JOIN OUR WHATSAPP CHANNEL
Universal Studios Settles Lawsuit Over Alleged Deceptive Trailer Featuring Ana De Armas: DEETs
Universal Studios was sued for false advertising over 'Yesterday' trailer, facing legal fees after setback. Here's all you need to know about this high-stakes legal showdown!
In 2022, Peter Rosza and Conor Woulfe sued Universal alleging that they had been cheated out of $3.99 each. Initially, a federal judge sided with them, finding movie trailers aren't exempt from false advertising claims. However, the men were left to pay Universal $126,705 in legal fees after a series of setbacks.
A lawsuit filed by two men who watched Ana de Armas in the trailer of 'Yesterday' before renting it, only to find that her role was cut from the finished movie, has been settled for false advertising.
False Advertising in Hollywood or Is It?
A settlement was reached on Friday that will end the case. No terms were disclosed and neither side responded to a comment request.
Court filings suggest that nobody is satisfied with the outcome. In defending a patently frivolous lawsuit, Universal had to spend nearly two years and thousands of dollars they believe. However, the plaintiffs' class action lawyers became convinced that California's courts are rigged in favor of Hollywood studios. That is after they believed that the claim was worth millions.
Any lasting significance in the case occurs from the court ruling opposing the studio and siding with the plaintiffs. According to Universal, movie trailers should be protected by the First Amendment since they are works of art. In the studio's warning, viewers could sue every time a movie didn't live up to its trailers if they were treated like advertisements.
According to U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson, trailers are false advertising and are therefore subject to false advertising laws.
Any which ways, converting that victory into real money proved challenging for the plaintiffs. Cody R. LeJeune and his team of class action lawyers argued that everyone who bought or rented a ticket to this movie could have been conned.
'Yesterday' tells the story of Jack who is a struggling musician. He discovers that he is the only person on Earth who remembers the Beatles after being hit by a bus. In reviving their discography, he rocketed to stardom. A brief appearance by De Armas as a suitor for Jack's affections was planned for late in the movie. She was, however, removed from the film after test screenings.
De Armas likely had nothing to do with most of the people who watched the film, Universal argued. The trailer featuring her might have been overlooked by viewers (or, if they did see it, they may have been more interested in the other stars or the Beatles' music).
It was up to LeJeune and his colleagues to prove that many people were disappointed to not see de Armas. They might have been crestfallen by her absence much like Woulfe and Rosza. However, their motion for class certification proposed only a hypothetical method of proving that. Maybe a survey would suffice?
Protecting Art or Consumer Rights?
The judge wrote in a ruling last August that plaintiffs' motion for class certification is patently inadequate.
There is a possibility that the false advertising suit will proceed. However, it wouldn't be worth much if there were just two plaintiffs. Based on Universal's estimates, the most they could hope for was $7.98.
Having filed a motion for attorneys' fees, the studio went for the kill. Despite allowing the false advertising claims the judge dismissed the plaintiffs' other product liability claims, ruling they are not applicable to movies.
Due to California's anti-SLAPP statute, Universal was entitled to legal fees as the winning party. Kelly Klaus, the studio's lead lawyer, charges $1,158 per hour. Universal sought $472,000 reimbursement which it considered a "generous" reduction, for two anti-SLAPP motions and two motions for legal fees totaling $672,000.
It was viewed differently by the judge. “In the Court’s experience, modern law firms are neither elegionary nor altruistic,” he wrote, knocking it down to $126,705.
An attempt was made by Universal to reach out and discuss a settlement. LeJeune, however, gave the impression that he would fight until the bitter end, filing multiple requests for discovery regarding various 'Yesterday' trailers. Further driving up Universal's defense costs.
“The attorneys who filed and sunk two years into this frivolous case are trying to pressure Universal into making a huge monetary payment (with no legal or factual basis) to end a case that is now worth $7.98,” wrote Stephanie Herrera, one of the studio’s lawyers.
For abuse of the discovery process, she asked the judge for an additional $43,000. May 21 was the trial date, and a hearing on that motion was scheduled for April 30.
Rosza and Woulfe evidently decided to end the debate at that point. It appears the parties expect to dismiss the case this week following the filing of a joint notice of settlement on Friday.
Latest Articles
