Informative EFF Post on the SPEAK FREE Act

The Electronic Frontier Foundation‘s “Deeplinks Blog” has an excellent post on the SPEAK FREE Act (the proposed Federal Anti-SLAPP law) we posted about on Thursday. The EFF post provides a very good summary of the purpose of the Act, how the proposed law would work in practice, and the background of SLAPP litigation.  Take a look HERE.

If you or your organization have been threatened with a defamation lawsuit, or if you would like to learn how to create safeguards to minimize the risks of such a lawsuit, please do not hesitate to contact Ward & Ward PLLC for a consultation with one of our attorneys. From pre-publication review through trial, the lawyers at Ward & Ward have considerable experience representing media, nonprofit, and commercial clients with various First Amendment issues.

Federal Anti-SLAPP Statute proposed in Congress

The always informative DC Anti-SLAPP Law blog has a great post on the proposed SPEAK FREE Act of 2015.  Given the ever-evolving anti-SLAPP landscape, and the confusion/discord over the application of state Anti-SLAPP statutes to claims in Federal Courts, the time is ripe for a Federal statute.

If you or your organization have been threatened with a defamation lawsuit, or if you would like to learn how to create safeguards to minimize the risks of such a lawsuit, please do not hesitate to contact Ward & Ward PLLC for a consultation with one of our attorneys. From pre-publication review through trial, the lawyers at Ward & Ward have considerable experience representing media, nonprofit, and commercial clients with various First Amendment issues.

Copyright Enforcement and the California Anti-SLAPP Law

Anti-SLAPP laws are typically associated with defamation lawsuits. So how can an Anti-SLAPP law help copyright owners who enforce their rights? An ongoing class action dispute against Warner Brothers and other defendants shows one way.

One of the claims in the class action suit against Warner Brothers and others arose from the defendants seeking subpoenas under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). A provision in the DMCA permits copyright owners to seek federal court subpoenas of ISPs in order to identify alleged copyright infringers. The defendants’ use of this process ultimately led to a claim against them for abuse of process.

In response, the defendants sought to dismiss the claim using California’s Anti-SLAPP law. The defendants argued that petitioning courts for redress of copyright rights is protected activity under the California Anti-SLAPP law. The defendants further argued that the plaintiffs could not establish a probability of success on the merits, as required under the law. A U.S. District Court agreed and recently dismissed the abuse of process claim.

Ward & Ward’s attorneys have substantial experience with Anti-SLAPP litigation, pre-publication screening and review for media and non-profit clients, negotiating licensing agreements on behalf of rights holders, and protecting the intellectual property rights of our clients. If you would like to discuss any such matters, please contact us.

Appeals Court: D.C. Anti-SLAPP Law’s Provision Not Available in Federal Court

A federal appellate court has made an important ruling regarding the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act. On Friday, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia decided Abbas v. Foreign Policy. While dismissing a defamation case against the Defendant, the Court also held that federal courts sitting in diversity jurisdiction may not apply the Anti-SLAPP Act’s special motion to dismiss provision. The Court reasoned that the provision conflicts with federal procedural rules and therefore does not apply in federal court.

The D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act helps protect those threatened with litigation arising out an “act in furtherance of the right of advocacy on issues of public interest.” It is defined to combat “SLAPPs” – Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. The law is most commonly associated with defamation lawsuits.

The Court’s ruling considerably impacts the landscape of defamation litigation in the District of Columbia. Some questions remain open – for instance, whether the Act’s special motion to quash provisions can still apply in federal court.

Have you or your organization been threatened with a defamation lawsuit? Would you like to reduce the risk of such lawsuits and ensure compliance with defamation and media laws? Ward & Ward PLLC has demonstrated success in these areas and can assist you. Call or email for a consultation with one of our attorneys.

Ward & Ward wins big for a highly respected NGO

Ward & Ward PLLC recently obtained a comprehensive victory for a highly respected NGO. Ward & Ward successfully defended C4ADS from claims for defamation and punitive damages brought by Kaalbye Shipping International. The high-profile lawsuit, characterized as a “David versus Goliath battle,” attracted significant attention, including articles in Foreign PolicyVocativ, and elsewhere.

In this particular battle, David prevailed. Ward & Ward attorneys Daniel Ward and Taimur Rabbani initially filed a declaratory judgment action on behalf of C4ADS in response to Kaalbye’s repeated threats of litigation.  Kaalbye responded by filing multiple defamation counterclaims against C4ADS.  C4ADS filed a Special Motion to Dismiss Kaalbye’s defamation counterclaims. If granted, a Special Motion to Dismiss under the D.C. Anti-SLAPP act provides for dismissal with prejudice of the targeted defamation claims, and the award of attorney’s fees and costs. In a recent Opinion, Judge Thomas Motley granted C4ADS’ Special Motion to Dismiss, dismissing with prejudice all claims brought by Kaalbye Shipping against C4ADS.

Have you or your organization been threatened with a defamation lawsuit? Would you like to create safeguards to minimize the risks of such a lawsuit? From pre-publication review through trial, the lawyers at Ward & Ward have considerable experience representing media, non-profit, and commercial clients with various First Amendment issues. Call or email Ward & Ward PLLC for a consultation with one of our attorneys.