The ‘Baby Reindeer’ case against Netflix could hinge on one line: ‘This is a true story’

As a seasoned attorney with decades of experience under my belt, I must say that this case between Netflix and Martha Harvey is quite intriguing. From my perspective, it seems like a classic example of a legal gray area, where the line between fiction and reality has become blurred.

As a film enthusiast, I found myself captivated from the get-go by the pilot episode of “Baby Reindeer” on Netflix. It’s a miniseries that doesn’t shy away from reality, and it made one thing crystal clear: This tale is based on real-life events.

The authenticity of Richard Gadd’s portrayal in “Baby Reindeer,” his account of a life-changing encounter with a serial stalker, is being scrutinized. This issue lies at the center of a significant legal battle, with potential implications for how Hollywood approaches the adaptation of real events in scripted productions in the future.

In June, the woman believed to have served as inspiration for the stalking character in “Baby Reindeer” filed a lawsuit against Netflix, claiming both negligence and defamation.

Fiona Harvey alleged that the streaming company based in Los Gatos, California, worth $170 million, spread falsehoods and tried to ruin her life maliciously for financial gain and viewership, even though they marketed the show as a real-life account.

Jason Shepard, interim dean at Cal State Fullerton’s College of Communications, commented that this series was exceptional as it illustrates the intricate boundary between factual narratives and dramatic documentaries, which can present distinct legal challenges.

For a while now, the true-story genre has consistently provided a steady stream of income and recognition for Hollywood studios. This is evident in various projects that have ranged from high-grossing biographical movies like “Bohemian Rhapsody” and “Bob Marley: One Love,” to critically acclaimed TV series such as “American Crime Story” and “Inventing Anna,” all of which have achieved significant success.

However, depicting actual individuals and occurrences can carry significant dangers, and it’s important to note that Netflix isn’t unfamiliar with defamation lawsuits in such cases.

In June, the streaming platform resolved a lawsuit brought by ex-New York City prosecutor Linda Fairstein, who claimed that her portrayal in Ava DuVernay’s Emmy-winning miniseries “When They See Us,” which focuses on the 1989 Central Park jogger case, was unjust.

In accordance with the agreement, I’ve been part of a decision that Netflix will shift a disclaimer, reminiscent of the one on “Baby Reindeer”, from the end credits to the start of the show instead. Fairstein didn’t receive any financial compensation from this arrangement, and DuVernay maintained their stance on the portrayal.

John L. Krieger, an intellectual property attorney at Las Vegas law firm Dickinson Wright, expressed that the “Baby Reindeer” case may prompt film producers and studios to exercise extra caution to ensure there are no accusations of complete accuracy in their works.

Based on its original one-man performance, “Baby Reindeer” follows Steve Gadd’s character, a comedian grappling with his career, whose life takes a turn for the unexpected when Martha Scott (Jessica Gunning) shows an alarming interest in him, leading to unsettling consequences.

Last month, the captivating drama series earned six Emmys, among them awards for Best Limited Series, Lead Actor (Gadd), and Supporting Actress (Gunning). Moreover, it achieved significant commercial success, garnering over 88 million views within its first three months on Netflix, as reported by the streaming service.

The alleged “real Martha,” however, was not a fan.

In simpler terms, Harvey contests the way Netflix portrays Martha as a woman with two stalking convictions, who assaults the character Donny Dunn (played by Gadd) and serves five years in prison due to these offenses.

In the lawsuit, it is stated that the defendants continued to tell untruths as they found it more appealing than reality, and this fabricated narrative proved profitable for them.

In the statement, Netflix declared their intention to strongly contest this issue and uphold Richard Gadd’s freedom to share his narrative.

In July, the broadcaster submitted a request to throw out Harvey’s claim, arguing that the content created by Gadd (the streamer) is a type of shielded expression and that no rational viewer would interpret “Baby Reindeer” as presenting factual statements about Harvey, along with other considerations.

In the creative liberty taken when crafting this series, every seemingly defamatory remark is set within a broader cinematic framework, serving to remind viewers that it’s not an exact depiction of real-world history.” (As a film enthusiast)

As a dedicated film enthusiast, I’m excited to share that the court has granted Netflix’s pleas to dismiss Harvey’s allegations of negligence and his request for punitive damages. However, they have chosen to uphold the defamation claim, finding it to be both legally sound and substantiated by evidence.

Netflix is challenging the court’s decision and argues that Harvey’s entire lawsuit should be dismissed.

Richard Roth, who’s working for Harvey, expressed great excitement over the court’s verdict,” was a possible way to rephrase the original sentence.

“It’s our conviction that Netflix is overstepping boundaries by claiming this story is true when it isn’t. … They plan to challenge the claim, but I must admit, successfully contesting it seems challenging.

Krieger noted that the judge presiding over the case appeared unusually convinced by Netflix’s decision to employ the term “This is a true story,” rather than the frequently used alternative, “based on a true story.” This choice stands out as it provides more scope for artistic liberty compared to the latter option.

In the realm of docudramas, the “based on a true story” label is frequently used as a shield against defamation lawsuits, according to Shepard.

He noted that the disclaimer holds significant legal weight, and it serves as a reminder to viewers not to accept everything as factual truth.

Nicole Page, an entertainment lawyer at the New York law firm RPJ, found it surprising that there wasn’t more legal protection surrounding the use of ‘true-story’ language.

In my perspective, I’m left scratching my head over this film. It’s unclear to me who took the reins on such a bold creative choice, yet it feels undeniably daring and intriguing.

As a dedicated film enthusiast, I always appreciate it when a series like “Baby Reindeer” includes a disclaimer at the end of each episode. It’s important to clarify that although this show is inspired by real-life events, various aspects such as characters, names, instances, locations, and dialogue have been artfully crafted for dramatic impact, ensuring a more engaging storyline.

To see the credits before Netflix autoplay the next episode, viewers must first click on the “view credits” button.

As a keen observer of ‘Reindeer’, I can’t help but feel that Martha’s actions in the series seem remarkably authentic. Shepard, in his own words, suggests that it would be plausible to believe that the real Martha carried out those activities. However, it’s crucial to note that making false accusations about someone’s criminal behavior is a clear case of defamation.

As a devoted cinephile, I’m speculating that if the court denies Netflix’s appeal, they might opt for a settlement with Harvey. This could mean paying him a reduced amount and perhaps modifying the “true-story” preamble to steer clear of a court trial.

If this matter progresses, my take is that Netflix’s argument hinges on whether the portrayal in their series can be considered “substantially factual.” As a movie critic, I find myself intrigued by the question of how closely reality aligns with the narrative presented.

In the creation of “Baby Reindeer,” Gadd claims he went to great lengths to conceal the true identity of his actual stalker. However, according to Harvey’s lawsuit, fans attributed the story to her after finding that one of her old tweets seemed to mirror a significant line from the series.

The grievance references a 2014 tweet from user @FionaHarvey2014, which tagged @MrRichardGadd and said, “I really need to hang my curtains.” The term “hanging curtains” is mentioned frequently in conversations between Donny and Martha throughout the series.

Since then, Harvey has openly discussed her claimed past interactions with Gadd and asserts in her legal action that Netflix failed to verify the truth behind the Scottish actor’s account.

Krieger proposed that the real-life aspect could have lured online detectives into searching for the authentic Martha.

Krieger found it remarkable how swiftly the internet managed to find [Harvey]. He further warned screenwriters to exercise caution when incorporating specific phrases or references from social media, as these could potentially lead back to their posts.

“Certainly those are things that may come into play.”

Read More

• TOMI PREDICTION. TOMI cryptocurrency
• LOGX PREDICTION. LOGX cryptocurrency
• JPY KRW PREDICTION
• CET PREDICTION. CET cryptocurrency
• OCT PREDICTION. OCT cryptocurrency
• NTRN PREDICTION. NTRN cryptocurrency
• Rapper YG arrested on suspicion of DUI, hit a Burbank curb with his red Lambo, police say
• The manic REAL meaning of the Joker’s ‘Folie a Deux’ title revealed
• BNB PREDICTION. BNB cryptocurrency
• XNO PREDICTION. XNO cryptocurrency

2024-10-14 13:34