HOLDINGS: [1]-Plaintiff’s complaint against defendant, a social networking service, for its refusal to disable a page, which plaintiff claimed incited violence and generated death threats against him, involved an issue of public interest under the anti-SLAPP statute, Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16; [2]-Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the complaint was both legally sufficient and supported by a sufficient prima facie showing of facts to sustain a favorable judgment; [3]-The evidence demonstrated that defendant had not used plaintiff’s identity, and any right of publicity claims failed for this reason alone; [4]-Plaintiff did not even allege – let alone show – that any advertiser used his name or likeness; at most, plaintiff showed that defendant allowed unrelated third-party advertisements to run adjacent to pages containing users’ comments about plaintiff and his business practices.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. understands CACI concealment
Outcome
Affirmed in part and reversed in part; remanded with instructions.