Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Bryan Freedman ain’t F’ing around. He had the website drop before Judge Liman meets them Monday. (Same info but the URL is amusing to me).

https://www.thelawsuitinfo.com/

[Anonymous]

The only thing I know for sure is there's no way Taylor would have Blake as her Super Bowl guest bestie this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bryan Freedman ain’t F’ing around. He had the website drop before Judge Liman meets them Monday. (Same info but the URL is amusing to me).

https://www.thelawsuitinfo.com/

There isn’t anything on the website that isn’t already publicly available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bryan Freedman ain’t F’ing around. He had the website drop before Judge Liman meets them Monday. (Same info but the URL is amusing to me).

https://www.thelawsuitinfo.com/

There isn’t anything on the website that isn’t already publicly available.

And I didn’t write otherwise. It’s so nice to agree isn’t it? His attorney was determined to get everything out and used phrasing suggesting he’d do it in a website and he delivered yet again.

For anyone else, anyone interested in a productive conversation, pages 60 and 61 of the timeline seem pretty damning to Lively to me.

[Anonymous]

So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

Yep. He’s had job loss, loss of representation and reputational damage already.

I think I’m so invested because I think, just me no doubt, that Baldoni’s sincerity really set something ugly off in the Reynolds household. They think he’s too priggish and too good to be true, but I think he had actual integrity and tries to live openly in terms of what he defines as his art and his profession and his personal life. More critically, he is sensitive and admits to flaws - RR and BL don’t. Their gross-out two crass asses in one nightmare marriage schtick is an obvious act to anyone with any maturity. So. Baldoni likes this book and starts the work of developing it a full 4 years before Blake I Am Too Good For Source Material gets wind of it. But since she’s got that specific - and innately corrosive and negative - personality to “edit” or reduce rather than generate ideas or material, she feels over time entitled to take the project she likes. It’s theft. She has maybe 10 functional brain cells but she’s grimy so she lied to get there.

She and her dork husband really thought they could destroy someone else’s life on all levels because they’re so great. Like damn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

But isn’t RR legally allowed to do that (free speech and all that)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

But isn’t RR legally allowed to do that (free speech and all that)?

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think you can make false accusations that cause someone to get fired, no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

Yep. He’s had job loss, loss of representation and reputational damage already.

I think I’m so invested because I think, just me no doubt, that Baldoni’s sincerity really set something ugly off in the Reynolds household. They think he’s too priggish and too good to be true, but I think he had actual integrity and tries to live openly in terms of what he defines as his art and his profession and his personal life. More critically, he is sensitive and admits to flaws - RR and BL don’t. Their gross-out two crass asses in one nightmare marriage schtick is an obvious act to anyone with any maturity. So. Baldoni likes this book and starts the work of developing it a full 4 years before Blake I Am Too Good For Source Material gets wind of it. But since she’s got that specific - and innately corrosive and negative - personality to “edit” or reduce rather than generate ideas or material, she feels over time entitled to take the project she likes. It’s theft. She has maybe 10 functional brain cells but she’s grimy so she lied to get there.

She and her dork husband really thought they could destroy someone else’s life on all levels because they’re so great. Like damn.

I guess insane amounts of money cannot make lies true and destroy someone. I find in fascinating when insanely rich and accomplished people let their worst traits (jealousy/self absorption/shame) cause them to self-destruct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

But isn’t RR legally allowed to do that (free speech and all that)?

WTAF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

But isn’t RR legally allowed to do that (free speech and all that)?

WTAF.

I know there’s a difference between when something crosses over into slander—I guess I just wasn’t sure where that line is. I guess it matters if he was saying it’s his opinion versus a fact?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

But isn’t RR legally allowed to do that (free speech and all that)?

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think you can make false accusations that cause someone to get fired, no.

I think you can if it's a matter of opinion and you genuinely believe it.

Baldoni could argue that his agent should have done some due diligence on the claim before dropping him. I would guess it would depend on what his contract with the agency says.

Also, while industry parlance is that the agent "fired" Baldoni as a client, technically Baldoni is the boss and the agency is the employee. So it's more like they quit. Which you are allowed to do.

Baldoni still might have a defamation claim here, as well as a tortious interference claim, but I think they'll have to prove Reynold's didn't believe the claims, and that might be hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bryan Freedman ain’t F’ing around. He had the website drop before Judge Liman meets them Monday. (Same info but the URL is amusing to me).

https://www.thelawsuitinfo.com/

Oh dang!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So RR called JB’s agent and told him JB was a sexual predator and then he was dropped by his agency. It really seems to be that JB suffered the damages here. Nothing he did was even remotely the behavior of a sexual predator.

But isn’t RR legally allowed to do that (free speech and all that)?

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think you can make false accusations that cause someone to get fired, no.

I think you can if it's a matter of opinion and you genuinely believe it.

Baldoni could argue that his agent should have done some due diligence on the claim before dropping him. I would guess it would depend on what his contract with the agency says.

Also, while industry parlance is that the agent "fired" Baldoni as a client, technically Baldoni is the boss and the agency is the employee. So it's more like they quit. Which you are allowed to do.

Baldoni still might have a defamation claim here, as well as a tortious interference claim, but I think they'll have to prove Reynold's didn't believe the claims, and that might be hard.

No you don’t have to prove Reynolds didn’t believe it. You have show Reynolds didn’t meet the standards to ensure statement was true.

[Anonymous]

I was following this drama since this summer - just how weird it was that the entire case was so public in their shunning of Baldoni. Now, even if you take Lively’s complaint as 100% correct, it still doesn’t make any sense what they all did. Maybe if you had an abusive director who was screaming at them, throwing things, etc. But there is nothing like that. Are we really to believe that Baldoni, Heath, the billionaire guy all just walked around the set ogling all the ladies and making it a terrible and tense work environment? Why did the guy who played Atlas tag the article and say - for gods sake read this - or whatever? I’m super confused by the cast and frankly this looks bad for them too. Seeing the clear creative takeover of the movie and them lining up solidly behind her - who wants to hire Jenny Slate or the other cast members if you can’t trust them either?