EricaSJ
Judge
^ In the L.A. Times article, it says:
So she might not be the one that made the decision, but she "helped".
'CSI' Writer Accused of Televised Revenge Plot
- Thread starter Daquien
- Start date
Kimbo08
CSI Level One
Goldfinger made a big, stupid mistake. What she did was purposeful. As a writer, she knows the extent of Slander/Libel (both technically since it was written in script form and then released on the internet) and quite frankly, she should have to pay the price. She knew what she was doing. She was trying to be sneaky and it came back and bite her in the ass. CBS will probably settle, but I hope this is a lesson to all PTB out there. What she did was wrong and she should face the consequences.
I agree that the couple is probably trying to cash out, but regardless of their motive, what she did was stupid, irresponsible, and may just cost the company 6 Million, not to mention her credibility is slightly compromised IMO.
I agree that the couple is probably trying to cash out, but regardless of their motive, what she did was stupid, irresponsible, and may just cost the company 6 Million, not to mention her credibility is slightly compromised IMO.
myfuturecsi
Corpse
Regardless of whether or not the couple wins, they had a right to sue. I was recently ina situation where my real name was posted along with a nasty label. I spoke to a friend who is a very, very high profile journalist and political strategist here in Canada and he told me I could sue. I'm considering it as I write this.
Even the threat of a lawsuit is enough to scare people. I hope SG learns her lesson. As ticked off as she was, she should have changed the names long before the script hit the website.
I still hope she doesn't get fired over it though, she has written some good episodes. She made a dumb mistake. But everyone does.
Even the threat of a lawsuit is enough to scare people. I hope SG learns her lesson. As ticked off as she was, she should have changed the names long before the script hit the website.
I still hope she doesn't get fired over it though, she has written some good episodes. She made a dumb mistake. But everyone does.
"Well, I was going to buy a house from you, until I saw that you had the same names as the victims-of-the-week from a recent CSI episode. Now I must decline."
Yeah, that could totally happen.
Anyway, it was silly of Goldfinger to use the same names. She should've changed the last names very early on in the script process, but the notion that this somehow harmed their business is just as silly.
Yeah, that could totally happen.
Anyway, it was silly of Goldfinger to use the same names. She should've changed the last names very early on in the script process, but the notion that this somehow harmed their business is just as silly.
myfuturecsi
Corpse
I don't think it's as simple as that, though. It is a rather violating feeing to see your name on the internet used in a negative way. Trust me. I know the feeling.
SG used their names in a negative way. Having your name associated with anything negative can be detrimental both financially and personally.
Whether or not she intended to hurt them is irrelevant. Your name is associated with your identity and your reptation as a person. People have a right to walk around knowing they are seen in a primarily good light, no one has a right to take that from you. It's one thing if you went out and damaged your own repuation, but when someone does that for you, it can quite devastating.
Kimbo08
CSI Level One
It doesn't matter if business went downhill for them or not. What she did was wrong. 6 Million sounds high to me, but the fact of the matter is that people have sued for less. I know that if I had a business, denied someone something, and then found out that this person created a complete warped version of me, using my first AND last name, I would be pissed!
It wasn't like the couple was in a small town, the lived in LA. The Real Estate is a little different there on account of it being a bigger area. So really, it may just be realistic enough for them to want that much.
As far as someone reccognizing a characcter, it makes sense. If I saw a character from an episode of CSI, I would say, "Oh were you in CSI?". Now, would I hold them to that character? No, but not everyone is as level headed. I think the case is totally justified IMHO.
It wasn't like the couple was in a small town, the lived in LA. The Real Estate is a little different there on account of it being a bigger area. So really, it may just be realistic enough for them to want that much.
As far as someone reccognizing a characcter, it makes sense. If I saw a character from an episode of CSI, I would say, "Oh were you in CSI?". Now, would I hold them to that character? No, but not everyone is as level headed. I think the case is totally justified IMHO.
byline
CSI Level One
Actually, technically, it would be strictly libel. Libel is written, slander is spoken, and since both forms are written, it would be considered libel.
AP defines libel as, simply, "injury to reputation." So all they have to do is prove that the leak of the early draft of the script somehow damaged their reputation (and frankly, it's hard to see how it could not) to win this case.
It used to be that libel cases hinged on malicious intent. In other words, if the complainant could prove that the writer deliberately intended to malign their character (intent being very hard to prove), then they might win their lawsuit. But no more. As AP says: "Words, pictures or cartoons that expose a person to public hatred, shame, disgrace or ridicule, or induce an ill opinion of a person are libelous."
Of course, this applies to newspaper reports of factual proceedings. It gets a little muddier with an obviously fictional story based on real people, and I think this is where malicious intent might apply. After all, fair comment and criticism are protected defenses, as long as they are not done maliciously. So it will be interesting to see where this case goes.
I agree with others that it would've been a whole lot smarter for Goldfinger to change the names. Everybody and their brother (and sister) is doing "ripped from the headlines" episodes these days, and then including the nudge/wink disclaimer of it not being based on a real person . . . when, of course, we all know it is. But usually the names are different enough that, even when we all know who the character is, the powers that be have the fallback position of saying the names are different, so clearly the characters are different from the people they're based on.
Adzix
CSI Level Three
one thing is for sure, if they actually were so worried about their reputation they would have never filed a lawsuit b/c this is when their rep is gonna go down the drain, for real this time. it's more than obvious that they want to earn money on this, since the economy is doing crappily.
but it doesn't change the fact that SG did something pretty stupid. on the other hand, those two people seem to be awful to be around. now if they lose the suit, nobody is gonna want to have anything to do with them so it's quite a gamble.
but it doesn't change the fact that SG did something pretty stupid. on the other hand, those two people seem to be awful to be around. now if they lose the suit, nobody is gonna want to have anything to do with them so it's quite a gamble.
myfuturecsi
Corpse
Are they awful because they filed a lawsuit against SG? We really don't know much about them other than they are a filing a lawsuit against a CSI writer? At least from what I've read?
Real Estate deals fall apart for many reasons, sometimes the buyer pulls out, sometimes the real estate agent makes mistakes.
It doesn't matter what transpired, it still did not give SG the right to tarnish their name in any way.
From the way I see it, SG did mean malicious intent because there is a history of a bad deal and from their she went on to write a story using their names. She may not have delibertely intended to cause harm, but they obviously feel she did in some form or another.
Now if Sara hadn't met them, well it could be a coincidence, but because there's a history there, SG's actions are very questionable.
It matters quite a bit, because that's what the lawsuit is claiming. They're claiming that this episode caused harm to their business. That claim is at the crux of the lawsuit and is the primary basis for the six million dollar figure they're asking for.
Last edited:
Adzix
CSI Level Three
well, since SG was so bitter after making business with them and now they are claiming such a long shot (that their business/good name suffered b/c of one episode with characters bearing some semblance to them) only to squeeze money from CBS, i don't think many people will want to conduct any more business with them. i mean, nobody remembers names of victims on those shows so more harm has been done by suing CBS.
SG behaved irresponsible, unprofessional, and stupid but it doesn't really matter if they are right or not in making that suit. what matters to their reputation is that people are gonna think: what in the world have they done to make somebody like SG so freaking pissed to put them on a show as such monsters? i better not buy a house from those dudes.
Speedystokesgirl
Judge
I agree with this! This is exactly what I would think. SG may have been wrong to use the names, but we don't know the WHOLE story. If SG was so pissed to do this then these agents are probably at fault.
And seriously, if people even recognized the names, would they have even associated these characters with those agents? Probably not, because chances are if people did recognized the names they would've thought it was coincidental and they wouldn't have know that SG had dealings with them.
I truly believe they will not win this case because they won't be able to prove it. The housing market sucks all over the country and they're just trying to make some money, plain and simple. IMHO
SG did wrong, but the agents did too and only the first names appear on the episode, NOT the last names so they really don't have much of a case. IMO
Wow does this mean I have a case when someone writes and ep with my name (be it first middle or last) in it? Seriously up until they went public I didn't even know the story was based on what they are claiming, as I am sure many didn't. I mean there are alot of people out there that share a name be it with real people or fictional characters. They say they are worried about their reputation, or was their business not getting customers and this was a way to bring them in? Hmm so many questions, and yet what can you do.
Seriously up until they went public I didn't even know the story was based on what they are claiming, as I am sure many didn't. I mean there are alot of people out there that share a name be it with real people or fictional characters. They say they are worried about their reputation, or was their business not getting customers and this was a way to bring them in? Hmm so many questions, and yet what can you do. 
Desertwind
Head of the Day Shift
Exactly.. and CBS is so covered by high paid attorneys, their not going to let something like this happen, they got such fine tuned contracts and are prepared for anything that comes along. These people need to get a life~
Last edited:
myfuturecsi
Corpse
It doesn't matter if we remember them, even if the episode had potential damage to their reputation, they have a right to sue.
Even if Goldfinger wins this case, her reputation could be tarnished.