False claims of "original" status don't support public interest in disseminating art for anti-SLAPP purposes

Coker v. Sassone, — P.3d —-, 2019 WL 117467, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 2, No. 73863 (Jan. 3, 2019)In the course of interpreting the Nevada anti-SLAPP law, the Nevada Supreme Court says some things about the relationship between counterfeits that might easily be taken out of context and applied to any copies; I hope future applications heed its careful language. Sassone is an artist and painter who has created numerous works of art, but never made original, signed lithographs. When he saw such advertised, he sued Coker, alleging that the copies being sold were counterfeit and that his signature was forged. Coker filed a special motion to dismiss under NRS 41.660, the state anti-SLAPP law, arguing that dissemination of artwork to the public is expressive conduct and is in the public interest. The district court denied Coker’s motion, finding that Coker failed to demonstrate that his conduct was “a good faith communication that was either truthful or made without knowledge…

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law posts –

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply