Anonymous wrote:https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.347.0.pdf

This is a fun little email exchange that cuts off right where Melissa Nathan is about to talk about other stuff she and Jed worked on! Could potentially be relevant if they mention wanting similar work done for you know who.

Some Lively supporters had speculated that Wallace is very underground and doesn't put things in writing or even gets paid in bitcoin or untraceable methods, but here he is using email and reference is made to a subcontract and a w9.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really find it funny tbh that Michael Gottlieb at Willkie can represent DRAKE in one of the most notorious rap battle feuds ever, where Drake was lightly accused of being a pedophile, and yet in that case the relationship between the attorneys is nowhere near as contentious as here in this case involving a kind of mid romance/DV movie.

I’m not sure Lively should be moving to transfer this beef to SDNY, I’m not sure Liman would grant this.

This whole litigation is just so wild. I have never seen anything like this before. If Freedman is actually dirty and Gottlieb can prove it, I will be elated. But I do think the chances of this being granted are low.

Dp how do you know the relationship between the attorneys for Drake and UMG is not contentious? Who are they? Are you working on one of their cases as well?

Hear me out. I know this will sound crazy to you, but I used The Google to search on the Drake case, which was last in the headlines back in April, and none of the lawyers had accused the other of extortion or was directly subpoenaing communications of the law firms, afaict.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.347.0.pdf

This is a fun little email exchange that cuts off right where Melissa Nathan is about to talk about other stuff she and Jed worked on! Could potentially be relevant if they mention wanting similar work done for you know who.

Some Lively supporters had speculated that Wallace is very underground and doesn't put things in writing or even gets paid in bitcoin or untraceable methods, but here he is using email and reference is made to a subcontract and a w9.

Well if Wayfarer would just have produced some docs like this (which confirms that Wayfarer purchased the second of the two options for $30,000 PM (per month) for three months), things might have been easier. But somehow old Jed was just monitoring communications I guess for a whopping $30K/month, even though he seems to have a whole team and he said “this is our wheelhouse and have it prioritized across all platform specialists working for me.”

Also, Jed does communicate via discord, which to me is suss.

Just repeating that according to this little old document, Wallace's firm was getting paid 90 thousand dollars for three months of just "monitoring." And I think Wallace's earlier affidavit claims that nobody worked on this project besides him, so this was $30K/month just for his own work from August through October? He must have a "very special set of skills."

Sorry -- here is Wallace's prior declaration: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.142.1_1.pdf

Here, in paragraph 16, Wallace says he was the only one on at Street Relations working on this project for Baldoni, so that's $30K/month for Wallace's "monitoring" lol okay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.347.0.pdf

This is a fun little email exchange that cuts off right where Melissa Nathan is about to talk about other stuff she and Jed worked on! Could potentially be relevant if they mention wanting similar work done for you know who.

Some Lively supporters had speculated that Wallace is very underground and doesn't put things in writing or even gets paid in bitcoin or untraceable methods, but here he is using email and reference is made to a subcontract and a w9.

Well if Wayfarer would just have produced some docs like this (which confirms that Wayfarer purchased the second of the two options for $30,000 PM (per month) for three months), things might have been easier. But somehow old Jed was just monitoring communications I guess for a whopping $30K/month, even though he seems to have a whole team and he said “this is our wheelhouse and have it prioritized across all platform specialists working for me.”

Also, Jed does communicate via discord, which to me is suss.

Just repeating that according to this little old document, Wallace's firm was getting paid 90 thousand dollars for three months of just "monitoring." And I think Wallace's earlier affidavit claims that nobody worked on this project besides him, so this was $30K/month just for his own work from August through October? He must have a "very special set of skills."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.347.0.pdf

This is a fun little email exchange that cuts off right where Melissa Nathan is about to talk about other stuff she and Jed worked on! Could potentially be relevant if they mention wanting similar work done for you know who.

Some Lively supporters had speculated that Wallace is very underground and doesn't put things in writing or even gets paid in bitcoin or untraceable methods, but here he is using email and reference is made to a subcontract and a w9.

Well if Wayfarer would just have produced some docs like this (which confirms that Wayfarer purchased the second of the two options for $30,000 PM (per month) for three months), things might have been easier. But somehow old Jed was just monitoring communications I guess for a whopping $30K/month, even though he seems to have a whole team and he said “this is our wheelhouse and have it prioritized across all platform specialists working for me.”

Also, Jed does communicate via discord, which to me is suss.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I’m sure that the reason some Baldoni supporters are shutting their feeds off for a while is all because of Nick Shapiro and has nothing to do with the fact (as they have been saying on Reddit) that they don’t like to hear about all of the losing Freedman is doing. 💯

Honestly just worried about the mental health of the Lively supporter who spams this post 24/7, often with strange conspiracy theories. But hey, if you all think that is normal and should be encouraged, continue to have no real life, Lively spammer.

I mean on the last page alone, the same person posted about Shapiro 4x; twice using the exact same sentence. I don't know why you are under the impression that only Blake posters are "flooding the zone." It's hard to know what else posting the exact same post repeatedly could be characterized as?

I’m not that poster but pretty sure her point, which remains unrebutted, is that Lively supporters want to ignore Shapiro’s presence on her team and the implications of his role. In any case, she/he posted about this for maybe half an hour. If it goes on for six months, day and night, let me know.

Wait, did Lively hire a crisis PR firm to retaliate against Baldoni, even though she signed a contract agreeing not to retaliate against him? If so, that would seem really shady.

No?

I don’t know much about PR, but I thought Baldoni supporters have been mocking Lively for 800 pages now for not being as good at PR as Freedman is. I wonder what you think she should do in this situation, besides the first thing you guys always suggest which is settle the lawsuit? Seems like she needed more PR help. Is Shapiro more shady than the socials plan we saw from Nathan which had its own section dedicated to targeting feminist messages from Taylor Swift fans? I don’t know PR, so you’d have to get me up to speed on these issues.

I’ve been on here a lot. I’ve never seen that. It’s curious how every fact is twisted to the extreme.

Are you serious? You have not seen Baldoni supporters saying that Freedman is much better at the PR angle than Gottlieb? Perhaps we have been in different threads.

That’s not what you said.

You said this

I don’t know much about PR, but I thought Baldoni supporters have been mocking Lively for 800 pages now for not being as good at PR as Freedman is

I have not seen 800 pages of Baldoni supporters mocking anyone over PR.

Have you?

I did not mean that this thread was composed of literally 800 pages of Baldoni supporters mocking Lively’s PR. I meant I have seen such mockery consistently across these last 800 pages.

But “I have not seen” 800 pages of mockery is not what you said first, either. What you said was:

“I’ve been on here a lot. I’ve never seen that. It’s curious how every fact is twisted to the extreme.”

“I’ve never seen that” doesn’t make sense as a response to “this thread is 800 pages of Baldoni supporters mocking Lively’s PR.” That sounds like you were saying you hadn’t ever seen anyone mock Lively for a bad PR response. Which clearly has happened a lot in this thread. Which is all I was trying to say in support of my statement that maybe Lively hired Shapiro to provide her with the better PR response everyone was saying she needed, sort of like Ellyn Garofalo is currently apparently taking point for Freedman in the CD. Cal. subpoena response where the coordinated legal filings and work with opposing counsel might be outside of his wheelhouse and capacities right now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I’m sure that the reason some Baldoni supporters are shutting their feeds off for a while is all because of Nick Shapiro and has nothing to do with the fact (as they have been saying on Reddit) that they don’t like to hear about all of the losing Freedman is doing. 💯

Honestly just worried about the mental health of the Lively supporter who spams this post 24/7, often with strange conspiracy theories. But hey, if you all think that is normal and should be encouraged, continue to have no real life, Lively spammer.

I mean on the last page alone, the same person posted about Shapiro 4x; twice using the exact same sentence. I don't know why you are under the impression that only Blake posters are "flooding the zone." It's hard to know what else posting the exact same post repeatedly could be characterized as?

I’m not that poster but pretty sure her point, which remains unrebutted, is that Lively supporters want to ignore Shapiro’s presence on her team and the implications of his role. In any case, she/he posted about this for maybe half an hour. If it goes on for six months, day and night, let me know.

Wait, did Lively hire a crisis PR firm to retaliate against Baldoni, even though she signed a contract agreeing not to retaliate against him? If so, that would seem really shady.

No?

I don’t know much about PR, but I thought Baldoni supporters have been mocking Lively for 800 pages now for not being as good at PR as Freedman is. I wonder what you think she should do in this situation, besides the first thing you guys always suggest which is settle the lawsuit? Seems like she needed more PR help. Is Shapiro more shady than the socials plan we saw from Nathan which had its own section dedicated to targeting feminist messages from Taylor Swift fans? I don’t know PR, so you’d have to get me up to speed on these issues.

I’ve been on here a lot. I’ve never seen that. It’s curious how every fact is twisted to the extreme.

Are you serious? You have not seen Baldoni supporters saying that Freedman is much better at the PR angle than Gottlieb? Perhaps we have been in different threads.

That’s not what you said.

You said this

I don’t know much about PR, but I thought Baldoni supporters have been mocking Lively for 800 pages now for not being as good at PR as Freedman is

I have not seen 800 pages of Baldoni supporters mocking anyone over PR.

Have you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really find it funny tbh that Michael Gottlieb at Willkie can represent DRAKE in one of the most notorious rap battle feuds ever, where Drake was lightly accused of being a pedophile, and yet in that case the relationship between the attorneys is nowhere near as contentious as here in this case involving a kind of mid romance/DV movie.

I’m not sure Lively should be moving to transfer this beef to SDNY, I’m not sure Liman would grant this.

This whole litigation is just so wild. I have never seen anything like this before. If Freedman is actually dirty and Gottlieb can prove it, I will be elated. But I do think the chances of this being granted are low.

Dp how do you know the relationship between the attorneys for Drake and UMG is not contentious? Who are they? Are you working on one of their cases as well?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liman denied Livelys motion to compel on the independent investigation Wayfafer arranged on the workplace harassment in response to the CRD, but also says Wayfarer can't rely on it.

ORDER denying 228 Motion to Compel. Wayfarer will be precluded from relying on the current investigation in support of the relevant affirmative defense. The motion to compel is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 228. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 6/16/2025) (ks) (Entered: 06/16/2025)

That seems like a fair decision. It was always kind of silly to expect that they would share this with Lively's team as it's pretty obviously privileged. But I can understand why Lively was concerned that this would essentially be some kind of sham investigation that Wayfarer would point to and say "look, we investigated and found now SH, case closed," especially since they didn't even initiate the investigation until long after the alleged incidents and they put Lively in an impossible bind with it -- she'd already sued, so participating in the investigation could compromise her lawsuit, but not participating in it means her input will not be involved at all.

So this seems like a good decision that side steps all those issues and basically renders the investigation moot except perhaps as an internal method for Wayfarer to identify problems in their HR/training/reporting processes (which for the record I do think exist).

PP. Wayfarers contention is that this was a response to the CRD and they were not on notice prior (IMO the 17 point list sufficed but what else can they say, I get it). I think the decision is fair but not really enforceable because Wayfarer will still presumably be able to read the notes and interviews and have that knowledge even if they can't use the actual report to defend themselves. However, it's still attorney client privilege so this was a good move for Wayfarer, and they might use this to develop their witness list.

More flood the zone, Nick Shapiro style

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liman denied Livelys motion to compel on the independent investigation Wayfafer arranged on the workplace harassment in response to the CRD, but also says Wayfarer can't rely on it.

ORDER denying 228 Motion to Compel. Wayfarer will be precluded from relying on the current investigation in support of the relevant affirmative defense. The motion to compel is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 228. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 6/16/2025) (ks) (Entered: 06/16/2025)

That seems like a fair decision. It was always kind of silly to expect that they would share this with Lively's team as it's pretty obviously privileged. But I can understand why Lively was concerned that this would essentially be some kind of sham investigation that Wayfarer would point to and say "look, we investigated and found now SH, case closed," especially since they didn't even initiate the investigation until long after the alleged incidents and they put Lively in an impossible bind with it -- she'd already sued, so participating in the investigation could compromise her lawsuit, but not participating in it means her input will not be involved at all.

So this seems like a good decision that side steps all those issues and basically renders the investigation moot except perhaps as an internal method for Wayfarer to identify problems in their HR/training/reporting processes (which for the record I do think exist).

PP. Wayfarers contention is that this was a response to the CRD and they were not on notice prior (IMO the 17 point list sufficed but what else can they say, I get it). I think the decision is fair but not really enforceable because Wayfarer will still presumably be able to read the notes and interviews and have that knowledge even if they can't use the actual report to defend themselves. However, it's still attorney client privilege so this was a good move for Wayfarer, and they might use this to develop their witness list.

Anonymous wrote:I really find it funny tbh that Michael Gottlieb at Willkie can represent DRAKE in one of the most notorious rap battle feuds ever, where Drake was lightly accused of being a pedophile, and yet in that case the relationship between the attorneys is nowhere near as contentious as here in this case involving a kind of mid romance/DV movie.

I’m not sure Lively should be moving to transfer this beef to SDNY, I’m not sure Liman would grant this.

This whole litigation is just so wild. I have never seen anything like this before. If Freedman is actually dirty and Gottlieb can prove it, I will be elated. But I do think the chances of this being granted are low.

Anonymous wrote:https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304/gov.uscourts.nysd.634304.347.0.pdf

This is a fun little email exchange that cuts off right where Melissa Nathan is about to talk about other stuff she and Jed worked on! Could potentially be relevant if they mention wanting similar work done for you know who.

Some Lively supporters had speculated that Wallace is very underground and doesn't put things in writing or even gets paid in bitcoin or untraceable methods, but here he is using email and reference is made to a subcontract and a w9.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I’m sure that the reason some Baldoni supporters are shutting their feeds off for a while is all because of Nick Shapiro and has nothing to do with the fact (as they have been saying on Reddit) that they don’t like to hear about all of the losing Freedman is doing. 💯

Honestly just worried about the mental health of the Lively supporter who spams this post 24/7, often with strange conspiracy theories. But hey, if you all think that is normal and should be encouraged, continue to have no real life, Lively spammer.

I mean on the last page alone, the same person posted about Shapiro 4x; twice using the exact same sentence. I don't know why you are under the impression that only Blake posters are "flooding the zone." It's hard to know what else posting the exact same post repeatedly could be characterized as?

I’m not that poster but pretty sure her point, which remains unrebutted, is that Lively supporters want to ignore Shapiro’s presence on her team and the implications of his role. In any case, she/he posted about this for maybe half an hour. If it goes on for six months, day and night, let me know.

Wait, did Lively hire a crisis PR firm to retaliate against Baldoni, even though she signed a contract agreeing not to retaliate against him? If so, that would seem really shady.

No?

I don’t know much about PR, but I thought Baldoni supporters have been mocking Lively for 800 pages now for not being as good at PR as Freedman is. I wonder what you think she should do in this situation, besides the first thing you guys always suggest which is settle the lawsuit? Seems like she needed more PR help. Is Shapiro more shady than the socials plan we saw from Nathan which had its own section dedicated to targeting feminist messages from Taylor Swift fans? I don’t know PR, so you’d have to get me up to speed on these issues.

I’ve been on here a lot. I’ve never seen that. It’s curious how every fact is twisted to the extreme.

Are you serious? You have not seen Baldoni supporters saying that Freedman is much better at the PR angle than Gottlieb? Perhaps we have been in different threads.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liman denied Livelys motion to compel on the independent investigation Wayfafer arranged on the workplace harassment in response to the CRD, but also says Wayfarer can't rely on it.

ORDER denying 228 Motion to Compel. Wayfarer will be precluded from relying on the current investigation in support of the relevant affirmative defense. The motion to compel is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close Dkt. No. 228. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 6/16/2025) (ks) (Entered: 06/16/2025)

That seems like a fair decision. It was always kind of silly to expect that they would share this with Lively's team as it's pretty obviously privileged. But I can understand why Lively was concerned that this would essentially be some kind of sham investigation that Wayfarer would point to and say "look, we investigated and found now SH, case closed," especially since they didn't even initiate the investigation until long after the alleged incidents and they put Lively in an impossible bind with it -- she'd already sued, so participating in the investigation could compromise her lawsuit, but not participating in it means her input will not be involved at all.

So this seems like a good decision that side steps all those issues and basically renders the investigation moot except perhaps as an internal method for Wayfarer to identify problems in their HR/training/reporting processes (which for the record I do think exist).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah I’m sure that the reason some Baldoni supporters are shutting their feeds off for a while is all because of Nick Shapiro and has nothing to do with the fact (as they have been saying on Reddit) that they don’t like to hear about all of the losing Freedman is doing. 💯

Honestly just worried about the mental health of the Lively supporter who spams this post 24/7, often with strange conspiracy theories. But hey, if you all think that is normal and should be encouraged, continue to have no real life, Lively spammer.

I mean on the last page alone, the same person posted about Shapiro 4x; twice using the exact same sentence. I don't know why you are under the impression that only Blake posters are "flooding the zone." It's hard to know what else posting the exact same post repeatedly could be characterized as?

I’m not that poster but pretty sure her point, which remains unrebutted, is that Lively supporters want to ignore Shapiro’s presence on her team and the implications of his role. In any case, she/he posted about this for maybe half an hour. If it goes on for six months, day and night, let me know.

Wait, did Lively hire a crisis PR firm to retaliate against Baldoni, even though she signed a contract agreeing not to retaliate against him? If so, that would seem really shady.

No?

I don’t know much about PR, but I thought Baldoni supporters have been mocking Lively for 800 pages now for not being as good at PR as Freedman is. I wonder what you think she should do in this situation, besides the first thing you guys always suggest which is settle the lawsuit? Seems like she needed more PR help. Is Shapiro more shady than the socials plan we saw from Nathan which had its own section dedicated to targeting feminist messages from Taylor Swift fans? I don’t know PR, so you’d have to get me up to speed on these issues.

I’ve been on here a lot. I’ve never seen that. It’s curious how every fact is twisted to the extreme.