Reply to Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]What is interesting is that there are three documents on the docket that distributors of Blakes drink products wrote to the company and expressed their concern and possibly halting distributing the products. One was Kroger’s and I think another was maybe a cruise line and I forget the third.

Basically, they said they were very nervous about the backlash against Blake, and they were wary to keep purchasing the product. Now you could argue that this was because of the retaliation campaign, but some of the things that they cited ate hard to blame on Wayfarer, for example one of them cited that they did not like that she was promoting her booze line during the domestic violence themed movie. That was not Wayfarer-  that was all Blake and she could’ve apologized that and didn’t.

They also didn’t like the baby bump interview, which again the journalist will testify that that was not Wayfarer.  Either way it’s Blake’s words and what would’ve been responsible for her to do is apologize and nip that in the bud rather than letting it fester.

Instead, she took no accountability, and in December the New York Times article was published. Which may have been the end of it, except no one was counting on WF releasing all of that information that turned the public - not to rehash this old thread, but the dance video, text messages, the PGA letter showing that she was in charge of much of the decisions, and things like people disagreeing the birth video was offensive or inappropriate.

If there was a smear campaign and I still really marvel that these people had the ability to tank what she is saying was $150 million brand in about a week time, she did not do the cleanup necessary that her distributors were asking her to do. [/quote]

If they have evidence showing Wafarer, via TAG and Wallace, promoted and encouraged the stories about the baby bump interview or Blake placing her products at the premiere party, then it's not "all Blake." The baby bump interview was old and went insanely viral right around the time of the premiere. Likewise, the stories about Blake promoting products at the premiere saw huge uptake in the days around the premiere, after Wayfarer hired TAG/Wallace. Blake will argue at trial that the impact on her brands was not "all Blake" but pushed and promoted by the people Wayfarer hired to "bury" her. This is the whole case.

Yes, the defense is "it was organic." But this is complicated by text and email evidence showing TAG and Wallace assuring Wayfarer that it would all "look organic."

A lot of this will come down to what experts are permitted to testify and about what, what expert reports are admitted into evidence. Blake's experts argue in favor of her narrative, Wayfarer's experts argue the other side. It is not that uncommon in a case like this, that concerns allegations of lost profits, for it to become a battle of the experts. That can make it a wildcard because you truly do not know what a jury of laypeople will do with that. We also don't know what the judge will decide regarding the experts -- I believe next week there is a hearing where the experts will testify and be subject to direct and cross examination, a sort of mini trial before the trial that will enable Liman to decide what is admissible or not. His decision is going to dictate the arguments each side can make in court to a great degree. We'll just have to wait and see.[/quote]

This is really a reach. If someone does a really crappy interview and looks bad and it goes viral, they can’t just blame the internet. it’s Blake’s words. Again I will point out the difference here between what happened with Taylor Swift. People were boosting false content about her, twisting things like the jewelry and other things that she was putting out around her album were Nazi symbols and things. That was just patently false.

But circulating various interviews of you sucking is not the same thing. And I’ll point out It was not just the baby bump video. It was videos of her promoting the movie which correct me if I’m wrong, but as the star of the movie she would want those circulating. there are multiple videos of her promoting her hairline, promoting her alcohol line, and being really sarcastic when people are asking her about domestic violence. None of that is Wayfares fault, all of that significantly harmed her reputation.

I also have not seen one shred of proof that tag or Jed actually did anything. $90,000 is not a lot for three months of activity and we saw some of the reports that he did. He was monitoring things just like he said.  there’s no evidence of a bunch of bots boosting content two years later -  there’s no evidence of content creators being contacted by the team. Despite over 100 subpoenas. [/quote]

What reports? Either Baldoni or Heath was asked in a depo and they had no reports. It's clear from the real-time texts that TAG was in charge of monitoring. TAG employees or interns would identify and send links to Katie Case who would flag to Jed for "action." [/quote]

OK, but I read reports in the docket. I read a lengthy letter from Jed Wallace to the team saying what he was finding when he was monitoring. And saying that they shouldn’t do anything because “everything is traceable.” he actually was finding evidence of bots from Lively’s team.

Do you just go off vibes on Reddit or if you actually been through the official documents in the docket?[/quote]

If there are actual Jed Wallace "monitoring" reports on the docket why haven't they been unsealed? Hard to see what the privacy concern or trade secret would be of reports just monitoring how the movie or Wayfarer or Baldoni were being covered in the press or discussed online. And I don't recall any discussion of Wallace claiming privacy or trade secrets to keep these "reports" sealed, like we've seen with his client lists.

I have not gone through every docket entry on this case but it seems odd we have yet to see a single one of these so called monitoring reports publicly. If they produced them, that would be a pretty convincing defense. So..... Where are they? The trial is in like two weeks.[/quote].

I’ve read a letter from Jed detailing activity around Justin and wayfarer in fall of 2024. I assume that was an example of a report. I assume that was official business he was being paid for and not something he did for kicks.[/quote]

That's a short email, not a report. A report would have actual data, charts, tracking figures, etc. Also that's ONE email. They paid this guy tens of thousands of dollars. Where is the work product? This is a major issue for their defense, especially because if there is no written evidence of substantial work product, they need Wallace to testify to what he did and that guy is not going to play well in front of a jury. They have a similar problem with Nathan, especially because both Nathan and Wallace need to testify to rebut Katie Case (where they will be criss examined with the evidence they lied under oath in their depositions, as shown by Case's depo and emails).[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics