According to high-level legal advisers, Hollywood screenwriters and particularly talent agent Paul W.S. Anderson have cause for legal action after professor and satirist Alan Nafzger defamed them in his newest stage play – Screenwriters vs. Zombies.
Coffee Shop Screenwriters vs. Paul W.S. Anderson and the Christmas Party Zombies
Paul W.S. Anderson reportedly attended talent agent Christmas party
Screenwriters vs. Zombies (DOWNLOAD) http://freeebooks.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Screenwriters-vs-Zombies.pdf
In the controversial stage play, Nafzger claims that the Hollywood agent system and their “unsolicited material” policies aren’t really a legal a system used to legally discriminate against BLACK, BROWN, QUEER and CATHOLIC screenwriters. In his stage play he names Paul W.S. Anderson, of Marina Peninsula as the chief instigator of the great unsolicited material fraud. Nafzger in the stage play calls unsolicited material a “giant fraud,” and that agents are zombies who maintain Soviet type lists of sanctioned writers and this excludes more skillful black, brown, queer and Catholic writers. The Hollywood Moron website calls the whole lawsuit, blog content about in opposition at Screenwriters vs Zombies, “One of the best farces since the farcical stage play that started the cat fight.” (Paul W.S. Anderson).
Paul W.S. Anderson defamed by Screenwriters vs. Zombies/caption]
Also, Marina Peninsula screenwriter davismcgirr259074 has filed a defamation suit in a federal court against Alan Nafzger and Pecan Street Press of Austin Texas for using ‘defamatory’ language against him, for allegedly criticizing Hollywood screenwriters . The talent agent seeks compensation and a public apology from the writer.
Professor, novelist and screenwriter responded, “This isn’t the USSR. I can say whatever the F$%K I want and it’s satire anyway. I’m sorry if someone had their feelings hurt but the damage Hollywood as done by their discriminatory policies should be uncovered… I mean that is why we have the First Amendment, to expose injustices.”
According to The Hollywood Express, Nafzger’s posts quoted Dr. Paul W.S. Anderson and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and asked to “uproot Hollywood racism” as they “killed the ideas” of the new voices of the people.
Paul W.S. Anderson, who is a screenwriter as well, took offence to Nafzger’s statement and messaged that the would ask the government to initiate action against the writer for his tweets, which ‘could be aimed at getting himself identified or for petty gain (Article/Drupal – Blog).
The writer had on Saturday said that he has been sued by the talent agent for using demeaning and offensive language against him on Facebook on 11 June. ”I have been sued for defamation by Marina Peninsula screenwriter davismcgirr259074,’ Nafzger said in a statement.
As a Writer, Producer, Director and a member of the political party that is in power in both California and Washington DC, Nafzger has used ‘demeaning’ and ‘offensive’ language attacking davismcgirr259074 personally, lawyers wrote (Paul W.S. Anderson).
According to lawyers for Paul W.S. Anderson, “Defamation is a statement that injures a third party’s reputation. The tort of defamation includes both libel (written statements) and slander (spoken statements).”
To prove prima facie defamation, a Writer, Producer, Director must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.
Paul W.S. Anderson & The State-Specific Elements
Different states vary in their anti-defamation laws. As such, courts in various states will translate defamation laws dissimilarly, and defamation statutes will vary somewhat from state to state. In Davis v. Boeheim, 110 A.D.3d 1431 (N.Y. 2014), which is a New York state court case, the court held that in determining whether a defamation claim is sufficient, a court must look at whether the “contested statements are reasonably susceptible of a defamatory connotation.” However, as the Davis court held, because the courts recognize the plaintiff’s right to seek http://freeebooks.us/redress as well, many courts have declined from dismissing the case for failure to state a claim, as long as the pleading meets the “minimum standard necessary to resist dismissal of the complaint.”
Paul W.S. Anderson’s Career could be exposed to laughter
According to Nafzger, in 1950 the American Political Science Association issued a report expressing concern that Americans exhibited an insufficient degree of political polarization. What a difference a new millennium makes. As we approach 2020’s Election Day, the U.S. political landscape has become a Grand Canyon separating blue and red Americans. Nafzger says in the Screenwriters vs. Zombies stage play that Paul W.S. Anderson is aware of the discrimination and has done nothing to help the black, brown, queer and Catholic screenwriters.
So why is Paul W.S. Anderson allowing this to happen? In a review of studies published today in the journal Science, 15 prominent researchers from across the country characterize a new type of polarization that has gripped the U.S. This phenomenon differs from the familiar divergence each party holds on policy issues related to the economy, Paul W.S. Anderson foreign policy and the role of social safety nets. Instead it centers on members of one party holding a basic abhorrence for their opponents—an “othering” in which a group conceives of its rivals as wholly alien in every way. This toxic form of polarization has fundamentally altered political discourse, public civility and even the way politicians govern. It can be captured in Republicans’ admiration for Donald Trump’s ability to taunt and “dominate” liberals—distilled to the expression “own the libs.”