Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

She brought a mostly fabricated story to the New York Times. That tends to generate quite a bit of publicity.

Yes but you didn't have to read it. You dont' have to read anything about any celeb. She's not the President or the CEO of a major corporation even. Just some actress. You could ignore every headline with her name and live a happy life.

You click because you want to. Don't lie to yourself. I think for a lot of people there is real pleasure in reading about the case just to hate the other side, the hate feels good.

If you are posting on this thread and can't admit this about yourself... come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

I for one never read anything about her, and only found out about the trial from this forum. I just want her to go away so people can devote their valuable DCUM time to other topics.

And yet here you are boosting this thread to the top of Recent Topics, almost certainly ensuring more people will click on it and respond.

SMDH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for Blake. She forced them to say that her point of view had merit and deserved to be heard. Yes it did.

She quite literally was shown to be a liar and had her career ruined. And it was only getting worse at trial here there would be abundant evidence that people find her unlikable whenever she opens her mouth in an unscripted setting.

And yet Wayfarer made a huge concession in the public statement. Why is that, do you think?

People aren’t being reasonable. While Wayfarer had a good chance of being fully vindicated at trial, a trial is always a risk. In this case, wayfarer is the one being sued and the only one at risk of losing even more money. The statement, which was from the lawyers by the way, strongly suggests that the deal was no money but a face saving statement for Blake. I know we all wanted to see wayfarer vindicated but we weren’t the ones at risk of losing millions more, no matter how small the risk might have seemed.

In what way? It simply doesn't mention money at all, which is not uncommon for settlement statements. It was almost certainly a requirement for negotiation (that there be absolutely no hint at how much money changed hands).

Keep dreaming, Blake lost nearly all her case on summary judgment, lost on the jury instructions she wanted, didn’t want the stipulation the judge was going to force on her, and was facing new accusations of destroying evidence that contradicted her depo testimony.


And, she didn’t even get an apology. She clearly caved and that was smart because she was going to have to face testimony on Van Zann, destroying dailies, and how much the general population organically dislikes her. First smart move she has made in several years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

She brought a mostly fabricated story to the New York Times. That tends to generate quite a bit of publicity.

Yes but you didn't have to read it. You dont' have to read anything about any celeb. She's not the President or the CEO of a major corporation even. Just some actress. You could ignore every headline with her name and live a happy life.

You click because you want to. Don't lie to yourself. I think for a lot of people there is real pleasure in reading about the case just to hate the other side, the hate feels good.

If you are posting on this thread and can't admit this about yourself... come on.

Again, backwards world for the Blake bots. Sure, she went to the paper of record and created a huge controversy, but no one had to read it. Do you ever think about how utterly ridiculous everything your post is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for Blake. She forced them to say that her point of view had merit and deserved to be heard. Yes it did.

She quite literally was shown to be a liar and had her career ruined. And it was only getting worse at trial here there would be abundant evidence that people find her unlikable whenever she opens her mouth in an unscripted setting.

And yet Wayfarer made a huge concession in the public statement. Why is that, do you think?

People aren’t being reasonable. While Wayfarer had a good chance of being fully vindicated at trial, a trial is always a risk. In this case, wayfarer is the one being sued and the only one at risk of losing even more money. The statement, which was from the lawyers by the way, strongly suggests that the deal was no money but a face saving statement for Blake. I know we all wanted to see wayfarer vindicated but we weren’t the ones at risk of losing millions more, no matter how small the risk might have seemed.

In what way? It simply doesn't mention money at all, which is not uncommon for settlement statements. It was almost certainly a requirement for negotiation (that there be absolutely no hint at how much money changed hands).

It wreaks of no money b/c of the timing and the fact that they even gave lively the face saving olive branch at all. Things were going really bad for her. Down to three claims with another MJOP pending that threatened to knock it down to one. Wayfarer stipulated to the protected activity which effed up Lively’s trial strategy. Her lawyers were upset about it but the judge rejected their request for a letter response. More documents were set to be unsealed. And you have to remember lively is the one who requested the protective order so it stands to reason that a lot of what was set to come out was embarrassing to her (more Taylor swift texts anyone?!). And it’s super clear things were being sealed not because they were sensitive but because they were embarrassing to Blake. There was nothing sensitive about the text released this week showing she asked to have dailies destroyed. It was just embarrassing. We haven’t even seen Lively’s full deposition. The clock was ticking for all of that to come out. She had a lot more to lose than gain given how decimated her case was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

She brought a mostly fabricated story to the New York Times. That tends to generate quite a bit of publicity.

Yes but you didn't have to read it. You dont' have to read anything about any celeb. She's not the President or the CEO of a major corporation even. Just some actress. You could ignore every headline with her name and live a happy life.

You click because you want to. Don't lie to yourself. I think for a lot of people there is real pleasure in reading about the case just to hate the other side, the hate feels good.

If you are posting on this thread and can't admit this about yourself... come on.

Again, backwards world for the Blake bots. Sure, she went to the paper of record and created a huge controversy, but no one had to read it. Do you ever think about how utterly ridiculous everything your post is?

My spouse, a well read person who follows the news and reads headlines regularly, did not read it. Because he was actually disinterested. Just scrolled on by.

You read it because you were interested. No one made you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

She brought a mostly fabricated story to the New York Times. That tends to generate quite a bit of publicity.

Yes but you didn't have to read it. You dont' have to read anything about any celeb. She's not the President or the CEO of a major corporation even. Just some actress. You could ignore every headline with her name and live a happy life.

You click because you want to. Don't lie to yourself. I think for a lot of people there is real pleasure in reading about the case just to hate the other side, the hate feels good.

If you are posting on this thread and can't admit this about yourself... come on.

Again, backwards world for the Blake bots. Sure, she went to the paper of record and created a huge controversy, but no one had to read it. Do you ever think about how utterly ridiculous everything your post is?

My spouse, a well read person who follows the news and reads headlines regularly, did not read it. Because he was actually disinterested. Just scrolled on by.

You read it because you were interested. No one made you.

Not OP but this is a stupid argument. I presume OP is a woman. When another woman says they were SH’s most women will be interested. The fact that your husband kept scrolling says more about him than OP. Sounds like a great guy who really cares about women’s issues. Thoughts and prayers on the marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

Not at all, but I do follow pop culture, entertainment and celebrity news. So she has been impossible to avoid. Quite unfortunate. But hopefully no longer!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

She brought a mostly fabricated story to the New York Times. That tends to generate quite a bit of publicity.

Yes but you didn't have to read it. You dont' have to read anything about any celeb. She's not the President or the CEO of a major corporation even. Just some actress. You could ignore every headline with her name and live a happy life.

You click because you want to. Don't lie to yourself. I think for a lot of people there is real pleasure in reading about the case just to hate the other side, the hate feels good.

If you are posting on this thread and can't admit this about yourself... come on.

Again, backwards world for the Blake bots. Sure, she went to the paper of record and created a huge controversy, but no one had to read it. Do you ever think about how utterly ridiculous everything your post is?

My spouse, a well read person who follows the news and reads headlines regularly, did not read it. Because he was actually disinterested. Just scrolled on by.

You read it because you were interested. No one made you.

Not OP but this is a stupid argument. I presume OP is a woman. When another woman says they were SH’s most women will be interested. The fact that your husband kept scrolling says more about him than OP. Sounds like a great guy who really cares about women’s issues. Thoughts and prayers on the marriage.

Okay I disagree with the PP about easily avoiding news of annoying Blake and her awful husband, but this is a real stretch. Get a grip. Thoughts and prayers to you for being such an angry bitter person. No one is obligated to give a rats ass about BL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for Blake. She forced them to say that her point of view had merit and deserved to be heard. Yes it did.

She quite literally was shown to be a liar and had her career ruined. And it was only getting worse at trial here there would be abundant evidence that people find her unlikable whenever she opens her mouth in an unscripted setting.

And yet Wayfarer made a huge concession in the public statement. Why is that, do you think?

People aren’t being reasonable. While Wayfarer had a good chance of being fully vindicated at trial, a trial is always a risk. In this case, wayfarer is the one being sued and the only one at risk of losing even more money. The statement, which was from the lawyers by the way, strongly suggests that the deal was no money but a face saving statement for Blake. I know we all wanted to see wayfarer vindicated but we weren’t the ones at risk of losing millions more, no matter how small the risk might have seemed.

In what way? It simply doesn't mention money at all, which is not uncommon for settlement statements. It was almost certainly a requirement for negotiation (that there be absolutely no hint at how much money changed hands).

Keep dreaming, Blake lost nearly all her case on summary judgment, lost on the jury instructions she wanted, didn’t want the stipulation the judge was going to force on her, and was facing new accusations of destroying evidence that contradicted her depo testimony.


And, she didn’t even get an apology. She clearly caved and that was smart because she was going to have to face testimony on Van Zann, destroying dailies, and how much the general population organically dislikes her. First smart move she has made in several years.

VanZann and these dailies would not have been discussed at trial, as they have nothing to do with her claims. Trial doesn't work like the TMZ bullpen sessions, folks.

Baldoni lost his entire countersuit to dismissal. Against NYT as well. Had his lead lawyer formally sanctioned by the court. Was still facing retaliation claims, the strongest and central part of her case, despite her SH claims being dismissed. Still expected to have to testify after a messy deposition. Still had to account for Jed Wallace, a huge liability, and Melissa Nathan, also a liability. Had to face comparisons to people like Johnny Depp, the Alexander Brothers, and RFK Jr., TAG's/Wallace's other clients. Had to face testimony from Katie Case, whose deposition and evidence showed both Wallace and Nathan to have lied in their own testimony.

The complete inability to recognize the problems in Justin's own case, Wayfarer's very real risk of liability, and the publicity risk when Justin actually had to take the stand and justify his texts to Jen Abel about Blake or explain his working relationship with Melissa Nathan and Jed Wallace over the last two years, is like some kind of mental illness.

The both had real risk here. You just refuse to see it because you've been leaning on "she's a liar, he's an angel" for the last 18 months. One of the bit benefits to Justin of this settlement (and perhaps a reason to fork over some cash) is that the trial would have undermined both those assumptions in a big way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

I for one never read anything about her, and only found out about the trial from this forum. I just want her to go away so people can devote their valuable DCUM time to other topics.

And yet here you are boosting this thread to the top of Recent Topics, almost certainly ensuring more people will click on it and respond.

SMDH.

Oh please this thread is hundred of pages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

She brought a mostly fabricated story to the New York Times. That tends to generate quite a bit of publicity.

Yes but you didn't have to read it. You dont' have to read anything about any celeb. She's not the President or the CEO of a major corporation even. Just some actress. You could ignore every headline with her name and live a happy life.

You click because you want to. Don't lie to yourself. I think for a lot of people there is real pleasure in reading about the case just to hate the other side, the hate feels good.

If you are posting on this thread and can't admit this about yourself... come on.

Again, backwards world for the Blake bots. Sure, she went to the paper of record and created a huge controversy, but no one had to read it. Do you ever think about how utterly ridiculous everything your post is?

My spouse, a well read person who follows the news and reads headlines regularly, did not read it. Because he was actually disinterested. Just scrolled on by.

You read it because you were interested. No one made you.

Not OP but this is a stupid argument. I presume OP is a woman. When another woman says they were SH’s most women will be interested. The fact that your husband kept scrolling says more about him than OP. Sounds like a great guy who really cares about women’s issues. Thoughts and prayers on the marriage.

Lol you are not a serious person.

[Anonymous]

The Deadline coverage of the settlement leans towards Blake, claims to have some insider info, and says Baldoni "blinked."

This is notable because Deadline has leaned mostly towards Justin throughout this thing:

https://deadline.com/2026/05/blake-lively-justin-baldoni-settlement-it-ends-with-us-1236880265/

[Anonymous]

Another massive reason this is a loss for Blake that people are overlooking. Estimates suggest each side has spent 50 million or more on legal feels. To Steve Sarowitz that’s a rounding error. To Ry Reynolds that’s huge. Let’s do that math. On the high end Reynolds is estimated to have a net worth of 400 million. On the high end SS is estimated to have a net worth of 3.4 billion. That makes Steve 8.5 times richer than Reynolds. The estimated trial costs would amount to 12.5% of RR’s net worth and only 1% of Steve’s. People don’t realize how big a difference there is between millionaires and billionaires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly hope to never see or hear about BL again in my life

It seems like that is very likely to go your way. No new projects and her companies are in the crapper.

Thank god.

I don't get this because it's very easy to avoid hearing about Blake. I only followed this case because I found it interesting, but previously had not thought about Blake since her Gossip Girl days. My husband, who has no interest in the case, continues to not spend any time thinking about Blake (or Ryan). Neither of us has ever seen any of her movies, including this one.

When people say "ugh I wish this celebrity would just go away" what they are actually saying is "I'm perversely obsessed with this person and seek out news about them every chance I get, and then complain about what an attention whore they are." Literally no celeb gossip or info is required reading. You could have been living a Blake-free existence this whole time. You chose not to.

She brought a mostly fabricated story to the New York Times. That tends to generate quite a bit of publicity.

Yes but you didn't have to read it. You dont' have to read anything about any celeb. She's not the President or the CEO of a major corporation even. Just some actress. You could ignore every headline with her name and live a happy life.

You click because you want to. Don't lie to yourself. I think for a lot of people there is real pleasure in reading about the case just to hate the other side, the hate feels good.

If you are posting on this thread and can't admit this about yourself... come on.

Again, backwards world for the Blake bots. Sure, she went to the paper of record and created a huge controversy, but no one had to read it. Do you ever think about how utterly ridiculous everything your post is?

My spouse, a well read person who follows the news and reads headlines regularly, did not read it. Because he was actually disinterested. Just scrolled on by.

You read it because you were interested. No one made you.

Not OP but this is a stupid argument. I presume OP is a woman. When another woman says they were SH’s most women will be interested. The fact that your husband kept scrolling says more about him than OP. Sounds like a great guy who really cares about women’s issues. Thoughts and prayers on the marriage.

Lol you are not a serious person.

She has to be a troll or completely unhinged