Movie studios are not allowed to use misleading marketing in movie advertisements, Ruling by a federal judge in the United States. The reason was a lawsuit filed by fans of Ana de Armas against Universal Studios. The actress appeared in the movie’s trailers yesterday (2019), but her scenes were ultimately cut from the film. This ruling could leave the studios vulnerable to similar lawsuits.
US Federal Judge Stephen Wilson has ruled that movie studios can be sued for misleading marketing based on movie trailers.
Fans of Ana de Armas Conor Woulfe and Peter Michael Rosza sued in January claiming they rented the movie after seeing De Armas in the trailer, only to find out it was cut from the final movie. Universal attempted to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that video props are entitled to broad First Amendment protection. The studio’s lawyers argued that the trailer is an “expressive artwork” that tells a three-minute story on the subject of the film, and therefore should be considered “non-commercial” expression.
But Wilson rejected that argument and ruled that the trailer was a commercial term that fell under California’s false advertising law and unfair competition law.
Universal is true that trailers involve some creativity and editing appreciation, but that creativity doesn’t outweigh the commercial nature of the trailer. At its core, a trailer is an advertisement designed to sell a movie by providing consumers with a preview of the movie.
Attorneys for Universal argued in their briefing on the matter that movie trailers have long included clips that do not appear in the final film. They’ve made it to a Universal movie Jurassic Park (1993), and the trailer consisted entirely of images not appearing in the film.
Universal also argued that classifying the trailers as a “commercial statement” would open the door to a series of lawsuits from dissatisfied moviegoers, who could argue personally that the film failed to live up to the expectations raised by the trailer.
At the plaintiffs’ contemplation, the trailer would be stripped of its full First Amendment protections and subject to onerous litigation any time a viewer claims to be disappointed about whether and how much a person or scene they saw in the trailer was in the final film; The film befitting the kind of genre they claimed to expect; or what an infinite number of disappointments the viewer could claim.”
Wilson attempted to assuage this concern by saying that the law of false advertising only applies when a “substantial portion” of “reasonable consumers” can be misled.
“The court’s ruling is limited to representing whether it is an actress or a scene in the film, and nothing else.”
Ana de Armas lawsuit: Fans are suing Universal
Connor Wolfe, 38, of Maryland, and Peter Michael Rosa, 44, of San Diego, say they each paid $3.99 to see the movie. yesterday For rent on Amazon Prime. To their disappointment, however, Ana de Armas is not seen in any scene in the film. This is why they are hoping to get at least $5 million in compensation with their lawsuit on behalf of all consumers who have been victims of this. The following statement comes from the lawsuit.
Because consumers were promised a movie with Ana de Armas through the trailer for yesterdaybut having never received a film of any Ana de Armas appearance, these consumers were not provided with any value for their rental or purchase.”
In the romantic fantasy comedy yesterday Play Himesh Patel Singer-songwriter Jack Malek, who wakes up one day in an alternate reality where the Beatles don’t exist. When the world thinks he wrote the Beatles songs, he turns out to be the world’s most successful singer-songwriter. In a deleted scene, Malik is invited on the talk show of James CordenHere, he gets to know the character of Roxanne, played by Ana de Armas. Malek sings it from a George Harrison song Something. Watch the deleted scene here.
The character Ana de Armas will appear in yesterday Entering into a romantic relationship with Himesh Patel’s character. Author Richard Curtis said earlier However, in the early shows, audiences were not happy with Patel’s character’s deviance from his relationship with his true love, played by Lily James.
“That was a pretty painful cut, because she was so good at it. I mean really radiant. You know, it’s one of those things where some of our favorite scenes from the movie are, but we had to cut it for the whole.”
In the lawsuit, Ana de Armas was described as a “talented, successful and famous actress”. Her roles are also listed Blade Runner 2049And the Take out the knives And the No time to die Call. Universal Pictures has not yet commented on this matter.
Do you want to be up to date with the latest news throughout the week? Then follow our page or follow Entertainmenthoek FacebookAnd the InstagramAnd the Twitter And the pinterest. This way you can stay updated with the latest news about your favorite movies and series.
“Infuriatingly humble travel fanatic. Passionate social media practitioner. Amateur writer. Wannabe problem solver. General food specialist.”