 doesn’t immunize “failure to warn” claims. ModelMayhem facilitates matches between models and employers, such as photographers.
0 kommentar(er)
