The rumor mill is one of the most persistent elements of online pop culture, something to be either ignored in lieu of official announcements and premieres or embraced as talking points for fans who love miring in the possibilities for each new project based on their favorite characters. One entity that finds it difficult to ignore online rumors—and, in fact, is exploiting legal avenues to thwart them outright—is the studios themselves, as <a href="https://puck.news/when-studios-weaponize-copyright-to-kill-spoilers/” rel=”nofollow noopener” target=”_blank”>this piece written by Eriq Gardner for the online verticalPuck lays out.
Gardner, an entertainment law expert and former legal editor for The Hollywood Reporter, writes about a recent Warner Bros. Discovery takedown of rumor material from the geek culture site Cosmic Book News, which led to a ban on its Facebook account over the weekend of San Diego Comic-Con. Per Gardner, the ban stemmed from two circumstances. The first being published predictions from Cosmic‘s editor, Matt McGloin, about how the Lanterns premiere would end based on readily available trailers, casting announcements, and press materials. The other: Spoilers leaked on Reddit that gave up key details of the show that soon proliferated on X, prompting a series of D.M.C.A. notices from Warner Bros. Discovery’s legal apparatus. Soon, a takedown notice of several online Lanterns posts, McGloin’s among them, led to his month-long Facebook ban, keeping him from promoting his site during pop culture’s peak news-generating event.
This development illustrates the studios’ indomitable power over their intellectual property and their willingness to wield it in the fight against spoiler culture, which thrives on a daily drip-feed of movie and TV updates. This includes, Gardner writes, the direct targeting of certain online pundits and outlets, which illustrates the murky line WBD is navigating between copyright protection and fair use to ensure its Lanterns secrets remain hush-hush. Is the mere discussion of potential plot points, some of which may turn out to be correct, enough for a studio to stomp it out entirely? Gardner’s piece cites highly publicized legal precedent and is a fascinating, alarming read, currently available to Puck subscribers.
