Abstract litigation image

Media and First Amendment

Media and First Amendment

Media and First Amendment

Download PDFDownload PDF
Print
Share

Overview

Our Media and First Amendment team represents a wide range of news and content companies, including publishers, broadcasters, technology companies, authors, content creators, artists, entertainers, and game developers, as well as other individuals and businesses facing First Amendment, intellectual property, and other content-related issues.

With team members located in offices across the U.S. we are well-positioned to help our clients navigate through the many issues confronting both traditional and new media.

Our experience includes:

  • Access to public records, including administrative and court records
  • Advertising clearance and representation in false advertising litigation
  • Defense against claims involving right of publicity, defamation, invasion of privacy and other content-related claims
  • Anti-SLAPP motions
  • Digital and online media issues, such as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
  • Reporter’s privilege and related subpoena and search warrant issues
  • Representation concerning adjudication to publish legal advertising
  • Other matters involving First Amendment speech rights

We also work closely with our Data Privacy and Security team, Sports and Entertainment team, and Technology and Commercial Practice among other practice groups across our offices, to provide the full range of advice and representation required by both online and traditional media clients.

Brian A. Sher
+1 312 602 5070
Rachel E. Matteo-Boehm

Rachel E. Matteo-Boehm

Partner and Co-Global Practice Group Leader - Intellectual Property and Technology, San Francisco

+1 415 268 1996
Eric P. Schroeder

Eric P. Schroeder

Office Managing Partner, Atlanta

+1 404 572 6894
Brian A. Sher
+1 312 602 5070
Rachel E. Matteo-Boehm

Rachel E. Matteo-Boehm

Partner and Co-Global Practice Group Leader - Intellectual Property and Technology, San Francisco

+1 415 268 1996
Eric P. Schroeder

Eric P. Schroeder

Office Managing Partner, Atlanta

+1 404 572 6894

Meet The Team

Brian A. Sher
+1 312 602 5070
Rachel E. Matteo-Boehm

Rachel E. Matteo-Boehm

Partner and Co-Global Practice Group Leader - Intellectual Property and Technology, San Francisco

+1 415 268 1996
Eric P. Schroeder

Eric P. Schroeder

Office Managing Partner, Atlanta

+1 404 572 6894

Areas of Focus

  • Business Speech

Related Insights

Insights
Nov 14, 2024

AI & Your Business: Libel Risks

As lawyers who often defend defamation suits, we know from experience that it’s not just media defendants who are sued for libel. Defamation suits are routinely filed against all sorts of businesses, arising from all kinds of content and communications. As the pressure to compete pushes more businesses to incorporate generative AI into their content-creation processes, it is important to be mindful of the different ways a libel lawsuit might arise. This applies to text, images, video, audio, and all other types of content and information. We expect to see a flurry of cases stemming from AI-generated content in the coming years falling into one of these four general categories: Libel by juxtaposition: This can result where truthful information about two different individuals or entities is juxtaposed as part of generative AI output, making it seem like the output is about the same person or entity. Libel by hallucination: the AI output text is simply not true. Libel by omission: In this scenario, the AI output is true, but a missing fact changes its meaning. Libel by misquote: When generative AI output gets a quote wrong (even by a word or two), or misattributes a quote to the wrong person, the result can be a libel lawsuit.  This insight details some of the first U.S. lawsuits arising from AI and libel which both illustrate the first and second of these scenarios: libel by juxtaposition and libel by hallucination.
News
Jun 01, 2023

Chambers USA 2023

Related Insights

Insights
Nov 14, 2024
AI & Your Business: Libel Risks
As lawyers who often defend defamation suits, we know from experience that it’s not just media defendants who are sued for libel. Defamation suits are routinely filed against all sorts of businesses, arising from all kinds of content and communications. As the pressure to compete pushes more businesses to incorporate generative AI into their content-creation processes, it is important to be mindful of the different ways a libel lawsuit might arise. This applies to text, images, video, audio, and all other types of content and information. We expect to see a flurry of cases stemming from AI-generated content in the coming years falling into one of these four general categories: Libel by juxtaposition: This can result where truthful information about two different individuals or entities is juxtaposed as part of generative AI output, making it seem like the output is about the same person or entity. Libel by hallucination: the AI output text is simply not true. Libel by omission: In this scenario, the AI output is true, but a missing fact changes its meaning. Libel by misquote: When generative AI output gets a quote wrong (even by a word or two), or misattributes a quote to the wrong person, the result can be a libel lawsuit.  This insight details some of the first U.S. lawsuits arising from AI and libel which both illustrate the first and second of these scenarios: libel by juxtaposition and libel by hallucination.
News
Jul 17, 2024
Steve Smith Named Co-Chair of New MLRC Sports Committee
Insights
May 09, 2024
Department of Education issues Dear Colleague Letter as student protests continue
Awards
Aug 17, 2023
The Best Lawyers in America® 2024
Insights
Jul 25, 2023
California’s expansive new children’s online privacy law faces first amendment challenge
Insights
Jul 10, 2023
The Best Legal Review of the FTC’s Regulatory Review of Consumer Reviews
Insights
Jun 23, 2023
A Quick Lesson on Harnessing Artificial Intelligence
News
Jun 01, 2023
Chambers USA 2023
Insights
Aug 31, 2022
What does the Palin v. New York Times case mean for you?