More from Variety<\/strong><\/p>\nTwo 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 movie.<\/p>\n
Universal sought to throw out the lawsuit, arguing that movie trailers are entitled to broad protection under the First Amendment. The studio’s lawyers argued that a trailer is an \u201cartistic, expressive work\u201d that tells a three-minute story conveying the theme of the movie, and should thus be considered \u201cnon-commercial\u201d speech.<\/p>\n
But Wilson rejected that argument, finding that a trailer is commercial speech and is subject to the California False Adverting Law and the state’s Unfair Competition Law.<\/p>\n
\u201cUniversal is correct that trailers involve some creativity and editorial discretion, but this creativity does not outweigh the commercial nature of a trailer,\u201d Wilson wrote. \u201cAt its core, a trailer is an advertisement designed to sell a movie by providing consumers with a preview of the movie.\u201d<\/p>\n
In their briefing on the issue, Universal’s lawyers argued that movie trailers have long included clips that do not appear in the finished film. They cited \u201cJurassic Park\u201d (another Universal film), which had a trailer comprised entirely of footage that is not in the movie.<\/p>\n
Universal also argued that classifying trailers as \u201ccommercial speech\u201d could open the door to a parade of arguments from dissatisfied filmgoers, who could make a subjective claim that a movie did not live up to the expectations created by the trailer.<\/p>\n
Story continues<\/button><\/p>\n\u201cUnder Plaintiffs’ reasoning, a trailer would be stripped of full First Amendment protection and subject to burdensome litigation anytime a viewer claimed to be disappointed with whether and how much of any person or scene they saw in the trailer was in the final film; with whether the movie fit into the kind of genre they claimed to expect; or any of an unlimited number of disappointments a viewer could claim,\u201d the studio’s lawyers argued.<\/p>\n
Wilson sought to address that concern, saying the false advertising law applies only when a \u201csignificant portion\u201d of \u201creasonable consumers\u201d could be misled.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Court’s holding is limited to representations as to whether an actress or scene is in the movie, and nothing else,\u201d the judge wrote, holding that based on the \u201cYesterday\u201d trailer, it was plausible that viewers would expect de Armas to have a significant role in the movie.<\/p>\n
De Armas was originally intended to appear as a love interest for the film’s protagonist, played by Himesh Patel. Patel’s character was to have met her on the set of James Corden’s talk show, where Patel would serenade her with the Beatles song \u201cSomething.\u201d<\/p>\n
Richard Curtis, the screenwriter, explained that de Armas was cut because audiences didn’t like the idea of \u200b\u200bPatel’s character straying from his primary love interest, played by Lily James.<\/p>\n
The plaintiffs, Conor Woulfe of Maryland and Peter Michael Rosza of San Diego County, Calif., each paid $3.99 to rent \u201cYesterday\u201d on Amazon Prime. They are seeking at least $5 million as representatives of a class of movie customers.<\/p>\n
The case will now proceed to discovery and a motion for class certification.<\/p>\n
Best of Variety<\/strong><\/p>\nSign up for Variety’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.<\/p>\n
Click here to read the full article. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Movie studios can be sued under false advertising laws if they release deceptive movie trailers, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday. US District Judge Stephen Wilson issued a ruling in a case involving \u201cYesterday,\u201d the 2019 movie about a world without the Beatles. More from Variety Two Ana de Armas fans filed a lawsuit in …<\/p>\n
Ana de Armas Fans’ Lawsuit Puts Studios at Risk Over Deceptive Trailers<\/span> Read More »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"\nAna de Armas Fans' Lawsuit Puts Studios at Risk Over Deceptive Trailers - harchi90<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n