Photo Credit: Shutterstock&nbsp;
Back in January, a couple of Ana de Armas&rsquo; fans filed a lawsuit claiming that they had rented the 2019 film &ldquo;Yesterday,&rdquo; after seeing de Armas in the trailer. And to their surprise, she was cut out of the final film!
On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled that film studios can be sued under false advertising laws if they release any sort of deceptive movie trailers. U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson issued a ruling in a case involving &ldquo;Yesterday&rdquo;.
The studio&rsquo;s response was that trailers are entitled to broad protection under the First Amendment. The studio&rsquo;s lawyers explained that a trailer is only an &ldquo;artistic, expressive work&rdquo; that tells the entire story in only a three-minute clip, to highlight the theme of the movie, and should it is technically a &ldquo;non-commercial&rdquo; speech, and argued that trailers include clips that do not appear in the finished film, just like in &ldquo;Jurassic Park&rdquo; (another film from the same studios), which got a trailer made entirely of footage that is not in the movie.
<iframe title="Yesterday &ndash; Trailer 1 (Universal Pictures) HD" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H3VeHyedL1U" width="1128" height="635" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>&nbsp;
The studio&rsquo;s lawyers argued, &ldquo;Under Plaintiffs&rsquo; 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,&rdquo; according to <a href="https://variety.com/2022/film/news/ana-de-armas-yesterday-false-advertising-1235467419/">Variety</a>.
However, the U.S. District Judge rejected that response and explained that a trailer is definitely a commercial speech and is subject to the California False Adverting Law and the state&rsquo;s Unfair Competition Law.&rdquo; U.S. District Judge Wilson wrote that the studio &ldquo;is correct that trailers involve some creativity and editorial discretion, but this creativity does not outweigh the commercial nature of a trailer. At its core, a trailer is an advertisement designed to sell a movie by providing consumers with a preview of the movie.&rdquo;
<img src="https://api.fastersmart.online/uploads/embeds/1671710030-BeFunky-collaget_87.jpg" alt="" width="980" height="700" />Photo Credit: Shutterstock&nbsp;
&ldquo;The Court&rsquo;s holding is limited to representations as to whether an actress or scene is in the movie, and nothing else,&rdquo; the judge wrote, holding that based on the &ldquo;Yesterday&rdquo; trailer, it was plausible that viewers would expect de Armas to have a significant role in the film. On the other hand, Richard Curtis, the screenwriter, explained that de Armas was cut because audiences didn&rsquo;t like the idea of Patel&rsquo;s character straying from his primary love interest, played by Lily James. De Armas was originally intended to appear as a love interest for the film&rsquo;s protagonist, played by Himesh Patel.
The case will now continue to discovery and a motion for class certification.
&nbsp;

On Air Now

Non-Stop Music

You May like

Schedule

Non-Stop Music