First Page
593
Abstract
California’s anti-SLAPP statute is designed to encourage free speech and to prevent litigation that chills participation in public discourse, including the creation and promotion of media. It is a standard industry practice for filmmakers to use trailers to promote their films before the final cut and to gauge the success of certain cinematic elements—such as characters, plot points, and overall tone—so the necessary adjustments can be made before the film is released to audiences. Subjecting studios and filmmakers to litigation for adjusting these relatively minor elements that were present in the trailers will chill this beneficial and standard industry practice. This Note contends that there is a doctrinal gap under California’s anti-SLAPP step two, where even minor elements can be found to mislead a reasonable consumer. This Note will analyze California’s anti-SLAPP statute, the Woulfe v. Universal City Studios LLC decision, First Amendment scholarship, and the industry customs surrounding trailers in determining whether legislative change is needed. It proposes a narrow statutory amendment creating a rebuttable presumption of nondeception at anti-SLAPP step two when studios show (1) objective indicia of good-faith iteration and (2) material trailer-to-film consistency, preserving suits against genuinely misleading campaigns while protecting iterative marketing.
Recommended Citation
Zach Cogan,
Here, There, and Absent from the Film: Carving Out a Protection for Trailers in California’s Anti-SLAPP Statute,
28 Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law
593
(2026)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/vol28/iss3/3