{"id":166153,"date":"2022-12-23T12:15:07","date_gmt":"2022-12-23T12:15:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/harchi90.com\/studios-can-be-sued-over-misleading-movie-trailers-judge-rules-in-ana-de-armas-fan-suit\/"},"modified":"2022-12-23T12:15:07","modified_gmt":"2022-12-23T12:15:07","slug":"studios-can-be-sued-over-misleading-movie-trailers-judge-rules-in-ana-de-armas-fan-suit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/harchi90.com\/studios-can-be-sued-over-misleading-movie-trailers-judge-rules-in-ana-de-armas-fan-suit\/","title":{"rendered":"Studios can be sued over misleading movie trailers, judge rules in Ana de Armas fan suit"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

A lawsuit filed by a pair of disgruntled Ana de Armas fans over the 2019 rom-com yesterday<\/em> could have far-reaching ramifications for movie studios.<\/p>\n

On Tuesday a judge in California allowed parts of a argument accusing Universal of false advertising to proceed, ruling that a movie trailer “constitutes commercial speech” and is not entitled to broad protection under the First Amendment.<\/p>\n

The case began in January, when Paul Michael Rosza and Conor Woulfe sued Universal claiming that they rented yesterday<\/em> with the expectation that de Armas would be in it because she appeared in a trailer, leading to their dismay upon realizing she had been cut from the movie.<\/p>\n

Lawyers for Universal tried to get the case tossed, arguing that a trailer is an “artistic, expressive work” and therefore eligible for First Amendment protections.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n